vault backup: 2026-02-04 08:57:59

2026-02-04.md

@@ -0,0 +1,91 @@
+---
+id:
+aliases: []
+title: 2026-02-04
+tags:
+  - authorship/original
+  - destiny/permanent
+  - status/draft
+  - type/daily
+dg-publish: true
+---
+# 2026-02-04
+
+## 2026-02-04 08:07
+
+### Questions for ConEst
+
+#### Purpose of ConEst
+
+What is the purpose of ConEst?
+To comb for requirements Bid missed?
+To create the CBOM for Ops?
+Anything else?
+How do they rank in importance?
+
+Why are other departments so confused about ConEst's purpose?
+(Ops stakeholder auditing CBOM to Joel: "missing screws")
+If we don't know, and Ops doesn't know, who does?
+That is, who defines our purpose?
+
+#### ConEst Organization
+
+What freedom does ConEst have to change its process and deliverables?
+suppose a plan to have Bid, with their request for ConEst,
+articulate certain requirements which they must have possessed to produce the bid estimate.
+Who would be involved in the change?
+Who would be the one to deny the request?
+
+If Bid's proposals are audited,
+why do they still cause ConEst constant headache?
+("local lighting control")
+
+Estimators and seniors are biased towards imprecision
+because its tolerance reduces monotonous work,
+but the logical conclusion of such bias is a Bid estimate.
+Obviously there is an ideal compromise
+between 1:1 takeoff to install and a square foot budget
+that ConEst is intended to produce.
+Who is ultimately responsible
+for defining the position of that point on the spectrum?
+How is it defined?
+How is it expected to be communicated to seniors and estimators?
+
+##### Process Variation
+
+What is an acceptable level of process variance senior to senior?
+To my mind the answer ought to be "none"
+or at least "as little as possible",
+since our process benefits greatly
+from every bit of consistency we can maintain,
+saying nothing of the fact that there usually _is_
+a better option between two.
+What's being done to address the variance which exists?
+What's being done to prevent it from re-emerging?
+
+It's my belief that the most practical solution
+is the frequent rotation of estimators in senior teams.
+It's in the interest of estimators
+that their personal heuristics not depend on who they're working for,
+so they can be expected to call attention to inconsistency
+allowing it to be addressed permanently.
+
+The only other option I can imagine
+is to document exact procedures for every scenario,
+which is obviously foolhardy.
+
+#### Less Important
+
+##### Proposal Transparency
+
+Am I alone in feeling that our proposals are deceptive
+beyond reasonable explanation?
+Would I be better of keeping my mouth shut about it?
+
+##### Incentives
+
+Bonuses based on awarded profit
+incentivize problematic (hare-hunting) behavior.
+Has such behavior been observed,
+or has chief strategy been organization-aligned
+in spite of the incentive?