Benchmarking Productivity Metrics Annual Conference Keystone, Colorado
Session Participants Moderator • Dave Hile – Watkins Engineers & Constructors Panelists • Jimmy Slaughter - S&B Engineers and Constructors • Paul Woldy – Chevron. Texaco Corporation • Ken Walsh - Arizona State University • Kent Goddard – Solutia • Steve Thomas – CII
Goals of this Session • Provide an Update on the CII Benchmarking Productivity Metrics effort • Illustrate proposed uses of the productivity metrics • Discuss the alignment of efforts between the CII Benchmarking initiative and Project Team 192, Engineering Productivity Measures research effort
First CII Annual Meeting Keystone, Colorado August 7 -8, 1985 AGENDA General Session, August 7, 1985 8: 30 A. M. Opening Remarks 8: 45 A. M. Keynote Address 9: 30 A. M. CII Overview … 11: 15 A. M. Productivity Measurements …
What Can Be Accomplished Owner & Contractor Safety Performance Lost Workday Case Incidence Rate 8. 00 7. 00 6. 80 6. 79 6. 10 6. 00 5. 80 5. 50 4. 90 5. 00 4. 50 4. 40 4. 00 4. 20 4. 10 4. 00 Estimated* 3. 44 3. 00 1. 90 2. 00 1. 55 1. 45 1. 14 1. 00 0. 63 0. 81 0. 55 0. 45 0. 31 0. 41 0. 27 0. 26 0. 23 0. 00 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 325 413 Industry* CII 477 497 527 613 644 888 591 Year and Work-hours (MM) 763 1, 122 936 1, 115
What Are We Doing? Construction Productivity Engineering Productivity • Concrete • Structural Steel • Piping • Instrumentation • Equipment • Electrical • Insulation
Construction Productivity - Concrete
Engineering Productivity - Concrete
Productivity Metrics Milestones Jun 2000 Established path forward. Jul 2000 Identified and discussed issues. Developed work plan and resource teams. Sept 2000 Developed preliminary Construction Metric definitions. Nov 2000 Reviewed Construction Metric definitions. Developed Engineering Metric categories. Feb 2001 Finalized Construction Metric definitions. Jun 2001 Finalized Construction Metric questionnaire. Initiated pilot data collection. Oct 2001 Validated Construction Metric questionnaire. Jan 2002 -Developed Engineering Productivity Metrics – first cut Apr 2002 Refined/Finalized Engineering Productivity Metrics Apr – Jun 2002 Integration with Project Team 192
How to Use the Metrics
Benchmarking ROADMAP Determine What to Benchmark Define the Metrics Develop Data Collection Methodology Identify Reasons for Deficiencies Develop Action Plan Collect Data Integrate Goals into Business Practices Identify Performance Gap Improvement?
Identify Performance Gap • Collect data and calculate raw productivity → Norms: wk-hrs/installed quantity • Calculate expected productivity → Regression model(s) • Assess the gap
Determining the Performance Gap (Notional Data) Concrete Foundations 21 -50 CY 16 14 Hrs/CY 12 Productivity Gap 10 8 Database Values 6 Your Project Expected Productivity 4 -10 -5 0 Project Environment Index 5 10
Benchmarking ROADMAP Determine What to Benchmark Define the Metrics Develop Data Collection Methodology Identify Reasons for Deficiencies Develop Action Plan Collect Data Integrate Goals into Business Practices Identify Performance Gap Improvement?
Identify Reasons for Deficiencies • Perform Self-assessment: Gap analysis & Key reports • Review References: CII Products On-line
Other Uses for the Data: Wk-hr Gain/Loss Metric Category Unit of Meas. Actual Qty Your Proj. Act Wk-Hr Your Proj. Raw Prod. DB Norms Wk-Hr Gain/Loss CY 300 3075 10. 25 8. 15 630 TN 150 1028 6. 85 4. 75 315 LF 8050 14, 088 1. 75 1. 25 4025 EA 4 2000 500 350 600 LF 20, 000 3, 300 . 165 . 102 1260 ELF 5, 000 1. 00 . 75 1250 EA 600 1, 590 2. 65 2. 00 390 8470 Concrete 5 -10 CY Structural Steel Piping 6” CS Sched 80 Equipment Pressure Vessels Electrical Cable Insulation Instruments
Other Uses: Potential Project Opportunity Metric Category • DB Productivity Expected Wk. Norms Hr Unit of Meas. Estimated Qty CY 450 8. 15 3668 TN 500 4. 75 2375 6” CS Sched 80 LF 15, 250 1. 25 19, 063 Equipment Pressure Vessels EA 6 350 2100 LF 36, 000 . 102 3672 Insulation ELF 10, 000 . 75 7500 Instrumentation Instruments EA 1000 2000 Concrete 5 -10 CY Structural Steel Piping Electrical Cable
ROADMAP Determine What to Benchmark Define the Metrics Develop Data Collection Methodology Identify Reasons for Deficiencies Develop Action Plan Collect Data Integrate Goals into Business Practices Identify Performance Gap Improvement?
Why Measure Productivity? • Industry • Competitiveness • Improvements • Profits
How to Get Started? • http: //cii-benchmarking. org • Benchmarking Training • Input • Compare My Project • Improve
Challenges • Roadmap Steps • Education • Management Buy-In
ROADMAP Determine What to Benchmark Define the Metrics Develop Data Collection Methodology Identify Reasons for Deficiencies Develop Action Plan Collect Data Integrate Goals into Business Practices Identify Performance Gap Improvement?
Challenges • Roadmap Steps • Education • Management Buy-In
Future Notional Data
Where Will You Be in Ten Years? Construction Productivity Wk-Hrs/Qty Productivity Performance 16 14 12 Industry 10 8 6 4 CII 2 0 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 925 875 1012 985 1010 1045 1003 1117 1092 1101 1057 1111 Year and Work-hours (MM) Notional Data
Summary Update on CII Benchmarking Productivity Metrics • Construction & Engineering Metrics have been developed • We are collecting data on construction metrics now • Data collection for engineering metrics will begin by August 31 st • If you need the metrics, you need to submit data!
Summary Proposed Uses for the Metrics • Gap analysis • Identify work-hour gains/losses • Provide check on estimating system • Trend analysis – are you improving?
Summary Alignment between CII Benchmarking & PT 192 • BM&M and PT 192 are working together to coordinate efforts • Differences, overlaps, and similarities between both groups have been identified • Both efforts will share data and results where possible on an ongoing basis • Both efforts need data to succeed
You Need To Benchmark and Support PT 192!
PT 192 Engineering Productivity Measurement
You Need To Benchmark and Support PT 192!
Comparison of BM&M and PT 192 Engineering Productivity Efforts “Similar but Different and Complimentary”
Actions to Align BM&M and PT 192 • Share PT 192 workshop results with BM&M. - Done • Design “General Project Information” portion of PT 192 data collection form to avoid redundancy with BM&M questionnaire. - Done • PT 192 participation on BM&M’s Implementation Session at 2002 Annual Conference. - Today • Share team members to maintain integration. - In progress • Share data. - Will begin as data is received • Joint BM&M / PT 192 meeting to share results. - 11/15/02 • Report to CII Executive Committee. - Fall 2002
You Need To Benchmark and Support PT 192!
Скачать презентацию Benchmarking Productivity Metrics Annual Conference Keystone Colorado
107f4585aea15a14024512855d7cae86.ppt