The proper evaluation of worker productivity is one very important measure in the determination of project status.\u00a0 To have a complete picture of the status of any project there must be some sort of measure of the productivity of the work force.\u00a0 Certainly, one would be interested in the physical progress, the amount of money expended, the amount committed, absenteeism and turnover rates, safety incident rate, supervision to worker ratio, craft distribution, worker density, manpower history, etc. to properly evaluate the status of a project.\u00a0 But one key factor in evaluation of status is worker productivity.\u00a0 There must be some consistent measure of the productivity of the workers on a project in order to frame the complete picture of project status.<\/p>\n

Generally, productivity evaluation is focused on the construction craft workers.\u00a0 However, no less important is the productivity of the office design and engineering staff.\u00a0 Having said that, this article is focused on the field construction staff and evaluation of productivity in the field.<\/p>\n

The first step in determination of productivity is understanding what is meant by the term \u201cproductivity\u201d.\u00a0 Productivity is how much work is actually being accomplished for the effort expended.\u00a0 In terms of a formula, my view is represented by (the total number of scheduled or estimated hours earned for the completion of a specific task or group of tasks) divided by (the actual hours expended for that specific task or group of tasks).\u00a0 The application of the result would be to divide the manhour estimate for the project by the productivity factor derived from the formula above to determine the forecast number of hours that is expected to be necessary to complete the scope of work.\u00a0 An example is: if it took a crew of workers 125 hours to accomplish 100 hours of estimated work, that would represent a productivity of 100\/125 or 0.80.\u00a0 This number would be used to divide into the total estimated field hours to accomplish the work on the project to arrive at a projected total number of hours for the construction work.\u00a0 The forecast number of manhours would then be Estimate divided by 0.80, or Estimate times 1.25.<\/p>\n

Productivity is a relative term, not absolute.\u00a0 While productivity from one project to another can be compared, the most valuable aspect is the productivity for one specific project at various times in the life of that project.\u00a0 Why is productivity not absolute?\u00a0 This is true simply because the basis for establishing productivity is the estimate and no two estimates are one hundred percent consistent and accurate.\u00a0 The closer the base estimates are to being consistent and accurate, the closer the productivity numbers are to being absolute.\u00a0 Whatever the situation, the important point is that productivity must be evaluated and done so in a consistent manner using consistent tools and measures.<\/p>\n

Productivity can be evaluated using the sophisticated means of computer-based schedules, estimates, earned value measurements, etc.\u00a0 However, it is often important to have an instantly available measure of productivity on a job site.\u00a0 This is not difficult to achieve.\u00a0 The results will never be absolutely infallible or completely accurate.\u00a0 However, they will be consistent and provide a very sound measure of productivity.\u00a0 It is better to be consistent and approximately correct than inconsistent and totally wrong.\u00a0 Consistency provides more accurate and valid results upon which decisions can be based with reasonable confidence.<\/p>\n

Enough background, how is productivity evaluated quickly and in a consistent manner?\u00a0 In a tour of the work area, count the number of workers visible.\u00a0 This number will be the denominator of the formula discussed above.\u00a0 While counting the total workers present, also count the workers engaged in actual work \u2013 those performing a true work-related task.\u00a0 For example, if there were only two people encountered in the work site tour, a welder and a welder\u2019s helper, then the denominator would be two.\u00a0 If the welder is striking an arc \u2013 actually welding, then he is productive and would be counted.\u00a0 If the helper is watching the welder perform the weld, then he is not doing productive work and thus would not be counted as such.\u00a0 So, given this situation, the productivity would be 0.50.\u00a0 Generally, productivity is not expressed with a unit of measure or even a percentage \u2013 just a simple number.\u00a0 In this case of the welder and helper, if when we were doing our tour, the two were standing over the weld looking at it and discussing it, neither would be counted as doing productive work and the resultant productivity would be 0 divided by 2 or zero.\u00a0 Another possibility is the welder is watching the helper clean the weld in preparation for laying another pass on the weld area.\u00a0 There is only one worker engaged in productive work and only one would be counted as such.\u00a0 Again, the productivity would be 0.50.\u00a0 This evaluation performed on a consistent basis at several intervals of time will provided a reasonably valid assessment of the productivity.\u00a0 Forecasts of manpower can then be constructed.\u00a0 Decisions related to manpower, craft distribution, labor cost, schedule duration, etc. can be made with reasonable confidence and certainty.<\/p>\n

Overall, productivity is easily evaluated.\u00a0 If a worker is actively engaged in meaningful work, he is productive.\u00a0 If he is not actively engaged in productive work at the moment of evaluation, then he is not productive.\u00a0 The key is be consistent in evaluating techniques and \u201crules of application\u201d \u2013 do not vary from one evaluation time period to the next.<\/p>\n

On a personal note, while being driven from the gate to the construction trailers on a large construction site, I quickly counted the workers I thought were actively engaged in productive work and the total number of workers I could see.\u00a0 Our route carried us through several work areas and at a slow speed, allowing for reasonable counting and evaluation.\u00a0 I came up with a productivity of 0.10 for the site.\u00a0 I determined that it would be no better than 0.25 regardless of what alterations or allowances I made in the evaluation.\u00a0 As it turned out, the official calculated value given by the contractors was in the 0.15 to 0.20 range.\u00a0 This quick evaluation gave our team several ideas for improvements and areas of further investigation for potential improvement of construction productivity.\u00a0 It also gave us a solid feel for projected end date and final overall construction cost.<\/p>\n

This evaluation can be performed several times in a day or once a week.\u00a0 Remember to be consistent in the evaluation method.\u00a0 You will almost never be absolutely right, neither will you be totally wrong.\u00a0 You will always be at least approximately correct. <\/span><\/p>\n

Submitted by:<\/p>\n

Richard S. Troell, P.E., President<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n

TEI Management<\/strong><\/p>\n

www.teimanagement.com<\/a><\/p>\n

Copyright 2011 \u2013 all rights reserved<\/p>\n