Best Practices and Benefits of Estimating Techniques and ...

NEW BUSINESS SECTOR

Best Practices and Benefitsof Estimating Techniquesand Technology

Illinois Institute of TechnologyCindy Menches, Ph.D., P.E.

Stephen Kleps

ELECTRI International—The Foundation for Electrical Construction, Inc.

Best Practices and Benefits of Estimating Techniques and Technology

ELECTRI InternationalThe Foundation for Electrical Construction, Inc.

Illinois Institute of TechnologyCindy Menches, Ph.D., P.E.

Stephen Kleps

iii

ELECTRI CouncilELECTRI International—The Foundation for Electrical Construction, Inc.

As of May 2013

PRESIDENT’S COUNSEL$1,000,000 or more

Hugh D. ‘Buz’ Allison, d. ELECTRI Council 1995-2011 Hugh D. ‘Buz’ and Irene E. ‘Betty’ Allison Trust

Richard W. McBride* The Richard W. and Darlene Y. McBride Trust

Albert G. Wendt* Cannon & Wendt Electric Company, Al and Margaret Wendt Trust

National Electrical Contractors Association*

Square D/Schneider Electric

PROGRAM GUARANTOR$500,000 or more

Electrical Contractors Trust of Alameda County McCormick SystemsThe Okonite Company

AMBASSADOR

$450,000 or more

Timothy McBride Southern Contracting Company

DIPLOMAT$350,000 or more

NECA Chapters and Affiliates

Boston ChapterSan Diego County Chapter

Manufacturers and Distributors

Accubid SystemsGraybar

ENVOY$300,000 or more

Contractors

Walter T. Parkes*, Michael Parkes O’Connell Electric Company


Northeastern Line Constructors Chapter


Maxwell Systems

REGENT$250,000 or more

Contractors

H.E. “Buck” Autrey*, Ron Autrey Miller Electric Company

John R. Colson Houston, Texas

Robert E. and Sharon Doran* Capital Electric Construction, In memory of Robert E. Doran, Jr.

Jerrold H. Nixon, d. ELECTRI Council 1995–2009, Eric F. Nixon Maron Electric Co.

Robert L. Pfeil, d. ELECTRI Council 1991-2007


Chicago & Cook CountyNew York City*Northeastern Illinois Northern CaliforniaNorthern Indiana Puget SoundSoutheastern Michigan* Western Pennsylvania

Manufacturers

Eaton Corporation Thomas & Betts Corporation

CHAMPION$200,000 or more


Los Angeles County Chapter

Manufacturers

Greenlee/A Textron Company

GOVERNOR$150,000 or more

Contractors

Arthur Ashley Ferndale Electric Co.

Stephen Bender Bana Electric Corporation

Brian Christopher Oregon City, Oregon

Lawrence H. Clennon Clennon Electric, Inc.

Larry Cogburn, Ron L. Cogburn Cogburn Bros. Electric, Inc.

Rex A. Ferry VEC Inc.

Clyde Jones Center Line Electric, Inc.

Michael Lindheim* The Lindheim Family

* denotes founding member of ELECTRI’21 COUNCIL (1989–1990)

Best Practices and Benefits of estimating techniques and technology

iv

Richard R. Pieper, Sr.* PPC Partners, Inc.

Dennis F. Quebe Chapel Electric Company

James A. Ranck J. Ranck Electric, Inc.

Stephen J. Reiten M. J. Electric, LLC

Greg E. Stewart Superior Group, A Division of Electrical Specialists

Dan Walsh United Electric Company, Inc.


CascadeCentral IndianaFinger LakesIllinois*Kansas City Long IslandNorthern New Jersey Oregon-Columbia Oregon Pacific-Cascade Santa Clara ValleySouth FloridaSouth Texas


Panduit Corporation

FOUNDER

$100,000 or more

Contractors

Michael C. Abbott Abbott Electric, Inc.

Gina M. Addeo ADCO Electrical Corporation

John Amaya Amaya Electric

Carlos Anastas ARS Proyectos

Ted C. Anton Newkirk Electric Associates, Inc.

Benjamin Appiah Patraba Electrical Systems

Ted N. Baker Baker Electric, Inc.

Clinton Beall B&D Industries Inc.

Michael Boggs Boggs Electric Company Inc.

D. R. “Rod” Borden, Jr.* Tri-City Electric Co., Inc.

Daniel Bozick Daniel’s Electrical Construction Company, Inc.

Scott Bringmann Alcan Electrical & Engineering, Inc.

Larry Brookshire* Fisk Acquisition, Inc.

Jay H. Bruce Bruce & Merrilees Electric Co.

Wally Budgell Robertson Bright Inc.

Richard L. Burns*, d. Burns Electric Company, Inc.

Nick Catalutch Eaton Electric Holdings, LLC

Ben Cook *Ben and Jolene Cook, Brownwood, Texas

Michael G. Curran Red Top Electric Company Emeryville, Inc., In honor of George T. and Mary K. Curran

Tom Curran Tom and Alana Curran, Piedmont, California

Ben D’Alessandro L.K. Comstock & Co., Inc.

Gene W. Dennis Universal Systems

Robert DiFazio DiFazio Electric, Inc.

Daniel J. Divane IV Divane Bros. Electric Co., In memory of William T. Divane, Sr. and Daniel J. Divane III

Randy Fehlman* Gregg Electric, Inc.

John S. Frantz Sidney Electric Company

Bradley S. Giles Giles Electric Company, Inc.

Greg Gossett ERMCO

Frank Gurtz Gurtz Electric Company, In honor of Gerald Gurtz

John F. Hahn, Jr.* Peter D. Furness Electric Co.

Michael Hanson Hunt Electric Corporation

Jarrett Hayes United Electric Company Inc.

Michael J. Holmes Holmes Electric Company

Eddie E. Horton Dallas, Texas

Mark A. Huston Lone Star Electric

Brian Imsand* Dillard Smith Construction Company

Thomas G. Ispas Daniel’s Electrical Construction Company, Inc.

Michael B. Joyce Zenith Systems, LLC

Mark Ketchel Truland Walker Seal Transportation

David W. Kurtz Shaw Electric Company

Max N. Landon McCoy Electric

Donald W. Leslie, Jr. Johnson Electrical Construction Corporation,

David MacKay Edward G. Sawyer Company, Inc.

Ron Markowski Ferguson Electric Construction Co.

Richard J. Martin* Motor City Electric Co.

Roy C. Martin Triangle Electric

Howard Mayers Mayers Electric Company

Mark J. Mazur MJM Electric Inc.

James C. Mc Atee Electric Power Equipment Company

Michael McPhee McPhee, Ltd.

David McKay MONA Electric Group

Todd A. Mikec Lighthouse Electric Company, Inc.

William R. Miller Miller Electrical Construction, Inc.

Thomas Morgan, Sr. Harrington Electric Co.

Harvey Morrison Pritchard Electric Co.

Joel Moryn Parsons Electric Company

Skip Perley TEC-Corp/Thompson Electric Co., In memory of Alfred C. Thompson

David Pinter Zwicker Electric Company, Inc.

Carl J. Privitera, Sr. Mark One Electric Company, Inc.

Chris Reichert Allison Smith Company LLC

electri council

v

Sonja Rheaume Christenson Electric, Inc.

Phillip G. Rose Roman Electric Company

Franklin D. Russell Bagby & Russell Electric Co., In memory of Robert L. Russell

Tim Russell R.W. Leet Electric, Inc.

Frederic B. Sargent Sargent Electric Co.

Tim Schultheis Schultheis Electric/TSB Inc.

Rocky Sharp Carl T. Madsen, Inc.

Travis A Smith Jordan-Smith Electric

Pepper Snyder Sprig Electric Company, Inc.

Herbert P. Spiegel A tribute in memory of Flora Spiegel, Corona Industrial Electric

Robert Spinardi St. Francis Electric

Jeff Thiede Oregon Electric Construction

Ronald J. Toomer Toomer Electrical Co., Inc.

Rob Truland Truland Systens Corporation

Gary A. Tucci Potelco, Inc.

Robert J. Turner II Turner Electric Service, Inc.

Angelo Veanes Ferguson Electric Construction Co.

Steve Watts CSI Electrical Contractors Inc.

Brad Weir Kelso-Burnett Company

Jack W. Welborn Electrical Corporation of America

David A. Witz Continental Electrical Construction Co.

John C. Wright Alterman, Inc.

Robert M. Zahn Chewning & Wilmer


AlaskaAMERIC Foundation (Mexico)American Line Builders ChapterArizonaAtlantaCanadian Electrical Contractors AssociationCentral OhioDakotasEastern IllinoisElectrical Contractors Trust of Solano & Napa CountiesGreater ClevelandGreater SacramentoGreater Toronto Electrical ContractorsKansasMichiganMilwaukeeMinneapolisMissouri Valley Line ConstructorsNorth Central OhioNorth FloridaNorth Texas

Penn-Del-JerseySan FranciscoSoutheastern Line ConstructorsUNCE-Union Nacional de Contructores Electromecanicos, A.C.

(Mexico)Washington D.C.West Virginia-Ohio ValleyWestern Line ConstructorsWisconsin


Advance/Philips ElectronicsCrescent Electric SupplyGE LightingLegrand North AmericaLeviton ManufacturingLutron Electronics Co., Inc.Milwaukee Electric Tool CorporationRuud LightingThomas Industries, Inc.Werner Company

Other Partners

Focus Investments AdvisorsIdeal Industries, Inc.MCA, Inc.Moss-Adams LLPOles Morrison Rinker & Baker LLPSan Diego Gas & Electric


vi

The authors wish to thank the electrical contractors who participated on the Task Force for this research. Task Force

members include:

Acknowledgements

This ELECTRI International research project has been conducted under the auspices of the Research Center.

©2013 ELECTRI International—The Foundation for Electrical Construction, Inc. All Rights Reserved

The material in this publication is copyright protected and may not be reproduced without the permission of ELECTRI International.

Heather Moore, MCA Inc.

Dr. Perry Daneshgari, MCA Inc.

Paul Sheridan, Plan Group (Canada)

Todd McCormick, McCormick Systems

Dan Divane, Divane Bros. Electric Company

Mike Jurewicz, Sprig Electric

Dennis Quebe, Chapel Electric Company

The author would also like to thank the following contractors for their participation in this research:

Aldridge Electric, Inc.Block Electric

Continental ElectricFaith TechnologiesHardt Electric, Inc.

Jordan-Smith ElectricKelso-Burnett Co.

United Electric CompanyIn addition, six anonymous contractors participated in the interviews for this research

The author would also like to thank the 81 anonymous contractors that participated in the on-line national

questionnaire on electrical contractor’s characteristics and estimating methods.

vii

Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................................... 1

1. Motivation for Studying Electrical Estimating............................................................................................31.1 Problem Definition ...................................................................................................................................................... 3

1.2 Approach to the Research ............................................................................................................................................ 3

2. Reflections on Electrical Cost Estimating ...................................................................................................72.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................. 7

2.2 The Purpose of the Cost Estimate ............................................................................................................................... 7

2.3 Basic Characteristics of Credible Cost Estimates ....................................................................................................... 7

2.4 A Reliable Process for Developing Credible Cost Estimates ...................................................................................... 8

2.5 Why Contractors Need to Develop Credible Cost Estimates ..................................................................................... 9

2.6 The Challenges in Developing Credible Cost Estimates ........................................................................................... 9

3. Understanding the Current Estimating Landscape ...................................................................................113.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................... 11

3.2 Statistical Methods Used ............................................................................................................................................ 11

3.3 Methodology of Studies ............................................................................................................................................. 12

3.4 Methods: Manual, On-Screen, and CAD-based Estimating .................................................................................... 13

3.5 Who’s Doing What ..................................................................................................................................................... 16

3.6 Characteristics of Companies .................................................................................................................................... 18

3.7 Method Selection ....................................................................................................................................................... 21

4. Migrating to CAD-based Estimating: Benefits and Challenges ............................................................. 254.1 Subjectively Experienced Benefits of CAD-based Estimating .................................................................................. 25

5. Major Obstacles to Adopting CAD-based Estimating Methods ............................................................ 335.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................. 33

6. Summary of Best Practices ...................................................................................................................... 396.1 Customize the Estimating Method for the Specific Job at Hand ............................................................................. 39

6.2 Vary the Estimating Technique to Optimize the Balance Between Estimating Time and Take-off Accuracy ....... 39

6.3 Employ Multiple Monitors and Paper Drawings ..................................................................................................... 39

6.4 Don’t Force a New Estimating System on One’s Estimators .................................................................................... 40

6.5 To Manage Software Cost and Commitment, Purchase Only a License or Two ..................................................... 40

6.6 Write a Proprietary Training and Software Usage Manual for the Software and Train In-House ......................... 40

6.7 Impressive Presentation Value in the Preconstruction Phase .................................................................................. 40

6.8 Increase Accuracy by Eliminating Error Prone Steps ............................................................................................... 40

6.9 The Estimating Take-off Software is an Additional Tool for One’s Estimators....................................................... 41

Table of Contents


viii

6.10 Easily Share Files Across Offices ............................................................................................................................... 41

6.11 Coordinate with the Electrical Designer to Optimize the Future use of CAD-based Estimating Software .............. 41

6.12 Clean-up CAD Files First when Applicable ............................................................................................................. 41

6.13 Take Advantage of Automated Updating of Take-off Quantities during Design Changes .................................... 41

6.14 Take Advantage of CAD Files Where the ‘Arcs’ are Shown in the Drawings .......................................................... 41

7. Conclusion and Recommendations for Further Study ............................................................................. 437.1 Conclusion .................................................................................................................................................................. 43

7.2 Recommendation for Further Study ......................................................................................................................... 45

Appendix A: Case Study for Company A Estimating Method .................................................................... 47Background and Decision to Invest in CAD-based Estimating Software ........................................................................ 47

Training Required ............................................................................................................................................................... 48

Learning Curve Effects ........................................................................................................................................................ 48

Use of the Software Based on Different Project Delivery Methods .................................................................................. 49

When the Software Might Not be Used ............................................................................................................................. 50

Barriers to Implementation ................................................................................................................................................ 50

Primary Sources of Variation in Estimating Situations, Processes, and Preferences ....................................................... 51

The Special Case of Experience as a Source of Variation .................................................................................................. 51

The Special Case of Method-Specific Skill as a Source of Variation ................................................................................. 51

Best Practices and Benefits of the CAD-based Estimating Software ................................................................................ 51

An Alternative to CAD-Based Estimating: PDF-Based On-screen Estimating Software ................................................ 52

Primary Lesson Learned about the Use of Estimating Software and Techniques............................................................ 53

Predictions about the Future of Estimating ....................................................................................................................... 53

Appendix B: Case Study for Company B Estimating Method ..................................................................... 55Background and Decision to Invest in PDF-based On-Screen Estimating Software ...................................................... 55

Training Required ............................................................................................................................................................... 55

Learning Curve Effects ........................................................................................................................................................ 56

Non-Directly Related Learning Curve Effects ................................................................................................................... 57

When the Software Might Not be Used ............................................................................................................................. 57

Barriers to Implementation ................................................................................................................................................ 58

Best Practices and Benefits of the On-Screen Estimating Software .................................................................................. 58


Appendix C: Case Study for Company C Estimating Method ...................................................................... 61Background and Decision to Remain with the Manual Method ...................................................................................... 61

Barriers to Implementing a PDF-Based On-screen Estimating Software or CAD-Based Estimating Software ............ 61

Barriers Specific to Implementing a CAD-Based Estimating Software ............................................................................ 63

Best Practices of the Manual Method ................................................................................................................................ 64


Appendix D: Results from National Questionnaire .....................................................................................67Questionnaire Responses .................................................................................................................................................... 67

1

In this presently challenging economy, two old adages in the electrical construction industry seem to ring as true

as ever: the electrical construction industry is an incredibly competitive market to operate in, and the foundation of

remaining successful within this competitive market place begins with accurate estimates. Estimating software producers

have recognized this and have created take-off software that has been designed to address these challenges by providing a

platform to perform faster and more accurate estimates. Based on a combination of extensive interviews with electrical

contractors and the results of a national questionnaire, this report outlines the present day role of this software in the

electrical construction industry and highlights some effective estimating strategies that electrical contractors have

implemented both with and without this estimating software.

A thorough examination of the present state of electrical estimating has revealed that there is tremendous variability

in the electrical estimating landscape. This is likely no surprise to estimators and executives alike within the industry,

who know that it is part of their job to manage that variability and produce timely and accurate estimates. Among many

factors that will be discussed in depth later in this report, this variability can include the type of the job to be estimated,

the structure of one’s estimating department, the characteristics of the estimators within the estimating department, what

time restrictions are on the estimate, the overall goals of the company, and certainly of the use, non-use, or partial use of

estimating takeoff-software. It is because of this variability that there exists no one perfect estimating software solution

that can be adopted by every electrical contractor across the country.

Instead this report outlines the benefits of the electrical estimating takeoff software, but also the obstacles to their

implementation. In addition, this report includes many strategies that electrical contractors of varying characteristics

have used to maintain the accuracy and timeliness of their estimates. Depending on the goals of the electrical contractor,

some have decided that a completely manual estimating process is best for them, others have chosen to selectively use one

or more estimating takeoff software, and last some have chosen to fully implement estimating takeoff software across their

estimating department. Based on this collection of strategies and information, an electrical contractor can decide if there

are new approaches that they can take within their estimating department that will benefit the company.

Executive Summary

3

1.1 Problem Definition

Estimating is perhaps the foundation of an electrical contractor’s business. The ability of an electrical contractor’s

estimating department to generate timely, consistent, and accurate estimates is of paramount importance. Poor estimates

can negatively impact a company, both in terms of lost jobs and lost profits, but accurate estimates can help win jobs

as well as grow and sustain a profitable company. In an effort to assist electrical contractors with developing timely

and accurate estimates, a multitude of software manufactures have produced electrical take-off software. However, the

environmental scan performed as part of this research determined that there currently exist a number of obstacles to the

full implementation of the features of most estimating software packages. Some common obstacles include:

1. The perceived high cost of the software and associated training.

2. Concerns that the benefits of the software would not be as large as advertised.

3. Concerns that technology will change in the near future rendering the software obsolete.

4. Lack of substantive evaluation of the estimating department to see how the department and estimating processes

might improve as a result of implementing the software.

5. Resistance of estimators to technological change.

6. Lack of technology and work environment required to optimally implement the software.

7. Misconceptions about the effectiveness of the software and its features and functions.

8. Difficulty in obtaining the native CAD files to optimize the use of the software.

9. Incompatible native CAD files provided by clients, which increase, rather than decrease, the effort required to use

the software.

10. Lack of trained staff to implement and use the software.

As a result of these obstacles, some electrical contractors may not be providing their estimating department with the

most advanced estimating tools, which may put them at a disadvantage in the highly competitive construction market.

1.2 Approach to the Research

In examining the obstacles to implementation of advanced estimating techniques and software, the research focused

on four objectives:

1. Motivation for Studying Electrical Estimating


4

1. Identify the current estimating landscape within the national electrical contracting industry; specifically, which

estimating techniques are used and by whom

2. Identify and quantify the potential benefits and best practices of using various estimating software and techniques

3. Identify the obstacles to implementing estimating take-off software

4. Provide potential solutions that successful electrical contractors have used to overcome these obstacles.

In order to identify the current estimating landscape within the national electrical contracting industry, an online

questionnaire was developed and sent to members of the National Electrical Contractors Association across the country.

This questionnaire collected data on two main factors that were hypothesized to predict whether an electrical contractor

has implemented an estimating process that is more advanced than a manual estimating method (i.e., they are using a

computerized estimating method). These two factors included (1) Type of Work Performed by the Contractor, and (2)

Company Culture. The types of questions on the questionnaire that corresponded to each of the two factors are identified

below.

Questions that probed the Type of Work Performed included questions about:

1. Hard bid v. negotiated contracts

2. Design/bid/build v. design/build

3. Public v. private owners/work

4. Low v. high job complexity

5. Electrical as prime contractor v. Electrical as a subcontractor

6. Construction sector: commercial, industrial, institutional, residential, or transportation

7. Annual revenue and annual number of projects underway

Questions that probed Company Culture included questions about:

1. Demographics of the estimating team

2. Separate estimating department v. no separate estimating department

3. Desired accuracy of the estimate

4. Presence v. absence of formal estimating procedures and quality assurance and quality control procedures

5. Presence v. absence of a unified database of historic cost information

6. Willingness to adopt the most current technologies v. reticence to adopt the most current technologies

The national online questionnaire also collected data on the prevalence of manual estimating methods versus on-

screen and CAD-based estimating methods and the criteria used by contractors to decide whether to use a manual or a

computerized estimating method.

Based on the results of the national online questionnaire, a phone-based interview was conducted to examine in

greater depth the obstacles to implementing computerized estimating software and also to examine ways that these

obstacles were overcome by contractors. The phone interview was conducted with those companies that participated in

the online questionnaire that also volunteered for the follow-up phone interview.

The last phase of data collection for the research was to conduct comprehensive phone-based case study interviews

with contractors using one of three different estimating methods: manual, on-screen, or CAD-based estimating. The

1. motivation for studying electrical estimating

5

purpose of these interviews was to determine the best practices currently in use for the PDF-based on-screen estimating

software and also for the CAD-based estimating software. As a result, one case study probed manual estimating, one case

study probed PDF-based on-screen estimating, and one case study probed CAD-based estimating.

The body of this report is the culmination of the online questionnaires, phone interviews, and case studies. Based

on these findings this report details the current estimating landscape in the electrical contracting industry; the benefits,

obstacles, and solutions to implementation of both the PDF-based on-screen estimating software and the CAD-based

estimating software; and three case studies of how different companies’ estimating departments employed the different

estimating methods.

7

2.1 Introduction

Estimating has been described as part art and part science. It is part science because the design drawings detail the

finite scope of the job and the intent of what is to be built. It is part art because inevitably there are many variables, some

known and some unknown, that make up the estimate. Arguably, there are potentially more variables within electrical

estimating because frequently the details of the electrical design are not show on the design drawings. The finer details of

the design, among many other critical decisions, are often left to the experience of the electrical estimator, who must be

both creative and systematic.

2.2 The Purpose of the Cost Estimate

The Means Illustrated Construction Dictionary defines estimating as “the process of determining the anticipated cost

of materials, labor, and equipment of a proposed project.” Put another way, the purpose of a cost estimate is to provide an

accurate representation of a contractor’s direct and indirect costs plus the profit (or loss) that the contractor would like to

make on the job being estimated. In the case of electrical contractors, this estimate is provided to general contractors or to

the owners directly so that a successful trade partner can be selected.

2.3 Basic Characteristics of Credible Cost Estimates

The two most fundamental characteristics of a credible cost estimate are: (1) the estimate is carefully constructed, and

(2) the estimate is detailed.

A carefully constructed estimate includes thoroughly thinking through every aspect of the job, which includes: (1)

Examining the plans and specifications to determine the exact scope of the job; (2) Identifying the potential challenges

and the pitfalls of the job (i.e., the risks); (3) Predicting the tasks on which the crews are likely to lose efficiency; (4)

Thoroughly reviewing the bid documents to determine if there are any special provisions that apply and could affect

the overall cost; and, (5) Reviewing the bid documents to determine the administrative requirements of the electrical

contractor.

An estimate should be as detailed as time will allow. A detailed estimate will have less risk associated with it than

a square foot estimate. The basis for a detailed estimate is an accurate takeoff of all the quantities on the project. An

accurate takeoff generally results from a non-rushed exercise of counting and measuring everything on the plans and in

the specifications, performed by experienced estimators implementing internally-standardized estimating procedures, and

estimates that are checked by other experienced estimators or managers.

2. Reflections on Electrical Cost Estimating


8

2.4 A Reliable Process for Developing Credible Cost Estimates

Credible cost estimates start by creating a reliable, standardized estimating process. This process should be

standardized across the company. Having a standardized process will assist in producing consistent estimates from each

individual estimator that are also easy to review. Often it is helpful to formalize parts of the procedure in the form of

checklists, steps, or instructions. One example of a checklist that applies to those elements associated with the take-offs

and pricing of an estimate is included below. The steps were compiled from many of the interviews of successful electrical

contractors. Many other contractors reading this document are likely performing many of these steps already, but perhaps

have not formalized any checklist that details their estimating process.

Checklist of Questions to Ask While Creating an Electrical Cost Estimate

1. Do we have all of the bid documents, including the design drawings, specifications, bid instructions, general

conditions, and special conditions?

2. Are we aware of the project’s scope?

3. Are there general or special conditions that will affect our pricing?

4. Are there any amendments or responses to requests for information (RFI) for the job?

5. Have our RFI’s been answered and factored into the estimate?

6. How much time do we have to complete the estimate?

7. What files are available to estimate from?

8. Which estimators will be working on the job and what sections of the job will they be estimating?

9. Will we be using manual estimating methods, PDF-based on-screen estimating methods, CAD-based

estimating methods, or some combination of these?

10. Take-off: Have we accounted for all the major items and assemblies within the project?

a. Has all the major electrical equipment been identified?

b. Are we aware of all of the technical specifications that apply to this equipment?

c. Has the non-electrical equipment been supplied with power from some source in our takeoffs?

d. Conduits and conductors accounted for?

e. Low voltage communications?

f. Low voltage security?

g. Underground work?

h. Exterior work?

i. Emergency lighting and power?

j. Switch gear rooms?

k. IT Rooms?

11. Is the material and labor pricing in our database up to date?

12. Have we obtained all of the vender quotes we requested?

13. Do the vendor quotes roughly match our historical pricing records?

2. reflections on electrical cost estimating

9

14. Have we received all the subcontractor quotes where applicable?

15. Do the subcontractor quotes seem reasonable?

16. Have we predicted where the biggest challenges of the job will be and priced them accordingly?

17. Have we double-checked all the takeoffs?

18. Have we double-checked all the pricing calculations?

19. Have we compared our detailed estimate to a unit cost estimate such as a square foot estimate as a way of

double-checking the pricing?

20. Have we compared the percentages breakdown of every major material type to the overall job cost and

compared those percentages to the company’s historical database?

21. Have we compared the estimate to recent estimates in the company’s historical database?

22. Has the estimate been reviewed by a senior estimator?

23. Has the estimate been reviewed and discussed by management?

24. Has management considered the intangibles of the job to determine an appropriate markup for the job,

including:

a. How confident the estimators are in their estimate?

b. How much time the estimators had to prepare the estimate?

c. What general contractor(s) are they presenting their bid to and who is the owner?

d. If prime work, who is the owner they will present their bid to?

e. How much does the company need the work or need the cash flow?

f. How many jobs do we currently have out to bid and what size are they?

g. What future work is coming up to bid?

h. What are the overall market conditions?

25. Have errors been checked for in the final bid submittal paperwork?

26. Has the owner or G/C received the estimate submittal on time?

2.5 Why Contractors Need to Develop Credible Cost Estimates

One large inaccurate estimate or a series of smaller inaccurate estimates could mean losing money for the company.

This would happen if the company underbid these jobs, but there can be similar consequences for a company if they

consistently overbid jobs. They will never be awarded a job and will not be able to bring in revenue.

2.6 The Challenges in Developing Credible Cost Estimates

Once again, the Means Illustrated Construction Dictionary defines estimating as “the process of determining the

anticipated cost of materials, labor, and equipment of a proposed project.” The key word in this definition is ‘anticipated’.

This essentially means that the estimator is attempting to predict the future. Clearly the challenge in predicting the future

is apparent: What are the raw material costs going to be in the future, such as copper, aluminum, and steel? What will fuel

costs be in the future? What will happen with labor rates in the future? How will the current fleet of equipment hold up?


10

What will the weather be like when the job starts? How organized will the general contractor be? Will there be project

delays? How cooperative will the other trades on the job be? .

The challenges of estimating accurate take-off quantities for a job are many. The design drawings may be incomplete,

there may not be enough time to estimate the job thoroughly, the estimators may lack experience, the methods used to do

the take-offs may be poor, and the estimating department may be understaffed.

In the past decade, estimating software has been developed to help the electrical estimator overcome some of these

challenges, particularly those challenges that relate to the take-offs. Both PDF-based on-screen estimating software

and CAD-based estimating software has been designed to make estimators more productive, more accurate, and more

organized. By no means will this software make up for any lack of experience in an estimator or make up for any mistake

made by an estimator, but they are powerful estimating tools that can benefit most estimators.

11

3.1 Introduction

The current national electrical estimating landscape is varied, both in the characteristics of the jobs to be bid and in

the estimating practices of the electrical contractors bidding those jobs. The jobs that are being estimated may be large

or small, or traditional design/bid/build or design/build. The time to estimate them may be two days or it could be two

months. The electrical designer may have completed very thorough electrical drawings with ‘standardized’ symbols and

may also be willing to share the native CAD files with the contractors. In contrast, the design could be incomplete and may

be provided in paper format. The job could be unique meaning that there isn’t much historical pricing data to work from,

or the job could be a standard tenant build-out that the electrical contractor has done hundreds of times before. All of this

variation must be effectively managed by an electrical contractor’s estimating department.

This chapter identifies the results of data collection and analysis performed to determine “who is doing what” in the

electrical estimating domain – what does the electrical estimating landscape look like in 2012. The analysis essentially

attempts to identify the characteristics of companies, their estimating practices, and how the company’s characteristics

specifically influence its estimating practices.

3.2 Statistical Methods Used

Discussion of Statistical Methods Used: Three statistical methods were used to analyze the data collected in this study:

(1) logistic regression, (2) correlation analysis, and (3) principle components analysis. Logistic regression is a specific

form of regression, where regression is a statistical method used to make inferences about populations based on a a specific

research question. Regression can predict outcomes based on a set of relevant variables. While the underlying math and

theory behind logistic regression may be more complicated than standard regression, logistic regression is simply a form

of regression that allows the researcher to predict a discrete outcome from a set of variables. In this study the discrete

outcome was the group that an electrical contractor belonged to; that is, either the electrical contractor (1) used manual

estimating methods on their estimates or (2) they used more advanced estimating methods, such as PDF-based on-screen

estimating or CAD-based estimating. The set of variables that the researchers used in the analysis included many of the

characteristics of that electrical contractor, such as their demographics, the construction sector that they operate in, and

the attitudes of their estimators and managers, to list a few of the variables.

Discussion of Logistic Regression: Logistic regression produces many results, but three fundamental results are the

most important to understanding logistic regression and why it was used for this study. The first is that it produces an

R-squared value which is an indication of how strong of a predictor the researcher’s set of variables was in predicting

3. Understanding the Current Estimating Landscape


12

the outcome (i.e., which group the contractor belonged to). Second is that the results indicate which variables amongst

the entire set of variables were most helpful in predicting the outcome. Last is that the results will indicate the statistical

significance of the results. Statistical significance indicates the degree that the phenomenon is “real” rather than caused by

mere chance. Typically if there is less than a 5% chance that the result was due to chance, then the results are deemed to be

statistically significant.

Discussion of Correlation: One of the fundamental elements of statistics is correlation. Correlation is the degree to

which two separate variables are related to each other. For example, in this research it was hypothesized that the larger

an electrical contractor was (based on their annual revenue), the more likely it would be that they used more advanced

estimating methods to produce their estimates. The correlation scale ranges from 0.0 to 1.0, with the 1.0 indicating perfect

correlation and the 0.0 indicating zero correlation between size and estimating method. This study used correlation to

analyze the collected data to see how strong the relationship was between all variables collected on the electrical contractor

(such as size of the electrical contractor, type of work typically performed, etc.) and their choice of estimating method,

including manual estimating or a more advanced estimating method.

Discussion of Principle Components Analysis: Principle Components Analysis (PCA) is often used for data reduction

because PCA can reduce a large number of highly correlated variables within a given study to a fewer number of

uncorrelated variables. PCA can take, for example, ten variables and combine them into four representative variables

that can closely express the relationships among variables. In this research, 37 variables were collected from electrical

contractors, each of which represents the differences between the electrical contractors. Principle components analysis was

performed to determine whether one or more summary statistics (i.e., variables) could be created that would adequately

represent the larger set of variables. The purpose for conducting the PCA was to produce a fewer number of variables

that could be used for another statistical method that attempted to predict the electrical contactor’s use of more advanced

estimating methods.

3.3 Methodology of Studies

This research consisted of three distinct phases of data collection, with each one involving a different methodology. Phase

1 involved an on-line questionnaire. Phase 1 involved the largest collection of data and subsequent analysis of that data. Phases

2 and 3 each involved in-person or phone interviews addressing more in-depth follow-up questions from Phase 1. Phases 2

and 3 were initially designed as separate phases, but were ultimately combined into one phase because of their similarities in the

questions asked of electrical contractors. The methodology will be discussed below for each of the three phases.

3.3.1 Methodology for Phase 1 (National Questionnaire on Electrical Contractor’s Characteristics and Estimating Methods)

Population and Sample: This questionnaire was administered on-line using Zoomerang, a reputable on-line survey

tool. It was sent to all NECA and EI members across the country, which totaled approximately 4000 contractors. The

contractors where permitted to take the questionnaire anonymously, but they could provide their contact information if

they wanted to participate in the next phase of the research. Most contractors chose to remain anonymous. A total of 82

responses were received of which 81 responses where complete enough to use in this research.

Composition of the Questionnaire: The questionnaire contained five sections (all of the results of the questionnaire

that are not specifically referenced within the body of this report can be found in Appendix D). Section 1 contained

eight questions about the demographics of the electrical contractor. Examples of these questions included the size of the

3. understanding the current estimating landscaPe

13

company (as measured in annual revenue) or what construction sector(s) they operated in. Section 2 contained eight

questions pertaining to the electrical contractor’s adoption (or not) of common technology used in the industry. Section

3 contained five questions pertaining to the composition of the estimating department of the electrical contractor. Section

4 contained 17 questions measured on a five point Likert scale ranging from “Strongly Agree, Agree, Neutral, Disagree, to

Strongly Disagree”. These questions related to the electrical contractor’s attitudes and philosophies of estimating in general

and also questions about the internal mechanics of their estimating department. Two examples of these questions include

“Your company has a thorough QA/QC system in place to review estimates” and “Your company reviews the efficacy of

your estimating systems at least annually,” where responses ranged from strongly agree to strongly disagree. Section 5

probed whether the electrical contractor employs an estimating method more advanced than manual estimating. If so, the

survey participant was invited to answer eight additional questions on the factors that determine which estimating method

they use. Two of these eight questions allowed for an open ended response.

3.3.2 Methodology for Phases 2 and 3 (Interviews)

Once the data gathered from Phase 1 was analyzed, the interview questions for Phases 2 and 3 were written to

address any unanswered questions or questions that needed further probing and any new questions that arose from the

questionnaire responses. Phases 2 and 3 were originally scheduled to be separate interview phases, but given their similar

goals, they were combined into one phase. Four different sets of questions were written for the four broad levels of

electrical contractors’ estimating methods: (1) Those contractors currently performing manual estimating who intend to

continue performing only manual estimates; (2) Those contractors currently performing manual estimating, but who want

to advance their estimating method beyond manual estimating; (3) Those contractors currently performing PDF-based

on-screen estimating; and (4) Those contractors currently performing CAD-based estimating.

The objectives for these questions were to:

1. Determine any misconceptions the electrical contractors had about the more advanced estimating methods and

estimating takeoff software

2. Identify the barriers to upgrading to either PDF-based on-screen estimating or CAD-based estimating

3. Identify solutions to those barriers

4. Identify the best practices of manual estimating, PDF-based on-screen estimating, and CAD-based estimating.

The interviews lasted between 1 hour and 3 hours, often divided up over a couple of phone calls. For those

contractors that could devote the additional time, three of them were chosen to have mini-case studies written on them to

comprehensively illustrate their estimating methods. One contractor was chosen that only performed manual estimating,

one contractor was chosen that performed PDF-based on-screen estimating and one contractor was chosen that

performed CAD-based estimating.

3.4 Methods: Manual, On-Screen, and CAD-based Estimating

3.4.1 Description of Manual Estimating Methods

Manual estimating methods include any estimating take-off work that doesn’t use any computer software beyond

spreadsheets. The manual estimating methods are the methods electrical contractors have been using since the electrical

contracting industry began and every estimator is likely very familiar with this method. The basic steps of the manual

estimating method have changed only modestly over the years.


14

The process of manual estimating begins with a paper copy of the electrical design drawings. Typically, the estimator

starts by counting the common devices within the drawings such as the light fixtures. The type of light fixture is identified

and then the estimator will go page by page and count all of them, most commonly using a highlighter or color pencil to

indicate that each light fixture has been counted. While counting they may use a clicker, take-off scratch paper, or rely on

their memory. At periodic points, these counts are inputted into a spreadsheet. These spreadsheets used to just be paper

ledgers, but modern electrical estimating most often utilizes a computer spread sheet such as Microsoft’s Excel or one of

the many spreadsheet software programs developed specifically for use by electrical contractors. This process is repeated

for the remaining devices within the drawings such as the receptacles, disconnects, motors, panels, and switch gear just to

list few of the many devices that need to be accounted for.

Next the conduits and conductors need to be taken off. As with the devices there are many different types and sizes of

conduits throughout the drawings. These conduits fall into three broad categories that are most often taken-off separately:

feeders, homeruns, and branch-lines. Because the feeders are generally larger conduits and contain larger conductors that

are expensive in relation to branch-lines, the feeders are generally taken off very carefully. The estimator may follow the

single-line-diagrams shown on the drawings that represent the approximate paths of these feeders, or the estimator may

attempt to ‘value engineer’ the feeder run if the estimator can determine a more efficient path for the feeder. In either case,

the length of the feeder is counted off of the paper drawings. This is most frequently done using a ‘wheel’ that can be set

to the scale of the drawings and then traced along the conduit’s path. In lieu of the wheel some estimators use engineer’s

rulers, but these take longer to use. The ‘wheel’ will then display the conduit length for that run. This length can either be

recorded onto the takeoff ledger or if the estimator is going to continue counting the same type and size of conduit, they

can continue on ‘wheeling’ and the wheel will continue to add to the conduit length taken off. To finish off the conduit

runs, the estimator will need to add the ‘drops’ or ‘rises’ to the total conduit length. These drops or rises account for the

vertical distances of the conduit runs. When this conduit run is done, the estimator inputs this length into the spreadsheet

for the pricing of the work.

Homeruns and branch-lines are less expensive per foot than the feeders, but they are much more numerous, as they

are responsible for connecting all the devices throughout the drawings. Some contractors will take-off the homeruns and

branch-lines in the same meticulous fashion as was described for the feeders. This is certainly the most thorough way to

do it. However, if there are time limitations or if the project is simple in scope and the estimator (and electrical contracting

company) has taken off many projects similar in scope, they may elect to take-off the branch-line conduits by ‘averaging’

methods. Common tenant build-outs or office space construction are examples where these methods are often used.

Examples of the averaging methods could include figuring 15 feet of conduit and 50 feet of conductors per light fixture or

per convenience receptacle. Perhaps if the space is more spread out and the ceiling heights are taller, a figure of 30 feet of

conduit and 100 feet of conduit are more appropriate. This comes down to the judgment of the estimator. In addition,

different average lengths can be assigned to the ‘opening’ depending on whether than opening is a light fixture, light switch,

or a receptacle. Again, the assignment of the averages depends on the experience of the estimator.

This brief discussion of the manual method was obviously over simplified as electrical estimating is complicated and

nuanced, but this discussion was meant to illustrate the major steps to performing a manual estimate which will compare

to the more advanced methods in the next two sections.

3.4.2 Description of PDF-based On-Screen Estimating Methods

In general PDF-based on-screen estimating is best thought of as taking the manual estimate and performing it on the

computer screen. There is very little automation in this process. The traditional manual techniques for taking-off devices


15

and conduits can still be used. Thus if an estimator is computer proficient, the PDF-based on-screen estimating software

can generally be learned fairly quickly, since they can estimate the way they traditionally estimated previously.

Estimators using PDF-based on-screen estimating software most frequently either use the software selectively, such as

for counting devices only, or they use the software on 90% or more of the take-offs within the drawings. When they use

the software selectively they perform the other parts of the takeoff manually. For those that use it selectively, their objective

for doing so is generally to speed up the takeoff process. For either the selective user or the more comprehensive user of

the software, the mechanics of the takeoff process are essentially the same.

Just as with the manual methods, users of the on-screen software often start the estimate by counting common devices

such as light fixtures. This can be performed either by utilizing the semi-automated counting feature which comes with

some versions of the on-screen software or by individually selecting and counting the light fixtures. For those estimators

that used the auto-count feature, the auto-count feature cannot electronically recognize the symbols within the file in

the same way that the CAD-based software can do, but rather it attempts to recognize the shape of the symbol on the

page. The user can define how precisely (or not) it would like the software to filter the symbols that the user selects. The

software will then display the list of all the potential symbols that it located, and it is up to the user to manually select the

symbols that match the item that is being counted. Not all users of this feature feel that it saves time, however experienced

users of the feature indicated that the feature definitely saved time in the counting of devices. The decision to use this

feature may come down to the individual estimator’s preference, however limited interviews on this feature did seem to

indicated that those users most experienced in using the feature found it to be both effective and time saving.

Estimators that do not use the auto-counting feature tend to count the light fixtures by individually selecting the

light fixtures just as one would do manually, except that the work occurs on-screen. This process starts by determining

the type of light fixture being counted, for example a Type 1 fixture. Once this is determined, the estimator can find that

type of light fixture in their company’s database of on-screen items. Next the estimator scans the drawings to locate each

light fixture and clicks on each one encountered. Clicking on each one leaves a color coded dot on that light fixture that

links that item to the database of items and it advances the count for that light fixture by one. Thus as the estimator goes

through the drawings, the counts in the spreadsheet on the side of the screen will continue advancing as the estimator

clicks through all the different items. The color coded dots throughout the pages indicate that all those items have been

taken off and the estimator can then move to another type of light fixture and repeat the process.

For taking off the conduits and conductors a similar process takes place within the on-screen software. The estimator

can select the type of conduit being taken off from the company’s data base of items. For example, the estimator could

select ¾” EMT with three 12 gauge conductors and set-screw type fittings. Then they could go through the drawings and

locate all the paths of these conduits. When a path is found the path is traced out on the screen with the mouse clicker

and the program leaves a color coded line linking that work to the item within the take-off database. The color coded line

indicates that that run has been taken off. As part of this conduit takeoff, the software will also allow the user to specify a

‘drop’ or a ‘rise’ at each end of the conduit run. The software will then add this to the conduit length tally. Once all the ¾"

EMT conduits have been located, this process is repeated for the other conduit types within the drawings.

Thus when the take-offs are completed within an on-screen environment, the drawings will look similarly covered

with color coded dots and lines as with a manual estimate. These dots and lines will be electronic instead of highlighters or

colored pencils. Another difference is that in the on-screen environment, these dots and lines are all directly linked to the

item description within the data base. They can also be changed if needed, which is why some estimators call on-screen

estimates “editable” estimates.


16

3.4.3 Description of CAD-based Estimating Methods

The predominant characteristic of CAD-based estimating methods is that they are much more automated than

manual methods or PDF-based on-screen estimating methods. Theoretically the CAD-based take-off software can

automatically take-off all of the items on the drawings, but in practice it is used in a more limited, but still effective role.

The CAD-based estimating process starts by obtaining the native CAD files from the designer and evaluating them

for compatibility for use with the software. This primarily consists of checking that the symbols for the devices to see that

they are properly ‘blocked’ such that the take-off software can recognize the symbols. The primary factor to how effectively

the CAD software can be utilized is the quality of the electrical designer’s drawings, both in how thorough the drawings are

and how well ‘blocked’ they are with standard symbols for devices. If the drawings are of a good quality the estimators are

going to use the CAD-based estimating software to take-off as many items as possible.

As with the two other estimating methods, estimators using the CAD-based estimating software generally start by

counting the most common devices such as light fixtures. If the CAD files are ones that the CAD-software has worked

with before, meaning that it can instantly recognize most or all of the light fixtures, the software will automatically begin

counting and tallying the number of light fixtures. If the drawings and thus light fixture symbols are new to the software,

the estimator may have to indicate to the software what the symbols represent, but once this is done, the software will

automatically count all those identified light fixtures. For either situation, the software will ‘gray-out’ the light fixtures

and devices that it counts. This way the estimator can easily identify on the screen what is left to take-off. This process

is repeated until all the counting tasks are completed. The software will have a spreadsheet on the side of the screen that

contains all the quantities of all the individual items, such as the light fixtures.

There is more variation to the take-off process for conduits and conductors. Some estimators will estimate these

manually using the averaging methods previously discussed. Other estimators will seek to take advantage of any ‘arcs’

shown in the drawings or any other conduits shown on the drawings that the software can identify and quantify. For

example if the ‘arcs’ are shown connecting all the light fixtures and light switches in a room, then the software can strike

potential orthogonal paths of the branch-circuit conduits connecting it all. In other situations where the conduits are

shown, the estimator can identify the type of conduit to the software and have its length quantified. In situations where

only single-line-diagrams are shown, some estimators will draw in the potential paths of the feeders for example, into

the drawing in a fashion similar to that of the on-screen take-offs and then have the CAD take-off software quantify the

lengths of the different types of conduits identified. This process is repeated as much as the estimator deems worthwhile.

Just as with the light fixture counts, this process results in a spreadsheet of the tallied quantities for each item.

3.5 Who’s Doing What

The data that was used to determine ‘who is doing what’ was gathered from both the national questionnaire and

from the interviews from the environmental scan and from Phases 2 and 3. The first half of this discussion will take a

quantitative approach and draw solely from the data collected from the national questionnaire. The second half will

examine what is behind the numbers by taking a qualitative approach and will classify electrical contractors based on the

many interviews conducted.

Quantitative Approach: The results of the questionnaire indicate that there is a fair amount of variability within

the estimating procedures of electrical contracting companies. Of the 81 respondents to the questionnaire, 44.4% of

the respondents use either PDF-based or CAD-based onscreen estimating, or both. (This figure may be higher than the

actual usage because of the non-responses bias which would suggest that users of this software would be more likely to


17

participate in this questionnaire concerning on-screen software than those that don’t use the software.) The other 55.6%

of companies are performing only manual estimates.

Of those electrical contractors that do use some form of on-screen estimating, an average of 38.1% of their jobs are

still estimated manually and 61.9% of their jobs are estimated with the on-screen software. This is a further division

between estimating practices. In addition, of those companies that use some form of on-screen estimating, 38.2% use

it exclusively or nearly exclusively on their jobs. Again, this highlights tremendous variability because even amongst

companies that have chosen to adopt on-screen estimating software, there is a divide on how it is used.

The next variation occurs based on the decision to differentiate the estimating staff: 52.9% of the companies vary their

estimating method based on who is estimating the job. The reasons for this vary, but those reasons most often cited were

the ability of the estimator to use the software (or not), their proficiency with the software, and the individual estimator’s

preference for the estimating method they would like to use.

Finally 50.0% of the companies will split up one job and estimate some portions manually and other portions with

on-screen software. This is an exactly even split on whether a job should be completed 100% within on-screen estimating

software or whether it is worth the additional organization required to break out certain pages or elements of a job to

perform them manually. These series of responses demonstrate not only the variation within companies, but also how

many of the differentiations have nearly equal advocates on each side of the issue.

Qualitative Approach: The interviews from the environmental scan and from Phases 2 and 3, also supported the

finding that there was considerable variation between contractors’ estimating methods and philosophies. In an attempt

to categorize the electrical contractors in a more understandable way, three broad categories were created. Because

the manual method and the PDF-based on-screen estimating method are most frequently used to produce a complete

estimate, as opposed to CAD-based estimating software which often has barriers to achieving a complete estimate, it is

helpful to differentiate electrical contractor’s estimating departments based on these two and distinguish between CAD-

estimating use later. Thus electrical contractor’s estimating departments generally fall into these three broad categories:

1. Manual Estimating Only: These electrical contractors have either made a conscious choice to not use PDF-based

on-screen estimating software or other issues have kept them from upgrading to PDF-based on-screen estimating

software.

2. Selective use of PDF-based On-screen Estimating Software: The use of the PDF-based on-screen estimating software

by these electrical contractors varies greatly. They may have purchased one license as a trial run, they may have pur-

chased licenses for those estimators that prefer to use the software over manual estimating, or they may have many

licenses available across the company, but choose to use the software selectively within jobs for specific tasks only.

such as counting common devices.

3. Nearly Exclusive use of PDF-based On-screen Estimating Software: These electrical contractors have made the deci-

sion to use PDF-based on-screen estimating software company-wide on 90% or more of their estimates. All of their

estimators are responsible for learning and implementing the software.

Within each of these categories the electrical contractor either has CAD-based estimating capabilities or they do not

have CAD-based estimating capabilities. No trend was observed to distinguish between these two groups, as the use of

CAD-based estimating software was equally prevalent across the three groups. As concerns the use of the CAD-based

estimating software, all of the companies interviewed would like to increase its use across their estimating department,


18

but other factors were limiting this. Generally the limiting factors were the availability of quality CAD files and properly

trained estimating staff.

3.6 Characteristics of Companies

In order to compare the characteristics of companies to their estimating method for the purpose of determining

‘Who is doing what?’, two research questions were formulated. 1) Can one predict whether an electrical contractor uses

an estimating method more advanced than the manual method based on the company’s characteristics? 2) Through

the use of principle components analysis, can one form one or more summary statistics that summarizes the various

characteristics of a company? The answers to these questions are both surprising and complicated.

Hypothesis for Research Question 1: In determining if one can predict whether an electrical contractor uses an

estimating method more advanced than the manual method based on the company’s characteristics, it was important

to determine which company’s characteristics had the potential to be influential in predicting the company’s estimating

method. After analyzing the results of the environmental scan of companies, it was determined that these characteristics

would include: 1) the type of work that they company typically performs, 2) the presence of formalized estimating

procedures, 3) the estimating department composition, 4) progressive behavior of the company, and 5) technologies

implemented.

Upon gathering this information, a correlation was performed on the company’s characteristics and their estimating

method. Logistical regression was used to perform the statistical analysis. It was hypothesized that the following

characteristics will lead to a greater likelihood of using more advanced estimating techniques:

■■ Higher company revenue

■■ Larger percentage of design/build and negotiated work

■■ Larger percentage of private work

■■ Larger percentage of complex work

■■ Larger percentage of prime contacting work

■■ Adoption of other technology, including use of a Trimble Total Station Device

■■ Use of laser scanning

■■ Use of project management software

■■ Having a younger estimating staff

■■ Having a formalized estimating procedure in place

■■ Placing a greater emphasis on accuracy in their estimates.

Hypothesis for Research Question 2: This question asked, “Can one form one or more summary statistics that

summarizes the various characteristics of a company through the use of principle components analysis?” The hypothesis

was that two summary statistics will result from the principle components analysis. The two components will be ‘Type

of Work Performed’ and ‘Company Culture’. Type of Work would summarize the nature of the work that the contractor

typically performs. This would likely include the total revenue of the company (indicating that they typically work on

larger jobs), the project delivery method used (either design/bid/build or design/build), the typical award type (such as

hard bid work or negotiated work), if they do more or less public work than private work, the sector they predominantly

work in (such as commercial, industrial, etc.), the typical complexity level of the job, and the percent of work they perform

as a prime contractor or a subcontractor.


19

Company Culture was expected to include the company’s adoption (or not) of technology, the age of the estimators,

the desired accuracy of their estimates, the estimating procedures followed within the company, and the estimating

department’s composition.

Results of Research Question 1: Contrary to the hypothesis, it was determined that the data collected could not be

used to predict whether an electrical contractor uses an estimating method more advanced than the manual method based

on the company’s characteristics. This was a surprising result given the thorough inclusion of a company’s characteristics

in the questionnaire. A total of 37 variables were compared to whether the company uses an estimating method more

advanced than the manual method in order to determine the correlations between these variables and the method. The

following scale was used:

0.0 to 0.2 Very weak to negligible correlation

0.2 to 0.4 Weak, low correlation (not very significant)

0.4 to 0.7 Moderate correlation

0.7 to 0.9 Strong, high correlation

0.9 to 1.0 Very strong correlation

None of the correlations had a strength of 0.30 or greater, which indicates that there is no meaningful correlation. For

the two characteristic that were predicted to be highly correlated, the Average Annual Revenue and the ownership of a

Trimble Total Station device, the correlations were only 0.23 and 0.21 respectively, which is considered a weak correlation.

In addition to the individual questions attempting to be correlated to the estimating method, the factor scores

generated by a principle components analysis on the data where attempted to be correlated to the estimating method

through the use of logistic regression. Logistic regression was required because the estimating method was a dichotomous

variable. The principle component analysis generated factor scores for each of the 37 variables. Logistic regression was

used to correlate these 37 factor scores to the estimating method, but the results were statistically insignificant. Because

of the small sample size, it was determined that only one run of this correlation was permitted in order to not have a Type

1 error rate buildup. Thus, even taking every factor score into account, one cannot predict the estimating method of an

electrical contractor.

Reflections on the Results Research Question 1: These results were surprising, although anecdotal evidence supports

these results. Throughout the interviews that comprised the environmental scan, companies were encountered that

embraced technologies ranging from the Trimble Total Station to laser scanning and yet did not invest in the estimating

software that would be required for more advanced estimating methods. Companies were encountered that did

100 million dollars or more of work per year and yet did not own on-screen estimating software. Companies were

encountered that placed such emphasis on the accuracy of their estimates and yet did not own on-screen estimating

software. Companies that did a large amount of negotiated, design/build work often did not own on-screen estimating

software. Perhaps the results shouldn’t be surprising. One way to interpret the results is that, given the data collected, it

would appear to be nearly random whether a contractor chooses to invest in on-screen estimating software or not.

Results of Research Question 2: The second research question asked whether one can form one or more summary

statics that summarizes the various characteristics of a company through the use of principle components analysis. The

principle component analysis did result in one component, which accounted for about 15% of the variance between the

companies. This component can be described as a contractor having a systematic approach to their estimating process.

The four variables that comprise this component are listed along with their component values: “Your company diligently


20

updates costs in its materials/labor database” (0.65), “Your company has a thorough QA/QC system in place to review the

estimates before they are submitted” (0.73), “Your company has a company-wide process or procedure for estimating”

(0.76), and “Your company reviews the efficacy of your estimating system at least annually” (0.72).

In determining which variables should be assigned to this component, Steven’s Statistical Significance Chart (1996)

was referenced based on a sample size of 81. This indicated a loading of 0.65 or greater as highly correlated based on

statistical significance.

Reflections on the Results Research Question 2: A number of interesting findings were generated from this principle

components analysis. The first is that only one component loaded on these 37 variables. The hypothesis was that this

analysis would result in two components that could summarize the characteristics of a contractor: the type of work they

perform and their company culture. Neither of these occurred as a component, however, the one component that did

load contained four of the variables that were hypothesized to make up company culture. In retrospect it would in fact

seem difficult to be able to completely summarize contractors based solely on the type of work they do and their company

culture. The reason is that both are very complicated concepts and also vary greatly among companies. In examining type

of work, the following variables describe the concept: 1) the contract type, either competitive hard bid contracts versus

negotiated contracts, 2) The project delivery type, either design/bid/build or design/build, 3) The sector of work, either

public or private, 4) The size of the company on a continuous scale from less than 1 million in annual revenue to over

500 million in annual revenue, 5) The average number of jobs performed per year, 6) The percentage of work in each of

the following categories: Commercial, Transportation, Industrial, Institutional, or Residential; 7) The complexity of their

jobs ranging from low complexity to high complexity; and, 8) The percent of work acting as a prime contractor versus a

subcontractor. Obviously there can be tremendous variability throughout these variables, and in addition, the possible

combinations of these variable is also numerous.

Variability within companies: If one examines the electrical industry as a whole, they would find tremendous

variability in each of these eight variables, but more importantly, many of variables vary within the same company. It was

hypothesized that one might find large companies that perform a lot of negotiated, highly complex, design/build work in

the private sector versus companies that do not. The reality is that many companies perform many different types of work.

They will have some negotiated work, but not much. They may be working on increasing the amount of their design/

build work, but it is taking time to advance. They perform commercial work, industrial work, and transportation work

equally well, and have relied on all three sectors to keep their company busy. The complexity varies from job to job as well.

All of this variability within a company is one reason why the theorized component of Type of Work, did not load onto a

component, since principle components analysis requires distinct variations between companies to produce a component.

The next component theorized in the principle components analysis was the company culture. Company culture

is a complex concept, but it was theorized that some of the key variables that would represent company culture would

be: embracing (or not) of technology, the age of company estimators, company estimating procedure, and the desired

accuracy of estimates. Tremendous variability was noted within companies thus resulting in difficulties in developing a

component from the variables. As noted, the one component that did load was contractors having a systematic approach

to their estimating process, which was comprised of the following variables: (1) “Your company diligently updates costs

in its materials/labor database” (.65), (2) “Your company has a thorough QA/QC system in place to review the estimates

before they are submitted” (.73), (3) “Your company has a company-wide process or procedure for estimating” (.76),

and (4) “Your company reviews the efficacy of your estimating system at least annually” (.72). Because this component

did load, this means that many companies answered that all of these variables very accurately described their company


21

while many other companies answered that these did not accurately describe their company. In other words, there was

a notable division between companies that felt the variables were good descriptors for their company and those that did

not. To some degree this result was surprising because it was theorized that few companies would be willing to admit

to disagreeing with these statements, but evidently some of them did. While it was also surprising that this component

did not predict whether a company uses more advanced estimating techniques or not, these companies should consider

implementing a companywide estimating process.

The third interesting aspect of this principle components analysis is that the one component that loaded only

accounted for 15% of the variance between contractors. Since no other component loaded, this indicates that only

15% of the variance could be explained by the data. This is likely another indication of the degree of variation between

contractors.

Other possibilities: It must also be noted that it is possible that only one factor loaded and it loaded the way it did,

because the sample size of this analysis was relatively small. In addition, it is possible that there was some non-response

bias within the results of the questionnaire. It is possible that two portions of the population of the electrical contractor

community were over represented in this questionnaire. A higher percentage of larger contractors (as measured by

annual revenue) than smaller contractors may have responded to this questionnaire. In addition, it is speculated that

a higher percentage of respondents to the questionnaire use a more advanced estimating technique than exists in the

population of electrical contractors. This is hypothesized because the questionnaire topic was on more advanced methods,

thus generating more interest and motivation for contractors who use more advanced methods to participate in the

questionnaire than those not using more advanced estimating methods.

3.7 Method Selection

In order to answer the question about how electrical contractors select their estimating method, a third research

question was formulated: Will there be a difference in the job characteristics that drive contractors to select manual

estimating methods over more advanced methods when multiple options are available?

Hypothesis for Research Question 3: This question asked, will there be a difference in the job characteristics that drive

contractors to select manual estimating methods over more advanced methods when multiple options are available? The

hypothesis is that there will be a difference and that difference will be caused by taking on jobs that are more expensive,

more complex, and require more time to estimate thus requiring the use of more advanced estimating methods such as

on-screen estimating or CAD-based estimating. This hypothesis is based on the idea that companies that invest in this

software desire greater accuracy in their estimates and will need more advanced estimating methods on the largest (i.e.

most expensive) and most complicated jobs. In addition it is hypothesized that jobs of this nature would require at least

two weeks or more to estimate. This would motivate a company to set up the job within the estimating software and be

take their time to methodically estimate the job, giving accuracy top priority.

Results of Research Question 3: Research question three asked whether there will be a difference in the job

characteristics that drive contractors to select manual estimating methods over more advanced methods when multiple

options are available. The hypothesis was that jobs that are more expensive, more complex, and require more time to

estimate will use more advanced estimating methods such as on-screen estimating or CAD-based estimating. The results

indicate that jobs that are less expensive, less complex, and have less time to estimate prompted the estimator to use more

advanced estimating methods such as on-screen estimating or CAD-based estimating. There were 32 respondents to these

three questions.


22

For the job characteristic of cost, the results indicate that if the job costs much less or somewhat less than typical jobs,

38% of estimators use on-screen estimating methods; but, if the job costs much more or somewhat more than typical, 15%

of estimators use onscreen methods. And, 47% use on-screen methods on every job regardless of job characteristics.

For the job characteristic of complexity, the results indicate that if the job complexity is much less or somewhat

less than a typical job, 41% of estimators use on-screen methods, but if the job complexity is much more or somewhat

more than typical, 15% of estimators use onscreen methods. And, 44% use on-screen on every job regardless of job

characteristics.

For the job characteristic of time given to estimate the job, the results indicate that if the time given to estimate the

job is much less or somewhat less than a typical job, 35% of estimators use on-screen methods, but if the time given to

estimate the job is much more or somewhat more than typical, 20% of estimators use onscreen methods. And, 45% use

on-screen on every job regardless of job characteristics. These results are shown in Figures 1, 2, and 3.

Reflections on the Results of Research Question 3: The first important finding is that an average of 45% of the

estimators that have multiple estimating methods available to them use on-screen on every job regardless of job

characteristics. The interviews from the environmental scan and from Phase 2 also found that a number of contractors

chose to standardize their estimating process such that all their estimates used on-screen estimating software. The feeling

by the estimating managers was that the software is useful and, for the sake of uniformity and organization within the

company, the software will be used on all jobs.

The next important finding is that for all three job characteristics – cost, complexity, and time – by an average of an

approximately two to one ratio, the estimators chose to use the on-screen software on jobs with less cost, complexity,

and time given to estimate. The interviews from Phases 2 and 3 helped to explain the possible explanation for these

findings. First, some estimators felt that the on-screen did save them time estimating and thus they would choose to use

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

Use on-screen methodswhen the job cost is much

less or somewhat less

Always use on-screen methods regardless of job

characteristics

Use on-screen methodswhen the job cost is muchmore or somewhat more

Cost of the Job

Figure 1: Cost of the job versus estimating method


23

it in situations where they had less time to estimate a job. Next, one feature of the software most frequently cited as being

very useful is the counting function. This is most frequently used for counting light fixtures and various devices. This

lends itself to less complex jobs where the majority of the takeoff work required is light fixtures and devices and these

components are in a relatively uniform distribution around the building. This is quite different than a more complex

electrical layout in a large, expansive building, with a lot of switch gear or other items that are highly ‘specification driven’.

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%




characteristics


Complexity of the Job

Figure 2: Complexity of the job versus estimating method

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%




characteristics


Complexity of the Job

Figure : Time given to estimate the job versus estimating method


24

The last finding – that the software is used more on less costly jobs – is more difficult to explain. It might be

possible that the question was misunderstood by the questionnaire respondents. One reason that it is suspected that the

respondents may have misunderstood the question is that clearly there are some jobs that are inexpensive enough that

on-screen software would not be of much assistance. An example would be a 2000 SF commercial tenant build out in a

very small storefront. Many estimators would chose to estimate this small project manually. Thus, it is possible that the

question was perceived to mean which individual elements of a job are estimated with the estimating software. In this case

the explanation for the complexity characteristics of a job may hold true. The respondents may have thought of switchgear

being an example where it is very expensive and might be better just estimating manually, as opposed to simple light

fixtures which are relatively cheap and have been found to be easy to estimate with the on-screen software.

25

4.1 Subjectively Experienced Benefits of CAD-based Estimating

All of the six broad benefits of PDF-based on-screen estimating apply to CAD-based estimating as well, but to different

degrees, for different reasons, with different applicability, and with different estimating methods required. For these

reasons this section will cover the same six benefits as the PDF-based methods. In many instances the benefits are greater

with CAD-based estimating, but implementing CAD-based estimating does have more obstacles than the PDF-based on-

screen estimating.

Goals of CAD-based Estimating are Different from PDF-based On-screen Estimating: Despite all the similarities in

the benefits between these two estimating methods, these two methods are overall different. The PDF-based on-screen

estimating method is a tool for performing the take-offs on-screen as opposed to manually on a desk. It has relatively little

automation and requires nearly 100% input from the estimator to complete the takeoffs. Frequently estimators use it to

take off 90% or more of an estimate. CAD-based estimating has a different focus. The users of this software value it for

its highly automated take-off abilities. It is often used very selectively on an estimate, for example to count all the light

fixtures or receptacles in a building. Sometimes it may not be used for anything else. For these reasons, CAD-based and

PDF-based estimating methods can be thought of as different in their approaches and goals.

4.1.1 Benefit 1: Potential Time Savings

Time Savings Varies: Scientifically comparing the take-off speeds of CAD-based estimating to manual estimating

can be just as difficult as was noted for the PDF-based estimating comparison. However, unlike that comparison, based

on contractor feedback, it was unequivocal that the CAD-based estimating methods made counting-type take-offs much

faster than the manual method – it was just of matter of how much faster based on different scenarios. A few common

scenarios will be discussed below.

Scenario 1: Counting Light Fixtures and Other Common Devices with a Fully Compatible CAD File: This scenario

entails requiring the estimating software to count all of the light fixtures and many of the common devices within a

building, particularly receptacles, and provide a total quantity for each type. The CAD file must be fully compatible, thus

allowing the software to recognize the symbols and possible device attributes within the CAD file. These fully compatible

files could come from a variety of sources and situations:

1. Files come from within the company’s own design department in either a design build or cost plus contract

arrangement where they electrical contractor completes significant portions or all of the design.

4. Migrating to CAD-based Estimating: Benefits and Challenges


26

2. These files could also come from a hard-bid contract that the contractor elects to draw a CAD overlay over the pro-

vided PDF drawings.

3. From a progressive electrical designer that by their own fruition uses the most common and current ‘standard’ sym-

bols from CAD libraries and also creates thorough electrical designs.

4. From an electrical designer that the electrical contractor was able to coordinate with ahead of the design to guide

them in how to create the design files to maximize their applicability for the contractor to implement the CAD take-

off software.

This last case commonly occurs in either integrated contract situations or in situations where there is a long-standing

relationship between an electrical designer and the electrical contractor.

Performance for Scenario 1: This scenario is where the CAD-based estimating software performs the best. Electrical

contractors have most frequently cited this scenario as being approximately five times faster than the manual method,

even after factoring in software set-up time and any other incidentals. Obviously this will vary by the building type being

estimated. Hospitals were most often cited for being great candidates for achieving maximum value from the software.

Scenario 2: Counting Light Fixtures and Other Common Devices with a Partially Compatible CAD File: This scenario

entails requiring the estimating software to count all of the light fixtures and many of the common devices within a

building, particularly receptacles, and provide a total quantity for each type. The CAD file may be only partially compatible

meaning that some symbols are chosen from a ‘standard’ CAD electrical library and some are not, and instead these symbols

not properly ‘blocked’ and likely do not have any attributes associated with them. In this scenario it becomes a judgment

call by the estimator to determine whether it is worth the time to ‘clean up the file’ within the native CAD file, which

generally entails properly ‘blocking’ the symbols and then run the ‘cleaned up’ file within the estimating software. This

situation occurs when the electrical designer does not select all their symbols from ‘standard’ CAD libraries, but rather uses

manually drawn symbols in their design, which are often copied from old jobs before ‘standard’ CAD libraries existed.

Performance for Scenario 2: The performance in this scenario is not as efficient as with the fully compatible CAD

file, but depending on how much time is required to ‘clean up the file’, contractors indicated that there would still be

three times the speed gain over manual estimating. Often the time it takes the estimator to evaluate the CAD file for its

applicability with the estimating software is about an hour. At that point depending on the size of the job, the estimator

may find it worthwhile to spend from half a day to a couple of days to ‘clean up the file’ within CAD. This clean up time

has been considered worthwhile because upon its completion, the use of the software may still save many days of take-off

work on that estimate.

Scenario 3: Counting Light Fixtures and Other Common Devices with a Poor CAD File: This scenario is described

for the sake of thoroughness, but the estimating software is generally not applicable in this scenario. In this scenario the

electrical designer has not chosen ‘standard’ symbols from a CAD library, nor have they properly ‘blocked’ what symbols

they have created. There may be other deficiencies as well. Electrical contractors reported that they receive poor CAD files

as frequently as 50%–90% of the time. These contractors most often reported that the quality of the CAD files from the

electrical designers has improved over the past five years, thus making the files more applicable for use with the estimating

software, but others reported that the quality has remained about the same over the past five years.

Other Scenarios Where the CAD-based Estimating Software Potentially Saves Time: The previous three scenarios

described broad scenarios where the primary goal was to count light fixtures, receptacles, or other devices. The next three

scenarios where commonly cited as being worthwhile situations in which to use the CAD-based estimating software.

4. migrating to cad-Based estimating: Benefits and challenges

27

Quantifying Branch-lines Where the ‘Arcs’ are Showing in the Drawings: In this scenario the electrical designer has

taken the time to draw the ‘arcs’ connecting all the light fixtures on a switch to each other and connecting them back to

their switch(s). When this has been done, electrical contractors have elected to use the feature within the CAD-based

estimating software that will semi-automatically calculate the conduit lengths by producing potential orthogonal conduit

runs for those conduits where the ‘arcs’ show the path, and the user just provides the drop lengths for the conduits. This

feature of the software has been cited as saving time over a comparable manual approach to quantifying conduit and has

also been cited as being more accurate than a comparable manual method.

Variations Within the ‘Arcs’ Scenario: It should also be noted that a couple of other variations apply to utilizing

the CAD-based estimating software on the ‘arcs’ used in connecting light fixtures. The first is that unfortunately not

all electrical drawings include the ‘arcs’. This is often done to save design time. Instead the light fixtures and associated

switches are tagged on the drawings with an identifying code. In this situation, contractors were most likely to perform

a manual takeoff of the branch-line conduits. The second scenario is when most, but not all of the ‘arcs’ are shown

throughout the drawings. This situation is an example of a contractor electing to ‘clean up’ the file. Some contractors have

noted that if the majority of the ‘arcs’ are shown, it is worth their time to have a CAD draftsman quickly finish drawing off

the missing ‘arcs’ since this can generally be rapidly completed. At this point, the completed CAD file can be put into the

software and a take-off of the lighting branch-lines completed. This purpose of this approach was not cited for the time

savings, but rather the increased accuracy in taking-off 100% of the branch lighting conduits in a consistent way.

Situations with Design Changes: Some versions of the CAD-based estimating software include a feature that will

automatically modify the quantity take-offs when design changes have occurred after the original take-offs have been

completed. When the conditions surrounding this process are right, this feature has been cited for saving both time and

aggravation by of the estimator. This feature has been cited as being most effective in situations where it is the contractor

that produced the CAD drawings, the contractor is making the design changes within their CAD files and these design

changes are moderate in scope. In this case, the full automation of this feature can be most frequently utilized.

In other situations where the modified designs were produced and modified by an outside designer and/or the scope

change was significant, this process may or may not be efficient and must be evaluated by the CAD estimator for its

applicability. The common pitfalls in this transaction are when the electrical designer is not consistent in their symbology

throughout all the drawing modification iterations or is not diligent in getting the electrical contractor all the modified

drawings that originated from the original design file. Often in this situation the electrical contractor has to spend

significant time double-checking the scope of the design modifications anyway. Another common pitfall is when the

scope of work is changed significantly. In the case of major modifications, it can become too confusing for the estimator

to be comfortable merely revising their original estimate, so they may elect to start from scratch. It should be noted that

all of these pitfalls will affect a completely manually estimate to a similar extent, but were noted here to demonstrate that

unfortunately this automated design changes feature cannot always be effectively utilized.

CAD Files with Single-Line Diagrams: When the CAD design drawings show the single-line diagrams whether they

represent feeders, underground work, or other conduit representations, the CAD-based estimating software has been cited

as effective to use for the time savings and increased accuracy. In a fashion similar to tracing the orthogonal routes of the

‘arcs’ for light fixtures and other ‘daisy chaining’ situations, the software can strike out the paths of the single line diagrams

and produce a quick and accurate take-off per conduit type.

PDF files with Single-Line Diagrams: When electrical contractors receive PDF files instead of CAD files and the single-

line diagrams are shown (and of course are deemed to be more or less properly value engineered) some contractors have

27


28

found it worthwhile to create their own CAD file that they overlay over the PDF files provided to them. They recreate the

single-line diagrams in their CAD file and then place this file within the CAD-based estimating software to generate the

take-offs. The goal of this procedure was frequently cited as increased accuracy as opposed to time savings.

Specification-Driven Items: Just as with the PDF-based on-screen estimating method, it was generally accepted that

the CAD-based estimating method offered no speed benefits when it came to counting items that were highly dependent

on the specifications associated with them. Common examples include switch gear, disconnects, transformers, and relay

assemblies. There were generally not many of them to be counted as compared to more common items such as light

fixtures and receptacles. In addition, the true cost of the item can only be ascertained after having carefully reviewed

the specifications on the item and after having determined the design engineer’s intent with the item. The CAD-based

estimating method didn’t offer any clear speed advantages over the manual method in resolving these issues.

Direct Electronic Tabulation of the Take-off Quantities: For the PDF-based on-screen estimating method, the benefit of

electronic tabulation of the takeoff was the predominant factor producing time savings in the estimating process over manual

estimating methods. For CAD-based estimating methods, the time savings associated with electronic tabulation are just as

significant. The difference is that since the CAD-based estimating methods normally produces tremendous time savings for

its most common applications, this element of time savings can be overlooked, but it is just as beneficial. The description of

this benefit as it applies to both PDF-based estimating and CAD-based estimating is repeated here for posterity.

Direct Electronic Tabulation: To describe this feature, some common manual methods of tabulating the take-off

quantities and inputting them into the labor and material pricing database will first be described. To start, estimators

using the manual method either had paper ledgers or spreadsheet software that they will type directly into. As they

recorded the number of light fixtures or the lengths of different conduit sizes, the quantities of each step had to be

recorded somewhere on paper or into a spread sheet for later summarization. When this process is completed for a page,

or a section of a building, etc. these tabulations need to be totaled and then manually entered into the pricing spreadsheet

or copied over from another spreadsheet that totaled the quantities. This can be a time consuming process.

Employing Direct Electronic Tabulation of the Take-off Quantities: This process was much more streamlined within

the on-screen estimating software and the CAD-based estimating software. For example, to count the number of Type

1 light fixtures on a floor of a building, the CAD-based estimating software automatically counted and tabulated the

quantities. There was no handheld counting clicker involved or relying on one’s memory to remember how many fixtures

had been counted. A similar process occurs for the other devices that the estimator desires to have the software count and

tabulate.

More Importantly: The greatest benefit of the direct electronic tabulation of the take-off quantities was that these

summarized quantities can be imported directly into the pricing database. With this process, if an estimator wanted, they

would never have to write down any quantity either by hand or type it into a spreadsheet. Significant time savings were

produced because of the lack of the step of having to manually type all of one’s summarized quantities into the pricing

database either from their paper or the lack of the step of having to type all the quantities into a spreadsheet during the

take-off process. This process cannot be understated, that in using the software the time spent manually typing in a long

array of quantities is eliminated. In addition, the potential for errors in copying the quantities, totaling the quantities, or

copying over the quantities was eliminated.

Summary for the Potential Time Savings: CAD-based estimating software is generally used selectively throughout an

electrical estimate as opposed to a holistic approach in which 90% or more of the electrical take-offs are generated within


29

the software. One important reason for this is that this selective use of the software can generate the most significant time

savings within the take-off process. When the software is used to count items such as light fixtures and receptacles with a

combatable CAD file, it can generate take-offs at about five times the speed of manual takeoffs. Even when the CAD files

are less than ideal and require some ‘cleaning up’ from the contractor’s CAD personnel, contractors still reported that the

software could generate take-offs at double the speed of manual take-offs.

Just as with the PDF-based on-screen estimating software, the CAD-based estimating software was used in situations

where the primary goal was increased accuracy and not time savings. As one example, when the contractor produces their

own CAD files overlaid over the PDF drawings they were provided instead of native CAD files, the contractors’ best guess

was that this process takes about the same amount of time as a manual estimate, but that it was worth the work for the

increased accuracy of the subsequent CAD-based estimating software’s take-offs on this work.

4.1.2 Benefit 2: Potential for Greater Accuracy

The two most commonly cited reasons for upgrading to both a PDF-based on-screen estimating method or a CAD-

based estimating method were increased speed and greater accuracy. When some electrical contractors discussed the

concept of increased accuracy when using CAD-based estimating methods, they defined accuracy as either minimizing

the errors in the take-off process or minimizing the potential for errors in the take-off process. When the CAD-based

estimating software is used under the supervision of a careful estimator, this is exactly what the software produces; A take-

off of items that is automatically generated directly from the information within the CAD files and not a secondary source

such as paper drawings or even PDF drawings. In addition, several error prone steps are eliminated through the use of the

CAD-based estimating software.

Employing Direct Electronic Tabulation of the Take-off Quantities: As was discussed in the time savings section, direct

electronic tabulation eliminates a very error prone step in the estimating process. Instead of having to manually type in

one’s quantities into the materials/labor pricing spreadsheets, the CAD-based estimating software automatically tabulates

the quantities in spreadsheet form that can then be electrically copied into the pricing spreadsheet. Eliminating this step

eliminates the possibility of mis-typing a number, misreading a number, typing data into the wrong column, etc. Even

veteran estimators mentioned that this has happened to them before and they may or may not have caught the mistakes.

Greater Organization of the Takeoffs: Because the CAD-based estimating software operates electronically as opposed

to on physical pieces of paper, the takeoffs can be much clearer and organized than on paper. For example, as the software

identifies the individual items, it will shade them gray to identify that they have been accounted for. Those items not

counted yet will retain their original color. This places the user in a visually organized environment to work in. Those

‘grayed’ items accounted for were linked to an organized tabulation on the side of the screen that was clearly identified and

also contained any item attributes or descriptions. In addition, layers can be created and turned on and off to aid in the

estimator checking their work and keeping it organized.

Reduction of User Fatigue: Operating within the visually organized CAD-based environment was cited as having

similar benefits as the PDF-based on-screen environment of reducing user fatigue as compared to manual estimating,

which can often be disorganized. However, since the CAD-based estimating software excels at automatically counting

devices such as light fixtures and receptacles, this feature was deemed to be the most fatigue reducing feature within the

software. Not only does the software remove some of the counting work out of the take-off process, but it does so in an

organized fashion such that it is clear what has been taken off and what hasn’t been. This can free up the mental energy of


30

the estimator, thus allowing them to focus on those nuanced items buried within the drawings, rather than reaching early

exhaustion chasing down light fixtures and other common devices.

4.1.3 Benefit 3: Younger Estimators Desire to Use Technology

The same arguments and anecdotal evidence that younger estimators desire to use technology to assist them with their

work as much as possible that applied to the PDF-based on-screen estimating software are also applicable for the CAD-

based estimating software. These younger estimators are often attracted to companies that utilize the latest technology and

in addition, these younger estimators often work more efficiently if they are able to utilize the technology. For CAD-based

estimating software, there is only one issue elements to note: Anecdotal evidence has noted that these younger employees

do not want to just use technology for technology’s sake, but rather use technology when it increases productivity or

otherwise eliminates wastefulness. With the highly automated features of the CAD-based estimating software that takes

advantage of the embedded information within the native CAD files, greater efficiency is possible.

4.1.4 Benefit 4: Great Presentation Value for a Client or General Contractor

Beyond Lump Sum, Low Bid Work: The great presentation value of the CAD-based estimating software may not be

the deciding factor on whether a contractor wins a lump sum, low bid job. However most electrical contractors perform at

least some work where their qualifications, reputation, and presentation matter more than price. This work may consist of

negotiated work, design/build work, or simply work that the owner is willing to balance qualifications with price. When

an electrical contractor is given the opportunity to price work in this environment, the presentation of some or all of their

estimate within the CAD-based estimating software can be very impressive to the owner or to the general contractor. Just

as with the PDF-based on-screen estimating software, the CAD-generated estimate can be presented in electronic form

paper. The presentation is particularly impressive because the take-off work on the drawings is coming directly off of the

original CAD-file and so all the work is shown with the same precision as the CAD-file.

Better Transparency in the Estimate: In working in an environment where qualifications play a part in the selection

of the electrical contractor, a transparent estimate can greatly increase the client’s confidence in the electrical contractor

and in their bid price. Employing CAD-based estimating software can assist in producing this transparency. Electrical

contractors have cited a couple of ways in which this occurs while they are meeting with an owner or general contractor

to review their bid. The first aspect of the CAD-based estimating software that brings transparency to the bid is that

the software provides a direct relationship between the drawings and their cost. For example, in discussing a particular

item in the bid, the owner or general contractor may ask, “What do you have covered for these items?” The electrical

contractor can click on that item or assembly and quickly be able to determine what exactly was the make-up of their

assembly, what they had accounted for, and what were the associated costs. This leads to the second aspect of the software

that provides greater transparency, which is that in going through this process item by item, the electrical contractor

is able to conspicuously demonstrate to the owner or general contractor their high level of precision within their bid.

Demonstrating their high level of precision can reassure the owner or general contractor that this electrical contractor has

all the items and assemblies thoroughly accounted for and that this electrical contractor would bring that same level of

precision to the work if awarded the job. These factors may help that electrical contractor win the job.

4.1.5. Benefit 5: Increased Organization of Estimates

Central location: When an estimate is performed within CAD-based estimating software, it is stored electronically. It

can be moved or copied at any time. All the estimates can be stored in one, convenient location. These estimates can be


31

accessed by anyone in the company, if desired. In addition, these estimates can be accessed on-line from any office within

the company’s network. Frequently a company may have multiple offices that need to collaborate on the same job and this

feature can be particularly useful. With electronic files, as long as the IT department has properly backed-up the server, the

files are safe and in one easy to access location.

‘Editable’ Estimate: Some of the CAD-based estimating software on the market comes with a feature which will

automatically detect changes within different revisions of the design drawings and update the take-off quantities

accordingly. As was discussed in the ‘Potential Time Savings’ section of this report, this feature can be very useful under

the proper conditions, but this is not always the case. For those situations where this tool cannot be taken advantage of,

the software has the same ‘editing’ advantages of the PDF-based on-screen estimating software. When the takeoffs for an

estimate are completed with CAD-based estimating software, they are editable at any point in the future. This can be an

important feature if there are design changes, mistakes in the estimate caught during the QA/QC phase, or (for example)

if in the course of performing the estimate, the estimator discovers a better path to route a feeder or a homerun. The

old work can be deleted and the new work inserted and then taken-off in its place. The quantities associated with these

changes are automatically updated as part of this change.

Estimate Review: Different companies review their estimates with varying degrees of thoroughness, but for those

companies that perform a quality review of their estimates, the CAD-based estimating software provides a great platform

for checking the take-off work. This is because all the take-off work is clearly and cleanly shown on the screen. It is much

easier to determine which sections of a building have been completed than with the manual drawings with the multitude

of hand drawn markings all over them. It is also easier to check on specific items in the estimate, because one can click on

that item and all those items are highlighted on that page.

4.1.6 Benefit 6: Provides Additional Tool for Estimators

Individual Estimator’s Preferences: There are an unlimited numbers of techniques that electrical estimators use to

perform their takeoffs. Some prefer the clicker, the wheel, an engineer’s ruler, the digitizer, counting in their head, chanting

to themselves, scratch paper, spreadsheets, crayons, highlighters, and color pencils. All of these options come down to the

judgment of the estimator in the tools and techniques that they would prefer to use to make themselves the most effective.

The CAD-based estimating software can be thought of as another one of these tools to make available to the company’s

estimators.

Within the PDF-based on-screen estimating section, it was noted that the adoption of that software can help motivate

some of the estimating staff that desires to use technology to the fullest extent possible and the adoption of the software

may assist some estimators in being more productive based on their estimating style and preferences. The same concepts

hold true for a company adopting the CAD-based estimating software, but there is one additional benefit to adopting this

new tool. It allows the unlocking of the embedded information within the CAD file, so that the estimator can take full

advantage of any information available within that file. Obviously this broad concept and all its implications have been

discussed throughout this entire section, but this concept was reiterated here to highlight the fact that the software is a tool.

For those companies that do not possess this tool, their estimators cannot take full advantage of native CAD files in those

situations where they are available.

33

5. Major Obstacles to Adopting CAD-based Estimating Methods

5.1 Introduction

Unfortunately there are more obstacles to adopting a CAD-based estimating method than for a PDF-based on-screen

estimating method. Many of the seven obstacles that applied to the PDF-based on-screen estimating method also apply

to the CAD-based estimating method. These seven obstacles will be briefly discussed in this section as they pertain to any

unique challenges to CAD-based estimating methods. Three additional obstacles that apply only to CAD-based estimating

methods will be discussed in detail.

5.1.1 Obstacles Shared with PDF-based Estimating Methods

1. Costs: Just as with the PDF-based on-screen estimating method, the CAD-based estimating method has costs

associated with purchasing the software, the training of the estimators on that software, the purchasing of any

computer hardware required to efficiently use the software, and the time lost due to the learning curve of mastering

the new software.

2. Benefits of the Software: While many contractors see the potential benefits of the CAD-based estimating software,

many of them are skeptical of the magnitude of the benefits advertised by the software producers. The largest

concern is that the software will not have as large of a time savings as advertised by the producers of the software.

Some of the factors controlling how much time is saved will be discussed in the subsequent ‘Subjectively Experience

Benefits of CAD-Based Estimating’ section of this report. The other predominant concern among contractors

is that the software will only be able be applicable and useful for a minority of the jobs the company performs

estimates on. The potential reasons for this are discussed later in this section.

3. Concerns that technology in the industry will change: The concerns are similar for both the CAD-based and PDF-

based on-screen estimating software: Technology may change in the future, affecting either type of software. In

particular, BIM-based software is expected to play an increasingly important role in the future. However, one

additional concern was noted for the CAD-based estimating software: electrical contractors have been attempting

to persuade architects and engineers to share their CAD files with them during the pre-bid stage, with only limited

success. Some believe this issue is unlikely to be resolved soon and new software is needed that doesn’t rely on

native CAD files.

4. Lack of critical evaluation and/or attention to the estimating departments to see how they might be improved: This

obstacle was identical for either CAD-based and PDF-based estimating methods. Some electrical contractors have

not evaluated the efficiency of their estimating departments in some time. In addition, some electrical contractors


34

have not actively examined ways to improve their estimating departments. Without this critical evaluation of the

estimating department as a whole, it is unlikely that a new estimating method such as the CAD-based estimating

method will be implemented.

5. Resistance to technological change: This obstacle was similar to that for the PDF-based on-screen estimating

methods, but to a lesser degree. Some resistance to technological change as pertains to potentially adopting CAD-

based was observed, particularly as concerns the estimating process becoming more automated and more reliant on

computers. However, despite the CAD-based software being arguably more technologically advanced than the PDF-

based software, these concerns were not as numerous. The reasons for this are unknown as this was not specifically

addressed in the interviews, but it is speculated that because there was perceived to be a greater benefit to the CAD-

based software than the PDF-based on-screen estimating software, the changes required on behave of the estimators

to adapt to the new technology were viewed as more worthwhile.

6. The technology and work environment required to optimally implement on-screen: The same requirements for the

PDF-based on-screen estimating software apply to the CAD-based estimating software. This includes having two

(or more) large monitors required to efficiently use the estimating software. Also, just as before this requires a

computer and monitor set-up that is stationary in an office. The major difference observed between the methods

was that with the CAD-based software, the estimator was much more likely to solely work on estimating and more

specifically CAD-based estimating, than other responsibilities within the company such as project management

duties. As a result, this estimator generally remained in their office for a majority of their time anyway, thus not

experiencing the difficulties of other estimators that may also be project managers or superintendents that try to

estimate outside the office with a small laptop computer.

7. Misconceptions: It is not understood why, but there were fewer misconceptions about the CAD-based estimating

software than the PDF-based on-screen estimating software. Possible reasons could be that the electrical contractors

more thoroughly examined the CAD-based product, the CAD-based software producers more heavily advertised

and promoted the CAD-based software at conferences or during on-site demonstrations, or perhaps there was

more discussion of the product amongst the trade journals of the profession. The one main misconception that

was observed was that some electrical contractors thought that they would have to radically change their standard

assemblies or items in their databases as a result of the new software. This may or may not be true based on how

thorough the electrical contractor’s database is already set-up. In addition, some contractors were concerned that

they may have to change the pricing in their databases associated with each item or assembly since the software

can conceivably estimate a job more accurately than the company had been doing for many years with the manual

method. This again, may or may not be true based on how accurately they had been estimating previously and also

how accurately they estimate with the CAD-based software, since there is still critical estimating judgment that is

required to operate the software.

5.1.2 Main Obstacle 1: Difficulty in obtaining the native CAD files

The first obstacle that a user of CAD-based estimating software must overcome is to obtain the native CAD files

during the pre-bid stage from the architects and engineers (A/Es) that designed the job. This is the most difficult obstacle

to overcome because it is largely out of the electrical contractor’s control. Without these CAD files, the CAD-based

estimating software cannot be fully utilized (Note that some contractors will overlay their own CAD work over the PDF

provided by the A/E and still be able to utilize elements of the CAD-based estimating software and certain elements of the

5. major oBstacles to adoPting cad-Based estimating methods

35

drawing. This method is less than ideal. This method is discussed in the ‘Subjectively Experienced Benefits of CAD-based

Estimating Methods.’). For years the A/E’s have shown tremendous reluctance to release their CAD files during the pre-

bid stage and this pattern only shows modest signs of changing in the future. The reasons for this reluctance vary, but the

three most common explanations from the A/E’s include:

1. The A/E’s feel there is no benefit to them in releasing the files at the pre-bid stage, only risk.

2. The A/E’s have liability concerns over releasing the files.

3. There are fears of the files being unethically copied, altered by the contractor, or other proprietary digital

information unknowingly released.

Most contractors have stated that they get the CAD files from the A/E less than 10% of the time. The situations

where the electrical contractor was able to obtain the files are most often from a good, longstanding relationship between

an electrical contractor and an electrical designer. If the electrical designer trusts the electrical contractor, they may feel

comfortable giving them the CAD files during the pre-bid stage. However, it was also noted that this practice is at times

discouraged because of concerns that the electrical contractor obtaining the CAD files has an unfair advantage over the

other electrical contractors bidding the job that do not receive the CAD files. For this reason, some electrical designers that

trust a particular electrical contractor will still not release the CAD files to them or anyone else in the pre-bid stage.

One additional common situation where the CAD files do get released during the pre-bid phase is when there is a

sophisticated owner (private or public) of the project who requires collaboration of all parties involved in their project.

This owner may have the parties work together under an Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) system to help facilitate

collaboration. This project delivery system can be quite effective and assists in all contractors and subcontractors

obtaining the CAD-files pre-bid, but it is a relatively rare situation in the construction industry.

Lastly, there are some A/E’s that will release their CAD files, but with lengthy legal liability waivers that the contractors

must sign. Most contractors do not mind the legal waiver, and are just pleased to have the native CAD files. Some

contractors have reported that these ‘benevolent’ A/E’s are very slowly becoming more common, but that this situation is

still rare.

5.1.3 Main Obstacle 2: Native CAD files received from the electrical designer are not immediately compatible with the estimating software

If the electrical contractor receives the CAD files from the electrical designer, the next obstacle they face is that the

CAD files are generally not immediately compatible with the CAD-based estimating software. There are four main issues

that account for this: (1) Electrical designs are often incomplete and require key elements to be determined before the job

can be properly estimated manually or with the software. (2) There are no true industry-wide standards for the symbology

used in electrical design. (3) The designs inevitably contain errors and also omissions. (4) The design drawings were not

completed to a thorough enough standard for the purposes of an automated estimate.

1. Incomplete Electrical Designs: This is the same obstacle that electrical estimators encounter that are performing

manual estimating. Generally only items such as light fixtures, devices, panels, switchgear rooms, and other open-

ings are shown on the drawings. Sometimes suggested routes for feeders are given via the single-line diagrams. If

these feeder routes are shown, they may be vague or not properly value designed. This requires that they be de-

signed or redesigned by the estimator, depending on the situation. Homeruns and branch lines are rarely shown on

the plans, again relying on the best judgment of the estimator to complete the design. These incomplete drawings


36

can be particularly frustrating for an estimator hoping to employ a CAD-based estimating method, because the

full power of the software cannot be realized if all the elements of the electrical design are not contained within the

CAD files.

2. No True Industry-wide Standards for the Symbology: This is the next obstacle that reduces the efficiency of the CAD-

based estimating software. Every electrical designer has different symbols to represent their light fixtures, devices,

panels, etc. These symbols may be recognizable to the estimator, but the software may not immediately recognize it,

requiring the estimator to manually input all the symbols into the estimating software so that it will recognize them

in the current set of electrical drawings being estimated. The automated counting ability of the software can still

be utilized once this process is complete, but this process definitely increased the overall estimating take-off time

because of all the manual input required.

3. Errors and Omissions in the Electrical Designs: Projects of a large size are prone to the electrical design containing

errors and omissions. In addition there are plenty of electrical designs that are not of the best quality for a variety

of reasons, yet the electrical contractors needs to bid on them regardless. Again, errors and omissions are a problem

for electrical estimators performing manual estimates as well, but once again these issues reduce the efficiency of the

CAD-based estimating software. The result may be that the software will either be taking-off incorrect items with

incorrect quantities, or it may miss those sections that were omitted in the drawings. In addition, the argument has

been made that the use of the software may make it less likely that the estimator would spot these problems within

the drawings, since the estimator is relying on the automation of the computer and also placing a less critical look

on the electrical design during the take-off. It is hard to prove or disprove this argument, but suffice to say the sce-

nario it predicts has the potential to occur when utilizing the software.

4. Difference Between an Intent Level Drawing and a Spec Level Drawing: Generally electrical designs are drawn within

CAD for expressing intent, and less drawing time and thoroughness are required in conveying intent only. However

in order to create ‘spec level’ drawings, more thoroughness is required within the drawings in order to utilize all the

capabilities of the CAD-based estimating software. This issue essentially comes down to how thoroughly the items

and assemblies within the electrical drawings were ‘blocked’, if at all. Blocking symbols, items, or assemblies in CAD

means that each symbol, item, or assembly is not merely a random collection of CAD lines, but is rather a single

entity with the attributes (specifications) of that item contained within the ‘blocked’ item.

Why Thorough Blocking Doesn’t Occur: The first reason blocking does not occur is that it is not necessarily required

for an intent level CAD drawing so the designers may not include this in their drawings. Depending on the electrical

designer it may be extra work for them to properly block all their items and symbols, so they are not necessarily going to

do this if it is not required. So what is done in lieu of this is their items may be manually drawn from scratch in CAD or

perhaps copied over again and again from their company’s old drawings. The designers do this when they don’t elect to

take the extra step to pull the item from a standardized CAD platform, from which the items come properly blocked. This

issue is really the same as the ‘Non-standard symbols’ issue presented in Obstacle 2.2, but with one additional nuance. For

this issue, it is not just that the symbols are different, but rather that the symbols were not chosen from a standard CAD

platform (or library). As an example, the ‘unblocked’ symbol for a GFI duplex receptacle would be a circle with two lines

through it and the text ‘GFI’ next to it. If instead, this symbol was chosen from a standard CAD platform, it may look the

same on a set of printed plans, but it would be instantly recognizable by the software as a standard GFI duplex receptacle.

In addition, if the work was very thorough, all the main specifications of that item could be revealed by clicking on the


37

item. For this example, that could mean including the amperage of the GFI receptacle, the manufacturer, and perhaps a

part number.

5.1.4 Main Obstacle 3: Estimators must know CAD

This obstacle is just as formidable as the previous two obstacles because the CAD based estimating software cannot be

fully implemented without a solid understanding of CAD software. Within the electrical industry there is a shortage of

experienced electrical estimators that also know CAD software well. Contractors reported that it was common for their

best estimators to not know CAD and for their best CAD personnel to not know how to estimate. One of the reasons cited

was that many of the experienced estimators came from the field. Because of the field experience these estimators know

every aspect of the trade, including all the different materials, conditions likely to be encountered in the field, common

pit-falls, and how to read electrical drawings. This made them great estimators. However, since they came from the field,

the vast majority of them have had no CAD training. For those personnel that do know CAD, many of them came from a

trade school or a college and focused on their CAD training. They often lack the practical estimating experience or do not

have the desire to do estimating. Many contractors have noted that they may only have one or two estimators that know

CAD within an estimating department of 10 or 15 estimators.

Why is a CAD Background Required?: When an estimator works with a CAD-based estimating software, they are

working in a CAD environment. Many elements of the software are unique to that software (and obviously must be

learned as well), but in navigating through the CAD files within the software, a solid CAD background provides the

necessary experience. In addition, there are two steps within the CAD-based estimating experience that must take

place directly within the CAD file prior to the use of the CAD-based estimating software. The first step is to open the

original CAD file and determine how thoroughly it was drawn in order to determine if the file is a good candidate for

the estimating software. Among other things, this includes checking how well the symbols were blocked. The second

step, if the file is determined to be useable within the estimating software, is to ‘clean it up’ within the CAD file first. This

often entails properly blocking some (or all) of the symbols that were not previously done. It may also entail completing

certain details of the drawing within CAD or drawing in quick items from scratch such as the ‘arcs’ that daisy-chain the

light fixtures and connect them to their switches. It may also include drawing in feeder or homerun paths. This obviously

requires CAD experience, but with the understanding of an experienced estimator.

39

6. Summary of Best Practices

A collection of best practices extracted from the interviews with numerous electrical contractors is discussed in the

paragraphs below.

6.1 Customize the Estimating Method for the Specific Job at Hand

This entails using the most appropriate estimating method whether that is the manual method, the PDF-based

on-screen estimating method, or the CAD-based estimating method, based on the job characteristics. If an electrical

contractor has two or all of these three options available as tools for their estimating department, most of these 14 best

practices can be followed. Three practices used for jobs of different characteristics are listed here:

a. Manually Estimate Small Jobs: Some jobs are clearly too small to benefit from more advanced estimating

methods.

b. Manually Estimate Spec-Driven Devices within a Job: For those devices that are generally small in quantity but

expensive in cost and highly reliant on their associated specifications, manual estimates are frequently preferred.

c. Use CAD-based Estimating Software for Counting Common Devices: If the native files are available and are

compatible, take advantage of the fast counting abilities of the CAD-based estimating software to count the most

common devices such as light fixtures and receptacles.

6.2 Vary the Estimating Technique to Optimize the Balance Between Estimating Time and Take-off Accuracy

This can apply to any of the three estimating methods. Each job should be evaluated to see if a square-foot estimate

will suffice on some elements, if a unit cost estimate would suffice on other elements, where ‘averaging’ methods can be

used to quantify conduit lengths, and where detailed layouts with exacting itemization is required.

6.3 Employ Multiple Monitors and Paper Drawings

A common set-up used to estimate drawings most effectively with the two estimating software options, includes two

or three large monitors and a set of paper drawings. 24” monitors are generally cost effective and adequately display the

drawings at a comfortable size for the estimator. In the two monitor set-up, one monitor displays the drawing being

taken-off and one monitor displays the spreadsheet that the quantities are being tabulated into. For the three monitor (or

more) option, the third monitor (etc.) can display the detailrd drawings alongside the main drawing page, or whatever

other page the estimator desires. For the paper drawings, generally the drawings index page is printed out and hung up for


40

easy referencing across the set of drawings. In addition, the drawings can be printed out in half size or 11 x 17 size. These

drawings can be used for quick cross-references across pages since they can be flipped through faster than the drawings

displayed on the monitors. They can also be used to orient the estimator within the whole scheme of the job.

6.4 Don’t Force a New Estimating System on One’s Estimators

As many companies move to replace manual estimating with newer PDF-based on-screen estimating methods or

CAD-based estimating methods, contractors have noted that it is better to work to convince one’s estimators of the

merits of the newly implemented estimating method rather than forcing the new method across the entire estimating

department. Estimating managers have reported higher estimator satisfaction and better results when their estimators are

allowed to choose their own estimating methods. In addition, many of the ‘hold-out’ estimators come around to the more

advanced methods when they see the benefits of them firsthand from watching their fellow estimators.

6.5 To Manage Software Cost and Commitment, Purchase Only a License or Two

If the software and associated training costs are a concern and/or if one would like to hedge their commitments to a

certain software, then purchase just one or two licenses and have one’s estimator that is most excited about implementing

the software take the time to learn it. After the learning curve has passed, have that estimator and the estimating manager

determine how effective the product is for their company, to determine how the software should be most effectively

implemented.

6.6 Write a Proprietary Training and Software Usage Manual for the Software and Train In-House

For those companies that desire to increase the usage of the estimating software across their estimating department, it

can be effective to have the original estimator that learned the software to formalize the estimating procedures by writing a

proprietary training and use manual for the company. That same estimator can also teach the other estimators within the

company that to desire to learn the software.

6.7 Impressive Presentation Value in the Preconstruction Phase

This generally applies to both the PDF-based on-screen estimating software and the CAD-based estimating software.

For those electrical contractors that either focus on their preconstruction services or bid jobs in an environment where

qualifications play a part in the selection of the electrical contractor, this benefit of the software is definitely a ‘best

practice’. When the estimate is being discussed with the client in an in-person meeting, because the take-off work for

either approach is saved electronically and linked to a pricing database, the contractor has the option to perform ‘real time

estimating’ and there is much more transparency in the estimate. For example, if the client would like to know how much

a particular part of the design is costing them, the electrical contractor can determine that or if the client wants to know

how much a change to the design would cost, the contractor can determine that too. Doing this not only impresses the

client, but also allows the contractor to demonstrate their level of their precision of their estimate to the client.

6.8 Increase Accuracy by Eliminating Error Prone Steps

With both the PDF-based and the CAD-based estimating software, error prone steps are eliminated, thus increasing

the chances of an accurate estimate. For both software options, when the devices and conduits are taken-off, the quantities

are automatically summed, tabulated, and kept in a spreadsheet form. This eliminates the error prone step of the manual

estimator summing their figures on paper and then having to manually type of this into a spread sheet. For the CAD-


41

based estimating software, it does even better by determining the take-off quantities based on the accuracy of the CAD

files, not the abilities of an estimator to find and correctly count and measure all of the items.

6.9 The Estimating Take-off Software is an Additional Tool for One’s Estimators

Owning either the PDF-based on-screen estimating software or the CAD-based estimating software or both, gives

contractors additional estimating tools at their disposal. For example if native CAD files can be obtained, then the CAD

software can provide tremendous benefits. For another example if a contractor has younger employees that feel that they

would be more effective is using the PDF-based on-screen estimating software, then that option is available to them.

6.10 Easily Share Files Across Offices

Whether by necessity or for convenience, use of either software allows the files being worked on to be electronically sent

from one office branch to another one. This can be useful if one branch has some estimators with free time and another

branch is overworked. This allows the take-off work to be transmitted for review or for collaboration between branches.

6.11 Coordinate with the Electrical Designer to Optimize the Future use of CAD-based Estimating Software

For those jobs that have a design/build or IPD type contract arrangement, it may be possible for the electrical contractor

to coordinate with the electrical designer before the design is started. The purpose of this coordination would be to alert the

designer to the fact that the contractor will be using CAD-based estimating software on the estimate and thus they should

coordinate the use of their symbols throughout the drawings so that the software will recognize the symbols.

6.12 Clean-up CAD Files First when Applicable

When native CAD files can be obtained, but they are not immediately compatible with the CAD-based estimating

software, an experienced estimator fluent in CAD can quickly review the files to determine if they can be efficiently

‘cleaned up’ in order to harness the full power of the estimating software. Evaluating the applicability of the CAD files

can usually be done in an hour. When the files are good candidates, the estimator can take a day or so to clean up the

file, generally by standardizing some of the symbols and/or properly ‘blocking’ the devices. This day spent could save the

company many more days of estimating time had the estimate been required to be done manually.

6.13 Take Advantage of Automated Updating of Take-off Quantities during Design Changes

Some versions of CAD-based estimating software include a feature that will automatically modify the quantity take-

offs when design changes have occurred after the original take-offs have been completed. When the design has been

created in-house and the design changes are modest in scope, the electrical contractor should take advantage of this feature

to reduce the frustration surrounding multiple iterations of design changes.

6.14 Take Advantage of CAD Files Where the ‘Arcs’ are Shown in the Drawings

When the native CAD files have the ‘arcs’ connecting all the light fixtures on a switch to each other and connecting

them back to their switch(s), the CAD-based estimating software will semi-automatically calculate the conduit lengths that

link the lights and switches, by producing potential orthogonal conduit runs for those conduits where the ‘arcs’ show the

path. This can save time and increase accuracy over a comparable manual method.

43

7. Conclusion and Recommendations for Further Study

7.1 Conclusion

The foundation of any great electrical contractor is built upon their estimating department and the ultimate goal of a

great estimating department is to win the company profitable work. Winning profitable work is most often the result of

consistently producing accurate estimates in a timely fashion. The requirement that electrical estimating departments both

balance and achieve these goals is just as important as it has always been. Software manufacturers have been producing

increasingly sophisticated electrical estimating takeoff software designed to assist estimators to meet these goals. Through

the interviews conducted as part of this research and through analyzing the results of the on-line questionnaire, it was

found that this software has many benefits, but that there are obstacles to the software’s full implementation.

PDF-based On-Screen Estimating Software: This type of software was found to have many benefits and only modest

obstacles to implementing it. The benefits include potential time savings, increased accuracy, appealing to younger

estimators desire to implement technology, tremendous presentation value for a client, greater organization of the

estimates, and the software is one more tool available for use by one’s estimators. Many of the obstacles to implementing

the software were self-imposed by electrical contractors. Some of these obstacles include misconceptions of the software,

resistance to technological change, and lack of critical evaluation of their estimating department. These along with a

couple of other modest obstacles such as cost and employee training, can be overcome.

CAD-based Estimating Software: This software has great power, but it also has more difficult obstacles to overcome

in order to achieve its full implementation. Its benefits include significant time savings in the take-off process, increased

accuracy because the takeoffs are directly linked to the accuracy of the CAD file, and assistance in updating takeoff

quantities during design changes. In addition, it shares many of the same benefits of the PDF-based on-screen estimating

such as appealing to younger estimators desire to implement technology in their career, tremendous presentation value for

a client, greater organization of the estimates, and that the software is one more tool available for use by one’s estimators.

Many of the obstacles are similar to those obstacles for PDF-based on-screen estimating, but it also has three additional

obstacles. These are that the native CAD files can be difficult to obtain, if obtained, the CAD files may not be of a high

enough quality to harness the power of the software, and this software requires estimators to be trained in CAD. As a

result, this software is generally not implemented as universally as it has the potential to be, but for those situations where

excellent CAD files can be obtained, the software can provide tremendous benefits.

Additional Interesting Findings: Also as part of this research two research questions were posed:


44

1. Can one predict whether an electrical contractor uses an estimating method more advanced than the manual meth-

od based on company characteristics, company culture, estimating department composition, progressive behavior,

and technology implemented?

2. Will there be a difference in the job characteristics that drive contractors to select manual estimating methods over

more advanced methods when multiple options are available?

For the first research question, it was determined that this research could not predict the estimating method, which

was surprising based on the variables tested. Major variables included size of a company, construction sector that that

company typically operates in, the company’s adoption of other current technologies, and the attitudes of the estimating

department concerning accuracy, QAQC and standardization of their estimates. While surprising, this result does indicate

that electrical contractors of nearly any characteristic are purchasing and implementing estimating take-off software. Thus

the software seems to have universal appeal across the spectrum of the electrical contracting industry.

For the second research question, there were some subtle differences in the job characteristics that drive contractors to

select manual estimating methods over more advanced methods when multiple options are available. The results indicated

that electrical contractors favored using the software on jobs with less time given to estimate, less complexity and less cost,

but about 45% of software users used the software regardless of the job characteristics. Through more in-depth interviews

it was determined that two broad rules applied:

1. For CAD-based estimating software, its utilization was generally a function of the availability of the native CAD files

and how usable those files were.

2. For the PDF-based on-screen estimating software, electrical contractors either used it on nearly 100% of their jobs

or they used it selectively for counting, regardless of the job characteristics. These findings are again an indication

that this software can have broad uses across varying types of jobs.

Estimating in the Future: The electrical estimating landscape has been evolving quickly and it is likely to continue to

evolve at a rapid pace. Paper drawings are quickly becoming a thing of the past and PDF’s are the predominate form of

document transmission. CAD files are being shared with increasing frequency in the pre-bid stage, but still remain a small

fraction of the overall drawings provided to electrical contractors. BIM is beginning to saturate the construction industry

and it appears that its use will grow as both owners and contractors desire more certainty prior to beginning construction.

Estimating will likely take place in a BIM environment in the future.

So where does this leave the software that this research has examined? It appears that both PDF-based on-screen

estimating and CAD-based estimating will continue to play an important role in the estimating process. While the

“halo” has been taken away from CAD-based estimating because of the difficulty in obtaining quality native files, many

contractors have reported that they are encountering more electrical designers willing to share their native files and in

addition, those native CAD files are becoming increasingly standardized such that the software can more easily recognize

the device symbols. With the BIM environment encouraging and/or requiring all parties to share their files, even more

electrical designers may feel comfortable sharing their native CAD files in the future. Thus at the present time, CAD-based

estimating software appears to have a solid role to play in the future.

PDF-based on-screen estimating also appears to have a key role in the future of estimating as more software producers

are producing their own version of PDF-based on-screen estimating software, indicating that they see a strong future

for it. In addition, PDF documents have become ubiquitous in a short matter of about five years or so. Designers are

comfortable sharing these files and the contractors receiving the PDF files enjoy their ease of use. It still appears to be

7. conclusion and recommendations for further study

45

many years before most jobs will be performed in a BIM environment. For the present time there will be jobs that don’t

require the BIM environment because they are too small or too simple. There will also be jobs where the costs associated

with a BIM environment will not be deemed to be cost effective. For each of these scenarios, PDF-based on-screen

estimating can still play a vital role in the estimating of the job.

7.2 Recommendation for Further Study

Many interesting questions were raised over the course of conducting this research. In particular, one interesting

query that was beyond the scope of this project would be to conduct a comprehensive study comparing both the speed

and accuracy of manual estimating compared to PDF-based on-screen estimating software and also compared to CAD-

based estimating software. Anecdotal evidence provided by electrical estimating department managers who had tried

to ascertain on their own by observing their estimating departments, determined that the software could be both faster

and more accurate than a manual estimate, but by the estimating managers’ own admissions, these conclusions were less

than scientific. A truly scientific study comparing estimating speeds and accuracy between estimating methods would

be difficult because of the need to isolate these two variables amongst the plethora of other variables that come into play.

Yet, while difficult, it would not be impossible to isolate these variables. If the anecdotal evidence was indeed supported

through a scientific study, more electrical contractors may be willing to invest in the software and experience the benefits

of it.

The second interesting question that requires further study is one of the unanswered original research questions

investigated during this project. That original research question asked, “Can one predict if an electrical contractor

uses an estimating method more advanced than the manual method based on a number of variables including

company characteristics, company culture, estimating department composition, progressive behavior, and technology

implemented?” Recall that with all the variables this study sought to correlate to the estimating method, none correlated

in any statistically significant or otherwise meaningful way. This was surprising and somewhat unsatisfactory as it made

it appear that the estimating method that an electrical contractor adopts is a random event. After having analyzed these

results, the new hypothesis is that the choice of estimating method is likely determined by the personality and professional

experiences of the decision maker(s) within a company that chose to invest in estimating software or not. Thus one

future research study could examine this relationship and see if it might predict an electrical contractor’s use of estimating

software or not.

47

Appendix A: Case Study for Company A Estimating Method

Background and Decision to Invest in CAD-based Estimating Software

For the corporate estimating manager at Company A, the first notion that CAD had the potential to be very useful

for their estimating department occurred in the early 1980’s. However, CAD was a new technology back then and wasn’t

very widely used, so the idea of using the information within a CAD file to assist the estimating process was essentially

unexplored and could not be implemented until CAD was more broadly used in the industry. However, the estimating

manager knew that there was a lot of information locked into the CAD files that had the potential to increase the efficiency

of the estimating process.

Now fast forward to 2007. The estimating manager felt that their company had enough staff proficient in using CAD

that they should invest in CAD-based estimating software. After witnessing a very impressive demonstration of the

CAD-based estimating software, the company decided to invest in the software. The software was produced by the same

company that currently produces their estimating spreadsheet software; hence, the transition was envisioned to be simple

and straightforward.

There were two main objectives for purchasing the software: (1) increased speed and (2) increased accuracy. When a

job comes in to be bid, the estimator first identifies the scope of the job. Once the scope has been identified, the company

would ideally like for the job to be estimated as quickly as possible while also being as accurate as possible. The estimating

manager determined that this CAD-based estimating software would assist them in doing just that.

In 2007 when Company A decided to invest in the CAD-based estimating software, they elected to immediately

purchase three (3) licenses. Many companies elect to test one license and then purchase additional licenses in the future

if needed, but Company A was confident in their estimating staff ’s proficiency with CAD and the potential power of the

software. They were also convinced that the usage of CAD-based estimating software would really take off in the overall

industry in the near future, and they wanted to “be on the leading edge, but not the bleeding edge.” In addition, the

software generated such a significant amount of enthusiasm within the staff that each estimator wanted their own license

to work with. This employee-centered interest was instrumental in moving the purchase and adoption process forward.

Because the cost of the software and necessary training would require a fairly significant investment, the first step to

the purchase process was to convince the accounting managers that the purchase of this software and all the necessary

staff training would be a good investment for the company. The accounting managers wanted some reassurance that this

software would increase the speed of the estimates prepared so that the company could then estimate more jobs (and,


48

presumably, win more work). They wanted to know how many more jobs that the estimating department could estimate

so that they could determine how short the payback period would be for the software and training investment.

Once the accounting managers were satisfied with the projections of increased estimating volume, the estimating

department was allowed to proceed with the software purchase and training.

Training Required

Training the estimators to use the software entailed hiring a professional from the software company to conduct

the training. Specifically, the company paid for a representative from the estimating software company to fly out to

Company A’s headquarters and provide two days of training on the software. The software company typically provided

three days of training, with the first day primarily focused on learning CAD. Since most of Company A’s estimators were

already proficient in using CAD, Company A elected to do preparatory CAD training internally without the software

representative. The idea was to ensure that all staff members who were scheduled to receive training on the new CAD

estimating software had the base level of CAD knowledge needed to use the software.

When the software trainer arrived for the two-day training session, everyone that was interested in learning the

software was invited to participate in the training. As noted earlier, the company had numerous estimators who were

enthusiastic about learning the software. The training was considered to be very useful overall, but one issue became clear

very quickly: some of the estimators needed more software assistance than others. Some people quickly and naturally

picked up on how to use the software while others needed more one-on-one assistance (i.e., where the software trainer

acted as a facilitator to guide them step-by-step through the process). In general, it was noted that many of the more

senior staff members required greater facilitation, while the more junior staff members learned the software essentially on

their own, using intuition and exploration.

Learning Curve Effects

Following the initial three day training session, there was a large learning curve as individuals became proficient in

using the software. While the demonstration of the software in a classroom setting seemed straightforward, in an actual

bidding environment, the estimators had difficulty producing the same results. According to the estimating manager,

“They couldn’t snap their fingers and everything was counted.” The biggest problem they encountered was estimating

from CAD files received from other designers. There were no consistent symbols used to represent the different electrical

components. For example, different designers each drew the receptacles differently. They also drew the light fixtures

differently. And, GFI receptacles were commonly drawn in many different ways as well. Some designers didn’t properly

‘block’ the symbols they drew in CAD. The attributes that the designers assigned to different symbols varied, and some

designers didn’t assign attributes at all. All this variation make harnessing the full efficacy of the software very problematic.

Through trial and error and learning, Company A developed a solution to the problems associated with non-standard

symbology. For CAD files that come from other designers, Company A determined that the best method to accommodate

all of the variability in the drawings was to have one of their estimators that is proficient in CAD ‘clean up’ the CAD

file before it is used within the estimating software. Cleaning up the CAD file might entail standardizing the symbols,

properly ‘blocking’ symbols, and even fixing errors in the CAD file. Once this is complete, the CAD file can then be used

in conjunction with the estimating software. While this process can be very time consuming, the company has generally

found it to be a worthwhile effort in order to maximize the efficiency of the CAD estimating software.

aPPendix a: case study for comPany a estimating method

49

Use of the Software Based on Different Project Delivery Methods

Company A acknowledged that they use the CAD-based estimating software in different ways depending on the

type of job and project delivery method being used to deliver the job. They further acknowledged that they receive CAD

files prior to bidding (i.e., pre-bid) only 5-10% of the time. However, Company A believes that they get a slightly higher

ratio of CAD files during the bidding stage than other companies because they have long-term relationships with several

designers, who have become comfortable enough to share the CAD files with them. The one additional issue to note is

that, even in these trusting situations, the designers may be reluctant to share the files for fear of other potential bidders

viewing this sharing as favoritism to Company A. This has occurred in a few situations.

The three most common project bidding/delivery situations for Company A are (1) design-bid-build jobs, where they

receive PDF files, (2) design-assist jobs, where they assist the owner in preliminary design or feasibility and thus generally

receive CAD files (or create their own), and (3) design-build jobs, where they are invited onto the construction team and

design the electrical work themselves.

Design-Bid-Build Delivery Method. When bidding a design-bid-build job, most companies receive PDF files of the

drawings, which prevent companies from using CAD-based estimating software. However, Company A has devised a way

to still use the CAD based estimating software. Essentially, because the company must perform a significant amount of

additional design work in order to ‘complete’ the design, the CAD-based estimating software can be used on this additional

design and then the job can be accurately estimated. For example, typically the drawings that they receive do not indicate

the locations of any branch circuits or the runs of the feeders that zigzag through the building. Even if the plans do

indicate potential paths for feeders, Company A may be able to perform value engineering and determine better paths for

the feeders. Some companies may simply do hand sketches for the feeder runs and use rules of thumb for determining the

average requirements for the branch circuits, but this company prefers to draw this missing information into CAD. Their

experienced estimators can take the PDF drawings that they received from the designer and overlay new CAD layers on

top of this. They can then detail the feeder paths and branch circuits in CAD and use the software to estimate the quantity

and cost. The estimating software also has a feature that assists in the branch circuit layout that can make this process a

little faster. Since all of this new design work can be completed in-house using the company’s standard symbols, the CAD

estimating software can effortlessly determine the quantities of all this new work.

Design-Assist on Projects. The power of the CAD-based estimating software is even more apparent in a design-assist

situation because even more design work is completed in-house by the company using their own standardized symbols.

Hence, the software can efficiently calculate quantities. In addition, the design may change over the life of the project, but

the estimating software has the capability to recognize these changes and update the quantity take-offs automatically.

Design-Build Delivery Method. Company A noted that the best use of the estimating software occurs when they receive

design-build work. Just as the power of the software was increased with the design-assist work, it is fully utilized on a

design-build job where 100% of the electrical work has been designed by the company. They can use all of their standard

symbols from their extensive CAD library, which can be recognized by, and counted in, the CAD-based software. In

addition, typically there can be many changes in the design over the life of the project. And frequently the owner of the

project will request cost estimates at many different stages and iterations of the job. The owner may request a conceptual

estimate, a schematic estimate, and various estimates of different layouts or designs of the building. This is often the

nature of design-build jobs, where the design evolves as the owner better understands its options. However, in this

situation, where many estimates may be needed in near-real time so that the owner can compare options, the CAD-bases

estimating software is most powerful. It can recognize the design changes and automatically update the quantity take-


50

offs. One of the estimators in Company A cited a design-build hospital job that particularly demonstrated the power of

the CAD-based software. He indicated that the job had such an extensive number of changes that he “would have quit if it

hadn’t been for the live updating capabilities” of the estimating software. He said the software really helped cut down on

the fatigue of this ever evolving and changing job.

When the Software Might Not be Used

Noting all the benefits of using the CAD-based estimating software, it might seem logical that Company A would use it

to estimate every job. However, this is not the case. Company A noted three circumstances that might cause them to use a

different estimating method rather than use the CAD-based software.

Experience. While most estimators are trained on using the software and are enthusiastic about using it, some

estimators simply do not know how to use the software, nor have they been required to learn it or use it. The estimating

manager pointed out that many of the senior estimators have decades of estimating experience and have their own “tricks

and techniques” for preparing estimates. Furthermore, they can often prepare an estimate using their manual method as

fast as can be prepared using the software. The company has entertained the idea of trying to determine which method

is faster – manual or CAD-based estimating – but they believe there are too many variables involved in accurately

determining “which method is faster or better.” They generally feel that it is “too close to call” on the issue of which

method is faster.

Time-pressure. Another situation where the software is typically not used is when a “rush job” is received, there is a

limited time to prepare the estimate, and all the estimators trained in using the CAD-based software are working on other

critical estimates. If no one trained in using the CAD-based software is available, the new job will often be completed

manually.

Conceptual estimating. Another situation in which the CAD-based software may not be used is when Company A is

asked to prepare one or more conceptual estimates. Typically, the company has not found it to be a good time investment

to draw the conceptual electrical design into CAD for the purpose of preparing a CAD-based conceptual estimate because

the design is prone to change radically over the course of the conceptual design stage, rendering each iteration of the

design to be so significantly different than the previous iteration that a great deal of time would be wasted on drastic re-

designing in CAD.

Barriers to Implementation

The estimating manager at Company A would ideally prefer that everyone in the estimating department be proficient

in using the CAD-based estimating software, but he noted several obstacles to achieving this goal. First, some of the senior

estimators have developed their own efficient methods and techniques that they use to estimate quickly and accurately, and

as such, they are satisfied with their manual techniques and prefer not to switch to CAD since they may not be comfortable

working in a CAD-based environment. Furthermore, since some of these estimators are not familiar with CAD, they would

need to learn both CAD and the CAD-based estimating program. For some of the senior estimators, the use of computers

is not intuitive or easy, so getting trained in CAD would be a challenge. Finally, another obstacle to adopting the software

is convincing the accounting department, and other executives in the company, that the return-on-investment makes the

initial cost worth the investment.


51

Primary Sources of Variation in Estimating Situations, Processes, and Preferences

Below are the sources of variation encountered by Company A that must be factored into their estimating decisions

and will influence the estimating method used on each job.

1. Size of project, where there are big jobs and small jobs and many in between

2. Delivery method, including design-bid-build and design-build

3. Time pressure, which ranges from “rush” jobs to jobs that have two months to be estimated

4. Design completeness, which ranges from jobs that come in the office relatively complete and accurate and others

which are in need of a lot of additional work

5. Availability of CAD files, where CAD files can be obtained on some jobs but on other jobs only the PDF files are

provided

6. Estimator preferences, where some estimators prefer a manual estimating method, some prefer using the PDF-based

software, some prefer using the CAD-based software, and some prefer a mix of the estimating methods.

These sources of variation help explain why the company feels it is important to provide estimators with the flexibility

to choose any method they believe will produce the best results, including a manual option and two advanced software

options (PDF-based and CAD-based software).

The Special Case of Experience as a Source of Variation

One of the most apparent variations in Company A’s estimating process is the difference in experience levels of the

estimators, and how these differences influence their estimating choices. Several of the senior estimators prefer to prepare

manual estimates rather than use the CAD-based estimating software. In fact, many of these estimators have decades of

experience at estimating and are true masters of their craft. Many of them contend that they can estimate a job just as fast

and as accurately as those that use the software. The estimating manager believes that the biggest advantage that these

senior estimators have over more junior estimators is the years of experience that can very quickly give them a ‘feel’ for the

job even before they begin estimating. They also have years of experience refining their heuristics, that is, their shortcut

techniques for developing ‘averages’ that they use to speed up their estimates. One example of using heuristics is for

estimating the branch piping, where an experienced estimator can average out how much conduit and wire will be needed

for the branch piping just as fast as a CAD user can map out all the branch runs on the computer.

The Special Case of Method-Specific Skill as a Source of Variation

Another source of variation in Company A’s estimating process is the method-specific skill of the estimator. For

example, two estimators can be equally experienced, but one may be faster and more skilled at manual estimating while

the other estimator is faster and more skilled at using computerized methods. In some instances, estimators may have the

skill to use both manual and CAD estimating methods. Some estimators have found it faster to do the counting in the

CAD software and then they perform their branch piping takeoff manually. Other estimators choose to do both counting

and branch piping within the CAD software. Given the variety in skills and preferences for using different methods, the

company should try to match the skills of the estimator to the skills required to estimate the job.

Best Practices and Benefits of the CAD-based Estimating Software

Two specific Best Practices/Benefits were noted during the case study interview.


52

Best Practice 1: Repetitive Work. Company A has discovered that one of the best uses of the CAD-based software is for

estimating repetitive work depicted on drawings that were obtained from a separate designer and in which they did not

perform any of the design work. Specifically, they noted that the efficiency of the CAD-based software is best demonstrated

in buildings where many of the floors have repetitive features and have very similar, but not identical, electrical layouts.

The estimator can take-off one floor of the building and then have the software essentially repeat the process for the other

floors. The software can immediately count the items that are similar on each floor and highlight those items. Then, it

becomes very easy for the estimator to identify which electrical features must still be counted on each of the floors. The

estimator can then proceed floor by floor and count the small amount of other items required to completely estimate each

floor. Although a similar approach can be performed manually, the slight differences between floors are not always clear,

and as a result, it may take a skilled and experienced estimator to recognize these differences quickly.

Best Practice 2: Real-Time Estimating. Company A has made a significant effort to market their pre-construction

services skills. In addition to assembling a great pre-construction team, the company also has used the CAD-based

estimating program to demonstrate how quickly they can update their quantities when a change has been made – a

feature they call “real-time estimating.” During a client meeting, the company can modify certain design elements and

show the client how the software will automatically update the quantity take-off in “real time.” Then they can also provide

the client with an updated cost on the potential design change. Generally, clients of Company A have been very impressed

with the ability to price changes so quickly.

An Alternative to CAD-Based Estimating: PDF-Based On-screen Estimating Software

Although the majority of the discussion so far has focused on CAD-based estimating methods, another computerized

estimating option that Company A offers is PDF-based on-screen estimating software, which can be used instead of the

CAD-based software or manual methods. The PDF-based software is essentially a type of manual estimating method that

uses the computer screen to display the PDF drawings. Hence, some estimators have developed proficiency in using this

method and prefer it over the manual and CAD-based methods. This section briefly discusses Company A’s adoption and

usage of PDF-based software.

In 2010, Company A purchased one license for a PDF-based on-screen estimating software. At the time they

purchased the CAD-based estimating software in 2007, the software company did not offer a PDF-based software option.

Subsequently, this option became available, and Company A cautiously adopted the method as a means to expand their

toolkit of estimating options. One license for the software was purchased at the request of an estimating employee who

believed that the software would be beneficial to his estimating process. This employee had not been trained to use the

CAD-based estimating software, but he did want to take advantage of the benefits of estimating software. Overall, after

the estimator began using the PDF-based software, he indicated that he really enjoys using the software, and furthermore,

the estimating manager attests to the high quality of his estimates. However, there is a general belief that the estimates take

the same amount of time to complete as the manual estimating method. Other employees within the company have tried

the PDF software and anecdotally reached a similar conclusion: that using the software takes the same amount of time to

complete an estimate as if done manually. The estimating manager described the software as “merely putting the manual

tasks of takeoffs onto a computer screen.”

So what is the benefit of PDF-based on-screen estimating software to Company A? There appear to be a number of

benefits to using the software. The estimators that use it indicate that it is easy to count devices with the software. They

also like the feature that allows the takeoff quantities to be directly entered into a spreadsheet by the software rather than


53

first having to write the quantities out on paper or manually type them into a spreadsheet, which is required when using

the manual method. They feel that this automatic process results in a time savings and, more importantly, one less step

that might introduce errors into the estimate.

Company A has also tested a more advanced version of this software that has an auto-count feature within it. The

auto-count feature cannot electronically recognize the symbols within the file in the same way that the CAD-based

software can do, but rather it attempts to recognize the shape of the symbol on the page. The user can define how precisely

(or not) it would like the software to filter the symbols that the user selects. The software will then display the list of all

the potential symbols that it located, and it is up to the user to manually select the symbols that match the item that is

being counted. This feature has received mixed results for the users in the company. They feel that it may take more time

to use this feature than to just count the symbols ‘manually’ on-screen within the software. The reason for this is that the

software takes a while to run the search for the symbols and that is a period of time that the estimator cannot do anything

else on the computer. Then once the list is found, the estimator must still go through the entire list of symbols and

manually select which symbols they want to count by clicking on each one. This process can take a long time. In addition,

there may still be errors in the recognition of the symbols. Thus the company has elected not to use this feature.

Primary Lesson Learned about the Use of Estimating Software and Techniques

The estimating manager has considered implementing one estimating process across the company, but doing so would

be too difficult and may not be beneficial either. The first issue is the variability of the jobs that they receive which each

call for a different method. The second is that they have to differentiate their estimator’s skills and match those skills with

the best method and job to estimate for that particular estimator.

In addition, they like to have it as an option for those estimators that would like to use it. This company works to keep

its employees satisfied and this is one of the examples of that. They feel that if their employees have the necessary tools

to perform an estimate the way that that employee is most comfortable performing an estimate, then the quality of the

estimate will be improved.

Predictions about the Future of Estimating

Company A feels that eventually BIM will saturate the market and become a common tool in most companies. In

this environment, the estimating process that is performed by most trades will take place semi-automatically within the

BIM model. The BIM software and market forces will eventually drive everyone to use the same symbols so that every

component of the building, including electrical symbols, is standardized. The BIM software will require everyone to

use the same layers and utilize one catalog of symbols. In addition, the company speculates that process for developing

designs, and how they are drawn, will be standardized. With all these measures in place, the BIM-based estimating

software will immediately be able to produce a bill of materials that can be used to develop an estimate. The company did

receive word that a BIM-based estimating program was in development, and while they have been told that this program

would likely not interface with the CAD-based estimating software, it will likely interface with the PDF-based estimating

software.

55

Appendix B: Case Study for Company B Estimating Method

Background and Decision to Invest in PDF-based On-Screen Estimating Software

Company B is a privately held company and as such the culture of the company is established by the owners and

executive managers and then passed down to the department managers and finally down to all the employees. One

particular trait that this company sought to focus on was accuracy in their estimating. It has been Company B’s goal to

generate such accurate estimates that they can put very small mark-ups on their estimates, yet can be confident that they

will achieve their profit goals should they be awarded the job.

The leader that set the tone for the desired accuracy in the estimating department was the estimating manager. He has

over three decades of estimating experience. He also has kept up to date on the new estimating software in the electrical

construction industry. The company has used one electrical software company’s spreadsheet software for over 15 years

now, but the estimating manager was particularly impressed by the software company’s relatively new PDF-based on-

screen estimating software. The PDF-based software is essentially a type of manual estimating method that uses the

computer screen to display the PDF drawings. Once the estimating manager felt comfortable enough that the bugs had

been worked out of the software, he decided it was time to convince the management of the company it was time to invest

in the on-screen estimating software.

Convincing management to invest in the on-screen software was not difficult after the estimating manager made the

pitch for the increased accuracy that the software could bring to their estimates. The discussion of the potential time

savings of the software was very brief because it wasn’t known how this would work out. With the goal of increased

accuracy in mind, the company purchased two licenses in 2009. One license was for the estimating manager and one

was for a new hire to the estimating department that expressed excitement towards using the on-screen software. It also

became this estimator’s responsibility to get the other estimators in the company trained in this software.

Training Required

The training that was provided with this on-screen estimating software was one 8-hour training course. The

estimating manager and the junior estimator received the introductory training. Unfortunately both estimators agreed

that the training was insufficient. They felt the eight hour presentation was more geared towards general contractors

instead of electrical contractors. Obviously, they felt that if the training focused on those elements that an electrical

contractor needs to focus on, then the training would have been much more beneficial. Ultimately each of them had to

learn the vast majority of the functions of the software on their own. The estimating manager had to teach himself the

software in between other estimates that he was doing at the time and in between his management responsibilities for


56

the estimating department. However, given the excitement, he had plenty of motivation to become proficient with the

software.

The junior estimator was given more flexibility of his time to learn the software. He was given the opportunity to

experiment with the software for a couple of months to determine how to use all of its features, but more importantly how

to use it most efficiently for the various types of jobs that the company bids on. However, in exchange for the freedom to

learn the software, the junior estimator was charged with writing a proprietary training manual for the company to train

the other employees on. This manual also outlined the most effective uses of the software on the different types of jobs.

He was also charged with the responsibility to train the other estimators in the company.

Learning Curve Effects

First Matter: As the junior estimator explored the on-screen estimating software, one of the first things he noted was

that their company needed to do a better job scanning in the paper drawings that they still sometimes received from public

or private project owners in lieu of PDF’s. The solution was a simple matter of increasing the resolution on the full-size-

plans scanner, such that the image of the project drawings had better clarity. The reason for this is that the on-screen

estimating software has an auto-count function that is more effective with higher resolution documents. The auto-count

feature cannot electronically recognize the symbols within the file in the same way that the CAD-based software can do,

but rather it attempts to recognize the shape of the symbol on the page. The user can define how precisely (or not) it

would like the software to filter the symbols that the user selects. The software will then display the list of all the potential

symbols that it located, and it is up to the user to manually select the symbols that match the item that is being counted.

The junior estimator has found this feature to be a worthwhile tool to use.

The Proprietary Training Manual: As noted earlier, the junior estimator was responsible for writing a training manual

for the software. This training manual would be based on his experimentation of the software and would be geared

towards electrical contractors and more specifically the work their company performed. (It should be noted again that

this particular software is not specifically for electrical contractors, but instead it can be used by any trade.) This manual

also contained the best practices for the software and the standardized assemblies that the company would use as part of

its implementation of the new software. The best practices written into the manual were those techniques that the junior

estimator determined to be most effective given the software’s strengths and weaknesses.

Variations within Estimators and Type of Work: The backgrounds of the estimators within the company vary greatly.

All four of the lead estimators spent much of their career in the field prior to becoming estimators, where as many of the

junior engineers have some type of construction or project management schooling as their background. This often meant

that the proficiency of the computer skills of the estimators varied. For this reason the amount of time that the junior

estimator had to spend training each estimator varied.

There was also tremendous variability in the type of work that the company performed. The company did tenant

build-outs, industrial work, highway lighting, wind farms, solar work, drilling, utility work, transportation work, and

airports. The different type of work made effectively implementing the software more challenging. Obviously prior to

starting with the on-screen estimating process, the estimators still needed to know how to properly estimate all elements

unique to each type of work, but this variability did mean that there would be much more variability within the software

that needed to be learned in order to be using the software most effectively.

Training Other Estimators: Once the junior estimator was comfortable with the software and the training manual that

he wrote was complete, he began to train the other estimators in the company. The company chose to have him train the

aPPendix B: case study for comPany B estimating method

57

other estimators one at a time. He was also to go over the estimating manual with them. This process took about one

year. This much time was not necessarily required, but the junior estimator was still responsible for completing his own

estimates during the same time period and in addition, the company employs a large number of estimators. The company

felt that this time commitment was reasonable given their commitment for achieving uniformity in their estimating

process.

Non-Directly Related Learning Curve Effects

There was some learning and work that had to be done that was not directly related to the use of the on-screen

software, but these elements required attention for the new estimating process to be most effective

Non-Directly Related Learning Curve 1: Building of Assemblies. Assemblies are an integral element of most electrical

estimates, and they are certainly not unique to on-screen estimating. Using the on-screen estimating software, an

estimator could estimate work with or without assemblies, just as they could with the manual method. Because of the

obvious benefit of assemblies, it typically benefits the estimator to employ them as much as is practical. When a company

first embarks on employing new estimating methods such as on-screen estimating, it should equally benefit them to

reevaluate their estimating process and strive to develop some uniformity in the process. This was the case for Company

B. In starting to use the on-screen software, they realized that while their current manual method was well organized, not

everyone was using the same items in their assemblies and that this should be made uniform. This was one of the biggest

tasks that the junior estimator tasked with writing the company manual in on-screen estimating was required to do. As

part of this, each item comprising an assembly was identified as well as any other incidentals integral to that assembly.

With this formally written up, any on-screen estimator could easily refer to the company’s manual for clarification.

Non-Directly Related Learning Curve 2: Determining branch-piping layout. This skill is also not unique to on-screen

estimating, but again it is the switching to an on-screen estimating process that prompted an evaluation of how the laying

out of branch-piping figures into their estimating. In doing the manual method, many estimators use averaging methods

to approximate the number of feet of branch piping and wire required for each type of opening. Many other estimators

using the manual method may prefer to layout as much of their branch-piping as practical and do a manual estimate off of

that layout. For Company B, part of the motivation for switching to an on-screen estimating method was greater accuracy.

One of the attributes of on-screen estimating software is its ability to clearly mark-up the branch piping layout in an

organized fashion. However, in order to accurately do this, the estimator needs to possess the skill to know the likely paths

of the branch-conduits. They then also need to learn how to either draw these paths in the software or how to trace these

paths in the software, if an estimator or engineer before them laid out the branch-piping. Learning this technique within

the software is not complicated, but it can take time to initially learn.

When the Software Might Not be Used

As was noted earlier, Company B has committed to using the on-screen estimating software on nearly 100% of the

jobs they estimate. However, there are some exceptions to its implementation on all the jobs they bid. These exceptions

generally result from the fact that this company is so diversified in the work that it performs, that no one software can

effectively estimate every job. The first situation is that some jobs are too small to warrant estimating them within the

software. They can just as easily be done by hand. This situation occurs infrequently within this company as most of the

jobs they bid are large projects.


58

The next situation is highway lighting jobs that are often easier to perform the takeoffs manually (though the

estimating manager said that they were considering using the on-screen software for this work in the future for the

purpose of uniformity in their estimating processes.) The last situation is utility work where they vary their take off of

this work between sometimes using their on-screen estimating software on it, but more often they use a different software

(unrelated to the company that provides their spreadsheet software and their on-screen estimating software) to perform

the takeoffs. The reason is that this other software specializes in utility work and is thus most appropriate in this one

situation.

Barriers to Implementation

The estimating manager mentioned that the initial barrier to implementing the PDF-based on-screen estimating

software was solved years ago. PDF’s were not widely available, but for the past five years or more, PDF files have become

ubiquitous. Thus this issue has no longer been a barrier. In addition, receiving paper copies of a job is no longer a barrier

either because the paper drawings can be scanned and they are immediately converted into PDF files.

The second minor barrier was that they have found it easier to work with TIF files within the software, but after they

had owned the software for about a year, the software manufacturer issued an update that allowed one to convert all the

PDF files they had into TIF files in a matter of 15 minutes or less. This update has been tremendously helpful to them.

The largest barrier was the time commitment of their employees due to the learning curve. They knew that they

would have to have one employee devote much of his time to learning the software, writing the propriety manual for the

company, and then training the other employees. Those other employees would then also have to overcome the learning

curve, resulting in a temporary loss of productively. The company was aware of this, but felt strongly that creating a

uniform estimating process and implementing the on-screen estimating software would pay off in the long term.

Best Practices and Benefits of the On-Screen Estimating Software

Two specific Best Practices/Benefits were noted during the case study interview.

Best Practice 1: Better Job Handoffs. The estimating manager noted that since they implemented the on-screen estimating

software, the job handoffs between the estimators and the project managers that occurs after they are awarded a job, have

been much better. The estimators have been delivering the project managers a more organized and thorough set of files, thus

making the handoff much less confusing for the project managers. With the estimates done on-screen and nicely color coded

and itemized, the project managers can go through the estimate with the estimator and quickly see what the project manager

needs to start working on first for his pre-construction planning. It was also noted that the project managers can immediately

order up to 80 percent of their bill of materials directly from the takeoffs from the estimate. Because of the greater accuracy

with the software, using the on-screen software has given them a better piece of mind to do this.

Best Practice 2: Real-Time Estimating With General Contractors. As with most electrical contractors that are

subcontractors to general contractors, there is extensive interaction between the two companies as the electrical contractor

prepares the bid to present to the general contractor. Company B has found the on-screen software a very helpful tool

during the discussions with the general contractors. It is most useful for two situations. The first is when the general

contractor calls Company B to discuss their estimate and how and why they determined the price that they determined.

It is very easy at that point to pull up the quantities and to see exactly where they are on the drawings to show the general

contractor where the prices are coming from. The second situation is when the general contractor is negotiating with

Company B to potentially lower their bid price. When this is taking place, Company B can easily pull up their takeoff files

aPPendix B: case study for comPany B estimating method

59

in the on-screen estimating software to double check their comfort level in reducing their price by a small percentage.

Sometimes they may elect to go back with a slightly lower price and other times they stick with their original pricing, but

Company B feels that it is the ability to verify the accuracy of their estimates within the estimating software that gives them

the confidence to adjust their price or standby their price.


It was the lead estimator’s feeling that their software provider realized that the contractors were never going to get the

native CAD files in the pre-bid phase and so they put their focus on the PDF-based on-screen estimating software. The

lead estimator has been very pleased with the software, but knows that the future of estimating will ultimately be linked

to BIM. The company has already been involved in three large BIM jobs and he sees more in the future. He has not used

any estimating software specifically geared towards BIM, but he feels it is just a matter of time before estimating in BIM

becomes the norm.

61

Appendix C: Case Study for Company C Estimating Method

Background and Decision to Remain with the Manual Method

Company C is an employee-owned company that has been in existence for over 100 years. They are one of the largest

MEP contractors in the market they serve. They work in the industrial, commercial, utility, and institutional fields. They

are a highly sophisticated company that has adopted many of the current technologies that assist an electrical contractor

in delivering quality service. However, they have not chosen to adopt either PDF-based on-screen estimating software or

CAD-based estimating software. They have examined each option, particularly the on-screen estimating software, but do

not feel that it would be a good investment for their company at the present time.

Both the president of the company and the estimating department manager stressed that they reevaluate their decision

not to invest in estimating software two to three times a year. Each time they have chosen not to upgrade because there

were too many barriers and they were unconvinced of the potential benefits. They listed the barriers that they have

encountered for each method. The barriers specific to CAD-based estimating software follows the general barriers listed

below.

Barriers to Implementing a PDF-Based On-screen Estimating Software or CAD-Based Estimating Software

Cost: One of the largest barriers for Company C to implementing a PDF-based on-screen estimating software has

been the cost. There is the upfront cost of the software, but they are far more concerned about the cost associated with

the training of their estimators, the cost associated with the learning curve required to master the software, and any costs

associated with a transition from the manual method to an on-screen or CAD-based estimating method. Because this

company has so many estimators and these estimators are spread around the company, the president and estimating

manager felt that training all these estimators would be a very time consuming and costly endeavor.

Technology will Change: Company C was also concerned that the technology will change in the future, thus making

their hypothetically purchased software and associated procedures outdated. They do not want to invest in the ‘Beta Max’

of the estimating software field. They felt that they would like to hear more about the experiences from those contractors

that did invest in the software. In addition, they would like the software producers to receive that feedback and improve

their software accordingly. Once a couple of cycles of that process were completed, they would then decide what software,

if any, to invest in. Because they felt like there wasn’t enough data out there at the present time, they weren’t comfortable

making a decision. In addition, they felt that the software on the market was changing so frequently, that there was a

good chance that something better than everything currently on the market would be out soon, possibly related to BIM


62

techniques. They noted that the use of BIM was rapidly increasing and that the amount of software associated with BIM

was increasing.

Software Not Required for All of their Work: Company C performs work in many different sectors, but some of their

work is very similar from job to job. One example Company C cited was tenant build-outs. They noted that so many

of those jobs are so similar and they have so much company data on the costs of the job, that square-foot estimates are

adequate to estimate the job with. In addition to the square-foot estimate for each of these jobs, they do break out the

specialty items such as switch gear rooms for each job, because those costs can vary greatly. The estimating manager noted

that in both the square-foot situation and the specialty item situation, neither estimating software would be of much

assistance.

Company C also noted a number of sectors that they work in that have the opposite situation. These jobs are overly

complicated and many elements of the job are very esoteric and require many specifications that drive the cost. One

example cited was powerhouses. They felt that jobs such as this would not benefit from either estimating software.

Material and Labor Databases: Company C recently updated their material and labor databases for the purpose

of increased accuracy within their company and also to create more uniformity in their estimates. This updating took

extensive time. It was also done based on their typical manual estimating procedures, rather than on-screen or CAD-based

estimating procedures. They felt that switching to either on-screen or CAD-based estimating procedures in the future

would require them to modify their databases that they just spent so much time on modernizing.

Accuracy Concerns: Company C was concerned that in switching to the software their accuracy may actually decrease

due to estimator apathy, estimator confusion in operating the software, or errors within the software. They felt that

estimator apathy might arise from the misguided assumption that since the computer was assisting them in the estimating

process, that was enough to guarantee an accurate estimate, with less critical thinking input required on the part of the

estimator. The estimating manager was concerned that the estimators would spend much less time thinking through the

job and thus potentially miss the subtle, yet most important aspects of the job.

The estimating manager said that the estimator confusion could result from not knowing the software well enough,

but thinking one in fact did. This may result in large quantity errors from such instances as the drawing scaling being

incorrect, the automated drop lengths on the conduits in the software being copied over wrong and not checked, and

counting and grouping the wrong types of devices. There were similar concerns with the software, that it may have

internal glitches that may produce wild quantity results that no one would bother to double check or even reason out by

rule of thumb methods to see if it is even roughly accurate. They felt that if the estimators were to increasing relying on

the software to produce their quantities, they would lose the feel of the job and also never gain the ability to approximate

the quantities of a job in a shorthand method.

Resistance from Veteran Estimators: Company C also noted that quite a few of their senior estimators were highly

resistant to changing their current estimating methods. In addition to that, some of these estimators are not very

computer savvy, with some only recently having learned spreadsheet software. The estimating manager felt that it wouldn’t

be worth fighting the resistance, especially when some estimators would require extensive training to use the software.

Autonomy of the Project Managers: Company C prides itself on the autonomy of their project managers. Company

C also requires their project managers to perform their own estimates. Company C values the autonomy they give their

project managers because as much is practical, the project managers are allowed to choose which jobs they would like

to work on. They then handle the job from start to finish. They estimate the job and then if Company C is awarded the

aPPendix c: case study for comPany c estimating method

63

job, that project manager will manage the job all the way through. Company C likes this approach because they feel that

it maximizes the commitment that the project manager puts into the job and also maximizes how familiar that project

manager is with that job. One issue with this approach is that Company C would not feel comfortable mandating that

these project managers must use a new estimating system such as on-screen or CAD-based estimating that they are

uncomfortable with.

Barriers Specific to Implementing a CAD-Based Estimating Software

Reluctant Designers: Company C has experienced the same difficulty in obtaining the native CAD files for a job in

the pre-bid stage that the rest of the construction industry has experienced. The architects and engineers on a job, and

specifically the electrical designers, generally only release their CAD files to the contractors that have been awarded the

contract for the job. The estimating manager said that they never receive CAD files during the pre-bid stage. He said

obviously the CAD-based estimating software would not help in this situation.

Poor Drawings: The estimating manager noted that construction dollars are always limited on jobs. The limitations

apply to every party involved in the process, including the designers. He speculated that the designers are the first party to

get financially squeezed by the owner of the project. The estimating manager felt that there is never enough money in the

design budget to complete the plans as accurately as their company would like. He noted that the majority of the drawings

that they receive are incomplete, contain omissions, contain errors, and some are not value engineered to any degree. He

said that for these reasons, they would never be able to rely on the CAD-based software to perform automated takeoffs on

the drawings. The take-offs that the software would produce would be incredibly inaccurate and incomplete.

Native CAD Files: The estimating manager noted that in general they don’t want the CAD files in the pre-bid stage

anyway. The reason is that these drawings are too complicated for the purposes of their estimates. The drawings contain

too much extraneous information that their estimators don’t need for their estimate. In addition, because the files are

more complex, it can be more of a challenge for the estimators to navigate the drawings and also the likelihood of a

mistake occurring in the take-offs increases because of the complexity.

Veteran Estimators and CAD: Just as some of their veteran estimators are not computer savvy and would require

extensive training to learn on-screen estimating software, the challenge would be even greater in learning a CAD-based

estimating software. The main reason for this is that first these estimators would need to learn CAD, then they would need

to learn the CAD-based estimating software. For most of them, this would be a large time commitment.

Completing the Designs in CAD: Due to a number of industry-wide factors, electrical designs are put out to bid in

an incomplete state. The burden of completing the designs either fully or partially lies with the electrical contractor

estimating the job. The contractor has the option of completing these drawings fully, partially, or to a degree anywhere

in between. Company C noted that they value highly accurate estimates and thus they work to complete the drawings as

much as feasible as part of their estimate. However, they have not found it worthwhile to complete these designs either

directly within CAD software, or to have an estimator complete the designs by hand and then have their CAD personnel

input the design into CAD. Instead Company C ‘redlines’ the drawings by hand as much as required to complete the

estimate and leaves it at that. After all the estimating manager noted, they are typically only award approximately 10% of

the jobs they bid. Thus in this scenario, they received the drawings in PDF form and completed the design manually, so

there are no CAD files in this process for the CAD-based software to work off of.

Design-Assist Approach: The estimating manager lamented that ideally their company would start working on the

job with the general contractor at the design development phase. Their company’s designers could value engineer the


64

electrical designs better than they typically see from other electrical designers. Their designers could then do the electrical

layout directly in CAD with their standard symbols. At that point the CAD-based estimating software would have some

applicability. However, the estimating manager said that this design assist model is not a large portion of their business,

and thus the CAD-based estimating software would not currently be beneficial for them.

Best Practices of the Manual Method

Two specific Best Practices were noted during the case study interview. Both best practices do not necessarily need

to pertain to a manual estimating method, but Company C’s procedures were set up to take full advantage of the best

attributes of their manual estimating method.

Best Practice 1: Mixed Manual Estimating Methods. Company C felt that they had optimized their estimating system

by varying the manual method that they use to do the take-offs on different elements of a job. These estimating methods

included the square-foot estimate, a unit cost estimate, detailed layouts when applicable, and a focus on specialty

equipment. They employ each method on those elements that will meet their accuracy requirements, while saving them as

much time as possible.

The first example is that which was cited earlier in this case study. On many jobs that they estimate over and over

again, a square-foot estimate combined with a breakout of the specialty equipment within the building, has given them the

accuracy that they desire, while reducing their estimating time. One of the most important aspects of this mixed approach

is knowing which buildings this approach will be accurate with and which it will not. Company C felt that they have great

experience differentiating their work, so that only the best candidates for this method are chosen. The rest will receive a

more detailed estimate.

On jobs that they feel require a detailed layout they will lay out approximate routes for the feeders and they will also

lay out the switch gear rooms. They have also found it worthwhile to lay out the lights because they are simple enough

to do. However, they generally don’t layout the branch lines because they haven’t felt it was worth the time. For these

they will use either unit pricing or other averaging methods to approximate the lengths of the conduits and conductors

required. They do periodically review their estimates on jobs they were awarded to determine how accurate they were and

have found that their mixed method generally meets their accuracy requirements, while saving estimating time.

Best Practice 2: Highly Responsive Estimating. Company C prides itself on being highly responsive to those owners and

general contractors requesting pricing from them. Often these owners or general contractors will have them start pricing

the job at the conceptual stage where the design is very uncertain. Company C uses their manual method of estimating to

generate a combination of square-foot pricing, unit pricing, and breaking out specific items for these clients. As the design

progresses and the clients request updated pricing, they will oblige and generate new numbers. They feel that their manual

method is more than adequate for this process.

From design change to design change during the design development phase Company C will continue to quote the

work for the owner or general contractor. Obviously this process can be frustrating for the estimators within Company C,

but it is equally frustrating for other companies as well. Sometimes these other companies will decide to stop responding

to the requests for revised quotes. This is where Company C can position itself to possibly be the last electrical contractor

with the patience to put up with all the revisions, and will then hopefully be awarded the job. The estimating manager

noted that they have won many jobs in this fashion.

aPPendix c: case study for comPany c estimating method

65


Company C does see on-screen estimating becoming more prevalent in the future. They also predict that it will be

more user friendly and efficient in the future. However, they felt that it needs additional time being tested in the market

to reach that point. For that reason, they are vigilantly watching the trends in the estimating practices of the electrical

estimating market. Company C also sees BIM increasing within the industry. They know that this will allow for greater

prefabrication possibilities, which will benefit everyone involved in the process.

67

Appendix D: Results from National Questionnaire

This appendix contains all of the results of the national questionnaire that are not specifically referenced within the

body of this report. It should be noted that most of this data is aggregated across all of the 81 survey participants. As such,

most of these results represent the average response that was received in response to a particular question. Additional

information concerning the methodology of this national questionnaire can be found in section 3.3.1. (Percentages may

not total to 100% due to rounding)

Questionnaire Responses

1. What percent of your contracts are competative hard bid contracts versus negotiated contracts?

Percent Hard Bid: 62.9%

Percent Negotiated: 29.8%

Percent Other: 7.3%

2. What percent of your company’s work is design/bid/build versus design/build?

Percent Design/Bid/Build: 44.0%

Percent Design/Build: 23.1%

Percent Other: 33.0%

3. What percent of your company’s work is public versus private?

Percent Public: 41.6%

Percent Private: 55.2%

Percent Other: 3.1%


68

4. What is the average ANNUAL revenue for your company over the past three years?

5. What is the approximate average ANNUAL number of jobs your company has been awarded over the past three years?

Response average: 1463

6. What type of construction does your company typically perform as measured in revenue volume of your jobs?

Aver

age

ANN

UAL

Rev

enue

aPPendix d: results from national questionnaire

69

7. What is the breakdown by percentage of the typical complexity level of you company’s work?

Percent Low Complexity: 21.4%

Percent Average Complexity: 36.9%

Percent High Complexity: 41.8%

8. What percent of the time does your company act as a prime contractor versus a subcontractor to a general contractor?

Percent Prime: 27.5%

Percent Subcontractor: 69.4%

Percent Other: 3.0%

9. Please check the box(es) below to indicate which software your company uses to prepare estimates. Check all that

apply.

10. Does your company use a Trimble Total Station device (or equivalent)?

Yes: 19.2%

No: 80.2%

Softw

are


70

11. Does your company use any laser scanning devices that are capable of 3D mapping to assist in your estimating of

existing structures?

Yes: 10.4%

No: 89.6%

12. Does your company use any project management, organizational, or communication software as part of your

projects?

Yes: 49.4%

No: 50.6

13. Decision to upgrade estimating method:


71

14. Does your company have a separate estimating department or is your estimating performed as part of a project

manager’s duties?

15. Does your company have a unified labor, materials, and historic costs database that all estimators work from?

Yes: 82.7%

No: 13.6%

Other: 3.7%


72

16. What is the age of your chief estimator?

17. What is the average age of all your estimators?

Age

Gro

upAg

e G

roup


73

18. Where does your company go to hire new estimators? (Check the top two please)


74

19. Please rate how strongly you agree with the following statements:


75

20. Please rate the following statements:

ELECTRI International3 Bethesda Metro Center

Suite 1100Bethesda, Maryland 20814-5372

Tel: 301-215-4538Fax: 301-215-4536

www.electri.org

© 2013 ELECTRI International— The Foundation for

Electrical Construction, Inc.All rights reserved.

Index No. F3302

Best Practices and Benefits of Estimating Techniques and ...

Documents