Plan from the supplied facts
Original method needs four hours per future run. Proposed method needs six transition hours once and two hours per future run. Future run count n is a nonnegative whole number; historical work is outside both future totals. Switching is lower effort only when 6+2n<4n.
| Future runs | Stay h | Switch h | Lower effort |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | 8 | 10 | Stay |
| 3 | 12 | 12 | Tie |
| 4 | 16 | 14 | Switch |
Work through the choice
The six-hour transition is recovered by three runs saving two hours each, but that is only a tie. Strict savings start at the fourth whole run.
For five future runs, what is the effort saving from switching?
Show the worked answer
Stay 4×5=20; switch 6+2×5=16; saving four hours.
Material to use in your plan
Use future run count, old/new recurring effort, transition effort, equality point and strict-saving region. Recheck the expected use horizon before recommending a switch.