Home Uncategorized MGT323 project management assignment 2

Uncategorized

MGT323 project management assignment 2

Collegeof Administrative and Financial Sciences

Assignment 2

Project Management (MGT323)

Deadline: 25/03/2021 @ 23:59

Course Name: Project Management Save Time On Research and Writing Hire a Pro to Write You a 100% Plagiarism-Free Paper. Get My Paper	Student’s Name:
Course Code:MGT323	Student’s ID Number:
Semester: II	CRN:
Academic Year:2020-21, II Term

For Instructor’s Use only

Instructor’s Name:

Students’ Grade:

Marks Obtained/Out of 5

Level of Marks: High/Middle/Low

Instructions – PLEASE READ THEM CAREFULLY

· The Assignment must be submitted on Blackboard (WORD format only) via allocated folder.

· Assignments submitted through email will not be accepted.

· Students are advised to make their work clear and well presented, marks may be reduced for poor presentation. This includes filling your information on the cover page.

· Students must mention question number clearly in their answer.

· Late submission will NOT be accepted.

· Avoid plagiarism, the work should be in your own words, copying from students or other resources without proper referencing will result in ZERO marks. No exceptions.

· All answered must be typed using Times New Roman (size 12, double-spaced) font. No pictures containing text will be accepted and will be considered plagiarism).

· Submissions without this cover page will NOT be accepted.

· Need References from Peer-reviewed Journals.

Assignment Workload:

· This Assignment comprise of a Case Study.

· Assignment is to be submitted by each student individually.

Assignment Purposes/Learning Outcomes:

After completion of Assignment-2 students will able to understand the

1. Recognize the steps of planning process in the project management. (L.O-1.2)

2. Estimate the project budget and cost control. (L.O-2.2)

3. Analyze to work effectively and efficiently as a team member for project related cases. (L.O-3.1)

Assignment-2-Case Study

Assignment Question: (Marks 5)

Please read the Case-5.2 “Post-Graduation Adventure.” from Chapter 5 “Estimating Project Times and Costs” given in your textbook – Project Management: The Managerial Process 8th edition by Larson and Gray page no: 164 also refer to specific concepts you have learned from the chapter to support your answers. Answer the questions asked in case study as deliverables where you should consider the milestones and technical requirements. Answers to the questions should be within 500 Words limit.

Answers:

Chapter 5 Estimating Project Times and Costs 163

lar38865_ch05_134-167.indd 163 09/06/19 02:42 PM

priorities.
∙ Partner with another organization or build a research consortium to share costs and

to share the newly developed technology and production methods.
∙ Cancel the project.
∙ Commission a break-even study for the laser printer.

Very little in the way of concrete savings was identified, although there was consen-
sus that time could be compressed to the market launch date, but at additional costs.

Lauren met with the marketing (Connor), production (Kim), and design (Gage)
managers, who yielded some ideas for cutting costs, but nothing significant enough to
have a large impact. Gage remarked, “I wouldn’t want to be the one to deliver the mes-
sage to top management that their cost estimate is $1,250,000 off! Good luck, Lauren.”
1. At this point, what would you do if you were the project manager?
2. Was top management acting correctly in developing an estimate?
3. What estimating techniques should be used for a mission-critical project such as this?

Case 5.2

Post-Graduation Adventure
Josh and Mike met as roommates during freshman year at Macalester College in St. Paul,
Minnesota. Despite a rocky start they became best friends. They are planning a two-week
adventure together to celebrate their graduation in June. Josh has never been to Europe
and wants to visit France or Spain. Mike spent a semester abroad in Aarhus, Denmark,
and traveled extensively in northern Europe. Even though Mike has never been to France
or Spain, he wants to go to someplace more exotic, like South Africa or Vietnam. For the
past week they have been arguing over where they should go. Josh argues that it will cost
too much to fly to South Africa or Vietnam, while Mike counters that it will be much
cheaper to travel in Vietnam or South Africa once they are there. They agree that they
can spend no more than $3,500 each on the trip and could be gone for only two weeks.

One evening when they were arguing with each other over beers with friends, Sara
said, “Why don’t you use what you learned in your project management class to decide
what to do?” Josh and Mike looked at each other and agreed that made perfect sense.
1. Assume you are either Mike or Josh; how would you go about making a decision

using project management methodology?
2. Looking first at only cost, what decision would you make?
3. After cost, what other factors should be considered before making a decision?

Final PDF to printer

164 Chapter 5 Estimating Project Times and Costs

lar38865_ch05_134-167.indd 164 09/06/19 02:42 PM

Appendix 5.1

LEARNING OBJECTIVES
After reading this appendix you should be able to:

A5-1 Use learning curves to improve task estimates.

Learning Curves for Estimating
A forecast estimate of the time required to perform a work package or task is a basic
necessity for scheduling the project. In some cases the manager simply uses judgment and
past experience to estimate work package time or uses historical records of similar tasks.

This improvement from repetition generally results in a reduction of labor hours for
the accomplishment of tasks and results in lower project costs. From empirical evi-
dence across all industries, the pattern of this improvement has been quantified in the
learning curve (also known as improvement curve, experience curve, and industrial
progress curve), which is described by the following relationship:

Each time the output quantity doubles, the unit labor hours are reduced at a constant rate.

For example, assume that a manufacturer has a new contract for 16 prototype units
and a total of 800 labor hours were required for the first unit. Past experience has
indicated that on similar types of units the improvement rate has been 80 percent. This
relationship of improvement in labor hours is shown below:

Use learning curves to
improve task estimates.

A5-1LO

Unit Labor Hours

1 800
2 800 × .80 = 640
4 640 × .80 = 512
8 512 × .80 = 410

16 410 × .80 = 328

.4096 × 800 = 328 hours, or 327.68
That is, the 16th unit should require close to 328 labor hours, assuming an 80 percent
improvement ratio.

Obviously a project manager may need more than a single unit value for estimating
the time for some work packages. The cumulative values in Table A5.2 provide factors
for computing the cumulative total labor hours of all units. In the previous example,
for the first 16 units, the total labor hours required would be

800 × 8.920 = 7,136 hours

Final PDF to printer

5-1
Understand estimating project times and costs is the foundation for project planning and control.
Plans are of little importance, but planning is essential. — Winston Churchill, former British prime
minister
Estimating is the process of forecasting or approximating the time and cost of complet- ing project
deliverables. Estimating processes are frequently classified as top-down and bottom-up. Top-down
estimates are usually done by senior management. Man- agement will often derive estimates from
analogy, group consensus, or mathemati- cal relationships. Bottom-up estimates are typically performed
by the people who are doing the work. Their estimates are based on estimates of elements found in the
work breakdown structure. Exhibit 5.1 summarizes some of the key reasons for estimating.
All project stakeholders prefer accurate cost and time estimates, but they also understand the inherent
uncertainty in all projects. Inaccurate estimates lead to false expectations and consumer dissatisfaction.
Accuracy is improved with greater effort, but is it worth the time and cost? Estimating costs money!
Project estimating becomes a trade-off, balancing the benefits of better accuracy against the costs for
securing increased accuracy.

EXHIBIT 5.1
Why Estimating Time and Cost Is Important
• Estimates are needed to support good decisions.
• Estimates are needed to schedule work.
• Estimates are needed to determine how long the project should take and its cost.
• Estimates are needed to determine whether the project is worth doing.
• Estimates are needed to develop cash flow needs.
• Estimates are needed to determine how well the project is progressing.
Cost, time, and budget estimates are the lifeline for control; they serve as the stan- dard for comparison
of actual and plan throughout the life of the project. Project status reports depend on reliable estimates as
the major input for measuring variances and taking corrective action. Ideally, the project manager, and in
most cases the customer, would prefer to have a database of detailed schedule and cost estimates for every
work package in the project. Regrettably, such detailed data gathering is not always possible or practical,
and other methods are used to develop project estimates.

5.1 Factors Influencing the Quality of Estimates
A typical statement in the field is the desire to “have a 95 percent probability of meet- ing time and cost
estimates.” Past experience is a good starting point for developing time and cost estimates. But past
experience estimates must almost always be refined by other considerations to reach the 95 percent
probability level. Factors related to the uniqueness of the project will have a strong influence on the
accuracy of estimates. Project, people, and external factors all need to be considered to improve the
quality of estimates for project times and costs.

Planning Horizon
The quality of the estimate depends on the planning horizon; estimates of current events are close to 100
percent accurate but are reduced for more distant events. For example, cost estimates for a party you are
organizing this weekend should be much more accurate than the estimates for a party that will take place
in six months. Now imagine how difficult it would be to estimate the total cost of a four-year transporta-
tion project. The accuracy of time and cost estimates should improve as you move from the conceptual
phase to the point where individual work packages are defined.

Project Complexity

Time to implement new technology has a habit of expanding in an increasing, nonlin- ear fashion.
Sometimes poorly written scope specifications for new technology result in errors in estimating times and
costs.

People
The people factor can influence the quality of time and cost estimates. For example, accuracy of estimates
depends on the skills of the people making the estimates. How familiar are they with the task they are
estimating?
lar38865_ch05_134-167.indd 136
09/06/19 02:42 PM

Which project structure is chosen to manage the project will influence time and cost estimates. One of the
major advantages of a dedicated project team is the speed gained from concentrated focus and localized
project decisions. This speed comes at an addi- tional cost of tying up personnel full time. Conversely,
projects operating in a matrix environment may reduce costs by more efficiently sharing personnel across
projects but may take longer to complete, since attention is divided and coordination demands are higher.

Padding Estimates
In some cases people are inclined to pad estimates. For example, if you are asked how long it takes you to
drive to the airport, you might give an average time of 30 minutes, assuming a 50/50 chance of getting
there in 30 minutes. If you are asked the fastest you could possibly get there, you might reduce the driving
time to 20 minutes. Finally, if you are asked how long the drive would take if you absolutely had to be
there to meet with the president, it is likely you would increase the estimate to, say, 50 minutes to ensure
not being late.
In work situations where we are asked for time and cost estimates, most of us are inclined to add a little
padding to reduce the risk of being late. If everyone at all levels of the project adds a little padding to
reduce risk, the project duration and cost are seriously overstated. This phenomenon causes some
managers or owners to call for a 10–15 percent cut in time and/or cost for the project. Of course, the next
time the game is played, the person estimating cost and/or time will pad the estimate to 20 percent or
more. Clearly such games defeat chances for realistic estimates, which is what is needed to be
competitive.

Organizational Culture
Organizational culture can significantly influence project estimates. In some organi- zations padding
estimates is tolerated and even privately encouraged. Other organiza- tions place a premium on accuracy
and strongly discourage estimating gamesmanship. Organizations vary in the importance they attach to
estimates. The prevailing belief in some organizations is that detailed estimating takes too much time and
is not worth the effort or that it’s impossible to predict the future. Other organizations subscribe to the
belief that accurate estimates are the bedrock of effective project management. Organizational culture
shapes every dimension of project management; estimating is not immune to this influence.

Other Factors
Finally, nonproject factors can impact time and cost estimates. For example, equip- ment down-time can
alter time estimates. National holidays, vacations, and legal limits can influence project estimates. Project
priority can influence resource assignment and impact time and cost.
Project estimating is a complex process. The quality of time and cost estimates can be improved when
these variables are considered in making the estimates. Estimates of time and cost together allow the
manager to develop a time-phased budget, which is imperative for project control. Before discussing
macro and micro estimating methods for times and costs, a review of estimating guidelines will remind us
of some of the important “rules of the game” that can improve estimating.
Final PDF to printer

5-2
5.2 Estimating Guidelines for Times, Costs, and Resources

Describe guidelines for estimating time, costs, and resources.
Managers recognize time, cost, and resource estimates must be accurate if project planning, scheduling,
and controlling are to be effective. However, there is substantial evidence suggesting poor estimates are a
major contributor to projects that have failed. Therefore, every effort should be made to see that initial
estimates are as accurate as possible, since the choice of no estimates leaves a great deal to luck and is not
palat- able to serious project managers. Even though a project has never been done before, a manager can
follow seven guidelines to develop useful work package estimates.

1. Responsibility. At the work package level, estimates should be made by the person(s) most familiar
with the task. Draw on their expertise! Except for super- technical tasks, those responsible for getting the
job done on schedule and within budget are usually first-line supervisors or technicians who are
experienced and familiar with the type of work involved. These people will not have some precon-
ceived, imposed duration for a deliverable in mind. They will give an estimate based on experience and
best judgment. A secondary benefit of using those responsible is the hope they will “buy in” to seeing that
the estimate materializes when they implement the work package. If those involved are not consulted, it
will be difficult to hold them responsible for failure to achieve the estimated time. Finally, drawing on the
expertise of team members who will be responsible helps to build communi- cation channels early.

2. The use of several people to estimate. It is well known that a cost or time estimate usually has a better
chance of being reasonable and realistic when several people with relevant experience and/or knowledge
of the task are used (sometimes called “crowdsourcing”). True, people bring different biases based on
their experience. But discussion of the individual differences in their estimate leads to consensus and
tends to eliminate extreme estimate errors.

3. Normal conditions. When task time, cost, and resource estimates are determined, they are based on
certain assumptions. Estimates should be based on normal condi tions, efficient methods, and a normal
level of resources. Normal conditions are sometimes difficult to discern, but it is necessary to have a
consensus in the orga- nization as to what normal conditions mean in this project. If the normal workday
is eight hours, the time estimate should be based on an eight-hour day. Similarly, if the normal workday is
two shifts, the time estimate should be based on a two-shift workday. Any time estimate should reflect
efficient methods for the resources nor- mally available. The time estimate should represent the normal
level of resources— people or equipment. For example, if three programmers are available for coding or
two road graders are available for road construction, time and cost estimates should be based on these
normal levels of resources unless it is anticipated the project will change what is currently viewed as
“normal.” In addition, possible conflicts in demand for resources on parallel or concurrent activities
should not be considered at this stage. The need for adding resources will be examined when resource
sched- uling is discussed in a later chapter.

4. Time units. Specific time units to use should be selected early in the development phase of the project
network. All task time estimates need consistent time units. Estimates of time must consider whether
normal time is represented by calendar days, workdays, workweeks, person days, single shift, hours,
minutes, etc. In prac- tice the use of workdays is the dominant choice for expressing task duration. How-
ever, in projects such as a heart transplant operation, minutes probably would be more appropriate as a
time unit. One such project that used minutes as the time unit was the movement of patients from an old

hospital to an elegant new one across town. Since there were several life-endangering moves, minutes
were used to ensure patient safety so that proper emergency life-support systems would be available if
needed. The point is, network analysis requires a standard unit of time. When com- puter programs allow
more than one option, some notation should be made of any variance from the standard unit of time. If the
standard unit of time is a five-day workweek and the estimated activity duration is in calendar days, it
must be con- verted to the normal workweek.

5. Independence. Estimators should treat each task as independent of other tasks that might be integrated
by the WBS. Use of first-line managers usually results in considering tasks independently; this is good.
Top managers are prone to aggregate many tasks into one time estimate and then deductively make the
indi- vidual task time estimates add to the total. If tasks are in a chain and performed by the same group or
department, it is best not to ask for all the time estimates in the sequence at once to avoid the tendency for
a planner or a supervisor to look at the whole path and try to adjust individual task times in the sequence
to meet an arbitrary imposed schedule or some rough “guesstimate” of the total time for the whole path or
segment of the project. This tendency does not reflect the uncertainties of individual activities and
generally results in optimistic task time estimates. In summary, each task time estimate should be
considered inde- pendently of other activities.

6. Contingencies. Work package estimates should not include allowances for contin gencies. The
estimate should assume normal or average conditions, even though every work package will not
materialize as planned. For this reason top manage- ment needs to create an extra fund for contingencies
that can be used to cover unforeseen events.

7. Risk assessment added to the estimate to avoid surprises to stakeholders. It is obvious some tasks carry
more time and cost risks than others. For example, a new technology usually carries more time and cost
risks than a proven process. Simply identifying the degree of risk lets stakeholders consider alternative
methods and alter process decisions. A simple breakdown by optimistic, most likely, and pes- simistic for
task time could provide valuable information regarding time and cost. See Chapter 7 for further
discussion of project risk.
Where applicable, these guidelines will greatly help to avoid many of the pitfalls found so often in
practice.

5-3
5.3 Top-Down versus Bottom-Up Estimating
LO
Describe the methods, uses, and advantages and disadvantages of top-down and bottom-up estimating methods.
Since estimating efforts cost money, the time and detail devoted to estimating are important decisions.
Yet when estimating is considered, you as a project manager may hear statements such as these:
Rough order of magnitude is good enough. Spending time on detailed estimating wastes money.
Time is everything; our survival depends on getting there first! Time and cost accuracy is not an issue.
The project is internal. We don’t need to worry about cost.
The project is so small, we don’t need to bother with estimates. Just do it.
However, there are sound reasons for using top-down or bottom-up estimates. Table 5.1 depicts
conditions that suggest when one approach is preferred over another.
Top-down estimates usually are derived from someone who uses experience and/ or information to
determine the project duration and total cost. However, these esti- mates are sometimes made by top
managers who have very little knowledge of the component activities used to complete the project. For
example, a mayor of a major city making a speech noted that a new law building would be constructed at
a cost of $23 million and would be ready for occupancy in two and one-half years. Although the mayor

probably asked for an estimate from someone, the estimate could have come from a luncheon meeting
with a local contractor who wrote an estimate (guesstimate) on a napkin. This is an extreme example, but
in a relative sense this scenario is fre- quently played out in practice. See Snapshot from Practice 5.1:
Portland Aerial Tram for another example of this. The question actually is, do these estimates represent
low- cost, efficient methods? Seldom. The fact that the estimate came from the top can influence people
responsible to “do what it takes to make the estimate.”
If possible and practical, you want to push the estimating process down to the work package level for
bottom-up estimates that establish low-cost, efficient methods. This process can take place after the
project has been defined in detail. Good sense sug- gests project estimates should come from the people
most knowledgeable about the estimate needed. The use of several people with relevant experience with
the task can improve the time and cost estimate. The bottom-up approach at the work package level can
serve as a check on cost elements in the WBS by rolling up the work packages and associated cost
accounts to major deliverables. Similarly, resource requirements can be checked. Later, the time,
resource, and cost estimates from the work packages can be consolidated into time-phased networks,
resource schedules, and budgets that are used for control.
The bottom-up approach also provides the customer with an opportunity to compare the low-cost,
efficient method approach with any imposed restrictions. For example, if the project completion duration
is imposed at two years and your bottom-up analysis tells you the project will take two and one-half
years, the client can now consider the trade-off of the low-cost method versus compressing the project to
two years—or in rare cases canceling the project. Similar trade-offs can be compared for different levels
of resources or increases in technical performance. The assumption is any movement away from the low-
cost, efficient method will increase costs—e.g., overtime. The preferred approach in defining the project
is to make rough top-down estimates, develop the WBS/OBS, make bottom-up estimates, develop
schedules and budgets, and reconcile differences between top-down and bottom-up estimates. These steps
should be done before final negotiation with either an internal or external customer.
S N A P S H O T
F R O M
P R A C T I C E 5 . 1
The Portland Tram is an aerial tramway in Portland, Oregon. The tram carries passengers between the city’s south
waterfront and the main Oregon Health & Science University (OHSU) campus,

Portland Aerial Tram*
Rigucci/Shutterstock
A revised funding plan and budget were agreed upon in April 2006, by a 3–2 vote of the city council. This plan
required concessions from all parties involved and called for a final budget of $57 million, with direct contributions
from the city of $8.5 million, or nearly 15 percent of the overall budget. This final bud- get was met, and the tram was
opened to the public January 27, 2007.
Budget concerns were not the only problem facing the tram project. Many residents in the neighborhood beneath the
tram were concerned that the tram would be an invasion of privacy and lead to lower property values. The residents
were promised that the overhead power lines would be buried, but as a cost saving mea- sure the plans were
scrapped. One irate homeowner living below the track placed a sign on his backyard fence stating “F%&! The Tram.”
The sign was not vis- ible from the street, only from the air. Lawsuits ensued.
The city ultimately negotiated with each resident living under the tramway and offered fair market value for their
homes.
* R. Gragg and A. Scott, “From Controversy to Icon: Portland’s Aerial Tram Turns 10,” Oregon Broadcasting Network, Febru- ary 12,
2017, www.opb.org/radio/. Accessed 2/14/19; S. Moore, “Audit: Tram Costs Shoot Skyward—Again,” Portland Mercury,
www.portlandmercury.com, February 2, 2006. Accessed 2/20/19; E. Njus, “Portland Aerial Tram Marks Its 10th Anniver- sary,”
Oregonian, www.oregon live.com. Accessed 2/2/19.
which is located high on a bluff overlooking the water- front. The tram ride takes four minutes and rises over 500
feet. The tram was jointly funded by OHSU, the city of Portland, and south waterfront property owners.
OHSU was the driving force behind the project. OHSU argued that the tram was needed so it could expand its
operations to the south waterfront, where there were plans to build several major facilities. The tram would also
reduce traffic congestions and make it easier for OHSU employees to commute to work. OHSU

isamajorplayerintheOregoneconomy,withanesti- mated annual economic impact of over $4 billion and over 35,000
jobs.
The OHSU tram would be one of only two city trams
in the United States, and advocates idea that the tram would become an like Seattle’s Space Needle.
OHSU political clout helped gain
Portland city council for the project in
cost estimate was $15 million, with
responsible for $2 million. A public
revealed a new cost estimate of $18.5
review in 2005 led to a cost readjustment of $40 million with a construction delay of six months.
In 2006 a change in city leadership led to an inde- pendent audit being conducted on the tram project. The audit
revealed that OSHU managers knew as early as 2003 that the cost of the tram would be in excess of $15.5 million
but withheld the information from city officials.
Public reaction was immediate and harsh. City Commissioner Randy Leonard accused the OHSU leadership of an
“outrageous shell game . . . all at the expense of taxpayers.” The city of Portland threatened to pull out of the project.
OHSU protested vigorously, threatening a lawsuit, should the tram be canceled. Negotiations ensued.
championed the icon for the city
approval by the 2003. The initial the city directly review in 2004 million. A second
In conclusion, the ideal approach is for the project manager to allow enough time for both the top-down
and bottom-up estimates to be worked out so that a complete plan based on reliable estimates can be
offered to the customer. In this way false expecta- tions are minimized for all stakeholders and
negotiation is reduced.

5.4 Methods for Estimating Project Times and Costs
Top-Down Approaches for Estimating Project Times and Costs
At the strategic level, top-down estimating methods are used to evaluate the project proposal. Sometimes
much of the information needed to derive accurate time and cost estimates is not available in the initial
phase of the project—for example, design is not finalized. In these situations top-down estimates are used
until the tasks in the WBS are clearly defined.
Consensus Method
This method simply uses the pooled experience of senior and/or middle managers to estimate the total
project duration and cost. It typically involves a meeting where experts discuss, argue, and ultimately
reach a decision as to their best guesstimate. Firms seeking greater rigor will use the Delphi Method to
make these macro esti- mates. See Snapshot from Practice 5.2: The Delphi Method.5 . 2
Originally developed by the RAND Cor- poration in 1969 for technological fore- casting, the Delphi Method is a group
decision process about the likelihood that certain events will occur. The Del-

The Delphi Method
five experts who have worked on film projects over- seas, two recently in India. He provides each of them with a
detailed summary proposal that describes the requirements as well as the 75-day shooting sched- ule. He asks them
to respond to an estimating ques- tionnaire concerning the costs of certain deliverables (e.g., accommodations, sets)
as well as total opera- tional costs, ignoring the lead actors’ contracts. He is surprised by the disparity between those
who have worked in India and the others. After several rounds, where opinions and ideas are exchanged, he has a
fairly good idea of what the total costs are likely to be as well as the risks involved. When he combines this
information with market research, he concludes that the project is not worth the investment.
One distinct advantage of the Delphi Method is that the experts never need to be brought together physically. The
process also does not require complete agreement by all panelists, since the majority opinion is represented by the
median. Since the responses are anonymous, the pitfalls of ego, domineering person- alities, and the bandwagon or
halo effect in responses are all avoided.
1 Gunga Din is a 1939 adventure film that tells the tale of three British officers in Rajasthan, India, who, thanks to a water boy
(Gunga Din), survive a rebel revolt.
phi Method makes use of a panel of experts familiar with the kind of project in question. The notion is that well-
informed individuals, calling on their insights and experience, are better equipped to estimate project costs/times than
theoretical approaches or statistical methods. Their responses to estimate questionnaires are anonymous, and they
are provided with a summary of opinions.

Experts are then encouraged to reconsider, and if appropriate, to change their previous estimate in light of the replies
of other experts. After two or three rounds it is believed that the group will converge toward the “best” response
through this consensus process. The midpoint of responses is statistically categorized by the median score. In each
succeeding round of question- naires, the range of responses by the panelists will pre- sumably decrease and the
median will move toward what is deemed to be the “correct” estimate.

It is important to recognize that these first top-down estimates are only a rough cut and typically occur in
the “conceptual” stage of the project. The top-down estimates are helpful in initial development of a
complete plan. However, such estimates are sometimes significantly off the mark because little detailed
information is gathered. At this level individual work items are not identified. Or in a few cases the top-
down estimates are not realistic because top management “wants the project.” Nevertheless, the initial
top-down estimates are helpful in determining whether the project warrants more formal planning, which
would include more detailed estimates. Be careful that macro estimates made by senior managers are not
dictated to lower-level managers who might feel compelled to accept the estimates even if they believe
resources are inadequate.

Ratio Method
Top-down methods (sometimes called parametric) usually use ratios, or surrogates, to estimate project
times or costs. Top-down ratio methods are often used in the con- cept, or “need,” phase of a project to
get an initial duration and cost estimate for the project. For example, contractors frequently use number of
square feet to estimate the cost and time to build a house; that is, a house of 2,700 square feet might cost
$160 per square foot (2,700 feet × $160 per square foot equals $432,000). Likewise, knowing the square
feet and dollars per square foot, experience suggests it should take approximately 100 days to complete.
Two other common examples of top-down cost estimates are the cost for a new plant estimated by
capacity size and a software product estimated by features and complexity.

Apportion Method
This method is an extension to the ratio method. Apportionment is used when proj- ects closely follow
past projects in features and costs. Given good historical data, estimates can be made quickly with little
effort and reasonable accuracy. This method is very common in projects that are relatively standard but
have some small variation or customization.
Anyone who has borrowed money from a bank to build a house has been exposed to this process. Given
an estimated total cost for the house, banks and the FHA (Federal Housing Authority) authorize pay to the
contractor by completion of specific segments of the house. For example, foundation might represent 3
percent of the total loan, fram- ing 25 percent, plumbing and heating 15 percent, etc. Payments are made
as these items are completed. An analogous process is used by some companies that apportion costs to
deliverables in the WBS—given average cost percentages from past projects. Figure 5.1 presents an
example similar to one found in practice. Assuming the total project cost is estimated, using a top-down
estimate, to be $500,000, the costs are apportioned as a percentage of the total cost. For example, the
costs apportioned to the “Document” deliverable are 5 percent of the total, or $25,000. The
subdeliverables “Doc-1 and Doc-2” are allocated 2 and 3 percent of the total—$10,000 and $15,000,
respectively.
Function Point Methods for Software and System Projects
In the software industry, software development projects are frequently estimated using weighted macro
variables called function points or major parameters such as number of inputs, number of outputs, number
of inquiries, number of data files, and number of interfaces. These weighted variables are adjusted for a
complexity factor and added. The total adjusted count provides the basis for estimating the labor effort
and for a project (usually using a regression formula derived from data of past projects). This latter
method assumes adequate historical data by type of software project for the industry—for example, MIS
systems. In the U.S. software industry, one person-month represents on average five function points. A
person working one month can generate on average (across all types of software projects) about five
function points. Of course, each organization needs to develop its own average for its specific type of

work. Such historical data provide a basis for estimating the project duration. Variations of this top-down
approach are used by companies such as IBM, Bank of America, Sears Roe- buck, HP, AT&T, Ford
Motors, GE, DuPont, and many others. See Table 5.2 and Table 5.3 for a simplified example of function
point count methodology.
From historical data the organization developed the weighting scheme for complex- ity found in Table
5.2. Function points are derived from multiplying the number of kinds of elements by weighted
complexity.
Table 5.3 shows the data collected for a specific task or deliverable: Patient Admit- ting and Billing—the
number of inputs, outputs, inquiries, files, and interfaces along with the expected complexity rating.
Finally, the application of the element count is applied and the function point count total is 660. Given
this count and the fact that 1 person-month has historically been equal to 5 function points, the job will
require 132 person-months (660/5 = 132). Assuming you have 10 programmers who can work on this
task, the duration would be approximately 13 months. The cost is eas- ily derived by multiplying the labor
rate per month times 132 person-months. For example, if the monthly programmer rate is $8,000, then the
estimated cost would be $1,056,000 (132 × 8,000). Although function point metrics are useful, their
accuracy depends on adequate historical data, the currency of the data, and the relevancy of the
project/deliverable to past averages.
Learning Curves
Some projects require that the same task, group of tasks, or product be repeated sev- eral times. Managers
know intuitively that the time to perform a task improves with repetition. This phenomenon is especially
true of tasks that are labor intensive. In these circumstances the pattern of improvement phenomenon can
be used to predict the reduction in time to perform the task. From empirical evidence across all indus-
tries, the pattern of this improvement has been quantified in the learning curve (also known as
improvement curve, experience curve, and industrial progress curve), which is described by the following
relationship:
Each time the output quantity doubles, the unit labor hours are reduced at a constant rate.
In practice the improvement ratio may vary from 60 percent, representing very large improvement, to 100
percent, representing no improvement at all. Generally as the difficulty of the work decreases the
expected improvement also decreases and the improvement ratio that is used becomes greater. One
significant factor to consider is the proportion of labor in the task in relation to machine-paced work.
Obviously a lower percentage of improvement can occur only in operations with high labor con- tent.
Appendix 5.1 at the end of the chapter provides a detailed example of how the improvement phenomenon
can be used to estimate time and cost for repetitive tasks.
The main disadvantage of top-down approaches to estimating is simply that the time and cost for a
specific task are not considered. Grouping many tasks into a com- mon basket encourages errors of
omission and the use of imposed times and costs.
Micro, bottom-up estimating methods are usually more accurate than macro methods.
Bottom-Up Approaches for Estimating Project Times and Costs
Template Method
If the project is similar to past projects, then template methods can be used as a start- ing point for the
new project. Templates are created based on the costs of previous, similar projects. Differences in the new
project can be noted and past times and costs adjusted to reflect these differences. For example, a ship
repair drydock firm has a set of standard repair projects (i.e., templates for overhaul, electrical,
mechanical) that are used as starting points for estimating the cost and duration of any new project.
Differences from the appropriate standardized project are noted (for times, costs, and resources) and
changes are made. This approach enables the firm to develop a poten- tial schedule, estimate costs, and
develop a budget in a very short time span. Develop- ment of such templates in a database can quickly
reduce estimate errors.
Parametric Procedures Applied to Specific Tasks

Just as parametric techniques such as cost per square foot can be the source of top- down estimates, the
same technique can be applied to specific tasks. For example, as part of an MS Office conversion project,
36 different computer workstations needed to be converted. Based on past conversion projects, the project
manager determined that on average one person could convert three workstations per day. Therefore the
task of converting the 36 workstations would take three technicians four days [(36/3)/3]. Similarly, to
estimate the wallpapering allowance on a house remodel, the contractor figured a cost of $5 per square
yard of wallpaper and $2 per yard to install it, for a total cost of $7. By measuring the length and height of
all the walls, she was able to calcu- late the total area in square yards and multiply it by $7.
Range Estimating
When do you use range estimating? Range estimating works best when work packages have significant
uncertainty associated with the time or cost to complete. If the work package is routine and carries little
uncertainty, using a person most familiar with the work package is usually the best approach. He is likely
to know best how to estimate work packages durations and costs. However, when work packages have
significant uncertainty associated with the time or cost to complete, it is a pru- dent policy to require three
time estimates—low, average, and high (borrowed from PERT methodology that uses probability
distributions). The low to high give a range within which the average estimate will fall. Determining the
low and high estimates for the activity is influenced by factors such as complexity, technology, newness,
and familiarity.
How do you get the estimates? Since range estimating works best for work pack- ages that have
significant uncertainty, having a group determine the low, average, and high cost or duration gives best
results. Group estimating tends to refine extremes by bringing more evaluative judgments to the estimate
and potential risks. The judgment of others in a group helps to moderate extreme perceived risks
associated with a time or cost estimate. Involving others in making activity estimates gains buy-in and
cred- ibility to the estimate.
Figure 5.2 presents an abridged estimating template using three time estimates for work packages
developed by a cross-functional group or groups of project stake- holders. The group estimates show the
low, average, and high for each work package. The Risk Level column is the group’s independent
assessment of the degree of con- fidence that the actual time will be very close to the estimate. In a sense
this number represents the group’s evaluation of many factors (e.g., complexity, technology) that might
impact the average time estimate. In our example, the group feels work packages 104, 108, 110, 111, and
114 have a high chance that the average time may vary from expected. Likewise, the group’s confidence
feels the risk of work packages 102, 105, and 112 not materializing as expected is low.
How do you use the estimate? Group range estimating gives the project manager and owner an
opportunity to assess the confidence associated with project times (and/ or costs). For example, a
contractor responsible for building a high-rise apartment building can tell the owner that the project will
cost between $3.5 and $4.1 million and take between six and nine months to complete. The approach
helps to reduce surprises as the project progresses. The range estimating method also provides a basis for
assessing risk, managing resources, and determining the project contingency fund. (See Chapter 7 for a
discussion of contingency funds.) Range estimating is popular in software and new product projects
where up-front requirements are fuzzy and not well known. Group range estimating is often used with
phase estimating, which is discussed next.
A Hybrid: Phase Estimating
This approach begins with a top-down estimate for the project and then refines esti- mates for phases of
the project as it is implemented. Some projects by their nature cannot be rigorously defined because of the
uncertainty of design or the final product. These projects are often found in aerospace projects, IT
projects, new technology proj- ects, and construction projects where design is incomplete. In these
projects, phase or life-cycle estimating is frequently used.
Phase estimating is used when an unusual amount of uncertainty surrounds a proj- ect and it is impractical
to estimate times and costs for the entire project. Phase esti- mating uses a two-estimate system over the
life of the project. A detailed estimate is developed for the immediate phase and a macro estimate is made

for the remaining phases of the project. Figure 5.3 depicts the phases of a project and the progression of
estimates over its life.
For example, when the project need is determined, a macro estimate of the project cost and duration is
made so analysis and decisions can be made. Simultaneously a detailed estimate is made for deriving
project specifications and a macro estimate for the remainder of the project. As the project progresses and
specifications are solidi- fied, a detailed estimate for design is made and a macro estimate for the
remainder of the project is computed. Clearly, as the project progresses through its life cycle and more
information is available, the reliability of the estimates should be improving. See Snapshot from Practice
5.3: Estimate Accuracy.
Phase estimating is preferred by those working on projects where the final product is not known and the
uncertainty is very large—for example, the development of reusable rockets or domestic robots. The
commitment to cost and schedule is only necessary over the next phase of the project, and commitment to
unrealistic future schedules and costs based on poor information is avoided. This progressive macro/micro
method provides a stronger basis for using schedule and cost estimates to manage progress during the
next phase.
S N A P S H O T
F R O M P R A C T I C E 5 . 3
The smaller the element of a work package, the more accurate the over- all estimate is likely to be. The extent of this
improvement varies by type of project. The following table is devel-
oped to reflect this observation. For example, infor- mation technology projects that determine their time and cost
estimates in the conceptual stage can expect their “actuals” to err up to 200 percent over cost and
Estimate Accuracy
duration and, perhaps, as much as 30 percent under estimates. Conversely, estimates for buildings, roads, and so
on, made after the work packages are clearly defined, have a smaller error in actual costs and times of 15 percent
over estimate and 5 percent less than estimate. Although these estimates vary by project, they can serve as ballpark
numbers for project stake- holders selecting how project time and cost estimates will be derived.
5.5 Level of Detail
Unfortunately, your customer—internal or external—will want an accurate estimate of schedule and cost
the moment the decision is made to implement the project. Addi- tionally, the customer who is paying for
the project often perceives phase estimating as a blank check because costs and schedules are not firm
over most of the project life cycle. Even though the reasons for phase estimating are sound and legitimate,
most customers have to be sold on its legitimacy. A major advantage for the customer is the opportunity
to change features, re-evaluate the project, or even cancel it in each new phase. In conclusion, phase
estimating is very useful in projects that possess huge uncertainties concerning the final nature (shape,
size, features) of the project.
See Figure 5.4 for a summary of the differences between top-down and bottom-up estimates.
Obtaining accurate estimates is a challenge. Committed organizations accept the challenge of coming up
with meaningful estimates and invest heavily in developing their capacity to do so. Accurate estimates
reduce uncertainty and support a discipline for effectively managing projects.
Level of detail is different for different levels of management. At any level the detail should be no more
than is necessary and sufficient. Top management interests usually center on the total project and major
milestone events that mark major accomplishments—for example, “build oil platform in the north sea” or
“complete prototype.” Middle management might center on one segment of the project or one milestone.
First-line managers’ interests may be limited to one task or work package. One of the beauties of WBS is
the ability to aggregate network information so each level of management can have the kind of
information necessary to make decisions.
Getting the level of detail in the WBS to match management needs for effective implementation is
crucial, but the delicate balance is difficult to find. See Snapshot from Practice 5.4: Level of Detail. The
level of detail in the WBS varies with the Practicing project managers advocate keeping the level of detail to a
mini- mum. But there are limits to this sug- gestion. One of the most frequent errors of new project managers is to

Level of Detail—Rule of Thumb
task of 40 workdays is used, it is possible that no cor- rective action would be taken until day 40, since many people
have a tendency to “wait and see” or avoid admitting they are behind or passing on bad news; the result may mean
far more than 5 days behind schedule.
The 5- to 10-day rule of thumb applies to cost and performance goals. If using the rule of thumb sug- gested in the
previous paragraph results in too many network tasks, an alternative is available, but it has conditions. The activity
time can be extended beyond the 5- to 10-day rule only if control monitoring check- points for segments of the task
can be established so clear measures of progress can be identified by a spe- cific percent complete.
This information is invaluable to the control process of measuring schedule and cost performance—for example,
payments for contract work are paid on “per- cent complete” basis. Defining a task with clear defin- able start and end
points and intermediate points enhances the chances of early detection of problems, corrective action, and on-time
project completion.
forget that the task time estimate will be used to con- trol schedule and cost performance. A frequent rule of thumb
used by practicing project managers says that a task duration should not exceed 5 workdays or at the most 10
workdays, if workdays are the time units used for the project. Such a rule probably will result in a more detailed
network, but the additional detail pays off in controlling schedule and cost as the project progresses.
Suppose the task is “build prototype computer- controlled conveyor belt,” the time estimate is 40 work- days, and the
budget $300,000. It may be better to divide the task into seven or eight smaller tasks for con- trol purposes. If one of
the smaller tasks gets behind because of problems or a poor time estimate, it will be possible to take corrective action
quickly and avoid delaying successive tasks and the project. If the single
complexity of the project; the need for control; the project size, cost, and duration; and other factors. If
the structure reflects excessive detail, there is a tendency to break the work effort into department
assignments. This tendency can become a barrier to suc- cess, since the emphasis will be on departmental
outcomes rather than on deliverable outcomes. Excessive detail also means more unproductive
paperwork. Note that if the level of the WBS is increased by one, the number of cost accounts may
increase geo- metrically. On the other hand, if the level of detail is not adequate, an organization unit may
find the structure falls short of meeting its needs. Fortunately, the WBS has built- in flexibility.
Participating organization units may expand their portion of the structure to meet their special needs. For
example, the Engineering Department may wish to further break their work on a deliverable into smaller
packages by electrical, civil, and mechanical. Similarly, the Marketing Department may wish to break
their new product promotion into TV, radio, periodicals, and newspapers.
5.6 Types of Costs
LO 5-4
Distinguish different kinds of costs associated with a project.
Assuming work packages are defined, detailed cost estimates can be made. Here are typical kinds of costs
found in a project:
1. Direct costs
a. Labor b. Materials c. Equipment d. Other
2. Direct project overhead costs
3. General and administrative (G&A) overhead costs
The total project cost estimate is broken down in this fashion to sharpen the control
process and improve decision making.
Direct Costs
These costs are clearly chargeable to a specific work package. Direct costs can be influenced by the
project manager, project team, and individuals implementing the work package. These costs represent real
cash outflows and must be paid as the project progresses; therefore, direct costs are usually separated
from overhead costs. Lower- level project rollups frequently include only direct costs.
Direct Project Overhead Costs
Direct overhead rates more closely pinpoint which resources of the organization are being used in the
project. Direct project overhead costs can be tied to project deliv- erables or work packages. Examples
include the salary of the project manager and temporary rental space for the project team. Although
overhead is not an immediate out-of-pocket expense, it is real and must be covered in the long run if the

firm is to remain viable. These rates are usually a ratio of the dollar value of the resources used—e.g.,
direct labor, materials, equipment. For example, a direct labor burden rate of 20 percent would add a
direct overhead charge of 20 percent to the direct labor cost estimate. A direct charge rate of 50 percent
for materials would carry an additional 50 percent charge to the material cost estimate. Selective direct
overhead charges provide a more accurate project (job or work package) cost than does using a blanket
overhead rate for the whole project.
General and Administrative (G&A) Overhead Costs
These represent organization costs that are not directly linked to a specific project. They are carried for
the duration of the project. Examples include organization costs across all products and projects such as
advertising, accounting, and senior management above the project level. Allocation of G&A costs varies
from organiza- tion to organization. However, G&A costs are usually allocated as a percent of total direct
cost or a percent of the total of a specific direct cost such as labor, materials, or equipment.
Given the totals of direct and overhead costs for individual work packages, it is pos- sible to cumulate the
costs for any deliverable or for the entire project. A percentage can be added for profit if you are a
contractor. A breakdown of costs for a proposed contract bid is presented in Figure 5.5.
Perceptions of costs and budgets vary depending on their users. The project manager must be very aware
of these differences when setting up the project budget and when communicating these differences to
others. Figure 5.6 depicts these different perceptions.

The project manager can commit costs months before the resource is used. This infor- mation is useful to
the financial officer of the organization in forecasting future cash outflows. The project manager is
interested in when the budgeted cost is expected to occur and when the budgeted cost actually is charged
(earned); the respective timings of these two cost figures are used to measure project schedule and cost
variances.
5.7 Refining Estimates
As described in Chapter 4, detailed work package estimates are aggregated and “rolled up” by deliverable
to estimate the total direct cost of the project. Similarly, estimated durations are entered into the project
network to establish the project schedule and determine the overall duration of the project. Experience
tells us that for many proj- ects the total estimates do not materialize and the actual costs and schedule of
some projects significantly exceed original work package–based estimates. In order to com- pensate for
the problem of actual cost and schedule exceeding estimates, some project managers adjust total costs by
some multiplier (e.g., total estimated costs × 1.20).
The practice of adjusting original estimates by 20 percent or even 100 percent begs the question of why,
after investing so much time and energy on detailed estimates, the numbers could be so far off. There are
a number of reasons for this, most of which can be traced to the estimating process and the inherent
uncertainty of predicting the future. Following are some of those reasons.
∙
Interaction costs are hidden in estimates. According to the guidelines, each task estimate is supposed to be
done independently. However, tasks are rarely completed in a vacuum. Work on one task is dependent
upon prior tasks, and the hand-offs between tasks require time and attention. For example, people
working on prototype development need to interact with design engineers after the design is completed,
whether to simply ask clarifying questions or to make adjustments in the original design. Similarly, the
time necessary to coordinate activities is typically not reflected in independent estimates. Coordination is
reflected in meetings and briefings as well as time necessary to resolve disconnects between tasks. Time,
and therefore cost, devoted to managing interactions rises exponentially as the number of people and
different disciplines involved increases on a project.
∙ Normal conditions do not apply. Estimates are supposed to be based on normal conditions. While this is
a good starting point, it rarely holds true in real life, espe- cially when it comes to the availability of
resources. Resource shortages, whether in the form of people, equipment, or materials, can extend
original estimates. For example, under normal conditions four bulldozers are typically used to clear a cer-

tain site size in five days, but the availability of only three bulldozers would extend the task duration to
eight days. Similarly, the decision to outsource certain tasks can increase costs as well as extend task
durations, since time is added to acclimating outsiders to the particulars of the project and the culture of
the organization.
∙ Things go wrong on projects. Design flaws are revealed after the fact, extreme weather conditions occur,
accidents happen, and so forth. Although you shouldn’t plan for these risks to happen when estimating a
particular task, the likelihood and impact of such events need to be considered.
∙ Project scope and plans change. As one gets further and further into the project, a manager obtains a
better understanding of what needs to be done to accomplish the project. This may lead to major changes
in project plans and costs. Likewise, if the project is a commercial project, changes often have to be made
midstream to respond to new demands by the customer and/or competition. Unstable project scopes are a
major source of cost overruns. While every effort should be made up front to nail down the project scope,
it is becoming increasingly difficult to do so in our rapidly changing world.
∙ People are overly optimistic. There is solid research indicating that people tend to overestimate how
quickly they can get things done (Buehler, Griffin, & Ross, 1994; Lovallo & Kahneman, 2003).
∙ People engage in strategic misrepresentation. There is growing evidence that some project promoters
underestimate the costs of projects and overestimate project benefits in order to win approval. This
appears to be particularly true for large-scale public works projects, which have a notorious habit of
coming in way over budget (remember Snapshot from Practice 5.1: Portland Aerial Tram).
The reality is that for many projects not all of the information needed to make accu- rate estimates is
available, and it is impossible to predict the future. The challenge is further compounded by human nature
and the political dynamics associated with gain- ing project approval. The dilemma is that without solid
estimates the credibility of the project plan is eroded. Deadlines become meaningless, budgets become
rubbery, and accountability becomes problematic.
Such challenges will influence the final time and cost estimates. Even with the best estimating efforts, it
may be necessary to revise estimates based on relevant informa- tion prior to establishing a baseline
schedule and budget.
Effective organizations adjust estimates of specific tasks once the risks, resources, and particulars of the
situation have been more clearly defined. They recognize that the rolled- up estimates generated from a
detailed estimate based on the WBS are just the starting point. As they delve further into the project-
planning process, they make appropriate revisions in both the time and cost of specific activities. They
factor the final assignment of resources into the project budget and schedule. For example, when they
realize that only three instead of four bulldozers are available to clear a site, they adjust both the time and
cost of that activity. They adjust estimates to account for specific actions to mitigate potential risks on the
project. For example, to reduce the chances of design code errors, they add the cost of independent testers
to the schedule and budget. Finally, organizations adjust estimates to take into account abnormal
conditions. For example, if soil samples reveal excessive ground water, then they adjust foundation costs
and times.
There will always be some mistakes, omissions, and adjustments that will require addi- tional changes in
estimates. Fortunately, every project should have a change manage- ment system in place to
accommodate these situations and any impact on the project baseline. Change management and
contingency funds will be discussed in Chapter 7.
5.8 Creating a Database for Estimating
LO 5-5
Suggest a scheme for developing an estimat- ing database for future projects.
The best way to improve estimates is to collect and archive data on past project estimates and actuals.
Saving historical data—estimates and actuals—provides a knowledge base for improving project time and
cost estimating. Creating an estimating data- base is a “best practice” among leading project management
organizations.

Some organizations, such as Boeing and IBM, have large estimating departments of professional
estimators that have developed large time and cost databases. Others collect these data through the project
office. This database approach allows the proj- ect estimator to select a specific work package item from
the database for inclusion. The estimator then makes any necessary adjustments concerning the materials,
labor, and equipment. Of course, any items not found in the database can be added to the project—and
ultimately to the database if desired. Again, the quality of the database estimates depends upon the
experience of the estimators, but over time the data qual- ity should improve. Such structured databases
serve as feedback for estimators and as benchmarks for cost and time for each project. In addition,
comparison of estimate and actual for different projects can suggest the degree of risk inherent in
estimates. See Figure 5.7 for the structure of a database similar to those found in practice.
5.9 Mega Projects: A Special Case
LO 5-6
Understand the challenge of estimating mega projects and describe steps that lead to better informed decisions.
Mega projects are large-scale, complex ventures that typically cost $1 billion or more, take many years to
complete, and involve multiple private and public stakeholders. They are often transformational, and
impact millions of people (Flyvbjerg, 2014). Examples include high-speed rail lines, airports, healthcare
reform, the Olympics, development of new aircraft, and so forth. What do these projects have in common
beyond scope and complexity? They all tend to go way over budget and fall behind schedule. For
example, the new Denver airport that opened in 1995 had cost overruns of 200 percent and was completed
two years later than planned. The “Chunnel,” the 31-mile-plus tunnel that connects France with England,
was 80 percent over budget. These are but two examples of many public works and other large-scale
projects in which costs came in way over than planned. In a study of government infrastructure projects,
Flyvbjerg found costs for bridges and tunnels, roads, and rails to be underes- timated 34 percent, 20
percent, and 45 percent, respectively, from baseline estimates (Flyvbjerg, Bruzelius, & Rothengatter,
2003)!
Mega projects often involve a double whammy. Not only did they cost much more than expected, but
they underdelivered on benefits they were to provide. The Denver airport realized only 55 percent of
forecasted traffic during its first year of operation. The Chunnel traffic revenues have been one-half of
what was predicted with internal rate of return of −14.5 percent! Again Flyvbjerg’s study revealed a
consistent pattern of underusage on most infrastructure projects (Flyvbjerg et al., 2003), including only a
5 percent forecasted usage for the Kolkata (Calcutta) metro in India!
So why does there appear to be a consistent pattern of overestimating benefits and underestimating costs?
Many argue the sheer complexity and long time horizon make it impossible to accurately estimate costs
and benefits. While this is certainly true, Flyvbjerg and his colleagues’ research suggests that other factors
come in to play. They concluded that in most cases project promoters use deception to promote projects
not for public good but for personal gain, political or economic. Deception may be delib- erate, or may be
the product of overzealousness, optimism, and ignorance (Flyvbjerg et al., 2003). In some cases,
promoters rationalize that nothing great would ever get built if people knew in advance what the real costs
and challenges involved were (Hirschman, 1967).
On some mega projects, there is a triple whammy. Not only are they over budget and under value, but the
cost of maintaining them exceeds the benefits received. These kinds of projects are called white
elephants.
A “white elephant” suggests a valuable, but burdensome, possession, which its owner cannot easily
dispose of and whose cost (particularly upkeep) is out of propor- tion with its usefulness. The term
derives from the story that the Kings of Siam (now Thailand) would often make a present of a white
elephant to courtiers who had fallen out of favor with the king. At first glance, it was a great honor to
receive such a revered beast from the king. However, the true intent was to ruin the recipient by forcing
him to absorb the costs of taking care of the animal.
Examples of white elephants abound. While traveling across southern China one of the authors was struck
by the palatial stature of the Trade Expo buildings each city had. It was as if each city had tried to outdo

its neighbor in terms of grandeur. When asked how often they were used, city officials would say once or
twice a year. The 2015 FIFA scandal brought attention to the hidden costs of hosting the World Cup.
South Africa built six new world-class stadiums for the 2010 competition. None of the post–World Cup
revenue generated from these stadiums exceeds their maintenance cost (Molloy & Chetty, 2015).
Chapter 5 Estimating Project Times and Costs 155

LO 5-7
Define a “white ele- phant” in project man- agement and provide examples.

White elephants are not limited to buildings and stadiums. Air France had to moth- ball the Concorde, the
world’s fastest commercial airline, because maintenance costs and noise restrictions did not justify a
three-flights-a-week schedule. It is not uncom- mon in our personal lives to acquire white elephants, such
as underutilized vacation homes or yachts.
Flyvbjerg and others argue that cost overrun is not the price of doing big things and that we are capable of
making better informed decisions on mega projects. The first step is to assume there is optimism bias and
even deception on the part of promoters. Proposals should require a thorough review by impartial
observers who do not have vested interest in the project. Some if not all financial risk should be absorbed
by promoters and those who benefit financially from the project. Sustainable business practices should be
used and maintenance costs be integrated into the forecasted cost/ benefit analyses of projects. See
Snapshot from Practice 5.5: Avoiding the Curse of the White Elephant to see how British organizers tried
to avoid the curse of the white elephant in the 2012 Olympic games.
In particular, Flyvbjerg advocates an external view based on the outcome of similar projects completed in
the past. It is called reference class forecasting (RCF) and involves three major steps:
1. Select a reference class of projects similar to your potential project, for example, cargo ships or
bridges.
2. Collect and arrange outcome data as a distribution. Create a distribution of cost overruns as a
percentage of the original project estimate (low to high).
3. Use the distribution data to arrive at a realistic forecast. Compare the original cost estimate for the
project with the reference class projects. Take, for example, a three-mile-long rail tunnel project. Tunnel
advocates estimate that it will cost $100 million. Analyses of similar tunnel projects in the region indicate
that on average they are 34 percent over budget. If the proponents cannot come up with a reasonable
explanation for why this project will be different, decision makers should assume that the tunnel will cost
at least $134 million.
The benefits of RCF are compelling:
∙ Outside empirical data mitigates human bias.
∙ Political, strategic, and promoter forces have difficulty ignoring outside RCF information.
∙ RCF serves as a reality check for funding large projects.
∙ RCF helps executives avoid unsound optimism.
∙ RCF leads to improved accountability.
∙ RCF provides a basis for project contingency funds.
The use of RCF is increasing as governments and organizations require this method be used to temper
project promoters’ estimates and reduce cost/benefit inaccuracies.
SNAPSHOT FROM PRACTICE 5.5
Once, hosting the Olympics was con- sidered the crown prize and a tremen- dous source of national pride. Seven
cities competed to host the 1992 Winter Olympics. For the 2022 Winter
Olympics only Beijing and Almaty (Kazakhstan) submit- ted bids. Oslo (Norway), the favorite, withdrew applica- tion
due to a lack of public support. Likewise, Boston withdrew application for the 2024 Summer Olympics in the face of
public outcry.
Why the outcry? Because of the legacy of exorbi- tant cost overruns and draining maintenance costs. The Olympics
has a long history of expensive white elephants. For example, the Beijing National Stadium, nicknamed the Bird’s
Nest, built at a cost of $480 million for the 2008 Olympic games, requires over $10 million each year to maintain and
has no regular tenant.

Some have attributed the Greek economic melt- down to exorbitant debt accrued from hosting the 2004 summer
games (Flyvbjerg, 2014). “It felt good at the time because we were the center of the world, and we got to show off our
country,” says gymnast Christos Libanovnos of the Hellenic Gymnastics Federation. “But what did it cost? So much
money—billions of euros. And now we are bankrupt, and everything just gets worse and worse every day. It’s hard
not to see a connection. It’s hard not to think that maybe it wasn’t worth it.”1
Perhaps the most infamous example of an Olym- pic white elephant is the 1976 Montreal Olympic Sta- dium.
Originally nicknamed the Big O, due to its unique doughnut design, the stadium soon became known across Canada
as the Big Owe. Estimated to cost $134 million, it took Canadian taxpayers 30 years to pay off the final $1.1 billion
debt. To make matters worse, the stadium was not completely finished by the time the Olympics opened. The
stadium has not had a main ten- ant since 2004, when the successful Montreal Expos moved to Washington, D.C.
The London 2012 Olympics organizers were com- mitted to reducing the Olympic financial hangover. In particular,
they were well aware of hidden post- Olympic maintenance costs of buildings that were no
Chapter 5 Estimating Project Times and Costs 157 Avoiding the Curse of the
White Elephant*
© Sophie Vigneault /123RF
longer in demand. One advantage they had over less developed countries is that the infrastructure and many of the
arenas were already in place and the Olympics provided a necessary upgrade. They built temporary arenas for less
popular sports. For example, after the games the water polo arena was deconstructed and materials recycled. The
12,000-seat basketball arena was designed to be portable so it could be used in future Olympics. Scalability was
another key consider- ation. For example, during the Olympics over 17,000 people watched swimming events in the
newly con- structed aquatic center. The aquatic center was down- sized to a 2,500-person capacity after the
Olympics and is now open to the public.
In recognition of its achievements, London 2012 Olympics won Gold in the Environmental and Sus- tainability
category of the 6th International Sports Events awards. “We set out with a huge promise to the world, to deliver the
most sustainable Olympic Games of modern times,” says David Stubbs, London 2012’s Head of Sustainability.
“Seven years, nine million visitors, and 2,484 medals later, that’s exactly what we achieved.”
1 Sanborn, J., “Was It Worth It? Debit-Ridden Greeks Question the Cost of the 2004 Olympics,” Time, July 9, 2012, p. 33.
/123RF

Quality time and cost estimates are the bedrock of project control. Past experience is the best starting
point for these estimates. The quality of estimates is influenced by other factors such as people,
technology, and downtimes. Companies that excel record past experiences and create an estimation
database that provides quick and accurate information on the cost of specific work packages.
Using top-down estimates is good for initial and strategic decision making or in situations where the costs
associated with developing better estimates have little ben- efit. However, in most cases the bottom-up
approach to estimating is preferred and more reliable because it assesses each work package, rather than
the whole project, section, or deliverable of a project. Estimating time and costs for each work package
facilitates development of the project schedule and a time-phased budget, which are needed to control the
project as it is implemented. Using the estimating guidelines will help eliminate many common mistakes
made by those unacquainted with estimating times and costs for project control.
The level of time and cost detail should follow the old phrase “no more than is necessary and sufficient.”
Managers must remember to differentiate among committed outlays, actual costs, and scheduled costs. It
is well known that up-front efforts in clearly defining project objectives, scope, and specifications vastly
improve time and cost estimate accuracy.
Culture plays a significant role in estimating. If the focus is on what went wrong instead of who is to
blame, then people should be more forthright in sharing their experiences and insights. However, if you
work in a punitive organizational culture that is only concerned with results, you are likely to be much
more guarded in what you share and may even pad estimates out of self-protection.
Finally, large-scale mega projects like subway systems or football stadiums often suffer from
underestimated costs and overestimated benefits. They also can evolve into white elephants whose cost of
maintenance exceeds benefits. Steps must be taken to remove bias and compare mega project estimates
with similar projects that have been done in the past.
Key Terms
Review Questions

Apportionment, 143 Bottom-up estimates, 140 Delphi Method, 142 Direct costs, 151 Function points, 143
Learning curve, 145
Overhead costs, 151 Phase estimating, 147 Range estimating, 146 Ratio method, 143 Reference class
forecasting (RCF), 157
Template method, 146 Time and cost
databases, 154 Top-down estimates, 140 White elephant, 155
1. Why are accurate estimates critical to effective project management?
2. How does the culture of an organization influence the quality of estimates?
3. What are the differences between bottom-up and top-down estimating approaches?
Under what conditions would you prefer one over the other?
4. What are the major types of costs? Which costs are controllable by the project manager?
5. Why is it difficult to estimate mega project (e.g., airport, stadium) costs and benefits?
6. Define a white elephant in project management. Provide a real-life example.
lar38865_ch05_134-167.indd 158 09/06/19 02:42 PM
Final PDF to printer
Chapter 5 Estimating Project Times and Costs 159
Exercises
5.1 Portland Aerial Tram
1. Can you think of a local public project that had significant cost overruns like
the Portland Tram project?
2. Do you agree with the statement that “nothing great would ever be built if people knew in advance
what the real costs and challenges were”?
5.2 The Delphi Method
1. What kinds of estimates are best suited for this method?
5.3 Estimate Accuracy
1. Why is the range so much higher for IT projects than construction projects?
5.5 Avoiding the Curse of the White Elephant
1. Can you identify personal examples of white elephants?
2. What else do you think Olympic organizers could do to make the event more
sustainable?
SNAPSHOT FROM PRACTICE
Discussion Questions
Exercises
1. Calculate the direct cost of labor for a project team member using the following data: Hourly rate:
$50/hr
Hours needed: 120
Overhead rate: 40%
2. Calculate the direct and total direct costs of labor for a project team member using the following data:
Hourly rate: $50/hr Hours needed: 100 Overhead rate: 30%
3. The Munsters have been saving money in order to buy a house. They figure that, given current interest
rates, they could afford a $400,000 home. Before looking at houses on the market they decide to explore
the possibility of building a new home. The Munsters figure they could buy a suitable lot for $70,000–
$75,000. At a minimum they want to build a 2,400-square-foot house. The cost for a house of the quality
they desire is $160 per square foot. Given this information, should the Munsters pursue the option of
building a new house?
4. Mrs. Publinsky and her husband, Xander, are planning their dream house. The lot for the house sits
high on a hill with a beautiful view of the White Mountains. The plans show the size of the house to be
2,900 square feet. The average price for a lot and house similar to this one has been $150 per square foot.
Fortunately, Xander is a retired plumber and feels he can save money by installing the plumbing him-
self. Mrs. Publinsky feels she can take care of the interior decorating. They both feel they can complete
the exterior painting with the help of their two sons.

The following average cost information is available from a local bank that makes loans to local
contractors and dispenses progress payments to contractors when specific tasks are verified as complete.
EXERCISE FIGURE 5.1
WBS Figure
a. What is the estimated cost for the Publinskys’ house if they use contractors to complete all of the
house?
b. Estimate what the cost of the house would be if the Publinskys used their tal- ents to do some of the
work themselves.
5. Exercise Figure 5.1 is a project WBS with cost apportioned by percentages. If the total project cost is
estimated to be $800,000, what are the estimated costs for the following deliverables?
a. Design
b. Programming c. In-house testing
What weaknesses are inherent in this estimating approach?
6. Assume you are the project manager for the Tidal 2 software project. You have been asked to
calculate the expected cost for the project. Your company’s database indicates that developers can handle
eight function points each person-month and that the cost per developer at your firm is $5,000 per month.
You and your team of five developers have come up with the following requirements:
Elements Count
Complexity
Inputs 10 Low Outputs 4 Low Inquiries 4 High
Files 28
Interfaces 18 High
Using the “complexity weighting” scheme shown in Table 5.2 and the informa- tion provided, calculate
the total number of function points, the estimated cost, and the estimated duration of the Tidal 2 project.
Medium

References
a. What is the estimated project duration?
b. If 20 people are available for the project, what is the estimated project duration?
c. If the project must be completed in six months, how many people will be needed for the project?
Buehler, R., D. Griffin, and M. Ross, “Exploring the ‘Planning Fallacy’: Why People Underestimate
Their Task Completion Times,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 67, no. 3 (1994), pp.
366–81.
Dalkey, N. C., D. L. Rourke, R. Lewis, and D. Snyder, Studies in the Quality of Life: Delphi and
Decision Making (Lexington, MA: Lexington Books, 1972).
Flyvbjerg, B., “Curbing Optimism Bias and Strategic Misrepresentation in Planning: Reference Class
Forecasting in Practice,” European Planning Studies, vol. 16, no. 1 (January 2008), pp. 3–21.
Flyvbjerg, B., “From Nobel Prize to Project Management: Getting Risks Right,” Project Management
Journal, August 2006, pp. 5–15.
Flyvbjerg, B., “What You Should Know about Megaprojects and Why: An Over- view,” Project
Management Journal, vol. 45, no. 2 (April/May 2014), pp. 6–19.
Flyvbjerg, B., N. Bruzelius, and W. Rothengatter, Mega Projects and Risk: An Anatomy of Ambition
(UK: Cambridge University Press, 2003).
Gray, N. S., “Secrets to Creating the Elusive ‘Accurate Estimate,’” PM Network, August 2001, p. 56.
Hirschman. A. O., “The Principle of the Hiding Hand,” The Public Interest, Winter 1967, pp. 10–23.
Jeffery, R., G. C. Low, and M. Barnes, “A Comparison of Function Point Counting Tech- niques,” IEEE
Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 19, no. 5 (1993), pp. 529–32.
Jones, C., Applied Software Measurement (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1991). Jones, C., Estimating
Software Costs (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1998).
Kharbanda, O. P., and J. K. Pinto, What Made Gertie Gallop: Learning from Project Failures (New York:
Von Nostrand Reinhold, 1996).

Lovallo, D., and D. Kahneman, “Delusions of Success: How Optimism Undermines Executives’
Decisions,” Harvard Business Review, July 2003, pp. 56–63.
Chapter 5 Estimating Project Times and Costs 161
7. Omega 2 Project. Using the “complexity weighting” scheme shown in Table 5.2 and the following
function point complexity weight table, estimate the total func- tion point count. Assume historical data
suggest five function points equal one person a month and six people have been assigned to work on the
project.
Complexity Weight Table
Number of inputs Number of outputs Number of inquiries Number of files Number of interfaces
15 Rated complexity low
20 Rated complexity average 10 Rated complexity average 30 Rated complexity average 50 Rated complexity high
lar38865_ch05_134-167.indd 161 09/06/19 02:42 PM
Final PDF to printer
162 Chapter 5
Estimating Project Times and Costs
Magne, E., K. Emhjellenm, and P. Osmundsen, “Cost Estimation Overruns in the North Sea,” Project
Management Journal, vol. 34, no. 1 (2003), pp. 23–29.
McLeod, G., and D. Smith, Managing Information Technology Projects (Cambridge, MA: Course
Technology, 1996).
Molloy, E., and T. Chetty, “The Rocky Road to Legacy: Lessons from the 2010 FIFA World Cup South
Africa Stadium Program,” Project Management Journal, vol. 46, no. 3 (June/July 2015), pp. 88–107.
Symons, C. R., “Function Point Analysis: Difficulties and Improvements,” IEEE Transactions on
Software Engineering, vol. 14, no. 1 (1988), pp. 2–11.
Walters, D. J., P. Fernbach, C. Fox, and S. Sloman, “Known Unknowns: A Critical Determinant of
Confidence and Calibration,” Management Science, vol. 63, no. 12 (2017), pp. 3999–4446.
Case 5.1
Sharp Printing, AG
Three years ago the Sharp Printing (SP) strategic management group set a goal of having a color laser
printer available for the consumer and small business market for less than $200. A few months later the
senior management met off-site to discuss the new prod- uct. The results of this meeting were a set of
general technical specifications along with major deliverables, a product launch date, and a cost estimate
based on prior experience.
Shortly afterward a meeting was arranged for middle management explaining the project goals, major
responsibilities, project start date, and importance of meeting the product launch date within the cost
estimate. Members of all departments involved attended the meeting. Excitement was high. Although
everyone saw the risks as high, the promised rewards for the company and the personnel were
emblazoned in their minds. A few participants questioned the legitimacy of the project duration and cost
estimates. A couple of R&D people were worried about the technology required to produce the high-
quality product for less than $200. But given the excitement of the moment, everyone agreed the project
was worth doing and doable. The color laser printer project was to have the highest project priority in the
company.
Lauren was selected to be the project manager. She had 15 years of experience in printer design and
manufacture, which included successful management of several projects related to printers for
commercial markets. Since she was one of those uncom- fortable with the project cost and time estimates,
she felt getting good bottom-up time and cost estimates for the deliverables was her first concern. She
quickly had a meeting with the significant stakeholders to create a WBS identifying the work packages
and organization unit responsible for implementing the work packages. Lauren stressed that she wanted
time and cost estimates from those who would do the work or were the most knowledgeable, if possible.
Getting estimates from more than one source was encouraged. Estimates were due in two weeks.
The compiled estimates were placed in the WBS/OBS. The corresponding cost esti- mate seemed to be in
error. The cost estimate was $1,250,000 over the top-down senior
Chapter 5 Estimating Project Times and Costs 163

management estimate; this represented about a 20 percent overrun! Furthermore, the bottom-up time
estimate based on the project network was four months longer than the top management time estimate.
Another meeting was scheduled with the significant stakeholders to check the estimates and to brainstorm
for alternative solutions. At this meeting everyone agreed the bottom-up cost and time estimates appeared
to be accu- rate. Following are some of the suggestions from the brainstorming session.
∙ Change scope.
∙ Outsource technology design.
∙ Use the priority matrix (found in Chapter 4) to get top management to clarify their
priorities.
∙ Partner with another organization or build a research consortium to share costs and to share the newly
developed technology and production methods.
∙ Cancel the project.
∙ Commission a break-even study for the laser printer.
Very little in the way of concrete savings was identified, although there was consen- sus that time could
be compressed to the market launch date, but at additional costs.
Lauren met with the marketing (Connor), production (Kim), and design (Gage) managers, who yielded
some ideas for cutting costs, but nothing significant enough to have a large impact. Gage remarked, “I
wouldn’t want to be the one to deliver the mes- sage to top management that their cost estimate is
$1,250,000 off! Good luck, Lauren.”
1. At this point, what would you do if you were the project manager?
2. Was top management acting correctly in developing an estimate?
3. What estimating techniques should be used for a mission-critical project such as this?
Case 5.2
Post-Graduation Adventure
Josh and Mike met as roommates during freshman year at Macalester College in St. Paul, Minnesota.
Despite a rocky start they became best friends. They are planning a two-week adventure together to
celebrate their graduation in June. Josh has never been to Europe and wants to visit France or Spain. Mike
spent a semester abroad in Aarhus, Denmark, and traveled extensively in northern Europe. Even though
Mike has never been to France or Spain, he wants to go to someplace more exotic, like South Africa or
Vietnam. For the past week they have been arguing over where they should go. Josh argues that it will
cost too much to fly to South Africa or Vietnam, while Mike counters that it will be much cheaper to
travel in Vietnam or South Africa once they are there. They agree that they can spend no more than
$3,500 each on the trip and could be gone for only two weeks.
One evening when they were arguing with each other over beers with friends, Sara said, “Why don’t you
use what you learned in your project management class to decide what to do?” Josh and Mike looked at
each other and agreed that made perfect sense.
1. Assume you are either Mike or Josh; how would you go about making a decision using project
management methodology?
2. Looking first at only cost, what decision would you make?
3. After cost, what other factors should be considered before making a decision?
Appendix 5.1
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
After reading this appendix you should be able to: A5-1 Use learning curves to improve task estimates.

Learning Curves for Estimating
A forecast estimate of the time required to perform a work package or task is a basic necessity for
scheduling the project. In some cases the manager simply uses judgment and past experience to estimate
work package time or uses historical records of similar tasks.

Most managers and workers intuitively know that improvement in the amount of time required to perform
a task or group of tasks occurs with repetition. A worker can perform a task better/quicker the second
time and each succeeding time she performs it (without any technological change). It is this pattern of
improvement that is impor- tant to the project manager and project scheduler.
This improvement from repetition generally results in a reduction of labor hours for the accomplishment
of tasks and results in lower project costs. From empirical evi- dence across all industries, the pattern of
this improvement has been quantified in the learning curve (also known as improvement curve,
experience curve, and industrial progress curve), which is described by the following relationship:
Each time the output quantity doubles, the unit labor hours are reduced at a constant rate.
For example, assume that a manufacturer has a new contract for 16 prototype units and a total of 800
labor hours were required for the first unit. Past experience has indicated that on similar types of units the
improvement rate has been 80 percent. This relationship of improvement in labor hours is shown below:

By using Table A5.1 unit values, similar labor hours per unit can be determined. Look- ing across the 16
unit level and down the 80 percent column, we find a ratio of .4096. By multiplying this ratio times the
labor hours for the first unit, we obtain the per unit value:
.4096 × 800 = 328 hours, or 327.68
That is, the 16th unit should require close to 328 labor hours, assuming an 80 percent improvement ratio.
Obviously a project manager may need more than a single unit value for estimating the time for some
work packages. The cumulative values in Table A5.2 provide factors for computing the cumulative total
labor hours of all units. In the previous example, for the first 16 units, the total labor hours required would
be
By dividing the total cumulative hours (7,136) by the units, the average unit labor
hours can be obtained:
7,136 labor hours/16 units = 446 average labor hours per unit
Note how the labor hours for the 16th unit (328) differs from the average for all 16 units (446). The
project manager, knowing the average labor costs and processing costs, could estimate the total prototype
costs. (The mathematical derivation of factors found in Tables A5.1 and A5.2 can be found in Jelen, F. C.,
and J. H. Black, Cost and Optimization Engineering, 2nd ed. (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1983.)
FOLLOW-ON CONTRACT EXAMPLE
Assume the project manager gets a follow-on order of 74 units; how should he estimate labor hours and
cost? Going to the cumulative Table A5.2 we find at the 80 percent ratio and 90 total units intersection—a
30.35 ratio.
800 × 30.35 =
Less previous 16 units =
Total follow-on order =
17,144/74 equals 232 average labor hours per unit
Labor hours for the 90th unit can be obtained from Table A5.1: .2349 × 800 = 187.9 labor hours. (For
ratios between given values, simply estimate.)
Exercise A5.1
NSDC has a contract to produce eight satellites to support a worldwide telephone system (for Alaska
Telecom, Inc.) that allows individuals to use a single, portable tele- phone in any location on earth to call
in and out. NSDC will develop and produce the eight units. NSDC has estimated that the R&D costs will
be NOK (Norwegian Krone) 12,000,000. Material costs are expected to be NOK 6,000,000. They have
estimated that the design and production of the first satellite will require 100,000 labor hours, and an 80
percent improvement curve is expected. Skilled labor cost is NOK 300 per hour. Desired profit for all
projects is 25 percent of total costs.
A. How many labor hours should the eighth satellite require?
B. How many labor hours for the whole project of eight satellites?
C. What price would you ask for the project? Why?
D. Midwaythroughtheprojectyourdesignandproductionpeoplerealizethata75percent

improvement curve is more appropriate. What impact does this have on the project?
E. Near the end of the project, Deutsch Telefon AG requests a cost estimate for four satellites identical to
those you have already produced. What price will you quote them? Justify your price.

Turn in your highest-quality paper
Get a qualified writer to help you with

“ MGT323 project management assignment 2 ”

Get high-quality paper

NEW! AI matching with writer

Hire a Writer

Client Reviews

4.9

Sitejabber

4.6

Trustpilot

4.8

Our Guarantees

100% Confidentiality

Information about customers is confidential and never disclosed to third parties.

Original Writing

We complete all papers from scratch. You can get a plagiarism report.

Timely Delivery

No missed deadlines – 97% of assignments are completed in time.

Money Back

If you're confident that a writer didn't follow your order details, ask for a refund.

New to Your Trusted Assignment Help Service? Sign up & Save

Calculate the price of your order

Type of paper needed:

Pages:

You will get a personal manager and a discount.

Academic level:

We'll send you the first draft for approval by at

Total price:

$0.00

Power up Your Academic Success with the
Team of Professionals. We’ve Got Your Back.

Power up Your Study Success with Experts We’ve Got Your Back.

Order Now Order Now