vault backup: 2025-07-22 16:59:59
This commit is contained in:
@@ -0,0 +1,41 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
id: construction-estimating-using-excel
|
||||
aliases: []
|
||||
tags:
|
||||
- media-commentary
|
||||
---
|
||||
# *Construction Estimating Using Excel*
|
||||
|
||||
Construction Estimating Using Excel
|
||||
(Peterson MBA PE, Steven)
|
||||
|
||||
432 page book
|
||||
|
||||
## Pros
|
||||
|
||||
* Lots of attractively formatted formulas for costs and quantities
|
||||
|
||||
### Notable Inclusions
|
||||
|
||||
* Lots of references
|
||||
* Review questions/problems
|
||||
* Detailed cost of ownership and operation of heavy equipment
|
||||
* Bracketed percent calculation (bond premium)
|
||||
* Glossary of terms
|
||||
|
||||
## Cons
|
||||
|
||||
* Intimidatingly long
|
||||
* Teaches suboptimal excel practice
|
||||
* Print-antagonistic
|
||||
* Heavy use of highlighter-blue for text, unnecessary backgrounds, and coloring entire pages
|
||||
* Uses a full width portion of the cover image at every chapter header
|
||||
|
||||
### Notable Exclusions
|
||||
|
||||
* Any significant detail on indirect/overhead/general expense costs
|
||||
* All lumped into the 6 page Chapter 25 - Markups
|
||||
|
||||
## Target audience
|
||||
|
||||
* Construction project managers with no prior experience estimating or using excel
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,35 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
id: electrical-estimating-methods
|
||||
aliases: []
|
||||
tags:
|
||||
- media-commentary
|
||||
---
|
||||
# *Electrical Estimating Methods*
|
||||
|
||||
Electrical Estimating Methods, Fourth Edition
|
||||
(Wayne J. Del Pico)
|
||||
|
||||
264 page book
|
||||
|
||||
## Pros
|
||||
|
||||
* Clear and condensed prose
|
||||
* Lots of philosophy
|
||||
* Practical attitude
|
||||
* Includes an appendix of common symbols and abbreviations
|
||||
|
||||
## Cons
|
||||
|
||||
* Some confusing non-electrical considerations/tangents (lap)
|
||||
* Doesn't acknowledge lack of standardization of certain terms
|
||||
(direct/indirect only, no incidental)
|
||||
|
||||
## Best Suited For
|
||||
|
||||
* Study by estimators in training
|
||||
* Reference by estimating teams looking to standardize procedures and terminology
|
||||
|
||||
## Overall
|
||||
|
||||
* Incredible book, I would love to have a copy
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,47 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
id: electrical-estimators-manual
|
||||
aliases: []
|
||||
tags:
|
||||
- media-commentary
|
||||
---
|
||||
# *Electrical Estimators Manual*
|
||||
|
||||
Electrical Estimators Manual:
|
||||
How to Estimate Electrical Construction Projects Including Everyday Labor Installation Rates
|
||||
(William Penn)
|
||||
|
||||
199 page book
|
||||
|
||||
## Pros
|
||||
|
||||
* Intelligent prose where present
|
||||
|
||||
* Condensed
|
||||
|
||||
* Notable Inclusions
|
||||
* Labor hours
|
||||
* Unit conversions
|
||||
* too many, including rare units
|
||||
* Checklist
|
||||
* VERY brief
|
||||
* Sample forms for small-scale manual estimation
|
||||
|
||||
## Cons
|
||||
|
||||
* No mention of certain fundamental topics:
|
||||
* Expenses
|
||||
* Indirect labor
|
||||
* Overhead
|
||||
|
||||
* Purely instruction, no philosophy
|
||||
|
||||
* Avoids addressing complications
|
||||
|
||||
## Best Suited For
|
||||
|
||||
* General info for electricians with no prior estimating experience
|
||||
* Use as a manual for very small outfits
|
||||
|
||||
## Overall
|
||||
|
||||
* Really more of a labor units manual than an estimating manual
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,39 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
id: mike-holts-illustrated-guide-to-electrical-estimating
|
||||
aliases: []
|
||||
tags:
|
||||
- media-commentary
|
||||
---
|
||||
# *Mike Holt's Illustrated Guide to Electrical Estimating*
|
||||
|
||||
Holt, C. M. (2023). Mike Holt's Illustrated Guide to Electrical Estimating. Mike Holt Enterprises, Inc
|
||||
|
||||
234 page textbook
|
||||
|
||||
## Pros
|
||||
|
||||
* Attractive design
|
||||
* Detailed color illustrations
|
||||
* Compelling topic organization and progression
|
||||
|
||||
## Cons
|
||||
|
||||
* No mention of RFQ process
|
||||
|
||||
* Many/most topics are grossly oversimplified
|
||||
|
||||
* Tone is undeservedly authoritative and principled,
|
||||
refusing to acknowledge the questions of complexity
|
||||
that the content itself begs
|
||||
|
||||
> "Never make assumptions"
|
||||
> What happens when RFI's go unanswered?
|
||||
|
||||
## Best Suited For
|
||||
|
||||
* Electricians with no prior estimating experience and no real need of detail
|
||||
|
||||
## Overall
|
||||
|
||||
This book is far too large in scope to lack the detail it does. The curriculum
|
||||
is clearly designed for those unlikely to need or understand its topics
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,113 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
id: the-failure-of-risk-management
|
||||
aliases: []
|
||||
tags:
|
||||
- media-commentary
|
||||
---
|
||||
# *The Failure of Risk Management*
|
||||
|
||||
The Failure of Risk Management
|
||||
(Why It's Broken and How to Fix It)
|
||||
by Douglas W. Hubbard
|
||||
|
||||
## Key Takeaways
|
||||
|
||||
### Qualitative Metrics Must Be Avoided
|
||||
|
||||
Qualitative risk analysis
|
||||
(i.e. risk matrices, scoring charts)
|
||||
departs from legitimate statistical methodology
|
||||
and has no robust evidence to suggest its efficacy.
|
||||
There is good reason to believe that such methods
|
||||
are deleterious to their intended purpose
|
||||
in contradiction to the common response
|
||||
that they are "better than nothing".
|
||||
|
||||
### Utility as a Measure of Value
|
||||
|
||||
Expected Value (Probability × Magnitude)
|
||||
alone can not predict or inform risky decisions,
|
||||
except for risk-neutral parties.
|
||||
People and organizations are risk-averse
|
||||
...
|
||||
|
||||
* [ ] Finish this paragraph. (see chapter 6) ➕ 2025-07-04
|
||||
|
||||
### Expert Opinion Must Be ~~Adjusted~~
|
||||
|
||||
Expert opinion is valuable despite its flaws.
|
||||
...
|
||||
|
||||
The book details the statistically observable tendency for people
|
||||
to underestimate risk and to be overconfident in their beliefs.
|
||||
It describes the process of "calibration"
|
||||
by which people can be trained to compensate for this bias
|
||||
and make predictions far more accurately.
|
||||
|
||||
Experts tend to be good at creating heuristics,
|
||||
but do not apply them consistently in practice.
|
||||
|
||||
> [!example]
|
||||
> Chapter 7 describes a study where experts
|
||||
> were shown to estimate risk differently for identical cases.
|
||||
|
||||
### Luck Looks Like Skill
|
||||
|
||||
> Chapter 7 p.154
|
||||
|
||||
Hubbard describes a study which concluded that,
|
||||
given the number of German pilots and their overall victory/defeat figures,
|
||||
there was a ~30% chance an individual would achieve The Red Baron's record
|
||||
_by luck alone_.
|
||||
|
||||
He later refers to the tendency to overvalue competence
|
||||
in the role of achieving improbable accomplishments
|
||||
as the "Red Baron effect".
|
||||
|
||||
### There's Always Enough Data
|
||||
|
||||
Hubbard challenges the popular rebuttal
|
||||
that X industry lacks the data to use quantitative models.
|
||||
|
||||
> [!quote] Fallacy of Close Analogy - p.236
|
||||
> ...the belief that unless two things are identical in every way,
|
||||
> nothing learned from one can be applied to the other.
|
||||
|
||||
## Mentioned Topics and Abbreviations
|
||||
|
||||
* Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)
|
||||
* Multi-Attribute Utility Theory (MAUT)
|
||||
* Actuarial Science
|
||||
* Options Theory (OT)
|
||||
* Modern Portfolio Theory (MPT)
|
||||
* Probabalistic Risk Analysis (PRA)
|
||||
* Value at Risk (VaR)
|
||||
* Loss-Exceedance Curve (LEC)
|
||||
* Risk Tolerance
|
||||
|
||||
## Critiques
|
||||
|
||||
### _Exsupero Ursus_
|
||||
|
||||
> Chapter 9 p.195
|
||||
|
||||
Hubbard uses _exsupero ursus_ to describe the tendency of his detractors
|
||||
to dismiss quantitative methods as inappropriate to their industry-specific risks.
|
||||
He provides another analogy in which one car is picked of two (ordinary) cars
|
||||
because the other car can't fly.
|
||||
Based on this strawman it is clear Hubbard believes his detractors are _correct_
|
||||
that qualitative methods can not capture the entire nuance of risk probability,
|
||||
but that they are failing to acknowledge that their preferred alternatives
|
||||
are not demonstrably more effective at doing so.
|
||||
The nuance Hubbard dismisses without addressing is the possibility of model _improvement_.
|
||||
A most competant detractor would be aware of the apparent contradiction
|
||||
but argue that their methods will eventually surpass quantitative methods
|
||||
if they are further developed.
|
||||
Such a position would additionally contextualize Hubbard's observations
|
||||
that detractors become emotional in their defense.
|
||||
To them, Hubbards methods represent an attractive short-term gain
|
||||
excluding a long-term payoff.
|
||||
|
||||
Hubbard's dismissal rubs me wrong
|
||||
because it reads exactly as he describes the "at least we're doing _something_" argument
|
||||
throughout the book and just pages earlier.
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user