Thomas, H R; Guevara, J M and Gustenhoven, C T (1984) Improving productivity estimates by work sampling. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 110(2), pp. 178-188. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Theoretical aspects are presented to evaluate the adequacy of work sampling as a surrogate productivity measure. A 10-week study is described in which work sampling data were gathered simultaneously with earned value information for a 10-man, small-bore pipefitter crew. Two forms of work sampling data were gathered that differed principally in the definition of direct work. The direct work percentages are statistically correlated to the ratio of earned to actual man-hours, and it is shown that the Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient could be improved by as much as 86% if the definition of direct work is restricted. The probability of a Type I statistical error is also greatly reduced. Data summarized according to 5-or 7-day moving averages is found to be more reliable than daily or weekly averages. It is shown how a prediction equation could be developed. The slope of this equation suggests that rather significant changes in the earned to actual man-hour ratio are reflected by rather small changes in direct work.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | slope, pipefitter, productivity, estimate, sampling |
| Subjects: | management, geotechnical engineering, data collection methods, practitioner, financial and cost management |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Cost Management, Business Strategy, Roles and Professions |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here