SlideShare une entreprise Scribd logo
1  sur  46
Overruns or Underestimates?
  "... their judgment was based more on blind
wishing than upon any sound prediction; for it is
the habit of mankind to entrust to careless hope
what they long for, and to use sovereign reason
     to thrust aside what they do not desire."
                                 Thucydides (c. 460 BC – c. 395 BC)


  A Political Perspective on
  Software Cost Estimation
                  Eduardo Miranda
              Carnegie Mellon University
                 October 15th, 2012
                                                              © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
Estimation politics

 The purposeful shrinking or padding of an estimate to
 achieve an objective or favor a course of action not
 warranted by the unaltered estimate
   – Shrinking consists in reducing the estimate below what the estimator
     honestly believes will be required

   – Padding refers to the practice of increasing the estimate beyond what
     the estimator honestly believes will be required to develop a system

 An adjustment to compensate for what you think others
 are or will be doing




                                                                   © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
Loss leader strategy ≠ Target costing ≠ Political
                   behavior

Loss leader strategy     Target costing




                                           © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
Price ≠ Budget ≠ Cost ≠ Estimate
                         Estimate
                            – A range of values within which an
                                organization believes it is possible for it to
                                achieve the objectives of the project with a
                                defined probability
                         Price
                             – What the seller or developer will get for doing
                                the work. Depending on the strategic intent
                                of the seller it could be higher than the cost
                                estimate, with the difference being the
                                expected profit or mark-up or they could be
                                lower, a loss, with the hope of entering a new
                                market, acquire a new technology or recoup
                                it in follow-up work
                         Budget
                             – A definite amount in terms of effort,
                                schedule, and resources, hopefully chosen
                                from the range of possible values defined by
                                the estimate, to which the budgetee or
                                executor of the project commits to
                         Margin
                             – The desired profit
                         Cost
                             – The amount of money or resources that has
                                been used to produce or acquire something,
                                and hence is not available for use anymore
                         Profit (or loss)
                             – The difference between the price and the
                                cost


                                                              © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
Agenda


 The cone of uncertainty revisited

 What is the evidence?

 Successful projects, price and cost, the consequences of
 overruns
 What can be done?

 Conclusion




                                                   © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
The cone of uncertainty




Relative
 Size
                                                                                          Barry Boehm,
Range                                                                                       Software
                                                                                           Engineering
                                                                                           Economics,
                                                                                          Prentice Hall,
                                                                                              1981



                                                                                            Todd Little,
                                                                                             Schedule
                                                                                          Estimation and
                                                                                            Uncertainty
                                                                                            Surrounding
                                                                                            the Cone of
                                                                                            Uncertainty,
                                                                                          IEEE Software,
                                                                                          May/June 2006

                          Plans and     Product       Detailed   Development
           Feasibility
                         Requirements   Design        Design       and Test


                                  Phases and Milestones
                                                                               © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
Some plausible explanations

 Cognitive bias
   – Overconfidence
   – Anchoring
   – …….
 Individual & administrative behaviors
   – Student syndrome
   – Parkinson’s law
 Political behavior
   – Shrinking
   – Padding
 All of the above




                                          © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
Cognitive bias


Overconfidence                                                    Anchoring




   Variability and Calibration of Expert Judgment in Software       Anchoring and Adjustment in Software Estimation, J. Aranda, 2005
  Estimation during the Bid Phase of a Project – An Exploratory
       Survey, Pedro Faria, University of Coimbra, 2011

                                                                                                                         © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
Individual & administrative behaviors


Parkinson’s Law                                                Student syndrome
 0.1                                       1.8

0.09                                       1.6

0.08
                                           1.4

0.07
                                           1.2
0.06
                                           1
0.05
                                           0.8   Normal
0.04
                                           0.6
0.03                                             Parkinson's
                                                 Law
                                           0.4
0.02

0.01                                       0.2


  0                                        0
       10   15        20         25   30
                 Task duration




                                                                                  © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
Cognitive bias vs. political behavior as cause of
chronic underestimations


                                                                                                   (Politics)




                                                                                                   (Cognitive bias)


                 B. Flyvbjerg, From Nobel Prize To Project Management: Getting Risks Right, 2006




                                                                                                      © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
So, what is the evidence?




                            © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
"The Montreal Olympics can no more have a
deficit, than a man can have a baby"
                     Montreal won the bid for the 1976 Olympic
                      Games in May 1970, the estimated budget
                      was $120 M
                     On Jan. 29, 1973 J. Drapeau, Montreal’s
                      mayor announced that the games would
                      cost $310 million
                     The 1972 Munich Olympics had cost
                      around $600 million




                                                    © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
Montreal’s Olympic Stadium and Toronto’s CN
Tower
                                     •Completed in 1976
                                     •Budget 63 million
                                     •40,500 cubic meters of concrete
                                     •Headcount peak 1,500
                                     •Cost per cubic meter of concrete
•Original budget 130 million.        $1,555

•Final construction 770 millions
•Total cost including repairs and
interest: 1.5 billion
•Planned completion 1976
•Completed 1987
•400 000 cubic meters of concrete
•Headcount at peak of construction
10,000
•Cost per cubic meter of concrete
$1,925

                                                                 © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
The C-130 Avionic Modernization Program (AMP)
according to GAO




GAO-08-467SP Assessments of
  Major Weapon Programs




                                        © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
C-130 AMP


                        According to the C-130
                        AMP PO the amount of
                       wiring and the number of
                        harnesses and brackets
                       needed for the installation
                       had been underestimated
                            by 400 percent




  GAO-08-467SP
Assessments of Major
 Weapon Programs




                                          © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
The EMS Commercialization Project




                                    © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
EMS Project
 Migrate 2,000,000 SLOC of application code from
 mainframe shared memory to client-server architecture
   – Fortran
   – Assembly
   – Hard real-time
   – Custom interfaces to SCADA system
   – Complicated GUI
   – Safety critical application
   – Two organizations that have never worked together and with very
     different cultures (public service, business) located 600 km away
   – Productizing the system
   – Deployment in a foreign country
   – Generating documentation
 Constraints
   – 8 months from bid to promised date + 2 months ready on-site
   – 1.5 M budget (hardware excluded)


                                                                   © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
Sensitivity chart for EMS

                        Unfeasible
      Need to rewrite




                          CPF        MPT
                                           Feasible




                                                      © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
© Eduardo Miranda, 2012
ERP Implementations

                                 Medium Organizations                                $m
                 Hardware
                         –Application, Web, and database servers including           0.8+
                         storage

                 Software ERP application Suite License
                         –HR, Financials, Distribution                              $3.2+
                         –1,000 seats

                 Implementation 9 months to complete pilot
                 site including process engineering, apps
                 configuration, and testing                                         $9.3+
                         –30 external consultants @ $1,200 a day
                         –30 internal staffers @ $100,000

                 Deployment
                         –3 external consultants at 9 sites for 3 months
                         –9 internal staffers at each site for 6 months
                         –5 days of user training at an average burdened user       $7.5+
                         salary of $50,000
                         –3 full-time training staff at an average burdened
                         salary of $100,000

                 Total                                                             20.8+


                                                                       © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
The Validation Of A Political Model Of Information
Systems Development Cost Estimating, A. Lederer and
J. Prasad, 1991




                                            © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
Software Management And Cost Estimating Error, A.
  Lederer and J. Prasad, 1999
     Uses                                    Practices                              Methods                  Result


                        Justify using cost-                   Multiple
                         benefit analysis
                                                  (+)         phased
Staff projects                                                                            (+)
                                                             estimates
Monitor project   (+)         User                                            (+)
                          management
  Schedule                                                                          Structured
                        signs-off estimate
  projects
                            Estimate              (+)                                    (+)
Select projects             prepared                         Accuracy of
                         proposal stage                                                          (-)
                                               (+)        estimates is part                                   Project
                                                         of IS performance                                   overruns
   Evaluate                                                    review
  estimators                                                                                                      (+)
  Evaluate                                                Estimates and
 developers                                                actuals are
Charge users                                   (+)           audited
                                                           Accuracy of               Informal
                                                         estimates is part                                       Software
                                                             of users                                        management and
                                                                                                              cost estimating
                                                           performance                                       error, A. Lederer
                                                                                                               & J. Prasad,
                                                              review                                                1999

                                                                                                       © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
Other studies
 Any other cost estimation inhibitors? A. Magazinović & J. Pernstål,
  Chalmers University, 2008
    – The results of this study were used for validation of the results of the Lederer and Prasad study
      that was conducted in the form of a questionnaire, answered by 112 software professionals with
      a response rate of 28%
    – Pressures from manager, users or others to increase or reduce the estimate was fully validated
      by the issues found in both cases.
    – Removal of padding was partly validated by an issue found in the VCC case.
 Better sure than safe? Over-confidence in judgment based software
  development effort prediction intervals, M. Jørgensen et al, University of
  Oslo, 2002
    – Hidden agendas: Software professionals have goals other than just a high correspondence
      between confidence level and hit rate. In particular, the desire to be evaluated as a skilled
      software developer may be an important agenda that leads to overly narrow effort Pis.
    – Project managers favor narrow intervals and high confidence: Study D indicates that most
      software developers preferred effort PIs that were much too narrow or based on a much too high
      confidence level, even when they knew that they were much too narrow
 When planners lie with numbers, M. Wachs, 1989
    – Planning, however, is not just analytical. We work in the fishbowl of politics and public-policy
      making. We serve as staff to politicians, consultants to government bodies, and representatives
      of private landowners and real estate developers. These roles are usually associated with
      clearly articulated interests. Our agencies, employers, and clients favor particular policies or
      programs for reasons that may be derived more directly from ideology, political commitments, or
      economic self-interest than from the results of analytical studies.
    – I have experienced this conflict between planning as science and planning as advocacy in my
      own consulting, and have accumulated dozens of case studies from alumni who return to the
      university to talk about their anxieties and conflicts as professionals.
                                                                                        © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
Successful projects & the consequences
         of underestimations




                                   © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
Budget overruns are not the same as project
                  failures
 Iridium
    – 66 LEO satellites designed,
      built, launched, and operated
      successfully
    – Completed on schedule
    – Completed below budget -$5B
    – Bankruptcy
    – Entire system was sold for $25M
      in 2000



                                         Titanic
                                            – Six months late
                                            – $100M budget, final cost $200M
                                            – Financial and creative
                                              blockbuster
                                            – Revenue of $1.8B




                                                                  © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
Even if overruns do not equate to project
failures, underestimations are not free:
 They affect which projects get done

 How much we end up paying for them; and

 Might throw the organization into a vicious firefighting
 cycle




                                                       © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
Which projects get done?



  “We have found it isn’t necessarily the best
 ones, but those projects for which proponents
  best succeed in conjuring a fantasy world of
underestimated costs, overestimated revenues,
   undervalued environmental impacts and
   overvalued regional development effects”

                            Machiavellian Megaprojects, Bent Flyvbjerg, 2005




                                                                               © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
Olympic gold


                        Atlanta               Sydney                 Athens      Beijing    London      Rio


    Year                   1996                  2000                   2004      2012       2012       2016

                                               AUS$                   Euros
 Original US$ 800                                                                US$ 15     US$ 2.4    US$14
                                                 1.7                    1.5
 budget millions                                                                 billions   billions   billions
                                               billions               billions
                                                                      Euros                  US$
  Actual                US$1.8                 AUS$ 6                            US $43*
                                                                         12                   15+
   cost                 billions               billions                          billions
                                                                      billions              billions
* Estimated. The actual cost has not been revealed by the Chinese government




                                                                                                          © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
The Freiman Curve




         Budget




                           29
                    © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
Underestimated projects cost more


                                                                                   Fatigue
                                                                  Overtime (Eoa)


                                       Learning                Effort
                                                     contributed by bringing in
                                                     additional personnel (Ea)
FTE




                                                                             Fatigue
                              Effort contributed thru overtime (Eob)

                                                  Communication Overhead (Eco)


             Budgeted Effort (Eb)
                           Ramp-up     Coaching
                         preparation


        Td               Ta                  Tl


                                 Tb

                                                                                       © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
Recovery cost

                                                   Project Parameters

                                                    Tb = 12 months

                                                      Ta = 1 month

                                                      Tl = 1 month

                                                   FTEb = 20 people

                                                       Teams = 4

                                                    Lag = 2 months

                                                       Ci = 0.025

                                                        Cr = 0.1

                                                        Cc = 0.1

                                                        Cd = 0.1

                                                        Co = 0.0

                                                        Co = 0.0


                                 2
                     b t   b t       4a t c u, t
         FTEa t, u
                             2a t

                                                        © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
Underestimations lead to system inefficiencies

                                                   Number of                 +                         -
                                          +
                                                    worked                         Fatigue                  Productivity
                                                     hours                                                                   -
                               PM                                                          +
                          intervention
                                              +                              +     Number +
                  -                                   QA
                                                                                     of                Rework
           +                                       activities
                                                                                   defects
  +                                                                                                                  -
       Rate of    -                                                      Project
      progress                                                          workload               +
                  +                                                                                            Other
                                    Resources                   +                                             projects’
                                    allocated to                                                               delays
                                    the project                                  +/-
                                -                                                                      -
                                                     +
                                                                                                                 -
                                              Add                        -             Organization                       Multitasking
                                         + resources                                   al resource
                      -         +                                                       availability
                                                                                                                           +

Underestimation       Management
                      intervention                + Scope           +         “Band                +       Organization
                                                                               Aid”
                                                     cuts                                                   workload
                                                                             projects
                                                                                                                 © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
What can be done?




                    © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
Before You Start
 Attachment to issues have career consequences. How do
 you expect your advocacy to affect your goals?

 The introduction of an estimation or screening process
 will impose limits in otherwise discretionary decisions,
 and although people vary to the extent that they seek
 power, they rarely relinquish it voluntarily.

 There is not unequivocal substantive solution to the
 problem. Other parties have views and solutions of their
 own and they are not likely to support you until they
 recognize their own views in it.

 Not matter how good the process, it cannot succeed on
 its own. It depends on others who can amend, delay,
 obstruct and even block its deployment and operation.
                                                     © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
Estimation Perspectives


  Political: There are multiple and distinct interests in
  organizations, each pursuing its own, occasionally
  parochial, objectives

    Cognitive: Our predisposition to judge future events
    in a more positive light than is warranted by actual
    experience

            Epistemological: What do we know? How?
            When?
                     Models: Measurement errors,
                     assumption errors, and scope
                     errors

                                                      © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
Your options

 Reduce political influences

 Compensate for political influences




                                        © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
Reducing political influences (The inside view)
 Visibility
    –   What is the work to be done?
    –   What risks were considered and which ones were excluded?
    –   Worst, most likely and best case estimates for effort, cost and schedule
    –   Safe estimates (x) for effort, cost and schedule
    –   Staffing curves
    –   Correlations between work elements
 Sanity checks
    – A final check that you should do whenever you solve a problem. It’s an
      informal test to see whether your answer makes sense in the context of the
      problem. It’s not detailed enough to verify that an answer is correct, but it is
      good at detecting logic or assumption errors which produce answers that
      cannot possibly be right
 Reliability
    – Given the same outputs two persons should arrive at more or less the same
      result for the same reason
 Traceability
    – It should be possible to understand how the outputs are related to its inputs.
      Not black magic.
 Advocates / Non-advocates estimates

                                                                            © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
Benchmarking & Compensating (The outside view)

 Rolls Royce’s Lead Time Model

 Class reference forecasting




                                          © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
Lead Time Model – Rolls Royce Controls




   A. Powell, Right on Time: Measuring, Modelling and Managing Time-Constrained Software Development , PhD. Thesis, University of York, 2001




                                                                                                                                          © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
Class Reference Forecasting




                              © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
Uplift curves

                                          Project sponsor must
                                         present justification for
                                           the uplift not to be
                                                 applied




  The British Department for Transport
      Procedures for Dealing with
      Optimism Bias in Transport
                Planning
          Guidance Document
               June 2004




                                                         © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
Reference Class Forecasting for DoD Projects – Cost Correction
                                             Cost Overruns & Underruns For 45 DoD Projects According to

                                                                                                                                                           C130 – AMP
                                                                    GAO 2008
                               14                                                                                                          100.00%
                                                                                                                                           90.00%             proposed budget =
                               12
                                                                                                                                           80.00%             3.9B
                               10                                                                                                          70.00%
                                                                                                                                                             Acceptable chance
  Frequency




                                                                                                                                           60.00%
                                    8

                                    6
                                                                                                                                           50.00%             of cost overrun =
                                                                                                                                           40.00%
                                                                                                                                           30.00%
                                                                                                                                                              10%
                                    4

                                    2
                                                                                                                                           20.00%            Required uplift =
                                    0
                                                                                                                                           10.00%
                                                                                                                                           0.00%
                                                                                                                                                              190%
                                            -25   0   25    50      75   100   125   150    175     200   225   250   275   300 More
                                                                                                                                                             Uplifted budget =
                                                                         Percentage of Original Budget
                                                                                                                            Frequency      Cumulative %       11.3B
                                                                         Required Cost Uplift                                                                Latest estimate with
                                    350                                                                                                                       half of original units
                                    300                                                                                                                       to be delivered =
       Original Budget Adjustment




                                    250                                                                                                                       5.3B
                                    200                                                                                                                      Latest estimate with
                                    150                                                                                                                       original number of
                                    100                                                                                                                       units to be delivered
                                     50                                                                                                                       = 12.5B
                                        0
                                        0.00%     10.00%   20.00%    30.00%    40.00%      50.00%    60.00%     70.00%   80.00%     90.00% 100.00%

                                                                         Acceptable Chance of Cost Overrun
                                                                                                                            Distribution   Trendline
                                                                                                                                                                          © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
Reference Class Forecasting for DoD Projects – Schedule
Correction
                                         Schedule Overruns & Underruns for 45 DoD Projects According
                                                                to GAO 2008                                                                        C130 – AMP
                               14                                                                                                 100.00%
                                                                                                                                                      proposed schedule
                               12
                                                                                                                                  90.00%              = 48 months
                                                                                                                                  80.00%
                               10                                                                                                 70.00%             Acceptable chance
 Frequency




                                8                                                                                                 60.00%
                                                                                                                                  50.00%
                                                                                                                                                      of cost overrun =
                                6
                                                                                                                                  40.00%              10%
                                4                                                                                                 30.00%

                                2
                                                                                                                                  20.00%             Required uplift =
                                                                                                                                  10.00%
                                0                                                                                                 0.00%
                                                                                                                                                      90%
                                        -10   0   10   20      30     40     50     60     70    80   90   100      More
                                                               Percentage of Original Schedule                                                       Uplifted schedule =
                                                                                                           Frequency            Cumulative %          91 months
                                                               Required Schedule Uplift
                                                                                                                                                     Latest estimate = 84
                               160
                                                                                                                                                      months
                               140
Original Schedule Adjustment




                               120

                               100

                                80

                                60

                                40

                                20

                                    0
                                    0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 70.00% 80.00% 90.00% 100.00%

                                                            Acceptable Chance of Schedule Overrun                Distribution         Trendline


                                                                                                                                                                © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
Applying Reference Class Forecasting to
   software development and information systems
   acquisitions

                          Collect Past
completed project data    Perfromance     project data base
                          Data
                                     A1


                                                    Select        reference projects
                                                    Reference
query                                               Projects
                                                             A2

                                                                            Generate         schedule reference distribution
                                                                            Class
                                                                            Reference
                                                                            Distributions    cost reference distribution
                                                                                        A3

                                                                                                                                cost uplift
                                                                                                              Calculate         schedule uplift
                                                                                                              Uplift
acceptable cost overrun chance
                                                                                                              Values
acceptable delay chance
                                                                                                                           A4
                                                                                                                                                                     adjusted cost
                                                                                                                                                                adjusted schedule
                                                                                                                                                  Adjust
                                                                                                                                                  Estimates
estimated cost
estimated schedule
                                                                                                                                                          A5




                                                                                                                                                      © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
Summary

 Prices and targets are not estimates. They should be
 recognized as such and the cost of following a given
 strategy acknowledged
 Underestimations cause inefficiencies

 Political and cognitive biases distort the inputs used by
 models and determine the fate of its outputs
 When an estimate can only be explained by delusion or
 deception, it is safer to assume the latter




                                                      © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
The estimation
problem isn’t
unsolvable, we
just need to
understand what
is involved and
perhaps use it as
a competitive
advantage




                    © Eduardo Miranda, 2012

Contenu connexe

Similaire à Eduardo Miranda (Carnegie Mellon) Overruns or Underestimates? A Political Perspective on Software Cost Estimation

Hospital management consulting v1 client.
Hospital management consulting v1 client.Hospital management consulting v1 client.
Hospital management consulting v1 client.Kalpit Sanghvi
 
Estimations: hit the target. Tips & Technics
Estimations: hit the target. Tips & TechnicsEstimations: hit the target. Tips & Technics
Estimations: hit the target. Tips & TechnicsAlex Tymokhovsky
 
Avoid software project horror stories - check the reality value of the estima...
Avoid software project horror stories - check the reality value of the estima...Avoid software project horror stories - check the reality value of the estima...
Avoid software project horror stories - check the reality value of the estima...Harold van Heeringen
 
Benchmark METRICS THAT MATTER October 4 2012
Benchmark METRICS THAT MATTER October 4 2012Benchmark METRICS THAT MATTER October 4 2012
Benchmark METRICS THAT MATTER October 4 2012BenchmarkQA
 
2014-01-27_Weitz_Outsourcing
2014-01-27_Weitz_Outsourcing2014-01-27_Weitz_Outsourcing
2014-01-27_Weitz_OutsourcingCytel
 
2014Q1-0127_USAW_CONF_Weitz_When Outsourcing Stops Making Sense
2014Q1-0127_USAW_CONF_Weitz_When Outsourcing Stops Making Sense2014Q1-0127_USAW_CONF_Weitz_When Outsourcing Stops Making Sense
2014Q1-0127_USAW_CONF_Weitz_When Outsourcing Stops Making SenseCytel
 
JoMax Consulting Introduction
JoMax Consulting Introduction  JoMax Consulting Introduction
JoMax Consulting Introduction Vince Benz
 
Galorath.dan
Galorath.danGalorath.dan
Galorath.danNASAPMC
 
ITSM Conference, Dubai, UAE 2009
ITSM Conference, Dubai, UAE   2009ITSM Conference, Dubai, UAE   2009
ITSM Conference, Dubai, UAE 2009Tariq Elsadik
 
Transform Your Application Portfolio - and Keep Your Focus!
Transform Your Application Portfolio - and Keep Your Focus!Transform Your Application Portfolio - and Keep Your Focus!
Transform Your Application Portfolio - and Keep Your Focus!Software AG
 
Data Insights OEP interim submission
Data Insights OEP interim submissionData Insights OEP interim submission
Data Insights OEP interim submissionSandeep Rao
 
EUCI Presentation
EUCI PresentationEUCI Presentation
EUCI Presentationblnoeide
 

Similaire à Eduardo Miranda (Carnegie Mellon) Overruns or Underestimates? A Political Perspective on Software Cost Estimation (20)

Hospital management consulting v1 client.
Hospital management consulting v1 client.Hospital management consulting v1 client.
Hospital management consulting v1 client.
 
The ROI of Talent Management
The ROI of Talent ManagementThe ROI of Talent Management
The ROI of Talent Management
 
VASUDEO RANE
VASUDEO RANEVASUDEO RANE
VASUDEO RANE
 
Guide to Software Estimation
Guide to Software EstimationGuide to Software Estimation
Guide to Software Estimation
 
Estimating 101
Estimating 101Estimating 101
Estimating 101
 
Estimations: hit the target. Tips & Technics
Estimations: hit the target. Tips & TechnicsEstimations: hit the target. Tips & Technics
Estimations: hit the target. Tips & Technics
 
Estimation
EstimationEstimation
Estimation
 
Avoid software project horror stories - check the reality value of the estima...
Avoid software project horror stories - check the reality value of the estima...Avoid software project horror stories - check the reality value of the estima...
Avoid software project horror stories - check the reality value of the estima...
 
Benchmark METRICS THAT MATTER October 4 2012
Benchmark METRICS THAT MATTER October 4 2012Benchmark METRICS THAT MATTER October 4 2012
Benchmark METRICS THAT MATTER October 4 2012
 
2014-01-27_Weitz_Outsourcing
2014-01-27_Weitz_Outsourcing2014-01-27_Weitz_Outsourcing
2014-01-27_Weitz_Outsourcing
 
2014Q1-0127_USAW_CONF_Weitz_When Outsourcing Stops Making Sense
2014Q1-0127_USAW_CONF_Weitz_When Outsourcing Stops Making Sense2014Q1-0127_USAW_CONF_Weitz_When Outsourcing Stops Making Sense
2014Q1-0127_USAW_CONF_Weitz_When Outsourcing Stops Making Sense
 
JoMax Consulting Introduction
JoMax Consulting Introduction  JoMax Consulting Introduction
JoMax Consulting Introduction
 
Galorath.dan
Galorath.danGalorath.dan
Galorath.dan
 
Neuerung Profile
Neuerung ProfileNeuerung Profile
Neuerung Profile
 
project-management-1.pptx
project-management-1.pptxproject-management-1.pptx
project-management-1.pptx
 
Selling Agile At Your Company
Selling Agile At Your CompanySelling Agile At Your Company
Selling Agile At Your Company
 
ITSM Conference, Dubai, UAE 2009
ITSM Conference, Dubai, UAE   2009ITSM Conference, Dubai, UAE   2009
ITSM Conference, Dubai, UAE 2009
 
Transform Your Application Portfolio - and Keep Your Focus!
Transform Your Application Portfolio - and Keep Your Focus!Transform Your Application Portfolio - and Keep Your Focus!
Transform Your Application Portfolio - and Keep Your Focus!
 
Data Insights OEP interim submission
Data Insights OEP interim submissionData Insights OEP interim submission
Data Insights OEP interim submission
 
EUCI Presentation
EUCI PresentationEUCI Presentation
EUCI Presentation
 

Plus de 233 Grados de TI

La Evolución en la Fabricación del Software
La Evolución en la Fabricación del SoftwareLa Evolución en la Fabricación del Software
La Evolución en la Fabricación del Software233 Grados de TI
 
I Jornada CSI - Javier Garzás (Kybele Consulting) - Tendencias actuales en la...
I Jornada CSI - Javier Garzás (Kybele Consulting) - Tendencias actuales en la...I Jornada CSI - Javier Garzás (Kybele Consulting) - Tendencias actuales en la...
I Jornada CSI - Javier Garzás (Kybele Consulting) - Tendencias actuales en la...233 Grados de TI
 
I Jornada CSI - Joaquín Lasheras (CenTIC) - Experiencia en la implantación d...
I Jornada CSI - Joaquín Lasheras (CenTIC) -  Experiencia en la implantación d...I Jornada CSI - Joaquín Lasheras (CenTIC) -  Experiencia en la implantación d...
I Jornada CSI - Joaquín Lasheras (CenTIC) - Experiencia en la implantación d...233 Grados de TI
 
I Jornada CSI - Mónica Wodzislawski (CES) - Probar para corregir, probar par...
I Jornada CSI - Mónica Wodzislawski (CES) -  Probar para corregir, probar par...I Jornada CSI - Mónica Wodzislawski (CES) -  Probar para corregir, probar par...
I Jornada CSI - Mónica Wodzislawski (CES) - Probar para corregir, probar par...233 Grados de TI
 
I Jornada CSI - Carlos Manuel Fernández (AENOR) - Hoja de ruta de certificac...
I Jornada CSI - Carlos Manuel Fernández (AENOR) -  Hoja de ruta de certificac...I Jornada CSI - Carlos Manuel Fernández (AENOR) -  Hoja de ruta de certificac...
I Jornada CSI - Carlos Manuel Fernández (AENOR) - Hoja de ruta de certificac...233 Grados de TI
 
I Jornada CSI - Almudena Díez (Visure Solutions) - Los requisitos y CMMI: un ...
I Jornada CSI - Almudena Díez (Visure Solutions) - Los requisitos y CMMI: un ...I Jornada CSI - Almudena Díez (Visure Solutions) - Los requisitos y CMMI: un ...
I Jornada CSI - Almudena Díez (Visure Solutions) - Los requisitos y CMMI: un ...233 Grados de TI
 

Plus de 233 Grados de TI (6)

La Evolución en la Fabricación del Software
La Evolución en la Fabricación del SoftwareLa Evolución en la Fabricación del Software
La Evolución en la Fabricación del Software
 
I Jornada CSI - Javier Garzás (Kybele Consulting) - Tendencias actuales en la...
I Jornada CSI - Javier Garzás (Kybele Consulting) - Tendencias actuales en la...I Jornada CSI - Javier Garzás (Kybele Consulting) - Tendencias actuales en la...
I Jornada CSI - Javier Garzás (Kybele Consulting) - Tendencias actuales en la...
 
I Jornada CSI - Joaquín Lasheras (CenTIC) - Experiencia en la implantación d...
I Jornada CSI - Joaquín Lasheras (CenTIC) -  Experiencia en la implantación d...I Jornada CSI - Joaquín Lasheras (CenTIC) -  Experiencia en la implantación d...
I Jornada CSI - Joaquín Lasheras (CenTIC) - Experiencia en la implantación d...
 
I Jornada CSI - Mónica Wodzislawski (CES) - Probar para corregir, probar par...
I Jornada CSI - Mónica Wodzislawski (CES) -  Probar para corregir, probar par...I Jornada CSI - Mónica Wodzislawski (CES) -  Probar para corregir, probar par...
I Jornada CSI - Mónica Wodzislawski (CES) - Probar para corregir, probar par...
 
I Jornada CSI - Carlos Manuel Fernández (AENOR) - Hoja de ruta de certificac...
I Jornada CSI - Carlos Manuel Fernández (AENOR) -  Hoja de ruta de certificac...I Jornada CSI - Carlos Manuel Fernández (AENOR) -  Hoja de ruta de certificac...
I Jornada CSI - Carlos Manuel Fernández (AENOR) - Hoja de ruta de certificac...
 
I Jornada CSI - Almudena Díez (Visure Solutions) - Los requisitos y CMMI: un ...
I Jornada CSI - Almudena Díez (Visure Solutions) - Los requisitos y CMMI: un ...I Jornada CSI - Almudena Díez (Visure Solutions) - Los requisitos y CMMI: un ...
I Jornada CSI - Almudena Díez (Visure Solutions) - Los requisitos y CMMI: un ...
 

Dernier

Anypoint Exchange: It’s Not Just a Repo!
Anypoint Exchange: It’s Not Just a Repo!Anypoint Exchange: It’s Not Just a Repo!
Anypoint Exchange: It’s Not Just a Repo!Manik S Magar
 
Commit 2024 - Secret Management made easy
Commit 2024 - Secret Management made easyCommit 2024 - Secret Management made easy
Commit 2024 - Secret Management made easyAlfredo García Lavilla
 
CloudStudio User manual (basic edition):
CloudStudio User manual (basic edition):CloudStudio User manual (basic edition):
CloudStudio User manual (basic edition):comworks
 
Tampa BSides - Chef's Tour of Microsoft Security Adoption Framework (SAF)
Tampa BSides - Chef's Tour of Microsoft Security Adoption Framework (SAF)Tampa BSides - Chef's Tour of Microsoft Security Adoption Framework (SAF)
Tampa BSides - Chef's Tour of Microsoft Security Adoption Framework (SAF)Mark Simos
 
Unraveling Multimodality with Large Language Models.pdf
Unraveling Multimodality with Large Language Models.pdfUnraveling Multimodality with Large Language Models.pdf
Unraveling Multimodality with Large Language Models.pdfAlex Barbosa Coqueiro
 
Scanning the Internet for External Cloud Exposures via SSL Certs
Scanning the Internet for External Cloud Exposures via SSL CertsScanning the Internet for External Cloud Exposures via SSL Certs
Scanning the Internet for External Cloud Exposures via SSL CertsRizwan Syed
 
SAP Build Work Zone - Overview L2-L3.pptx
SAP Build Work Zone - Overview L2-L3.pptxSAP Build Work Zone - Overview L2-L3.pptx
SAP Build Work Zone - Overview L2-L3.pptxNavinnSomaal
 
Kotlin Multiplatform & Compose Multiplatform - Starter kit for pragmatics
Kotlin Multiplatform & Compose Multiplatform - Starter kit for pragmaticsKotlin Multiplatform & Compose Multiplatform - Starter kit for pragmatics
Kotlin Multiplatform & Compose Multiplatform - Starter kit for pragmaticscarlostorres15106
 
Beyond Boundaries: Leveraging No-Code Solutions for Industry Innovation
Beyond Boundaries: Leveraging No-Code Solutions for Industry InnovationBeyond Boundaries: Leveraging No-Code Solutions for Industry Innovation
Beyond Boundaries: Leveraging No-Code Solutions for Industry InnovationSafe Software
 
Unleash Your Potential - Namagunga Girls Coding Club
Unleash Your Potential - Namagunga Girls Coding ClubUnleash Your Potential - Namagunga Girls Coding Club
Unleash Your Potential - Namagunga Girls Coding ClubKalema Edgar
 
Leverage Zilliz Serverless - Up to 50X Saving for Your Vector Storage Cost
Leverage Zilliz Serverless - Up to 50X Saving for Your Vector Storage CostLeverage Zilliz Serverless - Up to 50X Saving for Your Vector Storage Cost
Leverage Zilliz Serverless - Up to 50X Saving for Your Vector Storage CostZilliz
 
My INSURER PTE LTD - Insurtech Innovation Award 2024
My INSURER PTE LTD - Insurtech Innovation Award 2024My INSURER PTE LTD - Insurtech Innovation Award 2024
My INSURER PTE LTD - Insurtech Innovation Award 2024The Digital Insurer
 
Human Factors of XR: Using Human Factors to Design XR Systems
Human Factors of XR: Using Human Factors to Design XR SystemsHuman Factors of XR: Using Human Factors to Design XR Systems
Human Factors of XR: Using Human Factors to Design XR SystemsMark Billinghurst
 
"Federated learning: out of reach no matter how close",Oleksandr Lapshyn
"Federated learning: out of reach no matter how close",Oleksandr Lapshyn"Federated learning: out of reach no matter how close",Oleksandr Lapshyn
"Federated learning: out of reach no matter how close",Oleksandr LapshynFwdays
 
Integration and Automation in Practice: CI/CD in Mule Integration and Automat...
Integration and Automation in Practice: CI/CD in Mule Integration and Automat...Integration and Automation in Practice: CI/CD in Mule Integration and Automat...
Integration and Automation in Practice: CI/CD in Mule Integration and Automat...Patryk Bandurski
 
Artificial intelligence in cctv survelliance.pptx
Artificial intelligence in cctv survelliance.pptxArtificial intelligence in cctv survelliance.pptx
Artificial intelligence in cctv survelliance.pptxhariprasad279825
 
SIP trunking in Janus @ Kamailio World 2024
SIP trunking in Janus @ Kamailio World 2024SIP trunking in Janus @ Kamailio World 2024
SIP trunking in Janus @ Kamailio World 2024Lorenzo Miniero
 
"LLMs for Python Engineers: Advanced Data Analysis and Semantic Kernel",Oleks...
"LLMs for Python Engineers: Advanced Data Analysis and Semantic Kernel",Oleks..."LLMs for Python Engineers: Advanced Data Analysis and Semantic Kernel",Oleks...
"LLMs for Python Engineers: Advanced Data Analysis and Semantic Kernel",Oleks...Fwdays
 
Ensuring Technical Readiness For Copilot in Microsoft 365
Ensuring Technical Readiness For Copilot in Microsoft 365Ensuring Technical Readiness For Copilot in Microsoft 365
Ensuring Technical Readiness For Copilot in Microsoft 3652toLead Limited
 
Are Multi-Cloud and Serverless Good or Bad?
Are Multi-Cloud and Serverless Good or Bad?Are Multi-Cloud and Serverless Good or Bad?
Are Multi-Cloud and Serverless Good or Bad?Mattias Andersson
 

Dernier (20)

Anypoint Exchange: It’s Not Just a Repo!
Anypoint Exchange: It’s Not Just a Repo!Anypoint Exchange: It’s Not Just a Repo!
Anypoint Exchange: It’s Not Just a Repo!
 
Commit 2024 - Secret Management made easy
Commit 2024 - Secret Management made easyCommit 2024 - Secret Management made easy
Commit 2024 - Secret Management made easy
 
CloudStudio User manual (basic edition):
CloudStudio User manual (basic edition):CloudStudio User manual (basic edition):
CloudStudio User manual (basic edition):
 
Tampa BSides - Chef's Tour of Microsoft Security Adoption Framework (SAF)
Tampa BSides - Chef's Tour of Microsoft Security Adoption Framework (SAF)Tampa BSides - Chef's Tour of Microsoft Security Adoption Framework (SAF)
Tampa BSides - Chef's Tour of Microsoft Security Adoption Framework (SAF)
 
Unraveling Multimodality with Large Language Models.pdf
Unraveling Multimodality with Large Language Models.pdfUnraveling Multimodality with Large Language Models.pdf
Unraveling Multimodality with Large Language Models.pdf
 
Scanning the Internet for External Cloud Exposures via SSL Certs
Scanning the Internet for External Cloud Exposures via SSL CertsScanning the Internet for External Cloud Exposures via SSL Certs
Scanning the Internet for External Cloud Exposures via SSL Certs
 
SAP Build Work Zone - Overview L2-L3.pptx
SAP Build Work Zone - Overview L2-L3.pptxSAP Build Work Zone - Overview L2-L3.pptx
SAP Build Work Zone - Overview L2-L3.pptx
 
Kotlin Multiplatform & Compose Multiplatform - Starter kit for pragmatics
Kotlin Multiplatform & Compose Multiplatform - Starter kit for pragmaticsKotlin Multiplatform & Compose Multiplatform - Starter kit for pragmatics
Kotlin Multiplatform & Compose Multiplatform - Starter kit for pragmatics
 
Beyond Boundaries: Leveraging No-Code Solutions for Industry Innovation
Beyond Boundaries: Leveraging No-Code Solutions for Industry InnovationBeyond Boundaries: Leveraging No-Code Solutions for Industry Innovation
Beyond Boundaries: Leveraging No-Code Solutions for Industry Innovation
 
Unleash Your Potential - Namagunga Girls Coding Club
Unleash Your Potential - Namagunga Girls Coding ClubUnleash Your Potential - Namagunga Girls Coding Club
Unleash Your Potential - Namagunga Girls Coding Club
 
Leverage Zilliz Serverless - Up to 50X Saving for Your Vector Storage Cost
Leverage Zilliz Serverless - Up to 50X Saving for Your Vector Storage CostLeverage Zilliz Serverless - Up to 50X Saving for Your Vector Storage Cost
Leverage Zilliz Serverless - Up to 50X Saving for Your Vector Storage Cost
 
My INSURER PTE LTD - Insurtech Innovation Award 2024
My INSURER PTE LTD - Insurtech Innovation Award 2024My INSURER PTE LTD - Insurtech Innovation Award 2024
My INSURER PTE LTD - Insurtech Innovation Award 2024
 
Human Factors of XR: Using Human Factors to Design XR Systems
Human Factors of XR: Using Human Factors to Design XR SystemsHuman Factors of XR: Using Human Factors to Design XR Systems
Human Factors of XR: Using Human Factors to Design XR Systems
 
"Federated learning: out of reach no matter how close",Oleksandr Lapshyn
"Federated learning: out of reach no matter how close",Oleksandr Lapshyn"Federated learning: out of reach no matter how close",Oleksandr Lapshyn
"Federated learning: out of reach no matter how close",Oleksandr Lapshyn
 
Integration and Automation in Practice: CI/CD in Mule Integration and Automat...
Integration and Automation in Practice: CI/CD in Mule Integration and Automat...Integration and Automation in Practice: CI/CD in Mule Integration and Automat...
Integration and Automation in Practice: CI/CD in Mule Integration and Automat...
 
Artificial intelligence in cctv survelliance.pptx
Artificial intelligence in cctv survelliance.pptxArtificial intelligence in cctv survelliance.pptx
Artificial intelligence in cctv survelliance.pptx
 
SIP trunking in Janus @ Kamailio World 2024
SIP trunking in Janus @ Kamailio World 2024SIP trunking in Janus @ Kamailio World 2024
SIP trunking in Janus @ Kamailio World 2024
 
"LLMs for Python Engineers: Advanced Data Analysis and Semantic Kernel",Oleks...
"LLMs for Python Engineers: Advanced Data Analysis and Semantic Kernel",Oleks..."LLMs for Python Engineers: Advanced Data Analysis and Semantic Kernel",Oleks...
"LLMs for Python Engineers: Advanced Data Analysis and Semantic Kernel",Oleks...
 
Ensuring Technical Readiness For Copilot in Microsoft 365
Ensuring Technical Readiness For Copilot in Microsoft 365Ensuring Technical Readiness For Copilot in Microsoft 365
Ensuring Technical Readiness For Copilot in Microsoft 365
 
Are Multi-Cloud and Serverless Good or Bad?
Are Multi-Cloud and Serverless Good or Bad?Are Multi-Cloud and Serverless Good or Bad?
Are Multi-Cloud and Serverless Good or Bad?
 

Eduardo Miranda (Carnegie Mellon) Overruns or Underestimates? A Political Perspective on Software Cost Estimation

  • 1. Overruns or Underestimates? "... their judgment was based more on blind wishing than upon any sound prediction; for it is the habit of mankind to entrust to careless hope what they long for, and to use sovereign reason to thrust aside what they do not desire." Thucydides (c. 460 BC – c. 395 BC) A Political Perspective on Software Cost Estimation Eduardo Miranda Carnegie Mellon University October 15th, 2012 © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 2. Estimation politics  The purposeful shrinking or padding of an estimate to achieve an objective or favor a course of action not warranted by the unaltered estimate – Shrinking consists in reducing the estimate below what the estimator honestly believes will be required – Padding refers to the practice of increasing the estimate beyond what the estimator honestly believes will be required to develop a system  An adjustment to compensate for what you think others are or will be doing © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 3. Loss leader strategy ≠ Target costing ≠ Political behavior Loss leader strategy Target costing © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 4. Price ≠ Budget ≠ Cost ≠ Estimate  Estimate  – A range of values within which an organization believes it is possible for it to achieve the objectives of the project with a defined probability  Price – What the seller or developer will get for doing the work. Depending on the strategic intent of the seller it could be higher than the cost estimate, with the difference being the expected profit or mark-up or they could be lower, a loss, with the hope of entering a new market, acquire a new technology or recoup it in follow-up work  Budget – A definite amount in terms of effort, schedule, and resources, hopefully chosen from the range of possible values defined by the estimate, to which the budgetee or executor of the project commits to  Margin – The desired profit  Cost – The amount of money or resources that has been used to produce or acquire something, and hence is not available for use anymore  Profit (or loss) – The difference between the price and the cost © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 5. Agenda  The cone of uncertainty revisited  What is the evidence?  Successful projects, price and cost, the consequences of overruns  What can be done?  Conclusion © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 6. The cone of uncertainty Relative Size Barry Boehm, Range Software Engineering Economics, Prentice Hall, 1981 Todd Little, Schedule Estimation and Uncertainty Surrounding the Cone of Uncertainty, IEEE Software, May/June 2006 Plans and Product Detailed Development Feasibility Requirements Design Design and Test Phases and Milestones © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 7. Some plausible explanations  Cognitive bias – Overconfidence – Anchoring – …….  Individual & administrative behaviors – Student syndrome – Parkinson’s law  Political behavior – Shrinking – Padding  All of the above © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 8. Cognitive bias Overconfidence Anchoring Variability and Calibration of Expert Judgment in Software Anchoring and Adjustment in Software Estimation, J. Aranda, 2005 Estimation during the Bid Phase of a Project – An Exploratory Survey, Pedro Faria, University of Coimbra, 2011 © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 9. Individual & administrative behaviors Parkinson’s Law Student syndrome 0.1 1.8 0.09 1.6 0.08 1.4 0.07 1.2 0.06 1 0.05 0.8 Normal 0.04 0.6 0.03 Parkinson's Law 0.4 0.02 0.01 0.2 0 0 10 15 20 25 30 Task duration © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 10. Cognitive bias vs. political behavior as cause of chronic underestimations (Politics) (Cognitive bias) B. Flyvbjerg, From Nobel Prize To Project Management: Getting Risks Right, 2006 © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 11. So, what is the evidence? © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 12. "The Montreal Olympics can no more have a deficit, than a man can have a baby"  Montreal won the bid for the 1976 Olympic Games in May 1970, the estimated budget was $120 M  On Jan. 29, 1973 J. Drapeau, Montreal’s mayor announced that the games would cost $310 million  The 1972 Munich Olympics had cost around $600 million © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 13. Montreal’s Olympic Stadium and Toronto’s CN Tower •Completed in 1976 •Budget 63 million •40,500 cubic meters of concrete •Headcount peak 1,500 •Cost per cubic meter of concrete •Original budget 130 million. $1,555 •Final construction 770 millions •Total cost including repairs and interest: 1.5 billion •Planned completion 1976 •Completed 1987 •400 000 cubic meters of concrete •Headcount at peak of construction 10,000 •Cost per cubic meter of concrete $1,925 © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 14. The C-130 Avionic Modernization Program (AMP) according to GAO GAO-08-467SP Assessments of Major Weapon Programs © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 15. C-130 AMP According to the C-130 AMP PO the amount of wiring and the number of harnesses and brackets needed for the installation had been underestimated by 400 percent GAO-08-467SP Assessments of Major Weapon Programs © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 16. The EMS Commercialization Project © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 17. EMS Project  Migrate 2,000,000 SLOC of application code from mainframe shared memory to client-server architecture – Fortran – Assembly – Hard real-time – Custom interfaces to SCADA system – Complicated GUI – Safety critical application – Two organizations that have never worked together and with very different cultures (public service, business) located 600 km away – Productizing the system – Deployment in a foreign country – Generating documentation  Constraints – 8 months from bid to promised date + 2 months ready on-site – 1.5 M budget (hardware excluded) © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 18. Sensitivity chart for EMS Unfeasible Need to rewrite CPF MPT Feasible © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 20. ERP Implementations Medium Organizations $m Hardware –Application, Web, and database servers including 0.8+ storage Software ERP application Suite License –HR, Financials, Distribution $3.2+ –1,000 seats Implementation 9 months to complete pilot site including process engineering, apps configuration, and testing $9.3+ –30 external consultants @ $1,200 a day –30 internal staffers @ $100,000 Deployment –3 external consultants at 9 sites for 3 months –9 internal staffers at each site for 6 months –5 days of user training at an average burdened user $7.5+ salary of $50,000 –3 full-time training staff at an average burdened salary of $100,000 Total 20.8+ © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 21. The Validation Of A Political Model Of Information Systems Development Cost Estimating, A. Lederer and J. Prasad, 1991 © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 22. Software Management And Cost Estimating Error, A. Lederer and J. Prasad, 1999 Uses Practices Methods Result Justify using cost- Multiple benefit analysis (+) phased Staff projects (+) estimates Monitor project (+) User (+) management Schedule Structured signs-off estimate projects Estimate (+) (+) Select projects prepared Accuracy of proposal stage (-) (+) estimates is part Project of IS performance overruns Evaluate review estimators (+) Evaluate Estimates and developers actuals are Charge users (+) audited Accuracy of Informal estimates is part Software of users management and cost estimating performance error, A. Lederer & J. Prasad, review 1999 © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 23. Other studies  Any other cost estimation inhibitors? A. Magazinović & J. Pernstål, Chalmers University, 2008 – The results of this study were used for validation of the results of the Lederer and Prasad study that was conducted in the form of a questionnaire, answered by 112 software professionals with a response rate of 28% – Pressures from manager, users or others to increase or reduce the estimate was fully validated by the issues found in both cases. – Removal of padding was partly validated by an issue found in the VCC case.  Better sure than safe? Over-confidence in judgment based software development effort prediction intervals, M. Jørgensen et al, University of Oslo, 2002 – Hidden agendas: Software professionals have goals other than just a high correspondence between confidence level and hit rate. In particular, the desire to be evaluated as a skilled software developer may be an important agenda that leads to overly narrow effort Pis. – Project managers favor narrow intervals and high confidence: Study D indicates that most software developers preferred effort PIs that were much too narrow or based on a much too high confidence level, even when they knew that they were much too narrow  When planners lie with numbers, M. Wachs, 1989 – Planning, however, is not just analytical. We work in the fishbowl of politics and public-policy making. We serve as staff to politicians, consultants to government bodies, and representatives of private landowners and real estate developers. These roles are usually associated with clearly articulated interests. Our agencies, employers, and clients favor particular policies or programs for reasons that may be derived more directly from ideology, political commitments, or economic self-interest than from the results of analytical studies. – I have experienced this conflict between planning as science and planning as advocacy in my own consulting, and have accumulated dozens of case studies from alumni who return to the university to talk about their anxieties and conflicts as professionals. © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 24. Successful projects & the consequences of underestimations © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 25. Budget overruns are not the same as project failures  Iridium – 66 LEO satellites designed, built, launched, and operated successfully – Completed on schedule – Completed below budget -$5B – Bankruptcy – Entire system was sold for $25M in 2000  Titanic – Six months late – $100M budget, final cost $200M – Financial and creative blockbuster – Revenue of $1.8B © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 26. Even if overruns do not equate to project failures, underestimations are not free:  They affect which projects get done  How much we end up paying for them; and  Might throw the organization into a vicious firefighting cycle © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 27. Which projects get done? “We have found it isn’t necessarily the best ones, but those projects for which proponents best succeed in conjuring a fantasy world of underestimated costs, overestimated revenues, undervalued environmental impacts and overvalued regional development effects” Machiavellian Megaprojects, Bent Flyvbjerg, 2005 © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 28. Olympic gold Atlanta Sydney Athens Beijing London Rio Year 1996 2000 2004 2012 2012 2016 AUS$ Euros Original US$ 800 US$ 15 US$ 2.4 US$14 1.7 1.5 budget millions billions billions billions billions billions Euros US$ Actual US$1.8 AUS$ 6 US $43* 12 15+ cost billions billions billions billions billions * Estimated. The actual cost has not been revealed by the Chinese government © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 29. The Freiman Curve Budget 29 © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 30. Underestimated projects cost more Fatigue Overtime (Eoa) Learning Effort contributed by bringing in additional personnel (Ea) FTE Fatigue Effort contributed thru overtime (Eob) Communication Overhead (Eco) Budgeted Effort (Eb) Ramp-up Coaching preparation Td Ta Tl Tb © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 31. Recovery cost Project Parameters Tb = 12 months Ta = 1 month Tl = 1 month FTEb = 20 people Teams = 4 Lag = 2 months Ci = 0.025 Cr = 0.1 Cc = 0.1 Cd = 0.1 Co = 0.0 Co = 0.0 2 b t b t 4a t c u, t FTEa t, u 2a t © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 32. Underestimations lead to system inefficiencies Number of + - + worked Fatigue Productivity hours - PM + intervention + + Number + - QA of Rework + activities defects + - Rate of - Project progress workload + + Other Resources + projects’ allocated to delays the project +/- - - + - Add - Organization Multitasking + resources al resource - + availability + Underestimation Management intervention + Scope + “Band + Organization Aid” cuts workload projects © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 33. What can be done? © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 34. Before You Start  Attachment to issues have career consequences. How do you expect your advocacy to affect your goals?  The introduction of an estimation or screening process will impose limits in otherwise discretionary decisions, and although people vary to the extent that they seek power, they rarely relinquish it voluntarily.  There is not unequivocal substantive solution to the problem. Other parties have views and solutions of their own and they are not likely to support you until they recognize their own views in it.  Not matter how good the process, it cannot succeed on its own. It depends on others who can amend, delay, obstruct and even block its deployment and operation. © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 35. Estimation Perspectives Political: There are multiple and distinct interests in organizations, each pursuing its own, occasionally parochial, objectives Cognitive: Our predisposition to judge future events in a more positive light than is warranted by actual experience Epistemological: What do we know? How? When? Models: Measurement errors, assumption errors, and scope errors © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 36. Your options  Reduce political influences  Compensate for political influences © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 37. Reducing political influences (The inside view)  Visibility – What is the work to be done? – What risks were considered and which ones were excluded? – Worst, most likely and best case estimates for effort, cost and schedule – Safe estimates (x) for effort, cost and schedule – Staffing curves – Correlations between work elements  Sanity checks – A final check that you should do whenever you solve a problem. It’s an informal test to see whether your answer makes sense in the context of the problem. It’s not detailed enough to verify that an answer is correct, but it is good at detecting logic or assumption errors which produce answers that cannot possibly be right  Reliability – Given the same outputs two persons should arrive at more or less the same result for the same reason  Traceability – It should be possible to understand how the outputs are related to its inputs. Not black magic.  Advocates / Non-advocates estimates © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 38. Benchmarking & Compensating (The outside view)  Rolls Royce’s Lead Time Model  Class reference forecasting © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 39. Lead Time Model – Rolls Royce Controls A. Powell, Right on Time: Measuring, Modelling and Managing Time-Constrained Software Development , PhD. Thesis, University of York, 2001 © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 40. Class Reference Forecasting © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 41. Uplift curves Project sponsor must present justification for the uplift not to be applied The British Department for Transport Procedures for Dealing with Optimism Bias in Transport Planning Guidance Document June 2004 © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 42. Reference Class Forecasting for DoD Projects – Cost Correction Cost Overruns & Underruns For 45 DoD Projects According to  C130 – AMP GAO 2008 14 100.00% 90.00% proposed budget = 12 80.00% 3.9B 10 70.00%  Acceptable chance Frequency 60.00% 8 6 50.00% of cost overrun = 40.00% 30.00% 10% 4 2 20.00%  Required uplift = 0 10.00% 0.00% 190% -25 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 More  Uplifted budget = Percentage of Original Budget Frequency Cumulative % 11.3B Required Cost Uplift  Latest estimate with 350 half of original units 300 to be delivered = Original Budget Adjustment 250 5.3B 200  Latest estimate with 150 original number of 100 units to be delivered 50 = 12.5B 0 0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 70.00% 80.00% 90.00% 100.00% Acceptable Chance of Cost Overrun Distribution Trendline © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 43. Reference Class Forecasting for DoD Projects – Schedule Correction Schedule Overruns & Underruns for 45 DoD Projects According to GAO 2008  C130 – AMP 14 100.00% proposed schedule 12 90.00% = 48 months 80.00% 10 70.00%  Acceptable chance Frequency 8 60.00% 50.00% of cost overrun = 6 40.00% 10% 4 30.00% 2 20.00%  Required uplift = 10.00% 0 0.00% 90% -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 More Percentage of Original Schedule  Uplifted schedule = Frequency Cumulative % 91 months Required Schedule Uplift  Latest estimate = 84 160 months 140 Original Schedule Adjustment 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 70.00% 80.00% 90.00% 100.00% Acceptable Chance of Schedule Overrun Distribution Trendline © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 44. Applying Reference Class Forecasting to software development and information systems acquisitions Collect Past completed project data Perfromance project data base Data A1 Select reference projects Reference query Projects A2 Generate schedule reference distribution Class Reference Distributions cost reference distribution A3 cost uplift Calculate schedule uplift Uplift acceptable cost overrun chance Values acceptable delay chance A4 adjusted cost adjusted schedule Adjust Estimates estimated cost estimated schedule A5 © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 45. Summary  Prices and targets are not estimates. They should be recognized as such and the cost of following a given strategy acknowledged  Underestimations cause inefficiencies  Political and cognitive biases distort the inputs used by models and determine the fate of its outputs  When an estimate can only be explained by delusion or deception, it is safer to assume the latter © Eduardo Miranda, 2012
  • 46. The estimation problem isn’t unsolvable, we just need to understand what is involved and perhaps use it as a competitive advantage © Eduardo Miranda, 2012

Notes de l'éditeur

  1. Ultimately time, resources and money are the three criteria by which society and organizations decide what gets build, how it is built and by whom and in consequence, the importance of having credible and reliable estimates cannot be overstressed. Unrealistically small budgets as well as unnecessarily large ones result in misallocation of resources and wasteful spending.
  2. The effort, time and resource estimates for a software project are the range of values within which, an organization believes it is possible for it to achieve the objectives of the project with a defined probability and without jeopardizing its viabilityEstimates, are typically used to:Determine the economic feasibility of a projectEvaluate alternativesEstablish a project budgetAn estimate is merely a prediction of what is most likely to happen. There is no implication that the estimator will attempt to shape events so that the estimate is materializedAn estimate and a budget are two different things
  3. What are possible explanations for this?
  4. Cognitive bias -> The estimates are biased but we don’t do it on purposeIndividual and organizational behaviors -> The estimates are not bias but we don’t observe the overestimations because the behaviors result in the spending of all the effort associated with themPolitical behaviors -> Strategic intent
  5. The more important and bigger the project, the less the cognitive bias can be used as an explanation for bad estimates. The reason I make this point here is so you understand the importance of creating a defensible – self evident estimate
  6. We examined software project bids made by 35Norwegian and international software companies. Thebidding companies consisted of large, medium, andsmall development companies operating in Norway.All bids are in NorwegianKroner (1000 NOK is about $140 – October 2004).The mean value of the bids was 220 000 NOK, rangingfrom 21 000 to 560 000 NOK. As far as we haveobserved in other bidding rounds, this range of bids isnot uncommon when the number of bidders is high.
  7. Who prepares the estimates? The advocates (Olympic committees)
  8. The Freiman curve links the actual cost to the budget selected for the project. Frank Freiman, its inventor, was for many years the head of cost estimating for RCA and the developer of the FAST cost-estimating system. Succinctly stated:The greater the underestimate, the greater the actual expenditure;The greater the overestimate, the greater the actual expenditure;The most realistic estimate results in the most economical project cost.Small budgets (prices) may land a contract or result in a project approval, but they also frequently lead to financial loss and business failure. Initial project plans of staffing, scheduling, machine processing, tooling and materials' forming, etc., are not achievable. Though the project plan is established to realize the underestimated cost, the project mid-point management begins to realize that milestones and schedules are slipping. In response, there is reorganization, replanning, and possibly the addition of personnel and equipment. Delays and reorganization invariably increase costs.The cost to the organization is also high in other ways, including poor morale and the loss of capable and trained staff. Projects that suffer significant cost growth are often projects scheduled, planned, and staffed based on early underestimates, that eventually lead to a detailed project plan that simply cannot be realized. Underestimates threaten an organization's ability to survive.Needlessly high budgets serve an organization as poorly as the underestimate. Rather than resulting in greater profits, as one might hope, overestimates conjure up Parkinson's law: the money is available, it must be spent. Unless there is firm management control, the estimate becomes a self fulfilling prophesy and the organization becomes weak, unable to deliver a good product for a reasonable price.Realistic estimates result in the most economical cost. They remind managers to control the excess resources. Good estimates let the organization's resources work in harmony.The Miranda curveThe point here is everybody can produce an accurate estimate by making it arbitrarily large. However if the budget is to high you might jeopardize the feasibility of the project, in other words your client chooses another provider or you don’t get the funds.Budget choices influence the cost of the projectOn the left part of the curve we see that the effort necessary to maintain the commitments made is greater than if the work had been planned from the beginningOn the right size part of the curve we see the consequence of choosing an unnecessarily high budget. The project becomes too expensive and in consequence it does not get funds or another supplier is selected