Scheduling and SVTs: Rx for Efficiency

Abstract : Even though Benjamin Franklin first voiced this well-known adage in the 1700s, the message remains relevant in today s time of increased program scrutiny. For acquisition programs, the relevancy is clear as a program s health is assessed continually across four interdependent factors: cost, schedule, performance and risk. In the context of Franklin s adage, a program office measures time through the schedule factor. While scheduling has been a foundational factor for program evaluation, a series of new initiatives over the past several years has brought scheduling to the forefront of defense acquisition. In September 2010, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics (OUSD[AT&L]) released its Better Buying Power (BBP) guidance that outlined twenty three principal actions to improve efficiency. One of these principal actions specifically focused on scheduling: Set shorter program timelines and manage to them. In April 2011, the National Defense Industrial Association published the Planning & Scheduling Excellence Guide v2.0 (PASEG), which laid the foundation for Generally Accepted Scheduling Principles (GASP) eight overarching tenets for building, maintaining and using schedules as effective management tools. In May 2012, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) published its GAO Schedule Assessment Guide: Best Practices for Project Schedules (GAO-12-120G), defining the top 10 best practices to follow in scheduling. In July 2012, the Office of Performance Assessments and Root Cause Analysis (PARCA) within OUSD(AT&L) released a new Integrated Program Management Report Data Item Description (IPMR DID) for future contract awards over $20 million. This new DID replaced the previously separate DIDs for Contract Performance Report (CPR) and Integrated Master Schedule (IMS).