5.3. Documenting Predictive Project Controls
💡 First Principle: Schedule Variance and Cost Variance share the same starting point — Earned Value — but compare it against two different baselines, which is exactly why they answer two different questions and shouldn't be treated as one formula with two names.
Earned value basics. Three inputs feed both formulas:
- Planned Value (PV) — the budgeted cost of work that was scheduled to be done by this point
- Earned Value (EV) — the budgeted cost of work actually completed by this point
- Actual Cost (AC) — what was actually spent to complete that work
| Formula | Calculation | Answers | Positive Result Means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Schedule Variance (SV) | EV − PV | Are we ahead of or behind schedule? | Ahead of schedule |
| Cost Variance (CV) | EV − AC | Are we under or over budget? | Under budget |
Worked example: A work package was budgeted at $10,000 (PV) to be complete by today. The team has actually completed $8,000 worth of budgeted work (EV) and spent $9,000 doing it (AC). SV = $8,000 − $10,000 = −$2,000 (behind schedule). CV = $8,000 − $9,000 = −$1,000 (over budget). Same EV, two different comparisons, two different — and both unfavorable — answers.
⚠️ Exam Trap: SV and CV are not the same formula wearing two labels. They share the EV term but compare it against PV (schedule) and AC (cost) respectively — a scenario giving you all three values expects you to know which pair answers which question.
Predictive project artifacts. Beyond the schedule and cost baselines already covered, predictive projects document control through a change log (tracking every submitted change request and its disposition), variance reports, and status reports comparing planned vs. actual performance at regular intervals.
⚠️ Exam Trap: Just because Domain 2 carries only 17% doesn't mean its formulas appear only in Domain 2 questions. A Domain 1 planning scenario or a Domain 4 schedule-adjacent question can just as easily test SV/CV or critical path reasoning — under-preparing this content costs points well beyond its own domain weight.
What a mixed SV/CV signal is actually telling you. A status report showing positive SV alongside negative CV isn't a data error — it's a real, common pattern. A team ahead of schedule but over budget may be spending extra money specifically to accelerate the timeline, trading budget for speed. Reading these two numbers together, rather than treating either in isolation, is the actual associate-level skill: SV tells you about timeline health, CV tells you about spending health, and a scenario rarely asks you to report just one without also asking what the combination suggests about what's actually happening on the project as a whole — the pairing is usually the actual point genuinely being tested here, not either single number taken entirely by itself in complete isolation from the other one.
Controls documentation is evidence, not bureaucracy. When an audit, a sponsor question, or a dispute arrives months later, the change log and baseline history are what prove which version of the plan was in force and why it changed. A team that skips the paperwork hasn't saved time; it has traded a few minutes of recording now for an unanswerable question later.
