Most construction teams trust the schedule.
Fewer trust the data inside it.
Too often, the schedule functions as a compliance tool, rather than the operational system it was meant to be. Teams update monthly, react weekly, and make decisions without a clear line of sight into true performance. By the time delays are visible, options are limited. The typical response? Resequencing, stacking trades, and hoping to recover lost ground.
A new industry report from SmartPM, The State of Construction Scheduling 2025, analyzes over 70,000 baseline and update files, paired with 3,500 survey responses from construction professionals. The results show a clear disconnect between how schedules are intended to function and how they’re actually used across the industry.
Performance Confidence Is High. Performance Isn’t.
Surveyed teams rated their schedule literacy at 3.6 out of 5. But SmartPM’s analysis tells a different story:
- Only 12% of baseline schedules meet best-practice standards.
- Over 70% of projects underperform against their original plan (SPI < 0.90).
- Fewer than 5% maintain schedule integrity through project closeout.
Across 70,000 schedules, most delays surfaced early – but action came too late.
These numbers point to a systemic issue: many teams know how to build a schedule, but few know how to manage with it.
Delays Surface Early. Action Comes Late.
Schedule changes and early signs of slippage appear during the first 50% of project execution. Yet formal adjustments, particularly to completion dates, tend to occur in the final quarter.
This disconnect forces last-minute compression to happen. As float disappears, teams accelerate, reallocate resources, and adjust durations, not to reflect field reality but to preserve contractual milestones. The result is increased cost, reduced quality, and limited visibility into root causes.
Schedules Are Used for Compliance, Not Coordination
The report highlights another key issue: schedule updates are often incomplete or inconsistent. Over 45% of updates included changes to actual start or finish dates, which should remain fixed once recorded. One in three showed discrepancies between percent complete and duration remaining.
This lack of structure limits the schedule's ability to serve its intended purpose: providing a shared, objective view of progress that allows for early intervention and proactive management.
Laying the Groundwork for AI and Automation
Only 16% of respondents currently use AI or automation tools in scheduling. While interest is growing, adoption remains limited, primarily due to data quality concerns.
AI tools depend on consistent, accurate inputs. Without clean logic, regular updates, and standardized reporting, automation can’t deliver meaningful insight. SmartPM’s approach focuses on improving baseline structure and update integrity to ensure that analytics and AI can operate as intended.
What High-Performing Teams Do Differently
The data also shows a clear contrast between average performers and those using schedules effectively as a project control tool. High-performing teams:
- Use standardized metrics to evaluate schedule quality, delay, and feasibility.
- Update schedules frequently with accurate inputs.
- Align field and office by sharing objective performance data in real time.
- Prioritize visibility over documentation, ensuring risk is identified and addressed early.
These practices shift scheduling from a retrospective box-checking exercise to a forward-looking strategy.
Download the Full Report
The 2025 State of Construction Scheduling includes:
- Benchmarks from 70,000+ CPM Schedules
- Survey insights from 3,500 construction professionals
- 10 key analytics every project team should track monthly
- An action plan for improving schedule reliability and project outcomes.
