W13_LUCKY_Determining which EVM method is best suited to accurately measure % progress on Weekly Report, Mapping, Questions, Competitive bidding and Mid Term Exam projects of Team BISTRO12

W13_LUCKY_Determining which EVM method is best suited to accurately measure % progress on Weekly Report, Mapping, Questions, Competitive bidding and Mid Term Exam projects of Team BISTRO12

1. Problem Recognition, Definition, Root Cause Analysis and Evaluation

 

1. Problem Recognition

Determining the earned value or budgeted cost of work performed has been said to be one of most challenging areas of the earned value management (EVM) system. The earned value of any particular deliverable is defined as the planned value multiplied by the percentage complete.  The percentage complete is calculated by using a predetermined earned value measurement method.

2. Problem Definition

There are several earned value measurement methods in existence. Which EVM method would is best suited to accurately measure the percentage progress on some BISTRO12 projects?   

3. Root Cause Analysis and Evaluation

Determining an appropriate earned value measurement method or technique for some projects of Team Bistro 12 has been challenging for a majority of the team members. This could be due to a lack of proper understanding of the application of the various earned value techniques.

2. Development of Feasible Alternatives

For the purpose of determining the budgeted cost of work performed (BCWS), work tasks are classified broadly into the following three types^[i]:

1. Discrete Effort
• Used for physical, tangible end product^[ii] (See further examples below)
2. Apportioned Effort
• Used for discrete work effort, but dependent on another discrete work package (e.g. quality assurance)
3. Level of Effort(LOE)
• No tangible end product
• Time is the basis of measurement (e.g. project management personnel)

 

Discrete Effort methods that have been extensively used over the years include:

1. Incremental Milestones^[iii]
2. 50/50 Method
3. 0/100 Method
4. Equivalent Units
5. Units Complete
6. Percent Complete
7. Combination of the above

The above classification of work measurement types constitute the alternatives of the earned value technique from which a selection can be made.

3. Development of outcomes  for each alternative

The outcomes for each alternative are presented below:

• Discrete Effort  - Physical, tangible end product^[iv]
• Apportioned Effort -  Discrete work effort, but dependent on another discrete work package
• Level of Effort(LOE) - No tangible end product

 

The Team BISTRO12 projects, with their characteristic features, for which EVM methods are to be selected, are as follows:

1.      Weekly report

There are two aspects to the weekly report project viz:

·         Time Card submission

·         Individual report submission

Both aspects produce physical tangible end products (weekly reports/time card hours) and runs through the entire program duration.

2.      Mapping

This project spans a period of time over which the mapping process develops until it is finally completed for submission. A physical tangible end product (the mapping) will emanate.

3.      Questions

This project involves answering the questions in the Engineering Economy and Earned Value Management textbooks. The answers are to be verified before final submission to CFH. A physical tangible end product (solutions to the questions) will be delivered.

4.      Mid Term exam

Although, not sure of the form the midterm exam will take, it is expected to produce tangible end results. A physical tangible end product (solutions to the mid-term exam) will be produced.

5.      Competitive bidding

This project entails all aspects of a bidding process up to bid proposal submission. A physical tangible end result (submitted bid) is to be produced.

Focusing on the discrete work measurement techniques, and considering the characteristics of the projects under review, value is earned as follows:

Method                                   How Value is earned

Units completed                      same budget value for identical units (physical count of products)

Equivalent units                      planned units’ standards allowing for partial credits

Weighted milestones               each milestone weighted based on planned resources

Percent complete                     subjective

4. Selection Criteria

 

The selection criteria are as follows: 

·         Accuracy of work progress monitoring (predominant criterion)

·         Objectivity measurement

·         Ease of measurement

5. Analysis and Comparison of the alternatives

The analysis and comparison of the alternatives with respect to the projects is presented below:

Project: Weekly Report
S/N		Discrete Effort
	Attribute	Incremental Milestone	Equivalent units	Units Complete	Percent complete	50/50
1	Accuracy	Good	Good	Best	Fair	Poor
2	Objectivity	Good	Good	Best	Poor	Fair
3	Simplicity	Fair	Fair	Best	Fair	Good

Table 1: Analysis of Weekly report project [By Author]

 

Project: Mapping
S/N		Discrete Effort
	Attribute	Incremental Milestone	Equivalent units	Units Complete	Percent complete	50/50
1	Accuracy	Best	Good	Good	Fair	Poor
2	Objectivity	Best	Good	Good	Poor	Fair
3	Simplicity	Best	Fair	Good	Good	Good

 

Table 2: Analysis of Mapping project [By Author]

Project: Questions
S/N		Discrete Effort
	Attribute	Incremental Milestone	Equivalent units	Units Complete	Percent complete	50/50
1	Accuracy	Good	Good	Best	Fair	Poor
2	Objectivity	Good	Good	Best	Poor	Fair
3	Simplicity	Good	Poor	Best	Fair	Good

Table 3: Analysis of Problem solving project [By Author]

Project: Mid -Term
S/N		Discrete Effort
	Attribute	Incremental Milestone	Equivalent units	Units Complete	Percent complete	50/50
1	Accuracy	Good	Fair	Best	Fair	Poor
2	Objectivity	Good	Fair	Best	Poor	Fair
3	Simplicity	Fair	Fair	Best	Fair	Good

 

Table 4: Analysis of Mid-term exam project [By Author]

Project: Competitive Bidding
S/N		Discrete Effort
	Attribute	Incremental Milestone	Equivalent units	Units Complete	Percent complete	50/50
1	Accuracy	Best	Fair	Fair	Fair	Poor
2	Objectivity	Good	Fair	Good	Poor	Fair
3	Simplicity	Good	Fair	Fair	Fair	Good

 

Table 5: Analysis of Competitive bidding project [By Author]

 

 

6. Selection of preferred alternative

Using the Lexicography[v] non-compensatory model of multi attribute decision making, each project is examined to identify the best EV measurement technique to be used.

S/N	Attribute	Rank	Incremental Milestone	Equivalent units	Units Complete	Percent complete	50/50
1	Accuracy	3	Bidding=Mapping>Questions=Mid-term=Weekly report	Weekly report=Mapping=Questions>Mid-term=Bidding	Weekly report=Questions=Mid-term>Mapping>Bidding	Weekly report=Mapping=Questions=Bidding=Mid-term	Poor For ALL

Table 6: Application of Lexicography [By Author]

 

Problem solving (Questions) – unit complete and incremental milestone EV technique

Competitive bidding – incremental milestone

Mid-Term exam – unit complete

Mapping – incremental milestone

Weekly report – unit complete

7. Performance monitoring and post evaluation of results

For the purpose of performance monitoring, it would be good to use different EVM measurement methods for different milestones within the same project. However, I would use EVM method that gives the most accurate result for each milestone.

 

 

Reference

---

[i] Humphreys, G. (2002). Chapter 31 Measuring Accomplishment (pp. 621 -633). Project management using earned value (1^st edition). Orange CA.: Humphreys & Associates, Inc.

[ii] Haupt, E. & Carter, L. (2000). CPM 300 Principles of earned value implementation: CPM 300B – Management use of EV data. Retrieved from http://www.evmlibrary.org/library/CPM-300B%20Interpreting%20EVM%20Data,%20Haupt%20&%20Carter(2).pdf

 

[iii] Giammalvo, P. (2012, October 22). Integrated portfolio (asset), program (operations) and project management methodology course (cost engineering) Day 5 slides 50 -51 (An AACE methodology course). Lagos, Nigeria: Lonadek

[iv] Haupt, E. & Carter, L. (2000). CPM 300 Principles of earned value implementation: CPM 300B – Management use of EV data. Retrieved from http://www.evmlibrary.org/library/CPM-300B%20Interpreting%20EVM%20Data,%20Haupt%20&%20Carter(2).pdf

 

 

[v] Sullivan, W., Wicks, E., Koelling, P., Kumar, p., & Kumar, N. (2012).Chapter 14 Decision making considering multiattributes (p. 578). Engineering economy (15^th edition). England: Pearson Education Limited.

 

#END