Problem Recognition / Identification
Determination of Labour productivity has always been an issue within the company. The company has just been awarded a contract on re-imbursable basis and the client wants the project Controls team to report on the performance of the project using earned value. The client is particularly interested in knowing the actual hours expended on Projects and the level of productivity. Personnel productivity ultimately affect rate of completion of the job within approved budget.
Development of Feasible Alternatives/Solutions
With the client’s current request, there are basically three options available to the company at this crucial period.
Plan 1 – Do nothing about the request from the client and try to distract the client.
Plan 2 – Employ a consultant Project Controls Engineer to execute the project in order to fulfil clients’ demands.
Plan 3 – Challenge the in-house project controls team to calculate personnel productivity on the project to meet clients’ request.
Possible Outcomes and Cash Flow of Alternatives / Solutions
Plan 1: With the first plan, the company will be taking a big risk by not obliging to the request of the client. In a very competitive business like engineering design, it is imperative to always satisfy the customer because the future implication is that the company may not be recommended for future projects which in turn will reduce the revenue or cash flow of the company.
Plan 2: The second plan is to recruit a specialist or consultant Project Controls Engineer to execute the Project. Since this scenario was not initially considered during the proposal stage and the profitability analysis, there will be an increase in the cash outflow since it is very expensive to provide a specialist on the Project Controls Team. Ultimately, the client will be satisfied with the company since the company has met clients’ requirement.
Plan 3: With plan 3, the existing Project Controls team will have to study and conduct research on a quick method of calculating the productivity of personnel on the Project. The cash flow will relatively be the same since the existing team had been factored initially. The possible outcome is that the team will effectively analyse productivity though there may be a learning curve.
Selection Criteria / Attributes of best solution
- Customer Satisfaction
- Capacity and competency Building.
- Professionalism and effective reporting
Analysis and comparison of the Alternatives/Solutions
Analysing the three options available, the company should realise that goodwill and recommendation is very important in business especially a very competitive business. There is a general rule of thumb that the CUSTOMER IS KING. If it is the requirement of the customer / client to calculate the productivity so as to get true value for money, then opting for Plan 1 will not be good enough. The contractor company is in business to make money, therefore, anything that will send clients away will not be encouraged.
Option 2 is a very good and quick plan. With the plan, all kinds of request such as earned value analysis and productivity analysis can easily be produced by the specialist. This will make the client very happy and would recommend the company for future projects. This plan will be very expensive for the company since the specialist will be an expatriate, the company will pay hourly rates in dollars, provide good accommodation, rest & recreation allowances, flight tickets and other expenses. Secondly, the local project controls team will be denied the opportunity building capacity and Hands-on experience on this calibre of Project.
Option 3 is also a very good plan. The third option may initially not yield results because the current project controls team will try to calculate productivity for the first time so basically, there will be a learning curve. However, on the long run, the project controls team will improve in-house capacity by learning how to produce world class reports. One of the members of the team has even proposed on a method of calculating the productivity as discussed below:
Lets assume that the team wants to calculate the productivity of personnel on a certain deliverable in a Project of about 600 total Man-Hours
- Piping and Instrumentation Diagrams
S/No | Activity | Duration | Rules of Credit | Weighting | Planned Start | Actual Start | Plan Finish | Actual Finish | Completed (Y/N) |
1 | P & ID | 20 Hrs | Start | 10% |
|
|
|
| Y |
|
|
| IDC | 30% |
|
|
|
| Y |
|
|
| IFR | 30% |
|
|
|
| Y |
|
|
| IFC | 25% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Handover | 5% |
|
|
|
|
|
To Determine percentage % Complete of the above deliverable that has just been issued for IFR;
% complete = (20/600) hrs * 70%*100% = 2%
Credit Work Hours (CWH) = (percent complete) x (budgeted unit rate)
= 2% * 20 Hrs = 0.47hrs
The Productivity index is further calculated by the formula below:
Productivity index = (CWH to date) ÷ (actual WH to date)
= (0.47 / 14) hrs
= 0.03
The Project Controls teams intend to send this draft calculation to the client to see if it is acceptable. This process may be a reiterative process of getting the formula right. Once the formula is correct, the project controls team would have solved a problem they once thought was impossible to achieve.
Best Alternative to be Selected
Amongst all the options analyzed, Plan3 is the cheapest option available to the company in terms of the total amount that will be spent. Secondly, it will be an opportunity to develop in-house capacity. Thirdly, the client will be satisfied when their demands are responded too on time. Fourthly, this will be good for the company in terms of monitoring performance and productivity of personnel working on the Project.
Performance Monitoring / Post evaluation
For performance monitoring and post evaluation, The Company will train the project controls team of more accurate methods of calculating the productivity of personnel on the Project. The Project manager can also improve productivity of the team by introducing some incentives such as Target Bonuses, Merit Awards, Team Building sessions and Personnel recognition.
References:
- AACE International. Skills & Knowledge of Cost Engineering, 5th Edition Revised.Chapter-17, pp.17.1-17.9 Edited by Dr. Scott J. Amos, PE. 2010. AACE International. Morgantown, WV, USA.
- Sulliven, W. G., Wicks, E.M., Koelling, C. P., et al. (2009). Engineering Economy (14th ed.), Chp 4 pp104 -135. New Jersey: Pearson Education.
- Brassard M, Ritter D. The memory Jogger 2. Tools for Continuous Improvement and Effective Planning.2010.
Dr Paul, Can you please profer a better solution on calculating Productivity in Nigeria. This was just a trial reading from Skills & Knowledge. Thanks
ReplyDeleteSorry Lanre!!! I commented on this shortly after you posted it but my comment must have not registered for whatever reasons.
ReplyDeleteYou are on the right track, but need to look more into Chapters 15 and 16 in Skills & Knowledge.
Essentially, the only TWO things the client cares about are:
1) the number of drawings delivered and accepted by them, and;
2) the cost of REWORK as a percentage of the total amount billed.
Clients HATE paying twice or three times for mistakes made by the engineering folks.
So the first thing I would recommend is to find a STANDARD that you can use as a benchmark. IPA publishes them and if you can get that their data or data from other independent sources, that would be ideal. If you CANNOT get it, then see if you can get it from your client. Find out what THEY consider to be an "acceptable" rework number. (And based on experience, I would say no more than 3%)
So the first KPI metric I would urge you to track is actual man-hours per ACCEPTED drawing. This is sometimes referred to as EARNED MAN-HOURS. The second KPI metric I would urge you to consider would be REWORK MAN HOURS.
BUT, to protect yourself, and to generate confidence in your client that you are managing the work, I would set up a Pareto Analysis (See Memory Jogger II, page 122) that identifies the CAUSES of the rework and enables you to conduct root cause analysis and develop interventions to CORRECT the causes of the rework. (And I think you will find that in MANY cases, the rework is caused by changes the owner makes and not necessarily errors/omissions on the part of the engineer)
If you really want to take this to the extreme, what I would do is propose some sort of bonus or incentive for reducing or minimizing rework.
Bottom line here, I am in the process right now of creating a test question for your Benchmark Exam #2 that will incorporate more of this topic, so I will be challenging you next week to work through this type of problem.
BR,
Dr. PDG, Jakarta