5 ms·
> We have a tragic flaw and that flaw is that we overestimate our knowledge and abilities... The most frequent is in time estimates. I won't dispute that engi
by thayne 7y ago
> We have a tragic flaw and that flaw is that we overestimate our knowledge and abilities... The most frequent is in time estimates.
I won't dispute that engineers overestimate knowledge and abilities sometimes, or that estimates are wrong more often than not. However, most engineers I know are well aware that _any_ estimate they give will be wrong, but do the best with the knowledge they have because the PM needs some kind of estimate in order to plan. Estimates aren't low because we don't take into account our lack of knowledge, they are low (or sometimes actually high) because we don't even know how much we don't know.
- Vinnl 7y agoI don't really get that. Why would someone need an estimate if the estimate is wrong anyway - what use it is. Then if I'm forced to give an estimate, I usually add an order of magnitude precisely because I know there's a lot I don't know yet, and the worst and best cases of underpromising and over-delivering are better than vice versa. Yet many people's intuitions (also engineers') appear to disagree with that.
- Tempest1981 7y agoFor years, I felt guilty (or was made to feel guilty) for giving an accurate/realistic estimate. Mostly at startups, where you feel, everyday, that the company is at risk of failing. It's better to give a range of estimates - best case to worst case. Although managers may only hear the best case.
- Vinnl 7y agoSure, but especially when I'm made to feel guilty, my answer is always: the estimate I give does not influence how quickly the work is going to get done, so feel free to tell yourself that it will take half the time if that makes you feel better. I want to make it as explicit as possible that, if a manager only hears the best case, that's of their own volition.