Home / Approach
The method follows the question, the records and the project history.
No single delay analysis method is appropriate for every matter. The analytical approach depends on the question to be answered, the contractual context, whether the assessment is contemporaneous or retrospective, the quality of the programmes and records, the actual progress information and the intended use of the findings.
First principles
Three working principles.
The records come first
The analysis starts with the available programmes, project records and actual progress, and follows them to a conclusion. Conclusions follow the information rather than a preferred position; where the information does not support the position hoped for, we say so early.
The approach fits the question
Contemporaneous or retrospective, prospective or as-built based, each analytical approach answers a different question and needs different records. The approach is selected to suit the question, the timing, the contractual context and the available information, and the selection is explained.
Assumptions and limitations are visible
Material findings are connected to the relevant source information. Assumptions, reconstructed information, gaps and areas of uncertainty are identified expressly, so the reader can see what each conclusion rests on.
Methods and reference frameworks
Recognised methods, used as a guide.
The SCL Delay and Disruption Protocol (2nd Edition) and AACE International RP 29R-03 are recognised reference materials for delay analysis: guidance rather than mandatory rules. The overview below is a guide, not a rigid decision table.
Method selection is not determined by labels alone. Methods may need adaptation, combination or supporting analysis depending on the available records, and critical and longest-path assessment, float and concurrency analysis and programme-version comparison support whichever method is applied. See TIA vs Windows Analysis and Forensic Delay Analysis.
Evidence assessment
How the programme evidence is assessed.
The relevance and weight of each item depend on its timing, reliability, consistency, provenance and its connection to the issue being analysed, rather than on a fixed hierarchy.
Native programme data
Baseline and update programmes with their history, logic and float, read in their native form wherever possible.
Programme recordProgress and site records
Progress records and contemporaneous reports, site diaries, photographs, production information and as-built data.
Site recordCorrespondence and contract records
Correspondence, notices, instructions, RFIs and meeting records: the contractual and factual context the events sit in.
Contract recordWitness and reconstructed information
Used where contemporaneous records are incomplete, identified as such, tested for consistency and never silently blended with the record.
Identified expresslyUnsupported assertions are not treated as established facts: statements about delay are tested against the available records before they are relied on.
Consultancy and expert roles
Two roles, kept clearly distinct.
When appointed as an independent expert witness, the overriding duty is owed to the relevant court, tribunal or decision-making forum. Opinions remain independent of the appointing party, applicable procedural requirements, including CPR Part 35 where relevant, are followed, and expert work is kept separate from consultancy support on the same matter where independence may be affected. See Expert Witness Services.
Independent expert appointments - ProTech PlanningConsultancy and advisory work
Objective specialist analysis within the agreed scope: strengths, weaknesses, gaps and limitations identified candidly, so decisions are made on an accurate technical picture. This role carries no overriding duty to a tribunal and is distinct from expert evidence.
Conflicts checked, always
Every appointment begins with a conflict check across parties, projects and prior instructions, so the applicable role and any independence constraints are established before the engagement.
Technology & controls
Technology improves the process. Expertise determines the conclusion.
Controlled technology and AI-assisted workflows help the practice work efficiently across large programmes and record sets. They inform the analysis; they do not replace the judgement that reaches the conclusion.
Assisted workflows may help with programme comparison, detection of activity, date and logic changes between revisions, document organisation, chronology preparation, evidence referencing, data validation and quality checks. Every step sits inside a controlled process:
- 01
Project records
The source records: native programmes, updates, correspondence and site information. These remain authoritative throughout.
- 02
Structured processing
Records and data are organised and prepared, using technology to handle volume reliably.
- 03
Programme & data analysis
Programme comparison and change detection surface what moved, when and where.
- 04
Professional verification
Automated findings are checked back against the source records before they are relied on.
- 05
Expert judgement
Causation, criticality, concurrency and conclusions are determined by the responsible specialist.
- 06
Client deliverable
Findings prepared for their purpose, every material conclusion reviewed before release.
In short: technology supports the process; the source records and the responsible specialist control the conclusion.
“Complex analysis, clearly explained. Reports distinguish facts, assumptions, analytical steps, limitations and conclusions, and use timelines and programme illustrations where they improve understanding, so commercial teams, lawyers and decision-makers can follow the analysis as readily as planners.”On clarity - ProTech Planning
Put the approach to work
Tell us the question, and what records are available.
An initial discussion can identify the appropriate scope, the information that will be needed and the analytical route. Initial discussions are confidential, and enquiries are acknowledged within one business day.