Project Planning & Monitoring Specialist
PRIMAVERA P6 / SCHEDULING / DELAY ANALYSIS / TOOLS
Project Planning & Monitoring Specialist
PRIMAVERA P6 / SCHEDULING / DELAY ANALYSIS / TOOLS
Programme work for construction projects, on a single project or across a portfolio, remotely or on site.
A programme built from first principles rather than adapted from the last job. Work breakdown and activity coding that still make sense in month fourteen. Logic that reflects how the work actually sequences on site, durations built from production rates rather than from the target completion date working backwards, and a critical path that can be explained in a meeting without a laptop.
Level 3 programmes for approval, look-ahead programmes for the site, and the resource and cost loading that lets the same programme answer questions about money and manpower.
Planned against actual, period by period, against the approved baseline. Slippage flagged while it is still recoverable rather than reported after it is not. Bottlenecks identified and traced back to the thing causing them, which is usually a decision, an approval or a material rather than the activity itself.
Progress reports, S-curves, resource histograms, productivity analysis and cashflow forecasts, consolidated to the level the audience actually needs. A site meeting and an executive review are not the same report.
Time Impact Analysis, windows analysis and as-planned against as-built, selected according to what the contract asks for and what the records will support, not according to which method is easiest to run.
Delay events registered with cause codes and mapped to the clause they fall under. Excusable, compensable and concurrent delay separated rather than argued about later. Notices tracked against their contractual deadlines, because a valid entitlement served late is worth very little.
Prolongation cost built up and split by site overhead, head office, plant, labour and materials, so that the number in the claim can be traced to where it came from.
When time has already been lost, the question is what can still be pulled back and what it costs to pull it. Acceleration options priced against the delay they remove. Resequencing that a site can actually execute. A recovery programme that does not quietly assume everyone works faster from Monday.
Contemporaneous records kept as the work happens, in a form that can be used a year later by someone who was not there. Most claims are not lost on the analysis. They are lost because the record supporting the analysis was never kept, or was kept in a way nobody can navigate under cross-examination.
This is the cheapest work on this page and the one most often skipped.
Where several projects run at once, the questions change. Which of them is quietly slipping. Which one deserves attention this month. Where the same delay is appearing in four programmes because it has one cause. Master schedules, baselines, S-curves and cashflow forecasts consolidated into something a review meeting can act on.
By the project or by the task. A baseline built once and handed over. Monthly updating and reporting on a continuing basis. A single delay analysis prepared for a claim already in dispute. A review of someone else's programme before it goes for approval.
Remote work is normal here and has been for years, provided the information coming back from site is disciplined. That is a planning problem, not a distance problem.
Enquiries to info@JeemJehan.com. A short description of the project, the stage it is at and what is going wrong is enough to start.