Engineers tend to be introverted and technical, while the sponsor of a project will likely be more business oriented and experienced in negotiation. This can put the engineer at a disadvantage when it comes to negotiating and defending a schedule they have devised. While the schedule should cater to the owner, it must be realistic. This paper will take into account two parties: the owner (sponsor) of the project and the scheduler. It is important for a scheduler to be capable of defending, negotiating and managing change to the schedule.
Anyone given the task of creating a schedule, no matter how complex, must be prepared to argue their reasoning and stand by their analysis. If a schedule is shortened just for the sake of making it shorter neither party benefits. "Develop your negotiating skills and push for realistic solutions so that you can deliver what you promise" (McConnell). If the scheduler believes in their logic and durations then they are in a position to defend the schedule.
By getting talked into shortening a schedule you run the risk of falling behind and possibly sacrificing quality or safety for a pace that is too ambitious. "?once you have made an estimate, you still have to convince your customer or boss to accept it. If the estimated schedule is too long, customers and bosses will pressure you to shorten it?not because of flaws in your analysis but simply because they want it to be shorter. All too often, they succeed, and, as a result, many of us find ourselves working on projects that have been planned from the outset to achieve an unattainable combination of cost, schedule, and functionality. Such projects are programmed to fail" (McConnell).
The scheduler, of course ...