[mtippett]

Arggh.

I hate multipliers. It's not poor estimates that need to be doubled. It's the lack of experience in identifying the complexity or likely risks in a project.

So rather than multiply, ask for risks. You'll find that most engineers know the risks (or at least they may know it is without risk). As you explore risks, you'll find the estimates will lengthen automatically.

So rather than do the multiplier, explore the risks. They are what makes projects late, not intrinsic engineer productivity. You'll end up with better engineers who know themselves and their problem spaces better. You'll also get a clearer view of what could screw up your project.

[feoren]

I don't think OP is saying one engineer is 3x "more productive"; rather they're saying that engineers tend to be consistent in how much they over- or under-estimate tasks. It sounds a little like "story points", where each developer may end up having their own estimation scale.

[nudgeee]

I agree that project risks should be explored and multipliers are not substitutes for them. However multipliers are useful for ongoing dynamic distractions outside of the project that reduce your productivity, for example company meetings, hiring/debriefs, getting pulled into critical bugs, helping to support colleagues, etc.