How to use Earned Value Analysis with Microsoft Project

[Spy$Eyes]

Here I am trying to explain how other essential properties of the Earned Value Management (EVM) with Microsoft Project can be mapped. A major success of the EVM is that it is for the Earned Value (EV) only activities are well written, which are really ready and will thus increases the pressure on completion. Thus it becomes a requirement that each activity a verifiable result (deliverable) has, and, second, that this is really done and not done yet still remaining work - two conditions that are often neglected in project work. The EVM is used therefore in the maintenance stage of completion of the 0/100-Method happy. The EV is an activity so long 0 (0%) until it is completed, only after completion it is 100% of planned cost (baseline cost). Variations from this are the 20/80 or 50/50-Method: 20% (50%) of the planned costs are allocated to the EV, if the activity is started, the remaining 80% (50%) is added on completion. The calculation of the EV to diverging levels of completion is only allowed for example to administrative processes that have terminated any specific outcome, must be included but for the capacity and cost planning into the project plan and will be updated continuously in accordance with planning.

[Spy$Eyes]

In Microsoft Project, the EV analogous to the completion of the commotion is calculated. With the completion of appropriate care levels (0% / 100% / 20% / 100% or even 50% / 100%) may be more than the rules of completion are presented, but hamper the reporting of project status (such as mapping of remaining time / remaining effort, etc.) one. By various authors is proposed field "%-Physically completed the" use for the EVA, which is the earning-option adjustable by means of (TOOLS / OPTIONS / CALCULATE).

But this is an additional status to maintain. Regardless of the Planned Value but is always calculated as if all transactions up to date precisely the status of completion, as it identifies the plan (and how to function even with the "update is calculated as shown). This PV and EV were calculated but different methodologies, which complicates the interpretation of significant deviation, as well as an activity that is processed as planned, features on the way to completion systematic deviations between PV and EV. After the 0 / 100, for example, the EV method is always 0 to complete the activity, is the PV, however, would grow steadily. To avoid deviations by calculating the values of different methodologies, the PV must remain so long midnight until the planned end is reached. Only then he can get the 100% corresponding value. To achieve this, I propose three custom fields before operation. A text box that applied for this operation method (0 / 100, 20/80, etc. defined), and two cost fields, one for the PV and one for EV, in which the formulas are stored in the calculation of PV and the EV. The cost field is enabled for the summary tasks the rollup "summation".

[Spy$Eyes]

This will be achieved by PV and EV is calculated only from the lowest activity and accumulated on the upper levels. The difficulties of the baseline rollups for ex post transactions in the collection process and the project summary task are resolved. You only need the basic plan for the new selective operations to store, and already they are included in the EVA correctly. The fields I call EV method with a table that defines the acceptable methods for the Planned Value PV and EV for the Earned Value.

Cost field PV 

Switch ([EV-method] = "none"; 0; 
[EV-method] = "as scheduled", [BCWS]; 
[Projected Top]>] [status date; 0; 
[Planned end] <= [state date];] [Planned costs; 
[EV-method] = "0 / 100", 0; 
[EV-method] = "20/80", 0.2 *] [Planned costs; 
[EV-method] = "50/50", 0.5 *] [Planned costs; 
True, 0)

Cost field EV 

Switch ([EV-method] = "none"; 0; 
[Actual Finish] = [] end;] [Planned costs; 
[Actual Start] <]> [start, 0; 
[EV-method] = "as scheduled", [BCWP]; 
[EV-method] = "0 / 100", 0; 
[EV-method] = "20/80", 0.2 *] [Planned costs; 
[EV-method] = "50/50", 0.5 *] [Planned costs; 
True, 0)

The switch function has as arguments a list of value pairs, each consisting of a logical expression and the associated probability value. The list is processed from left to right. Once a logical expression "true" result, the cell value and the processing is terminated. Therefore, as the last pair of values "True, 0" is inserted so that the field always has a defined value.

[Spy$Eyes]

The EV method "none" I have introduced to specifically exclude individual files from the EV calculations. This can be useful if the timing between the actual cost is not unique (more about that in Part 3). The EV method "as scheduled" uses the calculation algorithms of Microsoft Project, as it is for ongoing administrative tasks that have no concrete results scheduled, typical and correct. These processes do I update the project plan also always calculated with the function "update such as".

For all other methods will be used Planned Value: If the status date is later than the scheduled end, 100% of planned cost of the PV will be credited if the planned start date is after the status date to the PV is not credited. The next value pairs in the switch function of PV are therefore processed only if the process should be started according to baseline, but not yet to be completed. Here are the values for the PV, which should be in the works, modeled according to the different methods. Similarly, the calculation of the Earned Value established. Only the date queries unplanned events compare with the status date, but to test whether any set of "Actual Start" and "Actual Finish" values. If the current top set, the process has begun, regardless of the degree of completion, and is the current end is set, the process is complete. With these two custom fields are now calculated PV and EV consistent on the method chosen and you can calculate SPI = EV / PV, the reflects the scheduling status of the project and not on the effects of different methods of calculation of EV and PV arise should be discussed. The calculation of the EV has the advantage of past transactions that are in the project plan or in the future, to contribute fully to the EV, which is not in the standard calculation made in Project. There, the EV will only be fully included in the EV calculation, if the process ends before the date of the status date.

A little added value of EVA own fields: group the events on the field EV method, you will receive an analysis of their cost structure for the EV methods. You see, what proportion of the total costs by administrative costs, and what costs will be spent directly for the deliverable. To not have their own identification of the processes is necessary.

[Spy$Eyes]

I have shown how to use custom fields to calculate the Planned Value (PV) and Earned Value (EV) according to different methods of completion status (eg 0 / 100 method can be done). With these two values enables the first key figure - the Schedule Performance Index (SPI = EV / PV)) - calculate the measure of the deviation of the current project status, scheduling compared to the baseline provides a. In this third part, I would like to discuss some specific features, which in the determination of the Actual Cost (AC) - Is the cost of note - to be that the second parameter of the Cost Performance Index (CPI = EV / AC) and arrives in the states the extent to which my cost of the planning depart from. Compared to this the actual costs incurred by the proposed costs of the performance achieved so far (Earned Value), not planned out this time budget. Actual costs of a project to hold the sounds only once for a simple hard work, not just against the demarcation of the cost to a certain status date - and perhaps every week again. The cost just to pull out of the financial system is the correct and appropriate to complete a project. Unfortunately, that the accounts of bills but never in sync with the project progress. Even if an external consultant immediately to the end of the month his bill, sends it takes - if the processes are very fast - that appear two weeks until the costs in financial accounting. But until then, each status report is long on the boards.

[Spy$Eyes]

A well-functioning time registration is to be able to make for the return of the expenses in my experience, a necessary condition to Earned Value Analysis promptly (and if the evaluation comes too late, no one needs them anyway). In the preliminary to the EVA I have to think hard about what costs I include in the determination of the CPI and will be determined by the frequency of status. I argue for differentiated solutions that provide me with one hand, current data in short time intervals, the other, correct data on specific reporting intervals or milestones. When I have a real-time feedback of the actual expenses, subject to actual costs but steadily, while the PA will be credited only after completion of the activity to 100% (see discussion in Part 2 of this series). This results in a systematic difference between EV and AC, which leads to discussions, as the AC tend to be larger than the EV. This uncertainty is manageable if the duration of the activities is not too long (50-10 days) and the project in a sufficient number of activities is structured. To overcome this discrepancy, I have already implemented policies that involve the calculation of the CPI, only those activities which have been completed. The best way to define in this case, a status of "completed constructed" - a custom attribute - that is set manually when all costs are covered for these activities safely. A little more complicated such a procedure, the EVA, as a separate EV be defined for the calculation of the CPI has, however, prevents blurring in all discussions about the method.

[Spy$Eyes]

In Microsoft Project take on the Actual Work field and current costs, the role of the actual values. If you want to enter data directly in the project plan, they must be entered for each assignment in each operation. This can be used in the view process or resource use for the period of weeks or even days to be made. However, one must carefully mind here is that the transaction period is set to Fixed. Otherwise, Project begins to Microsoft (and associated dates) to change all the deadlines, for the remaining work will be distributed to the rest of the activity and the transaction Fixed Work or Fixed unit, this leads inevitably to amend the expiry date. This approach requires not only the response based on activities by the employees, but also causes a lot of effort and needs lots of care in the maintenance of the project plan. Only with the Project Server solution and implemented there feedback on the timesheets I think this way for passable, but a recording of expenses per procedure requires a carefully structured project plan, employees are encouraged to fill out their time in the message, do not despair. The advantage is that the actual cost can then be removed from the project plan in Microsoft Project and all useful metrics for cost variance are defined. Still, I've met a project in which a comparison of planned and actual was made in the level of detailed activities. The management was interested only in deviations at the level of project and the project manager was happy with the comparison at the level of work packages. A response only at the level of the project is in the default Project Server solution already provided. This can be configured easily without having to program evaluations.

[Spy$Eyes]

In the case of the preferred solution I have actual expenditures and actual costs are not directly in the project plan is updated, but kept in separate data structures. The current work and current costs in the project plan that come only with the completion of activities and come closest to the Earned Value, not actual costs. These procedures have both in the project plan and in the feedback, the posting will be displayed clearly. Mostly I use to work packages and arrange any type of transaction (with a custom text field) exactly one work package. In the Request form the same work packages are stored, can the team members who book their feedback. A few macros to help keep the system consistent with low manual effort. For the calculation of the CPI do I copy the EV from the project plan into an Excel spreadsheet, and also the actual cost of the time and cost tracking. The calculation of key figures such as SPI, CPI and others is then easy to do in Excel, and versions in clear diagrams.

[IMG]http://img231.imageshack.us/img231/8...istracking.jpg[/IMG]

In the Excel table can also represent the development of key figures on the time axis, as in Project itself, the values can only be read on the current status date. Here, Excel provides a simple and useful. The effort to incorporate the data in Excel is very small, 15 minutes to take on the current information in a prepared table rich forever. The effort to get current data in sufficient quality, the time to create a representative display exceeds by far.

[Pratim]

With the use of custom fields can be with Microsoft Project Earned Value and Planned Value simply and reliably according to the desired method of completion (0/100-Method determine). The cost of this is - a structured project plan with resource and cost planning - provided only very slight. Project boundaries has in my opinion in the recording of actual expenditures and actual costs. Here, the algorithms that schedule the remaining work on the end of the process of making felt uncomfortable, so they may be useful in other situations. But in the estimation of completion dates, I see the use of project and the team much more in demand as a program. With a parallel acquisition is done to help here very well. Earned Value Management is helpful when I use the basic ideas and plan my project structure clean and focus on the delivery of my project properties. It is not the key figure is actually important - it is only an indicator to look more closely - but a good project.