This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

Piero Lunghi, Marco Botarelli, David Brizioli University of Perugia, Via Duranti 67, 06125 Perugia, Italy, lunghi@unipg.it

Abstract The new product cost estimation activity is considered by enterprises as a very critical issue. In our work we are going to analyse the situation of Engineering To Order (ETO) firms, i.e. of those firms in which design and production phases are pulled by a specific customer order. By the term designing phase we include also light or heacy customization of a specific product. One of the problems that those firms have to face during their activity is the correct economic evaluation of a job order. In this work we present an innovative cost engineering model to estimate customized product cost; based on the division of costs in two categories, “variant” (the dependent variable) and “invariant” (the independent variable), and the definition of a relationship between them. The paper is supported by a case study describing the implementation of the proposed model in an ETO company. Keywords Cost engineering, Cost estimating, Detailed method, Parametric method, Analogy Method, Engineering To Order.

1

Introduction

One of the main trends characterizing the modern production systems is the increasing importance of customized products. Today, a high level of customization can be found in most industries: automotive, personal computer, fashion, household appliance and many services are offered with an increasing number of versions on which customer can directly express their preferences. We can find two main reasons that make enterprises extend their products’ portfolio: to enhance competition and increasing customer expectations. In such a scenario, the Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs), representing the main economic structure not only in Italy, but also in Europe, are in a very tricky situation, given the opportunity to lever their traditional features (competence on products and operations flexibility) to deliver a very personalized offer. Building a business model on customized product can lead to significant problems due to the fact that product costs can be highly variable and not easily foreseeable. The consequence of this situation is that the margin of a job offer, already limited by the global competition, can be strongly reduced. Hence we can understand how critical the cost estimating phase is in order to carry out a correct estimate, especially because many times this activity has to be completed very quickly. In such a situation we can understand the growing importance of Cost Engineering issue to support this critical phase. The concept of Cost Engineering include, as well as the cost estimate, the definition of a production process cost control model in order to improve the estimation procedure, organizational learning and decisional support. The first studies in this field go back to the ‘80s, but their significant applications came in the late ‘90s. Nowadays, Cost Engineering represents an emerging research field as well as an important management tool, as demonstrated by the project V-CES (Virtual Cost Engineering Studio), involved in the development of a Cost Engineering software for SMEs. Existing Cost Engineering model has been developed, used and optimized, considering new product cost estimating issues, but it has been rarely applied to evaluate a customized products job orders. The aim of this paper is the to illustrate the development and the application of a Cost Engineering model in manufacturing companies producing personalized product, where design

The estimating process is a critical factor influencing the survival of organization developing. This activity requires many types of input: experience.. for its efficiency. 2 Cost Engineering Methodologies Cost Engineering is defined by Humpherys and Wellman [1995] as an application of scientific principles and engineering methodologies aimed to resolve problems related to cost evaluation and control. our work is focused on those companies having ETO (Engineer to Order) as production process with a high level of product in catalogue and the possibility. in conjunction with a cost model with defined cost rates. the previous one then becomes the basis of the cost modelling that learns. Shepperd.1 Cost Estimating As previously mentioned. Maxwell. Shepperd. (iii) the Detailed/Bottom-up Method. (ii) the Parametric Method. while the cost accounting generates the cost rates based on the manufacturing data. 2006]. . (3) Cost calculation and evaluation. which is based on the estimation of each activity and material consumed by the product. 2003]. Some of the main cost estimating methodologies are: (i) the Analogy Method. (2) Production Control. In particular. evaluation and accounting. 1997. The model that we are going to describe in the following paragraph are composed mainly by the following phases: (1) Cost Estimating. to the cost calculation. Modeling. 1984]. to define a customization of a specific component as well as the entire product. within the new product development process [Roy.1. It typically required a supporting tool to store data on past projects. Surmann. Wiedels et al. Schofield. Consequently. it provides the relevant information and data from the execution of the production plan. Briand. manufacturing process and components information and. which in turn can lead to a partial or even total re-design of the product itself. for the customer. Schofield. 2000. this is the main activity of Cost Engineering and it generates cost estimates that are based on the specification of a solution on behalf of a decision maker. Letters et al. Bashir. the manufacturing input data is used to generate the actual costs. 1999]. [1998] assert that the function of Cost Engineering is the realization of an objective. 2. which is based on the concept of similarities/analogies between old and new products and their cost differences. Cost Estimating is one of the main activities of Cost Engineering and it is defined as the process of output (product or work activity) cost forecast using historical data. 1997. 2001.. Kitchenham.1 The Analogy Method The Analogy Method is one of the most applied methods to define product and production costs structures [Hughes. Cost Engineering helps enterprises in the decisional phase. producing and selling product in the actual competitive market [Shtub and Versano. 1998. Pahl. Beitz. Ingo. reliable estimate of operative costs and investments in order to support the project and investment control decision process (for example to make decisions like make or buy). Klein. Thompson. data. Jose. business planning and managerial science. which is based on statistical models applied to historical data to determine the new product cost. 1997. In other words. Several model of Cost Engineering has been developed in recent years in order to facilitate its implementation in complex systems like the manufacturing filed [Weustink et al. 1998].and production phases are pulled by a specific customer order. Wieczorek. 1998. in cost budget definition and management. 2. Lars. it should be integrated in a formalized procedure of cost engineering [Rajkumar. which are then compared with the cost estimates and their underlying assumptions. Tessem. accurate. the development entails capturing the knowledge from domain experts in order to formalize it into similarity functions and analogy rules [Briand. Boehm. (4) Cost Modelling. 1996. 1996. Emam.. Wiedels et al. such a tool allows users to report and analyse those data to find similarities with new project costs. 1996.

(iii) The methodologies used to select cost drivers for a new project. Steece. 1978. 2001]. Crespo. 1998. multiple or curvilinear regression) and by a correct definition of input variables.2 The Parametric Method Following the definition of Parametric Cost Estimating Handbook [International Society of Parametric Analysts. 2002]. Chulani. to compete in the actual global environment. this method is applied when all the specifications on project and product are clearly defined [Cavalieria. Putnum. Boehm. obtained by a regression analysis (for example linear. Existing Cost Engineering model has been developed. (ii) The statement of the model. Graser. considering new product cost estimating issue. Myrtveit. Clark. Sicilia. even if the Parametric Estimating Handbook [International Society of Parametric Analysts. The most important features of this method are the following: it uses for the analysis the work breakdown structure (WBS) of all activities needed to develop. typically all the similarity dimension are equally weighted. Bailei. For this reason a typical process implies a mixed approach: the application of the Parametric or the Analogy Method during the early stage of a project and then the implementation of a Detailed Method when the project became more defined. used and optimized. Zagorski. 2002. 2. Sicilia. 1984. Christensen. “a parametric cost estimate is one that uses Cost Estimating Relationship (CERs) and associated mathematical algorithms (or logic) to establish cost estimates”.1. Pinto. Given its characteristic. Selby.3 The Detailed Method The Detailed (or Bottom-up) Method identifies the single components of a product and aggregates the estimation of their cost (material and production) to define the total cost of the final product with a high degree of detail. 1997. Bashir. several studies introduce different methodologies to increase model quality and to manage uncertainty [Shrum. Horowitz. Ferens. Pinto. but it has been rarely applied to evaluate a customized products job orders.1. Boehm. Jensen. Arena. 1981. 2006]: (i) The choice of CERs. 2004. the material cost is estimated or obtained directly by suppliers. This aspect has received probably little attention by researchers since now. Stensrud. Madachy. Chulani. 1999] use weight as the baseline cost driver and then generate measures of differential cost driver to refine the cost estimate. Lorell. 2003] shows how a correct cost driver selection represents a critical success factor for a parametric estimation. As we have already said that process is very . 1965. Clark. Moore. Cavalieria. Thompson. For example. Maccarrone. Boehm. the difficulty to introduce parameters related to technological improvement and environmental factors. the method needs accurate data that have to be managed by skilled personnel. 2005]. Westland. Our approach was developed with the aim to provide a tool capable of obtaining an estimating process not only rapid but also accurate enough. 2. 1999. produce and manage the final product and their cost. 1999]: the difficulty to define a “similarity rate” between the new and past projects. The main disadvantage of the Detailed Method is that it is very resources and time consuming given that every component involved in the final product is analysed [Koelle. The main factors influencing the quality of the resulting cost model are the following [Cuadrado-Gallego. This method can be applied only when detailed information on project. 1995]. Garcìa-Barriocanal. many commercially available cost estimating packages [Ferens. The main criticalities of this method are the following [Bashir. Maccarrone. as demonstrated by several works [Farr. The parameters are usually identified as “cost drivers”. production process and product are available [Younossi. Boehm. 2004]. 1999. 2003]. Thomson. Fernàndez-Sanz. 2001. the introduction of subjectivity in some parts of the estimation processes. especially for SMEs. given they heavily influence costs. 3 Cost Engineering in Engineer To Order Enterprises We have already pointed out the importance of customized products for manufacturing firms. 1983.Wieczorek 2000]. Cuadrado-Gallego. Basil. Mason. Steece.

……. As we can see from the abovementioned.critical because on the one hand. Each variant cost is then given by each product variation due to the customization. that people who are in charge to manage this particular process could not have. Finally. (iii) obtain a gap between estimation and real costs. Conceptually. this method can lead to sensitive errors in the cost evaluation process. the basic idea of the problem is the definition of a product structure identifying which parts of it could be subjected to modification. Subsequently it should be developed a specific relation linking how those parts can be modified and how these modifications influence cost variation. n . can’t be modified after customer acceptatance) and on the other. to be correctly applied. In particular we focused on ETO enterprises having a large number of items on catalogue and producing highly personalized components. 3. (ii) “invariant” (Ci). j = 1. 3.2 The cost estimating model Once the costs are classified in those categories. at the same time this method could be difficult to implement given the variability between different orders and this could lead to an estimation which is not accurate enough. it has to consider all the adding activities and resources consumed by the customization.. The Parametric Method could be rapidly applied as well as the previous one. Given that the level of such a personalization can be very high and can be varied every time. Conceptually. (iv) support the realization of the budget for the new products.1.1. it determines the definition of a sales price (the upper limit of which is affected by the market and which. (ii) speed up the job order estimation activity.1 Costs classification The innovative point of the proposed model is based on the classification of the total cost (Ctot) in two categories: (i) “variant” (Cv). we can proceed to define the relationship between them. The application of the Analogy Method implies resolving a problem related to the evaluation of the “difference grade” between the standard product and the personalization required by the specific customer.1 Description of the model The object of our model is to support the cost estimation and control it in order to: (i) make an estimate for a job order with a detailed understanding of the job order costs. a new product development can be read as a particular case of our model where all costs are variable. so we have: Cv i = Where: ∑ k j =1 f ij (M j ) . 3. The various Cost Engineering methodologies we presented differ essentially from the Cost Estimating method adopted. which represents costs influenced by the personalization (the dependent variable of our model). usually. which represents costs subjected to negligible variations so they can be considered unaffected by the personalization compared to the standard product (the independent variable). Such a classification allows to manage and to analyse a portion (the variable costs) of the whole product cost speeding up the estimating time. the Detailed/Bottom Up Method allows a very accurate cost evaluation but it requires. we have: Ctot = ∑ Cv i + ∑ Ci h i =1 h =1 n z Where n and z are respectively the number of defined variant and invariant costs. The simplification of the model is given by the definition of a sub-set of costs that have to be analysed during the negotiating phase. technical skills and a considerable amount of time.

Westland. surface proportional variation between the fase and its support. 1997. − M3. Putnum. Horowitz. Subsequently. cost of specific equipment purchasing. Basil. Otherwise it entails the application of Cost Estimating Relationships (CERs) using linear regression as well as multiple or curvilinear regressions [Taylor. Hamaker. At the same time it is very critical [International Society of Parametric Analysts. the following variables were defined: − M1. time spent for prototyping phase. Stewart. Boehm. Bailei. If the variance is higher than the acceptable errors. Cvi fij Mj 3. 4 Case study The proposed model has been applied in an Italian ETO company producing mechanical component (face seals) for companies in mechanical. Boehm. 2003] to define the range of such a variable within which the function can be applied. The functions fij in the model can be defined both by statistical analysis from historical data and by accurate definition. time spent for tests. has to be carefully valuated. material cost.variant cost i (dipendente variable). k number of identified product feature that determine variant costs. definition of the acceptable error of the analysis. time spent for the re-engineering phase. special equipment used during the manufacturing phase. the cost function has to be defined. 1995. materials used for face seals components. Zagorski. − C2. they have to translate customizable feature in geometrical and production process variables independent variables). 1965. even considering the application to a subset of costs. especially the cost function and eventually modify it. prototyping activities. 1978. necessary for example when the firm has to manage a new product/personalization or it doesn’t have enough historical data.e. Selby. face seals height proportional variation. Clark. in particular this phase we have three main activities: product costs analysis. test. i. for the latter.2 The methodology application The application of the model needs a preliminary analysis where managers have to define the variable used in the model. how the variation of cost is after an alteration of independent variables previously defined. 1983. it has the same problems in terms of complexity and application time. Jensen. − C1. Madachy. independent variable j representing one of the product feature that determine variant costs. After the definition of the input needed by the model and their source. n number of defined variant costs. Johannes. a gap analysis should be created between the estimation and the real costs. support roughness proportional variation. definition of all the features changeable by customers. − M2. 1984. In the following phase managers have to classify cost in variant and invariant and. that is the estimate of a customized product cost. 1995]. The application of this last option. automotive and household appliance industry. managers should carefully analyse the model. Since it can be compared to a Detailed Method. − C5. Farr. 1981. After the implementation of the model. . function linking the product feature j (Mj) with the variant cost i (Ci). After an analysis of the product the following variant costs were defined: engineering. − C4. Wyskida. − C3.

4 j C = ∑∑∑∑{[Pr 5 l m n p x n p l + ps ps Pr x n l p x p m ( + ) x ]x ps 1 M ps M x 2 p m l . p).9% 11.7% 3..1% 67. dij eij the parameters of the independent variables Mj. the previous functions were defined using both a CERs using linear regression and a detailed valuation to define the material cost.8% 28.0% 3.4% -4. Variances C1 -7.1% C4 10.2% 8. As we can see.2% 10.0% -8. In Tab. C3 and C4 compared to the variables M1. Pri the price/volume unity of material i.3% -12. m − n.6% 9.0% 12..7% 1.3 = 1.9% C2 -4. C2. the constant term (the intercept) related to the variables Ci and Mj.0% -2. The valuation of costs C1. p ≤1 G xa ≥ M j j j j = 1.m-n.. pi the weight of material i.7% 7.7% 1.. evidenced a linear regression coefficient greater than 0.3 a ≤M j j Where G is a positive number whose value is higher compared to the other variables. psi the specific weight of material i.2% -0. 1. under the hypothesis that just the support height can be changed and that it has a cylindrical shape.p the binary variable indicating if the material has been changed In every project we have: ∑∑∑∑ M l m n p l .3% Mean -2..7% Standard deviation 8.. m) to the combination (n.9% Tab.8% -2. the error in the estimating process is below the value of 15 % proposed by many The formula considers the substitution of face and support material from the combination (l.2% 33.4% 7.3% 4. Ml. Variances of estimated costs (blank cells means the cost was not modify respect to a standard product) The model was applied in 7 job orders.. 1 shows the variances of those costs respect to real values.7% 11.3% -4.0% 8..6% C3 -8.7% -3. As we can see.2% 2.0% -9..m−n .5% 3. ….5% 3.74. 1 . M2 and M3.9% 8. p } 1 Where aj the binary variable indicating if the variation j has been included in the personalization.1% Job orders 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 11.The functions cost were defined as following: C = ∑d x a + e x M i ij j ij j i = 1.2% 9.

141–155 (2001). Holland. n. – Sicilia M. “Resource estimation in software engineering”. – Zagorski H.W. Software Quality Journal. “Calibration Approach and Results of the COCOMO II Post– Architecture Model”.22. “Cost Model for Future Software Life Cycle Processes: COCOMO 2. – Maccarrone P. “Software engineering economics”. Farr L.14. “An assessment and comparison of common software cost estimation modelling techniques”. 339–357 (2006). ISBN: 0-89791-146-6. 573–583 (1999). – Thompson V. References Bailei J. Lars. its output will be more accurate compared to a Parametric Method: given that it is based on the valuation of the relationship linking variant cost rather than the entire generic product cost. Vol. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering. – Westland C. ISERN-00-05 (2000). – Emam K. Chulani S. ISERN-98-27 (1998). Springer Netherlands. Vol.91. One of the benefits of the model is that it moves the estimation problem from the job order negotiating phase (when time represent a very critical factor) to the product design/development phase.1 n. 7–19 (1984). 167-177 (1965). – Horowitz E. The case study evidenced the possible results obtainable by the model even if the limited number of job order considered during this first part of the filed test. 5 Conclusions The main result of this analysis is the creation of a product costs structure composed by the two mentioned cost categories. W. – Madachy R.1. neural network models for the estimation of production costs: A case study in the automotive industry”. Cuadrado-Gallego J. 107–116 (1981). “Models for estimating design effort and time”. “A Meta-Model for Software Development Resource Expenditures”.authors [Rajkumar. 57–94 (1995). 165177 (2004). – Wieczorek I. Chulani S. – Selby R. “Parametric vs. Vol. – Clark B. The paper is supported by a case study describing the implementation of the proposed model in an ETO company producing mechanical component for companies in mechanical. . Vol. – Boehm B.4. – Boehm B. Annals of Software Engineering. – Clark B. – Steece B. 2006] as a reference. Furthermore. International Software Engineering Research Network Technical Report. Boehm B. it allows a more detailed analysis level with a comparable level of effort required. In Proceedings of the 20th Annual Conference of the International Society of Parametric Analysts (ISPA) and the 8th Annual Conference of the Society of Cost Estimating and Analysis (SCEA) (1998). except for the order n°3 where a particular customization leads to an unexpected increasing time required for the engineering and prototyping phase. Vol.0”. Ingo. International Journal of Production Economics. n. – Wieczorek I.J. automotive and household appliance industry. In this way the resulting model will be faster to apply respect to Detailed Method given that we do not need to analyse every single component of the product. Design Studies. W. “Bayesian analysis of empirical software engineering cost models”. the model itself can represent for sellers a useful contracting tool: ideally they could use it by performing a “what if” analysis to quickly propose possible alternatives to customers in terms of solutions and prices. At the same time.” Economics of Automatic Data Processing. – Basil V.4. “Quantitative Analysis of Programming Cost Factors: A Progress Report. Bashir H. ISSN 10227091.1. “Enhancing input value selection in parametric software cost estimation models through second level cost drivers”. – Pinto R. W.25. Boehm B. Vol. – Maxwell K. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering. – Surmann D. Cavalieria S. – Fernàndez-Sanz L. Briand L. International Software Engineering Research Network Technical Report.10 n. The development of the research project provides further analysis of data covering a longer period of time and a greater number of job orders. – Steece B.A. Briand L. Jose. Amsterdam: North-Holland. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Software Engineering.

Thesis. Hamaker J. – Moore R. Hughes R. (1999). Vol. 20–21 October 1999 (1999). – Lars H. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Vol. 465-486 (1997). http://www. “Estimating software project effort using analogies”. ISBN: 0-8186-7247-1. England PRICE systems 19th European users symposium.J. Taylor I. V.J. – Schofield C. – Ingo H.41 n.H.”. – Stewart R. ISBN 08330-3282-8 (2002). “Effort estimation using analogy”. – Crespo J. present. 1-9 (1997). Japan. “An Improved Macrolevel Software Development Resource Estimation Model”. ISBN 0-82479-670-5 (1995). – Versano R.org/newbook. Smit K. Sicilia M. “A controlled experiment to assess the benefits of estimating with analogy and regression models”.25..rand. 170–178 (1996). Cranfield University. – Lorell M. Computers in Human Behavior. Rajkumar R.M. – Cuadrado-Gallego J. 23-31 (2002). 2. price across the enterprise. “Investigation regarding cost engineering in small satellite development”. – Christensen D.4.. Vol. “Engineering Design: A Systematic Approach”.4 n. “A general empirical solution to the macro software sizing and estimation problem”. 67– 75 (1996). Journal of Parametrics. Information and Software Technology.v-ces. 141-148 (2000). October 13-14. Putnum L. International Society of Parametric Analysts “Parametric Estimating Handbook . n. http://www.D.J. Van Baaren R.H. “Calibrating software cost models to department of defense databases — a review of ten studies”. – Wellman P. XIV n. 1-9.C. London. Aalborg. – Brinke E.E. – Stensrud E. Shrum T. – Kals H. Air Force Institute of Technology (1997). ISBN # 09720204-2-X. www. Ferens V. 33–52 (1999). – Mason J. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering. n. Wiley. Proceedings of the 18th international conference on software engineering. “Product information structure as the basis for the control of design and engineering processes”. Springer. Marcel Dekker. Osaka. 510–525. 38 n.Ferens D. Roy R. Kybernetika. “Analogy and complex software modelling”. Younossi O. Acta Astronautica. In: 85th Meeting of the AGARD Structures and Material Panel. – Kals H. “Sources of power: how people make decisions”. Shepperd M. ISBN 0-47130-510-3 (1995). Vol. “Cost Estimator’s Reference Manual – second ed.13. Technology & Industrial Arts.htm (2003). “Virtual Cost Engineering Studio (V-CES): the challenges of a Just-In Time service for cost engineering professionals”. “Basic cost engineering (3rd edition)”. a comparison between neural networks and regression analysis”. Pahl G. – Streppel A. Tessem B. ISBN: 0-26211227-2 (1998).J. Koelle D. Vol. Vol. – Jose R. – Johannes J. “A generic framework for cost estimation and cost control in product design” Journal of Materials Processing Technology. Vol. – Graser J. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering. Myrtveit I.4. Wiendels V. – Schofield C. Klein G.23 n. 167-172 (1997).62. “Calibration and Validation of the Checkpoint Model to the Air Force Electronic Systems Center Software Database”. Jensen R. – Garcìa-Barriocanal E. IEEE Transaction on Software Engineering.4. “Cost engineering: a feature based approach”. 103. Berlin. “Expert judgement as an estimating method”. Weustink I. ISBN 3-54019-917-9 (1996). 345–361 (1978). MR-1596. 88–92 (1983). – Streppel A. – Wyskida R.Third Edition”. New York. What and How?”. “Software cost estimation with fuzzy inputs: Fuzzy modelling and aggregation of cost drivers”. 249–264 (2005). “Development costs of reusable launch vehicle”.org/. Proceedings of the 29th CIRP International Conference on Manufacturing Systems”. Shtub A. “Military Jet Engine Acquisition: Technology Basics and Cost-Estimating Methodology”. Vol. 51. Vol. future”.. – Modeling S. Journal of Reducing Space Mission Cost Vol. Zandbergen B. . C. Cambridge. M. RAND.J. 1: 289–303 (1998).2.J. 736–743 (1997).1. Proceedings of the 5th ISPA Conference. n.F. – Arena M. Humphreys K. Denmark.com (2006). Shepperd M. “Parametric estimating: past. ISBN 1-861940-96-3 (2003). “Estimating the cost of steel pipe bending. – Beitz W. “Cost Engineering: Why. – Kitchenham B. International Journal of Production Economics. 201-207 (1999). Lutters D.11.ispa-cost. Vol.T.

- Selecting Forecasting Methods
- Using Feedback to Help Students to Learnp
- Z 014 Norwegian Standard Wbs Cbs p
- EV-Forecasting Schedule.jacob (1)
- EV LESSONS LEARNED the Costs and Benefits of the Earned Value
- EV Forecasting Schedule.jacob
- CLAIM-Type of Claims
- Exam 70-177 Microsoft Project Server 2010, Configuring (70-177)
- Exam 70-178 Microsoft Project 2010, Managing Projects (70-178)
- COST Cost Contingency Monte Carlo Stanford Uni
- EV a Gentle Introduction to Earned Value Management System
- EV Earned Value Management Oracle
- CLAIM Who Owns the Float
- COST Cost Management Plan
- EV LESSONS LEARNED the Costs and Benefits of the Earned Value
- CLAIM-Type of Claims
- EV-Forecasting Schedule.jacob (1)
- EV a Gentle Introduction to Earned Value Management System
- EV Forecasting Schedule.jacob
- COST an Innovative Cost Engineering Model for ETO Companies
- Exam 70-177 Microsoft Project Server 2010, Configuring (70-177)
- COST Cost Contingency Monte Carlo Stanford Uni
- Exam 70-178 Microsoft Project 2010, Managing Projects (70-178)
- COMMUNICATION How to Be a Great Communicator

Sign up to vote on this title

UsefulNot usefulp

p

- ch28
- Design and Engineering Services Including Topographical Survey
- BMFP 4512 What is industrial management
- Software Engineering Question Bank
- DARSHAN'S CV
- Harrold Publications
- Engineering Economy Lecture Notes 1
- ch6
- Summer Bill(2012) Last
- Seminar CAD On 18th March 2011
- TFTT_TOC
- Simple Light Cover
- value analysis and value engineering
- The Watts New Collection
- 1-2014 - Copy
- - Introduction to RE
- Altair NVH.pdf
- Good Resume Use as Template
- Software Engg.pdf
- How to Be Successful Engineer
- ECE 161 Syllabus
- nctuns-------------alanbroady
- Finally Done
- Adoption and Up Gradation of CMMI Prospect
- Assembly Planner Overview - Asia - 062213
- civil.xlsx
- 921528 (1)
- Technical Sales
- WP Making PDS Inter Operable
- Professor Steven Male cv VM Seminar Malaysian IVMa
- An Innovative Cost Engineering Model for ETO Companies

Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

We've moved you to where you read on your other device.

Get the full title to continue

Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.

scribd