The current usage of names to describe analytic methodology lacks clear definition and discipline. The use and definition of Time Impact Analysis (TIA) has a staggering array of variations with no uniform definition. Add to this dilemma the changes which evolve within these national and regional groups over a period of time and it may seem virtually impossible to arrive at a consensus as to what the term entails.
The base formulation of Time Impact Analysis arises from the use of fragnet tools which model changes in scope, events and non-events. When incorporated into the current Project CPM update, the fragnet will project the model’s impact on the project network to complete. The projection of consequential time impact is then utilized to notice the owner of the projection and to serve as a basis of negotiating a Change Order.
In its base form, Time Impact Analysis is always a forward looking projection within the ongoing CPM Schedule to Complete. The only aspect of as-built information which is relevant to the analysis is that data which formulates the basis for the schedule update at any given data date. While there are many references to Time Impact Analysis within the forensic scheduling community, the base methodology cannot and does not involve any element of comparison of actual as-built dates relative to those dates projected from the data date of the original Time Impact Analysis.
As it is clear that the Construction Industry knows forensic schedule analysis methods and approaches to be described by various common names, how would you describe Time Impact Analysis from a forensic perspective? Briefly, what is the forensic methodology you believe to be associated with the term?
