2.6 KiB
id, aliases, title, tags, dg-publish
| id | aliases | title | tags | dg-publish | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-01-11 |
|
true |
2026-01-11
2026-01-11 09:00:??
2026-01-09#2026-01-09 14:45
2026-01-11 11:00:??
!favorite-quotes#"It Takes an Engineer to Build a Bridge that Barely Stands"
The value that estimators provide for a contractor is in modeling project cost. If the goal were simply to present a number the cost will not exceed, than anyone could be an estimator. If the goal were only to present a reasonably accurate figure, with no other constraints, then there are few who in the world who couldn't, given infinite time for a single bid. The true value of an estimator, then, is in their ability to model project cost efficiently, that is, to achieve acceptable accuracy and precision as quickly as possible,--- much as the engineer's is in building a bridge that meets the requirements as cheaply as possible.
Estimating "as accurately as possible" is akin to building a bridge "as strong as possible"; it sounds nice, but ignores the actual objective of optimal cost-efficiency.
I think that most estimators believe this to be the case, but, whatever they believe in mind, they believe in practice that the goal is to model cost as accurately and precisely as possible, given the time allowed for bid. Estimates tend always to take exactly as many weeks as until the bid due date, even those of significantly different turnaround but equal scope and complexity. This behavior is objectionable, since if an acceptable estimate could be provided in two weeks, it is not cost-effective1 to allow it to take four.2
Important
Objectionable as it is, it is to be expected that estimators will use all time allowed them when the standards for acceptability are inadequately defined.
-
"Cost" referring both to estimator salaries and the opportunity cost of declined bids. ↩︎
-
Supposing a contractor maintained a modern portfolio theory styled record of estimates including pending bids, and projects ongoing and completed (each with confidence estimates), uncorrupted by estimating-culture#Incentives, they may have reasonable basis to set sliding standards for estimate precision to be specifically determined at consideration of the opportunity for bid according to current climate (i.e. their transient risk appetite). I believe my use of the absolute is still fair: No contractor is doing that, so they lack a competent measure of risk tolerance besides continuing to tolerate what they have historically. ↩︎