The Schedule Looks Right… Until You Test It

This Expert Insight piece is part of a series by Chris Bradshaw, SVP Project Controls - see on “good” project controls and decision-making

A schedule can look credible on paper – and still be fundamentally flawed. On the surface, everything appears in place. Activities are loaded, durations assigned, milestones met. The dates align with expectation. Progress updates are being issued regularly.

But when you start to test the schedule – and I mean really test it – the cracks begin to show.

Key interfaces were missing, procurement was disconnected from construction, and the overall schedule was a static picture than a dynamic tool to support decision-making.

What you are left with in these situations is a plan that looks right, but does not behave correctly.

And that matters.

Because the schedule is not just a reporting tool. Your schedule is the primary model of how the project will be delivered. If that model is flawed, every downstream decision is affected.

Forecasts become unreliable. Risks are either hidden or misunderstood. Recovery actions are based on false assumptions. In many cases, teams develop confidence in the dates simply because the schedule is detailed. But detail is not the same as accuracy.

 A credible schedule must stand up to challenge.

It must reflect execution reality, clearly identify the true drivers of completion, and respond logically to change. If the logic isn’t right, the forecast won’t be either. And if the forecast can’t be trusted, decision-making is compromised.

Continuing the Conversation

This perspective by Chris Bradshaw is drawn from a broad range of projects and environments, but it only scratches the surface of the challenges and opportunities facing the discipline today.

Get in touch to find out how Chris’ approach will help your project stay on track, on budget and on schedule.