EVM from the Middle

[RTucker]

Hello all,

I have been challenged by external influences to make EVM function under the
following conditions:

Define the BCWS(hours)/Resource at CAP Level 5 (not at the lowest level
tasks) of the WBS/schedule, collect actual hours worked at the CAP, but
status the tasks (levels 6-12) using a 50/50 EV method.

Using MS Project, Actual Work becomes a calculated field when it is a
Summary Task. Therefore, if I report actual hours to teh Summary task using
the Task Usage table, then status a subordinate task's %Complete, MSP will
recalculate the Actual Work values entered.

It is my belief that the EVM logic built into the tool will not allow the
collection of CV data at L5 and SV data at Levels 6-12. Does anyone know of
a way to maintain the Actual Work hours and the 50/50 %Complete values so I
can extract the data into, perhaps, wInsight? I've experimented with
%WorkComplete versus %Complete. This brings more variables (effort versus
duration) into the fray.

I have the opportunity to use other tools if it helps this situation. All
textbook answers have been reviewed and tried. I am looking for someone's
unique tricks/experience to solve this one.

 

[Steve House [Project MVP]]

Perhaps others understand better what you're asking but you are using some
jargon here that makes it difficult to know just what you're trying to do.
What are you talking about when you use the term CAP Level 5?

You are correct in the work in a summary task is a calculated field - how
could the total hours worked on a group of tasks be anything except the sum
of the hours worked on the individual tasks within the group. If there are
hours to be worked in your WBS that are not accounted for by the performance
tasks, you haven't broken down the summaries into sufficient detail - one
should be able to remove all summary tasks from the plan, lkeaving all their
subtasks of course, and still get all the work of the project accomplished.
A summary task is in essence a reporting convenience and has no work
directly attributable to it.

% complete refers to duration, not work while earned value is computed using
work, not duration. The 50/50 method says you get credit for 50% of the
work required at the moment the task begins and the other 50% when the task
ends. You can easily enter such values into Project. If you want, you can
enter duration progress and work progress separately by going to the Tools
Options menu, Calculation tab and clearing the check box "Updating task
status updates resource status." However, note that EV's SV (Schedule
Variance) is based on *work* performed versus *work* scheduled up to the
status date, NOT duration, so you still have to record actual work hours for
your level 6-12 tasks to get a meaningful result. It almost sound like you
want to track performance tasks at a rough level of detail, recording only
50/50 values but summary tasks at a full level of detail. No offense
intended but Spock would say that's highly illogical <grin>, putting the
cart before the horse. Imagine the ultimate case - a summary with only one
subtask. The subtask is scheduled for 5 days duration, 40 man-hours of
work. At the end of the first day, you want the summary task to show 8
hours of actual work with 32 remaining but the performance task to show 20
hours of work complete with 20 hours remaining??????? What purpose would
that serve? I can't imagine why you wouldn't want them to be in agreement
with one another but even if you didn't for some reason, that seems
backwards to me, seriously distorting the validity of any conclusions you
might draw from the data (and drawing sound conclusions on which to base
management decisions is the whole purpose of the exercise in the first
place). It would make more sense to have the summary reporting first order
approximations, sort of an "executive overview" while the detail tasks show
the most accurate information, the other way around.

HTH