IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The effect of project schedule adherence and rework on the duration forecast accuracy of earned value metrics





Earned Value Management (EVM) in project management integrates cost, schedule and technical performance and allows the calculation of cost and schedule variances, performance indices and forecasts of project cost and schedule duration. The earned value method provides early indicators of project performance to reveal opportunities and/or highlight the need for eventual corrective actions. The introduction of the earned schedule (ES) method in 2003 has led to an increasing attention on the forecast accuracy of EVM to predict a project's final duration. Previous research has shown that the ES method outperforms the more traditional predictive metrics for project duration forecasting. In this paper we critically review and test a novel ES extension, the p-factor approach, to measure schedule adherence based on the traditional earned value metrics. A large set of fictive project networks has been constructed under a controlled design and performance is measured by means of Monte Carlo simulations.

Suggested Citation

  • M. Vanhoucke, 2008. "The effect of project schedule adherence and rework on the duration forecast accuracy of earned value metrics," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 08/524, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
  • Handle: RePEc:rug:rugwps:08/524

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Honohan, Patrick & Klingebiel, Daniela, 2003. "The fiscal cost implications of an accommodating approach to banking crises," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 27(8), pages 1539-1560, August.
    2. Michael Bordo & Barry Eichengreen & Daniela Klingebiel & Maria Soledad Martinez-Peria, 2001. "Is the crisis problem growing more severe?," Economic Policy, CEPR;CES;MSH, vol. 16(32), pages 51-82, April.
    3. Jean-Charles Rochet & Xavier Vives, 2004. "Coordination Failures and the Lender of Last Resort: Was Bagehot Right After All?," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 2(6), pages 1116-1147, December.
    4. De Bandt, Olivier & Hartmann, Philipp, 2000. "Systemic risk: A survey," Working Paper Series 0035, European Central Bank.
    5. Franklin Allen & Douglas Gale, 2000. "Financial Contagion," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 108(1), pages 1-33, February.
    6. Marvin Goodfriend & Robert G. King, 1988. "Financial deregulation, monetary policy, and central banking," Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, issue May, pages 3-22.
    7. A. Karas & K. Schoors, 2005. "Heracles or Sisyphus? Finding, cleaning and reconstructing a database of Russian banks," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 05/327, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    8. Gordy, Michael B., 2002. "Saddlepoint approximation of CreditRisk+," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 26(7), pages 1335-1353, July.
    9. William Tompson, 2004. "Banking Reform in Russia: Problems and Prospects," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 410, OECD Publishing.
    10. Helmut Elsinger & Alfred Lehar & Martin Summer, 2006. "Risk Assessment for Banking Systems," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(9), pages 1301-1314, September.
    11. Perotti, Enrico, 2002. "Lessons from the Russian Meltdown: The Economics of Soft Legal Constraints," International Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(3), pages 359-399, Winter.
    12. Rodrigo Cifuentes & Hyun Song Shin & Gianluigi Ferrucci, 2005. "Liquidity Risk and Contagion," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 3(2-3), pages 556-566, 04/05.
    13. Larry Eisenberg & Thomas H. Noe, 2001. "Systemic Risk in Financial Systems," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(2), pages 236-249, February.
    14. Anatoly Peresetsky & Alexandr Karminsky & Sergei Golovan, 2011. "Probability of default models of Russian banks," Economic Change and Restructuring, Springer, vol. 44(4), pages 297-334, November.
    15. George Sheldon & Martin Maurer, 1998. "Interbank Lending and Systemic Risk: An Empirical Analysis for Switzerland," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 134(IV), pages 685-704, December.
    16. Boissay, Frédéric, 2006. "Credit chains and the propagation of financial distress," Working Paper Series 573, European Central Bank.
    17. Hans Degryse & Grégory Nguyen, 2007. "Interbank Exposures: An Empirical Examination of Contagion Risk in the Belgian Banking System," International Journal of Central Banking, International Journal of Central Banking, vol. 3(2), pages 123-171, June.
    18. Angelini, P. & Maresca, G. & Russo, D., 1996. "Systemic risk in the netting system," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 20(5), pages 853-868, June.
    19. Iman van Lelyveld & Franka Liedorp, 2006. "Interbank Contagion in the Dutch Banking Sector: A Sensitivity Analysis," International Journal of Central Banking, International Journal of Central Banking, vol. 2(2), May.
    20. Hamerle, Alfred & Liebig, Thilo & Scheule, Harald, 2004. "Forecasting Credit Portfolio Risk," Discussion Paper Series 2: Banking and Financial Studies 2004,01, Deutsche Bundesbank.
    21. Hasan, Iftekhar & Dwyer, Gerald P, Jr, 1994. "Bank Runs in the Free Banking Period," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 26(2), pages 271-288, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Vanhoucke, Mario, 2010. "Using activity sensitivity and network topology information to monitor project time performance," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 359-370, October.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rug:rugwps:08/524. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Nathalie Verhaeghe). General contact details of provider: .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.