WORK MEASUREMENT Work measurement is the careful analysis of a task, its size, the method used in its performance,

and its efficiency. The objective is to determine the workload in an operation, the time that is required, and the number of workers needed to perform the work efficiently. Work measurement helps to determine the time spent performing any process and offers a consistent, comparable methodology for establishing labor capacities. Work measurement can be extremely effective at informing supervisors of the working times and delays inherent in different ways of carrying out work. The purpose of a measurement method is to achieve full coverage of the work to be measured. A good work measurement system has many benefits. It helps to reduce labor costs, increase productivity, and improve supervision, planning, scheduling, performance appraisal, and decision making.

WORK MEASUREMENT METHODS

Work measurement programs involve the use of a number of techniques, each selected to cover an appropriate part of the task. The purpose of measurement is to collect real data about actual events. To obtain time standards, the data are usually converted to target data or data that apply under known conditions. All work measurement systems are based on the same, simple three-stage procedure: analysis, data collection and measurement, and synthesis. They differ in the nature and degree of analysis, the nature and level of data collection and measurement, and the nature of the synthesis process. However, the three-stage procedure remains common. Before measurement begins, the task to be measured is analyzed and broken down into convenient parts that are suitable for the chosen measurement technique. The purpose of the measurement technique is to derive a "basic time" for each of these activities, elements, or motions. At the measurement stage, it is necessary to collect descriptive or qualitative data on the nature of the task, the conditions under which it is performed, and other factors, which may have a bearing on the time that the task takes to be complete. When repetitive jobs are measured, data are collected over a number of representative cycles of a job to obtain a "mean" or "typical" value. An analysis of the results can be done using statistical techniques to determine the number of observations that must be made to provide a given level of confidence in the final results. At the synthesis stage, the various parts of the task and their associated basic times are combined together in correct sequence and with the correct frequency to produce the time for a complete job. During this stage, the basic time will be adjusted for allowances to become the standard time for the task. There are four work measurement methods, each of which has strengths and weaknesses. The historical data method shows the time it actually took to complete a task. Such data have the advantages of being easy to collect, understand, and communicate, but they provide no information for future improvement. For the work sampling method, a large number of random observations are made of the task to determine the steps in its normal performance. This method is easy to learn and use, and it provides more operational detail than historical

data. The disadvantage of work sampling is that it requires thousands of samples to establish an accurate measure for each step. The time study method uses continuous and snapback approaches to record the elapsed time of a task. The snapback approach requires a stopwatch with a reset button that allows the observer to read and record the time at the end of each work element then reset (snapback) the watch to zero. Although popular, the time-study method is subjective and relies heavily on the experience of the time-study analyst. A computerized data collector provides more accurate timing than the stopwatch. However, converting actual time to the expected or normal time remains a problem. The predetermined motion/time systems method is based on the premises that all work consists of basic human motions and that times can be assigned to these motions if they are defined and classified in a systematic way. A film or videotape records what a job entails and how long it takes. This technique is used most frequently in studying high-volume settings such as a workstation or an assembly line. An observer measures a job by watching and analyzing it into its basic constituent motions. This method requires substantial training and practice to acquire and maintain accuracy. It enables all types of tasks to be assigned time/duration values that can then be extended into cost values. The results are not easy to communicate, but when properly executed, this method yields very accurate times.

MEASURING PRODUCTIVITY AND METHODS TO IMPROVE PRODUCTIVITY

Productivity is an overall measure of the ability to produce a good or service. More specifically, productivity is the measure of how specified resources are managed to accomplish timely objectives as stated in terms of quantity and quality. Productivity may also be defined as an index that measures output (goods and services) relative to the input (labor, materials, energy, etc., used to produce the output). PRODUCTIVITY MEASURES: It has been said that the challenge of productivity has become a challenge of measurement. Productivity is difficult to measure and can only be measured indirectly, that is, by measuring other variables and then calculating productivity from them. This difficulty in measurement stems from the fact that inputs and outputs are not only difficult to define but are also difficult to quantify. Any productivity measurement system should produce some sort of overall index of productivity. A smart measurement program combines productivity measurements into an overall rating of performance. This type of system should be flexible in order to accommodate changes in goals and policies over time. It should also have the ability to aggregate the measurement systems of different units into a single system and be able to compare productivity across different units. The ways in which input and output are measured can provide different productivity measures. Disadvantages of productivity measures have been the distortion of the measure by fixed expenses and also the inability of productivity measures to consider quality changes (e.g., output per hour might increase, but it may cause the defect rate to skyrocket). It is easier to conceive of outputs as tangible units such as number of items produced, but other factors such as quality should be considered.

Experts have cited a need for a measurement program that gives an equal weight to quality as well as productivity. If quality is included in the ratio, output may have to be defined as something like the number of defect-free units of production or the number of units which meet customer expectations or requirements. The determination of when productivity measures are appropriate performance measures depends on two criteria. The first is the independence of the transformation process from other processes within the organization. Second is the correspondence between the inputs and outputs in the productivity measurement process.

USE OF PRODUCTIVITY MEASURES

Productivity is a required tool in evaluating and monitoring the performance of an organization, especially a business organization. When directed at specific issues and problems, productivity measures can be very powerful. In essence, productivity measures are the yardsticks of effective resource use. Managers are concerned with productivity as it relates to making improvements in their firm. Proper use of productivity measures can give the manager an indication of how to improve productivity: either increase the numerator of the measure, decrease the denominator, or both. Managers are also concerned with how productivity measures relate to competitiveness. If two firms have the same level of output, but one requires less input thanks to a higher level of productivity, that firm will be able to charge a lower price and increase its market share or charge the same price as the competitor and enjoy a larger profit margin. Within a time period, productivity measures can be used to compare the firm's performance against industry-wide data, compare its performance with similar firms and competitors, compare performance among different departments within the firm, or compare the performance of the firm or individual departments within the firm with the measures obtained at an earlier time (i.e., is performance improving or decreasing over time?). Productivity measures can also be used to evaluate the performance of an entire industry or the productivity of a country as a whole. These are aggregate measures determined by combining productivity measures of various companies, industries, or segments of the economy.

PRODUCTIVITY INDEX
Since productivity is a relative measure, for it to be meaningful or useful it must be compared to something. For example, businesses can compare their productivity values to that of similar firms, other departments within the same firm, or against past productivity data for the same firm or department (or even one machine). This allows firms to measure productivity improvement over time, or measure the impact of certain decisions such as the introduction on new processes, equipment, and worker motivation techniques. In order to have a value for comparison purposes, organizations compute their productivity index. A productivity index is the ratio of productivity measured in some time period to the productivity measured in a base period. For example, if the base period's productivity is

calculated to be 1.75 and the following period's productivity is calculated to 1.93, the resulting productivity index would be 1.93/1.75 = 1.10. This would indicate that the firm's productivity had increased 10 percent. If the following period's productivity measurement fell to 1.66 the productivity index of 1.66/1.75 = 0.95 it would indicate that the organization's productivity has fallen to 95 percent of the productivity of the base period. By tracking productivity indexes over time, managers can evaluate the success, or lack thereof, of projects and decisions.

FACTORS AFFECTING PRODUCTIVITY

There is quite a variety of factors which can affect productivity, both positively and negatively. These include: 1. capital investments in production 2. capital investments in technology 3. capital investments in equipment 4. capital investments in facilities 5. economies of scale 6. workforce knowledge and skill resulting from training and experience 7. technological changes 8. work methods 9. procedures 10. systems 11. quality of products 12. quality of processes 13. quality of management 14. legislative and regulatory environment 15. general levels of education 16. social environment 17. geographic factors The first 12 factors are highly controllable at the company or project level. Numbers 13 and 14 are marginally controllable, at best. Numbers 15 and 16 are controllable only at the national level, and 17 is uncontrollable.

IMPROVING PRODUCTIVITY
Productivity improvement can be achieved in a number of ways. If the level of output is increased faster than that of input, productivity will increase. Conversely, productivity will be increased if the level of input is decreased faster than that of output. Also, an organization may realize a productivity increase from producing more output with the same level of input. Finally, producing more output with a reduced level of input will result in increased productivity. Any of these scenarios may be realized through improved methods, investment in machinery and technology, improved quality, and improvement techniques and philosophies such as just-in-time, total quality management, lean production, supply chain management principles, and theory of constraints.

A firm or department may undertake a number of key steps toward improving productivity. William J. Stevenson (1999) lists these steps to productivity improvement:

Develop productivity measures for all operations; measurement is the first step in managing and controlling an organization. Look at the system as a whole in deciding which operations are most critical, it is over-all productivity that is important. Develop methods for achieving productivity improvement, such as soliciting ideas from workers (perhaps organizing teams of workers, engineers, and managers), studying how other firms have increased productivity, and reexamining the way work is done. Establish reasonable goals for improvement. Make it clear that management supports and encourages productivity improvement. Consider incentives to reward workers for contributions. Measure improvements and publicize them. Don't confuse productivity with efficiency. Efficiency is a narrower concept that pertains to getting the most out of a given set of resources; productivity is a broader concept that pertains to use of overall resources. For example, an efficiency perspective on mowing the lawn given a hand mower would focus on the best way to use the hand mower; a productivity perspective would include the possibility of using a power mower.

As a cautionary word, organizations must be careful not to focus solely on productivity as the driver for the organization. Organizations must consider overall competitive ability. Firm success is categorized by quality, cycle time, reasonable lead time, innovation, and a host of other factors directed at improving customer service and satisfaction.