![]() |
||
|
|
||
|
|
|
by: Charles Symons The more accurate your estimate, the greater your ability to deliver on time and budget and satisfy your customers. Few people realise that the most accurate estimate will also lead to the lowest cost development. There is no practical proof of this assertion, but the notion was first put forward by Abdel Hamid and Madnik ten years ago (Sloan Management Review, Fall 1990).
Their premise is (see illustration): if you over-estimate the effort and time that will be needed compared with what should be needed, then Parkinson's Law will apply. 'Work will fill the time made available for its completion.' On the other hand, if you under-estimate, this will only be discovered late in the life of the project, when you will either have to de-scope or add in extra resources to deliver the system on time. So over- or under-estimating leads to a higher cost than the most accurate estimate. Other powerful arguments appeared in a paper by Fred Bootsma of Nortel at the 1999 IFPUG Annual Conference. He reported the improvements in estimating accuracy he achieved by using the Full Function Points V1 method (a forerunner of COSMIC FFP) for estimating effort and schedule for telecommunications software. The side-benefits of improved estimating accuracy were felt at the organisation level and included:
The difficulty with accurate estimating is greatest early in the life of a project when you have the least knowledge of the requirements. There is always the danger that the estimator gets stuck with the early estimate because it has entered the sponsor's mind. It then becomes politically impossible to amend it later. Inaccurate estimating with un-stated uncertainty, giving a false impression of accuracy, is a recipe for disaster. SMS training emphasises the importance of:
|
||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
Articles
Services
Training
|
||||||||||||||
| Software Measurement Services Ltd. | |||
|
|||