Hatipkarasulu, Y (2020) A conceptual approach to graphically compare construction schedules. Construction Innovation, 20(1), pp. 43-60. ISSN 1471-4175
Abstract
Purpose: This paper aims to present a graphical comparison method for construction schedules, which illustrates the differences for each individual activity. The method overlays the observed differences on a bar chart creating a representation of whether each activity is ahead, on or behind schedule at a given date. Design/methodology/approach: The method is implemented using a Microsoft Project add-in (plug-in). The paper demonstrates the method and its potential uses with three illustration cases: a time impact analysis, an alternative analysis for the selection of subcontractors and a multi-baseline analysis of an as-built schedule. Findings: The cases included in the paper show that the proposed method uses a simplified and familiar attribute comparison for each activity in a schedule. The method affords flexibility in presenting differences between schedules such as the start/finish dates or duration. As the method does not rely on a specific software application or analysis method, it can be implement to different software applications as well as performance or delay analysis techniques. The method also makes it possible to present multiple and selective baseline comparisons overlaid on an updated or as-built schedule. Originality/value: The method graphically presents a comparison of start dates, durations and finish dates for each activity that can be integrated with any schedule. The method can be used for forensic analysis as well as project control measures during construction. As the method does not rely on any specific performance or delay calculation method, it can be applied to any forensic analysis technique and delay analysis.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction scheduling; delay analysis; graphical comparison; planning management; project controls; time impact analysis |
| Index terms: | planning management, duration, project control, construction scheduling, impact analysis, subcontractor, methodology, delay analysis |
| Subjects: | practitioner, control systems, data analysis and analytics, operations management, research methods, project controls |
| Topics: | Time Control, Roles and Professions, Project Management, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
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