Schedule Analysis
Turning schedule data into findings
Schedule analysis interprets the model to explain performance, entitlement, and risk. Concepts: critical and near-critical path review; float analysis and float ownership; delay analysis methods including as-planned versus as-built, impacted as-planned, collapsed as-built, window analysis, and time impact analysis (TIA); concurrent delay; pacing and mitigation; fragnets; schedule risk analysis using three-point estimates and Monte Carlo simulation; and resource and productivity analysis.
Traps: applying a retrospective method when a prospective entitlement question is asked; inserting a fragnet at the wrong data date; ignoring concurrent delay or float ownership provisions; using the as-built schedule with hindsight to claim entitlement; and confusing total float consumption with critical delay.
Worked example: at the data date, a design change adds a 5-day fragnet to a path carrying 2 days of total float. The projected completion moves 3 days, not 5. Those 3 days are the time-impact result for that event; the 2 days of float absorbed the remainder. Repeat the insertion event by event in chronological windows to separate causes.
Rule of thumb: a defensible analysis uses contemporaneous schedules, documented events, and a consistent method - and states its assumptions, because the method chosen often determines the answer.