Schedule Analyzer

• US 20090216602A1
• Filed: 12/22/2008
• Published: 08/27/2009
• Est. Priority Date: 02/21/2008
• Status: Abandoned Application

• Current Assignee: Mark E. Henderson
• Original Assignee: Mark E. Henderson
• Inventors: Henderson, Mark E.
• Application Number:
  US12/341,899
• Publication Number:
  US 20090216602A1
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 705/9
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/00 Administration; Management
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/06311 Scheduling, planning or task assignment for a person or group
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/0635 Risk analysis of enterprise or organisation activities
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/06395 Quality analysis or management

Abstract

A project schedule is managed by developing a float profile area chart having a float profile with a float gradient for at least one non-completed activity within the project schedule to pictorially assess schedule viability. A schedule risk index (SRI) score is calculated to qualitatively assess a risk level associated with the project schedule. Schedule quality metrics are measured and the values for the metrics aggregated to provide an indication of the project schedule being manipulated by a scheduler. Historical trends for the schedule quality metrics are trended across at least two update intervals, and schedule performance is also measured, e.g., by trending early starts and early finishes for the project and a relative slippage occurring from the across schedule updates.

Claims

1. A method for managing a project schedule, said method comprising:

developing a float profile area chart having a float profile with a float gradient for at least one non-completed activity within the project schedule to pictorially assess schedule viability;

calculating a schedule risk index (SRI) score to qualitatively assess a risk level associated with the project schedule, wherein calculating the schedule risk index score includes comparing changes from a recent schedule update relative to a previous schedule update based on a plurality of weighted factors to tabulate the SRI score, the SRI score being indicative of risk the project schedule will miss a scheduled completion date;

measuring a plurality of schedule quality metrics and aggregating the values for the metrics to provide an indication of the project schedule being manipulated by a scheduler;

recording historical trends for the schedule quality metrics and weighted factors across at least two update intervals; and

measuring schedule performance by trending early starts and early finishes for the project and a relative slippage occurring from the previous schedule update to the recent schedule update.

2. The method of claim 1, wherein the float gradient is a measure of a number of days an activity may miss a target deadline prior to impacting a scheduled completion of the project schedule.

3. The method of claim 2, wherein the float profile area chart includes a first axis defining positive and negative float gradients and a second axis defining a number of activities defined along a second axis of the area chart.

4. The method of claim 3, wherein the float profile area chart includes a float profile having all non-completed activities plotted against float gradient, the float gradient including a positive float gradient range expressed from 1 to 1,000 days, a mid-point of zero days float, and negative gradient range expressed from −

1 to −

1,000 days.

5. The method of claim 2, wherein developing the float profile area chart includes displaying a float profile for a current period and a float profile for a target period.

6. The method of claim 2, wherein developing the float profile area chart includes displaying a float profile for a historical period and a float profile for a current period.

7. The method of claim 2, wherein developing the float profile area chart includes displaying float profiles for activities grouped by activity type.

8. The method of claim 1, wherein developing the float profile area chart includes displaying a float profile for each of at least three time periods during the project schedule.

9. The method of claim 1, further comprising wherein the score is a schedule risk index score within a range of 0 to 100, wherein a schedule risk index score of 100 corresponds to a highest risk of the project schedule missing a scheduled completion date.

10. The method of claim 1, further comprising displaying the schedule risk index score in a graphical report along with the float area profile chart.

11. The method of claim 1, wherein the weighted factors include one or more of the factors selected from the group consisting of (i) Early Start (ES) date slippage expressed in terms of percentage of remaining activities;

(ii) Severity of ES slippage expressed in terms of average number of ES days with respect to days in the period;

(iii) Early Finish (EF) date slippage expressed in terms of percentage of remaining activities;

(iv) Severity of EF slippage expressed in terms of average number of EF days with respect to days in the period;

(v) Percentage of remaining activities having 50 or fewer days of float;

(vi) Percentage of remaining activities having less than or equal to 0 days of float;

(vii) Percentage of logic changes changed in the period with respect to total logic ties;

(viii) Criticality expressed in terms of negative float;

(ix) percentage of duration increases of remaining activities;

(x) Average number of days of duration increases with respect to days in the period; and

(xi) Percentage of constrained activities associated with the schedule bypassing mathematical calculations.

12. The method of claim 11, wherein the weighted factors include three to eleven of factors (i) through factors (xi).

13. The method of claim 12, wherein the weighted factors include all eleven of factors (i) through (xi).

14. The method of claim 13, wherein the weighted factors are determined by multiplying values associated with factors (i) through (xi) by the following weighting percentages (i) 10%;

(ii) 5%;

(iii) 10%, (iv) 5%;

(v) 15%;

(vi) 10%;

(vii) 10%;

(viii) 10%, (ix) 10%;

(x) 5%; and

(xi) 10%, respectively.

15. The method of claim 1, displaying the SRI score for each schedule update on at least one report, wherein the at least one report also includes one or more of a float area profile chart, measured schedule quality metrics, recorded historical trends for the schedule quality metrics, early starts and early finishes for the project, and a relative slippage occurring from the previous schedule update to the recent schedule update.

16. The method of claim 1, identifying measures of schedule quality includes measuring at least one of the metrics selected from the group consisting of:

(i) Activity Duration Changes;

(ii) Progress Reported to a Non-Started Activity;

(iii) Recording an Actual Start/Finish after the schedule Data Date;

(iv) Recording 100% progress to an Incomplete Activity;

(v) Number of Added or Deleted Activities;

(vi) Number of Revised Activity Descriptions;

(vii) Number of Logic Changes;

(viii) Number of Calendar Changes;

(ix) Number of Actual Start Changes; and

(x) Number of Actual Finish Changes.

17. The method of claim 16, wherein the metrics include all ten of metrics (i) through metrics (x).

18. The method of claim 16, further comprising:

updating the project schedule during at least three project schedule updates; and

measuring and recording the schedule quality metrics at each project schedule update.

19. The method of claim 18, further comprising:

tracking changes in the project schedule quality over time; and

generating a tabular report indicative of changes in the project schedule at each project schedule update.

20. The method of claim 19, wherein one or more of the following metrics selected from the group consisting of:

(i) number of added or deleted activities;

(ii) number of logic changes;

(iii) activity duration changes;

(iv) average of duration increase;

(v) schedule risk index (SRI);

(vi) total float (maximum);

(vii) average float;

(viii) minimum float;

(ix) total activities in the schedule versus remaining activities to complete; and

(x) grouping of near critical activities by float ranges, are captured at each of the at least three project schedule updates and generated in the tabular report.

21. The method of claim 19, wherein one or more of the following metrics are captured at each of the at least two project schedule updates and generated in the tabular report:

(i) early starts (ES); and

early finishes (EF).

22. The method of claim 19, wherein the project schedule is associated with one or more of field development or production of hydrocarbons from a subsurface formation.

23. A tangible computer-readable storage medium having embodied thereon a computer program configured to, when executed by a processor, manage a project schedule, the medium comprising one or more code segments configured to:

develop a float profile area chart having a float profile with a float gradient for at least one non-completed activity within the project schedule to pictorially assess schedule viability;

calculate a schedule risk index (SRI) score to qualitatively assess a risk level associated with the project schedule, wherein calculating the schedule risk index score includes comparing changes from a recent schedule update relative to a previous schedule update based on a plurality of weighted factors to tabulate the SRI score, the SRI score being indicative of risk the project schedule will miss a scheduled completion date;

measure a plurality of schedule quality metrics and aggregating the values for the metrics to provide an indication of the project schedule being manipulated by a scheduler;

record historical trends for the schedule quality metrics and weighted factors across at least two update intervals; and

measure schedule performance by trending early starts and early finishes for the project and a relative slippage occurring from the previous schedule update to the recent schedule update.

24. The tangible computer-readable storage medium of claim 23, the medium further comprising one or more code segments configured to update the project schedule during at least three project schedule updates;

and measuring the schedule quality metrics at each project schedule update.

25. The method of claim 23, further comprising tracking changes in the project schedule quality over time;

and generating a tabular report indicative of changes in the project schedule at each project schedule update.

26. A system for managing a project schedule, comprising:

a processor;

a display unit operatively coupled to the processor; and

a memory operatively coupled to the processor, the processor being configured to;

develop a float profile area chart having a float profile with a float gradient for at least one non-completed activity within the project schedule to pictorially assess schedule viability through the display unit;

calculate a schedule risk index (SRI) score to qualitatively assess a risk level associated with the project schedule, wherein calculating the schedule risk index score includes comparing changes from a recent schedule update relative to a previous schedule update based on a plurality of weighted factors to tabulate the SRI score, the SRI score being indicative of risk the project schedule will miss a scheduled completion date;

measure a plurality of schedule quality metrics and aggregating the values for the metrics to provide an indication of the project schedule being manipulated by a scheduler;

record historical trends for the schedule quality metrics and weighted factors across at least two update intervals; and

measure schedule performance by trending early starts and early finishes for the project and a relative slippage occurring from the previous schedule update to the recent schedule update.