Evaluation of Factors Affecting Labor Productivity

IJSTE - International Journal of Science Technology & Engineering | Volume 3 | Issue 07 | January 2017 ISSN (online): 2349-784X

Evaluation of Factors Affecting Labor Productivity by AHP Method Himanshu Agarwal PG Student Department of Civil Engineering ITM University, Gwalior, India

Sohit Agrawal Assistant Professor Department of Civil Engineering ITM University, Gwalior, India

Vaishant Gupta Assistant Professor Department of Civil Engineering ITM University, Gwalior, India

Dr. Mukesh Pandey Head of Dept.

Department of Civil Engineering ITM University, Gwalior, India

Abstract This research paper represents the evaluation and identifying the factors affecting labor productivity of building construction projects and highway projects in Gwalior region. To do so, as per sample size many stakeholders are working in construction fields. They have analyzed all factors by Analytic hierarchy process (AHP). I have prepared a questionnaire survey format by AHP method and send this questionnaire form these stakeholders. 14 factors are evaluated through a complete literature review.

These 19 factors are take in main three groups; Management, Human and external. After evaluate and identifying all factors, the top ten factors are carried out, those top ten factors are behaved negative role in construction industry in Gwalior region. These top five factors are given; Labor fatigue, Labor skill, Method of construction, communication between site management and labor, Late arrival and early quit & frequent unscheduled breaks.

Keywords: AHP, Stakeholder, Questionnaire ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ I.

INTRODUCTION

Productivity is the major factor that affects the sequence of work, criteria and overall performance of any other organization, industries, factories etc. The ratio of outputs to inputs is called productivity. Construction field works and industrial works are maximum labor based with hand tools and equipments. The labor productivity is decreases the cost approximate 30% to 40% of overall total project cost. In the terms of economics “productivity is the ratio of output from production, per unit of input”. In construction industry, it is a small productivity sector because of a minimum number of technical tools is used and the maximum number of workers is unskilled. So that, in this sector to necessary a maximum number of tools to handle the maximum work for make a work is easy or simple and the skilled labor are used and provide a training for unskilled labor.

II. OBJECTIVE  

To evaluate the most important factor those, behave negatively for labor productivity in the construction project.

To find out the factors ranking by AHP criteria.

No. 1.

1A 1B 1C 1D 2.

2A 2B 2C 2D 2E 2F 2G 2H 2I

Criteria

Human

Management

Table – 1 Frame Work of Factors Sub criteria Labor fatigue Labor skills Availability of experienced labor Labor motivation Labor supervision Method of construction Delay in payment Lack of construction managers leadership Late arrival, early quit and frequent unscheduled breaks Sequence of work Communication between Site Management and Labor Storage location Labor Interference and congestion

All rights reserved by www.ijste.org

36

Evaluation of Factors Affecting Labor Productivity by AHP Method (IJSTE/ Volume 3 / Issue 07 / 008)

2J

Incentive scheme

III. ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS A multi-criterion-decision-making problem is known as analytic hierarchy process. The AHP techniques firstly represent L.M. Saaty (1977 and 1944). The objective of AHP techniques is to compute the relative priorities (Weights) used a given set of criterion, factors or alternatives on a nominal ratio scale. It is based on totally decision maker those filled the survey form from his experience or knowledge that used in construction field.

IV. SURVEY FORMAT ‘A’ is less important than ‘B’ 9

8

7

6

5

4

‘B’ is more important than ‘A’

3

2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Table – 2 Pair Wise Comparison Scale for AHP Techniques Given by Saaty Numerical Scale Verbal judgment of Preferences 9 Extremely preferred 8 Very Strongly to Extremely 7 Very Strongly Preferred 6 Strongly to Very Strongly 5 Strongly Preferred 4 Moderately to Strongly 3 Moderately Preferred 2 Equally to Moderately 1 Equally Preferred

V. AVERAGE RANDOM INDEX (RI)

Size of matrix RI

1 0

2 0

Table – 3 Average Random Index 3 4 5 6 7 0.58 0.9 1.12 1.24 1.32

8 1.41

9 1.45

10 1.49

The average random index (RI) is used when we calculate the consistency ratio (CR=CI/RI). When the number of factors is used in one group or makes a one pair wise comparison matrix.

For example, we take a number of factors in one group or matrix is 4 then the RI is 0.9 used or number of factors is used 10 then the RI is 1.49 according to average random index Table 2.

VI. METHODOLOGY 

Firstly, make an AHP structure for define the problems of every element. The AHP techniques are introduced by Thomas Saaty (saaty1990). In this techniques makes a pair wise comparison according to decision makers those fill the survey form own experience, feelings or knowledge of the construction project. In this research paper we make a pair wise comparison matrix P×P. where P is the number of factors is used in one group.

VII. STRUCTURE OF AHP

  

To resolve the problem for introducing a goal.

To achieving the goal for introducing an objective.

Find evaluation criteria for each criteria.

After this create a pair wise comparison matrix for each criteria and each level and used nominal scale 1 to 9 that shown in table 1.

Factor

Table - 4 Comparison Matrix of Human FACTOR LF LS AEL LM LF 1 2 5 9 LS 0.5 1 3 7 AEL 0.2 0.33 1 3 LM 0.11 0.14 0.33 1 TOTAL 1.81 3.47 9.33 20 Table – 5 Solving Consistency Index and Consistency Ratio Matrix LF LS AEL LM Total Weight Consistency Measure All rights reserved by www.ijste.org

37

Evaluation of Factors Affecting Labor Productivity by AHP Method (IJSTE/ Volume 3 / Issue 07 / 008)

LF LS AEL LM TOTAL

0.553 0.276 0.111 0.061 1

0.576 0.288 0.095 0.040 1

0.536 0.322 0.107 0.035 1

0.45 0.35 0.15 0.05 1

2.115 1.236 0.463 0.187

0.529 0.309 0.116 0.047 CI RI CR

4.057 4.035 4.004 3.994 0.007 0.9 0.008

LF= Labor fatigue LS= labor skill AEL= Availability of experienced labor LM= Labor motivation Factor LS MC DP LCML LA SW CSML SL LIC IS TOTAL

Table - 6 Comparison Matrix of Management Related Factor LS MC DP LCML LA SW CSML SL 1 1 3 4 1 1 0.33 1 1 1 5 5 1 4 3 3 0.33 0.2 1 3 1 1 1 3 0.25 0.2 0.33 1 0.33 0.33 0.33 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 3 1 0.25 1 3 1 1 1 1 3 0.33 1 3 1 1 1 3 1 0.33 0.33 1 0.33 1 0.33 1 0.33 1 1 1 1 1 0.25 1 1 0.33 3 3 0.33 3 1 1 9.91 5.64 16.66 27 7.99 14.33 9.24 18 Table – 7 Solving Consistency Index and Consistency Ratio Matrix

LIC 3 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 15

IS 1 3 0.3 0.3 3 0.3 1 1 1 1 12

Factor

LS

MC

DP

LCML

LA, EA &FUB

SW

CSML

SL

LIC

IS

Total

Weight

LS MC DP LCML LA SW CSML SL LIC IS TOTAL

0.101 0.101 0.033 0.025 0.101 0.101 0.303 0.101 0.033 0.101 1

0.177 0.177 0.035 0.035 0.177 0.044 0.058 0.059 0.177 0.059 1

0.18 0.3 0.06 0.02 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.02 0.06 0.18 1

0.148 0.185 0.111 0.037 0.111 0.111 0.111 0.037 0.037 0.111 1

0.125 0.125 0.125 0.041 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.041 0.125 0.041 1

0.069 0.279 0.069 0.023 0.069 0.069 0.069 0.069 0.069 0.209 1

0.036 0.324 0.108 0.036 0.108 0.108 0.108 0.0357 0.027 0.108 1

0.056 0.167 0.167 0.056 0.167 0.056 0.167 0.056 0.056 0.056 1

0.2 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.267 0.067 0.067 0.067 1

0.08 0.25 0.03 0.03 0.25 0.03 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 1

1.176 1.976 0.804 0.367 1.236 0.769 1.352 0.569 0.735 1.015

0.118 0.198 0.08 0.037 0.124 0.077 0.135 0.057 0.074 0.102 CI RI CR

Consistency measure 11.287 11.571 10.975 11.077 11.247 11.144 11.171 11.259 11.149 11.554 0.138 1.49 0.093

LS= Labor supervision MC= Method of construction DP= Delay in payment LCML= Lack of construction managers’ leadership LA, EA &FUB=Late arrival, early quit and frequent unscheduled breaks SW= Sequence of work CSML= Communication b/w site management and labor SL= Storage location LIC= Labor interference and congestion IS= Incentive scheme VIII. CALCULATION OF WEIGHT, CONSISTENCY INDEX AND CONSISTENCY RATIO The First Step Is to Calculate the Weight   

Firstly add the factors.

All the factors are individually divided by the total of all individual factors.

After follow 1 and 2 points write average of all factors.

All rights reserved by www.ijste.org

38

Evaluation of Factors Affecting Labor Productivity by AHP Method (IJSTE/ Volume 3 / Issue 07 / 008)

The second step is to calculate the consistency index by using formula đ?œ†đ?‘šđ?‘Žđ?‘Ľâˆ’đ?‘›

CI= đ?‘›âˆ’1 Where â€˜Îťmax’ is the maximum Eigen value and ‘n’ is the no. of factors.

The third step is to calculate the consistency ratio by using formula đ??śđ??ź CR= đ?‘…đ??ź Where RI is the average random index.

When the Consistency ratio is equal or less than 0.1 or 10%, then calculated value of consistency ratio is acceptable or consistent. Otherwise the calculated value of consistency ratio is inconsistent or unacceptable. Then the matrix is recalculating or reform.

IX. RESULT To follow all these procedure top ten factors are given below.

Table – 8 Top ten factors Rank 1 2 3 4 5

Factor affecting labor productivity Labor fatigue Labor Skill Method of construction Communication b/w site management and labor Late arrival, early quit & frequent unscheduled breaks

AHP 0.529 0.309 0.198 0.135 0.124

X. CONCLUSION On the basis of present study, in this research paper I have checked or identify total 19 factors which affects the labor productivity in the field of civil engineering of building construction project or highway projects etc. Total 36 survey form sent the stakeholders they were analyze these form and after I had collected these form. The return response of survey form is 100%.

Top five factors are Labor fatigue, Labor skill, Method of construction, communication between site management and labor, Late arrival and early quit & frequent unscheduled breaks.

REFERENCES [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]

Khaled M. EI-Gohary, Mostafa E. Shehata (2011) “Towards improving construction labor productivity and projects performance.� Alexandria Engineering Journal. 2011, 50; 321-330.

Shashank K, Dr. Sutapa Hazra, Kabindra Nath Pal “Analysis of Key Factors Affecting the variation of Labor Productivity in Construction Projects� ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 4, Issue 5, May 2014.

Teicholz Paul, 2001. U.S. construction labor productivity trends, 1970-1998. Journal of Construction Management and Engineering, ASCE, vol.127, issue 5, pp. 427-429.

ASCE M, William Ibbs ( 2005) “ Impact of changeâ€&#x; s timing on labor Productivity. “Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 2005, 131(11), 1219-1223 KsiÄ…Ĺźek M., Nowak P.,Expert methods for design solutions assessment, Logistyka 2009, nr6.

Hatush Z., Skitmore M.R., Assessment and evaluation of contractor data against client goals using pert approach, Construction Management and Economics 15(4), 1997, 327-340.

All rights reserved by www.ijste.org

39