>A follow-up....and because I respect you as the "just the facts, Sgt Joe Friday, no nonsense", then maybe you can make sense of this.
>
>I found how someone is calculating this....again, for a bad sprint of 60 hours on an original guess of 33.5 hours, I figured the accuracy was 55.83%. But I've got a project manager saying it's about 21%. Here is how the PM is calcing it...this seems more like a factor than an accuracy percentage.
>
>1 - abs ( amount estimated - remaining work left - time spent)
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> amount estimated
>
>
>so that....
>

>
>1 -   abs (  33.5  - 0 - 60)
>       ----------------------------
>              33.5
>
>1 -  ( 26.5)
>      ----------  
>        33.5
>
>1 -  .791
>
>
>accuracy:   21%
>
>

This is one of those cases where there's zero value getting bent out of shape over naming/semantics/terminology. In this case maybe the accepted use of "accuracy" has evolved since the 2008 link I cited earlier.

The only things that are important are that:

- Everyone agrees what it means
- Everyone agrees how it's calculated
- If you're feeding the values into 3rd party software, that software must also use the same definition