#UX and #design friends, we need to talk about estimating. I'd like to share some advice that's come up 3 times this week, in hopes it's useful. And it's echoed, by the way, in the BUSINESS OF UX course @EliNatoli and I are teaching at my UX 365 Academy (link at the end).

(1/12)

Avoiding wars with clients is a matter of how you structure your engagements, along with how you spell out what you're doing in your proposals/contracts. That starts with estimating.

The biggest 2 rules I follow are these:

(2/12)
1. I do not EVER estimate a project in full from start-to-finish.

2. Once we're past initial Discovery (see below), I estimate in small chunks, e.g. "here's what will take us to the next iteration/review."

(3/12)
NEVER estimate past the point where you may get new information based on a build/test cycle.

Believe me when I say that you'll be wrong every time. Ask me how I know ;-)

(4/12)
So instead, first, I estimate a Consult/Discovery part that details what I think we need to do to get a handle on what's actually wrong here, and how long that will take.

For example...

(5/12)
...every client I have agrees to a time span, either me working directly with their team or me evaluating what they have and speaking with them. That is all pure fact-finding, nothing more. Getting the lay of the land (including politically).

(6/12)
There are no deliverables other than a summary of

(1) What I think is wrong, and

(2) What I suggest they do next, with or without me.

There's no scope for them to adjust, in other words. Nothing to change their minds about.

(7/12)
"I'm giving you X days/weeks, and at the end of that I'll tell you what I see."

Once I get past that, if they need me to advise on design/dev for an iteration, I chunk that out as a timeframe as well. X weeks with X review points, and those reviews are specified.

(8/12)
1 full day onsite, a 3-hour ZOOM session, etc. I don't ever estimate past a single iteration cycle or sprint, because there are too many unknowns, too many opportunities for them to second guess and change their minds about what they want to do.

(9/12)
This keeps the emphasis on the span of time instead of the tactical work at hand. If I give them a cost for 3 weeks, that figure reflects the distinct possibility that I may or may not spend 8 hours a day every day of those 3 weeks.

(10/12)
Whether I do or don't is irrelevant; I'm saying to them, "if you want my undivided attention for X weeks, here's what that costs."
You have to base your estimates on the only thing you can CONTROL, which is the TIME you spend.

Estimating tasks is a losing proposition.

(11/12)
You limit your risk by charging appropriately for that time — all of it. And you're also not inviting debates about how long something should or shouldn't take.

I hope that's helpful, and again — there's a LOT more where that came from here: https://t.co/s5JuUZnIEo

(12/12)

More from Tech

What an amazing presentation! Loved how @ravidharamshi77 brilliantly started off with global macros & capital markets, and then gradually migrated to Indian equities, summing up his thesis for a bull market case!

@MadhusudanKela @VQIndia @sameervq

My key learnings: ⬇️⬇️⬇️


First, the BEAR case:

1. Bitcoin has surpassed all the bubbles of the last 45 years in extent that includes Gold, Nikkei, dotcom bubble.

2. Cyclically adjusted PE ratio for S&P 500 almost at 1929 (The Great Depression) peaks, at highest levels except the dotcom crisis in 2000.

3. World market cap to GDP ratio presently at 124% vs last 5 years average of 92% & last 10 years average of 85%.
US market cap to GDP nearing 200%.

4. Bitcoin (as an asset class) has moved to the 3rd place in terms of price gains in preceding 3 years before peak (900%); 1st was Tulip bubble in 17th century (rising 2200%).

You May Also Like

1/“What would need to be true for you to….X”

Why is this the most powerful question you can ask when attempting to reach an agreement with another human being or organization?

A thread, co-written by @deanmbrody:


2/ First, “X” could be lots of things. Examples: What would need to be true for you to

- “Feel it's in our best interest for me to be CMO"
- “Feel that we’re in a good place as a company”
- “Feel that we’re on the same page”
- “Feel that we both got what we wanted from this deal

3/ Normally, we aren’t that direct. Example from startup/VC land:

Founders leave VC meetings thinking that every VC will invest, but they rarely do.

Worse over, the founders don’t know what they need to do in order to be fundable.

4/ So why should you ask the magic Q?

To get clarity.

You want to know where you stand, and what it takes to get what you want in a way that also gets them what they want.

It also holds them (mentally) accountable once the thing they need becomes true.

5/ Staying in the context of soliciting investors, the question is “what would need to be true for you to want to invest (or partner with us on this journey, etc)?”

Multiple responses to this question are likely to deliver a positive result.