Scoping: Capitalise on your experience to minimise guessing and… risk.

“How long will it take to produce this?”

“Well… who’s going to do it?”

“Who ‘s available? Paul would be great, but he takes longer…”

“Marie too, but someone would need to review it because…”

Does that sound familiar?

Scoping is risky: if you get it wrong, you may lose money, or piss off annoy your client when you’ll ask for more money and time to complete the job. Nobody wants that, right?

Worst: you may end up forcing people to produce something with not enough time to do it properly.

GOAL:
Get better at scoping to hit the target!

PLAN:
Capitalise on your experience to minimise guessing & minimise risk.

A little while ago I posted Training Projects: How much does it cost? How long will it take? and finished it by suggesting to keep track of the effort spent during your projects, in the same way you estimated it in the first place. This way you collect data on which you can base future estimates.

HOW?
Create your own ratios for  tasks, roles or deliverables.

First you breakdown your project like a story: sequence what needs to be done and identify who will do it. You end up with your lists of deliverables and roles that need to be filled. 

About the roles… Different roles dictate rates, especially when some roles require different levels of expertise. You may use the same person to fill different roles, but if it implies tapping into different levels of expertise, it will raise the question of different rates. You may want to charge one rate to lessen accounting, but this would raise the value your client is getting for the rate you’re charging… One could argue that “higher-paid” resources are faster at “lesser” tasks, but it is a [very] contentious question… Separate role-based rates make it easier to track data and create your own ratios, even if it requires more “accounting”.

So let’s look at an example, very simplified example of a completed tracking table, after a project…

Task	Hrs (estimate)	Hrs (actual)	Role	$
Analysis	(sum)	(sum)		…
Review materials	16	12	Senior ID	…
Meetings and discussion	8	10	Senior ID	…
Write-up of Design Document	40	36	Senior ID	…
Etc.	…
Storyboarding	(sum)	(sum)		…
Module 1	(sub-sum)	(sub-sum)		…
Lead Support	4	7	Senior ID	…
Alpha	24	28	ID	…
QC Content	8	4	Copy Editor	…
Edits after client review	4	8	ID	…
Etc.	…
Module 2	(sub-sum)	(sub-sum)		…
Lead Support	6	3	Senior ID	…
Etc.	…

Tracking [more] detailed data allow you to determine your…

• Effort/cost per deliverable
• Effort/cost per role
• Effort/cost per unit of learning, like an hour of elearning

With this data you can compare the estimate to the actuals, figure out why there are differences, identify those that you can control, and take notes for the next scoping exercise.   🙂

The level of detail is up to you. For sure the temptation of diving into details is great. We have to be careful with that: too much detail becomes counter-productive. The key is to first define what you want to know, then identify the data you need.

For sure this requires more “accounting”. And to be viable, you likely need a timesheet system that supports it, more [PM] time to enter the estimated data AND discipline of ALL resources to enter the data properly.

Do you think it’s worth it?       🙂

Scoping: Apples to apples, or aren’t we really talking about “produce” baskets?

The truth is, it is almost impossible to find comparable apples to compare, because most projects are somewhat unique: it’s never just “apples”… there is always some other fruit, or even some vegetables in the mix…   😉

The notion of elearning levels have been around for many, many years. Their purpose is grand: use a common language to define expectations, and give budget ballparks, right?

But each discussion about elearning levels starts with a clarification of what those levels mean, by discussing it thoroughly with your client. Eventually it requires some examples of what you’ve done to support the budgets you’re asking for… which in the end, you propose a “produce” basket that will be different from the other bidders’.

So it’s like you’re bidding to become this client’s personal chef. You’ll need to understand his likes and dislikes, his preferred dishes and the ones he’s willing to eat in a bind, and of course, how long he’s willing to wait for it, and how much he’s willing to pay.

But come to think of it, talking ingredients may not be the right approach…

Should we talk “cooking”? Ingredients are just ingredients… even the best ones can not be fully appreciated if they weren’t prepared properly, or prepared to there full potential.

Should we talk “Restaurant”? The food itself can be great, but if the plating, service or dining room aren’t right, the expectations are in jeopardy.

Isn’t it about the overall experience?  In our case, the learning experience?

Of course elearning levels are part of the overall experience. But they do not address all of it.

The learning experience is created by the successful combination of several things:

• Learning strategies  (tell-show-try-me, activities, storytelling, concept-based, scenario-based, serious gaming, etc.)
• Engagement strategies  (look & feel, concept-based, storytelling, gamification, etc.)
• Delivery strategies  (synchronous-in person-virtual, asynchronous-self-pace, coaching, mentoring, technology-based, etc.)
• Learning materials  (writing, media producing, assembling-integrating, authoring-programming, etc.)
• Overall quality  (look & feel, writing style-grammar-typos, clarity, consistency, precision, bugginess, etc.)

In terms of elearning levels, the one thing I find is not addressed properly, if at all, is the engagement part. You might say that it’s part of the learning strategy… to which I’d respond it’s time to looked at it separately. Don’t you think?

Now another question come to mind… should we consider learning experience levels?    🙂

Training Projects: How much does it cost? How long will it take?

“How much will this cost?”

“How long will it take?”

Don’t you love these questions? Especially when you’re asked before you had a chance to get enough information to provide a proper answer.

So how do you answer these? …and be comfortable with your answer, as you may very well have to deliver on it!

I see a few ways to answer these:

• “Not sure… I’ll get back to you.” Safe answer, but be sure to get back with an answer, whatever it is, even if it is a referral to someone else.
• Give a ballpark. Make sure you’re range is wide enough to cover your butt, but note that they’ll specifically remember the lower end.
• Give a “wag”. If your ballpark’s range is too big, then it’s a wag (“wild ass guess”). Make sure you use that term, and say why you’re using it.
• Give a “researched” answer based on information obtained through research.
• Give an “experienced” answer based on direct experience (yours or your team’s). This is the best one, as it takes into account people, methodologies, tools, etc. that you know.

What you need to do is get the conversation going, to get the information you need to properly answer the questions. You’ll need details about this, that and the other thing. The less experience or knowledge you have at doing the work you have to estimate, the more detailed breakdown you should do. If you can’t break it down, then you need to add assumptions on which your estimate is based. The problem is that the more assumptions you add, the more restrictive your proposal may become.

You will get the details you need through a fairly elaborate line of questioning that cover a wide range of areas, such as: business goals, executive support, performance goals, subject-matter, availability of existing useable materials, target audience(s), learner’s location, level of details, learning outcomes, learning strategies, expected level of interactivity and engagement, expected/required length of the training, timeframe, availability of SMEs, number of review cycles, etc. …and, of course, the client’s values.

As there are many factors to consider, I usually recommended a two-part approach: do a first [smaller] project to scope the second [much bigger] project. I’ll dig more into scoping in follow-up posts…

So here’s a takeaway point: keep track of the effort spent during your projects, in the same way you estimated it in the first place! This way you’ll start collecting data on which you’ll be able to base your future estimates!

Makes sense?