The Estimating Problem In Project Management And Decision Ma

The Estimating Problem in Project Management and Decision-Making

Effective project management relies heavily on accurate estimates of time, cost, and resources. The case study of Barbara highlights the complexities and challenges involved in project estimating, demonstrating different techniques and the importance of critical evaluation in selecting the most reliable estimate. This analysis discusses the estimating techniques presented in the case, how project managers can determine the most appropriate estimate, and the rationale for selecting a particular estimate in project planning.

Different Estimating Techniques Discussed

The case study primarily discusses two estimating techniques: the three-point estimate and the triangular distribution estimate. The three-point estimate involves determining optimistic (4 weeks), most likely (13 weeks), and pessimistic (16 weeks) durations. It is used to account for uncertainty and variability in tasks by considering different potential outcomes. In contrast, the triangular distribution assumes that each of the three estimates (optimistic, most likely, and pessimistic) has an equal probability of occurrence, leading to a combined estimate that is calculated as the average of these three points, which in this case results in 13 weeks. Additionally, Peter mentions analogy estimating, a method involving comparing the current work package to similar past projects to gauge duration, especially considering factors such as complexity that are not explicitly captured in databases.

Deciding Which Estimate is Better

A project manager determines the most appropriate estimate through several criteria: accuracy, context, project complexity, and underlying assumptions. The key is evaluating the credibility and relevance of the estimates, considering historical data, expert judgment, and the specific conditions of the project. For instance, the three-point estimate, while useful in averaging potential outcomes, may oversimplify the complexity of certain work packages by ignoring project intricacies. On the other hand, analogy estimating, especially when considering project complexity, may provide a more realistic and context-specific forecast. Risk considerations also play a vital role; estimates that incorporate uncertainty and potential variability tend to be more reliable. Therefore, a critical assessment of each technique's assumptions, alongside historical data and expert insights, guides the project manager in selecting the most credible estimate.

Which Estimate Would I Use as a Project Manager?

If I were the project manager in this scenario, I would prioritize the estimate derived from analogy estimating and expert judgment, especially considering Peter’s insights about the work package’s complexity and historical data. The reason is that complexity significantly influences task duration, and generic estimates like the three-point method may underestimate or oversimplify such factors. Peter’s estimate of 16-17 weeks, based on similar past projects and professional expertise, appears closer to the realistic timeline for this particular work package. Although the three-point estimate suggests 13 weeks, neglecting the work package's complexity could lead to schedule overruns and penalties, as noted in the case. Therefore, favoring a conservative and contextually grounded estimate aligns with best practices in risk management and realistic project planning.

References

• Kerzner, H. (2017). Project Management: A Systems Approach to Planning, Scheduling, and Controlling. Wiley.
• PMI. (2017). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide). Project Management Institute.
• International Journal of Project Management, 38(4), 245-259.
• Chong, C., & Montibeller, G. (2017). Risk-based multi-criteria decision analysis: the value of information. European Journal of Operational Research, 260(1), 48-61.
• Wang, Z., & Shen, Q. (2019). Integrating cost and schedule risk analysis in project estimating. Construction Management and Economics, 37(12), 703-716.
• Laughlin, E. (2018). The use of analogy in project estimation: practical insights. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 144(5), 04018034.
• Haugan, P. (2018). Earned Value Project Management. CRC Press.
• ATA, T. (2021). The importance of risk assessment in project estimation. International Journal of Risk and Contingency Management, 9(2), 45-58.
• Goracci, A., & Fragata, A. (2021). Comparing project estimation methods: a case study approach. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, 19(4), 1024-1042.
• Lin, Y., & Ding, L. (2020). The effectiveness of historical data in improving project estimations. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 67(3), 756-768.