6. Project Planning, Scheduling and Cost Control

Introduction and Context

Real estate projects convert land, finance, regulatory permissions, design information and managerial capability into completed physical assets. Their outcomes are judged not only by architectural quality but also by whether the asset is delivered at the required time, within the approved cost, and in accordance with the intended scope and performance standards. Project planning, scheduling and cost control therefore form the operational core of real estate development management.

A development may appear financially attractive at feasibility stage but lose value through delayed approvals, incomplete design information, procurement failures, contractor claims, rework, inflation or uncontrolled changes. Time and cost are closely connected. A delay may increase interest during construction, extend professional fees, postpone sales revenue, trigger contractual damages and reduce the present value of future cash flows. Similarly, cost-cutting decisions can create delays, quality defects or higher operating costs after completion.

Effective control begins before construction. The project team must define the scope, divide the work into manageable packages, establish logical relationships, estimate resources and costs, approve a baseline, and create reliable systems for measuring actual performance. Control is not simply the preparation of a schedule or a budget. It is a continuous management process involving planning, measurement, analysis, forecasting, decision-making and governance.

This chapter develops an integrated approach to work breakdown structures, network scheduling, critical path analysis, resource planning, budgeting, baselines, earned value management, forecasting, change control and performance dashboards. The discussion is relevant to residential, commercial, retail, industrial, mixed-use and infrastructure-linked real estate projects.

Learning Objectives

After studying this chapter, the learner should be able to:

1. Develop a work breakdown structure and relate it to project scope, responsibility and cost control.

2. Construct and interpret activity networks, critical paths, float and milestone schedules.

3. Prepare resource plans and understand resource-constrained scheduling.

4. Establish project budgets, cost codes, cash-flow plans and integrated time-cost baselines.

5. Apply earned value management to assess schedule and cost performance.

6. Forecast estimate-at-completion and identify corrective actions.

7. Design a disciplined change-control process for scope, time and cost changes.

8. Use dashboards and digital tools to support managerial decision-making.

9. Evaluate risks, ethical issues and common weaknesses in project control systems.

From Development Intent to a Controllable Project

Planning starts with a development brief. The brief should state the asset type, location, capacity, quality level, sustainability objectives, target market, statutory requirements, budget parameters, completion date and commercial assumptions. Ambiguity at this stage is costly because an unclear brief produces inconsistent design interpretations and unstable estimates.

The project must then be divided into control accounts and work packages. A control account is a management subdivision for which scope, budget, schedule and responsibility can be assigned. A work package is a lower-level deliverable or group of activities that can be estimated, scheduled, assigned and measured. The objective is to achieve sufficient detail for control without creating unnecessary administrative burden.

Three dimensions must remain aligned:

• Scope: what is to be delivered.
• Time: when the work and milestones are to occur.
• Cost: what resources and expenditure are authorized.

Quality, risk, procurement, safety and sustainability influence all three. A schedule that ignores permit conditions is not realistic; a budget that excludes testing and commissioning is incomplete; and a scope statement that does not define quality standards invites disputes.

The Work Breakdown Structure as the Project’s Organizing Model

The work breakdown structure (WBS) is a hierarchical decomposition of the total project scope into progressively smaller components. It is deliverable-oriented: it describes what must be produced rather than merely listing organizational departments or calendar activities. For a mixed-use development, major WBS elements may include land and enabling works, design and approvals, substructure, superstructure, building envelope, mechanical and electrical services, interiors, external works, testing and commissioning, sales and handover.

A useful WBS has several characteristics. It covers the entire approved scope, avoids overlap between elements, uses a consistent coding system, assigns responsibility, and identifies deliverables that can be objectively verified. The “100 per cent rule” requires the lower levels collectively to represent the full scope of the parent element. If the project includes a basement, for example, its WBS should account for excavation, shoring, dewatering, foundations, waterproofing, structural works and associated testing rather than treating the basement as an unexplained allowance.

The WBS is not the same as an activity list. “Construct basement” is a deliverable or work package; excavation, blinding concrete, reinforcement, formwork and concrete placement are activities needed to produce it. The WBS dictionary supplements the hierarchy by defining inclusions, exclusions, assumptions, acceptance criteria, responsible parties and interfaces.

A practical coding structure may link project, building, discipline, work package, cost category and location. This allows the project team to compare planned, committed and actual costs at the same level at which progress is measured. Without consistent coding, financial records and schedule records become difficult to reconcile.

Example of a Simplified WBS

For a residential tower, a simplified structure might be:

1. Project management and controls

2. Design, surveys and statutory approvals

3. Site preparation and excavation

4. Foundations and basement

5. Structural frame

6. Façade and roof

7. Mechanical, electrical and plumbing systems

8. Internal finishes and fixed equipment

9. External works and landscaping

10. Testing, commissioning, handover and close-out

Each element should be broken down only to the level at which duration, cost, responsibility and completion can be measured reliably. Excessive decomposition creates false precision and consumes control effort; inadequate decomposition conceals risk and makes progress claims subjective.

Scheduling: Translating Scope into Time

A schedule converts work packages into time-phased activities. Each activity should have a defined description, predecessor and successor relationships, estimated duration, responsible organization, required resources and a completion condition. Schedules commonly include design, procurement, construction, testing, approvals, sales-related deliverables and handover activities.

Activity relationships express logic. The most common is finish-to-start: an activity cannot begin until its predecessor finishes. Other relationships include start-to-start, finish-to-finish and start-to-finish. Leads and lags may be used, but they should be justified because excessive use can hide the underlying logic. For example, façade installation may start after a defined number of structural floors are completed, but the relationship is clearer when expressed through location-based planning or a documented lag rather than an arbitrary date constraint.

Milestones are significant zero-duration events such as planning approval, financial close, commencement of excavation, completion of the structural frame, practical completion and handover. A milestone schedule is useful for executive reporting, but it must be supported by detailed activities. A project can show all milestones as “on track” while underlying procurement or design activities are already late.

Critical Path Method

The critical path method (CPM) calculates the longest logical path through the network. Activities on this path have zero or near-zero total float under the approved schedule assumptions. A delay to a critical activity may delay project completion unless corrective action changes the logic, duration or resources.

For each activity, the forward pass calculates early start (ES) and early finish (EF):

EF = ES + Duration

The backward pass calculates late finish (LF) and late start (LS):

LS = LF − Duration

Total float is commonly calculated as:

Total Float = LS − ES = LF − EF

Consider a simple sequence. Excavation takes 20 days, foundations 30 days, structure 60 days, services rough-in 25 days and finishes 35 days. If each follows the previous activity, the path is 170 days. A parallel procurement path may contain design release of 15 days, manufacturing of 45 days and delivery of 20 days, totalling 80 days. It does not control completion if it finishes before the structure-related path, but it may become critical if manufacturing or delivery is delayed beyond the available float.

Criticality is dynamic. A non-critical activity can become critical when its float is consumed. In complex projects there may be several near-critical paths, and management attention should not be restricted to the single path shown by software. Calendar assumptions, constraints, incomplete logic and excessive activity durations can also produce a misleading critical path.

Schedule Quality and Updating

A schedule is a management model, not a static promise. It should be updated at agreed reporting dates using actual starts, actual finishes, remaining durations, approved changes and verified progress. Updating only by moving unfinished activities to a new data date can conceal slippage. The team should record the cause of variance, its effect on downstream work and the proposed recovery action.

Schedule quality checks should examine missing logic, excessive constraints, negative float, unrealistic activity durations, open-ended activities, invalid progress and inconsistent calendars. The baseline schedule must be preserved so that current performance can be compared with the approved plan.

Resource Planning and Production Logic

Time estimates are meaningful only when linked to resources. Resource planning identifies labour, plant, materials, subcontractors, design personnel, inspection capacity and finance required to execute the work. A duration estimate based on unlimited resources is often unrealistic in a market where specialist labour, cranes, façade manufacturers or statutory reviewers are constrained.

Resource loading assigns planned quantities to activities. Resource histograms show demand by period and reveal peaks, gaps and conflicts. If three projects require the same specialist subcontractor at the same time, the organization may need to resequence work, procure an alternative supplier, increase capacity, or revise the completion date.

Resource levelling adjusts the schedule to remove over-allocation, usually allowing completion dates to move. Resource smoothing attempts to use available float while retaining the required completion date. These techniques involve trade-offs between time, cost, productivity and risk. Adding a second shift may accelerate work but increase supervision, fatigue, safety risk and premium labour cost. Crashing shortens activity duration by adding resources; fast-tracking overlaps activities that were originally sequential, increasing coordination and rework risk.

Location-based projects benefit from flow approaches such as takt planning and line-of-balance methods. These approaches seek a stable production rhythm as crews move through floors, apartments or zones. They can expose trade interference more effectively than a purely activity-based schedule, particularly in repetitive residential construction.

Building the Cost Plan and Budget Baseline

The cost plan develops progressively as information improves. Early estimates may rely on area rates, functional units or analogous projects. Later estimates use elemental quantities, supplier quotations, subcontractor bids and detailed bills of quantities. A professional estimate states its basis, date, currency, tax treatment, escalation assumptions, exclusions, quantities, rates and level of design maturity.

The approved budget normally includes direct costs, indirect costs, professional fees, statutory charges, financing-related costs where relevant, contingencies and management reserves according to the organization’s governance rules. Contingency is intended for identified or foreseeable uncertainty within the approved scope; it should not be used casually to finance unapproved scope. Management reserve may be controlled at a higher level for unknown-unknowns, subject to authorization.

Cost accounts should correspond with the WBS and procurement structure. The budget should be time-phased so that planned expenditure is assigned to periods. This produces a planned value curve and supports cash-flow forecasting. A budget that states only a total amount cannot reveal whether a cash requirement is emerging earlier than expected.

The cost baseline is the time-phased, approved budget for measuring performance. It differs from the funding requirement, which may include financing arrangements, reserves or cash-flow needs not treated as earned work. The total cost baseline plus management reserve may form the total authorized budget, depending on the organization’s accounting policy.

Commitments are also important. Actual cost records what has been invoiced or paid, whereas committed cost represents awarded contracts, purchase orders and other obligations. A project can appear within actual budget while commitments have already consumed most of the remaining allowance. Effective cost control therefore monitors budget, commitments, actuals, accruals, forecast final cost and remaining exposure.

Earned Value Management: Integrating Time and Cost

Earned value management (EVM) integrates scope, schedule and cost through three principal measures:

• Planned Value (PV): the authorized budget for work scheduled to be completed by a given date.
• Earned Value (EV): the authorized budget for work actually completed by that date.
• Actual Cost (AC): the cost incurred for the work performed by that date.

From these measures, managers calculate:

Schedule Variance (SV) = EV − PV

Cost Variance (CV) = EV − AC

Schedule Performance Index (SPI) = EV ÷ PV

Cost Performance Index (CPI) = EV ÷ AC

An SPI below 1 indicates that less budgeted work has been completed than planned. A CPI below 1 indicates that the project has spent more than the budgeted value of completed work. Variances should be interpreted carefully: EVM measures progress in the time-phased baseline and does not by itself explain causes or guarantee the actual completion date.

Suppose a project has PV of $10 million, EV of $8 million and AC of $9 million at the reporting date. SV is −$2 million and CV is −$1 million. SPI is 0.80 and CPI is approximately 0.89. The project is behind the planned production value and is spending inefficiently relative to earned work. The appropriate response is not automatically to reduce quality or accelerate indiscriminately. The team must investigate design changes, productivity, procurement, rework, valuation rules and cost coding.

Forecasting Final Cost

If the approved budget at completion is $50 million and the CPI is 0.89, a simple estimate at completion is:

EAC = BAC ÷ CPI = 50 ÷ 0.89 ≈ $56.18 million

This formula assumes that current cost efficiency will continue. Other formulas may be appropriate. If future work is expected to follow the original budget but past variance is exceptional, an estimate may be calculated as actual cost plus the remaining budget. Where both schedule and cost performance are expected to influence remaining work, a combined index may be used, such as:

EAC = AC + (BAC − EV) ÷ (CPI × SPI)

Forecasts are not mechanical truths. They should incorporate known procurement prices, approved changes, remaining quantities, productivity evidence, escalation, claims, risk exposure and management judgement. The estimate to complete (ETC) should be supported by a bottom-up review of remaining work rather than relying only on a statistical index.

Change Control and Baseline Governance

Change is normal in real estate projects. It may arise from client decisions, regulatory requirements, design development, unforeseen ground conditions, market repositioning, errors, omissions or value engineering. The objective is not to eliminate every change but to distinguish necessary, beneficial and avoidable changes and to assess their consequences before authorization.

A robust change process includes:

1. Identification and formal description of the proposed change.

2. Technical, commercial, schedule, risk, quality and sustainability assessment.

3. Confirmation of funding and contractual responsibility.

4. Review by the authorized change authority.

5. Approval, rejection or deferral with a recorded decision.

6. Updating of drawings, specifications, WBS, schedule, budget, risk register and contracts.

7. Communication to affected parties.

8. Verification of implementation and close-out.

A change log should record the origin, date, value, time effect, status, decision-maker and cumulative impact. Constructive changes—where conduct or instructions effectively alter the scope without a formal variation—are particularly dangerous because they generate claims and weaken cost visibility. Site instructions should therefore be controlled, documented and linked to commercial assessment.

Value engineering is a structured effort to achieve required function at optimum whole-life cost. It is not simply indiscriminate cost reduction. Replacing a façade material may reduce capital cost but increase cleaning, energy or replacement costs. Decisions should consider performance, durability, maintainability, embodied carbon, procurement risk and user value.

Performance Dashboards and Digital Control

A performance dashboard converts control data into a form suitable for decision-making. A useful dashboard distinguishes leading indicators from lagging indicators. Leading indicators may include unresolved design queries, procurement status, approval cycle time, labour productivity, safety observations, percentage of inspections passed and forecast risk exposure. Lagging indicators include completed quantities, actual cost, certified payments, defects and achieved milestones.

A project dashboard may show:

• overall milestone status and critical-path movement;
• PV, EV, AC, CPI and SPI;
• approved budget, commitments, actuals, forecast final cost and variance at completion;
• change requests and pending claims;
• procurement packages at risk;
• safety, quality and environmental indicators;
• top risks with owners and response dates.

Digital common data environments connect drawings, specifications, schedules, cost plans, requests for information and approvals. Building information modelling can support quantity extraction, 4D sequencing and 5D cost integration, although model quality and classification standards are essential. Mobile field applications can capture quantities, photographs, inspections and daily reports close to the point of work. Business intelligence tools can combine accounting, procurement and schedule data, but automated dashboards remain only as reliable as their source data.

Artificial intelligence and advanced analytics can assist with anomaly detection, productivity analysis, document classification, delay-risk prediction and forecast improvement. Their use requires data governance, validation, cybersecurity and human review. A predictive model should not be treated as an objective decision-maker where the data are incomplete or biased.

An Illustrative Case: Recovering a Delayed Mixed-Use Development

Background

This illustrative case concerns a 28-storey mixed-use development containing retail space, offices and residential units. The approved construction budget was $72 million, with practical completion planned for month 30. The project used a design-and-build contract, a cost-loaded baseline schedule and monthly EVM reporting.

Situation and Problem

At the end of month 16, the project reported PV of $31 million, EV of $27 million and AC of $30 million. The CPI was 0.90 and the SPI was 0.87. The critical path had moved from the structural frame to façade procurement and internal services. Several design packages had been issued late, and the client had informally requested upgraded lobby finishes. The contractor had also submitted claims relating to late information and restricted site access.

The executive committee initially proposed accelerating all trades. The project controls manager warned that the proposal could increase congestion and rework because the façade sequence and services coordination were unresolved.

Analysis

The team conducted a WBS-based review rather than relying on the headline indices. It found that:

• the façade supplier had not received approved shop drawings;
• electrical containment was being installed before coordinated ceiling zones were released;
• the upgraded lobby request had not been valued or incorporated into the baseline;
• actual costs included substantial preliminaries caused by delay;
• several progress claims were based on installed quantities that had not passed quality inspection.

The project therefore had both performance problems and measurement weaknesses. A simple CPI forecast overstated confidence because unresolved design and procurement issues could cause additional losses.

Approach and Solution

Management approved a recovery plan with five elements. First, the design manager established a two-week look-ahead process for all information required by procurement and site operations. Second, façade and services interfaces were replanned by zone using a location-based sequence. Third, only selected activities were crashed after a productivity and safety assessment. Fourth, the lobby upgrade was processed as a formal change with a separate budget and time assessment. Fifth, the cost team reconciled certified progress, commitments, accruals and actual invoices by control account.

The contractor was required to submit a bottom-up estimate to complete, supported by remaining quantities and supplier quotations. The client and contractor also agreed a protocol for evaluating delay responsibility and contemporaneous records.

Outcome

Over the following reporting periods, the project reduced design-related waiting time and stabilized the façade sequence. The forecast completion date moved two months later than the original baseline but was protected from further slippage. The forecast final cost increased because of additional preliminaries and the approved lobby change. Although the original cost target was not recovered, the revised forecast was more credible and enabled the client to update financing, sales and cash-flow decisions.

Learning Points

The case demonstrates that EVM identifies a condition but does not explain it. Recovery must address the physical causes of variance. It also shows why unauthorized scope changes distort performance data, why commitments matter, and why acceleration should be selective rather than symbolic. A transparent revised forecast is more valuable than an artificially optimistic baseline.

Risks, Limitations and Common Mistakes

Several weaknesses frequently undermine project controls. The first is beginning detailed scheduling before scope and design maturity are adequate. The second is treating the baseline as a target to be protected from revision rather than a controlled reference that changes only through authorization. The third is reporting percentages complete without objective rules. “Ninety per cent complete” may conceal incomplete testing, unresolved defects or unpaid subcontractor exposure.

Other common mistakes include excessive activity constraints, missing schedule logic, double counting contingency, ignoring procurement lead times, measuring physical progress using expenditure alone, mixing approved and pending changes, failing to accrue costs, and using software outputs without managerial interpretation. Cost and schedule data can also be manipulated through front-loaded payment profiles, premature progress recognition or delaying the recording of actual costs.

Control systems have limitations. EVM can be weak for design work, procurement activities or long-duration packages unless suitable earning rules are established. Indices can be distorted by a small baseline, unusual early expenditure or changes in measurement methods. A project may achieve a favourable CPI by deferring necessary work. Quantitative dashboards may also encourage attention to what is measurable rather than what is important.

Governance, Ethics and Professional Responsibility

Project controls involve financial reporting, contractual entitlement, lender information and decisions affecting workers, occupants, communities and investors. Professionals must report performance accurately, preserve audit trails and distinguish facts, assumptions, forecasts and opinions. Deliberately deferring cost recognition, overstating progress, hiding changes or manipulating the critical path is unethical and may create legal and financial liability.

Governance should define approval thresholds, segregation of duties, baseline authority, change-control rights, document retention and escalation procedures. Sensitive commercial information must be protected, particularly in cloud systems and collaborative platforms. Procurement decisions should be fair, transparent and free from undisclosed conflicts of interest.

Schedule and cost pressure must never justify unsafe work, defective construction, environmental non-compliance or misleading sales representations. Professional judgement requires the manager to explain trade-offs and escalate risks when commercial instructions conflict with statutory, contractual or ethical obligations.

Current Developments and Best Practice

Contemporary project control is moving toward integrated data environments, model-based estimating, real-time field capture, predictive analytics and portfolio-level resource planning. There is also increasing emphasis on carbon budgets, climate resilience, circular materials and whole-life cost. These developments extend control beyond initial construction cost and completion date toward asset performance and long-term value.

Best practice can be summarized as follows:

• define scope and acceptance criteria before detailed control;
• maintain one coherent WBS, coding structure and responsibility matrix;
• link activities, resources, quantities, costs and contracts;
• preserve the approved baseline and document every authorized change;
• use objective progress rules and reconcile schedule with accounting records;
• review commitments, accruals, risks and remaining quantities, not only invoices;
• focus on causes and corrective action rather than indices alone;
• protect the critical path while monitoring near-critical work;
• combine quantitative dashboards with field verification and professional judgement;
• use digital and AI tools with data governance, validation and human accountability.

Chapter Summary

Project planning, scheduling and cost control create the management architecture through which real estate projects are delivered. The WBS defines the complete scope and provides the basis for responsibility, coding, estimating and reporting. Network scheduling translates deliverables into logical activities, milestones and critical paths, while resource planning tests whether the proposed programme is achievable. The cost plan becomes useful for control when it is coded, approved and time-phased into a baseline.

Earned value management integrates planned value, earned value and actual cost to reveal schedule and cost performance. CPI, SPI, variances and forecasts support decisions but must be interpreted through physical evidence, procurement status, risk and remaining work. Change control protects the integrity of scope, time and cost baselines. Dashboards and digital systems improve visibility, but they do not replace sound data, field verification or professional judgement. Ethical governance requires accurate reporting, controlled authorization, transparent records and refusal to compromise safety, quality or legal compliance for apparent short-term performance.

Key Terms

WBS: A hierarchical decomposition of the total approved project scope into manageable deliverables and work packages.

Work package: A controllable element of work with defined scope, responsibility, duration and budget.

Control account: A management-level point at which scope, schedule, cost and responsibility are integrated.

Baseline: An approved reference plan against which actual performance and changes are measured.

Milestone: A significant project event, normally with zero duration, used to mark achievement or decision points.

Critical path: The longest logical path through a schedule network that determines the planned completion date.

Float: The amount of time an activity may be delayed without delaying a defined successor or project completion.

Resource loading: The assignment of labour, plant, materials or other resources to scheduled activities.

Resource levelling: Adjusting activities to resolve resource over-allocation, possibly changing completion dates.

Cost plan: A structured estimate of expected project expenditure based on defined scope and assumptions.

Planned Value: The authorized budget for work scheduled to be completed by a specified date.

Earned Value: The authorized budgeted value of work actually completed by a specified date.

Actual Cost: The cost incurred for the work performed by a specified date.

Cost Performance Index: Earned Value divided by Actual Cost, indicating cost efficiency.

Schedule Performance Index: Earned Value divided by Planned Value, indicating progress against the time-phased plan.

Estimate at Completion: The forecast total cost of the project when all authorized work is completed.

Contingency: Budget allowance for identified or foreseeable uncertainty within approved scope.

Change control: The formal process for evaluating, authorizing, recording and implementing project changes.

Dashboard: A visual management report that presents selected performance measures, trends, risks and decisions.

Review Questions

Short Answer Questions

1. What is the purpose of the work breakdown structure in real estate project control?

2. Distinguish between Planned Value, Earned Value and Actual Cost.

3. What does a total float of zero generally indicate?

4. Why should project costs be time-phased?

5. State two weaknesses that can make an EVM report misleading.

Long Answer Questions

1. Explain how a WBS, schedule, responsibility matrix and cost code structure should be integrated.

2. Describe the critical path method, including forward pass, backward pass and float calculation.

3. Discuss the preparation of a real estate project cost baseline and the treatment of commitments, contingency and management reserve.

4. Explain the principles and process of formal change control, including the risks of constructive changes.

5. Evaluate the role of digital dashboards, BIM, mobile field systems and AI in project controls.

Analytical / Application Questions

1. A project has PV of $24 million, EV of $20 million and AC of $22 million. Calculate SV, CV, SPI and CPI, and explain the managerial meaning of the results.

2. A contractor proposes adding a second shift to recover a three-week delay, but design information remains incomplete. Analyze the proposal using critical-path, resource, cost, quality and safety considerations.

3. A client requests upgraded finishes after construction has begun. Prepare the information and decision sequence that should be followed before the change is incorporated into the project baseline.

22. Multiple Choice Questions with Answers

Question 1

Which feature most clearly distinguishes a WBS from a simple activity list?

A. A WBS is organized around deliverables and total scope

B. A WBS contains only activities on the critical path

C. A WBS records actual expenditure for each invoice

D. A WBS eliminates the need for a project schedule

Correct Answer: A. A WBS is organized around deliverables and total scope

Question 2

An activity has ES of day 12, EF of day 20, LS of day 16 and LF of day 24. What is its total float?

A. 2 days

B. 4 days

C. 8 days

D. 12 days

Correct Answer: B. 4 days

Question 3

A project reports PV of $10 million, EV of $8 million and AC of $9 million. Which conclusion is correct?

A. The project is ahead of schedule and under budget

B. The project is behind schedule and over cost relative to earned work

C. The project is behind schedule but under cost

D. The project is ahead of schedule but over cost

Correct Answer: B. The project is behind schedule and over cost relative to earned work

Question 4

If BAC is $50 million and CPI is 0.89, which simple EAC is implied when current cost efficiency is assumed to continue?

A. $44.50 million

B. $50.89 million

C. Approximately $56.18 million

D. Approximately $39.55 million

Correct Answer: C. Approximately $56.18 million

Question 5

What is the primary purpose of a time-phased cost baseline?

A. To remove all project uncertainty

B. To compare planned expenditure and earned work with actual performance over time

C. To replace the contract price with a market estimate

D. To authorize every future design change automatically

Correct Answer: B. To compare planned expenditure and earned work with actual performance over time

Question 6

Which action best represents resource levelling?

A. Adding unlimited labour without changing the schedule

B. Adjusting activities to resolve resource over-allocation, possibly extending completion

C. Deleting activities with high labour demand

D. Recording resource costs only after project completion

Correct Answer: B. Adjusting activities to resolve resource over-allocation, possibly extending completion

Question 7

A client informally requests upgraded lobby finishes. What should occur first from a governance perspective?

A. The contractor should install them immediately

B. The change should be described and assessed for scope, cost, time and risk

C. The baseline should be deleted

D. The request should be treated as contingency automatically

Correct Answer: B. The change should be described and assessed for scope, cost, time and risk

Question 8

Why can a favourable CPI fail to demonstrate that a project is healthy?

A. CPI never uses cost information

B. Costs may be deferred or necessary work may not yet have been performed

C. CPI is calculated only from the critical path

D. A favourable CPI always proves the project is ahead of schedule

Correct Answer: B. Costs may be deferred or necessary work may not yet have been performed

Question 9

Which dashboard item is most clearly a leading indicator?

A. Final account value at project close-out

B. Number of unresolved design queries affecting procurement

C. Total defects recorded after handover

D. Final certified construction cost

Correct Answer: B. Number of unresolved design queries affecting procurement

Question 10

What is the most appropriate response when EVM reveals poor performance but does not identify the cause?

A. Ignore the result until completion

B. Reduce quality immediately

C. Investigate physical progress, productivity, procurement, changes and cost records

D. Rebaseline the project without authorization

Correct Answer: C. Investigate physical progress, productivity, procurement, changes and cost records