Over the past several years I have had hundreds of conversations regarding the Recommended Practice on Forensic Schedule Analysis (RP29R-03 published by AACE International. More recently I spoke to a fellow delay expert who shared his objections to the RP as currently published. These objections included the oft-repeated complaints that the recommended practice does not contain a single best recommended practice, fails to include any legal citations, and includes methodologies rejected by many courts. The delay expert got me thinking about the judicial status of CPM issues. I note that virtually the entire structure of CPM scheduling is in a constant state of flux. Therefore the areas where the law of CPM is unsettled are more numerous than where they are settled.

I wrote here a year ago letting you know that the Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering International (“AACEI”) was seeking input and updating its Recommended Practice No. 29R-03 Forensic Schedule Analysis, which strives to “provide a unifying reference of basic technical principles and guildelines for the application of critical path method (CPM) scheduling [...]

I have an 11 year old son. I enjoy telling him stupid stories and joking around with him, especially in front of his friends. One of my regular bits is that I will proclaim to him that I am not really who he thinks I am and that I’ve been living a lie. I’ve told [...]

When a construction project finishes later than planned, there is commonly a great deal of discussion regarding what caused the delay, and who was responsible. As a result, when delays are present on a project, the parties (and their analysts) are often locked in long discussions regarding the project’s Critical Path – the logic chain [...]

Unrestricted participation in social media for technical issues can greatly facilitated the technical interaction of professionals; a good and productive use of this tool. At the same time it allows those who have poorly conceived or ill conceived comments to distribute those comments without having to think too much.

Getting the big-picture when flying at several thousand feet, whether it is the landscape below or a complicated construction dispute, is exhilarating. Knowing the overall pattern is essential lest you lose yourself in the details of the construction dispute. Just as you can see the endless grid of roads through the Great Plains, or the breathtaking curve of mountain ranges in central Pennsylvania, this pattern is almost impossible to see from ground level. The same is true of construction disputes. Hence experts.

I am a forensic schedule analyst.  By definition, I look at schedules after-the-fact and try to figure out what went wrong with the project, what caused the problems and their impact, and who is responsible.  By inference, you can imagine I almost always work on projects where the quality of the schedules is an issue. [...]

Forensic schedule analysts, particularly in adversarial situations, often reach different conclusions using the same set of facts.  In my experience, significant differences often arise from well-meaning, inexperienced practitioners who use a delay analysis method that is not appropriate for a particular situation or who improperly implement a particular analytical method.  I have also seen many [...]