Performance Intensity (PI):

Concept of Performance Intensity

Think of Performance Intensity a miles-per-hour unit of measure. Reflect on how you use this
value in your daily driving. By quickly glancing at a speedometer, you can determine whether
you are driving too slowly (to make deadlines) or too fast (to endanger others around you).
Important to note is that the speedometer is a self-management tool.
Likewise, Performance Intensity is a unit of measure that can be presented to those performing
the work, so that they can self-manage. This is an important distinction from Dominant Project
Managements approach to Project Time Management, where Project Controls functions as a
watchdog, monitoring project performance and reporting on deviations from plan. (Top of Page)

Performance Intensity is Based on the Activity Duration

Performance Intensity is based on the activity duration, and presupposes that it reflects a realistic
(deterministic) estimate of the number of Continuous Crew Days that an activity will take to
perform and complete. Such durations should be devoid of any padding, buffers, contingency or
other adjustments to puff of the duration beyond what is needed to perform the work in one
continuous effort.
PI is a Rate, Expressed as a Fraction
In order for Performance Intensity to function as a miles-per-hour, it must be a rate. Rates are
expressed as fractions, with numerators and denominators. In Performance Intensity, the
numerator reflects Duration Days, which is cumulative value derived by summing the activity
durations of select groups of activities. The denominator is Allotted Time, the amount of time
associated with the subset of Durations Days in the numerator. (Top of Page)

Performance Intensity Core Formulas

All PI Core Formulas follow the same fractional value described in the previous paragraph. The
main difference is in which subset of activities one is examining. For instance:

Planned PI: Focuses on activities yet to be performed. Durations Days sum the durations
of activities yet to be performed, and Performance Period reflects the time available to
perform those activities.
Actual PI: Measure activities that have been performed, fully or partially. Durations
Days sum the durations of activities that have been earned during a designated period
of time (Performance Period).
Catch-Up PI: Focuses on activities that remain to be performed. Durations Days sum
the durations of remaining activities. Performance Period reflects the time remaining to
perform those activities.(Top of Page)

Performance Intensity Derivative Formulas

The above Core Formulas can be combined and compared to one another in various ways. They
can also be serialized, so as to show trends from one reporting period to the next. Finally, they
can be applied to select subsets of Schedule activities.

Compound PI: This is where various Core Formulas are combined to derive insightful
statistics about performance.
Trending PI: Various extrapolations of PI across time so as to show trends.
Targeted PI: This is where PI is applied to any subset of activities that can be isolated,
using the filtering functionality of the scheduling software, and the activity codes
assigned to the activities. Examples include:
o Area PI: By building, by floor, by area
o Phase PI: By project phase
o Responsibility PI: By performing entity
o MCP PI: PI by Momentum Checkpoint (see below)(Top of Page)

Paths and Path Segments

Concept of Paths and Path Segments
Momentum Science has identified two new components within the Critical Path Method
Schedule, that have always been there just never defined: Activity Path and Activity Path
Segment.
Under Dominant Project Management, there is only the Activity (at one end of the spectrum) and
the overall Schedule (at the other end of the spectrum). There is nothing in between. Even the
infamous Critical Path is only defined as a set of activities leading from Project (Schedule)
Start to Project (Schedule) Finish. We have not found one Dominant Project Management book
that actually defined the word, path.
By comparison, Momentum Management provides a clear definition of what constitutes an
Activity Path. In fact, it goes further by defining Path Ends, Path Start, and Path Finish
(including the conditions necessary to qualify as each). It further clarifies the overlapping nature
of Activity Paths, resulting in individual activities actually residing on multiple Activity Paths at
the same time.
Finally, it defines a new term, Activity Path Segment, to help us isolate a subset of activities
along a single Activity Path that have no intervening or interfering connections, except between
the activities one to another, in serial order.

Application of Path and Path Segment Designations

With the establishment of these intermediate Work Scope Containers, for the first time work
performance can be planned, executed, monitored, and analyzed with greater granularity that the
Overall Project, but without getting into the minutia of activity-by-activity comparisons (as is
now the common practice under Dominant Project Management). Said bluntly, Activity Paths
and Path Segments allow us to still be able to spot the forest from the trees. (Top of Page)

Momentum Checkpoints
Concept of Momentum Checkpoints (MCPs)
Another innovation of Momentum Science is the concept of a Momentum Checkpoints (MCPs).
These temporal markers (timestones) act just like distance markers (milestones), by helping to
orient the Project Execution Team to where they are with respect to intermediate progress
"checkpoints."

Application of Momentum Checkpoints

In practice, Momentum Management (see Volume 7) calls for the identification of three levels of
MCPs, labeled Level A, Level B, and Level C.

Level A MCPs: These are Owner-imposed deadlines required by contract. As such, it is

Level A MCPs that the Owner monitors closely throughout Project Execution.
Level B MCPs: These are self-imposed by the Contractor. They reflect need dates by
which certain portions of Work Scope must be completed in order to insure (safeguard)
Level A MCPs.
Level C MCPs: These are inserted during Schedule Development by the Project Team,
to act as pacing markers (timestones), so as to insure achievement of Level B MCPs.
(Top of Page)

Momentum Tracking
Concept of Momentum Tracking
All we need to do is combine the two previous innovations and we have a new science with
which the Contractors Project Execution Team can self-manage: Momentum Tracking.

Application of Momentum Tracking

First we establish the three levels of MCPs and sprinkle them across the Project Schedule. Next,
for each Activity Path we calculate and report Performance Intensity against the nearest
MCP. By referring to the Performance Intensity associated with a given Activity Path or Path
Segment, the Contractor (or subcontractor) can regulate its own performance effort in real time!
Those last three words reflect a phenomenal distinction between Momentum Management and
conventional Project Time Management under Dominant Project Management.

Where the latter reports progress after-the-fact by statusing the schedule (monthly or
even weekly) after the work has been performed, Performance Intensity is an
instantaneous, real time feedback that allows the Project Execution Team to speed up or
slow down on a momentary basis.
Where the latter compares actual performance to planned performance (looking
backward), Performance Intensity values are correlated to upcoming MCPs (looking
forward).
Where the latter monitoring is performed by an external watchdog (Project Controls),
Performance Intensity is an automated feedback loop that allows self-monitoring by the
Project Execution Team. (Top of Page)

Discrete Activity Float

The Problem: Float Abuse
The way that Total Float has been formulated, depicted, and utilized according to Dominant
Project Management guidelines ... has been problematic from the get-go.

Formulation: First, Total Float is defined as the difference between Earliest Dates and
Latest Dates. This, in itself, is problematic, since both sets of dates are theoretical and
without practical significance.
o Earliest Dates represent what would happen if everything went flawlessly for the
entire length of the project. No same, living person with any practical real life
experience would sign up for that assumption.
o Latest Dates represent the last possible moment one can procrastinate to, again
based on the assumption that everything will go flawlessly from now until the end
of the project. What responsible perform leaves everything until the last possible
moment?
o Total Float, as a numeric value, represents the difference between these two sets
of extreme dates, neither of which a responsible Project Executor would rely
upon!
Depiction: Second, Total Float is redundantly reported. Total Float does not belong to an
individual activity; it belongs to an entire Activity Path that spans two bulkhead Date
Constraints. Accordingly, the Total Float should not be reported separately for each
activity along that Activity Path, but only once for the entire Activity Path.

Since Dominant Project Management does not recognize the Activity Path as a discrete Work
Scope container within the schedule, it has no choice but to erroneously report Total Float
alongside each activity that resides on the (unrecognized) Activity Path. This is seen in any
standard CPM tabular, where Total Float is reported in the far-right column.

Utilization: Third, Total Float is generally understood to represent a surplus of time,

when the time required to perform a set of activities is compared with the time available
to perform that set of activities. This general understanding leads to a number of abuse
problems.

Individual contractors, seeing that their activity has Total Float (even though, it does not
see previous point), take advantage of the extra time. At the other end, the Owner sees the
Total Float and decides to add additional scope to the Contractors contract, without having to
extend the contract completion deadline. (Top of Page)

The Solution, Discrete Activity Float

Cognitive Project Management solved the problem by figuring out how to allocate the Total
Float proportionately to all activities along the Activity Path. Doing so accomplishes several
things:

It secures each Project Participants discrete portion of the overall Activity Path float.
This Discrete Float is theirs to use or lose. But because it has been determined by formula
(and policy) it can be protected.
Once and for all, it rids Project Time Management of a great nemesis, Float Usurping,
which is where, on a first-come-first-served basis, whoever can gobble up the Total Float
first enjoys it. All others, downstream, work without a net.
It also provides for a new set of statistics that can be correlated to the Activity, Activity
Path Segment, and Activity Path.
Finally, because activities quite often reside multiple Activity Paths simultaneously,
Discrete Activity Float can be aggregated thus yielding a composite Float value for
each activity that is distinct and telling. Applying Discrete Activity Float, one will see
that activities lying side-by-side on the same Activity Path can actually have different
Discrete Activity Float values! (Top of Page)

Flow Rate Measurement

Consider two separate activities, both with the same duration, and both bearing the same Total
Float. Are these two activities equivalent in terms of the amount of influence they either exude
on downstream activities or feel from upstream activities?

Concept of Flow Rates

The answer depends on how the activities related to the activities before and after them. And
were not just talking about immediately before or after! Here is what we consider under Flow
Rate Measurement:
As to What Precedes

The number of activities immediately-preceding the Subject Activity.

The nature of the logic ties linking to the immediately-preceding activities.
o Finish-to-Start logic ties:
Will impact the entire length of the Subject Activity.
Require the prior performance of the entire length of the Restricting
Activity.
o Start-to-Start logic ties:
Same as the Finish-to-Start, it will impact the entire length of the Subject
Activity.
Unlike the Finish-to-Start, it will only require prior performance of a small
(initial) portion of the Restricting Activity.
o Finish-to-Finish logic ties:
Unlike the other two relationship types, it will only impact a small (final)
portion of the Restricted Activity.
Same as the Finish-to-Start, it will require the prior performance of the
entire length of the Restricting Activity
Collectively, the number of logic ties coming into a Subject Activity, regardless of from
how many activities.
Beyond the immediately-restricting activities, the numerous of activities that precede the
Subject Activity, all the way back to the start of each path on which the activity resides.

As to what Succeeds
The same as above, just reversed. (Top of Page)

Flow Rate Computations

Based on the above variables, Flow Rate computations reflect the amount of delay pressure
being felt by each individual activity. Pressure is measured by arithmetic formulas that factor
Discrete Activity Float, Activity Resiliency, Activity Vulnerability, and other variables.
Pressure measurements are taken at each as activity hook point. These hook points are treated
as Flow Gates, and the amount of pressure against each separate Flow Gate are aggregated to
derive a Delay Vulnerability value per activity and then, per Activity Path Segment, Activity
Path, and MCP. (Top of Page)

Activity Dynamic Performance Data

We must never lose sight of our goal: to provide the Project Execution Team with as much good
information as possible about what lies ahead. Our focus is always forward. Look where you
are going and go where you are looking.
All of the above technical clap-trap can be reduced to two separate perspectives that can be used
to vector in and predict likely Momentum Hotspots the basis for Dilemma Forecasting (see
Volume 7)

Vulnerability: Vulnerability speaks to the likelihood of an activity being delayed by

upstream activities. The higher the Vulnerability Index the more likely the hit of a
delay.
Resiliency: Resiliency speaks to the ability of the activity to bounce back from the
upstream hit. Resiliency takes into consideration Discrete Activity Float and Flow
Rate pressures.
Soft-Ground Advisories. We borrowed the title from the sign on the side of the road,
Soft Shoulders, which alerts the driver that if they venture too far off the pavement,
their vehicle may sink into the soil.

Likewise, thanks to Vulnerability and Resiliency, when we vector the two values across a project
schedule, we can identify areas in the schedule where activities have the highest likelihood of
experiencing upstream delay AND the lowest intrinsic ability to rebound from the hit. These
Soft Ground areas warrant special, closer attention by Project Management.