An Investigation into the Use of Laney U Chart as a Visual Schedule Tracker to Graphically Monitor the Schedule Performance Index

Open access

Abstract

The intent of this article is to explore a mathematically sound method to graphically monitor schedule performance index (SPI) such that it enables the project manager to take objective data based decisions regarding the progress of the project schedule. The article aims to leverage the theory and application of control charts, specifically the U chart and Laney U chart and test its applicability to earned value management by trending schedule performance index on a time series chart. Off the shelf software, MinitabTM was used to generate the control charts based on earned value and planned value. While this paper proves that the Laney U chart, with correct interpretation, acts as an effective trigger-based tool for schedule risk management, it also generates further avenues for research into similar use of control charts for cost performance and other quality indices.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Anbari F. T. (2003). Earned value project management method and extensions. Project management journal 34(4) 12-23.

  • Fleming Q. W. & Koppelman J. M. (2016). Earned value project management. Newtown Square Pennsylvania: Project Management Institute.

  • Hansen J. P. (2007). Population control charts for population data. Journal for Healthcare Quality 29(1) 29-36.

  • Jacob D. (2003). Forecasting Project Schedule Completion with Earned Value Metrics The Measurable News 1 7-9.

  • Jones G. & Govindaraju K. (2001). A Graphical Method for Checking Attribute Control Chart Assumptions. Quality Engineering 13(1) 19-26.

  • Khesal T. Saghaei A. Khalilzadeh M. Rahiminezhad Galankashi M. & Soltani R. (2019). Integrated cost quality risk and schedule control through earned value management (EVM). Journal of Engineering Design and Technology 17(1) 183-203.

  • Laney D. (2007). P-Charts and U-Charts Work (But Only Sometimes). Quality Digest 14(4). Retrieved from https://www.qualitydigest.com/may07/departments/what_works.shtml on October 10 2019.

  • Laney D. B. (2002). Improved control charts for attributes. Quality Engineering 14(4) 531-537.

  • Leu S. S. Lin Y. C. Chen T. A. & Ho Y. Y. (2006). Improving traditional earned value management by incorporating statistical process charts. Proceedings of ISARC 275-280.

  • Lipke W. (2002). Statistical Process Control of Project Performance. The Measurable News 25-28.

  • Lipke W. & Vaughn J. (2000). Statistical process control meets earned value. CrossTalk: The Journal of Defense Software Engineering 13.

  • Lipke W. 2003 Schedule is different The Measurable News March 2003 31-34

  • Moon J. (2018). Theory and Application of J Charts for Holistic Risk Based Statistical Adverse Event Trending. International Journal of Health and Economic Development 4(1) 9-31.

  • Oakland J. S. (2007). Statistical process control. Routledge. Linacre House Jordan Hill: Butterworth-Heinemann

  • Prayogi R. Pratami D. Puspita I. A. & Bermano A. R. (2019). Measuring Schedule Performance of Fiber to The Home Project Using Earned Value Management. In 2018 International Conference on Industrial Enterprise and System Engineering (IcoIESE 2018). Atlantis Press.

  • Vandevoorde S. & Vanhoucke M. (2006). A comparison of different project duration forecasting methods using earned value metrics. International journal of project management 24(4) 289-302.

Search
Journal information
Metrics
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 52 52 36
PDF Downloads 44 44 30