Planning, Scheduling, and Forecasting

February 20th, 2007 by Hal

Glen Alleman took me to task for yesterday's posting Misunderstanding Project Planning as Anticipation. He wrote a rather comprehensive rebuttal to my claim that the general understanding of planning is as anticipating a future. Glen makes a good case that best practice — at least in DoD projects — doesn't misunderstand planning. Since I've only worked at one defense contractor, I won't contradict him. I will say that my experience of the everyday practice of planning is as I described. Project managers/planners usually take an approach that limits alternatives concluding with "the plan". The plan is then represented as a CPM schedule. I don't argue with Glen that this is inadequate, nor am I saying that some people know better AND do something different. I am saying that the usual practice is to have a smart experienced person create a plan that is then represented as a schedule for others to follow. That is a practice that must change if we want better project performance.

When the future is represented in a critical path schedule it will be wrong.

In Glen's posting, The Role of Planning, he makes a distinction between planning and scheduling that I'll elaborate on. Let's start with scheduling. There's a notion of scheduling that derives from our use of scheduling programs that leads to a misunderstanding of what it is. Inputting tasks and due dates doesn't produce a schedule. Even in the most autocratic organizations, people are smart enough not to do what was input on an out-of-date document. Scheduling requires commitment. Normally, performers must "stand ready" to do what has been scheduled.

Today, I was speaking with a GE appliance scheduling person. She told me that a technician would come see me tomorrow between 1:00 and 5:00 PM to diagnose a problem with an appliance. She also said that the person would order the parts only after a visit. It would almost certainly require a return visit. Later in the day, I was surprised when the technician called asking, "What is really wrong with the appliance?" I told him. He said he'd skip the visit and order the usual parts first. He will not meet what she "scheduled" but will deliver (I'm hoping) better service. This is the nature of scheduling. Performers (or their agents) make commitments. Without commitments all we have is a wish list. Next time a service person fails to show up "as scheduled" you'll know why.

Project managers and planners haven't been trained to forecast.

Scheduling starts with a set of requests to get something specific done by some specific time. We are not doing our job when we just list those activities with "due dates". It is only a wish list. We need to engage with performers to elicit their commitment to take action — specific action. Either they or their supervisors commit to action by saying something like, "I promise to get that done by Friday noon." That is what we want from scheduling.

Planning is something different, as Glen points out. Planning is a conversation where we explore alternative futures and strategies to prepare ourselves for taking action to complete our promise. I want to emphasize "explore alternatives". This contrasts with a usual practice of locking in on one future. We know one thing for sure about the future. When it is represented in a critical path schedule it will be wrong. It can't come out that way. Minor variations will compound that will take the project off course unless the team re-plans.

The last thing I want to address is forecasting. Project managers and planners haven't been trained to forecast. For all of you who have been trained as project managers and project planners, I want you to honestly answer this question, "Name three forecasting approaches that you routinely use on your projects." I learned forecasting techniques. But I didn't learn them in any project management education. As project managers we don't forecast. Sure, like everyone, we have our hunches about the future. We might even be confident enough with our hunches to commit to action. I'm not saying that we wouldn't benefit from forecasting. All I'm saying is that we don't have a disciplined practice of forecasting.

So where does this leave us? You and your team need to engage in recurring planning conversations that lead to promising (scheduling) conversations. That is the practice that will improve your projects.

What Are They All Thinking? Or, Maybe They Aren’t

What’s Progressive about CPM?

Comments on the Fool Me Once, Twice Comments

Management-as-Determining?

Handle Projects with the Web’s Help — Collaboratively

This entry was posted on Tuesday, February 20th, 2007 at 11:20 pm and is tagged: Language Action Perspective, lean, Last Planner. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed. Convert this post to a PDF document.

Social Bookmarking

2 Responses to “Planning, Scheduling, and Forecasting”

Glen B. Alleman Says:
February 21st, 2007 at 12:15 am
Hal,
I see in your example the source of the comments on “scheduling” of the repairman and the questions to PM’s regarding forecasting. The world of project management as a profession is very broad and very deep. With overlap in some cases. The defense experinces I speak of are also found in large construction in the petrochemical industray for example. Finance and insurance enteprise project have similar processes in place for seperating planning from scehduling.

There are no doubt unlimted counter examples to me experinces. So when you say “project managers and planners haven’t been trained to forecast,” a qualification of domain may add value, because all the ones I’ve know over the decades at places like Chevron, Texaco, Bosie Cascade, Duke Power, Salt River, SCE, PG&E, Monsanto, Wells Fargo, Amgen, Exxon, TVA, … have in most cases acted in ways I describe.

Isn’t it a wonderful things to have such variety?
Robert Ferguson Says:
February 21st, 2007 at 8:47 am
Hal,
Nice comment about forecasting today. In fact both estimation and forecasting require some knowledge (history) of team performance. Last planner uses %PPC as a performance measure.

If I have knowledge of team performance then the team can make projections about completion and range of error (risk).

Team level measures must be owned and collected by the team. I suggest we consider performance measures for schedule, throughput, productivity and a quality index.

The project manager can keep each of the performance measures for each team as a stoplight. A team operating as desired gets green lights. This does not mean perfect but means within the % error inherent in the work and measurement system. A team operating within the bounds of their contingency gets yellow. A team that is operating outside of contingency gets red.

Any red light or three successive yellow lights warrants an investigation and possible change action. Something in the plan is not working or something is happening at the team level that will cause a problem.

Forecasting is important. It is what our sponsors and customers want to know and informing them is an essential element of project success.

Bob Ferguson

Comment On This

If you haven't left a comment here before, you will need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.