As Built Critical Path

As Built Critical Path

Bernard Ertl
InterPlan Systems

Thank you Bernard,

I should have searched the forum first.

Manu

At the risk of incurring wrath, and perhaps defying decades of collected legal wisdom, I am going to suggest that there is no such thing as a Critical Task unless it is a Task scheduled to occur in the future of some nominated date.
"Critical" and "Float" are concepts which only have meaning for, and are only defined for, Tasks which are in the future.
Critical Tasks (ie those with no float, or the amount of float which is being used for the definition of "Critical", but let’s say zero for now) can only be Tasks which are scheduled in the future relative to some nominated date. Any Task which is complete, AS AT SOME NOMINATED DATE,(ignore started but not finished for now) has an Actual Start Date (AS) and an Actual Finish Date (AF), and ES=LS=AS, EF=LF=AF, Free Float=0, Total Float=0, but this does not therefore make them Critical because being complete excludes them from the critical/non-critical consideration.
Because the time elapses and progress occurs each day, each day sees a different future from the previous day and so the Critical Path (ie the stuff in the future) is different every day. A valid ABCP analysis would have to present a day by day account of the state of affairs, n’est pas?

No body plan the past.

Agreed.
The day is over with the works done. A planner looks ahead.

You have talked about the past and your have talked baout the future but you have forgotten the third alternative; Today (or Time Now, Data Date, Status Date, etc.) It is this third option that makes the consideration of an As-Built Critical Path possible.

How so?
Does the analyst put himself in the planner’s shoes on the day that the event occurred, or the day that the event is determined to have occurred which may not have been realised until the analyst gets involved after the project is finished (late)
Does the analyst imagine that day to be Time Now, and then analyse the effect of the event on the plan which is/was the current plan on that day (ie, not the baseline plan which may be much older and much less current and relevant), as the planner would have done or as he should have done?
What if the planner did not do that analysis on that day (perhaps too busy making S Curves)?
What if the only available plan which could have been the "plan which is the current plan on that day" is old and out of date and has not been kept up with actuals, updates and re-scheduling?

Trevor,

I guess that about sums it up. (I know that you were being disparaging, but that is pretty much what a Forensic Claims Analyst does.) I couldn’t have put it better myself.

You are mostly right about trying to understand the Planner’s intent as well. Don’t forget to look at the minutes of the weekly and monthly meetings, memos, and other written information to try to determine otherwise unpublished plans and understandings.

Thanks for the confirmation.
Not disparaging, just asking.
The theory is fine but the reality is something else.
Obviously, claims and disputes occur and a resolution process, however imperfect, is necessary.
The whole process is maintained as and portrayed as scientific in its means and ends. But is not very, I think.
Not suggesting for a moment that forensic claims analysts do anything less than the very best they can muster but the obstacles to an accurate, objective story of what happened and who is to blame, and fair resolution, are enormous.