Примеры использования Project timetable на Английском языке и их переводы на Русский язык
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
Project timetable.
Assurance over project timetable and costs.
Project timetable.
The Board is concerned that the current ERP project timetable is unrealistic because.
Project timetable and work plan.
Upon enquiry, the Advisory Committee was provided with an updated project timetable see annex.
Project timetable and workplan.
As a result, delays have accumulated unnoticed orhave been accepted in the belief that they can be absorbed within the overall project timetable.
The project timetable until March 2011 is as follows.
This could indicate that costs are being reduced or deferred in an effort to contain cost overruns oraccount for changes to the project timetable.
An analysis of the project timetable, project budget and deployment strategy and other critical elements is currently nearing completion.
The contract sum contained a number of provisional sum allowances for work that had not been designed fully in the time allowed in the project timetable.
The Board is concerned that the project timetable and forecast costs are not routinely updated to reflect slippage against forecast completion dates.
The capital master plan would be delayed and its success jeopardized if the provision of resources for the associated departmental activities was not aligned with the project timetable.
For example, forecasts are focused on showing how the project timetable and costs remain on track according to plan, and contingency planning is underdeveloped.
The Board notes that the project team is already routinely working additional hours andweekends in an effort to absorb delays within the overall project timetable and are showing signs of fatigue.
For example, forecasts are focused on showing how the project timetable and costs remain on track according to plan, and contingency planning is underdeveloped.
The project timetable also assumes that all steps in the project will be completed on time against very challenging deadlines and has not been subject to any adjustment for risk or optimism bias.
The Secretariat affirmed that the start of the build phase before completion of the design did not present any risks, butthat any delays in completing the"get to green" recovery plan could have an impact on the project timetable.
The Board notes that an external review of the project timetable was commissioned by the administration prior to the release of the Umoja Foundation request for proposal in November 2011.
In its current report, the Board reiterates 16 of its previous recommendations that have been partially implemented or not implemented, and makes 5 new andadditional recommendations that relate to the project timetable and budget, readiness assessments, process owners, change management and benefits realization plans ibid., para. 29 of the summary.
The Board was of the view that the project timetable and costs were insufficiently robust and transparent to enable effective and timely decision-making for mitigation of risks by the General Assembly, the Management Committee and the Steering Committee.
In the meantime, the Board noted that, to support this process, an IPSAS project team had been established in the Tribunal andwas reviewing the project timetable recommended by the United Nations IPSAS team to establish how it could achieve the milestones and resources needed to support this process.
The Board indicated that assurance consisted of an independent assessment to determine whether the elements required to deliver a project successfully were in place and operating effectively, andwhether the cost projections and project timetable took into account identified risks and were sufficiently robust.
Ii The need to align IPSAS timetables with related enterprise resource planning project timetables; the enterprise resource planning system for the Secretariat, Umoja, was expected to be deployed over the course of 2013;
In the meantime, the Board noted that, in order to support this process, an IPSAS project team had been established in the Tribunal andit was reviewing the project timetable recommended by the IPSAS implementation team to establish how it could achieve the milestones and obtain the resources needed to support the process.
These included delays in gaining approval for necessary funding;the need to align IPSAS timetables with the project timetables pertaining to the enterprise resource planning(ERP) process; a heightened awareness of the scale and complexity of the work involved in development of required procedures and system changes; problems in recruitment and retaining of project staff and competing reform initiatives limiting staff ability to engage in IPSAS implementation tasks.
The Advisory Committee notes with concern that the project continues to report new delays in the project timetable and increased funding requirements on an annual basis, and stresses the need to prevent any further delay and cost escalation.
The projected timetable of the work of the Commission, however, continues to be a cause for concern.
Noting with concern the projected timetable of the work of the Commission on the submissions already received by it and those yet to be received and, in this regard, the consequences of the duration of the sessions of the Commission and the meetings of its subcommissions.