Project Management Cost Estimating Model
Project Management Cost Estimating Model
Delphi – Round 1
I. Participant Information:
Name:
Employer name:
Division:
Location (City, State):
Email address:
Phone:
Date prepared:
Professional certification:
PMI – PMP, etc.
INCOSE – CSEP, etc.
Other (please specify):
Years of experience in project management and planning:
Years of experience in cost modeling and estimation:
Years of experience with COCOMO and/or COSYSMO:
Which category would best describe your application domain? (Check all that apply)
Management of Info System
Operating Systems
Process Control
Command and Control
Military - Airborne
Signal Processing
Communications
Military – Ground, Sea
Simulation
Engineering and Science
Military – Missile
Testing
Environment/Tools
Military – Space
Web
Utilities
Other (please specify):
By participating in this research effort, results of this survey and future research will be
provided and shared with you and your organization. Thank you very much for your
participation and contribution.
Contact Person:
Leone Young
Research Assistant
The Systems Development & Maturity Laboratory (SysDML, www.sysdml.com)
Stevens Institute of Technology
Email: lyoung@stevens.edu
Phone: (415) 279-3216
1
Project Management Cost Estimating Model
II. Introduction
As an effort to further understand systems centric project management cost estimation, we
have proposed a research model for estimating project management effort required for systems
development phase. The proposed model was synthesized via the framework of the Constructive
Systems Engineering Cost Model (COSYSMO). However, the proposed model contains different
types of measuring method and classification. In addition, the rating scales of the EM (i.e.
efficiency) drivers would differ from those (effort multipliers) of COCOSYSMO due to
differences between systems engineering (SE) and project management (PM) efforts.
Throughout literature, many have suggested that there is a relationship between SE and PM,
and evidently, a significant amount of research has been dedicated to SE cost estimating. Yet,
there is a void in PM effort costing (see Exhibit 1).
Exhibit 1 – Research Motivation
We define project management services as the work of initiating, planning, executing project
plans, as well as monitoring and controlling project processes, activities and resources. For the
proposed research, managerial responsibility, activities and processes are the focus, which
excludes the technical aspects that SE is responsible of.
III. Instructions
The questionnaire consists of two parts. The first portion includes open-ended survey questions
and importance ratings for the proposed PM cost models. The second portion includes PM
efficiency drivers and its scale rating on PM people, process and tools (PPT).
For your convenience, the current values of the drivers given in Software Development Cost
Estimating Guidebook (USAF Air Logistics Center, 07/2009) are provided to serve as the
starting point for each PPT efficiency scale rating. If you disagree with these values, you may
provide the appropriate values based on your own experience and expertise. However, please do
notice that this intention was suggested by a subject matter experts’ (SME), and those values
were generated by other SMEs estimates and historical data.
2
Project Management Cost Estimating Model
IV. Open-Ended Survey Questions and Rating of Importance
3
Project Management Cost Estimating Model
In your opinion and based on your professional experience with managing projects, please
answer the followings:
1. Between model #1 and #2, which model would be more adequate and appropriate to
measure and reflect project management effort? Please justify.
4
Project Management Cost Estimating Model
2. Please recall the possible cases (Case 1, 2 & 3) of project management effort
presented today. In your opinion, which case and effort function scenario would
appropriately represent the realistic SE/PM projects in industries? Please justify
your choice.
3. How do industry corporations and government estimate PM costs? What type of
estimating method do they use to estimate PM effort? What PM related cost factors
or drivers do they currently use?
5
Project Management Cost Estimating Model
4. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the proposed models? How can the
proposed model become more practical and applicable for industry use? What is
missing in this research effort and what other factors do we need to consider?
5. Considering Model #1, please check-mark the importance and appropriateness for
each of the following 18 PM effort multipliers.
Effort Multipliers/
Inappropriate
, can be
Eliminated
Least
Important
Scope
Understanding
Scope Volatility
Scope Growth
Requirements
Volatility
Requirements
Growth
Budget Constraints
Schedule Span
Project
Complexities
Systems
Complexities
6
Somewhat
Important
Important
Very
Important
Most
Important
Project Management Cost Estimating Model
Effort Multipliers/
Inappropriate
, can be
Eliminated
Least
Important
Somewhat
Important
Important
Very
Important
Most
Important
Documentation
Level
Level of Service
Requirements
Stakeholder
Cohesion
Project
Management
Maturity
Project
Management
Experience/
Continuity
Process Capability
Technology
Maturity and Risk
Tool Support
Multisite
Coordination
Scope
Understanding
Other:
6. Below is a list of attributes that represent PM capability associated with planning,
organization, direction and monitoring. Please check-mark the importance for each
PM attribute.
PM Capability
Inappropriate,
can be
Eliminated
Least
Important
Communication
skills
PM experience
Information
sharing
willingness
Delegates
appropriately
Well-organized
7
Somewhat
Important
Important
Very
Important
Most
Important
Project Management Cost Estimating Model
PM Capability
Inappropriate,
can be
Eliminated
Least
Important
Supportive and
motivational
Open-minded
and flexible
Provide
constructive
criticism
Positive
attitude
Technical
competency
Team builder &
player
Ability to
evaluate and
select project
resources
Goal oriented
Courage and
conflict solving
skills
Problem solver
Take initiative
Creativity
Integrator
(team, PM
activities, etc)
Decision
making skills
Other:
Other:
Other:
8
Somewhat
Important
Important
Very
Important
Most
Important
Project Management Cost Estimating Model
V. Project Management Efficiency Driver Rating Scale on People, Process &
Tools (PPT)
Exhibit 2 – General View of Project Management Cost Estimating Model #2
People – PM Capability & Attributes
Project Management Capability & Attributes are defined as the following:
 Communication skills
 Team builder & player
 PM experience
 Ability to evaluate and select project resources
 Information sharing willingness
 Goal oriented
 Delegates appropriately
 Courage and conflict solving skills
 Well-organized
 Problem solver
 Supports and motivates project team
 Take initiative
 Open-minded and flexible
 Creativity
 Provide constructive criticism
 Integrator (team, PM activities, etc)
 Positive attitude
 Decision making skills
 Technical competency
As a starting point, a subject matter expert has suggested us to adapt the human capability ratings
from the Software Development Cost Estimating Guidebook (SWDCEG), which was published
by the United States Air Force’s Air Logistics Center in July, 2009. Please provide the value that
you think is appropriate for PM capability. If you disagree with these values, you may provide
the appropriate values based on your own experience and expertise.
9
Project Management Cost Estimating Model
Very Low
Low
Nominal
High
Very High
PM
Capability
Poorly
motivated &
inexperienced
Poorly
motivated or
inexperienced
Traditional
Highly
motivated or
experienced
Highly
motivated &
experienced
SWDCEG
project
capability
1.46
1.19
1.00
0.86
0.71
COSYSMO
Personnel
/team
capability
Your
estimates
1.48
1.22
1.00
0.81
0.65
Productivity
Range
1.46/0.71
2.06
=
1.0
Process – Project Management Process Maturity
Process maturity can be measured by adapting different maturity measuring tools, such as
CMMI, the Berkeley Project Management Process Maturity Model, or the Organization Project
Management Maturity Model (OPM3) by Project Management Institute (PMI). The maturity is
generally classified as the following:
(Least Mature) Initial => Repeatable => Defined => Managed => Optimized (Most Mature)
Very Low
Low
Nominal
High
Very High
PM Process
Maturity
Initial
Repeatable
Defined
Managed
Optimized
SWDCEG
Modern
practices
1.21
1.10
1.0
0.91
0.83
COSYSMO
Process
capability
1.47
1.21
1.00
0.88
0.77
Your
estimates
1.0
10
Productivity
Range
1.21/0.83
1.46
=
Project Management Cost Estimating Model
Tools – Efficiency and Support
The automated tool support parameter represents the degree to which the project development
practices have been automated and will be utilized in the project development life cycle
processes.
Very Low
Low
Nominal
High
Very High
Tool
Support
Very few
primitive tools
Basic tools
Extensive/Few
Integrative
tools
Moderately
integrated
environment
Fully
integrated
environment
SWDCEG
automated
tool support
1.24
1.10
1.00
0.91
0.83
COSYSMO
tool support
1.39
1.18
1.00
0.85
0.72
Your
estimates
1.0
11
Productivity
Range
1.24/0.83
1.49
=