When it comes to health, financial, or educational goals, it’s important to have a structured plan. Research shows that people who plan exercise routines and meals are more likely to reach their fitness goals.¹ Similarly, in academics, students who create a study plan are more likely to achieve better grades.²

But what about planning construction projects? MCA, Inc. has studied this question over the past three decades. In the early 2000s, analyses and jobsite observations showed that one hour spent planning can save 17 hours on installation.³ But what makes a good plan, and does a better plan lead to a better outcome?

This article summarizes MCA, Inc.’s findings and offers practical takeaways contractors can use to set up, manage, and course-correct plans that predict outcomes early.

From Data to AI-Driven Insights

Using Agile Intelligence™ models, MCA, Inc. developed data-driven answers to two questions that can help guide, monitor, and predict project outcomes by the time a job reaches 10% complete:

• What makes a good plan?
• Does a better plan lead to a better outcome?

This approach combines decades of project data and field experience with AI.

Often at the start of a construction project, in the short window between project award and project start, the project manager (PM) rushes to put together a budget for labor and materials.

Once installation starts, the budget often becomes a lonely spreadsheet that’s left behind. At most, it is reviewed when the PM or financial professional has a feeling that things are about to go sideways. That’s when the blame game begins: Who is at fault — the estimator or the field and project teams?

The latest analysis tested a theory observed across construction projects: A solid, structured plan for the work — not only at the beginning but updated and managed throughout — correlates with materially better financial outcomes.

While no two construction projects have the exact same conditions, nearly all construction projects have similarities that allow them to be comparable, despite differences in size, type of work, or duration. Common characteristics include jobsite obstacles (absenteeism), common phases (planning, procurement, installation, and closeout), and change orders (scope shifts from start to finish).⁴

Recognizing these commonalities, the analysis could investigate how differences in planning relate to project outcomes across a sample of 50 projects over four years, varying in size and type of work.

To evaluate planning quality and its relationship to outcomes, the evaluation asked:

• Did the project team (PM and field leader) have a plan for the work?
• How good was the plan?
• Did the team manage the work to the plan throughout installation?
• Was the plan continuously reviewed and updated?

In addition to understanding the project’s planning and management behaviors, the study defined project outcomes in terms of financial performance, specifically:

• Profit deviation: Did the project make more, less, or as much profit as expected (measured in dollars and as a percentage of gross profit)?
• End-of-job gross profit.

Project Planning: What Does a Good Plan Look Like?

Whether you are setting personal goals or developing a work plan for a major project (such as a new data center), the fundamentals of effective planning remain the same. A good plan is clear, specific, measurable, and maintainable, making it easy for everyone involved to understand their responsibilities and work toward a common goal.

On projects large and small, MCA, Inc. has worked with hundreds of contractors that have built the infrastructure needed within their companies to plan and manage projects through implementation of tools such as a work breakdown structure (WBS) to create the plan and JPAC® to measure productivity and manage changes throughout.

It’s important to note that the plan for work is different from a plan for hours or installed quantities. Understanding the differences between these is the crux of shifting how an organization plans for and measures work across its projects. These fundamentals of planning for work (not just labor hours) are the basis of JPAC® and ASTM Standard E2691 for productivity measurement, with roots back to Frederick Taylor’s The Principles of Scientific Management.⁵

A good plan for work also goes beyond creating a “work package,” which captures a collection of related activities on a project but misses the full picture of how that work achieves each of a project’s deliverables.

A WBS is a hierarchical segmentation of a project’s work into smaller, more manageable components. On a construction project, this structure might be broken down by phase, building, floor, or area and type of work. The lowest level of the WBS is a description of the tasks to accomplish the deliverable for that piece of the project.

By utilizing a well-laid-out and detailed WBS, it can:

1. Ensure all the work is captured on a project.
2. Get the project team on thesame page about what is includedin the scope.
3. Allow the work to be easily understood by field crews.
4. Make resource assignment and handoff less tacit.
5. Give the project team a baseline labor hour budget (BLHB) based on the work, which is critical to measuring productivity and capturing changes throughout the job’s duration.