Comparing the health of the project to that of a vehicle reveals some strik-ing similarities. People who neglect the routine maintenance of a vehicle typically experience premature breakdowns and exorbitant repair costs that could be traced directly back to that neglect. Similarly, if a contractor fails to carry out routine maintenance on a project, instead taking the easy approach of updating schedules, the outcome is very likely to be an expen-sive ‘repair’ in the form of a claims battle and often a claims loss, or even missed opportunities.
Most construction professionals do not enjoy reporting progress. This task rivals in unpopularity the other bane of keeping minutes of meetings.
The fact that the progress-reporting duty is taken on not with relish, but usually because no-one else will touch it with a barge pole, is evident in the tosh that often passes for the monthly client progress report.
These reports concern more than just progress, of course. The usual sec-tions are there – safety, risk, commercial, etc. – but this chapter concerns the programme/progress section. Quite often the programme and/or progress sections fall into one of two approaches:
1 The ‘I’m going to prove to everyone, especially my boss, how clever I am, with lots of technical jargon and long words’ approach; or
2 The ‘Let’s take last month’s report and just change the figures’
approach.
The first approach will be almost impenetrable and unfathomable to anyone reading it, including the boss. The second approach is plain boring and is effectively saying to the client that you can’t be bothered and that the monthly report is unimportant.
On most projects, the client is looking for simplicity in the monthly report, and he is primarily interested in one key thing: when will the project be complete. The information in the programme/progress section of the report to the client should be easy to understand and well annot-ated/explained.
The format of progress reporting should be agreed with the client at the
outset of the project. The programme, which will normally be maintained as a critical path network in proprietary planning software, should be capable of being summarised to level 1 barchart format.
The most readily understood graphic is that of the ‘staggered-line’.
Graphics of the original baseline programme and the current revised or working programme should have a vertical line showing the progress cut-off date. Progress may be indicated either by colouring along the bar or by the vertical line diverting to the actual progress position for each bar. This is a very simplistic ‘progress indicator’ chart. See the example in Figure 10.1.
Unfortunately, the client is generally left to interpret the chart for himself, and often he will not have the information to do this meaningfully and may easily jump to the wrong conclusion. Therefore, both the chart and the accompanying narrative should contain an explanation of why activities are shown in delay, what the implications are for completion of the project, and how you intend to redress the situation and by when.
The simple ‘progress indicator’ chart and an accompanying narrative may be enough for many projects, but each project is unique and many will necessitate auxiliary methods, which may even be required under the contract. Details of three such methods are given below.
The first of these is the ‘planned progress’ chart. This addresses the volume of work, and simply measures the volume of progress in terms of activity weeks, giving no allowance for weighting of activities. Planned progress can be shown in terms of a cumulative S-curve of activity weeks achieved if the early dates are met. Another curve can be generated from the late dates. When plotted on the same chart, the area between the curves represents the zone within which the actual achievement line should lie. See the example in Figure 10.2.
Figures are calculated after each progress update and the actual line plotted. The closer this line is to the early (lefthand) line, then the more com-fortable all parties should feel. A drift towards the late (righthand) line means that float is being used up and more activities are becoming critical.
Even though there is no weighting factor, the fact that every programme activity is taken into account means that the law of averages comes into play, and the outcome is virtually identical to one where complex weightings based on earned value or work content have been laboriously applied.
A second method is the ‘Progress Tracking’ chart. This is a simple but effective way of showing progress in terms of quantity or value of work done at any point. It is basically two charts in one. The ‘x’ axis is a common time scale. The lefthand ‘y’ axis shows unit per time unit (week or month) shown in histogram form; whereas the righthand side relates to the cumula-tive figure and is shown as a simple line. The actual performance is input on a regular basis and compared to the plan. See the example in Figure 10.3.
Because this method relies on the work being measured in the same units throughout, this approach is well suited for package works or 60 Programmes and record keeping
Figure 10.1A progress indicator chart.
Figure 10.2 A planned progress chart.
Figure 10.3 A progress tracking chart.
Progress records and other record keeping 63 individual operations or trades. It would usually be introduced to show close control of a particular critical or near-critical activity. As the planned figures are likely to be based on early dates, it is important to stress that the plan is target-based and that moderate slippage does not necessarily mean that the programme has been compromised.
The third method is a ‘line of balance’ chart. This approach comprises a series of cumulative line graphs set against a common time scale. This approach is somewhat specialist in nature and is ideal for situations of rep-etition, such as housing and high-rise. See the example in Figure 10.4.
The angle of each line represents the rate of output, and the gap between the lines shows the working float between operations or trades. In a situation where the lines represent recorded progress on site, it is easy to see who is delaying whom. This method also allows simple ‘what-if’ sce-narios to be explored.
A further method of recording progress which should be encouraged is that of colouring in drawings as work proceeds. However, the colouring in of drawings is not particularly useful in comparing progress to a plan. But it is an accessible way of showing how the site is proceeding and should not be dismissed on the grounds of crudity. Often it is exactly what is needed to convey a sense of momentum; and this method of recording progress is particularly useful in a claim situation.
However, for progress reports, this method should only cover one or two activities at a time, and one should avoid confusing the message
Figure 10.4 A line of balance chart.
through overkill. Types of activities that are particularly suited to this method include piling, pipe caps, slabs, roof coverings and ceilings.
To summarise, simplicity is the watchword. First, the contractor should state when the project is forecast to be complete. Second, give the client a programme with a staggered line and explain the main features; including what is to be done to recoup lost time. Finally, use any of the auxiliary methods, as appropriate, to focus on critical areas or to get key points across.
Progress reporting should not be a complicated progress. Clients do not scrutinise boring or complicated documents to find the hidden message. It is in everyone’s interest to present information in as simple a format as pos-sible. The client will never complain of condescension if the message is clear and, if he wants something a little more sophisticated, he will ask for it.
It may be necessary in claim situations to develop a daily, specific, as-built programme to justify a delay claim. An as-as-built record of the accepted project programme will usually only record the actual start and finish dates for each activity. However, to support a delay and/or disrup-tion claim, it is beneficial to identify and record multiple starts and stops of affected activities.
Site diaries maintained by job-site supervisory staff are important source documents used to develop a daily, specific, as-built programme.
The site diaries should record the following information on a daily basis:
• weather;
• manpower by number, trade and subcontractor;
• specific work performed, with reference to the corresponding pro-gramme activity number;
• delays/interruptions/issues encountered;
• work stoppages;
• variation, or change in the order work performed;
• repair or rework performed;
• RFIs (requests for information) submitted;
• CVIs (confirmation of verbal instructions) received.
A quality as-built programme can be generated from well-kept site diaries.
The as-built data can be maintained in an electronic database, and nowa-days can be collected using handheld devices during job-site walkthroughs.
Photographs are also a very helpful way of documenting site progress.
However, to be useful they should be labelled with the date of the photo and specific description of the subject.
Records in a claim situation
Obtaining a correct extension of time and time-related costs is all to do with the strength of a case, and whether it can be proved with factual 64 Programmes and record keeping
records. It is a truism to say that there is no substitute for good record keeping.
For example, can you prove that an entitlement to an extension of time resulted from information being received late? The key element in most cases lies in the contemporaneous project records. Success in a claim is all about keeping them; and then using them to demonstrate cause, effect and entitlement.
First, let’s deal with the programme; for if you don’t keep details of what was built and when, then there is very little chance of proving cause and effect. Earlier chapters in this section explain the importance of plan-ning and programming.
Now let’s consider the contemporaneous project records, and particu-larly those that relate to the work activities on the programme. Frequently, these records are just a list of percentages for the programme activities as at the date of the site meeting.
Ideally, for each activity the following progress information should be maintained on a fortnightly or monthly basis as a minimum:
1 In addition to recording the percentage of work achieved, record the actual start and finish dates, together with any periods of inactivity or stoppages.
2 Where possible, subdivide the programme activity into smaller ele-ments, e.g. for brickwork and blockwork subdivide into elevations; for suspended ceilings subdivide into floor areas or groups of rooms.
3 Maintain allocation sheets of who did what, where and when.
4 The weather conditions.
5 Any problems encountered together with any steps taken to overcome them including resources used.
In addition all operational supervisory staff should keep meaningful site diaries, supplemented with photographs as these often prove very useful later if a dispute materialises. Photographs must be properly identified and the following information should be recorded on the reverse:
1 the date and time taken;
2 position from where the photograph was taken;
3 full details of the subject matter;
4 a reference number for the photograph;
5 name of the photographer.
Disruption and loss of productivity are difficult to prove as generally very little contemporaneous data are available from site showing the levels of pro-ductivity attained before and after the disruptive event. Any data kept that can establish disruption and productivity loss, particularly in respect of sub-contractors who carry out the majority of the work, will be invaluable.
Progress records and other record keeping 65