Earned Value Management (EVM)

This topic discusses earned value management (EVM) as a means of monitoring the progress of a project.
By the end of this topic, you should be able to discuss how EVM can be used to assess project performance.

1 Introduction
Methods such as Gantt charts & milestone analysis help in monitoring & evaluating the progress of a project
but provide little information on underlying causes when there are deviations between the project baseline
plan & actual project performance. The following information about a project that has been running for 6
months illustrates this: (1) actual costs incurred for the first 6 months are £700,000; (2) planned budgeted
costs for these 6 months are £900,000. There is a £200,000 negative cost variance, but is the project behind
schedule, is it way behind schedule & we have overspent the money, or is it on schedule & we have used
more efficient methods in developing this project? EVM can determine how much work was accomplished
for the money spent to answer these questions as it evaluates a project by integrating the criteria of time,
cost, & value realised (performance) to draw conclusions about current project status. In essence, EVM
requires that not only planned expenditure & actual cost incurred are measured, but also the value of the
work actually accomplished (the earned value) at the cost rates set out in the original budget.

2 Why and when to use EVM?

Implementing EVM can be costly, time consuming, & might not be suitable for some organisations or
projects. However, when implemented & used correctly, EVM can provide the following benefits:

 EVM allows problems to be identified & corrected at an early stage in a project, typically when it is only
15-20% complete. Statistical evidence suggests that the percent overrun at the 20% completion point
will be within 10% of the percent overrun at project completion, with things typically getting worse.
 EVM imposes the discipline of planning the entire project at cost, schedule & technical levels before
starting the work. Early tracking of variances provides quick insight into future impacts.
 EVM provides a disciplined, standardised approach to project measurement and terminology.
 EVM provides an objective analysis of performance by linking it to cost, schedule and completion of
technical requirements (performance).
 EVM improves the delivery and management of a project by encouraging the use of collaborative
working relationships between different organisational departments.

EVM should only be used on projects where the benefits outweigh the cost. It is most suitable for projects
that have defined deliverables, are longer in duration (typically 6 to 12 months or longer), have strict budget
limits and/or have little or no dependence on other efforts managed under separate contracts. EVM is less
suited for work that provides intangible benefits, for projects with open-ended or undefined objectives (not
measurable), & for projects that are short in duration (cost of implementation outweighs benefits). Despite
this, using EVM on short-term projects can generate a huge volume of performance metrics that can be used
to measure larger projects. Projects with tight budgetary constraints would also benefit from EVM as it
highlights cost overruns early & sometimes before they occur.

3 Earned value process: 7 steps

Step 1: Developing the work breakdown structure (WBS): The information for individual tasks that need
to be performed on the project & the individual work packages is provided in a hierarchical format by the
WBS that enables the necessary human resources to be allocated to the task requirements. Subsequently, the
project network derived from the WBS enables the correct sequencing of tasks to be identified and provides
the basis for developing a time-phased budget that enables the project team to determine the timing of the
1
budget expenditures required to complete the individual tasks. More importantly, it enables the project team
to determine the points in the project when budget money is likely to be spent in pursuit of those tasks. The
WBS should be developed by dividing the planned work into smaller components, known as work and
planning packages. The WBS must match the entire content of the project and be to a level of detail that
reflects its size, complexity, and level of risk: the greater these are, the greater the level of detail required.
The WBS should also support historical cost collection for future cost estimating purposes.

Step 2: Developing the schedule: Once the WBS is defined, work is time phased on a schedule for each
task and an appropriate budget is applied. Determining how much budget is to be allocated to project tasks is
important, as is the understanding of when the resources will be employed across the development cycle of
the project. Consideration should be given to how performance will be measured for each task when
defining their length & construct as well as the budget assigned to each task. The schedule is developed
from the scope of the work to be undertaken, broken down to the activity level, activity interrelationships &
durations, resource requirements, & assigned responsibilities. A robust schedule is used to develop a
realistic baseline plan, help define priorities and provide status reports, aid the identification and impact
analysis of problem areas, and provide support for any corrective actions required.

Step 3: Assigning work (resource loading): Work is assigned by aligning the organisational breakdown
structure (OBS) to the WBS to create a control account that forms the management focal point for EVM.
Control accounts enable actual costs to be accumulated & compared to budgeted cost of work performed; a
control account manager (CAM) is responsible for the management of work & the tracking and reporting of
EV data for all work defined within their control account. This includes analysing EV metrics, past work
activity, future work plans, conducting risk management & mitigation as required, & reporting on variances.
Work packages allow the total scope of the project to be defined & are the lowest level at which resources
are allocated; work packages are for near-term work while planning packages are for far-term work.

Step 4: Measuring performance accomplishment: This is the key part of EVM. Performance must be
measured when the work is accomplished. The method used for each work package is determined before the
project begins based on the type of work required. Subjectivity involved with performance measurement
must be reduced to a minimum. There are several methods for measuring EV:

• Incremental Milestones are the best method for discrete work packages that exceed two months.
Objective, product-oriented milestones that represent verifiable events are established, preferably at least
one per month, & the assigned budget is divided based upon a weighted value assigned to each
milestone. Value is earned as a milestone is completed. This is the best method for accurately &
objectively measuring performance but is not always practical or possible.
• 0/100 Technique measures 100% of performance when the task is complete. It is best for short work
packages, preferably less than one month, or for packages in which all costs are not incurred until the
end, even if the task spans more than one month. It is often used for procurement packages where 100%
of the performance is earned when the item is purchased. The completion criteria must be clearly
identified in the work package scope of work.
• Equivalent Units Technique is used for work packages that contain a series of like units with repetitive
operations, with planning based on unit standards, standard hours, and pay points. The plan is based on
planned completions while the EV is based on actual completions.
• Percent Complete Technique involves forecasting what the percent complete will be at the end of each
month & then applying that percentage against the approved budget at completion to determine the
planned accomplishment. However, it is subjective and is typically applied on long-term, high budget
tasks, & so there is a high level of cost & schedule exposure associated with it.
• 50/50 Technique (or X%/Y%) is used for work packages that are less than or equal to two consecutive
months in duration & for which there are no intermediate milestones. X% (default 50%) of performance
is taken when the task starts & Y% (default 50%) is taken when it ends. The technique is best used when
the effort consists of several short operations and calculation can be accomplished cost effectively.

2
• Level of Effort (LOE) plans and earns performance using a straight line approach. Performance always
equals scheduled amount, so there should be no schedule variances. Cost variance can occur if actual
costs are higher than expected. LOE is used on tasks that are more time-related than task-oriented, i.e.
tasks that have no measurable output. Since LOE does not show schedule variances, it should not be
used for any task with a schedule that might slip or be variable in duration. Any task with defined
deliverables should not use LOE as there is a basis for measuring performance other than time.

Step 5: Establishing the performance measurement baseline (PMB): The PMB unifies technical scope,
schedule, & budget into an overall plan that is used to monitor & control all aspects of the project. One
difficulty in establishing a baseline for a long duration project is that it is impossible to know the exact work
details for many years in the future at the time of the initial baseline establishment. There is no option other
than to wait for this information to establish a baseline since progress cannot be monitored until that time. A
second problem is the time required to establish a baseline for a large project. It is possible to use a rolling
wave concept that recognises that there might be a lack of detail in the statement of work for distant future
activities at the time of initial planning. Rolling wave integrates bottom-up and top-down planning for
establishing the PMB. Bottom-up consists of developing all the specific requirements at the lowest possible
level & then summarising that information upwards for use in the total project plan & budget; this would be
used for near-term activities and would be described in specific work packages within the control account.
Top-down would be used for higher level planning for far-term activities with no specific scope; these
would be defined within the control account but work would be allocated to longer term, higher level,
planning packages. As more information becomes available over time, the high level planning packages
would be converted to detailed work packages. An interim baseline can be used for the initial project work
if the establishment of a PMB is considered to be too difficult.

The PMB represents the highest level WBS and includes Undistributed Budget (UB) that is used when
new effort is added to the contract after the work has started. UB contains work that is associated with an
activity, but has not yet been detail planned and distributed to that activity’s work packages. The PMB does
not equal contract value, since a project manager usually sets aside Management Reserve (MR) that is over
and above the PMB. MR is designed to cover unanticipated but in scope changes. The project manager
should use MR as appropriate, although a log of its uses should be maintained and reported. The amount of
MR set aside for a project varies depending on the level of risk. The PMB plus the MR represents the
Contract Budget Base (CBB), which is the total cost of the work. The CBB plus the fee represents the
contract value, which is the total price of the work. Figure 1.1 shows the standard breakdown for a CBB.
Figure 1.2 depicts a typical time-phased cumulative PMB (or budget cost of work scheduled). The
cumulative PMB is best represented by an S-shaped curve that depicts a slow build up, acceleration through
the middle, and a slow, tapered-down completion. The CBB is a set amount above the PMB. MR is the delta
between the CBB and PMB. Example 1 demonstrates how a CBB is calculated.

Example 1: What is the CBB based on the following data? The PMB is £15,000. The MR is 12% of the
PMB. The contract fee is £150.

 CBB = PMB + MR = £15,000 + (12% of £15,000) = (£15,000 * 1.12) = £16,800

 The £150 Fee is a red herring as it sits outside the CBB but is included in the contract value.

3
Figure 1.1 The standard breakdown for a CBB

Figure 1.2 A performance measurement baseline (PMB)

Step 6: Collecting actual costs (EVM terminology): The actual cost associated with performing the work
is essential for determining the cost position of a project. A standard terminology was adopted when EVM
was first devised by the US Department of Defence (US DoD) and it remains in use today. The terminology
has been modified in recent years. The following basic earned value data elements are those originally
used by the US DoD, with the more recent terminology also included for reference:

• Budgeted Cost of Work Scheduled (BCWS) (or Planned Value, PV) is the time phased costs
associated with work packages & is the baseline used against which performance is measured. When all
planning packages have been summed, at the end of the BCWS, the work is complete and is known as
Budget at Completion.
• Budgeted Cost of Work Performed (BCWP) (or Earned Value, EV) is the value earned by the work
performed to date and is expressed in terms of the costs originally set out in the initial estimate. BCWP
is dependent on the BCWS, with the value that could be earned (rather than simply what has been spent)
depending on how much was originally planned and the completion of the work.
• Actual Cost of Work Performed (ACWP) (or Actual Cost, AC) is the actual costs incurred to date
(which typically differ from planned costs, usually due to overruns). The ACWP data includes costs for
subcontractor invoices, labour, material, travel, etc. It is the sum of all costs associated with the effort.
• Budget at Completion (BAC) is the baseline plan for the entire effort and represents the sum of all
planned work.
4
• Latest Revised Estimated (LRE) is the latest estimate of what it will actually cost to complete all work;
it is often referred to as the Estimate at Completion (EAC). The LRE (or EAC) yields the latest revised
estimate of where the project is expected to end in terms of cost.

Example 2 demonstrates how BCWS, BCWP and ACWP are calculated.

Example 2: I intended to attend the gym 6 times last week but was only able to make it 3 times. Each
session cost £5 and I was required to pay for the sessions one week in advance. However credit is given for a
future session if one is missed. What were my BCWS (PV), BCWP (EV) and ACWP (AC)?

 BCWS: I planned on 6 sessions & paid for 6 sessions so: 6 * £5 = £30

 BCWP: I only made it to the gym 3 times so: 3 * £5 = £15
 ACWP: Even though I only went to the gym 3 times, the full £30 had to be paid

Step 7: Earned value analysis (performance measurement): The analysis includes reviews of past
performance, variance reports, and future performance by calculating schedule variance & cost variance.
Schedule Variance (SV) is a monetary (£) representation of the difference between the amount of work that
was expected to be accomplished (BCWS or PV) and the amount of work actually accomplished (BCWP or
EV). It does not necessarily relate to time delay in the project schedule unless the tasks incurring the SV are
on the critical path. Cost Variance (CV) is the difference between the amount of work performed (BCWP
or EV) and the cost of performing that work (ACWP or AC). A positive value for both SV and CV is good
(either ahead of schedule or under cost) and a negative value is bad (behind schedule or over cost). Figure
1.3 indicates that the project depicted is behind schedule and over cost.

 Equation (1) SV = BCWP - BCWS (or EV - PV)

 Equation (2) CV = BCWP - ACWP (or EV - AC)

Figure 1.3 Graph depicting SV and CV

Figure 1.4 demonstrates how BCWS, BCWP & ACWP link together. The original baseline data for schedule
and budget is represented as BCWS. Schedule slippage from the BCWS (or PV) is attributed to the BCWP
(or EV) and comprises the earned value of the project. The earned value figures can be used to create the
ACWP (or AC), highlighting the difference between the project’s budgeted and actual costs.

5
Figure 1.4 A simplistic model showing the key elements of EVM

Variance at complete and budgeted cost of work remaining: Other commonly-calculated elements
include Variance at Complete (VAC), which is the difference between the planned (BAC) and expected
cost to complete the work. This calculation uses the LRE, which is typically the contractor’s projection of
overrun or under-run at completion. EAC is used to provide an independent assessment of the cost at
completion based on the historical performance. Budgeted Cost of Work Remaining (BCWR) represents
the planned cost of all work left to do on the project. Figure 1.5 shows the data elements discussed.

 Equation (3) VAC = BAC - LRE

 Equation (4) BCWR = BAC - BCWP

Figure 1.5 Graph depicting elements used to measure earned value

6
Analysis of past performance: Past performance should be analysed because one must understand it &
implement lessons learned to control future performance. The cost performance index (CPI) & schedule
performance index (SPI) are used to measure past performance against an index of one. A CPI of one
means the project is exactly on target for cost; a CPI less than one is bad (negative cost variance); greater
than one is good (positive cost variance). For example, a CPI of 0.9 means that every £1.00 spent gives only
£0.90 worth of work completed. An SPI of one means the project is exactly on target for schedule; an SPI of
less than one is bad (negative schedule variance); greater than one is good (positive schedule variance). For
example, an SPI of 0.9 means that for every £1.00 planned only £0.90 worth of work is accomplished.

 Equation (5) CPI = BCWP / ACWP (or EV / AC)

 Equation (6) SPI = BCWP / BCWS (or EV / PV)

Example 3: Based on the following cost report, calculate CPI and SPI for Test?

BCWS BCWP ACWP

Design 400 400 430
Manufacture 1500 900 1100
Test 290 300 310

CPI = (BCWP / ACWP) = (300 / 310) = 0.97

SPI = (BCWP / BCWS) = (300 / 290) = 1.03

Past performance & use of management reserve (MR): MR should not be used to cover unfavourable
cost variances. However, overrun items do not always clearly fall into ‘overrun or unanticipated but in
scope’, & so MR is sometimes used to cover variances. Use of MR to offset or ‘heal’ a cost growth overrun
should be preceded by thorough examination of the course of action. Two good reasons to use MR are:

1. If contract is cost plus, contract is near completion, and/or risk is low. MR is used to cover a cost
overrun because it is quicker to use funds/authorisation available rather than use the paperwork process
of adding cash for the cost overrun, then reducing cash for unused MR.
2. If contract is cost plus and MR balance is more than sufficient for remaining contract work. MR is
sometimes used to cover a small scope increase change made to the effort because the cost and time
involved in processing an engineering change request is prohibitive.

Past performance indices (percentages): Percent planned, complete, and spent should be examined. If
percent planned is much greater than percent complete, the project is significantly behind schedule. If
percent spent is much greater than percent complete, the project is significantly overrunning. One can
compare percent MR spent with percent complete to see if MR is being used at a rate equal to (or less than)
the rate at which the project is being executed. The percent complete can also be compared with the
Integrated Master Schedule percent complete to establish if the EV data is similar to the schedule status data.

 Equation (7) % Planned = BCWS / BAC * 100

 Equation (8) % Complete = BCWP / BAC * 100
 Equation (9) % Spent = ACWP / BAC * 100

Projection of future performance: EV enables the early identification of problems. There are various ways
to analyse and project future performance. First, the To-Complete Cost Performance Index (TCPI) was
designed to lend credibility to the EAC. Second, the EAC uses past data to predict future performance.

• Equation (10) EAC = ACWP + (BAC - BWCP) / CPI

7
Using past performance data, one can project an independent EAC using the CPI Forecast and the CPI-SPI
Forecast. The CPI Forecast assumes the cumulative CPI will remain constant throughout the project and is
often referred to as the ‘best case’ forecast. It sounds unusual to refer to no improvement in productivity as
the ‘best case’ but, historically, the CPI at completion will be very close to or worse than the CPI at the
15%-20% complete point and so maintaining a constant CPI is considered good. The CPI-SPI Forecast
takes into account the schedule. It assumes that all remaining work will follow the same cost & schedule
performance trends, & that it will cost even more money to heal the schedule variance. The CPI-SPI forecast
is referred to as the ‘worst case’ because projects are typically behind schedule and the inclusion of SPI
increases the EAC. If a project is ahead of schedule, the SPI actually decreases EAC & so ‘best case’ and
‘worse case’ should be used with caution. A robust EAC provides credible rationale for important funding
actions and reviews and for providing direction to the contractor. It facilitates better project planning, thus
helping to avoid funding surprises and allowing the team to focus on any necessary corrective actions.

• Equation (11) CPI Forecast = BAC / CPI

• Equation (12) CPI*SPI Forecast = ACWP + ((BAC - BCWP) / (CPI * SPI))

TCPI uses information on past performance to predict future performance; it is the performance that must be
achieved while completing the work remaining (BCWR) in order to meet the completion target. TCPIBAC is
the performance that must be sustained to meet the BAC, while TCPILRE is the performance that must be
sustained to meet the LRE. TCPILRE is typically analysed more than other TCPI indices as it reflects the
contractor’s position regarding future performance.

• Equation (13) TCPIBAC = BCWR / (BAC - ACWP)

• Equation (14) TCPILRE = BCWR / (LRE - ACWP)

Future performance (LRE): LRE validity can be assessed by comparing TCPI to CPI. If TCPI is lower
than CPI, then productivity is expected to be lower in the future. If the difference is great, one should ask
what is expected to happen to decrease productivity in the future or can anything be mitigated to lessen the
decrease? If TCPI is greater than CPI, then productivity is expected to be higher in the future. If the
difference is great, one should ask what is expected to happen to increase productivity in the future & is this
reasonable or is the contractor being optimistic? Generally, a TCPI greater than cumulative CPI by more
than 5% is considered optimistic & should be examined further. EV can be used to assess how reasonable
the LRE is. The contractor usually develops a cost to complete using a bottom-up analysis of remaining
work. The cost to complete is added to the actual costs to date to yield the LRE. The LRE usually includes
human input regarding future performance and so it will account for special situations & circumstances that
cannot be accurately captured simply by using statistics. However, this also means that the LRE inherently
includes optimism that might be exaggerated.

4 Problems with using EVM

Re-baselining: A firm basis for project control requires the PMB to incorporate approved changes in a
timely manner. Common causes of change include late or poor quality material & equipment furnished by
others, defective or incomplete drawings & specifications, ambiguous contract wording, conflicting
documentation, & changed objectives of a project. To have control over any changes it is important to:

1. Define the scope of work clearly in the contract.

2. Formally identify who is authorised to initiate changes.
3. Ensure that contract terms are clear by using standard corporate terminology from other similar projects.
4. Analyse change patterns.
5. Set a monetary (£) threshold for changes.
6. Document change history and costs.
7. Assign trained personnel.
8
8. Provide technical/schedule/cost reserves for changes.
9. Evaluate all impacts of changes.

Every baseline needs to change at some point in time; this is typically due to the addition of new work to
contract or use of MR. On major projects a baseline is likely to be considerably revamped, or re-baselined,
at least once during its life. Usually re-baselining occurs when a major engineering change request or project
change occurs. Valid reasons to re-baseline include the addition of major new work, project scope changes
directed by the customer, or a ‘technical breakthrough’ or new approach to solving a problem. Re-baselining
to eliminate large variances should be avoided. It is unlikely that most contractors will re-baseline based on
a technical breakthrough until close to contract completion. They will continue to report favorable variances
until effort nears completion just in case unanticipated cost overruns occur in the future or in case the
‘technical breakthrough’ ends up not working. Usually, the bottom line is the only line used when evaluating
the need to make contract changes, especially those that change the fee and so it is to the contractor’s benefit
to maintain the favorable variances until the company is certain future overruns are unlikely.

A re-baseline sometimes occurs to heal cost and schedule variances. This over the target baseline (OTB)
can happen when the work performed is no longer consistent with the PMB and CBB. For example, an
agreement is reached to perform small amounts of additional work or change the work effort related to but
not within the funded scope of the contract. This additional work will sometimes be covered using MR if
enough MR exists; if not, cost and schedule variances due to the addition of this work are likely to be
reported. An OTB is negotiated to eliminate any large variances since they are due to the accomplishment of
additional work that had no accompanying contract paperwork and funding.

If the re-baseline is major, it presents a challenge for analysing performance data because it usually
eliminates all variances. It often sets BCWS=BCWP=ACWP so CV=SV=0, it updates BAC and LRE so
VAC=0, and cumulative performance indices hover near 1.0. Cumulative data shows smaller percentage
variances since the base is larger. It is difficult to understand if a project is performing any better than before
the re-baseline. Better analysis is conducted by considering performance since the re-baseline occurred by
subtracting cumulative BCWS, BCWP and ACWP at the re-baseline point from cumulative BCWS, BCWP
and ACWP reported in the current month’s reports. Then, calculate CV, SV, CPI, etc. using the modified
values to provide a measure of performance since the re-baseline. Example 6 demonstrates this.

Example 6: In June BCWS = BCWP = ACWP = £110. In December BCWS = £165, BCWP = £155, and
ACWP = £165
• Cumulative CPI and SPI are good:
– CPI = BCWP / ACWP = £155 / £165 = 0.94
– SPI = BCWP / BCWS = £155 / £165 = 0.94
• Performance data since re-baseline
– June to Dec BCWS = £165 – £110 = £55
– Jun to Dec BCWP = £155 – £110 = £45
– Jun to Dec ACWP = £165 – £110 = £55
• CPI and SPI since re-baseline looks much worse:
– CPI = BCWP / ACWP = £45 / 55 = 0.81
– SPI = BCWP / BCWS = £45 / 55 = 0.81

9
Other problems with EVM: Effective use of EVM involves providing accurate & up-to-date information,
particularly in terms of the percentage of work packages completed. Since this information is a key to
determining the EV at any point in time, the calculated EV is only as accurate as project team members
allow it to be through developing & enforcing an honest reporting system. In reality, organisations often
adopt a simpler decision rule for assigning completion percentages; some of the more common methods for
measuring performance accomplishment were discussed previously.

An important caveat with the percentage complete rule has to do concerns the level of detail to be used in
calculating task value. Critics of EVM argue that unless reasonable gradients of completion are
acknowledged and used by all parties, there is a high potential to create misleading information through the
earned value analysis. One criticism levelled at EVM argues that excessive levels of detail are dangerous
and essentially not interpretable. For example, suppose a project uses completion values based on 10%
increments (e.g., 10%, 20%, 30%, etc.). As a practical matter, it is fundamentally impossible to successfully
delineate between, say, 30% and 40% completion for most project activities; hence, the use of too much
detail is more likely to mislead rather than clarify the true status of a project. The main exception to this rule
occurs in projects in which there is a fair degree of prior knowledge of how well delineated the development
process is or in situations where it is easier to accurately gauge the amount of work done within any project
task. For example, in a simple construction project, where the project steps are well known in advance and
rigorously followed, a higher level of detail can be employed. Similarly, with software development where
the task consists of writing code, a senior programmer might have an excellent sense of the total number of
lines of code needed to complete the task; if the total task requires approximately 5,000 lines of code and a
programmer completes 500 lines of the programme, it would be reasonable to assign a figure of 10%
completion of the total task performance requirement.

Another problem with establishing accurate or meaningful EVM results concerns the need to recognise the
human factor in project activity completion projections. Project teams sometimes continuously report
stronger results than might be warranted in order to send the right signals about the project status. Pressure
might also come from project managers as they find themselves under pressure from top management to
show steady results. Thus, the level of detail controversy is not simply one of accurately matching technical
performance on the project to the best external indicator, or number of gradients. It is often also a problem
rooted in human behaviour, suggesting that excessively fine levels of detail might not only be inappropriate
for the types of project activities we engage in, but they might also be prone to misuse by the project team.
A further problem is the link between performance accomplished & level of difficulty; e.g. EVM figures
might show that a work package is 80% complete but there is no way of knowing whether the completed
work was ‘easy’ while the remaining 20% of the work is ‘difficult’; if this is the case, it is likely that both
cost and schedule might overrun. Finally, re-baselining makes it difficult to establish how well the project is
progressing against the original baseline. Clear records must be kept so that direct comparisons can be made.

EVM is not a flawless methodology for project tracking and control but does allow project teams to gain a
better perspective on the ‘true’ nature of a project’s status mid-stream; that is, in the middle of the
development and implementation process. This can help to provide up-to-date information as realistic plans
for corrective action can be developed. The more we learn, & the faster we learn it, of the status of a project,
the better equipped we will be to take measured and effective steps to get a troubled project back on track.

Summary

EVM helps to define and control a project so that its objectives can be met. It provides improved visibility
and supports timely decisions if actual performance is either better or worse than originally planned for.
However, it is important to be aware of potential issues with EVM such as project re-baselining as it is often
used to mask poor performance, although it can be an appropriate approach under certain project conditions.

10