Project Planning
Structuring a project so it can be delivered, costed and reported against — scope, breakdown, schedule and gates.
Workflow
- 01Initiation
- 02Work Breakdown
- 03Scheduling
- 04Baseline
- 05Gate Approval
- 06Progress Measurement
If you change this
It implies 3 topics across one module.
See the path ahead →Why it matters
A schedule is the visible output. The work breakdown structure is the consequential one: it determines what cost can be attributed to, what can be reported, and whether the project's financial position can be produced at all.
- It is the reporting spine: Cost, commitment and progress all attach to the breakdown. A structure that suits delivery but not finance produces a mapping layer, and the mapping layer becomes a spreadsheet.
- Gates only work against a baseline: Without one that changes formally, variance reporting is a comparison against the current opinion.
- Progress has to be measurable: Percent complete that is self-reported effort will sit at ninety for months.
The workflow
- 01
Initiation
Scope, objectives and success measures defined, with the funding source and approval path named.
- 02
Work breakdown
Decomposed to the level work is assigned and cost is captured — and to the level external reporting needs.
- 03
Scheduling
Sequenced with real dependencies, resource-loaded against actual availability.
- 04
Baseline
Scope, schedule and budget frozen, with a change route for anything after.
- 05
Gate approval
Approved to proceed against criteria set in advance.
- 06
Progress measurement
Physical progress measured against the baseline, not estimated against the remaining effort.
Design the breakdown against both audiences at once. Delivery wants it by project and phase; finance and the funder want it by asset class, service or category. One structure has to carry both, and retrofitting the second is where the manual reporting comes from.
What you need in place
- A breakdown that serves finance and delivery: Agreed jointly, tested against the actual external reporting categories.
- A baseline that only changes formally: Otherwise there is nothing to measure against.
- Gate criteria set in advance: With a real option to not proceed.
- Physical progress measures: Milestones or quantities, not effort consumed.
- Alignment to the chart of accounts: The project structure has to fit the ledger it posts into.
- Dependency mapping across projects: Portfolio-level constraints are invisible inside a single plan.
Questions to ask
01Two audiences
Does the breakdown produce the external report natively?
If it needs a mapping layer, that layer is where the effort will go.
02Baseline
What is the baseline, and when did it last formally change?
Informal drift makes variance meaningless.
03Progress
How is percent complete determined?
Self-reported effort is why projects are ninety percent complete for a quarter.
04Gates
Has a gate ever stopped a project here?
If not, the gate is a reporting event.
05Ledger fit
Does the structure fit the chart of accounts?
Establish this before design, not during build.
06Resources
Is the schedule loaded against real availability?
A plan resourced on notional capacity is a forecast of slippage.
Metrics and KPIs to track
Schedule performance
Milestones met on the baseline date, and cumulative slip.
Baseline changes
Formal changes per period, with cause.
Progress measurement basis
Share of projects measured on physical progress.
Gate outcomes
Proceed, conditional and deferred, as a distribution.
Planning accuracy
Estimate at initiation against final outcome, trended.
Alongside this