4 ms·

Lol no, then the estimators learn to pad their estimates in order to maintain some semblance of an orderly process and management just ends up managing having c

by dv_dt 5y ago

Lol no, then the estimators learn to pad their estimates in order to maintain some semblance of an orderly process and management just ends up managing having completely screwed up their scheduling measurements as a predictor of anything. So that practice leads to management in the dark about wether a project is actually at risk for completing on time. Edit: if you want trust and fast quality execution you can help the team develop best case, median, and worst case timelines.

NAHWheatCracker 5y ago
It's disgusting how people drive away from truth and it causes other people to have to make wild corrections to manage the lies. It snowballs into meaninglessness. I once gave a detailed estimate of a project I thought would take 2-6 months. I called out the major blockers, explained the highest variability parts of the project, and made suggestions about how we could reduce variability. Rather than address any of the points I made, the managers focused on nailing me down to a single estimate. Presumably they had to sell it as a quarter-long project. I sat in the office of the engineering manager, and explained that any single estimate would be a lie. He told me that it wasn't a lie, it's just my best guess. I said my best guess is 2-6 months. He asked for 3 months. I said he can use whatever he wants, but my estimate is the same. I think they ended up using 3 months. The ordeal complete drained my energy and the project went no where. My future estimates went through the roof and they eventually stopped asking. Now projects don't have any believable plans.
- arius 5y ago
  In such case I would recommend to under promise and over deliver. Your estimate conveys that it's risky selling it as a 3 months project and risk free as 6 months. It's in your best interest to sell it as 6 months and have a chance to complete it in 3. You could bargain 5 months by taking few risk. Nonetheless a good manager should have understood your estimation range and act accordingly.
  - NAHWheatCracker 5y ago
    I think that's a good approach as well. I don't want to belabor the point, but I had been ignored on previous project estimations as well. Management was going to use whatever estimate they wanted. My focus was on the blockers and risks.
klabb3 5y ago
There are many more issues with deliberately misleading employees: - Some workers will see through the lies and adjust while others won't. The general version of this problem is that there are many lies but only one truth, and lies don't have any self-correcting mechanism built in, resulting in more variance, and in extreme cases, chaos. - If you mislead people into always-on crisis mode, they will get desensitized and won't trust you, which is especially important when there is a real crisis. The general version of this is crying wolf. The fact that a cultural phenomenon is irrational and self destructive is perfectly compatible with success, because of noise. Cultural norms do not converge towards optimum quickly, there are too many other factors at play, and social evolution is veeeeery slow. Evolution is probably the most misapplied theory ever proposed.

by dv_dt 5y ago

NAHWheatCracker 5y ago

It's disgusting how people drive away from truth and it causes other people to have to make wild corrections to manage the lies. It snowballs into meaninglessness. I once gave a detailed estimate of a project I thought would take 2-6 months. I called out the major blockers, explained the highest variability parts of the project, and made suggestions about how we could reduce variability. Rather than address any of the points I made, the managers focused on nailing me down to a single estimate. Presumably they had to sell it as a quarter-long project. I sat in the office of the engineering manager, and explained that any single estimate would be a lie. He told me that it wasn't a lie, it's just my best guess. I said my best guess is 2-6 months. He asked for 3 months. I said he can use whatever he wants, but my estimate is the same. I think they ended up using 3 months. The ordeal complete drained my energy and the project went no where. My future estimates went through the roof and they eventually stopped asking. Now projects don't have any believable plans.

arius 5y ago
In such case I would recommend to under promise and over deliver. Your estimate conveys that it's risky selling it as a 3 months project and risk free as 6 months. It's in your best interest to sell it as 6 months and have a chance to complete it in 3. You could bargain 5 months by taking few risk. Nonetheless a good manager should have understood your estimation range and act accordingly.
- NAHWheatCracker 5y ago
  I think that's a good approach as well. I don't want to belabor the point, but I had been ignored on previous project estimations as well. Management was going to use whatever estimate they wanted. My focus was on the blockers and risks.

klabb3 5y ago

There are many more issues with deliberately misleading employees: - Some workers will see through the lies and adjust while others won't. The general version of this problem is that there are many lies but only one truth, and lies don't have any self-correcting mechanism built in, resulting in more variance, and in extreme cases, chaos. - If you mislead people into always-on crisis mode, they will get desensitized and won't trust you, which is especially important when there is a real crisis. The general version of this is crying wolf. The fact that a cultural phenomenon is irrational and self destructive is perfectly compatible with success, because of noise. Cultural norms do not converge towards optimum quickly, there are too many other factors at play, and social evolution is veeeeery slow. Evolution is probably the most misapplied theory ever proposed.