Contemporaneous period critical path analyses have been considered, by some, to be the "Gold Standard" of schedule delay analysis methods. But what if the project schedules show projected critical paths that do not properly reflect reasonable critical paths and generate illogical results? Why do courts appear to side with this method? This panel will tackle the highly charged debate between contemporaneous period critical path analyses versus as-built critical path analyses by presenting case studies and using facts and schedules derived from actual cases that will illuminate the technical, legal, and contractual factors that weigh on the selection and implementation of a forensic schedule analysis method. The panel will present a series of fact patterns and associated schedules and will discuss and debate the key parameters in choosing the correct analysis method under the different circumstances. Methods under consideration include the as-planned vs. as-built, the contemporaneous period (or "windows") analysis, the retrospective time impact analysis, and the collapsed as-built.
Upon completion of this session, participants will be able to:
- Understand the technical reasons for selecting an analysis method, including the quality of the source schedules and the purpose of the analysis.
- Understand the legal and contractual factors that bear upon method selection.
- Understand reasons why different analysis methods yield different results.