The core responsibility of a scheduling professional is to understand the impact of variances on the project timeline. While the resource has a recovery plan, the scheduler must first perform a quantitative analysis to determine the true effect on the critical path and project finish before deciding on next steps (like escalation or rebaselining). Documentation alone is insufficient for a high-risk, critical path activity.

Best practice involves maintaining the integrity of the schedule model. Adding ill-defined work directly can create false precision and clutter. A dedicated backlog or list allows for proper analysis, estimation, and prioritization before formal integration via change control, which aligns with progressive elaboration and disciplined schedule management.

Resource leveling is the primary technique for resolving resource overallocation. By leveraging the available total float (slack) of non-critical activities, the scheduler can delay tasks within their float to smooth resource demand, often without delaying the project finish date. Fast-tracking doesn’t address resource conflicts, crashing costs money (which isn’t available), and substitution may affect duration or quality.

The Schedule Performance Index (SPI) measures schedule efficiency. An SPI of 0.92 means the project is earning value at 92% of the planned rate (EV/PV = 0.92). This indicates a negative schedule variance and a delay, as work is being accomplished slower than planned. It is a measure of rate, not a direct time or budget measure (option 1 is for CPI, option 2 misinterprets the percentage, option 3 is incorrect as an SPI < 1 forecasts delay).

The primary advantage of three-point estimating is that it quantifies uncertainty. By using formulas like (P + 4M + O)/6 for PERT, it provides a more realistic weighted average duration that accounts for risk. More importantly, the spread between the pessimistic and optimistic estimates gives the scheduler and team insight into the level of uncertainty, which is crucial for risk analysis and contingency planning.

An external dependency is a logical relationship between project work and an activity outside the project team’s control. The correct scheduling practice is to represent it as a link from an external milestone or activity. This clearly communicates that the start/finish of an internal task is contingent on an external event, without falsely representing the external event as a task the project manages. Constraints (option 2) are less dynamic for uncertain dates.

A key role of the scheduling professional is to inform decision-making, not to make unilateral commitments on risk tolerance. The best practice is to present the probabilistic analysis clearly—showing the trade-off between an earlier date (higher risk of being wrong) and a later date (higher confidence). The sponsor, with their understanding of business impacts, is in the best position to select the date that aligns with the organization’s risk appetite.

The schedule baseline is the approved version of the schedule used as a reference point for performance measurement. When significant approved changes alter the project’s planned work, a new baseline is required to provide a realistic and agreed-upon plan against which to measure future progress (Earned Value Management). It is a tool for objective measurement, not for hiding problems or preventing change.

A core principle of Critical Chain Project Management is the recognition that individual task estimates often include hidden safety (padding). CCPM advocates for using aggressive, but achievable, estimates (e.g., 50% probability) for individual tasks. The safety time removed from individual tasks is then aggregated into shared buffers (Project Buffer, Feeding Buffers) placed at strategic points to protect the overall project deadline from the inevitable variability in task completion.

The core responsibility of a scheduling professional is to understand the impact of variances on the project timeline. While the resource has a recovery plan, the scheduler must first perform a quantitative analysis to determine the true effect on the critical path and project finish before deciding on next steps (like escalation or rebaselining). Documentation alone is insufficient for a high-risk, critical path activity.0