Loading
Normal optimism. Applying the multiplier to new estimates is a cheaper fix than trying to estimate better.
Almost every team is biased in one direction and consistent about it. The multiplier is more useful than the apology, because it can be applied on the next quote.
It compares estimated against actual hours across finished projects, broken down by phase and by type of work, to show where the optimism lives.
A firm-wide accuracy figure is nearly useless. The pattern by phase is what improves the next estimate.
Take five or more finished projects. For each, enter estimated and actual hours per phase.
Use phases rather than whole projects. A project that came in on budget can contain a phase that took three times its estimate and another that took a third.
It will not tell you why a phase overran. That needs the project's own history.
It also cannot correct for a project that went wrong for reasons unrelated to estimating.
Look for consistency rather than size. A phase that is always fifty per cent over is easy to fix — multiply it. A phase that is sometimes half and sometimes triple is a scoping problem, which is harder and more important.
Discovery and integration phases are the usual offenders, for the same reason: they are estimated before anyone knows what is there.
Five or more for a pattern.
Phase. Task-level estimates on unscoped work are guesses.
Run it both ways — the difference is informative.
Half an hour on your own figures, and an honest answer about the parts Treepie does not improve.