Tracking Earned Value

[Langhorne]

We are attempting to track various EVA metrics over time, and there are two
ways to do it: One, capture the EVA metrics week by week right after we
update and publish the schedule (we're in a Project Server environment); Two,
reset the Project Status date week by week from the most recent published
schedule and capture the EVA metrics per the status date. Comparing the two
approaches, BCWS is identical each week, ACWP is close, and BCWP is very
different. Because BCWP is so different, SPI and CPI end up being different
also. In fact, with method One we see them going down, and method Two shows
them going up.

Any idea why this would be the case? Is one or the other a best practice
for tracking EVA over time? (We're using Project and Project Server 2003, by
the way).

Thanks in advance...

- Langhorne

 

[Jack Dahlgren]

The first method is not a valid method.
The reason is that you have marked a large amount of work as being performed
and by backdating the status date, you are making project think that it was
performed at a different time. The only accurate method is to record the
values at the time the work is being statused. This is your second method.
You can store the values in an excel spreadsheet or other location to build a
historical record over time (and produce the traditional s-curves)

-Jack Dahlgren

 

[Langhorne]

Thanks for your quick reply, Jack. What you say makes sense, but just to
clarify -- did you mean that the "second" method is not valid (backdating
status dates)? My method "one" was (I think) to record the values each week
as the project is statused. Sounds like that's the right way to do it, and
yes that's what we've been doing in a separate spreadsheet. Unfortunately,
it's giving us worse information. Oh well.... thanks again.

- L

 

[Langhorne]

Thanks for your quick reply, Jack. What you say makes sense, but just to
clarify -- the first method I mention is the one where we capture the values
weekly as they occur. The second involves backdating the status date. So
I'm hoping that's the one that's not valid based on your description.

Thanks...

- L