Ce diaporama a bien été signalé.
Nous utilisons votre profil LinkedIn et vos données d’activité pour vous proposer des publicités personnalisées et pertinentes. Vous pouvez changer vos préférences de publicités à tout moment.

022 Construction Productivity (PART 1)

897 vues

Publié le

Construction Productivity (PART 2)

Publié dans : Ingénierie
  • 7 Sacred "Sign Posts" From The Universe Revealed. Discover the "secret language" the Universes uses to send us guided messages and watch as your greatest desires manifest before your eyes. Claim your free report. ●●● http://scamcb.com/manifmagic/pdf
    Voulez-vous vraiment ?  Oui  Non
    Votre message apparaîtra ici
  • Nine Signs Wealth is Coming Your Way... ◆◆◆ http://ishbv.com/manifmagic/pdf
    Voulez-vous vraiment ?  Oui  Non
    Votre message apparaîtra ici

022 Construction Productivity (PART 1)

  1. 1. helpdesk@construction-productivity.co.uk htt://www.construction-productivity.co.ukhtt://www.construction-productivity.co.uk CONSTRUCTIONCONSTRUCTION PRODUCTIVITYPRODUCTIVITY
  2. 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. 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.
  4. 4. 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
  5. 5. 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.
  6. 6. 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;
  7. 7. 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.
  8. 8. 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.
  9. 9. 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.
  10. 10. 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)
  11. 11. 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.
  12. 12. 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
  13. 13. 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.
  14. 14. 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.
  15. 15. 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.
  16. 16. 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.
  17. 17. 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.
  18. 18. CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYCONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITY There are five basic resources used to produce goods. These are: • Capital • Land • Materials • Plant/ Machinery • Manpower
  19. 19. CONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYCONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITY Use of high quality management techniques such as; •Planning •Scheduling •money invested in the project
  20. 20. 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;
  21. 21. CONSTUCTIONCONSTUCTION PRODUCTIVITYPRODUCTIVITY • Last planner system; • JIT & Quality Management Systems; • Construction Productivity-Logistics; • Productivity Improvement; • ISO 9000, ISO 9001, ISO1400; • Quality Assurance.
  22. 22. 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.
  23. 23. 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.
  24. 24. 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
  25. 25. 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.
  26. 26. 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.
  27. 27. 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.
  28. 28. 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.
  29. 29. 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.
  30. 30. 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.
  31. 31. 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.
  32. 32. 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.
  33. 33. 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:
  34. 34. 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.
  35. 35. 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.
  36. 36. 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).
  37. 37. 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.
  38. 38. 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.
  39. 39. 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
  40. 40. 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.