Both plans are good but I believe that when SV is neagative and cost variance is positive would be a better plan because you would be under budget. The work being done is slacking but it could be fixed if the project manger adds reinforcement or puts more pressure on his team to worker harder. The first option is ok but I don't think it is a better option because you will be over budget which will cost the company more money. It will be hard to recuperate from. The work being done is on scheduled however the more the team proceed in the schedule the more cost it will accumulate. The over budget can be fixed but the project must reduce on costly test, expensive material, or etc. which can increase risk. This is why I choose option 2 there is a better chance in fixing the issue without adding more risk to the project.
I feel it depends on the project we are working on if the project is going to be of great value when it will be on the market in it is ok for me to go a little overboard on the cost so the CV to be negative and the Schedule variance(SV) to be positive.
If the schedule variance is negative that is we are behind the schedule and the cost variance is positive that means we are under budget then I feel there will be more pressure on the employees to complete the work as per time and the cost variance will go negative since employees will be working overtime and more materials would be required.
I would prefer a project with negative SV and positive cost Variance(CV) as it would be a challenge to complete the project on time and also be under the budget.
In my opinion, Schedule variance should be positive and cost variance negative is better if one situation has to be choose between two given. When schedule variance is positive, it is beneficial for the project because the project is progressing ahead of its schedule. While the schedule variance negative means the project is behind is a schedule which isn't terrible however, it determines that the project worth is decreasing as its lagging behind the schedule. It can also determine that the project isn't worth as much as it should be. When cost variance is negative, it does bring the project over budget but it can be worth more if it is completed on schedule.
Schedule Variance and Cost Variance are two essential parameters in earned value management; helps you to analyze the project’s progress, i.e., how are you performing regarding schedule and cost. Schedule Variance helps to determine if you are behind or ahead of schedule, and Cost Variance helps determine if you are under budget or over budget. If both variances are positive, this means that the project is progressing well. However, something is wrong if either variance is negative and the project team has to take corrective action to bring the project back on track. Now the advantage of one choice ( provided in the question) over the other largely depends on how much negative either SV or CV are.I think option 2 ( SV is negative and the CV is positive) is preferable because a negative CV implies going over budget as planned for the project. Adjusting budget as project has already started is quite challenging to accomplish. However, this negativity can be overcome in the initial phase by working extra hours on the project till it matches the deadline as set. However, if the project was already at this terminal phase, having a negative would be a tremendous setback for the project. Overall, choice 1 or 2 depends on various aspects such as the nature of the project and the phase at which the the project is currently in.
Assuming the schedule variance and cost variance are both very high values, I would rather have a negative schedule variance and positive cost variance. I believe it is easier to catch up on a project schedule than it is to cut costs and future spending. In some circumstances it may be possible to increase spending to catch up on the schedule. In this case, being behind on schedule and below budget can complement each other well.
