My Communities

According to my opinion that you should use the Top-down approach whenever possible because in this estimation we discuss with some experts and managers, and also estimating by some research. So may be some experts and managers already know about budgets for each activities like how much money will have to spend in each activities and may be it is also possible that they have worked experienced about budgeting so it will plus point for us and if we have any doubt of experts' estimation we can also research on this, by this we can come up with final desicion. I think the major advantage of this estimation that as we know, it is time efficient approach that is really very important for any project.

Thank you for sharing

For me the parametric cost estimates is the most preferred because its provides a more realistic budget estimate

I think combining all three would be good. Depending on the scenario , they could come in handy.

It depends on the size of the project. and to make it more ideal, i think it is good to use all the three approaches. if the estimate needs to be specific the bottom up approach will do better because people at the ground will be able to provide exact estimates. If we want to estimate big things like salaries, supplies and others then top down will really do better as managers and research will be involved. you can not involve a junior worker who is on the ground to estimate his own salary, obviously he will provide a very large estimate. Parametric will also contribute in coming up with specific estimates as well as cost per unit will do the perfect job in calculating the actual amount of the thing estimated.

From my point of view, the best way to generate cost estimates for a project is to combine all three methods. Indeed, the top-down approach has shown its limits and cannot be as realistic as the bottom-up approach as we assume that the people with whom we work are honest, while in some cases ( acquisition of equipment, cost of known activities), the parametric method is recommended.
It is therefore preferable to make a trade-off between all three methods to obtain a realistic budget.

Parametric cost budgeting is the best in my opinion. It gives out a true reflection on what's expected during implantation. However sometimes inflation mostly affects prices of certain commodities hence while making a budget one should be very keen not to miss out on this and more

I believe that you should use the top-bottom estimates .

If you want ,it is possible to use parametric but this is just to calculate so using the second approaches is better

You can use the top-down estimates .

I think, I'll go with Top Down approach because I still believed in the wisdom of Higher Management.

I prefer parametric method as it can be quick and realistic and also it is better to consult people who will be implementing the activities for consultation.

I prefer parametric method as it can be quick and realistic and also it is better to consult people who will be implementing the activities for consultation.

I believe that all of those approaches are effective when the matter is generating cost estimates. Why am I saying that? Because each one has appropriates circumstances to be applied and clearly we can find advantages and disadvantages in that process. Firstly, for Top-down there is possibility to generate cost for each section of the work breakdown structure which isn't enough to cover every complementary services and goods. Secondly, for Bottom-up there is a possibility to put the dishonest employees in action, they can not tell the truth about the real cost for their section of the work breakdown structure or even make wrong the cost estimates and ask for less of how much they really need to do the activities of their own section. And, thirdly, for parametric which sometimes can be considered the best approach even having available the cost-per-unit if we have to manage a big project it can take a plenty of time trying to make counts for each category of goods or services that are necessary. So, in summary, that level of project management is hard and we have to study our organization and figure out which one is appropriate for each situation and apply being conscious of the risks of each of them, or we can try to combine all of them.

The parametric approach, in my opinion, is the best approach because it is not overly complicated; all that is required is to ensure that you have a true actual cost per unit and then multiply, and this calculation is quite simple, so it certainly simplifies a seemingly complex activity.

The Parametric approach should be used.
Because it saves time and it is easier. What is most important is to get the right cost per unit

I believe that the use of bottom-up approach is best since you will be working with the real cost rather than being unsure yet the budget is something crucial to the success of the project

In Parametric approach. lies in that the observed values are used to model the non-observed ones and this assumption might not be true. The resulting estimators could then be seriously biased. A parametric modulization and the solution via maximum likelihood is another possible approach

I believe that the best approach to estimated a budget is by involving the three approaches i.e Top- bottom, bottom-up, and products' unit cost for this provides a broader view.

I believe you should use the parametric approach to Estimating budget whenever possible because it gives a more accurate estimate.

I believe that one should use each approach whenever possible because one approach can't be applied to all activities of the project.

I believe you should use the top-down approach whenever possible because it allows alot of other team members in the process and thus creates a room for honesty,and, it will be hard to forget some activities because the vast number of people will mean that the activities are listed as careful as possible. And to add on that, this approach is quick and simple.

Prametric approach will not always fduring cost estimate of activities especially social a nd environmental impact types., because it is diffifult to find out cost per unit for those activities. Then bottom-up approache may help in this case. Therefore the best way to find realistic cost estimate is the combination of bottom up and parametric approaches.

Ideally a combination of all three. Parametric would be used to calculate some of the fixed costs and costs of real goods. Beyond that top down with collaboration with employees in areas where there is not an established or well known expectation for the expense of the activity.

I think using a combination of bottom-up, top-Down and Parametric is the best option when estimating costs. Manager has to look at the cost involved, nature of the project, financial risks involved and vulnerabilities to ascertain when to use any of the approaches commensulate with the needs of the project

Top down is more effective than bottom down, I think

I prefer using the both methods to come up with the feasible cost estimates for the quality and reliable products and services. for top down approach you will know the price and even the best quality and exact place to buy them, for bottom up you will know the most applicable items for your project and then parametric method will help you estimate the accurate costs.

I agree with most of the previous comments. I think all 3 approaches should be used depending on the cost to be budgeted, although it's sometimes hard to apply the bottom-up. In some cases the parametric approach is hard to apply, and in other circumstances the top-down approach may not come up with important facts that should be considered when estimating costs for other locations (and that beneficiaries are really aware of). For example, we had a construction project in an African country. We applied the top-down and parametric approaches. We have taken into account other construction projects in the region, controlled different budgets from local builders and construction companies. But what we did not know is that we should have considered a huge amount for "local bribery". Unfortunatelly, it was a common standard practise and became a problem that would have come up in an early stage if including a bottom-up approach.

As for me, i think the top-down approach is far more better since it does not give room for lower ranked officers to develop insincerity syndrome to the estimate cost.

I am happy to be in this team and i do like data management and data collection using electronic devices as it is easier and safe and the cost is not high

I feel combo of all approaches would be better as it would comprehensively capture all costs.

I agree with the idea of combining two approaches. The parametric approach tends to be applicable in a few scenarios while the bottom up which may seem ideal is more likely to be compromised by exaggeration.U sing all the three can be perfect but will use up more resources. Top down and parametric is therefore my preferred choice

Absolutely. They would work best in combination rather than individually

I believe it is of best interest to use all three approaches when estimating activity costs, because not every activity cost estimation will fit with one single approach.

The topic on the generation cost estimates present a clear view on how the project manager can develop an overall budget of a project. My organization often employs the the top-down approach when generating the project. the implies that the CEO of the organization, the project manager, the Board of Management, and Managers of different directorates are responsible of generating the cost estimates. In addition, the Project manager is often tasked to engage experts for professional opinion and carry out research on the constraints which may affect the budgetary process.

Parametric estimation is highly preferable because it is highly accurate than the rest since it is based on data that is existent.

I would choose the parametric approach because it is very realistic in my opinion.

A combination of the three approaches is best. You will be able to have both realistic(top-bottom) and assumptions (bottom-up) of the cost and by incorporating parametric estimates there will be ease in calculation.

In my opinion the Top-down approach is the one that works best as it allows team members especially the department heads to have a say in the estiamted costs. And of course with each budget we should allow a flexibilty which means even if we are not totally accurate with our research we are still within the budget line or at least not totally overboard.

Even thugh using the 3 approaches is important, for me the bottom-up is better. It creates ownership by service delivery workers. Using the top-down approach will have the potential of not taking into account important field needs, for example in healthcare area, the "frontline healthcare workers". Additionaly, there are activities you can't simply use the parametric approach, even it may be more realistic.

Parametric approach where I get to ask for quotations for all materials I purchase so that this can be used as proof for price-per-unit.

In my believes the best approach can be use due to the size of project, hence the large size project using top down while small size bottom up is ok. In any case, a parametric approach can used
to enhance budgeting estimation and accuracy

I think the best way is to use all the 3 approaches ,making use of each approach on the circumstances which best suits it.

According to my understanding and after a thorough analysis from these approaches. Parametric is the best approach to use...very transparent, and seem easy to calculate especially when cost per unit is involved.

We should use parametric technique as much as possible because we will get the exact cost and no. of units required for the project

The Bottom up approach is the best way to getting the real budget in my opinion and on the other hand there should be some ways developed for reducing the degree of dishonest from the team members/ project participants

Parametic type of approach is the best approach in the case where you know the unit cost of a product. I would also recommend bottom up.

Bottom up should be used more often because it gives realistic estimates .

I believe in considering the most effective approach to use one must take note of the project at hand. If the task at hand is definite and a familiar variables is involve then 'parametric' will be the best approach for me. However where it complex and new then 'up down' should be the best approach this is because it will be safe to implore expert and research. And lastly 'bottom up' will be most effective where the project is a repeated project or similar to the previous .

I think bottom up estimation is good because the one who use it will estimate the cost and it more realistic than others

For me if i were to choose just one out of them, i would go with bottom-up because i feel like those spending the money on their activities with their cost estimate can be controlled, an employee who is in charge of cost estimate for their activity can only be dishonest, and dishonesty should not be tolerated, with that in mind, a project manger should be able to make sure the cost estimate an employee is giving is cross checked from other nearby sources. Parametric would be perfect but does not really apply to every activity.

I believe you should use the parametric approach because it helps you reduce market risk, in essence after survey is made, along market chargesin specified commodity or equipment will help avoid over spending.

Estimating cost of the project is as good as planning the project itself.
In this module, I have learnt is essential for the project manager and finance manager to collaborate to draft out cost estimate for line item, and implement possible risk from past project so fo avoid over budgeting.

I totally agree with you.

I totally agree with you.

I believe that the parametric approach is best for budgets because ensures accountability as it is easy to defend.

I believe that you should use the Bottom-Up approach whenever possible because with a smaller company like mine it is easier to stay on top of those responsible for estimating their costs. Because these individuals are often experts with their portion of spending and execution they are most likely going to be accurate in their budget requests and also understand all costs that will be expected.

I feel parametric approach works perfectly for petty things.

Bottom up because it the responsibilities of individuals involved to create cost estimates.

for me I can prefer and chose Top-down because it cover all sectors to come together and solve the issue with an immediate solution which makes the task to be more simple and fast

I prefer the buttom up when working with very honest employees, however there are areas where the parametric approach is better, like we've been taught, you can work with all the approaches for a better result.

I believe that parametric is better, because the project manager have the direct control and can use the internet platforms such as emais, booking.com, etc. to reduce time consumption and finish the budgeting process earlier.

I can use bottom-up approach because it is designed by the people who implemented the project and they know the context very well. They can estimate the cost of activities more better.

I think the bottom up approach is best in terms of verification of the assumptions made prior.

Sometimes, I feel our national policies affect our estimated costs

Bottom up because it the responsibilities of individuals involved to create cost estimates.

Bottom up estimation instills team bonding and commitment among the project team members because if they are involved from the very basic level, they in turn get more committed and dedicated in achieving the project’s overall objectives. In order to correctly estimate the resources, each team member who has been assigned a particular task from a work break down structure should be given a authority to estimate the project’s resources. Bottom up estimation displays a more detailed overview of time and cost.

Parametric is an ideal approach for majority projects because of the element of calculating the actual cost estimates. however, it doesn't negate what the bottom-up and top-down approaches have to offer. In an ideal setting, majority projects are donor funded and often times, these donors want to know or have the opinions of the project implementers and beneficiaries. this is where the other two approaches come in handy.

However, using a WBS, where each of the tasks has been listed, it would really be easy to use the parametric approach then because it saves time in estimating costs per activity which the other two approaches seem to overlook because of the occurrence of consultations regarding the project budget.

I would prefer employing the bottom-up approach, firstly, it gives an opportunity to staff implementing the project to participate in the budget planning process, secondly it reduces pressure on the project manager in researching about the costs, this responsibility will fall on the project implementers.

I would prefer to use the Bottom-up approach. I choose this approach because I believe that when selecting a project team we will be having people who have some sort of experience in the the activities assigned to them. These activities may have smaller activities within themselves that may attract more costs, So with the experience of these individuals they can be able to identify these cost items and help make our budgets more realistic.

I think the bottom up approach is best in terms of verification of the assumptions made prior.

I think the most effective approach will be the parametric approach , because it will reduce any fruadulant behaviour associated with the budget , though it can give room to over budget , because buying thyings in bulk is cheaper than as a single entity.

As for me, it all depends on what project you are working on but parametric is best when a price unit is provided.

in my opinion, parametric is the best approach to calculate the budget. Because this is easy to calculate, and we do it ourselves. This approach also produces maximum results.

I think a combination of parametric and bottom-up approaches work better because it reduces under estimation of certain costs.
more so the people down are the ones in operations and understand reality out there better.
for the delays, top managers can just direct and command faster execution of such activity.

In my opinion, it's always important to combine methods and on my organization we normally create a project design group composed by staff from top, meddle and button project management and from the relevant project sectors. Normally, the small Top management group draft the budget and share with the rest for discussions and inputs however sometimes it comes from the button for discussion at the top management or within the selected group that when required it include other multisectorial stakeholders.

Estimating Cost require at the first instance clear understanding of the desegregated activities schedule to be held in certain location that require a costing exercise. Also the use of procurement data from previous or similar projects or the actual market services and supplies assessment helps. The parametric approach sounds more practical and comprehensive because it requires a calculation based on multiplication of unit price X the quantities of certain item or service, however lamp sum calculations may be also applied for generic activities/ fees on the project.

I conquer with Joeberk, choosing to be the simplest one among others. Because in Parametric, you can easily calculate your expenses. Just multiplying the quantity of the items to their unit prices. Simple.

I think you can start with the Bottom-Up approach to be able to see the broader picture from the perspective of all the departments involved.This combined with the Parametric approach later can be used to come up with a project cost.

I believe one should be using a Bottom-up estimation because is definitely one of the most accurate methods of coming up with the definitive estimate of any given project. However, one needs a quality resource collection and a concrete work breakdown structure to be successful. To apply this technique, you must break down the project into its tiniest parts: the work package and activities. Remember, it does more than estimating the resources, time, and costs of a project’s activities, as it can also be used to evaluate change requests. Even though there are multiple cost and duration estimation techniques, bottom-up estimating is highly recommended as it can be used together with all the other estimate techniques. However, remember that even though it is highly accurate, some mistakes may heavily impact your estimates.

The most effective way to generate the project costs is the bottom -up approach, in most cases provides realistic costs though has some challenges of dishonest ,you have to be keen when you use this approach.

I will go with parametric as well. This is due to the simplicity of the process unlike top-down, and bottom-up which are exposed to dishonesty from professionals.

Estimating budgets is the most critical part of the project planning because without budgets the project will not pick up. moreover, bad budgets will plunge the project to uncertain circumstances.

yes parametric is a great way of estimating costs

it is true bottoms up approach is the greatest since it brings all stakeholders on board

moreover, bottoms up approach makes the lower stakeholders feel part of the whole program

This was the unit I was looking forward to the most and has been great insight for me.

To create an activity based budget, I will prefer to use the bottom-up method where the individual who will be spending the money creates the cost estimate.

In order to curb the disadvantage this method comes with, I will give deadline for a feed back as well as bench mark their response with a Top-down method for dishonest outrageous cost.

Thank you.

To create an activity based budget, I will prefer to use the bottom-up method where the individual who will be spending the money creates the cost estimate.

In order to curb the disadvantage this method comes with, I will give deadline for a feed back as well as bench mark their response with a Top-down method for dishonest outrageous cost.

The bench mark drawn will be used to estimate across.

Thank you.

use all the three approaches and tally the results because it helps to get the realistic cost.

This is a very vital phase in project management

for me, I recommend using the approach that fits the situation that iam working on

Applying all the three approaches in my opinion will lead to a more accurate budget as it will include the least obvious expenses.

It depends on the type of budget you want which will make you decide which of the three approaches to use and other times, you could use two and all of the three approaches at others times.

I believe that bottom up is the most effective especially in these changing times of unstable economies where by rates of different things keeps changing. this means that there is need of updated information to be used in budgeting which can be gotten from people who are hands on

I think we should use the bottom up approach whenever possible because it is generated by a combined team of experts and people directly involved in the project implementation. They are more likely to come up with costs really close to the actual cost

Parametric is the most reliable even for someone who's new with creating budget but knows the costs of materials or resources to run the project can easily adopt parametric.

Budgeting is one of the most difficult things I have face in project. Messing around with it will automatically force you and your team to adject the other 2 constraints of project management.

Pour moi estimé le coût de chaque activité est plus avantageux. Ça permettra de s'assurer que tout les coût sont pris en compte

I believe that you should use the parametric approach whenever possible because it is more reliable and easy to implement. However, adding more of the other approach will indubiously provide more consistancy.