Skip to main content

The "True Cost" Phantom in Project Cost Tracking

I want to know if I should wear a coat when I go out the door on an unpredictable spring morning. The temperature from the weather app on my phone isn't going to match exactly the temperature just outside my front door, but it will be close enough to make the decision. If the question at hand is whether or not I should wear a coat, it would be a costly mistake to set up an elaborate system of thermometers around my property to try increase the precision of my measurement of the temperature. The added expense wouldn't yield any better decisions about whether to wear a coat, so why bother?

We are interested in tracking the relative costs of the various projects we undertake in our organization. We must admit up front that we will never be able to measure the precise cost of each of our projects. Consider the following things you could include in the "true cost" measurement of a project. Where will you draw the line?

  • An engineer reads an article on the bus that gives her a great idea for the project. Bill the time of the bus ride to the project?
  • A secretary (not formally part of the project) orders pizza for a project team for a lunch meeting. Is her time free for the project or should she bill it?
  • A developer stays late to patch a critical error in a system and misses the beginning of a child's soccer game. Is missed family time--and the potential decrease in employee satisfaction--a cost of the project?
  • A developer runs some code that inadvertently maxes out the processor on a server in the data center for a few hours. Do we count the cost of the increased electricity and cooling costs in the data center?
The "true cost" of a project is a pointless fiction since "true cost" is a phantom we can't possible hope to perfectly quantify. It will always have a subjective element to it.

Measuring the cost of a project is a backward-looking metric. We only care about the cost insofar as it helps us make future decisions. When we are trying to give the university administration information about whether to add a new module to PeopleSoft, will it matter whether the cost of implementing the SharePoint upgrade last year was $30,000 or $50,000? Of course not. No project is exactly like the last one. Even if we could measure precisely the last project (which we can't) it wouldn't help us know exactly the cost of future projects. 

We don't pay the football coach based on the number of hours he spends drilling the team. We pay him based on the winning record he can produce. We don't really care about the inputs. We care about outputs. 

Does the the trustees of the university care about how many hours it takes us to complete a project? I doubt it. They won't think we're being dishonest with them if we can't provide a precise tally of hours we spent on a project. They care about the value we are producing for BYU and the value that BYU can in turn produce for the world.

Let's step from from our goal to track the "true cost" of a project. And let's go even further. Let's stop tracking our inputs and instead experiment with ways we can track our outputs. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Making People Feel Stupid: A Cardinal Sin in Design

People will go to great lengths and inconvenience to avoid appearing or feeling stupid. A great example of when design makes a user feel stupid comes from Alan Coopers 1999 book The Inmates are Running the Asylum on page 24. Cooper is talking about the keyless entry system on his car keys. "The large button locks the car and simultaneously arms the alarm. Pressing the button a second time disarms the alarm and unlocks the car. There is also a second smaller button labeled 'Panic.' When you press it, the car emits a quiet warble for a few seconds. If you hold it down longer, the quiet warble is replaced by the full 100-decibel blasting of the car alarm, whooping, tweeting, yowling, and declaring to everyone within a half-mile that some dolt--me--has just done something execrably stupid. What's worse, after the alarm has been triggered, the little plastic device becomes functionally inert, and further pressing of either button does nothing. The only way to stop that ho...
Post a Comment
Read more

Hammers and Nails: Technology Push Design

"We need to refine our requirements first, before we look at tools." This is a common phrase that I hear. While I sympathize with the sentiment, I think it is frequently wasteful. I suspect that we'd get to the right requirements faster by looking at tools already available in a given problem space. Pushing the concept further, is it foolish to find a cool technology and then look for ways that that technology can apply to current problem spaces?  What if you don't even recognize you have a problem space? Without a constant search and openness, we'll miss many serendipitous opportunities. Here is BYU professor Larry Howell discussing this issue. I often enjoy doing something ... that is sometimes controversial. In this approach, rather than starting with a need, you start with a new technology and you search to identify a need that it can fulfill. This second more controversial approach is called "technology push design."   You can imagine t...
Post a Comment
Read more

How much will you remember?

There is a commonly passed around "stat" that, according to a blog post I recently read, isn't true. You've probably seen it or heard it. It is said that people remember: 10% of what they read 20% of what they hear 30% of what they see 50% of what they see and hear 70% of what they write and say 90% of what they say as they do The blog author says: Quite where these numbers come from is a mystery to many, and indeed it is difficult to understand what 90% retention actually means… 90% of what for how long? As a model it looks and on first thought appears to be credible, however as many of us will know some people have almost 100% retention for a considerable period of time if they read something, others teach others from a structure or procedure which they themselves do not understand! Thanks, RapidBI, for pointing out this common misconception!
Post a Comment
Read more