1 / 21

Linda Esker Kathleen Dangle Fraunhofer Center Maryland

Developing An Early Project Cost Estimate: An Applied Case Study From Project Concept through Contract Award . Linda Esker Kathleen Dangle Fraunhofer Center Maryland. Project Overview The Early Project Cost Estimate Estimate Phases Challenges Strategy

kaelem
Download Presentation

Linda Esker Kathleen Dangle Fraunhofer Center Maryland

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Developing An Early Project Cost Estimate:An Applied Case Study From Project Concept through Contract Award Linda Esker Kathleen Dangle Fraunhofer Center Maryland

  2. Project Overview The Early Project Cost Estimate Estimate Phases Challenges Strategy Approach: Methodology and Models Used Decisions to go forward Summary / Lessons Learned Topics Covered

  3. Project Overview • A large Ground Space Communication System • COTS-intensive • For both HW and SW • 5-year project duration • Many areas highly scientific • Need appropriate technical expertise as well as those who understand what is involved in the cost estimate, especially SW • Would require a blended estimation team • Development of the estimate began in the earliest initial concept phase

  4. Cost Estimate Began Before Typical 1st Milestone Life-Cycle Phases RFP Reviews

  5. The Early Project Cost Estimate • Cost estimate developed bythe projectto estimate government and contractorproject costs for budget/funding approval • Activity played a significant role in the development of the project • Value of the activity included not just the resulting estimate, but also drove understanding, evolution, and “selling” of the project concept • State of the practice for early project estimates: • Typically use general, high-level, “personal” heuristics/ rules of thumb by subject matter experts • Not able to effectively use estimation tools because details required as inputs are not known early in the project • Process followed not as disciplined or structured (or repeatable) as expected in estimates during later phases of project lifecycle

  6. The Early Project Cost Estimate (cont.) • The good news: With government emphasis on better project estimates, projects now need a basis of estimate and confidence levels • The bad news: Solid estimates face challenges that make use of estimation tools an uphill battle • Politics — Organizational budgets have a life of their own, are highly competitive, and defy comprehension for those not in the political know • Personal opinion and aggressive (or naive) optimism, “This should be easy…” • Distrust of what they do not understand

  7. Early Project Estimate Phases 1 2 3 4 • “In the Beginning…” • Forming the concept • “Let there be light…” • Maturing the project’s architecture and requirements • Defining a project lifecycle & WBS • Defining the estimation process and models • “And it was good…” • Iterating on the architecture, schedule, models, and estimate • Evaluating options and “what ifs” • “And it was better…” • Formalizing Estimate Confidence Lessons Learned Lessons Learned Lessons Learned

  8. Early Project Estimate Phase 1 • Started with: • Top-down approach • Fully understanding of the scope • Understanding SW and HW requirements of the project • Examined use of a commercial estimation tool • Found it was difficult to use at this very early stage • Needed more details than what was available • Input was constantly changing as project investigated technologies and needs and tool data cumbersome to update • Management did not trust estimation tool results • Wanted greater insight into and control on how estimate was determined • Wanted costs broken down into their areas of interest

  9. Early Project Estimate Phase 1 Decision: Next use bottoms-up approach for greater accuracy • Concept studies performed to develop notional architecture • Estimate used: • General parametric models • Expert judgment • COCOMO • Spreadsheets • HW: Developed MEL (Master Equip. List) • SW: Used analogies/LOC • Percentages used to estimate many areas: • Management • Contingency, reserve & inflation • Spread of labor, HW, SW by fiscal year • Other technical unknowns Approach • Phase Start: Blank page; immature • requirements; forming team; gathering • historical data; top-down approach Challenge: Create initial estimate with minimum information Strategy: Formulate concept • Lessons Learned • Initial informal “off-the-cuff” estimates can derail a project from the start • Do not count on Mgmt. acceptance of tool estimate results

  10. Early Project Estimate Phase 2 • Enhanced the Estimate with some structure: a notional architecture, schedule, and bottoms up-analysis • Stabilized requirements to refine the HW and SW estimate • COCOMO schedule and effort distributions allowed us to distribute costs over the timeframe to allocate budget to fiscal years • COSYSMO could now be used to validate engineering SME estimate • Needed to use requirement expansion factors • Project still going through definition and needed to adjust for changes

  11. Early Project Estimate Phase 2 Decisions: Pursue 2 independent paths (dev., deploy.); focus on things missing • Migrated approach from parametric overlay to bottoms up • Established physical notional architecture to organize costs • Approach helped drive engineer thought process • Estimate used: • Expert judgment • Analogous estimation - some historical data • COCOMO for SW effort & duration • % still used to estimate • Management (based historical data) • Contingency, reserve, inflation, & unknowns • Spread of labor, HW, SW by fiscal year Approach Strategy: Use bottoms- up approach; define models; HW/SW by arch • Phase Start: Immature requirements; notional architecture beginning to evolve • Lessons Learned • Hybrid of bottoms-up & parametric modeling works best • Everyone understood what was known (justifiable) and unknown Challenge: Establish sound basis for good estimate

  12. Iterative Development of the Estimate Labor, Material, Cost Phasing • WBS • (By Notional Architecture) Project Lifecycle Schedule Estimation Model • RESOURCES • Hardware • Antenna • Antenna part 1 • Antenna part 2 • Computers • Server • Workstation • Software • Software item 1 • Software item 2 • Engineering tasks • Integration Tasks • Transition tasks Items, Costs SLOC COCOMOModel Effort, Duration Effort Notional System Architecture • Master Resource Sheet of • Hardware • Software • Engineering Effort • Integration Effort • Transition Effort

  13. Early Project Estimate Phase 3 • Areas of Focus • Identifying a good system model on which to base confidence in the estimate—having a solid Basis of Estimate (BOE) • Ensuring Implementation schedule is realistic • Understanding changing expectations and being flexible to deal with change ►Filling voids in analogous systems by using SW SMEs to provide sizing information ► Using a notional system to obtain sufficient information for an early project estimate and trying to avoid over-engineering the perfect system • Key Accomplishments • Met goals of project: Early Project Estimate for RFP; presentation to HQ; understandable/supportable basis for budget – SW: – HW:

  14. Early Project Estimate Phase 3 Decisions: Ready to go; freeze estimate for RFP • Incorporated inputs from Trade Studies and another independent cost estimate • Aligned cost structure, schedule, WBS, and notional architecture • PM worked with all technical teams to understand basis of estimate (BOE) • Loaded Resources by skill level & labor rates • Spread labor, HW, SW costs by fiscal year based on schedule • Only PM remained % • Enhanced estimate model to allow: • Many different views (architecture elements,high cost drivers) • Investigation of options ("what if" a ground station were eliminated?) Approach Strategy: Use 2 separate Teams (dev. & deploy.); merge results • Phase Start: Matured requirements & team; near complete notional architecture • Lessons Learned • BOE review sessions need a strong driver • The better the estimate fidelity the more useful for “holes” & “what ifs” • Working as a team creates buy-in and project team is much smarter Challenges: Honing the estimate;

  15. Early Project Estimate Phase 4 Decisions: Project has confidence with expected range • Performed Risk Cost Analysis • Focused on high cost drivers • Optimistic • Most likely • Pessimistic estimate • Used triangular distribution and Monte Carlo to simulate confidence ranges • Compared dispersions with expected ranges • Detailed resource items enabled analysis of procurement long lead items & phasing Approach • Phase Start: RFP Released; Project estimate frozen; fewer distractions Strategy: Examine Estimate Cost Risks • Lessons Learned • A solid early Project cost estimate enables developing confidence levels and understanding where the estimate falls within the levels before contract start Challenge: Understand Confidence in Estimate

  16. COCOMO Lessons Learned • At this phase, the summary COCOMO tables are very helpful. However, • They do not give consistent information • Percentages do not add up to 100% • Total effort has two different values • This makes them appear to be unreliable • Had to make adjustments

  17. COCOMO Lessons Learned • Modular approach of COCOMO products is ideal • Project had definite need for a COCOTS-like tool, but • Seemed too immature • Decisions on COTS were not controlled by government • Overlap of COSYSMO and COCOMO II makes management wary of using them together • Need some better quantification of the overlap in the estimate

  18. Summary / Lessons Learned • Start early: Plan for iterations of the estimate • The project estimate will iterate through phases and different estimation techniques as more information is learned • The estimation process can aid in the maturation of the project concept, requirements, and schedule • Be Adaptable/Flexible:Standard tools cannot handle all of management’s needs • Early on there is not a clear definition/agreement on how to proceed and implement the project; need to change and adapt • Be sure your cost estimation tools are flexible • Need to handle what is known about the project at early and also later phases of the evolution • COTS may not match all your needs—a hybrid approach works well

  19. Summary/Lessons Learned • Be Mindful of Management: Need to work with high-level management and keep them in the loop • Early “off-the-cuff” promises can derail a thorough estimation process • Don’t promise too much too soon—early promises cannot be rescinded • It is imperative that the higher management teams have faith in the estimation work • You need to thoroughly understand (and justify) how a tool’s model handles all aspects of the estimate • Even if not accepted for an end result, use tools to also give a sanity check for any ad hoc estimation practices

  20. Summary / Lessons Learned • WBS is Critical: Projects need a WBS that can help them collect data and learn • Lobby for better WBS to facilitate data and information collection when necessary • Current WBS templates/guidelines make it difficult to extract software from other parts of the system development work • Project was afraid to specify that WBS differentiate between software and other activities • Would love to see this addressed as a SW best practices

  21. Questions For more information contact us at: Linda Esker lesker@fc-md.umd.edu Kathleen Dangle kdangle@fc-md.umd.edu

More Related