Construction Management - Coursework Example

Running Header: Construction Management Student’s Name: Instructor’s Name: Course Code: Date of Submission: Table of Contents Table of Contents 2 1.0 Introduction 3 2.0 Productivity analysis 4 2.1 The project inputs 4 2.2 Project resources 5 2.3 Expected project changes 6 2.4 Quality aspect of the project 6 3.0 Ways of improving productivity 6 4.0 Conclusion 8 References 9 1.0 Introduction Productivity measure of a project is understood by many as the process of ascertaining level to which the project has been to achieve its goals. It particularly takes into consideration the ratios of the project inputs and outputs. This way one can be able to determine the worthiness of the resources that have been invested for the project. According to Peypoch and Solonandrasana (2008), the project observer or assessor may have different options in terms of the project scope and the relative importance of all the resources that put into the project. The level of productivity can be measured based on the output or the level of functionality of a completed project. In many occasions, resources utilized in a project are measured in monetary terms. It is argued that the most effective productivity measure must be able to be used as the baseline for determining the ways that can be used to ensure performance improvement. In addition, according (Sharpe and Arsenault 2007), productivity measurements results can also be used in informing the worthiness of the investment processes, the methods and tools used as well as the outsourcing process. Even there is always need to continuous measure the level of productivity of a project, there are a number of factors that have persistently continued to influence the productivity estimates and which include quality and project change requirements. In the contemporary society, there are many issues that have been raised with productivity measurements. More important the process of measuring productivity is narrowly based on the simplistic ways which do not add up to giving clear expectations of the project (Hulten et al 2001). This is because some codes of measurement are taken into account while others are ignored and consequently affecting the results of productivity measurement. The primary objective of this report is to critically evaluate the reasons that have made productivity measurement a difficult task and some of the ways that can be employed to improve project productivity. 2.0 Productivity analysis Productivity is particularly very difficulty to define because of the several factors that have to be taken into consideration. The productivity measurement tools must take into account the objectives of the project and the ways in which different tools will be applied to achieve the specified objectives. The various trends in terms of economical and political environment are some of the factors that have continued to make the process of measuring the level of productivity a very difficult task (Nadiri and Ingmar 2001). This is because these elements are never static and they continue to change thus posing new challenges to experts in measuring the level of productivity. The four key elements that ought to be factored into productivity measurement include the scope of product output, the project resources, project changes and quality delivery. These key four elements assumed to be among the several factors that have greatly hardened the process of determining the productivity level a project. 2.1 The project inputs This defines the functional units that have to be engaged in order to correspond with the project needs. Even though the value of the inputs can be determined, it’s not always easy to determine from the onset the size of the project and the likely impact of certain resource inputs to the project results. Throughout the project duration, several requirements have to be taken into consideration. The project is always expected to take less effort but produce results that are able to satisfy the requirements of the project. This is the reason as to why productivity is always made difficult to define because it cannot be easy to determine the project output before its conception or implementation (Rutkauskas and Paulavičienėm 2005). Ideally, the project outputs are expected to conform to the project goals in order to say that the project has been successful or not. In other words the impact the effort that was put into the project could only be seen once the project has been completed. However, this has not been easy for many the experts. This is due to the fact that the project continues to take shape as the implementation process continues to place. 2.2 Project resources On the other hand, the scope of resources cannot be accurately estimated at the onset of the project. Resources are important factor in productivity. Resources in projects include finances and employees who must be in possession of specific skills and capabilities. Regardless of how easy it looks on how resources can be measured, it has never always been the case. According to Sanjeev (2007), it is never easy to interpret the entirely the amount of resources that may be required to complete the project. Economic trends always make this process to be a very difficult one. Perhaps because it economic trends are never stable and therefore cannot be easily predicted. For example prices for purchasing resources do change. The prices can change for the better if they go down and if they escalate, then it means that the cost of the project will change and consequently raising the question if the project will be able to satisfy its stated objectives. 2.3 Expected project changes According to (Sharpe and Harrison 2008), determining the likely changes that are expected in the course of executing a project cannot be clearly recognized at the start of the project. This is because some project changes can come when the project is almost half way and therefore may necessitate the need to make numerous changes in order to meet the changing marketing demands. This way it means the project expertise will be able to ascertain the level of productivity to a certain level as they will be expected monitor the project is fairing. This has actually denied the experts the opportunity to determine how the project productivity will look like at the end. 2.4 Quality aspect of the project Quality can be described as the ability of the project to deliver the best results and which conforms the already determined objectives. As a matter of fact productivity can only make meaning if the quality of the product delivered is the right one. But to determine the end result of a project has never been easy and that productivity can only be waited until the project is completed for it to be determined (Sharpe 2004). Quality determination requires that hypothetically, all aspects to be taken into consideration more especially production process and reworks. Project quality can be based on the cost incurred and the output. 3.0 Ways of improving productivity For the productivity of the project to be improved a number of factors need to be taken into consideration. These refer to those variables which in way of the other can influence the end result of a particular project. The key considerations include: the process used to select the project, the process of execution the abilities of the project team leaders and their members, the existence of soft skills, commitment by senior staff management and the process of communicating the results to individual team members who are part of the implementation process. The following are the most important strategies that can be used to improve the productivity of various projects (Sharpe 2003). First, it is the acquisition of all important information and material with regard to specific projects. This could be used to determine whether there are any linkages between the Key Performance Indicators (KPI) and the project selected. This will enable the project implementer to come up with specific strategies that enable the closing of the gap between the project selection and productivity. Second, it is always known that large projects are complex to manage to execute and they always pose serious challenges to the management team. However, according to (Sharpe 2007), when projects come extremely big and unmanageable or when they go beyond the expected completion time, there is need to break it into smaller and manageable sizes as long as they can be integrated. Third, employee recruitment, training and development could play a major role in bringing about resilience in work performance. Employee training and development should be particularly aimed at developing new skills both for the seen team leaders and their members. High level of employee competence, engagement and commitment can also be enhanced through employee training programmes. Training is associated to high level of efficiency as employees will learn how to execute their tasks with minimal cost. Fourth, as matter of fact, high level of productivity can be attained if the project leaders are competent enough. In other words, the teams’ leaders are expected to demonstrate management capabilities in terms of analyzing statistical data manage teams and be able coordinate all key stakeholders (Peypoch 2007). In order to facilitate these is always need for the team leaders to be well equipped both in terms of hard and soft management skills. Ability to demonstrate different skills can be so helpful in managing complex team activities. Fifth, it is important also to note that the tendency to accelerate projects in order to have them completed within the specific periods has been cited as one the major causes of failure of the projects to be productive. This tendency should be handled with great care as it may real cost the business. The time cycle for the project should be realistic and attainable (Sahay 2005). 4.0 Conclusion In general, productivity measurement is a very complex process for any given organization. From this report it has been established that there are several factors that contribute in making the process even more difficult and they include the determination of the project outputs, resource utilization, quality delivery and changing of the project features. However, the report has managed to identify some of the ways that can be used to facilitate improvement in productivity and which include: the selection of workable projects, breaking large projects into small and manageable pieces, training and development of employees, learning of both soft and hard skills and setting appropriate time schedules for projects in order to avoid rushing to completing projects while committing errors. On the other product measures can be easily be derived from the production function. Meanwhile a lot of assumptions have to be made which include profit maximization, and the returns that are constant to project. However, important point that was noted is that problems do arise and they should be ignored as they may result into biasness when explaining productivity estimates. References Hulten, Charles R., Edwin R. and Michael J. 2001, New Developments in Productivity Analysis, University of Chicago Press for the National Bureau of Economic Research. Nadiri, I. and Ingmar, P. 2001, “Dynamic Factor Demand Models and Productivity Analysis”, in Hulten, Dean and Harper (eds.). Peypoch, N. 2007, “On Measuring Tourism Productivity,” Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, vol.12, No.3, pp. 237-244. Peypoch, N. and Solonandrasana, B. 2008, “Aggregate efficiency and productivity analysis in the tourism industry,” Tourism Economics, 14(1), pp. 45-56. Rutkauskas, J. and Paulavičienėm, E. 2005, “Concept of Productivity in Service Sector,” ISSN 1392-2785 Engineering Economics, vol.3 (43), p.29-34. Sahay, B.S. 2005, “Multi-factor Productivity Measurement Model for Service Oganization,” International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, vol.54, No.1, pp.7- 22 Sanjeev, G. M. 2007, “Measuring Efficiency of the Hotel and Restaurant Sector: the Case of India.” International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, vol. 9, Issue 5, pp.378-387. Sharpe, A. 2003, “Why are Americans More Productive than Canadians?” International Productivity Monitor, Spring, no.6, pp. 19-37. Sharpe, A. 2004, “Ten Productivity Puzzles Facing Researchers,” International Productivity Monitor, Fall, No.9, pp.15-24. Sharpe, A. 2007, “Lessons for Canada from International Productivity Experience,” International Productivity Monitor, Spring 2007, no.14, pp. 20-37. Sharpe, A., J. and Arsenault D. 2007, “The Impact of Interprovincial Migration on Aggregate Output and Labour Productivity in Canada, 1987-2006,” International Productivity Monitor, Fall , No.15, pp.25-40. Sharpe, A., J. and Harrison, P. 2008, “Why Have Real Wages Lagged Labour Productivity Growth in Canada?” International Productivity Monitor, Fall , no.17, pp.16-27. Read More