Arthur Davidson
After an extended period of unusual quietness, a handsome young second grader burst into the room where his mom was sitting. With much excitement, he proudly announced he is 7 feet tall! In disbelief and curiosity, she inquired how he had come to such an “interesting” conclusion. That is when he showed his mom the colorful ruler he had so carefully constructed and sure enough, by his measurement tool, he was 7 feet tall. Of course, his mom had a better measurement tool, which resulted in a slight difference of approximately 3 feet shorter!
When it comes to a turnaround, almost everything related to its success is riding on the schedule in a make-or-break fashion. As it should, scheduling has become progressively more sophisticated over the years. Not only has the software become more feature rich and easier to use, but the philosophy and management of the scheduling process itself has become more sophisticated. Turnaround organizations have placed great emphasis on codified scheduling standards for use at their sites. There is much better alignment among work breakdown structure, organizational breakdown structure and cost breakdown structure. Coding structures have become more intelligent. Contingency is being applied to schedules in a much smarter fashion. Schedule recovery strategy has improved. Resource leveling techniques have improved. Administrative controls have been greatly improved to ensure access and functionality are customized appropriately for each role and individual user. Fortunately, the improvements continue, even with very promising new scheduling software coming into the industry.
One area where there is enormous opportunity for improvement is the use of a truly objective measuring tool during the development of the schedule itself. It seems every scheduler has his own unique method of measuring and tracking his progress. I have seen turnaround schedulers work three or four months to build their schedules to a reported 95-percent complete, then use another two or three months building the last 5 percent. Obviously, they were not using an objective measuring tool when they overestimated their progress so severely. One reason this is so serious is because confidence in the schedule begins with confidence in the scheduler.
The thing I have noticed about good measuring tools is they don’t just tell you where you are in the process; they help guide you to where you are in the process. They not only tell you how much progress you have made on baking a cake, but they provide the list of ingredients and steps, adding much more clarity and objectivity. Just as rules of credit are applied to progress on work in the field, rules of credit can and should be applied to schedule development. And just as a work list is provided for field work, a work list can and should be provided for schedule development. Good schedulers come with a good background of experience — a strength that can also be a weakness. How so? Often, schedulers are slowed down by building things into the schedule that were required by a previous client, but the current client neither uses nor wants these items.
It has been rightly said scheduling is not just a science, but an art. This makes it much more difficult to provide an objective measurement. But the good news is many things we measure contain an element of art. For instance, we forecast how long it will take to finish concrete or weld a seam even though they both may contain a certain degree of craftsmanship. While art may not be quantifiable into specific values, it can be quantified into specific ranges. That is how schedule progress can be both forecasted and measured with a great degree of objectivity and accuracy. We begin with looking at the work list for the scheduler. Will he do field walk-downs? Will he research drawings? How many activities does he have to import or build? How many logic ties will he have to make on average for activities? How many codes will he have to add to each activity on average? Will he build filters, global changes or layouts? Will he set up reports? Will he attend planner collaboration or contractor review meetings? How much time is expected for delays, mandatory meetings and non-scheduling activities? Depending on the field knowledge, scheduling knowledge and proficiency level of the scheduler, each schedule building activity can be assigned an agreed number of hours for completion, allowing overall progress to be forecasted and tracked objectively. As the evolution continues, turnarounds will only get better.
For more information, contact Mike Bischoff at (281) 461-9340, email sales@tamanagement.com or visit www.tamanagement.com.
