Critical Path Method (CPM) scheduling is clearly the industry standard for virtually all large construction projects.  Because every project is unique, there is no set formula or format used to determine whether any particular schedule is adequate for a specific project. However, there are some common issues upon which many professionals agree:

• A standard computerized CPM scheduling program should be used.
• The ultimate goal of the CPM schedule should be to provide a fair and accurate representation of the contractor's "as planned" and "as built" work sequencing.
• The project schedule should be simple enough to effectively communicate project deadlines to the Owner, the A/E, the contractor and the subcontractors.
• Project activities such as submittals, procurements, lead times and punch lists should not be included in the schedule as separate activities because they do not reflect work actually performed in the field.
• Instead, these items should be implied by their relationships to actual field work. A/E's and Owners often ask for these types of activities because they perceive that it will make their work easier. In fact, this will make everyone's work much more difficult because the schedule will be almost impossible to accurately update and track.
• Logic ties in the Baseline Schedule and all updates should not be altered during the construction process.
• For large construction projects, the critical path should be examined where Total Float (TF) = 0 and also where TF equals a sufficient number of days to accurately reflect project concurrencies which may affect the critical path between periodic updates.
• The "Progress Override" and "Retained Logic" functions of Primavera should both be utilized when examining a forecasted delay in the project schedule.
• "Preferential" logic ties should be eliminated or minimized because they unduly restrict Free Float and may cause illogical work sequencing.
• When a schedule is cost and resource loaded, leveling should be performed at every update. However, these resources should not be identified as "driving" on a lump sum project.
• When possible, the contractor should consider whether it is feasible to link the Project Updates to the Payment Requistions for purposes of determining Earned Value.
• When possible, Activity Codes should include a Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) in standard Construction Specifications Institute (CSI) format.
• When possible, cost loading should follow the contractor's Schedule of Values as referenced in the Payment Requisition.