Task Tracking Methods

[Kevin Slane]

Our new scheduler wants us to use Physical % Complete on the "My Tasks" page
and hide the % Work Complete field. She says that Physical % Complete is the
only way to track EV. We're having a professional disagreement about this.
I told her, out of the box, I can't make the my tasks page work with Physical
% as the sole progress update option. Could I get some generic advice from
the community on this one?

 

[Andrew Lavinsky]

I think you and I had a bit of discussion around this one before. You can
do it with a custom Actual Start date and some macro magic.

Out of the box though, the issue is that Actual Start won't be transmitted
to MPP without something in the % Complete field.

- Andrew Lavinsky
Blog: http://blogs.catapultsystems.com/epm

 

[Gary L. Chefetz]

Kevin:

I would love to hear from your expert how she measures physical percent
complete for software. I completely understand the concept of physical
percent complete when applied to building physical objects that have a
well-defined end point. I've been asking this question of EV experts for the
last 10+ years and I've yet to get a satisfactory answer. Inasmuch as your
projects combine both disciplines, it seems to me that using work is the
best compromise, but I'm always open to enlightenment.

 

[Kevin Slane]

You're correct, Andrew, we did discuss this before. That's why I told her
that there was no out of the box capability to support what she wanted to do.
The question you answered for me back then was asked in anticipation of this
discussion I'm having with her right now. I knew it was looming on the
horizon and I wanted to be sure my answers were well founded.

Kevin

 

[Kevin Slane]

Gary,
I said the EXACT same thing. How do you measure Physical % on a software
design project? The answer is that the end result is a physical "widget" but
I disagree. My budget hours are based on work (as expected) and the amound
of work I spend on my tasks is the sole determination of my percent complete.
She tells me that you can't do EV calculations without Physical Percent
Complete. I know this to be false.

I appreciate your answer. Perfect!

Kevin

 

[Gary L. Chefetz]

From a purist POV, she is technically correct, however the misapplication of
Earned Value went over the top when the government made that fateful
executive order. It think that the important thing is to be consistent.

 

[Andrew Lavinsky]

The way I see this conversation going most typically in IT shops is:

1) Resources should estimate how many hours they've worked, and how many
hours remain. This will give you both % Work Complete and % Complete.
2) It's the PM's job to assess the Physical % Complete based on inspection
of deliverables and prearranged criteria. Consider the Physical % Complete
to be the PM's sanity check on the work reported by the resource. The PM has
to be able to poke the deliverable to assess Physical % Complete (or review,
assess, test, etc.)
3) The PM can then compare Physical % Complete to % Work Complete and %
Complete to identify potential issues, and control EVMS. Otherwise, you're
just allowing your resources to self report their own status - which may/may
not be dangerous. I have seen only a few self-respecting PM's trust IT
resources to report their own EVMS status.

....although it sounds like you've already had a pretty similar discussion.

In my current implementation, we're using Physical % Complete to track pipe
construction - in which case the internal construction superintendents are
reporting on external contractor progress based on predefined metrics. Not
quite the same thing.

 

[Kevin Slane]

Interesting! Thank you. I'm curious what you have to say about our
situation. We're an engineering and manufacturing company. One project
schedule will have a large portion devoted to hardware engineering, another
part to software engineering, and another to manufacturing. Do you think, in
order to get an accurate picture on the hardware & manufacturing side, that
we should use physical % complete, and tell the software guys to go ahead and
status the physical as though it were %work? In other words, if 50% of the
sofware task is complete, to put 50% in the physical field like she wants?

 

[Gary L. Chefetz]

Kevin:

You know the system supports multiple tracking methods, so why not use
Physical % Complete for hardware engineering and manufacturing and use %
Work Complete for software? You need to make sure that your users are well
trained so that they don't get confused or frustrated with the mix.

 

[Andrew Lavinsky]

Your challenge will be in translating that 50% into some sort of schedule
projection. What does 50% mean in terms of the end date? That's where it
gets difficult.


- Andrew Lavinsky
Blog: http://blogs.catapultsystems.com/epm

 

[Kevin Slane]

It supports multiple tracking methods within a single project? If that's the
case, I did not realize that.

This is all good information, but unless I can convince her that you don't
have to use physical % in order to calculate EV, it may be all for not.

A second question; I see the following options when setting a task tracking
method: 1.) % Work Complete
2.) Actual work done and work remaining
3.) Hours of work per period

I didn't think I could (out of the box) use Physical % to track progress
from the my tasks page. Am I wrong?

 

[Kevin Slane]

I agree. The problem I have with manually entering a percent complete,
whether it's physical or %work, is that it's almost always a WAG. I like
dealing in work hours.