- Problem Definition
As mention in previous blog, it is time to do the re-baseline in order to meet the target. In Week 10, Client had approved Author and 4 other team members Change Order proposal for descoping Paper Project with note that re-baseline should also be submitted. Therefore, individual rebaseline as part of the team had been submitted as requested in W 12 (cut date).
- Development of Feasible Alternatives
In general, re-baseline is of modifying the project plan to closely match the cumulative actual cost line . Two methods will be used for this purpose:
- Utilizing sunk cost by consider below condition at the cut date:
- BCWP = ACWP
- BCWS = ACWP
- Adjust BCWS, while remain BCWP and ACWP at the same as actual
Figure 1 – Two methods of re-baseline (Method 1 : left side, Method 2 : right side) 
- Development of the Outcomes for Alternatives
Below is the individual progress up to W12.
Table 1. Up to W12 Progress Report – Manhours
Method 1 :
In method 1, re-baseline is done by consider BCWS = BCWP = ACWP at the cut date. In this case BCWS = BCWP = ACWP is $ 5,450 (109 manhours x $50/manhours). The result is SPI will be reset to 1 (BCWP/BCWS = 1). W13 onward, other activities will utilize original plan while SIM-01 and SIM-03 will refer to the result of learning curve analysis in previous blogs. Gap between before and after W12 is due to Paper De-scoping Change Order.
- SIM 01 – Weekly Report
Manhours adjusted from : 1.3 to 0.9 manhours
- SIM 03 – Blog Posting
Manhours adjusted from : 1.77 to 2.7 manhours
Figure 2. Re-baseline using Method 1
Method 2 :
In method 2, at cutoff date BCWP, ACWP and BCWS are maintain as actual. While for the W13 onward, will be similar with method 1.
Figure 3. Re-baseline using Method 2
- Selection of the Acceptable Criteria
Comparison should be done to see which method is more realistic as a new basis including from the cost wise
- Analysis and Comparison of the Alternatives
Table 2. Method 1 and 2 – Comparison
Main concern at the cut date progress is the SPI value which happen to be main reason of this re-baseline, both method produce SPI = 1. However from table 2, method 2 has advantage since it save more manhours than method 1.
- Selection of the Preferred Alternative
Based on comparison result, Method 2 offered better saving, however since re-baseline was done at team level, then Method 1 was chosen
- Performance Monitoring and Post-Evaluation of Results
Once re-baseline complete, it is important to maintain the the new schedule and arrange better strategy especially to facilitate current daily workload condition.
- Humphreys, G. C. (2002). Lerning Curve. Project Management Using Earned Value (3rd ed.). Chapter 34. CA: Humphreys & Associates, Inc.
- Permana, A. (2013). W17_APE_My Re-Baseline Schedule. Retrieved from :http://simatupangaace2014.wordpress.com/2013/11/19/w17_ape_my-re-baseline-schedule/
- EIA Standard. (1998), ANSI/EIA-748-1998 Earned Value Management Systems. Retrieved from : https://www.emcbc.doe.gov/pmo/supporting_files/ansi-eia_748_may98.pdf
- Irawan, H. (2015, June). W13_HI_Exercise for Team Re-baseline | GARUDA AACE 2015. Retrieved from https://garudaaace2015.wordpress.com/2015/06/09/w13_hi_exercise-for-team-re-baseline/
- Darwito, R. (2015, May). W11_RD_ Rebaseline preparation (Part 1 – Learning Curve) | GARUDA AACE 2015. Retrieved from https://garudaaace2015.wordpress.com/2015/05/24/w11_rd_-rebaseline-preparation-part-1-learning-curve/
- Darwito, R. (2015, May). W12_RD_ Rebaseline preparation (Part 2 – EAC Analysis on Blog Posting) | GARUDA AACE 2015. Retrieved from https://garudaaace2015.wordpress.com/2015/05/24/w12_rd_-rebaseline-preparation-part-2-eac-analysis-on-blog-posting/