022 construction productivity (part 1)
TRANSCRIPT
[email protected]://www.construction-productivity.co.ukhtt://www.construction-productivity.co.uk
CONSTRUCTION CONSTRUCTION PRODUCTIVITYPRODUCTIVITY
CONSTRUCTION PRODUCTIVITYCONSTRUCTION PRODUCTIVITY
• Productivity level have a direct impact on the macro-economic success or failure of modern industrialised economies.
• The industry employs a large number of skilled, semi skilled and un-skilled workers.
CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYCONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITY
• The industry deals with a wide range of building and civil engineering projects.
• Improving construction productivity depends on many factors.
• its activity also provides work for the economic sector.
RESEARCH MODEL (Process model productivity on site)
Organisational Factors
Contract management
Finance
Etc
PROJECT WORK ENVIRONMENT
Pre-construction Activities (1) D1. Client brief D2. Project objectives D3. Specification D4. Design/build-ability D5. Contractual arrangement D6. Planning D7. Scheduling D8. Estimating
Site/Project Manager (2) Characteristics D9. Experience/capability D10. Leadership style D11. Authority/influence D12. Goal commitment D13. Involvement
Labour (6) Characteristics D39. Subcontracting
Labour D40. Direct labour
Management (3) Factors D14. Clarity of tasks D15. Team work D16. The style of management D17. Safety management
Management (4) System D18. Planning D19. Communication D20. Controlling D21. Co-ordinating
Resource (5) Management D22. Labour selection D23. Labour control D24. Material selection D25. Material handling D26. Plant D27. D31. Waste on site D32. D38. Delay and Disruption on site
Motivating Factors (7) D41-D46 Hygiene Factors D47-D55
P R O D U C T I V I T Y
Project Performance Time Cost Quality Safety
Job Satisfaction
Effort Rewards
Ability and Skill of worker
PRODUCTIVITY MODELPRODUCTIVITY MODEL
• site/project manager Characteristics• management Factors• resource Management• management Systems • labour Characteristics• waste on site• delay and disruption• motivating Factors• hygiene Factors
CONSTRUCTION PRODUCTIVITYCONSTRUCTION PRODUCTIVITY• The role of project manger:• Mobilising resources• Remove constraints and difficulties
from the siteTo study construction productivity iscomplex and difficult. • Construction companies find it
difficult, or are unable to study the level of productivity within their organisation.
• Mainly, because of the limitations.
CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYCONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITY
Common failures within theconstruction industry are oftenmanifest in: • cost and time overruns; • poor quality workmanship; • repetitive work; • wastage on site and at the head
office;• idleness within the workforce;
CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYCONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITY
• incorrect estimating;• poor planning;• lack of good quality product; • safety management-site safety
and the level of accidents; • Claims; • Disputes;• poor quality machinery on site.
CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYCONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITY
•Harvey and Ashworth (1998) have investigated that, despite Britain’s improved productivity,
•West Germany, France and Italy are 104%, 41% and 12% more productive than Britain respectively.
CONSTUCTION CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYPRODUCTIVITY
•In 2008 only 2% difference in productivity amongst top 100 firms.
•Amongst average and small UK construction firms, up to 45% more manpower is required to complete a project compared to other European Countries.
CONSTUCTION CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYPRODUCTIVITY
• Dispute in February 2009.• The use of foreign contractors and
skilled labour force on UK civil engineering construction projects.
• Lord Mandelson appointed Mark Gibson (The Whitehall and Industry Group)
CONSTUCTION CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYPRODUCTIVITY
• To review the UK construction productivity and make recommendations.
• Larger index numbers indicate poorer productivity.
• For example, relative to US Gulf Coast, UK projects have 11% worse productivity.
CONSTUCTION CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYPRODUCTIVITY
• Table1.01 shows comparative labour productivity between years 1998 to 2008.
• US Gulf Coast 1.00• Germany 1.05• Continental Europe 1.06 • The Netherland 1.08• UK 1.11• France 1.20
CONSTUCTION CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYPRODUCTIVITY
• In his report Mark Gibson compared the productivity level amongst several European countries.
• With USA construction contractors• His investigation showed that UK
productivity has improved compared to earlier reports.
CONSTUCTION CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYPRODUCTIVITY
• Countries represented in Continental Europe were France, Germany, The Netherlands, Italy, Spain and Ireland.
• However, to compare with earlier report UK productivity has been improving over the past 10 years.
CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYCONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITY
• Q 1) Today’s Productivity level in West Germany, France and Britain are? 1-5% difference.
• The construction industry employs more than 7% of Europe’s workforce and represents approximately 12% of GDP.
CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYCONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITY
• The world economic forum 2009 ranks Britain 76th out of 134 nations on productivity/
efficiency of public sector.• UK is behind countries such as:• Greece • Ethiopia• Mozambique.
CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYCONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITY
Sir Michael Latham also identified:• potential for cost reduction in his
report entitled ‘Constructing the Team’ (HMSO July 1994).
• A potential 30% saving was also strongly advocated.
CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYCONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITY
There are five basic resources usedto produce goods. These are:• Capital • Land • Materials • Plant/ Machinery • Manpower
CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYCONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYUse of high quality
managementtechniques such as;•Planning•Scheduling•money invested in the
project
CONSTUCTION CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYPRODUCTIVITY
Including:• improved Communication• efficient use of labour• efficient use of material and
equipmentUse other methods of constructionproductivity improvement such as:• Lean construction;
CONSTUCTION CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYPRODUCTIVITY
• Last planner system;• JIT & Quality Management Systems;• Construction Productivity-Logistics;• Productivity Improvement;• ISO 9000, ISO 9001, ISO1400; • Quality Assurance.
CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYCONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITY• Sir Michael Latham set up the Working
Group II.• To find out what steps are required to
improve Productivity. • The board agreed that a single solution
to the problem is unlikely to be found. • The board concluded that some
important tried and tested measures had already been taken.
• These methods had proven to be successful.
CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYCONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITY
Their recommendation suggestedthat issues such as:• Value Engineering (VE) • Life cycle costing • Pre-fabrication• StandardisationWhich will improve the level ofproductivity.
CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYCONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYGroup II recommended thepromotion of other techniques not commonly used in the UK. This included: • Total quality management • Total quality control and bench-
marking
CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYCONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYProject mangers can alsoimprove construction productivityby: • The use of best practice productivity
data which has been collected carefully and accurately.
These information should cover areassuch as:• Tendering;• planning processes;• The use of IT – based information
management systems (MIS) for material procurement.
CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYCONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITY
• Training site workers so that they become multi – skilled craftsmen.
• The introduction of post qualification training on new products.
• Methods and time management techniques.
• The promotion of pre-fabrication and assembly.
CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYCONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITY
Some researchers give reasonsfor the decline in productivitydue to:• A big step in communication
channels; • Often on large construction
projects where there is a lack of a clear communication method.
CONSTUCTION CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYPRODUCTIVITY
• The time that members of the management team spend on site obtaining data.
• Writing reports and sending to different departments.
• All these paper work diverts them from giving adequate attention to managing the project.
CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYCONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITY• Over looking areas on the
construction site which need improvement during the construction period.
• Lack of a ‘team effort culture’, which would bind all levels of the workforce together.
• The lack of a speedy feedback system.
CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYCONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITY• Technological Factors-The smaller
construction firms are less adaptable.
• They are slower to accept the arrival of new technology.
• They delay the Policy of increased mechanisation on site.
• In general they are less competitive.
CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYCONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITY
• BSRIA in mid-90th has identified that the UK construction labour force lags behind other countries in terms of:
• Skills; • Salaries; • working conditions; • Job motivation.
CONSTUCTION CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYPRODUCTIVITY
•The report also claims that UK workers loose around 19% of their working capacity through late starts and early finishes.
•compared to 5% in America •and 3% in Sweden and
Germany.
CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYCONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITY
•Q-visit BSRIA site and investigate if the trend has changed in 2009.
•The reasons given by BSRIA for productivity decline in early 2000 were:
CONSTUCTION CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYPRODUCTIVITY
• Many UK sub-contractors do not organise and execute their work in a productive way.
• mechanical/electrical (M&E) installation work that was monitored was characterised by numerous levels of sub-contractors.
CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYCONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITY
• There was a loss of 12% as a result of poor management.
• storage of materials on site very poor.
• Handling of materials were found to cause delay on all of the UK projects monitored.
CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYCONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITY
• On the more than 90 UK sites monitored, workers were found to have received no post-qualification training.
• The average level of productivity in the UK projects monitored was only 56%.
• Compared with the best-achieved productivity figures (benchmark).
CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYCONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITY
• Site workers in the UK were engaged in too much office administration
• Above average inappropriate design and specification.
• As a result, slowed down work.• Resulted in poor levels of house
keeping.
CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYCONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITY
• time wastage was identified at all levels of the construction process;
• from contract strategy;• Procurement;• project organisation;• services design;• and in the whole philosophy of
construction.
CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYCONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITY
• There are other factors, which may cause a decline in productivity;
these factors may arise from:• shortage of equipment • information• bad weather
CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYCONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITY
• management style • wastage on site or at the head
office • lack of training • variations in the scope of work,• disruption on site.
Etc.
Repetitivework
Poor Lifecycle costing
LessPre-fabrication
andstandardization
Incorrectestimating
PoorCommunication
Lack ofinnovativemethods
Poor planning
Poor qualitymachinery
MAJOR REASONSFOR
PRODUCTIVITYDECLINE
Idlenesswithin theworkforce
Lack of:VEJITTQMQC
Poor safetymanagement/site safety
Wastage onsite
Wastage atthe head
office,
Repetitivework
Cost-Timeoverruns,
Poor qualityworkmanship
,
Lack of goodqualityproduct
No. of Claims,Disputes,
OrganizationalManagement
Box 2
SystemControlBox 3
Team WorkBox 4
Waste ControlManagement
Box 5
HighProductivity
ProjectPerformance
TIMECost
QualitySafety
Client/customerssatisfaction
JobSatisfactionRewards
Effort-Ability-commitment-worker's skill
ContractualRelationship
MANAGERIALTECHNOLOGICAL
SOCIAL
Not SignificantD18, D29, D32, D33,D36-D39% OF NOT SIGNIFICANT=8/ 55x100=14.50%
SignificantD1-D8, D9-D13, D14-D17,
D19-D21,D23-D25, D24, D27,
D31-D35% OF SIGNIFICANT
FACTORS=30/ 55x100=54.5%
D22% OF SIGNIFICANT
FACTORS=1.8%Other relevant factors D40% OF SIGNIFICANT=1.8%
Significant42, 44-46, D48-D51,
D53-D54% OF SIGNIFICANT
FACTORS=18%Not significant
D43, D47, D52, D55% NOT
SIGNIFICANT=7.2%
Highproductivity