Dec 04, 2018 12:01 PM
Replying to Keith Novak
...
I'm not familiar with all the acronyms you're using but I think I understand the question. Your front end engineering design (i.e. pre-planning) used a set of assumptions that differed from your detailed engineering plan developed later, which resulted in a large variance which I'm assuming is your SPI.
You might develop a notional schedule and identify the critical path(s), but I would absolutely not commit the entire schedule without knowing the impacts to cost and flow. If you are on critical path, you might need to commit certain tasks, as a risk mitigation plan to the entire program schedule in order to make the schedule feasible. We refer to this as "partial-commitment"
Without knowing the impacts, committing to an entirely new schedule involving unknowns can be taking on massive risk. Yes I have encountered this situation many times, and very often we find that the first re-plan reveals new problems that we have to go work before we have a workable plan.