Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Disclaimer
Information contained within this presentation is for education purposes
only. How a programme or schedule is built, maintained and managed is
the responsibility of the owning organisation. Focus Planning Ltd
accepted no responsibility for changes made to programmes or
schedules which are altered as a result of reading slides contained within
this presentation. The configuration and settings of computer software
are the responsibility of the license holders and Focus Planning Ltd
accept no liability for the configuration used by the license holder.
Has the same name as the original source project with reflection appended to it.
Internally, contains a link to the source project that allows the application to
merge changes to the reflection into the source project.
Has a what-if status.
Essentially a reflection is a carbon copy of a project, but unlike just hitting Copy in
P6; a reflection retains a logical link between the source project and the copy which
allows any changes to the copy to be reflected against the source project to identify
the impact of change.
This is particularly useful when calculating potential delays in a What-If scenario,
especially as P6 will provide a summary of the changes for the user to communicate
to the project stakeholders. In order to allow for a clear change control and reporting
process when calculating delays with reflections we will include a baseline
integration later in the slides which supports transparent identification of change.
Process Summary
Over the next few slides we will go through the below high-level process in
order to identify and report back on a delay to a project..
For the Baseline Name, it is best practice to include the following elements;
.Project Name
.Data Date
.Last Modified Date
.Change Description (i.e. Prior to Delay Modifications)
Create Reflection
To
1.
2.
3.
4.
This method involves creating a new activity or activities to identify the delay, and logically linking these
to existing activities in order to move the schedule activities in line with the delay. Whilst this method
makes the delay activity clear when looking at the programme, it can communicate the wrong message
to others looking at the programme who may only look at the delay activity on its own, rather than
looking at the impact of the delay on all activities.
2.
This method involves locating existing activities that will have an increased duration due to the delay.
For example, a delay of bad weather may mean that concrete curing takes an extra 3 days, so this
method would involve taking the remaining duration and increasing it by 3 days. The benefit to this
method is the clear variance to the last updates baseline, the main negative being the delay is not
highlighted in the programme unless the user adds a description to the activity, i.e. From Cure
Concrete to Cure Concrete Incl Delay.
For the purpose of these slides we will use the second method. The method used by the user is at their
discretion.
Focus Planning Ltd
Initial Assessment
Now the reflection has been changed its time to assess how it compares with the original schedule.
To do this go back to the PROJECTS window and right-click the Reflection, select Merge Reflection Into
Source Project. The Preview Changes screen will open. This screen contains a few elements which we will
go through now.
The Reflection Differences window highlights values which have been changed in the reflection, so as
you can see above the Remaining Duration for the Concrete Cure activity has changed from 10 days to
13 days. Selecting the GROUP CHANGES BY options changes the layout of how differences are grouped.
Activity lists changes by Activity, and Subject Area lists changes by change type, i.e. Duration
Changed/Logic Changed/etc.
Focus Planning Ltd
Initial Assessment
Below the Reflection Differences window are the merging options. These should be ticked according to
the requirements of the planner. The Prior To Merging options include two options, the first creates a
copy of the source (original) project as a Baseline, if you decided not to take a baseline of the original
project earlier you will want to tick this box in create one now, as it is a key element of how we assess
delays. The second option is user preference, as best practice it is good process to create a backup.
The After Merging Options cover what to do with the reflection after merging has been completed. Again
this is user preference, as best practice it is good process to keep the reflection for future reference but
this should be moved out of the working EPS once this exercise has been completed so as not to clutter
it up.
New Baseline
The final action to complete is to take a new baseline on the source project, this will allow the P6 Claim
Digger to assess variations to the overall schedule.
To do this follow the steps from the previous slide (No.5)
10
Claim Digger
Now we have a project which has been baselined to current progress prior to the delay, a reflection has
been used to update the programme taking the delay in to account, a report has been taken highlighting
the actions taken by the planner, and a new baseline has been taken to highlight the status of activities
with the delay entered.
Now what we can do is take the before delay baseline and compare this with the after delay baseline to
give us an impact assessment of the delay on the entire programme.
Primavera comes with a tool to help us with this, called Claim Digger. This tool has been specifically
produced to compare multiple project versions and baselines.
To access claim digger select TOOLS then CLAIM DIGGER. The below window will open. It can take some
time for the window to open, if it doesnt open after one minute then minimize P6 as it sometimes
opens on the desktop .
11
12
Programme
with
Baseline
Variance
Report
detailing
changes
made by the
planner
Claim Digger
Report
detailing
changes to
the schedule
Programme
Baseline
Pre-Delay
Reflection
with
changes
13
Summary
So to summarise there are various methods to ensure delays are
analysed and recorded, but by using Reflections with Claim
Digger, we are able to track every stage of the schedule update
process to communicate with the project stakeholders.
This ensures the original schedule isn't over-written and lost as
baselines can be restored as projects in their own right, and gives
us the information needed to review the changes against the
original schedule in a format that can be reviewed by nonplanners and planners alike.
Other Delay review methods including Time Impact Analysis will
be covered in future slides and a copy will be made available on
the Focus Planning Ltd website at http://www.focus-planning.com
or by contacting info@focus-planning.com
Focus Planning Ltd
14