When a construction project finishes late, the natural question is: who or what caused the delay? Delay analysis is the process of comparing planned vs. actual timelines and attributing delay to specific causes.
Why Delay Analysis Matters
Delay drives cost (extended overhead, labor, equipment) and often leads to disputes. Owners may withhold liquidated damages; contractors may claim extended overhead and impact. A clear, defensible delay analysis supports negotiations, mediation, or expert testimony.
Common Methods
As-planned vs. as-built: Compare the baseline schedule to what actually happened. Simple conceptually but doesn’t show cause and effect.
Impacted as-planned: Insert owner-caused delays into the baseline and see the projected effect on the finish date. Often criticized for not modeling concurrent delay or progress.
Collapsed as-built (or but-for): Build an as-built schedule, then remove specific delays and recalculate. The difference in finish date is attributed to the removed delay. Good for isolating the effect of specific events.
Windows / time-slice: Analyze delay in discrete periods (e.g., monthly). For each window, compare planned vs. actual and assign delay to causes. Can be more defensible when done with care and good data.
Choosing the right method depends on contract terms, available data, and the purpose (project control vs. claim support).
Documentation
Strong delay analysis depends on solid records: schedules, daily reports, RFIs, change orders, and correspondence. Zeconic provides schedule impact and delay analysis using recognized methods and clear documentation for your claim or dispute.