How can I update a MS Project plan to show schedule slippage?

Question

Once I've set up my baseline, I like to use the Tracking view to see schedule slippage (ie: is a project going to be "late"?). The problem occurs when I'm updating the % Complete, but a task that was supposed to be complete (or in progress) has not been started yet, so I leave it at 0% Complete. Project doesn't update the tracking Gantt, so you can't see that the project is "slipping".

How do you handle this?

My "Hack" Workaround

In my Options > Calculation I generally have the following set:

1. Move end of completed parts after status date back to status date.
2. Move start of remaining parts back to status date.
3. Move start of remaining parts before status date forward to status date.
4. Edits to total task % complete will be spread to the status date.

For tasks that are complete or partially complete, this works great - just fill in the % Complete value, and things jump around, showing you if you're ahead or behind schedule for the remaining tasks.

However, if a task that was supposed to start before the current status date has not even started, I don't know how to make Project push that task forward to the current status date. The only workaround I've found is to assign it a small % complete, such as 1%. Then it moves the remaining part of the task forward to the status date. But this seems kind of hackish to me.

How can I get MS Project 2003 to show schedule slippage on unstarted tasks? Is there a setting / Tool or other feature I need to be using?

Example

Set up a new Project with the following tasks: 1. Task 1 (1d) starts on Monday 2. Task 2 (2d, dependent on 1) starts on Tuesday 3. Task 3 (1d, dependent on 2) starts on Thursday 4. Task 4 (0h, milestone, dependent on 3) Finishes on Friday.

Now, let's set the Status Date to Thursday - we're updating the project plan.

In Scenario 1, Task 1 is 100% complete, but task 2 for some reason is only 50% complete. If we fill that information in, Project will split task 2, and move the second part of the split (the remaining 50%) to start on Thursday. As a result, Thursday's task moves to Friday, and our Friday milestone moves to Monday and we can clearly see the project completion will be late by a day (1 day's slippage).

In Scenario 2, Task 1 is still 100% compete, but task 2 hasn't been started yet (0%). If we fill in the 100% complete for Task 1, and leave everything else at 0%, Project does NOT move Task 2 to Thursday, and as a result there doesn't appear to be any slippage, so at a glance we might conclude the project is still on-time. As a workaround, if I put a 1% in for Task 2, then it does go ahead and splits the task, but that's just a hack to get it to update the timeline, and can't be the only way to do things. At least I hope not. Hence this SE question!

Answer 1

If a task that was supposed to start in the past, did not actually start, then that workload (or some of the workload if it was only partially completed) still needs to be done. So the task, or the remaining part of the task needs to be moved into the future.

The act of moving it into the future means that there is more work for the project to do between now and completion, so completion could slip. It is this effect that you want to see correct?

So:

1. On your status date use the Update Project menu item (on the Project tab in MSP 2010) to move all uncompleted work to a specific point in time (usually tomorrow). This will move uncompleted work into the future

2. Since 1 does not resolve overallocations, you then need to Level the plan (unless you are using auto-levelling). Having done that MSP will attempt to schedule all remaining work to be done from the update date until completion. This may or may not result in a slippage of your end date

Answer 2

Couple of suggestions

if you type a % in, and then change it back to 0%, Project will sometimes move that task right to the project start date instead!

In the absence of any predecessors or a "Start No Earlier Than" constraint, MS Project assumes that you could start that task on the project start date.

if a task that was supposed to start before the current status date has not even been started yet, I don't know how to make Project push that task forward to the current status date.

You can put a "Start No Earlier Than" constraint of status date.

In addition to the Tracking Gantt, you can also use the "Start Variance" and other Variance columns to see schedule slippage.

Couple of cautions

1. It is not a good idea to make a blanket assumption that all delayed work will start on status date. You need to get buy-in from task resources that they are indeed planning to do so.
2. You can move tasks that don't have any predecessors (or whose predecessors have completed) to start on status date. Others must be left to follow the dependency logic.

Answer 3

Have you tried to baseline the project plan? my suggestion is to use baseline dates and actual dates to show slippage. When you have a critical path shown with predecessors MS project would show the impact of moving dates.

Answer 4

The package that is starting late should have a predecessor. That predecessor should be slipping which will cause everything after it to slip. This will push the start date out of the succeeding packages.

However, if you hard coded dates for your packages, the project will keep the start date as is. So you need to remove those constraints and have all of your packages "start soon as possible". This will enable the tool to function right.

Answer 5

The method I use to move activities to progress to current date even they have not been started or partially started is

Select Project tab, Change status date to current date or progress date, select update project, select "Reschedule uncompleted work to start after " & check date, select Entire project & OK. This is similar to progressing in P6

Answer 6

I hope I understood the question. Here I go..

If activity A is started and is getting delayed, then end date needs to be pushed forward by increasing the duration of activity A

If activity A is not started and is getting delayed (and its predecessor activity B is already completed), then lag needs to be added in predecessor of activity A.