In this blog, I’ll discuss why I have a deep appreciation for the Last Planner System, but also why it might be holding you back, particularly if you are pairing it with the Critical Path Method (CPM). I’ll cover the specific ways in which this could be affecting your project and provide actionable steps to fix these issues. If you’re ready to dive in, you’ve come to the right place!
Key Components of the Last Planner System
Let’s break down the Last Planner System into its core components. At its heart, the Last Planner System involves the following steps:
- Master Schedule: This is usually done with CPM.
- Milestones: Derived from the master schedule, these milestones are critical to project completion.
- Pull Planning: This step involves trade partners coming together to sequence and coordinate their work.
- Look-Ahead Planning: Typically done six weeks in advance, this step focuses on identifying and resolving potential roadblocks.
- Weekly Work Planning: Coordination of activities one week ahead to ensure 100% commitment from trade partners.
- Day Planning: Detailed coordination of activities on a daily basis.
- Percent Plan Complete (PPC): This tracks how well the planned activities are completed, ideally aiming for above 80%.
While this system appears efficient, its integration with CPM can lead to numerous problems, which I’ll explain below.
The Truth About Using the Last Planner System with CPM
Although I love the Last Planner System, pairing it with CPM can be detrimental. CPM often leads to an overall master schedule that becomes a wish list—either too long or too short, with inaccurate milestones. This mismatch trickles down through all the other components of the Last Planner System, leading to inefficiencies.
One major issue with CPM is that it tends to focus on larger zones or batches, which are not ideal for complex phases of a project, particularly during the interiors phase. This causes delays and wasted time, as the sequences are not aligned with reality.
When you try to pull plan with incorrect milestones, the whole system can break down. Instead of focusing on specific zones and accurate durations, you end up with inaccurate pull plans that either strain trade partners or waste their time.
Common Mistakes People Make with Pull Planning
A common mistake I see in the field is that people try to loop their pull plans back into the overall CPM schedule. This creates an overly detailed plan that no one can follow or manage. In an attempt to remedy this, some teams keep their pull plans separate, but this causes vertical misalignment. Without synchronization between the pull plan and the master schedule, changes in one don’t reflect in the other, leading to confusion and missed commitments.
Why You Can’t Achieve Flow with the Last Planner System
Another issue arises when look-ahead and weekly work plans are not based on flow. Instead, they become chaotic activities scattered throughout the schedule. Without simulating a steady trade flow, the commitments made in weekly work plans often fail, leading to frustration and inefficiency.
During day planning, teams often abandon the structured approach altogether. Instead of filtering their plans through daily handoffs, roadblocks, and constraints, they resort to addressing labor counts and immediate needs, without considering the bigger picture. This lack of flow planning ultimately results in low PPC scores, ineffective root cause analysis, and an inability to meet deadlines.
How to Fix These Issues
The root of the problem lies in the reliance on CPM. The Last Planner System, when paired with CPM, simply cannot function as intended. The solution? Replace CPM with Takt planning.
Takt planning ensures that milestones are accurate and flow is maintained throughout the project. When you use Takt, your pull plans are based on real, accurate sequences. Trade partners’ commitments become realistic, saving time and resources while ensuring smooth handoffs and coordinated work. In this way, the entire system operates as it should, and your PPC scores will reflect real progress. Root causes of delays will be visible, and you can implement fixes with confidence.
Conclusion
The Last Planner System has its strengths, but when used alongside CPM, it falls short. By shifting to Takt planning, you can eliminate many of the issues that cause breakdowns in your workflow. I hope this blog has helped shed light on why you may be experiencing difficulties and what you can do to overcome them.
If you want to learn more we have:
-Takt Virtual Training: (Click here)
-Check out our Youtube channel for more info: (Click here)
-Listen to the Elevate Construction podcast: (Click here)
-Check out our training programs and certifications: (Click here)
-The Takt Book: (Click here)
Discover Jason’s Expertise:
Meet Jason Schroeder, the driving force behind Elevate Construction IST. As the company’s owner and principal consultant, he’s dedicated to taking construction to new heights. With a wealth of industry experience, he’s crafted the Field Engineer Boot Camp and Superintendent Boot Camp – intensive training programs engineered to cultivate top-tier leaders capable of steering their teams towards success. Jason’s vision? To expand his training initiatives across the nation, empowering construction firms to soar to unprecedented levels of excellence.
On we go!