Is Delay Analysis Science or Art?

The Art of Delay Analysis

However, the “art” of delay analysis was not something I learned from textbooks. Instead, it became evident through my personal interests and experiences. My academic background is in history, and my passion for the subject has persisted throughout my life. Today, I find myself reading far more history books than scheduling manuals. For a long time, I thought my history education was a disadvantage, especially since most of my peers and opposing experts were engineers. Yet, studying history has provided valuable lessons that have directly informed my approach to preparing delay analyses. Now, I see my reports as history papers, and my historical studies have revealed important insights into the art behind effective analysis.

Parallels Between Historians and Delay Experts

I have come to believe that the science and art of delay analysis are not as different as they might seem. Historians and scheduling experts face similar challenges. Good historians avoid anachronism, that is, they resist the temptation to interpret historical events through the lens of modern perspectives. Instead, they strive to understand events as they were viewed at the time they occurred. In scheduling and delay analysis, we call this the “Contemporaneous Timeframe.”

Similarly, a good delay expert must do more than just get the analytics right; they must also consider historical perspective. The scientific aspect is the analytical component, while the art lies in applying the correct historical context. Delay analyses are more reliable when they evaluate contemporaneous schedules from the contemporaneous perspective.

Common Analytical Pitfalls

One frequent mistake in delay analysis is adjusting Remaining Durations in Contemporaneous Schedules. This anachronistic practice occurs when analysts alter contemporaneous schedules—either by increasing the remaining durations of non-impacted activities (often to argue concurrency), or by reducing the durations of impacted activities to minimize or remove delay impacts from the critical path. If these revised durations were not known at the time, making such changes after the fact undermines the authenticity of the analysis.

Another common error is relying on as-built schedule analyses without considering contemporaneous schedules. While as-built schedules are useful for establishing when events happened, they do not explain why those events occurred as they did. Without prioritizing the contemporaneous perspective present at the time of the delay, such analyses risk losing credibility and can create confusion that is challenging to resolve.

The Importance of Historical Perspective

The art of delay analysis, from a historical standpoint, involves seeing the delay from the contemporaneous perspective—understanding float values and comparing the scheduled completion status to the contract completion.

A thorough and honest delay analysis requires evaluating what the contractor or owner was thinking and planning when the delay happened. Maintaining awareness of how project teams plan and manage their schedules is crucial, and this is best achieved by actively engaging with those teams during the updating process. In other words, simply applying analytical techniques is not enough. The science of delay analysis can be learned from books, but the art is honed through practical experience.