In defense of last planner

The Scheduler Who Defended CPM without Ever Learning Takt or Scrum

There is a scheduler who has worked in construction for eighteen years. Highly skilled in CPM. Builds complex P6 schedules with thousands of logic ties. Generates metrics. Tracks float trends. Creates Power BI dashboards filtering data across seventeen projects simultaneously. Earns $150 per hour consulting on schedule development and recovery. Respected by owners. Relied upon by project teams. And when someone suggests he learn Takt planning or Scrum or Last Planner systems, he pushes back: critical path is a fact because every project has a critical path. Therefore CPM is essential. And he does not understand why people attack the system. When pressed further about whether he has actually studied these other systems, he admits: not really. He attended a one-hour Last Planner presentation once. Read a blog post about Takt. Heard someone mention Scrum in passing. But never implemented them. Never trained in them. Never built schedules using them. Never experienced projects running on flow systems instead of push systems. And now he defends CPM passionately against people who have implemented Takt on hundreds of projects and trained extensively in Scrum and run Last Planner systems for years. Not because he knows these other systems and concluded CPM is superior. But because he only knows CPM. And defending what you know is easier than learning something new. Charles Darwin teaches: it is not the strongest of the species that survive nor the most intelligent but the ones most responsive to change. And this scheduler is not responding to change. He is clinging to systems that produce 24% success rates because learning new systems requires admitting he spent eighteen years mastering a broken tool. So he defends CPM. Attacks alternatives he never learned. And wonders why more projects are shifting toward Takt, Last Planner, and Scrum while CPM contractors continue finishing projects late and burning people out.

Here is what happens when people defend systems without learning alternatives. A superintendent gets hired to recover a failing project. Schedule is four months behind. Trades are stacked. Sequences are chaos. And the owner demands a recovery plan. So the superintendent brings in a CPM scheduler. Who builds a massive recovery schedule? 5,000 activities. Complex logic ties. Resource loading. Float analysis. And generates reports showing how to crash the schedule back on track through overtime, increased crew sizes, and compressed sequences. The superintendent reviews the plan. Sees it requires workers to burn out for six months. Sees it pushes trades into conflicts. Sees it forces materials and work into readiness before proper make-ready happens. And realizes: this is a push system. It is forcing work instead of flowing work. So he asks: what if we used Takt planning instead? Visual boards showing trade flow through zones. Holding rhythm and crew counts steady instead of pushing them up and down. Creating flow instead of chaos. And the scheduler says: that will not work. You need CPM for complex projects. Takt is too simple. But the superintendent implements Takt anyway. Within two weeks, trades see their flow visually. Coordination improves. Conflicts resolve before they happen. And the project recovers without burnout. Not because Takt is magic. But because Takt is a hold system that creates flow. While CPM is a push system that forces chaos. And the scheduler never learned the difference because he only studied one system his entire career.

The real pain is defending systems you never questioned. A project manager uses CPM for every project. Updates P6 schedules weekly. Generates variance reports. Tracks critical path. Reviews float trends. And tells everyone: this is how professional construction gets managed. When someone mentions Last Planner, he says: tried it once, did not work. When someone mentions Takt, he says: too rigid, does not apply to my projects. When someone mentions Scrum, he says: that is for software development, not construction. But when you dig deeper, the truth emerges: he never actually implemented these systems. He attended a presentation. Read an article. Heard someone describe them. But never trained. Never practiced. Never built weekly work plans with foremen. Never created Takt boards showing zone flow. Never ran sprints with autonomous teams. He dismissed them based on partial understanding. And now he defends CPM while his projects finish late. Because changing systems requires admitting the old system failed. And that admission is harder than continuing to fail with familiar tools. So he keeps using CPM. Keeps finishing projects behind schedule. And keeps wondering why 24% success rates are acceptable in an industry where manufacturing achieves 90%+ success rates using lean flow systems.

The failure pattern is predictable and expensive. Three friends who are dear to someone challenge him about his stance on CPM. They say: you are too radical. CPM works. Critical path is a fact. Last Planner is garbage. Takt does not apply to everything. And when you ask why they believe this, they reveal: they barely know how to implement Last Planner. They have never studied Takt deeply. They have never gone through Scrum training. They only know CPM. And they defend it because learning alternatives requires time, effort, and humility. Easier to attack systems you never learned than experiment with them and discover they work better. So they stay on the CPM bandwagon. Finish projects at 24% success rates. And tell themselves the problem is execution not systems. Never realizing that manufacturing transformed productivity by changing systems. Not by executing broken systems better. If your project needs superintendent coaching, project support, or leadership development, Elevate Construction can help your field teams stabilize, schedule, and flow.

What Each System Actually Does

Scrum is a collaborative system with small autonomous teams. A product owner, Scrum master, and development team have planning meetings. They use Scrum boards and metrics and daily huddles to move forward tasks outlined, identified, ranked, and scored by the product owner. They complete work at rapid pace. Twice the work in half the time. Then they do sprint reviews and retrospectives. The goal is constantly improving speed and quality with autonomous teams. Scrum works heavily with burn down charts instead of timelines. It is the most ideal system for design. Designers love it. Scrum is fantastically implemented for radically complex work that must be done fast. On construction projects, Scrum works brilliantly for critical path items. For everything requiring short interval production planning. Complete projects can run on Scrum combined with pull plans for long lead procurement.

Last Planner has difficulties on very large complex projects like hospitals or laboratories if you attempt using it for the whole system. It becomes so burdensome you spend most time managing the schedule instead of building. If you use Last Planner with CPM, it still does not work. Because CPM makes it not work. Unpredictable supply chains and chaos from the overall master schedule prevent getting things done well. But implement Last Planner for critical swim lanes, critical scopes, critical paths and it works beautifully. Last Planner combined with Takt is a perfect marriage. Phase planning, six-week make-ready look-aheads, weekly work plans, day planning, daily huddles all create collaboration and culture while respecting foremen. The focus should be on roadblocks not PPC tracking. People using Last Planner chase PPC metrics so much they forget about preparing work by removing roadblocks. But ignoring the many wonderful things Last Planner gave construction would be selfish, nearsighted, and ignorant.

CPM is a non-visual system. Very flawed. The primary reason construction projects fail. It should be dethroned. Removed from contracts. Removed from government contracts. Owners need to wake up. Schedulers need to recover. They need CPM Anonymous courses to learn Scrum, Last Planner, and Takt so they can find careers that do not hurt people on construction projects. If people must use CPM, precede it with Takt. You can create Takt trains for almost anything. Exteriors, site work, interiors, basements, concrete. Anything. When people say Takt does not apply to everything, they are showing ignorance because they do not know how to use it.

Takt is the single best system for managing construction projects because it creates flow. CPM has nothing to do with flow. Not a single thing in that software helps visualize flow. The fact that it tracks float incentivizes delaying activities and stacking them at the end. Every part of CPM creates bad culture. Takt shows flow remains consistent. And here is the breakthrough: Takt is a hold system. Last Planner is a pull system. Scrum is a fast pull system. And CPM is a push system. Push means being on top of somebody else. Out of sequence work. Getting pushed into areas with other trades. Getting pushed to do work before ready. Crew counts pushed up and down. Materials pushed forward and back. Contractors pushed to do things they did not agree to and cannot accomplish. Last Planner and Scrum queue up work to follow work that is ready. About making work ready. Pulling work behind you. Takt says: here is your slot, here is your slot, here is your slot. Everyone agrees contractually and verbally to hold those dates. So they flow evenly. Pull work but hold the rhythm. Everyone agrees to keep crew counts and material buffers the same and adjust everything else like Takt zones. Hold systems create flow. Pull systems create readiness. Push systems create chaos.

Signs You Are Defending Systems You Never Learned

Watch for these patterns that signal you are protecting familiar tools instead of discovering better ones:

• You dismiss alternatives like Takt or Scrum or Last Planner without ever training in them or implementing them on actual projects just reading articles or attending presentations
• You defend CPM by saying critical path is a fact without understanding that humans enter the data and you cannot see flow until too late making the critical path invisible not factual
• You argue systems do not apply to your projects without experimenting to discover whether they work because learning new systems requires admitting you mastered a broken tool
• You charge $150-350 per hour for CPM scheduling that takes twelve weeks to create schedules superintendents could create in hours using Takt without schedulers
• You follow the money protecting jobs that depend on CPM complexity instead of following truth that simple systems empower teams to schedule themselves without dependency on specialists
• You only attack systems trying to fix broken foundations instead of attacking the enemy that creates 24% success rates and 76% challenged or failed projects

These are not signs of expertise. These are signs of defending what you know instead of learning what works. Darwin teaches: it is not the strongest that survive nor the most intelligent but the ones most responsive to change. And defending CPM while refusing to learn Takt, Last Planner, and Scrum is refusing to respond to change. So you become extinct while responsive teams thrive.

The Only Problem Is What You Cannot See

Who would think it was good idea for everyone to get in cars blindfolded and try making it to work just because they have been there before? That is what we do with CPM. We would have car wrecks everywhere. Why is cancer such a deadly disease? Because most of the time we do not know we have it until too late. Why is CPM such a deadly disease? Because you cannot see the problems until too late. The only problem you have on your project are the problems you cannot see. CPM hides problems in complexity. 5,000 activities with logic ties so complex the human mind cannot track flow. By the time the schedule grows, you just put things in sequences in WBS sections then logic tie them together. And it becomes impossible to see flow. No superintendent on earth can build a CPM schedule and see flow while building it. Only God could create a CPM schedule and see flow and problems while building it and logic tie it correctly as it grows. It cannot be done.

When do you want to see if a building is built right? After construction is complete when a forensic team comes in? By then it is too late. You want QC inspectors there when placing concrete. You want to see schedule quality when building the schedule. You cannot do that in CPM. That is the genius behind Takt. You can see flow while building the plan. Same with Last Planner. When do you want to see? When you are building it. Nobody however good can build a CPM schedule and see flow as that schedule grows. Building schedules blindfolded is like driving blindfolded. And when problems appear, CPM metrics say: hey, you should not have done that. While Takt says: let us not do this in the first place. Have you ever hit your head and somebody said watch your head after? That is CPM. All the Power BI metrics, float metrics, float trends just say watch your head after you already hit it. They do not fix anything. Do not prevent anything. Do not help. Takt prevents problems by making flow visible when building the schedule.

The Tyranny of OR Versus AND

Do not fall for the tyranny of the OR. OR means: I either do this or that. Either use this software or that one. Either use this system or the other one. Do not do that. Where is the AND? Why can’t we use this and that? Mix this and that? Use the best of all these systems? If you must use CPM, address the concern by building a Takt plan first. See the flows. Build the schedule. Then translate that into the CPM schedule if required. Why waste time spending four, five, six, seven, eight times the amount of work to build CPM once you have Takt? But if you want to, go ahead. Forget the tyranny of the OR. It is not this or that. It is AND. This is a shopping mall. A grocery store. Pick what you need. What will nourish you at the time? Nobody forces you to get one of each of everything they sell in a grocery store. You pick out what you need. How are these systems any different than going to the grocery store? They are tools to use. As long as you have the systems philosophy and use it as a system, you can pick and choose what you need and apply it to the project team and adapt it.

Most of the time it is not taking each system in its entirety and plugging it in 100%. Usually it is adaptation to the project site according to the project, the people, the aptitude of people, the skills of people, and their circumstances. Takt is a hold or flow system. Last Planner and Scrum are pull systems. CPM is a push system. And push systems are the worst thing you can ever get into. So adapt your systems to the needs of the project. Do not fall for the tyranny of the OR. There are ANDs. Treat things like you are in the shopping mall or supermarket. Apply what you need for nourishment. Make sure you understand all your systems. Do not subscribe to one or two because that is all you know.

Why Most Trade Partner Problems Are GC’s Fault

Trade partners on job sites that all GCs complain about? Most of it is not their fault. Most of it is our fault as the general contractor. Period. How do you expect a trade partner to be successful when we dictate the schedule, do not give them flow, crash land projects, interrupt their supply chains, do not educate them, treat them poorly, do not ask their opinion, and shove CPM schedules down their throats? If I was a trade partner, I would only accept jobs where I could collaborate with the superintendent and agree on an overall flow schedule. As soon as they shove CPM garbage down my throat, I know: we are going to lose money on this job. General contractors and people in construction: most of what is wrong is our fault. And it is time to fix this. It is not easy to do all this stuff. But it never was. Who are we worried about making it easy on? Our workers. I care about you getting home on time to your family. I care about you having a remarkable life. I never said it would be easy. I expect you to do more. I think you can do more. So step up. We all need you to step up and take care of our trades and do the right thing. It is not easy. But it is 100% possible.

Follow the Money and Come See for Yourself

Follow the money. Who gets paid to tell you the truth? Does telling you CPM is not working make money? No. It loses money. Loses friends. Loses opportunities. There is no incentive to attack CPM except to stop hurting workers. But who makes money off CPM? Consulting firms. 12-person teams on huge industrial projects doing controls. Schedulers charging $150-350 per hour for CPM scheduling. Follow the money. Who is going to tell you the truth? A scheduler getting paid $150-350 per hour or someone who loses money speaking truth? Schedulers want to use CPM because you need them. Takt, Last Planner, Scrum? Teams can do it themselves. Superintendents can create Takt plans in hours. But right now companies need schedulers to spend twelve weeks creating huge CPM schedules. Follow the control. Will a scheduler ever want to get rid of CPM knowing it gives them control, data, metrics, funding for their position, job security? You can figure that out for yourself.

Some religions have preachers who say: believe me, believe my interpretation, believe what I was taught, and believe me believe me believe me. Others say: here is an invitation, you go ask God yourself and get revelation yourself. The second kind invites you to pray for yourself, get revelation yourself, and connect with God yourself. Same thing in construction. Would you rather have a scheduler say believe me believe me believe me? Or would you rather have someone say: go try it, go experiment with these systems, go do it and see if it does not make the difference, come and see, get your own answers? People getting mad about bashing CPM have only ever done projects in CPM. When you have done hundreds of projects in Takt and seen it work, when you have implemented Last Planner on many projects, when you have gone through Scrum training, then you can talk about the merits of different systems. But if you have only ever done CPM, you are like the preacher saying believe me listen to me instead of saying go experiment and ask for yourself. Complexity is the enemy of execution. CPM is complex. Last Planner is simple. Takt is simple. Scrum is simple. If we want something effective in construction, it has to be simple.

The Challenge

Stop defending systems you never learned. Stop attacking alternatives you never implemented. Stop protecting jobs that depend on complexity instead of serving workers who need simplicity. Darwin teaches: it is not the strongest of the species that survive nor the most intelligent but the ones most responsive to change. So respond to change. Learn Takt. Train in Scrum. Implement Last Planner. Experiment with flow systems instead of defending push systems. Come and see for yourself whether visual boards showing trade flow work better than 5,000-activity schedules hiding problems until too late. Get your own answers instead of believing schedulers who profit from CPM complexity.

As Darwin teaches: it is not the strongest of the species that survive nor the most intelligent but the ones most responsive to change. And construction is changing. Massive shift toward Takt, Last Planner, and Scrum. Massive shift away from CPM. You can adapt and thrive. Or defend what you know and become extinct. The choice is yours. But remember: the only problem you have on your project is what you cannot see. And CPM makes everything invisible until too late. While Takt makes flow visible when building the schedule. So you prevent problems instead of recovering from them. That is why Takt wins. That is why flow wins. That is why simple wins. On we go.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the difference between hold, pull, and push scheduling systems?

Takt is a hold system where everyone agrees to hold dates, rhythm, crew counts, and material buffers to create flow. Last Planner and Scrum are pull systems that queue up ready work behind completed work. CPM is a push system forcing out-of-sequence work, stacking trades, and pushing work before readiness.

Why can you not see flow when building a CPM schedule?

CPM schedules grow so complex with thousands of activities and logic ties that human minds cannot track flow while building them. You just sequence things in WBS sections then logic tie them together and it becomes impossible to see problems until too late, like driving blindfolded.

What is the tyranny of the OR and how does AND replace it?

Tyranny of OR means either/or thinking: either use this system or that one. AND means using multiple systems as needed like picking what you need from a grocery store, Takt for flow, Last Planner for collaboration, Scrum for complex work, adapting to project needs.

Why are most trade partner problems the general contractor’s fault?

GCs dictate schedules without collaboration, provide no flow, crash land projects, interrupt supply chains, treat trades poorly, do not ask opinions, and shove CPM schedules down their throats, then blame trades for failing in systems designed to make them fail.

How do you respond to change instead of defending familiar systems?

Experiment with alternatives yourself rather than dismissing them based on articles or presentations. Train in Takt, implement Last Planner, learn Scrum, then compare results to CPM from experience not theory, come and see for yourself rather than believing what others claim.