- #1
dale2k9
- 1
- 0
I'm a software developer. We do estimates based on a P10, P50, or P90 where the P10 assumes that the actual time to complete a task is going to be the estimated amount or vary by no more than plus or minus 90 per cent. A P50 means that the actual will vary from the estimate by no more than 50 per cent, and a P90 will vary by no more than 10 per cent.
For a large set of projects, approximately 500, we're being asked to provide a P70 but we don't have any statistical data or practice for providing a P70 estimate. We have completed P10s for each of these 500 projects. For the most part, we care about resource planning and budget across the set of projects, not any individual project.
What I would like to know is if there is any standard way or common way in dealing with statistics and probability to convert a P10 mathematically to a P70? What I suggested to my boss is to take the P10 * 1.9 to get the worst case estimate and multiply that by .7 to get to a reasonable P70. So the formula would be P10*1.9*.7 or P10*1.33.
That would not account for the possibility of the actuals for some projects being under by 90 per cent (that's not going to happen); it assumes that all errors are on the up side but I think senior management cares more about that risk than they do about the downside.
Any help or suggestions on how this could be done is greatly appreciated.
Regards,
Dale
For a large set of projects, approximately 500, we're being asked to provide a P70 but we don't have any statistical data or practice for providing a P70 estimate. We have completed P10s for each of these 500 projects. For the most part, we care about resource planning and budget across the set of projects, not any individual project.
What I would like to know is if there is any standard way or common way in dealing with statistics and probability to convert a P10 mathematically to a P70? What I suggested to my boss is to take the P10 * 1.9 to get the worst case estimate and multiply that by .7 to get to a reasonable P70. So the formula would be P10*1.9*.7 or P10*1.33.
That would not account for the possibility of the actuals for some projects being under by 90 per cent (that's not going to happen); it assumes that all errors are on the up side but I think senior management cares more about that risk than they do about the downside.
Any help or suggestions on how this could be done is greatly appreciated.
Regards,
Dale