There are three critical scenarios where splitting a BOQ item into multiple activities is essential. Let’s explore these cases in detail and see why applying this best practice can significantly improve your project schedule’s reliability.

1. Different Locations: The “One Size Fits All” Mistake

One of the most common errors is combining work across different locations into a single activity. For example, in an apartment schedule, planners often combine all tiling work that includes the bedroom and the bathroom into one activity.

Why is this a problem? Each area has different dependencies and logic flows. For instance:

• The bedroom tiles can be completed after installing the bedroom ceiling work.

• The bathroom tiles can be completed after installing the bathroom false ceiling.

Moreover, the successors of the tile work in each area are entirely different. If the bathroom tiling is delayed, marking the “tiles” activity as in-progress will give the wrong impression that all tiling work is incomplete. This can cause delays in unrelated activities, such as wardrobe installation in the bedroom, or sanitaryware in the bathroom resulting in misleading forecasts and out-of-sequence work.

Solution: Split Activities by Location

Instead of having one tiling activity for the entire apartment, split it into “Bedroom Tiles” and “Bathroom Tiles” as separate activities. This allows the schedule to reflect the unique dependencies and progress of each area. It reduces out-of-sequence work and improves the accuracy of your forecasts.

Bottom Line: If you have multiple locations with different logic dependencies, split them into separate activities from the start to keep your schedule accurate and realistic.

2. Execution Spans Over Time: The Hidden Delays in Staged Work

Another mistake is failing to account for staged execution when a single activity is spread over a long period. For example, painting a building involves multiple stages:

• Primer & stucco

• First coat

• Second coat

• Final coat

Some planners create a single “Paint” activity with a 14-day duration, representing the combined “net” effort of all stages. However, the actual execution span might take 3 months due to other intermediate activities and dependencies between coats.

Why This Approach Fails

By treating painting as one activity, the schedule doesn’t reflect intermediate progress. If the primer stage is complete, the schedule will still show “Paint” in progress, making it unclear what stage the work is at. Additionally, this creates unnecessary delays and misleading float calculations because the activity has been “in progress” for 3 months while the original duration is only 14 days.

Solution: Split Activities by Stages

Instead of a single painting activity, create separate activities for each stage. This approach provides better visibility into progress, avoids unnecessary delays, and enables more accurate forecasting.

Bottom Line: If an activity spans multiple stages with other activities in between, split it into separate activities to better reflect reality.

3. Different Materials: Tracking Procurement and Dependencies

A single BOQ item can involve different core materials with different procurement timelines. For example, a cladding installation activity might require:

• Metal framing

• Insulation panels

• Exterior cladding sheets

If you combine all these materials under one activity, the schedule won’t capture delays in the procurement or installation of each material. As a result, your project may face unforeseen out-of-sequence work and misleading delay forecasts.

Solution: Split Activities by Material

Break the cladding work into separate activities, such as:

• Metal Frame Installation

• Insulation Installation

• Cladding Installation

This breakdown allows you to track the procurement and installation of each material independently. If one material is delayed, you can adjust the schedule accordingly without impacting unrelated activities.

Bottom Line: If an activity involves different core materials, split it into separate activities to improve procurement tracking and minimize misleading delays.

Conclusion: The Power of a Well-Structured Schedule

You don’t have to split activities for each minor scope item because you don’t want to have 200,000 instead of 5,000 activities into your schedule. You need to keep the same level of details but add few more activities and only as necessary. As a planner, your job is to create a schedule that reflects reality. Misrepresenting BOQ items as single activities can lead to inaccurate progress tracking, out-of-sequence work, and misleading forecasts. By splitting activities in cases of different locations, execution spanning over time, or different materials, you can avoid these pitfalls and ensure your project schedule remains a reliable forecasting tool.

Remember: A detailed, structured schedule may take more time to build, but it saves you time and headaches in the long run by providing accurate, actionable insights.

Regards,

Osama Saad, MBA, PMP, PSP, CCP, PMI-SP

Learn More!

Enroll in our Planning Engineer and Project Control Courses

The post When Planners Should Split BOQ Items into Multiple Activities in Schedules appeared first on Smart PM Blog.

This gap often leads to well-planned projects that fail during execution because scheduling best practices are ignored. Scheduling is more than just creating a baseline; it’s a specialized field with foundations, principles, and protocols that must be followed to maintain a reliable, realistic schedule.

Why Scheduling Is More Than Just Setting Dates

Too often, planners approach scheduling with the sole goal of producing realistic activity dates. While this is important, it’s only part of the picture. The backend configurations that includes the logic, relationships, and constraints, etc are equally important.

A static schedule quickly becomes irrelevant in a dynamic project environment. The real art of scheduling lies in ensuring that the schedule remains harmonic, flexible, and easy to maintain as the project progresses.

A well-developed schedule isn’t just about baseline creation; it’s about managing the schedule as it moves through time. The goal is to build a schedule that is both Realistic and Update-friendly

If your schedule updates consistently show unrealistic forecasts, the issue may not lie in your plan – but in poor scheduling practices.

7 Key Areas to Watch for in Your Schedule

Here are critical scheduling best practices that planners often overlook:

1- Lags

Excessive lags can cause misleading forecasts if not managed carefully. Replace lags with task dependent activities as necessary.

2- Critical Path Structure

The CPM network behaviour is very sensitive toward the critical path. A weak or inaccurate critical path results in a schedule that doesn’t reflect the true time risks. Ensure your critical path is clear and logical.

3- Total Float

Extremely high or low total float values can indicate poor schedule health. Total float review shou be a a part of your schedule quality checklist – even in the schedule updates to ensure your schedule stays relevant and reflects true project flexibility.

4- Redundant Logic

Unnecessary or redundant relationships between tasks can complicate your schedule and cause misleading forecasts.

5- Out-of-Sequence Progress

When tasks are completed out of sequence, your schedule’s logic can become disrupted. Correct out-of-sequence progress and ensure your updates reflect actual progress.

6- Logic and Resource-Driven Relationships

Many planners focus on the naturalization part of the logic (e.g. the one between block and plaster). However, the relationships that govern resource crew movements should be incorporated in the schedule too. Scheduling provides a strong framework for resource allocation.

7- Task Fragmentation

Breaking tasks into overly small fragments creates unnecessary complexity. Instead, focus on logical, manageable task sizes that make your schedule easier to track and update.

From Static to Dynamic: The Art of Scheduling for Execution

To truly excel as a project control professional, you must shift your mindset from static planning to dynamic scheduling. A dynamic schedule adapts to changes and provides reliable forecasts throughout the project lifecycle. Following scheduling best practices help you achieve this goal effectively.

In the end, scheduling isn’t just about the initial plan or the baseline. It’s about mastering the art of movement through time, ensuring that your project can adapt to reality while staying aligned with its objectives.

Conclusion

The difference between a good planner and a great project controller lies in their ability to maintain the schedule’s integrity over time. Remember, your schedule isn’t just a document — it’s a living tool that can significantly impact your project’s success.

So, take a step back from your baseline, dive deeper into the scheduling fundamentals, and start building schedules that truly work in practice.

Regards,

Osama Saad, MBA, PMP, PSP, CCP, PMI-SP

Learn More!

Enroll in our Planning Engineer and Project Control Courses

The post Stop ignoring scheduling: Why a good plan isn’t enough appeared first on Smart PM Blog.

Let’s explore why it’s important to minimize lags and when to replace them with task-dependent activities to enhance schedule integrity.

Why Are Lags Problematic?

Lags are time delays applied between activities to represent waiting periods or preparatory work. For example, a planner might add a 7-day lag between two Activities to represent “work preparation.” While this approach seems convenient, it introduces several challenges:

1. Lack of Attributes: Unlike activities, lags do not carry attributes such as descriptions, durations, or percent complete. This makes them untrackable and excludes them from scope definition or progress monitoring.
2. Ambiguity: The meaning of a lag might be clear to the schedule developer but not to reviewers, project stakeholders, or future users. This can result in disputes and misleading forecasts.
3. Impact on Claims: In cases like Extension of Time (EOT) claims or delay analyses, lags can lead to conflicting interpretations. For instance, is a 7-day lag representing site clearance by the client or work preparation by the contractor? Such ambiguity can delay resolutions and escalate disputes.

To avoid this conflict, the contractor can make the purpose of each lag clear in the baseline narrative report but it is not a common or practical approach.

Lags Best Practices

Wherever possible, lags should be replaced by task-dependent activities. For example, instead of inserting a lag for “work preparation”, introduce a task-dependent activity called “Work Preparation” that has its own attributes like a clear description, duration and relationships.

This approach provides several benefits:

• Clarity and Accountability: Activities are fully trackable.
• Transparency: Reviewers and stakeholders can clearly understand the project scope.
• Reduced Disputes: Activities eliminate the ambiguity of lags, reducing the potential for conflicting interpretations.

While replacing lags with activities is often ideal, lags have their role in specific situations. For example, a Start-to-Start (SS) + lag relationship between “Block Work” and “Plaster Work” is convenient. This is acceptable when no intermediate tasks occur during the lag period.

Consequences of Misusing Lags

Lags are frequently used by planning engineers for:

• Material Handling and Storing: Delays in moving or storing materials.
• Work Preparation: Time needed to organize resources before starting a task.
• Curing: Waiting periods for concrete to set.

While these scenarios are common, introducing an activity often provides a better solution, offering greater control and clarity. Moreover, excessive lags can result in significant challenges:

• Void in Scope Definition: Untraceable lags create gaps in the schedule that cannot be monitored.
• Misleading Forecasts: Ambiguity in lag interpretation can impact project timelines.
• Complicated Dispute Resolutions: In delay claims, conflicting interpretations of lag meaning can lead to costly and time-consuming disagreements.

Conclusion

Lags must be used strategically in project scheduling because overuse or misuse of lags compromises the schedule’s clarity and reliability. By replacing critical lags with task-dependent activities and minimizing unnecessary lags, we can create robust schedules that are both reliable and easy to maintain in the future.

Regards,

Osama Saad, MBA, PMP, PSP, CCP, PMI-SP

Learn More!

Enroll in our Planning Engineer and Project Control Courses

The post Mind The Lag appeared first on Smart PM Blog.

Longest Path

Definition: It is the longest sequence of activities that drives the forecasted schedule completion date.

Focus: It focuses on the “longest” chain of activities and the dominant driver of the forecasted completion date.

Use Case: The longest path analysis is more prominent in the schedule updates. This analysis can examine how the forecasted completion date is derived because it can effectively determine the longest sequence of activities among other competing critical paths.

Critical Path

Definition: It consists of activities that have a total float amount of less than or equal to zero. Although the total float amount that determines the criticality threshold can be customized inside Primavera P6 under the scheduling options (refer to the below snapshot), zero is the industry standard.

Focus: It focuses on the most critical tasks that directly impact the contract’s completion date.

Use Case: The critical path analysis is used in both the baseline schedule and the schedule updates. However, in the schedule updates, the critical path analysis will produce distinct results over using the longest path analysis alone. Analyzing the multiple float paths is an effective method for performing critical path analysis during project execution.

Identifying the Longest and Critical Paths

There are some ways to identify and recognize both the longest path activities and the critical path activities in P6. However, I will only cover the most common features that I personally use.

1- Filter

You can filter the longest path and critical activities as highlighted in the below image.

2- Activity Columns

You can add “Critical” and “Longest Path” columns to your activities layout as below.

3- Grouping

You can group your activities by whether the activities are “Critical” or  “Longest Path” as per the image below.

Finally, I would like to add two final points you need to consider while analyzing the critical path and longest path activities.

• In the baseline, the critical and longest paths are the same.
• In the schedule update, a critical path is not necessarily the longest.
• The longest path is always a critical path except when the forecasted completion date is earlier than the contract completion date. In this case, the longest path will show a positive float and therefore, it is not critical. However, this is rarely the case. In my experience, Contractors do not often submit a schedule update that shows a completion date that is earlier than the contract completion date.

Conclusion

To sum up, the critical path and longest path analyses can shadow each other but are not the same. Performing any of both analyses will depend on your objective and which schedule version you are using.

Regards,

Osama Saad, MBA, PMP, PSP, CCP, PMI-SP

Learn More!

Enroll in our Planning Engineer and Project Control Courses

The post Longest Path vs Critical Path appeared first on Smart PM Blog.