Construction Productivity (PART 2)

1. helpdesk@construction-productivity.co.uk
htt://www.construction-productivity.co.ukhtt://www.construction-productivity.co.uk
CONSTRUCTIONCONSTRUCTION
PRODUCTIVITYPRODUCTIVITY

2. 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.

3. 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.

5. 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

6. CONSTRUCTION PRODUCTIVITYCONSTRUCTION PRODUCTIVITY
• The role of project manger:
• Mobilising resources
• Remove constraints and difficulties
from the site
To study construction productivity is
complex and difficult.
• Construction companies find it
difficult, or are unable to study the
level of productivity within their
organisation.
• Mainly, because of the limitations.

7. CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYCONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITY
Common failures within the
construction industry are often
manifest in:
• cost and time overruns;
• poor quality workmanship;
• repetitive work;
• wastage on site and at the head
office;
• idleness within the workforce;

8. 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.

9. 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.

10. CONSTUCTIONCONSTUCTION
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.

11. CONSTUCTIONCONSTUCTION
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)

12. CONSTUCTIONCONSTUCTION
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.

13. CONSTUCTIONCONSTUCTION
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

14. CONSTUCTIONCONSTUCTION
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.

15. CONSTUCTIONCONSTUCTION
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.

16. 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.

17. 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.

18. 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.

19. CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYCONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITY
There are five basic resources used
to produce goods. These are:
• Capital
• Land
• Materials
• Plant/ Machinery
• Manpower

20. CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYCONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITY
Use of high quality
management
techniques such as;
•Planning
•Scheduling
•money invested in the
project

21. CONSTUCTIONCONSTUCTION
PRODUCTIVITYPRODUCTIVITY
Including:
• improved Communication
• efficient use of labour
• efficient use of material and
equipment
Use other methods of construction
productivity improvement such as:
• Lean construction;

22. CONSTUCTIONCONSTUCTION
PRODUCTIVITYPRODUCTIVITY
• Last planner system;
• JIT & Quality Management Systems;
• Construction Productivity-Logistics;
• Productivity Improvement;
• ISO 9000, ISO 9001, ISO1400;
• Quality Assurance.

23. 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.

24. CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYCONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITY
Their recommendation suggested
that issues such as:
• Value Engineering (VE)
• Life cycle costing
• Pre-fabrication
• Standardisation
Which will improve the level of
productivity.

25. CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYCONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITY
Group II recommended the
promotion of other techniques
not commonly used in the UK.
This included:
• Total quality management
• Total quality control and bench-
marking

26. CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYCONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITY
Project mangers can also
improve construction productivity
by:
• The use of best practice productivity
data which has been collected
carefully and accurately.
These information should cover areas
such as:
• Tendering;
• planning processes;
• The use of IT – based information
management systems (MIS) for
material procurement.

27. 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.

28. CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYCONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITY
Some researchers give reasons
for the decline in productivity
due to:
• A big step in communication
channels;
• Often on large construction
projects where there is a lack
of a clear communication
method.

29. CONSTUCTIONCONSTUCTION
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.

30. 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.

31. 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.

32. 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.

33. CONSTUCTIONCONSTUCTION
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.

34. 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:

35. CONSTUCTIONCONSTUCTION
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.

36. 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.

37. 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).

38. 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.

39. 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.

40. 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

41. 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.