Halloween season is upon us… a
time for trick-or-treating with kids, dressing up in something fun and, of
course, watching scary movies. When it comes to horror favorites, zombie movies
often top the list. From Train to Busan and Dawn of the Dead to Zombieland,
we can’t help but love a good tale of the undead. Zombies share a few distinct
traits: they’re lifeless, without a real pulse, disconnected from reality and,
worst of all, capable of infecting others.
Now, you might wonder why zombies
belong in a discussion about construction law and project controls. Believe it
or not, our industry has its own version of the undead: ”zombie schedules.“ Just
like in the movies, these schedules look alive on the surface but are, in
reality, lifeless and contagious. They spread confusion across the project,
distort decision-making and drain energy from everyone involved. And, just like
the heroes in those films, whether a lone survivor or a determined crew, our
job is to identify, contain and cure the outbreak of zombie schedules before
they take over a project.
What is a Zombie Schedule?
A zombie schedule is one that no
longer reflects the project’s actual status, fails to account for changes in
scope or sequence, and cannot provide an accurate plan forward or actual
progress information from the past. As a result, schedule updates become a
chore or a paper exercise, as their only purpose is to produce something that can
be submitted as a checklist item. In a zombie schedule environment, project teams
often compress and overlap remaining activities to mask delays, making the
schedule even less realistic. The more disconnected it becomes, the less
motivated the field team feels to engage in updates. This creates a vicious
cycle, as sporadic and inaccurate updates lead to an even more “zombified”
schedule, infecting project decisions and conclusions that rely on flawed data.
Fortunately, there are proven
strategies to bring zombie schedules back to life, both during an active
project and in forensic delay analysis.
How to Keep the Schedule Alive
on Active Projects
On an active project with a
zombie schedule, the goal is to get back on track. The best chance to do that
is by taking the following steps:
- Involve the Entire Team: Engage project
managers, superintendents, project engineers and field staff to participate in
regular schedule updates. When everyone contributes during the update, the
schedule becomes a communication tool rather than a compliance task. Each team
member will understand what each work activity represents, who oversees it and how
it interfaces with others.
- Establish a Regular Update Routine: It is
good practice to establish good schedule update hygiene with recurring meeting
invites and ensure all members either attend these meetings or provide updates
and inputs via other means. The schedule printouts should be distributed to the
team after each update.
- Maintain the Right Level of Detail: Use a
schedule that is detailed enough to manage the work, but not so granular that
it becomes unmanageable. Activities with too short of a duration are cumbersome
to update and monitor, while activities with too long of a duration fail to
capture necessary interdependencies and are hard to status accurately. The
schedule can develop and grow as the project progresses, becoming more detailed
as necessary.
- Capture Reality, Not Just Progress: Each
update should record not only physical progress, but also changes in sequence,
logic and added scope. Keep the schedule “alive” by reflecting what is actually
happening on site. Additional scope could be introduced using “fragnets”
(sub-sets of activities) or via changes to the existing activities (such as
duration increases). The schedulers should keep a log of changes with the
reasons behind each modification.
- Monitor the Critical and Near-Critical Paths:
The project team should monitor the project critical path, near-critical paths
and the driving paths to the key milestones. Avoid gaps in logic and check for
open ends, excessive constraints and out-of-sequence relationships. Regular
schedule health checks ensure the network remains realistic and mathematically
sound.
- Review and Diagnose Changes Regularly: The
project team should regularly review schedule updates and determine if the
critical and driving paths changed, reasons for such changes and the reasons
for delays. It is easier to stay on top of the issues as a project progresses
rather than trying to identify what went wrong retrospectively, sometimes years
later with a different team than your original project team. Delays that go
unnoticed create a “waterfall effect” where small slips accumulate into major
impacts. Regular schedule reviews allow timely responses to these delays.
- Avoid the Temptation to “Crush” the Schedule:
Re-planning and resequencing can help recover time, but arbitrary compression
and overlap of trades often create unrealistic expectations and field
congestion. A “crushed” schedule may look good in a meeting, but usually leads
to inefficiency, trade stacking, and burnout.
In short, a healthy schedule breathes, it
evolves with the project, reflects field reality and helps the team plan
forward. Once it stops doing that, it may look alive, but it is already beginning
to decompose.
Zombie Schedules in Forensic Delay
Analysis
In a forensic setting, zombie schedules
pose a different challenge because the objective is not to expect a perfect
schedule, but to understand how it was used and what it represents. As AACE’s
Recommended Practice 29R-03, Forensic Delay Analysis, emphasizes, CPM
schedules are models of reality, not reality itself. The analyst’s role is to
evaluate how well those models reflected actual project performance and
decision-making at the time. A schedule that was imperfect, yet actively used
by the project team to plan, track progress and make management decisions,
often provides more reliable evidence than a “corrected” schedule created after
the fact by the analyst. The goal in forensic analysis is, therefore, to
determine how much analytical value remains in the contemporaneous schedules,
not to reconstruct an ideal version that never existed. With that said, 29R-03
permits the analyst to make changes to a contemporaneous schedule and should
consider this before abandoning the schedule analysis completely.
To review a potential zombie schedule
during forensic analysis, the analyst and counsel should consider the following
steps:
- Review Contractual Schedule Requirements: Examine the contract and specifications to identify the standards the schedules had to meet, including update frequency, submittal and approval processes, baseline requirements and specific delay analysis clauses. It should be confirmed whether the contractor followed these requirements and determine how any deviations affect reliability.
- Assess Schedule Health: Run a schedule health check based on contract requirements and/or general industry guidelines to identify open-ended activities, missing relationships, out-of-sequence logic, excessive constraints and other similar parameters. These signs may reveal when the schedule stopped functioning as a planning tool and became a reporting exercise.
- Schedule Sequencing: In some cases, the analyst can identify issues with activity sequencing by reviewing how the schedule was actually used during the project, rather than how it was originally built. If the sequence shown in the contemporaneous schedule was actively used to manage the project and was physically achievable in the field, the analyst may generally treat that sequence as appropriate. However, if the schedule reflects sequences that are physically impossible, such as installing structural steel before completing foundations in the same area, the analyst may question the schedule’s reliability or consider correcting those logic ties before using it in a forensic analysis. This distinction highlights that schedule quality requirements differ between project controls and forensic delay analysis.
- Verify Actual Progress and Dates: Generally, for critical and near-critical paths, cross-check reported progress in the schedules against contemporaneous project records such as site reports (daily, weekly or monthly reports), pay applications, RFIs, submittal logs, meeting minutes, photos and correspondence. These may confirm whether the schedule data reflects what truly happened in the field. As previously stated, you are not looking for perfection, so it is important to keep that in mind when analyzing actual progress and dates.
- Evaluate Schedule Use and Intent: Determine how the project team used the schedule. Identify whether it guided field coordination and decision-making or served only to satisfy submission of a document that nobody looked at during the project. This distinction helps clarify whether the schedule ever functioned as a management tool. If a zombie schedule was used as a decision-making tool during the project, the credibility of a zombie schedule may still exist for the purposes of forensic analysis. It may also be useful to compare the master schedule against lookahead schedules to evaluate if those show similar or different scopes of work being performed on the project.
- Determine Analytical Usability: Use the results of your checks to decide how much confidence you can place in the schedule, for a forensic analysis. If it remains reliable, apply quantitative methods such As-Planned vs. As-Built or Windows analyses. If your review shows characteristics of an unreliable and unused schedule, consider other methods for analysis. Since these decisions depend on the individual experts, it is likely that two experts may disagree on the usefulness of the schedules.
- Isolate and Document the “Living” Portions: In cases where some part of a schedule is usable, identify and document the schedule segments that reflect reality. Based on the method of analysis, the expert may consider different methods and changes to schedules so that a set of reliable data can be used to perform an analysis and clearly show how deficiencies in the rest of the schedules affect the overall conclusions. The expert may have to choose an As-Planned vs. As-Built method that relies on the baseline schedule and as-built data, if the updates are deemed unreliable. If the updates are usable, methods as Windows Analysis or Half-Step Analysis maybe used by the expert.
Ultimately, zombie schedules demand a
different level of scrutiny during forensic analysis. By verifying contract
compliance, testing the quality of the schedules and isolating valid data, the
analyst can separate what remains “alive” from what must be discarded and rebuilt,
producing a credible and defensible delay analysis.
Conclusion
Zombie schedules may make for
entertaining analogies, but in real projects, they create serious risk. But
unlike in the movies, the zombies you encounter on your next construction
project can be cured (if not avoided entirely) with consistent participation, honest reporting,
and proactive management. When schedules stay connected to field reality, they
not only help deliver projects successfully, but also serve as credible
evidence if disputes arise.
Whether you are counsel trying to explain
the risks of these schedules to your clients, a project manager fighting to
keep your schedule alive, or a forensic analyst dissecting one that did not
survive, the goal is the same: to understand what the schedule tells you about
the life of the project and ensure the next one does not rise from the dead.
Co-Author Avi Sharma is a Director at Delta Consulting Group, serving as a consultant and expert in construction scheduling, delays, damages, loss of productivity, and project controls. He has international experience as a general contractor on major infrastructure projects spanning heavy civil, water and wastewater treatment, commercial, transportation, educational, healthcare, residential, sustainable, and mixed-use developments. Avi advises contractors, owners, design firms, and legal professionals on litigation support, expert testimony, construction claims, damages assessment, risk prevention, and claim avoidance. A recipient of the Denver Business Journal’s 40 Under 40 Award and AACE International’s Outstanding Young Professional Award, Avi has also authored and presented numerous papers and articles on construction scheduling, damages, and loss of productivity topics.
Co-Author Alena Rymkiewicz is an Associate Director at Delta Consulting Group.
She has extensive practical and academic experience in construction industry,
scheduling and forensic delay analysis. She developed delay analysis models and
worked with schedules for large and small construction projects worldwide,
including hydroelectric, nuclear and coal power plants, subways and railways,
highways, bridges, canals and tunnels, ship building, sewage treatment,
industrial complexes, hotels, shopping malls, medical buildings and housing
projects located in North America, South America, Eastern Europe, Middle East,
and Asia.
