Costing Techniques
The basic types of cost estimates
Unit I - Module 2 1
Cost Prof
Unit Index
Unit I – Cost Estimating
1. Cost Estimating Basics
2. Costing Techniques
3. Parametric Estimating
Unit II – Cost Analysis Techniques
Unit III – Analytical Methods
Unit IV – Specialized Costing
Unit V – Management Applications
Unit I - Module 2 2
Cost Prof
Outline
• Introduction
• Costing Techniques
• Using Costing Techniques
• Comparison of Techniques
• Summary
• Resources
Unit I - Module 2 3
Cost Prof
Introduction
• The three essential cost estimating
techniques (or methodologies) are:
11 – Analogy
– Parametric
– Build-Up
• Other topics will be discussed in relation
to the three essential techniques
– Expert Opinion
– Extrapolation from Actuals
Unit I - Module 2 4
Cost Prof
Costing Techniques
• Analogy
• Parametric
• Build-Up
• Other Topics
Unit I - Module 2 5
Cost Prof
Costing Techniques Overview
• Costing Techniques provide the
structure of your cost estimate
– They’re what enable you to predict future
costs based on historical data
– Techniques rely on statistical properties,
logical relationships, and emotional appeal
• Three essential types
– Analogy: “It’s like one of these”
– Parametric: “This pattern holds”
– Build-Up: “It’s made up of these”
Unit I - Module 2 6
Cost Prof
Analogy - Method
• Comparative analysis of similar systems
• Adjust costs of an analogous system to
3 estimate the new system
• Adjustments could be based on:
– Programmatic information
– Physical characteristics
– Performance
– Government vs. Commercial practices
– Contract specifics
5 – Economic trends
$
$
Unit I - Module 2 7
Cost Prof
Analogy - Application
• Used early in the program life cycle
– Data is not available to support using more
detailed methods
– Not enough data exists for a number of similar
systems, but can find cost data from a single
similar system
• The best results are achieved when
– Similarities between old and new systems are high
– Adjustments can be quantified
– Subjective adjustments are minimized
• Can be used as a cross check for other
methods
Unit I - Module 2 8
Cost Prof
Analogy – Advantages /Disadvantages
• Advantage
– Can be used early in programs before detailed
requirements are known
– Difficult to refute if there is strong resemblance
• Disadvantage
– Introduces subjectivity in the adjustment
– Difficult to obtain cost/technical data on old/new
systems for comparison
– No objective test of validity
Unit I - Module 2 9
Cost Prof
Analogy - Example
Attribute Old System New System
Engine: F-100 F-200 Tip: The mischief in
analogy most often
Thrust: 12,000 lbs 16,000 lbs arises in the
Cost: $5.2M ? adjustment. Why do
we so readily believe
12 a linear relationship
which passes through
Q: What is the unit cost of the F-200? the origin?
A: $5.2M * (16,000/12,000) = $6.9M
Warning 1: An adjusted Warning 2: An adjusted analogy
analogy is like a regression, but is, by definition, estimating outside
the slope is just a guess. the range of the data.
Unit I - Module 2 10
Cost Prof
Parametric Estimating - Method
• A mathematical relationship between a
3
parameter and cost
4 – Parameter may be physical, performance,
operational, programmatic, or cost
9 • Uses multiple systems to develop
relationship Warning: Rates, factors, and ratios
in use may not be statistically based.
8 • Allows statistical inferences to be made
200
Parametric could also be called Cost 150
Estimating Relationships (CERs), 100
50
Rates, Factors, Ratios 0
0 200 400 600 800 1000
3
Unit I - Module 2 11
Cost Prof
Parametric Estimating - Application
• Use of Parametrics
– Requires a good database which is relevant to the
4
the system being estimated
– Excellent for use early in program life cycle before
a detailed design exists
– Used as the design progresses to capture
changes
• Good as a cross-check for other methods
•
• Warning: Be leery of estimating
outside the range of the data.
Unit I - Module 2 12
Cost Prof
Parametric Estimating –
Advantages/Disadvantages
• Advantages
– Can be easily adjusted for changes by modifying
input parameters
– Sensitivity Analysis - Can show how changes to
certain parameters impact the cost
8 – Objective measures of validity
9 – Statistical measures for risk
• Disadvantages
– Difficult to ensure consistency and validity of data
4 – Must constantly review relationships to ensure that
relationships reflect current status of relevant
programs, technology, and other factors
7 – “Black box syndrome” with pre-existing CERs,
commercial models
Unit I - Module 2 13
Cost Prof
Parametric Estimating - Example
• CER for Site Activation as a function of
Number of Workstations:
13 – Site Act ($K) = 82.8 + 26.5 * Num Wkstn
• Estimated based on 11 data points for
installations ranging from 7 to 47
workstations
• Example expanded in Module 3 3
Unit I - Module 2 14
Cost Prof
Build-Up - Method
• Estimating is done at lower levels and results
rolled up to produce higher-level estimates
– Often the lowest definable level at which data exist
• Elements of this method could include
11 – Standards
– Time and Motion Studies
5 – Well defined work flow Build-Up could also be called
– Variance Factors Engineering Build-Up, Industrial
– Parts List Engineering (IE), Catalog/Handbook
– Lot Size and Program Schedule Considerations
– Program Stage
– Support Labor
Unit I - Module 2 15
Cost Prof
Build-Up - Application
• Used when you know detailed product
information at the lowest level (i.e.,
hours, material, etc.)
• Used in a manufacturing environment
where Touch Labor can be accurately
estimated
Unit I - Module 2 16
Cost Prof
Build-Up – Advantages/Disadvantages
• Advantages
– Easy to see exactly what the estimate includes
– Can include Time and Motion Study of actual
process
– Variance Factors based on historical data for a
given program or a specific manufacturer
• Disadvantages
– Expensive and requires detailed data to be
collected, maintained, and analyzed
– Detailed specifications required and changes must
be reflected
6 – Small errors can be magnified
– Omissions are likely
Unit I - Module 2 17
Cost Prof
Build-Up - Example
• Problem: Estimate hours for the sheet metal
element of the inlet nacelle for a new aircraft
– Similar to F/A –18 E/F nacelle which has a 20%
14 variance factor (actuals to standards) and a
support labor factor of 48% of the touch labor
hours
– The standard to produce the sheet metal element
of the new inlet nacelle is 2000 touch labor hours
• Solution: Apply F/A-18 E/F factors to the
standard touch labor hours
– 2000 hrs x 1.2 = 2400 touch labor hours
– Add the support factor of 48% to get the total
hours estimate of 2,400 x 1.48 = 3,552 hours
Unit I - Module 2 18
Cost Prof
Other Topics
• Expert Opinion
• Extrapolation
from Actuals
Unit I - Module 2 19
Cost Prof
Expert Opinion - Method
• Uses an expert or a group of experts to
estimate the cost of a system
– One-on-one interviews
– Round-table discussions
1
– Delphi Technique
Expert Opinion could also be called
Engineering Judgment, Round
Table, or Delphi Technique
Warning: Expert Opinion alone
is not widely considered to be a
valid technique
Unit I - Module 2 20
Cost Prof
Expert Opinion - Application
• Only used when more objective
techniques are not applicable
• Used to corroborate or adjust objective
data
– Cross check historical based estimate
• Use for high level, low fidelity estimating
• Last resort Tip: Expert opinion is the least regarded
and most dangerous method, but it is
seductively easy. Most lexicons do not
even admit it as a technique, but it is
included here for completeness.
Unit I - Module 2 21
Cost Prof
Expert Opinion –
Advantages/Disadvantages
• Advantages
– Good cross check of other estimate from
Subject Matter Expert (SME) point of view
– Allows perspective to an estimate that may
be overlooked without SME
• Disadvantages
– Completely subjective without use of other
8
techniques
– Low-to-nil credibility
Unit I - Module 2 22
Cost Prof
Extrapolation from Actuals
• Extrapolation from actuals is not a method, it
is a subset of some methods
– Using actual costs to predict the cost of future
items of the same system
• Extrapolation is used in several areas, which
include: 100
95
– Averages 90
Cost
– Learning Curves
85
80
– Estimate at Completion 75
15 70
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Quantity
Extrapolation from Actuals could also be called Averages,
2 Learning Curves, Cost Improvement Curves, Cost/Quantity
Curve, Estimate at Completion (EAC), and Earned Value (EV)
Unit I - Module 2 23
Cost Prof
Extrapolation from
Actuals - Application
• Best application is for follow-on
production units/lots
10 • Requires accurate cost database
– At an appropriate level of cost detail
– Validate and normalize data
Unit I - Module 2 24
Cost Prof
Extrapolation from
Actuals – Advantages/Disadvantages
• Advantages
– Utilizes actual costs to predict future costs
– Can be applied to hours, materials, total costs
– Highest credibility and greatest accuracy
– Many government bodies require or encourage the use of
this technique
• Possible complications:
– Unknown events affecting bookkeeping of actuals
– Changes in cost accounting methods
– Contract changes affecting actuals
– Configuration changes, process changes all have impacts
• Disadvantages:
– Extrapolating beyond a reasonable range
Unit I - Module 2 25
Cost Prof
Using Costing Techniques
• Estimate Requirements
• Top Down vs. Bottom Up
• Cost Element Structure
(CES)
• Technique Selection
• Checking Results
• Documentation
Unit I - Module 2 26
Cost Prof
Estimate Requirements
• Why are we developing this estimate?
What will it be used for?
– Milestone A, B, or C decision
– Developing a budget
– Developing a “ball park” or rough order of
magnitude (ROM) estimate
– Comparing alternatives
– Evaluating proposals
Unit I - Module 2 27
Cost Prof
Top Down vs. Bottom Up
• There are two general ways to structure an
estimate
– Top Down
– Bottom Up
• Top Down is generally associated with the
Parametric or Analogy techniques
• Bottom Up frequently uses more than one
method at the lowest level but is generally
associated with the Build-Up technique
Unit I - Module 2 28
Cost Prof
Cost Element Structure
• Determine what needs to be estimated and
1 develop an appropriate Cost Element
Structure (CES)
– CES Dictionary defines what is included in each
element
– Characteristics associated with cost elements that
are routinely used to classify costs
• Program Phase: Development, Production, O&S
• “Color of Money”: RDT&E, Procurement, O&M
• Funding Source
• Non-Recurring or Recurring
• Direct or Indirect
Unit I - Module 2 29
Cost Prof
Technique Selection
• Review available techniques
• Compare alternatives
• Select or develop appropriate
technique
• Identify primary and secondary
techniques
Each costing technique has strengths and
weaknesses and can be applied at different
times in the life cycle of a cost estimate
Unit I - Module 2 30
Cost Prof
Checking Results
• Cross Checking your results greatly increases
credibility
– Example: A parametric-based estimate can also show an
analogy as a “reasonableness test”
– Doesn’t necessarily result in the exact same number, but
should be a similar number (same order of magnitude)
• An independent* estimate is more detailed than a
cross check and attempts to get the same result
using a different technique
– Example: Use the results from one commercial software
estimating package to validate the results of another
*Note: “Independent” has many meanings. The most stringent meaning is in Title 10 USC Section 2434 and involves
an organization out of the chain of command of the acquiring agency. A looser meaning is an estimate done by an
organization unbeholden to the program manager in funding or accountability. The loosest meaning is a separate
estimate.
Unit I - Module 2 31
Cost Prof
Documentation
• Within reason, more information is better
than less
• Any information that is used in the analysis
must be included in the documentation
• Documentation should be adequate for
another cost analyst to replicate your
technique
• Like they used to tell you in math class….
If You Don’t Show Your Work,
You Don’t Get Any Credit!
Unit I - Module 2 32
Cost Prof
Comparison of Techniques
Unit I - Module 2 33
Cost Prof
Comparison – Advocacy
• Advocates of Build-Up drink beer and say:
– More detailed = more accurate Hey, it’s a joke,
– Analogy is prey to invalid comparisons lighten up!
– Parametric is too “theoretical”
• Advocates of Analogy drink bourbon and say:
– Like things cost like amounts
– Build-Up is prey to omission and duplication
– Parametric is “diluted” by less applicable systems
• Advocates of Parametric drink wine and say:
– Most thoroughly based on historical data
– Analogy is just a one-point CER through the origin!
– Build-Up is prey to omission and duplication
Unit I - Module 2 34
Cost Prof
Comparison – Life Cycle Applicability
Program Life Cycle
Concept & System Production & Operations &
Technology Development & Deployment Support
Development Demonstration
[Extrapolation
Parametric From] Actuals
Engineering [Build-Up]
Analogy
Gross Estimates Detailed Estimates
Chart #300R4, Defense Systems Management College (DSMC), 2001
Unit I - Module 2 35
Cost Prof
Summary
• You need to have all the costing
techniques in your repertoire
• For each, you need to know:
– What it is
– When to apply
– How to execute
– Strengths
– Weaknesses
Unit I - Module 2 36
Cost Prof
Resources
• Chart #300R4, Defense Systems
Management College (DSMC), 2001.
– [Link]
.htm
• Joint Industry/Government Parametric
Estimating Handbook, Second Edition, Spring
1999.
– co-sponsored by Defense Logistics Agency (DLA),
Defense Contract Management Command
(DCMC) (now Defense Contract Management
Agency (DCMA)), and Defense Contract Audit
Agency (DCAA)
– [Link]
Unit I - Module 2 37
Cost Prof