Our approach to schedule quality and risk
Practical, hands-on and honest. A schedule is only useful if people trust it, so we test it before anyone relies on it.
Quality first, then risk
A risk analysis run on a weak schedule gives a precise answer to the wrong question. So every engagement starts by checking that the critical path holds together and that every activity is linked to a successor. One missing link can leave hundreds of activities showing float they don’t have.
Early-stage schedules are judged fairly. Constraints and lags are often unavoidable before baseline, and qualification activities legitimately wait on many predecessors. Our quality checks allow for that, so the findings are about what genuinely matters.
P50 and P75, explained
The P50 date is the one you have an even chance of beating. The P75 date is the one you can commit to with reasonable confidence. The gap between them is the cost of uncertainty, and the risk register tells you which risks are driving it.
We present both, show which risks move them most, and recommend which date to baseline and announce.
Our three-stage risk analysis
Schedule quality
Metrics-based quality score, critical path test and manual logic review. Findings go back to the planner before the model is built.
Risk workshop
Risk events with probability and duration impact, mapped to activities, plus minimum, most likely and maximum duration ranges for the Monte Carlo model.
Outputs and decisions
Results against agreed key milestones, risk drivers, and recommendations, delivered as a formal report and a presentation.