Bottoms Up Parametrics And Ever Increasing Details
Our SEER for Manufacturing (formally SEER-DFM) and now abbreviated SEER-MFG, uses what we call bottoms up parametrics.. Bottoms up parametrics differ from general parametric estimation modeling in a few respects:
- Bottoms Up Parametrics Don’t Necessarily Minimize the Number of Inputs
- Bottoms Up Parametrics ask for detailed levels that traditional parametric estimating would not.
I was briefed on a new tooling analysis method that actually allows the user to specify specific tools if they want to. Way more detail than a traditional parametric model. But exactly what the bottoms up people desire.
Thank you for reading “Dan on Estimating”, if you would like more information about Galorath’s estimation models, please visit our contact page, call us at +1 310 414-3222 or click a button below to ask sales questions, sign up for our free library or schedule a demo.
This post was written by
Dan Galorath is the President and CEO of Galorath Incorporated and the chief architect of SEER-SEM, an algorithmic project management software application. He is a recognized expert in the fields of software estimation and sizing and the author of Software Sizing, Estimation, and Risk Management.
Comments
Project Prediction Infographic
We are noticing several parametric hardware cost estimates prepared to such a detailed breakdown, that it negates the purpose of parametric estimates. The detail is equal to a bottoms up estimate. It looks like the parametric estimating model’s output is used to show the “boss” the validity of the estimate. This practice is missing the power and value of parametric cost estimating, where a few cognizant parameters yield a credible estimate. It is true that it takes greater engineering knowledge of the item to be estimated at higher levels of breakdown.