Organizations often have comprehensive progress and cost reports, but struggle to objectively determine whether a project is truly proceeding according to plan. Earned Value Management brings together scope, schedule, progress, and costs into a single integrated methodology that makes performance measurable and future results more predictable.

This master class covers Earned Value Management from a practical perspective. The focus is not only on calculating metrics, but primarily on understanding the signals behind the numbers and translating them into appropriate management actions.

Why this master class?

Many projects continue to report “on track” for a long time, even though time and budget overruns are already becoming apparent. Traditional reports often compare only the budget actually spent with the available budget. This leaves out of the picture how much work has actually been completed and what needs to be done to finish within the remaining time and budget.

Earned Value Management identifies deviations earlier and provides a more objective basis for forecasts, decision-making, and corrective actions. The master class helps participants assess performance indicators not in isolation, but in conjunction with scope changes, progress measurement methods, planning quality, and remaining work.

What will you learn?

The focus is on interpreting Planned Value, Earned Value, and Actual Cost, as well as the derived metrics Schedule Variance, Cost Variance, SPI, and CPI. Participants explore how ETC, EAC, VAC, and TCPI can be used to assess the most likely final costs and the remaining work required. The session also discusses why an SPI or CPI taken out of context can lead to incorrect conclusions, how unreliable completion percentages distort the picture, and how overly broad or poorly structured baselines can mask problems. The masterclass demonstrates how trends in these indicators can signal productivity losses, structural cost overruns, insufficient progress, front-loaded budgets, delayed procurement, or unrealistic recovery expectations. Attention is also given to the quality requirements for a usable Performance Measurement Baseline.