Progress Measurement System

Percent complete is usually invented

Ask three people how complete an activity is and you get three answers. Every number downstream. Earned value, CPI, SPI, forecast outturn. Inherits that guess and reports it as fact. Rules of credit replace the guess with arithmetic.

See how it works

The same steel, measured two ways

Structural steel package, 40 tonnes

Delivered to site. Erected. Not yet bolted up, not yet surveyed. Ask the site team where it stands.

Estimated by eye

65%

By rule of credit

60%

Delivered

20%

Erected

40%

Five points looks like nothing. On a £40M package that is £2M of earned value which does not exist, carried into CPI, into the forecast, and into a valuation someone has to defend. And 65% cannot be reproduced by anyone else. 60% can.

How it works

Four steps, and only one of them involves the site.

Define the rules

Fixed steps with fixed weights per discipline. Steel: delivered 20%, erected 40%, bolted 25%, surveyed 15%. Six starter sets included, twenty slots available.

Weights must total 100%, enforced

Register the work

Items with quantities, budget hours, WBS and the P6 Activity ID they belong to. Done once, at the start.

The field ticks steps

One sheet, Y against completed steps only. No percentages typed by anyone, so there is nothing to argue about and nothing to inflate.

Push it into P6

The update block gives Activity ID, % complete and actual dates in P6 column order, VLOOKUP against your export and import.

Fits the workflow you already use

It refuses nonsense

Any spreadsheet can average some weights. What makes a progress claim defensible is everything it rejects. These are the checks that run on every item, every period.

Progress went backwards

An item claiming less this period than last. Either this claim is wrong or the last one was. Both need answering before the valuation goes out.

Steps ticked out of order

Bolted before erected. Physically impossible, so the claim is wrong somewhere.

Rule sets not totalling 100%

A discipline whose weights sum to 90% silently under-reports every item using it. Caught on entry.

Earning against zero budget hours

An item with progress but no budget distorts every roll-up it touches.

Claims with no claimant

An unattributed claim is the first thing challenged in a dispute, and the hardest to defend a year later.

Claims with no date

Without a date you cannot prove which period the work was earned in.

No P6 Activity ID

The item cannot be pushed back to the schedule, so the update is silently incomplete.

Items at 100%

Not an error, a prompt. Confirm the activity is actually closed in P6.

Pricing

Progress Measurement

£199

One-time purchase

Rules of credit library
Weighted progress calculation
Eight integrity checks
P6 update block
2,000 work item capacity

Complete suite

£1,399

Everything, one price

PROJECT CONTROL CENTER
Forecast Engine
All eight industry packs
Schedule Quality Analyser
Progress Measurement System
NEC4 Programme Compliance Tracker
Disruption & Productivity Loss Register
Carbon & PAS 2080 Tracker

Schedule Quality

£149

Sold separately

All 14 DCMA checks
Per-activity findings
Adjustable thresholds
2,000 activity capacity

See the Analyser

Questions

How is this different from just typing a percentage?

Nobody types a percentage. The field ticks the steps that are genuinely finished and the weighting does the arithmetic. Two people looking at the same steel report the same number, because there is nothing left to have an opinion about.

Does it get progress back into P6?

Yes. That is what the P6 Update Block is for. Activity ID, % complete, actual start and actual finish, laid out in P6 column order so you can VLOOKUP it against your export and import. It fits the workflow planners already use rather than replacing it.

What if my disciplines are different?

The rule library is yours to define. Six starter sets ship with it. Structural steel, pipework, cable, concrete, equipment and earthworks. And you can add up to twenty, with five steps each. The only rule is that weights must total 100%, which the sheet enforces.

Hours-weighted or quantity-weighted?

Both, side by side, switchable as the reporting basis. Where the two disagree sharply you usually have a mix of high-quantity, low-effort work skewing one of them. Which is worth knowing before you report either.

Does this prove the work was actually done?

No, and the tool says so plainly. A ticked step is still a claim made by a person. This makes the claim consistent, weighted and auditable. Physical verification is still a site walk. Any tool claiming otherwise is overselling.

How does it fit with your other tools?

It sits upstream of both. PROJECT CONTROL CENTER's EVM and the Forecast Engine's earned value are only as good as the % complete you feed them. This is where that number should come from.