3.4Tracking Progress (Complete, Actuals)
The essentials in 30 seconds
- You regularly update the actual state: % complete, actual/remaining work and actual dates, via the Tracking table or the progress buttons.
- The Tracking Gantt overlays actual bars and baseline bars: the variances (delay, overrun) jump out.
- Prefer actual work to subjective % complete; regular tracking distinguishes a decorative schedule from a steering tool.
Running mini-case — Meriem holds her weekly progress meeting
Meriem, a BTP project manager in Algiers, has launched the site and switched to tracking. Every Friday, she opens the Tracking table and updates the actual state: the % complete, but above all the actual work (hours spent), the re-estimated remaining work and the actual dates. She knows that a simple 'I'd say 60%' is subjective: for costly tasks, she prefers to enter the actual work. Then she switches to the Tracking Gantt, where the actual bars are overlaid on the baseline bars: a delay on a critical task is immediately visible. She notes the reflex: set a recurring progress-meeting day, and prefer actuals to the subjective.
Standalone case for this section: it comes back in the lesson, the diagram, the script and the 48h challenge of section 3.4.
1. Updating the actual state
The project starts: time for progress tracking. Regularly, Meriem updates the actual state: the % complete, the actual work (hours spent), the remaining work and the actual dates. Entry is done via the Tracking table or the progress buttons (0%, 25%, 50%, 75%, 100%).
2. Comparing with the planned
The point of tracking: continuously comparing actuals with the baseline. The Tracking Gantt overlays the actual bars and the baseline bars; the variances — delay or overrun — become visible at a glance. This is where the baseline set in 3.3 comes fully into its own.
3. Regularity makes the difference
A schedule updated once then abandoned quickly becomes false. A regular rhythm (often weekly) detects drifts early. Meriem also knows that the % complete alone is subjective: a task 'at 90%' for three weeks often hides a problem that tracking the actual work would have revealed.
🔎 Concrete example — 🔎 Concrete example — Actual rather than subjective %
Meriem compares two ways to track a formwork task:
% complete alone : fast but subjective ('I'd say 60%').
Actual work + re-estimated remaining : precise, feeds costs and earned value.
-> a task 'at 90%' for 3 weeks hides a problem.Reading: the actual work reveals the blockages that the % masks.
Lesson: regular tracking keeps the schedule faithful to reality.
Section vocabulary
- % complete
- Percentage of progress of a task (estimated or based on the work done).
Simple example: Meriem marks a task at 50%.
What it is not: the number of hours actually consumed.
Reflex: quick progress → % complete.
- Actual work
- Hours or days actually consumed on a task.
Simple example: Meriem enters 36 hours spent on the formwork task.
What it is not: the work planned in the initial schedule.
Reflex: refine costs → actual work.
- Actual dates
- Effective start and finish dates of a task, entered as tracking proceeds.
Simple example: Meriem notes that the task actually started on Monday.
What it is not: the dates planned in the baseline.
Reflex: what happened → actual dates.
- Tracking table
- Set of columns dedicated to entering progress (% complete, work, actual dates).
Simple example: Meriem enters each task's progress there.
What it is not: a frozen costs table.
Reflex: enter progress → Tracking table.
- Tracking Gantt
- View overlaying actual bars and baseline bars to visualise variances.
Simple example: Meriem sees the late task there at a glance.
What it is not: a simple diagram without a reference.
Reflex: see variances → Tracking Gantt.
In practice — In practice — Updating progress
- Open the Tracking table (View > Tables > Tracking) and set a regular rhythm, like Meriem.
- For each progressed task, enter the % complete, or better the actual work and the actual dates.
- Switch to the Tracking Gantt to compare actual bars and baseline bars.
- Spot the variances (delay, overrun) and check whether the finish date or the budget are slipping.
Step-by-step script — holding a progress meeting like Meriem (4 min)
1) Open the Tracking table and set a recurring progress-meeting day. 2) For each progressed task, enter the % complete or, better, the actual work and the actual dates. 3) Switch to the Tracking Gantt to overlay actuals and the baseline. 4) Spot the variances and their impact on the finish or the budget. 5) Decide on action if a variance threatens the objectives.
Keep this rhythm: a schedule updated once then abandoned quickly becomes false.
Copy-paste template — my tracking sheet
Rhythm : recurring progress meeting (e.g. weekly)
Enter : % complete, actual work, remaining work, actual dates
Prefer : actual work (precise) rather than % complete alone (subjective)
Compare : Tracking Gantt -> actual bars vs baseline bars
Rule : a schedule never updated is decorativeA weekly meeting
Meriem updates every Friday: drifts are detected early.
A task that stalls
A task 'at 90%' for three weeks: the actual work reveals a blockage.
A visible variance
The Tracking Gantt shows an actual bar beyond the baseline: Meriem analyses the delay.
A budget that slips
The actual work exceeds the planned: Meriem raises the alarm before the cost runs away.
✓ Best practices
- Update at a regular rhythm (e.g. weekly).
- Prefer actual work to subjective % complete.
- Analyse the variances on the Tracking Gantt.
✗ Common pitfalls
- Making a decorative schedule that is never updated.
- Relying on % complete alone (a task 'at 90%' that stalls).
- Updating rarely (drifts detected too late).
Key takeaways
- You regularly update % complete, actual/remaining work and actual dates.
- Entry is done via the Tracking table or the progress buttons.
- The Tracking Gantt overlays actuals and the baseline: variances become visible.
- Updating turns the schedule into a genuine steering tool.
48h challenge — apply it tomorrow
Like Meriem, open a project's Tracking table and set a progress-meeting day. Enter the actual work and the actual dates for two or three tasks, then switch to the Tracking Gantt to compare actual bars and baseline bars. Write in one sentence the most striking variance and its possible impact on the finish date or the budget.
- I can explain how to update real progress.
- I compare actuals with the baseline in the Tracking Gantt.
- I know how to prefer actual work to subjective % complete.
Frequently asked questions
Should you enter % complete or actual work?
It depends on the precision wanted. % complete is fast but subjective; actual work (hours spent) plus re-estimated remaining work is far more precise and feeds costs correctly. As soon as you track a budget, you prefer actual work. The trap of % alone: a task 'at 90%' for three weeks often hides a problem.
How often should progress be updated?
A regular rhythm is better than a perfect but rare update. For most projects, a weekly refresh is a good compromise: frequent enough to detect drifts early, spaced enough to remain sustainable. On critical phases, you can move to daily. The essential thing is regularity.
What does the Tracking Gantt compare?