Project Progress Reporting Mistakes: Misusing TEXT Field in Microsoft Project

Misleading project progress reporting? Let’s be honest. If you’ve been a project planner in Malaysia long enough, you’ve either seen it… or done it.

That little trick where the planner use the Text field in MS Project to insert their own formula — something like cost-based weightage to calculate “physical progress.” It looks smart. It works for your monthly progress report. The chart looks convincing. Stakeholders are happy. For now.

But here’s the question: Is it real?

Last month, I joined a routine site inspection for a mid-sized building project. The planner proudly presented the latest update: “We’re at 72% overall progress.” The Gantt chart looked clean. Progress bars were neatly filled. The report printed from Microsoft Project had a column labeled “% Complete (TEXT1)” — all glowing numbers.

But when we stepped out onto the actual site, reality hit hard. Concrete columns were still unfinished. Work below ground for some of the buildings hadn’t even begun. Excavators sat idle in patches of red earth. From a quick walkaround, it was obvious: this project was nowhere near 72%. If anything, it was closer to 30%.

What went wrong?

When “Progress” Isn’t Really Progress

In MS Project, there’s a field designed to measure how far along a task is — it’s called % Complete.

That’s the system’s official language for physical progress. While % Complete doesn’t directly drive the critical path, it reflects the status of activities and helps communicate what’s actually happening on site. It’s the field the scheduling engine is built to understand — and the one most tools expect you to update.

But instead of updating % Complete based on the actual status of work at site, many planners — especially in the construction industry — bypass it altogether.

Instead, they create a formula in Text field. A custom calculation based on cost weightage. Something like:

Progress = (Cost of completed activities / Total cost) x 100%

Sounds logical, right? After all, it reflects the value of work done. But there’s a catch. Actually, several.

Why It’s a Dangerous Shortcut

Here’s what really happens when you go down the Text field route:

1. It Misrepresents Physical Reality

Just because a high-value activity is done doesn’t mean the site looks 60% complete. Try explaining that to the client standing on an empty plot.

2. It Breaks the Logic of MS Project

When you skip % Complete, the engine no longer knows what’s done and what’s not. Critical path analysis? Delay forecasting? All off. You’ve just disconnected the brain from the body.

3. It’s Not Auditable

That formula in Text1? It’s invisible to anyone not looking for it. Try answering to an auditor or a government monitoring officer when they ask:

“How did you calculate this progress again?”

4. It Creates a False Sense of Progress

You feel like the project is moving. The report says 72.42%. But the site tells a different story — maybe 30% complete, if you’re lucky.

We don’t just fool stakeholders. We fool ourselves.

Why Planners Fall Into This Trap

Most of the time, it comes from a good place. You want your progress claim to reflect actual physical progress. You’re trying to match S-curve reporting. You want quick updates.

But MS Project isn’t Excel. It’s not meant to be twisted into doing something it wasn’t built for — especially not when it comes to tracking physical progress.

The Right Way to Do It

If you need both physical and financial progress — do it right.

✅ Use % Complete to reflect actual site physical progress.
That’s your foundation for delay analysis, scheduling accuracy, and earned value management.

💰 Use cost fields like Actual Cost and Baseline Cost to track financial progress.
You can generate weighted S-curves separately for reporting.

📊 If you must use cost-based formulas, don’t fake it in the schedule logic.
Use Excel dashboards or Power BI. Use external reports. But let MS Project do what it does best — schedule and track.

Wake-Up Call for Every Project Planner

If you’ve ever used Text1 to calculate physical progress based on cost weightage — this is your sign to stop. Not because someone told you it’s wrong. But because deep down, you already know it doesn’t reflect what’s really happening on site.

When a project appears 72% complete in your report but looks barely 30% done in real life — that’s not smart planning. That’s self-sabotage.

Your role as a planner isn’t just to generate pretty charts. It’s to represent reality — clearly, truthfully, and in a way the team can trust.

Don’t fall into the trap of quick fixes. Don’t let your tools become illusions.
Progress is not about perception — it’s about facts.

Final Words to Fellow Planners

Stop treating MS Project like a spreadsheet.
Stop “customizing” progress just to please reports.
Start using % Complete like it was meant to be used.
Your future self (and your project director) will thank you.

Want more honest stories from the world of scheduling?

📖 Grab your copy of Confession of a Project Scheduler today — real lessons, real mistakes, and real growth.
Get the book here » https://coachirwan.com/confession-of-a-project-scheduler/