Page 194 - Untitled-1

COST/SCHEDULE INTEGRATION 173

Boy, were they ever wrong! If the financial data had been coordinated with
the progress data, it would have been noted that only 40 percent of the planned
work had been accomplished. Not only was the project behind schedule (40% vs.
50%) but they had spent 45 percent of the budget to accomplish only 40 percent
of the work. The finance report, of good cost results on this project, was mislead-
ing and wrong.

This example is used later in the book (see Section 8) to build a case for us-
ing earned value analysis techniques. But it’s also important to note it here, in
defense of integrating the cost function with the other project management el-
ements. There is no justification for isolating the financial data. It is okay to
utilize different tools to support these functions, and it is even okay to have
different parts of the organization responsible for each part. But they have to
be connected.

Options for Cost/Schedule Integration

It is debatable whether it is better to have all of the costing and scheduling func-
tions supported by a single program, or located in two or more specialized tools.
There are advantages and disadvantages to both and there is no clear winner.

The case for the single, integrated solution is headed by the ability to have
just one set of data, in one location. Anytime that you have multiple programs
with multiple databases, you are prone to several problems. One is that the
data in the two locations may have differences. We have better things to do
than to spend our time explaining to senior management, or the client, why a
screen that they are looking at says that $100,000 has been spent, and our
screen shows $94,000.

Another problem is the timing of the data. It could well be that the database
with the $100,000 expense has a data date of 5/1 while the lower cost was as of
4/15. As soon as you have more than one database, you always have to wonder
which one is the latest and most valid. Furthermore, the 5/1 database may very
well be entirely valid, but the 4/15 database is the one that is synchronized with
the scheduling data. Such synchronization is essential for performance measure-
ment operations, such as earned value analysis.

Also, in favor of the single product approach is the ability to enter data just
once. With two separate systems, the possibility of data errors is doubled. And
one more thing: With a single system, you are always certain of a data match be-
tween the cost data and the schedule data. There will be a one-to-one relation-
ship of all elements.

So it would appear that the single product approach is the way to go. But let’s