1.18k likes | 1.77k Views
Improving Production Efficiency. David Ellings David Rosebrook Business Mentors 2006 DKC Conference, Toronto. What’s On Tap. Industry standards Efficiency myths and facts Study profile A case study The results The hidden effect The bottom line Simple steps to improve your position
E N D
Improving Production Efficiency David Ellings David Rosebrook Business Mentors 2006 DKC Conference, Toronto
What’s On Tap • Industry standards • Efficiency myths and facts • Study profile • A case study • The results • The hidden effect • The bottom line • Simple steps to improve your position • Building the team
Measuring Success? Employees Equipment Building Size Volume
SALES: $5,000,000 EXPENSE: $4,850,000 PROFIT: $150,000 or 3% SALES: $750,000 EXPENSES: $600,000 PROFIT: $150,000 or 20%
Risk Reward
NAICS Code Industry Segment Profit 8%
0 – 22% 15 – 30% 50 – 80%
Direct Costs 20 – 50% Material/Equipment 50 – 90% Labor 50 – 80% DIRECT COSTS
50 – 90% Labor Focus For Efficiency
Top Five Inefficiencies • Materials • Buying smarter and using wiser • Speed of work • Get your employees to move faster through the assigned tasks • Amount of management • Train your staff to function in the field with less management oversight • Pricing • Estimating program pricing problems • Project size • Advance to larger projects…they are more substantially more profitable Myths
Ratio Difference Efficiency 1% increase in efficiency results in a 5% increase in profits
True Inefficiencies • Scheduling • Time management and efficient use of resources • Material procurement • Multiple trips, retaining stock, price shopping • Accuracy • Time card slippage, accountability, management • Drive time • Most significant indicator, liability, waste, waste, waste
Study Profile Executive Summary • Productivity trends carry a large impact on profitability • Utilize detailed data gathered over three years to analyze efficiency • Productivity focused on production employees and management processes • Clear conclusions were able to be drawn by the results
Introduction • Background • Productivity is the key factor of economic health • Industry productivity is not well defined • Rely on productivity figures from sources of questionable credibility • Exactware, Means etc. • Ineffective management results • Need to offset the tightening of profits by the insurance industry
Introduction • Objectives • Study efficiency trends over an extended period • Create an awareness • Counter insurance industry pressure on margins • Increase management tools • Nothing matters unless we increase…. $ NET PROFITS $
Introduction • Scope • Defined: The American Association of Cost Engineers “Productivity is a relative measure of labor efficiency, either good or bad, when compared to an established base or norm” • Its nature creates difficulties in tracking it as an absolute value over time. • Information is gathered against movements of an established base, or benchmark value
Introduction • Methodology • Study detailed movement of 82 production employees • Focus on inefficient time and not on production cycles • Created buy-in through incentives and self-improvement • Used sampling and statistical analysis techniques to establish and confirm results • Sampled across all company production areas • Gathered data very quietly
Affecting Factors • Project Uniqueness • Each job is different and unique • Environmental factors • Landscape, weather, and physical location • Aesthetic factors • Level of quality required, material selection, existing conditions • Human factors • Expectations of adjusters, owners, managers etc. • Uniqueness requires modification of the process…creating an inefficient learning curve at the beginning stages of each project activity
Affecting Factors • Technology • Hugh effect on overall productivity • Modify skill requirements • Create difficulties in separating contributions of technology, management and labor to the efficiency • Less motivation to add technological changes when the associated labor is not expensive • Sometimes expensive and only a temporary strategic advantage
Affecting Factors • Personnel • Management • Level of training, accountability, and knowledge • Documented studies – poor management activities account for over 50% of the inefficiencies • Production • Cross training, flexible contract increase efficiency • The fall of “real wages” within the industry • Old skills retire...young talent goes else ware • Industry tends to retire or fall off at an earlier age • Lack of formal training • Lowest of any formal sector of the economy • Workforce tends to be transient, causing a reluctance to invest capital to train
Case Study Assumptions Employee • Carpenter • Generalist to handle multiple tasks • Wage: $25/hour • Burden: 50% • Total cost to employee: $37.50/hour • Work year available: 1960 hours/year • 2080 hours minus 3 weeks for holidays, vacation and sick time. • Expected production: $100/hour
Scenario One 7:00 AM arrive at your facility to get assignment and supplies 7:00 – 7:30 drive to work site 7:30 – 9:30 install trim (productive work) 9:30 – 9:45 break (paid) 9:45 – 11:30 finish trim and paint (productive work) 11:30 – 12:00 lunch (unpaid) 12:00 – 1:45 install interior doors (productive work) 1:45 – 2:00 break ( paid) 2:00 – 3:00 install door hardware (productive work) 3:00 – 3:30 drive back and unload items and paperwork
Scenario One Results • 8 hours worked and paid • $200 wages + $100 burden = $300 cost • 6.5 hours productive revenue generation • 1.5 hours unproductive time paid 19% of paid time unproductive
Scenario Two 7:00 AM arrive at your facility to get assignment and supplies 7:00 – 7:30 drive to work site 7:30 – 7:45 get coffee then discuss project, activities last evening and other personal items with the rest of the production crew 7:45 – 8:00 unload supplies and tools from truck and set-up to work 8:00 – 9:00 install trim (productive work) 9:00 – 9:15 break (paid) 9:15 – 9:20 put away coffee, doughnuts and items from break
Scenario Two 9:20 – 10:00 install trim but a scope clarification problem arises (productive work) 10:00 – 10:15 discuss project with home owner and/or call project manager for clarification 10:15 – 10:30 install trim (productive work) 10:30 – 10:40 at 10:20 the carpenter realized that there wasn’t enough trim to complete the work, so a discussion about this issue occurs with the crew and the carpenter winds down his activities to get ready to leave for a store 10:40 – 11:00 drive to Home Depot (even though there was another lumber yard 5 min away but was unknown to the carpenter)
Scenario Two 11:00 – 11:30 locate trim in store, pick-up a couple of other supplies on your account, look at a the new compound miter saw, look at bath fixtures for a home remodel or side job, go to pro-desk to check out, converse with pro-desk manager about the weather or sports, load items into truck and leave 11:30 – 11:40 stop for gas and snacks 11:40 – 12-00 drive back to project 12:00 – 12:30 lunch (unpaid) 12:30 – 12:40 conclude lunch and put away lunch supplies, clean-up and use restroom
Scenario Two 12:40 – 1:00 install last piece of trim ( project completed for the day, other supplies to arrive tomorrow) 1:00 – 1:15 wind down from activities and load vehicle 1:15 – 1:30 drive to a different work site 1:30 – 1:45 set-up tools and work at new site, also greet and discuss things with crew/homeowner 1:45 – 2:15 install windows (productive work) 2:15 – 2:30 break (paid) 2:30 – 2:35 put away coffee, doughnuts and items from break
Scenario Two 2:35 – 2:50 install insulation (productive work) 2:50 – 3:00 wind down for day, load truck and leave 3:00 – 3:30 return to facility, drop of time sheet/paperwork and unload supplies and debris
Scenario Two Results • 8 hours worked and paid • $200 wages + $100 burden = $300 cost • 3.0 hours productive revenue generation • 5.0 hours unproductive time paid 63% of paid time unproductive
The Cost of Inefficiency Scenario One Scenario Two Industry Average 1.5 hrs = $56.25/person/day = $13, 781/year 5.0 hrs = $187.50/person/day = $45,937/year 2.6 hrs = $99.00/person/day = $24,255/year
What about the revenue that should have been earned during the inefficient time spend….
Lost Revenue • 2080 hrs in a work year = $208,000 • 3 weeks removed for vacation, holidays, etc. • 1960 possible productive hours in a year • At $100/hr = $196,000/person/year of revenue generation
Lost Revenue Scenarios • $36,750/yr of lost revenue per person • 367.5 hrs unproductive = 1592.5 hrs productive • $122,500/yr of lost revenue per person • 1225 hrs unproductive = 735 hrs productive Avg. $64,680/yr of lost revenue per person • 646.8 hrs unproductive = 1313.2 hrs productive
What Does All of This Mean? Company Assumption • 1,000,000 revenue for year • 60% direct costs = $600,000 • 25% materials/equipment = $150,000 • 75% direct labor = $450,000 • 25% overhead = $250,000 • 15% profit = $150,000
What Does All of This Mean? Company Assumption • We will use the average efficiency to test 1/3 of production day is inefficient 2 hours 38 minutes non-productive 5 hours 22 minutes productive time
1% increase in efficiency results in a 5% increase in profits
Small Increase, Big Gain 5% increase = 25% more profit • Productive time • 5hr 22min to 5hr 37min…..or only 15 min/day • 12,000 hrs of labor in our example • 1,500 personnel days per year • 1,500/days X .25hrs X $100 = $37,500increase inPROFITS
Results 5% increase = 25% more profit • 1,000,000 revenue increased to 1,037,500 • 60% direct costs = $600,000 • 25% materials/equipment = $150,000 • 75% direct labor = $450,000 • 25% overhead = $250,000 • 18% profit = $187,500
Results 5% increase = 25% more profit Therefore with the exact same costs the company was able to produce an increase of $37,500 of additional revenue which increased the profit by the expected 25% from $150,000 to $187,500 with only 15 min of increased production per person each day.
Results 5% increase = 25% more profit In addition, in order to capture the same profit of $187,500 without increasing the efficiency would require a 25% increase in the revenue or an additional $250,000 of sales…. Which is the easier improvement?
Actual Results History • 62% increase in employee retention • With incentives wages increased 6½ X greater then rate of inflation • 18% increase in margins • 76% decrease in paid none revenue travel time • 36% decrease in management related inefficiencies • 54% reduction in production inefficiencies
Actual Results NET PROFITS 42.4%
Break Time 10 Minutes
Recap • Direct costs represent 50% to 80% of the companies total expenditures • Labor represents 50% to 90% of the total job costs on a project
Recap • Direct costs represent 50% to 80% of the companies total expenditures • Labor represents 50% to 90% of the total job costs on a project
True Inefficiencies According to Dave • Scheduling • Materials procurement • Accountability of employees • Travel time
A Solution • Build a construction team that is accountable for the outcome of the project from the time the first call is received until the final check is cashed • Proactively plan the project and then execute the plan • Measure your progress and outcome
Contents • Building the construction team • Planning the project • Estimating • Budgeting • Scheduling • Materials • Measuring our progress