← PORTFOLIO HOME Estimating & Decision Tools

Ground the Numbers. Make the Call.

Nine tools in total: two ground your numbers before you decide anything — a guided PMBOK estimating walkthrough and a Monte Carlo risk simulator — and seven genuinely different decision methodologies handle the choice itself, not variations on the same idea. Five (Weighted Scoring, Kepner-Tregoe, Decision Tree EMV, AHP, TOPSIS) work best choosing between 2-4 discrete options. Two (RICE, Cost of Delay/CD3) are built for the opposite case — ranking a longer list, like a backlog or roadmap. These apply just as well outside program management as within it — a vendor choice, a purchase, a hiring decision, or any multi-criteria call.

Estimating

Ground the Numbers First

Live

A guided, step-by-step walkthrough of PMBOK estimating technique — parametric and three-point (PERT) estimating, with explanations at every step.

Choose this when: you need a defensible estimate built the way PMBOK actually teaches it, not a single gut-feel number.
Example: Estimating a new integration task with a three-point PERT range instead of guessing one number and hoping it holds.
Open Tool →
Live

Quantitative risk analysis that runs thousands of simulated outcomes to show a probability curve, not a single-point guess.

Choose this when: a single-point estimate hides real uncertainty, and you want to see the full range of likely outcomes.
Example: Simulating 10,000 possible schedule outcomes to see the actual probability of hitting a target date.
Open Tool →
Decide

Seven Decision Methodologies

Live

Weight your criteria, score each option against each one, and get a fast, transparent, defensible ranking.

Choose this when: you have a handful of clear, quantifiable criteria and want the most universally-understood method.
Example: Choosing between three software vendors, weighing Cost (35%), Feature Fit (30%), and Timeline (35%).
Open Tool →
Live

Filter out anything that fails a non-negotiable requirement first, rank what's left, then stress-test the winner.

Choose this when: some of your criteria are true dealbreakers, and you want a structured check before you commit.
Example: Hiring for a compliance role where an active certification is a non-negotiable filter.
Open Tool →
Live

Compare options whose outcomes are genuinely uncertain, by their probability-weighted expected value.

Choose this when: your options don't have one certain outcome — each could go a few different ways.
Example: Build in-house, buy off-the-shelf, or hire a contractor — each with its own odds and net cost.
Open Tool →
Live

Reach × Impact × Confidence ÷ Effort — a formula built for ranking product ideas by value per unit of work.

Choose this when: you're prioritizing product features and want a formula where weak Confidence or high Effort can sink an idea.
Example: Prioritizing three features for next quarter by reach, impact, confidence, and effort.
Open Tool →
Live

Derive your criteria weights mathematically from head-to-head comparisons, with a built-in consistency check.

Choose this when: you want more rigor than assigning weights yourself, or the decision is high-stakes.
Example: Choosing a car on Cost, Safety, and Comfort via repeated head-to-head comparisons.
Open Tool →
Live

Ranks options by geometric distance from an ideal best-case and worst-case profile.

Choose this when: some criteria should be minimized (like cost), and you want a more statistically robust ranking.
Example: Comparing cars on Style, Reliability, and Fuel Economy against Cost, all at once.
Open Tool →
Live

Cost of Delay ÷ Duration — sequences a backlog of committed work by economic urgency.

Choose this when: the question isn't "which one" but "what order" — a genuinely different question.
Example: A smaller fix with lower Cost of Delay but a much faster finish should still go first.
Open Tool →