Martin Barnes is, no doubt, right when he says that he has never known actual progress to reflect the planned progress in complex delay situations (NCE 22/29 July). However, not all delay situations are complex and even when they are it is not always practicable to create a logic linked 'as- built' programme to assess their impact.
In contracts that are disrupted or inefficiently managed, the actual logic links would be fragmented and not as easy to establish as Barnes suggests.
On complex contracts the records do not often permit the resources to be tracked in the detail required to establish firm logic links. In such cases it can be more practicable to adjust the logic of the approved contract programme to reflect actual progress than it is to build an 'as-built' programme.
While the actual 'as-built' performance must be the major basis for the analysis of delays, does this mean that the use of logic linked 'as- built' programmes is the only method to use? If so, perhaps the contract should place an obligation on the parties to prepare them on a regular basis. On the other hand if other methods can achieve reasonable assessments more efficiently, then the sooner this is acknowledged the better.
Jim Pragnell (M), Gibb, Gibb House, London Road, Reading, Berkshire RG6 1BL