How to do a fair impacted-as-planned analysis?
In the Open Standard
Bo JohnsenMember for 20 years 7 months
- Created
- 10
- 4
0
I’ve done a few impacted-as-planned programmes before, however, only based on either one or a few delay events (claims for EOT) so no problem. Now I’m about to incorporate more than 100 claims into one single global impact programme, which the Employer has asked for (only to be used for initial discussions in an attempt for amicable settlement).
Do you relate all the impacts to the baseline dates of the individual activities? Then one could might as well have taken only the predominantly delay event. This is not fair to the Contractor.
Do you relate all the impacts (delayed start, increased duration or delayed finish) based on the links in the programme? Then you’ll most probably get a completion date way out into the future that bears no resemblance to a reasonable completion date / the actual completion date as the impacts will reinforce each other the more delay events you add to the programme (almost similar to the law of error accumulation). This approach is not fair to the Employer (even though as a Contractor I would prefer that).
I’m aware of the limitations of the impacted-as-planned analysis method and that it is certainly not fair, however, now when having been asked by the Employer I would like to make it as “fair” as possible. Therefore, can anybody give guidance of the principles in doing a proper and “more fair” impacted-as-planned analysis when incorporating many delay events into an overall delay impact programme?
I’ve read several papers on the subject, but they all tend to only describe the basic principles, i.e. impact on baseline dates, which are fairly simple to do when having 1 event, but not necessarily for 10 events or more (100+).
Best regards,
Bo
Do you relate all the impacts to the baseline dates of the individual activities? Then one could might as well have taken only the predominantly delay event. This is not fair to the Contractor.
Do you relate all the impacts (delayed start, increased duration or delayed finish) based on the links in the programme? Then you’ll most probably get a completion date way out into the future that bears no resemblance to a reasonable completion date / the actual completion date as the impacts will reinforce each other the more delay events you add to the programme (almost similar to the law of error accumulation). This approach is not fair to the Employer (even though as a Contractor I would prefer that).
I’m aware of the limitations of the impacted-as-planned analysis method and that it is certainly not fair, however, now when having been asked by the Employer I would like to make it as “fair” as possible. Therefore, can anybody give guidance of the principles in doing a proper and “more fair” impacted-as-planned analysis when incorporating many delay events into an overall delay impact programme?
I’ve read several papers on the subject, but they all tend to only describe the basic principles, i.e. impact on baseline dates, which are fairly simple to do when having 1 event, but not necessarily for 10 events or more (100+).
Best regards,
Bo
10 replies
Oldest first- 0Samer Zawaydeh ·Dear Bo,
What is the project parameters:
Duration:
Budgeted Amount:
Final duration:
Final Invoiced Amounts:
Client Requested Changes:
Time Impact:
Cost Impact:
Approved Time Extension Due to other factors:
Contractor Delays:
You are trying to avoid the number crunshing, but I do not think that you can avoid that. Prepare a list of the delay in excel and study then according to importance. Concentrate on the driving delays. The minor delays of the Contractor are going to be disregarded any ways if you are talking about amicable settlement. So list them according to priority and get management approval on the list that you want to study.
With kind regards,
Samer
- 0Shah. HB ·Hi to all
If you want to show all the delay events together it is better to make use of spreadsheets.Which is easy for others who are unaware of planning software and its results.
You can create nice presentation using spread sheets. You can show the consented pro gramme of works as the first bar then due to delay event 1 how the project completion date got shifted as the second bar similarly you can repeat for all the delay events.For further substantiation you can attach the impacted pro-gramme of delay events for reviewers reference - 0Bo Johnsen ·Dear Samer,
Thank you for the answer.
The number crushing has been done long time ago, so has the Excel sheet with a prioritised list of delay and initially only a delay analysis with the most driving delays, as you suggest, was also carried out. Time- and cost impact analyses have also been done long time ago for almost each and every claim. The Employer has now asked for all claims to be incorporated into one global time impact analysis (not cost).
Anyway, forget all about the actual project. The question was more related to the principles/theory of carrying out an impacted-as-planned analysis involving multiple delay events, not just one or a few.
Regards,
Bo
- 0Shah. HB ·Hi bo
You can form a WBS named delay event fragnet ,under this WBS you can create a schedule of delay events based on the chronological order[All delay events are tied together ].In that you can eliminate concurrent delay events if any
and impact on the consented pro-gramme of works - 0Samer Zawaydeh ·Dear Bo,
The theory of delay and studying its consequences is the same as the theory of the Critical Path Method. It did not change.
You need to determine the delay event, get it approved by the Engineer, and then impact the schedule. You study each delay event independently, then you study them all together.
With kind regards,
Samer - 0Samer Zawaydeh ·Dear Bo,
You might find this article interesting as well. I copied the last paragraph for your review:
Title: Critical Path Delay Analysis
Case: City Inn Ltd v Shepherd Construction Ltd [2007] CSOH 190
Year: 2008
Court: Outer House of the Court of Session in Scotland
http://www.planningengineers.org/publications/legalcases.aspx
"
In deciding upon the criticality of the alleged delaying events, and therefore the entitlement to extension of time, the judge considered that the application of practicality and common-sense was more reliable than a flawed as-built critical path analysis."
With kind regards,
Samer - 0Andrew Flowerdew ·Samer,
Although I think the principle you state will still stand, (it’s nothing new, a fatally flawed analysis is a fatally flawed analysis - which may not be relied upon), I believe this case is subject to appeal and therefore you should be a little careful of quoting from it just yet.
Personally I think aspects of this case should have been dismissed due to the contractor failing to meet the burden of proof, (as would possibly have been the case in the USA), but I doubt that will be the decision of any appeal either.
So we wait and see! - 0Khuong Do ·
Hi,I write an article
Hi,
I write an article regarding How to perform Impacted As-Planned Delay Analysis in Primavera P6.
If you're interested, kindly read it here https://doduykhuong.com/2016/09/19/how-to-perform-impacted-as-planned-delay-analysis-in-primavera-p6/
Log in or join to reply
ProjectControls.com is free to join. Members can post questions, reply, vote and follow discussions.
Existing members: your original username and password still work. Forgot password?