Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Labor Productivity:
An Earned Value Approach
By
Awad S. Hanna, Ph.D., P.E.
Professor
University of Wisconsin-Madison
Department of Civil and Environmental
Engineering
2314 Engineering Hall, 1415 Engineering Dr.
Madison, WI, 53706
Tel (608) 263-8903
Hanna@engr.wisc.edu
President
Hanna Consulting Group Inc.
1314 Farwell Drive
Madison, WI 53704
Tel (608) 246-0221
Fax (608) 246-0614
Biography
Awad S. Hanna, Ph.D., P.E
Awad S. Hanna is a professor and chair of the construction engineering and management program
at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, department of Civil and Environmental Engineering.
Dr. Hanna holds M. S. and Ph.D. degrees from Penn State University and he is a register
professional engineer in the U S and Canada. Awad has been an active construction
practitioner, educator and researcher for over 30 years. He has taught construction
management courses at Penn State University, Memorial University of Newfoundland, Canada,
and University of Wisconsin-Madison. Dr. Hanna has conducted several research projects for
the Electrical Contracting Foundation including landmark studies on the cumulative impact of
change orders on electrical/mechanical labor productivity, schedule compression and
acceleration, impact of stacking of trades on labor productivity, performance evaluation for
electrical supervisors, and craftsmen, and productivity factors in electrical construction. Dr.
Hanna has conducted research for other national organizations including the National Highway
Research Program, the Mechanical Contracting Foundation, the New Horizon Foundation and
the Construction Industry Institute. Dr. Hanna has taught more than 300 successful seminars
and workshops in more than 35 states on topics such as change orders impacts, project
scheduling, estimating, labor productivity, construction delay claims.
Dr. Hanna is also a national consultant representing and assisting many contractors and owners in
productivity losses related to change orders, acceleration and compression, delay, and trade
stacking.
Ross Umentum
Productivity Improvement
y
Ross Umentum
Learning Objectives
1.
2.
3.
4.
Ross Umentum
Objectives (Continued)
5.
6.
7.
8.
Analysis of trends
9.
Ross Umentum
Productivity Analysis
Selected
Selected Activity
Activity
In
In Progress
Progress
Work
Work hours
hours
Quantities
Quantities
Productivity
Productivity
Calculations
Calculations
Performance
Performance
Evaluation
Evaluation
Workhour
Workhour
Forecast
Forecast
Analysis
Analysis of
of
Trends
Trends
2)
3)
Binary Approach
4)
15%
Hanger Installation
15%
Duct Rough-In
50%
100%
Ross Umentum
HVAC
DUCTS
Erected
Connected
Accepted
Phase Breakdown
Area Breakdown
Hanna 2004
Prof. Awad Hanna
10
Description
Base % Complete
Hr
Earned
Actual
11
(2)
Budgeted
Hours
(3)
Percent
Complete
(4)
Earned
Hours
(5)
Actual
Hours
(6)
Activity
Performanc
e Factor
973
78%
759
867
0.88
821
59%
484
579
0.84
325
30%
98
65
1.50
151
15%
23
15
1.51
383
100%
383
366
1.05
574
40%
230
248
0.93
456
5%
23
23
0.99
195
0%
N/A
160
35%
56
65
0.86
Grilles/Flex
240
25%
60
55
1.09
VAV's
38
50%
19
24
0.79
75
95%
71
85
0.84
58
0%
N/A
20
25%
1.00
Set Equipment
54
30%
16
12
1.35
4523
49%
2226
2409
0.92
PROJECT TOTALS
Ross Umentum
12
Example (Continued)
Job % Complete = Earned = 2226 = 0.492
Base
4523
Performance Factor =
Ross Umentum
13
1.0
25%
50%
75%
100%
% Complete
Ross Umentum
14
Case Study #1
Case Study #2
Case Study #3
Type of Work
Mechanical
Architectural
Sheet Metal
Sheet Metal
13,731
15,268
7,344
17
29
37
Project Location
Lower Midwest
Western US
Upper Midwest
Ross Umentum
15
Ross Umentum
16
Ross Umentum
17
Ross Umentum
18
1.30
1.27
1.19
1.18
1.20
1.19
1.17
1.15
Performance Factor
1.15
1.14
1.10
1.06
1.04
1.06
1.08
1.05
1.13
1.12
1.14
1.01
1.00
1.03
1.00
0.95
0.95
0.93
0.87
0.75
20%
0.92
Case Study #1
Case Study #2
Case Study #3
Planned Productivity
0.80
10%
0.94
0.94
0.93
0.90
0.70
0%
0.95
0.99
30%
40%
50%
60%
Percent Complete
70%
Ross Umentum
80%
90%
100%
19
1.29
1.26
1.20
1.16
1.21
1.13
Performance Factor
1.18
1.10
1.07
1.02
1.07
0.98
1.00
0.96
0.96
0.97
0.88
0.98
0.96
0.92
0.88
20%
30%
40%
1.03
0.94
0.94
0.92
0.95
Case Study #1
Case Study #2
Case Study #3
Planned Productivity
0.80
10%
1.02
0.99
0.92
0.92
0.90
0.70
0%
1.13
50%
60%
Percent Complete
70%
Ross Umentum
80%
90%
100%
20
15%
11.0%
10%
Forecast Error
7.5%
6.1%
9.3%
5.7%
4.1%
5%
5.2%
3.6%
4.4%
3.2%
2.0%
1.8%
0%
0.0%
-0.2%
-0.8%
-3.3%
-2.7%
-2.7%
-5%
-7.2%
-4.5%
-5.5%
-6.0%
Case Study #1
Case Study #2
Case Study #3
Zero Error
-10%
-12.7%
-15%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Percent Complete
Ross Umentum
21
10%
7.5%
5.9%
6.0%
5%
2.8%
2.2%
Forecast Error
0.3%
0.5%
2.4%
-2.7%
-2.3%
0.0%
-0.4%
0%
-3.2%
2.9%
3.7%
-2.8%
-1.4%
-0.7%
-2.3%
-5%
-4.5%
-5.6%
-5.5%
-6.6%
-10%
Case Study #1
Case Study #2
Case Study #3
Zero Error
-11.2%
-12.6%
-15%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Percent Complete
Ross Umentum
22
Ross Umentum
23
Major Conclusions
y
Ross Umentum
24