I have been employed in the construction industry for over 30 years. The majority of this time has been spent in the role of planning and co-ordination and I now spend a proportion of my time involved with time-related disputes.
In respect of delay analysis, likeminded colleagues and I have always championed the application of experience and a pragmatic approach based on the available factual evidence. It is therefore encouraging to read Dominic Helps’ comments (5 November, page 54) and hear that Nick Henchie’s hopes that the perception of delay analysis as a black art may be dispelled (7 January, page 46).
The existence of this myth can probably be put down to the technique referred to as critical path analysis (CPA) and the volume of undecipherable charts it often brings with it. CPA is a helpful tool, but the SCL Delay and Disruption Protocol offers no explanation of why it should always be appropriate and neither does it say why other recognised programming methods may be inappropriate.
It’s time to stop being led up the critical path and to adopt a realistic and reasonable approach.
Stephen Lowsley, Project Planning