Level:
Advanced
TCM Section(s):
7.6. Risk Management
3.3. Investment Decision Making
Venue: 2022 AACE International Conference & Expo
Abstract: Project schedules often have factors imposed on them which degrade them as tools for quantitative schedule risk analysis using Monte Carlo simulation (MCS).The contractor’s detailed proposal schedules frequently employ mechanisms encompassing commercial goals, rendering them unsuitable for use in quantitative risk modeling.A good bit of effort is typically required to convert these schedules into reliable tools for risk modeling.
This paper describes these problems and develops processes for identifying them and repairing them to withstand the rigors of simulation.It discusses why such findings often lead to creating summary schedules that strictly adhere to best practices while representing the overall project plan rather than de-bugging the contractor’s detailed schedule.
Using standards for critical path method (CPM) scheduling implies that what is needed to support MCS is to follow best practice CPM guidelines. Some of those guidelines have pronounced impacts on the conduct of MCS-based schedule risk analysis.This paper highlights and explains these practices and argues that the best way to proceed with a schedule risk analysis is to create a simpler, smaller, but entirely compliant summary schedule rather than simulate the project’s detailed schedule with its flaws.
TCM Section(s):
7.6. Risk Management
3.3. Investment Decision Making
Venue: 2022 AACE International Conference & Expo
Abstract: Project schedules often have factors imposed on them which degrade them as tools for quantitative schedule risk analysis using Monte Carlo simulation (MCS).The contractor’s detailed proposal schedules frequently employ mechanisms encompassing commercial goals, rendering them unsuitable for use in quantitative risk modeling.A good bit of effort is typically required to convert these schedules into reliable tools for risk modeling.
This paper describes these problems and develops processes for identifying them and repairing them to withstand the rigors of simulation.It discusses why such findings often lead to creating summary schedules that strictly adhere to best practices while representing the overall project plan rather than de-bugging the contractor’s detailed schedule.
Using standards for critical path method (CPM) scheduling implies that what is needed to support MCS is to follow best practice CPM guidelines. Some of those guidelines have pronounced impacts on the conduct of MCS-based schedule risk analysis.This paper highlights and explains these practices and argues that the best way to proceed with a schedule risk analysis is to create a simpler, smaller, but entirely compliant summary schedule rather than simulate the project’s detailed schedule with its flaws.