Earlier quoted context omitted.
According to this reasoning you should set targets based on expected time, not "median" time. You're saying the tail of "completion time" is long, and so the median is a poor estimator for expected time. But if you actually knew the distribution of times for task completion (which is implied if you know the 'median time'), you could simply use the expected value of this distribution and your projects would then tend…
Exactly. All this article is really saying is "most of the time, adding together median expected times underestimates the sum of mean expected times". Well then, easy fix: add together the mean expected times off the bat.
Instead we have to understand the distribution, and the mean as well, and add up how long it takes on average, rather than just in the most numerous case.
Further, and perhaps more importantly, by understanding each distribution, you have far greater knowledge about what the expected time will be, and where the delays are most probable; and you can begin to start analyzing where those delays might be coming from in the interactions of all the parts of the system. This is straight-up quality talk right out of W. Edwards Deming, and it's how you start to improve how you produce in general. Good stuff.