Slip chart-inspired project schedule diagramming: Links, extension to network schedules, and unification

Araújo, L G and Lucko, G (2016) Slip chart-inspired project schedule diagramming: Links, extension to network schedules, and unification. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 142(7): 4016011, ISSN 0733-9364

Abstract

Schedule delays are an unfortunate prevalent occurrence in the construction industry. To clearly visualize, track, and mitigate them, graphical and analytical tools are needed. But traditional bar charts do not clearly show delays, and network charts all but hide them. Neither facilitates side-by-side comparisons of schedule updates. Networks can be converted into a modified slip chart from the aerospace industry, which is particularly adept at analyzing delays. Contributions to the body of knowledge include the ability to communicate schedule information more efficiently with less ink, yet in a time-scaled manner, including lead or lag constraints, performing side-by-side comparisons that immediately reveal float gain or loss versus criticality, rapidly identifying underperforming activities, and scrutinizing delay events and assigning responsibility to project participants. To validate the new approach, a delay example from the literature is reanalyzed to gain insights into schedule performance. Comparing the network conversion with a previously developed linear schedule one indicates that the entire approach provides a single framework to plan and control project schedules, which thus can be called the Unified Diagramming Method.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: cost and schedule
Index terms: schedule performance, body of knowledge, schedule delay, conversion, aerospace industry, construction industry
Subjects: manufacturing engineering, industry analysis, project controls, knowledge management
Topics: Time Control, Engineering Principles, Information Management, Research Practice
Descriptive scope: 2 CT

N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here