CAD Dept. Management Challenge!! (Productivity)

[Hans_2011]

Hi all,

I would like to know if any of you can help me with this very tricky CAD Management issue I have.
In my company we have an Engineering Dept. which does CAD engineering design (from general arrangement, to detailed fabrication drawings and later 3d models from them). The problem I am facing is that it is very difficult to measure the productivity of the department since we have different equipment all the time.
It is difficult to set Finish Date targets since it is very difficult to assess the difficulty of the task to be done. Then Project Management becomes extremely difficult, with usual delays and cost consequences since I don't know how long it should take to finish a certain work and as a result you have to rely on the speed of the workers (which I know is not good!!). I have surfed the internet a lot trying to find an answer to this, but surprisingly, there are very little (or none) topics about this!
The problem is quite difficult to tackle , but at least I want to start measuring the difficulty of a task once it has been finished (which is easier than to assess it before you don't know exactly how the final drawing will look like!). Then I can measuring performance and in that way start putting in place some well directed incentives and punishments based on workers performance to increase productivity...

So the question is: How do you assess the difficulty of an AutoCAD drawing (after it has been finished) in terms of Man-Hours/drawing? A very gross approximation is enough. I understand it depends a lot on the experience of the draftman but I ened to take that variable out, saying that the same person would do all the drawings.
I was thinking that I could maybe count the lines on the finished drawing to get a correlation of this with the total time taken to finish it? Then using this correlation, with the number of lines of another CAD Drawing I could estimate the time it would be needed to finish it?

Please I am totally open to suggestions. If I am not clear enough, please let me know to further explain.
Thank you in advance,
Hans

[jaberwok]

If you are thinking about the engineering, the number of lines in a drawing isn't a good indicator of dificulty and, anyway, are you considering individual drawings or a set of drawings that make up a project?
If you are talking about time estimating; the ability to do this really only comes with experience so you can compare a current project with earlier ones.

Or are you thinking only about the mechanics of creating a drawing file after the engineering and design have already been done?

[Hans_2011]

If you are thinking about the engineering, the number of lines in a drawing isn't a good indicator of dificulty and, anyway, are you considering individual drawings or a set of drawings that make up a project?
If you are talking about time estimating; the ability to do this really only comes with experience so you can compare a current project with earlier ones.

Or are you thinking only about the mechanics of creating a drawing file after the engineering and design have already been done?

Hi Jaberwok,
Thank you for your reply.
I want to estimate the time that is required to draw a certain equipment given all the parameters.
A very stupid but graphical example would be to know how long (man-hours) does it take to draw a square with a hole in the middle given that the square side length is 10 and the hole is centered on one face with diameter of 5. Then I want to use this result to estimate how long does it take to draw rectangles with 2 holes, strange shapes with lots of holes, etc... Each new drawing is different from the previous one, but it has commonalities in the sense that in has holes, and is a defined shape.
In the real life, we are talking about very complex equipment but this is just a graphical example to show what I mean.

What kind of correlation can I use to estimate the amount of time that it should take an average drafter to draw the next shape (that has never been drawn before)?
This may sound stupid, but it is key to measure and improve productivity in the engineering department. Without this, everything is out of control and drafters can take as long as they want...

What you suggest, to compare latest project with the previous ones, is what I am trying to do, but the main problem is that I cannot estimate how much more time should it take to draw the rectangle with two holes when compared to the square with one hole. So I need to assess the difficulty of the first one relative to the second (and new) to estimate, at least roughly, how many more hours it should take to draw the second one. I hope you understand... If not, I will be glad to explain further.

Regards,
---
Hans

[cadtag]

.... the main problem is that I cannot estimate how much more time should it take to draw the rectangle with two holes when compared to the square with one hole. So I need to assess the difficulty of the first one relative to the second (and new) to estimate, at least roughly, how many more hours it should take to draw the second one. I hope you understand... If not, I will be glad to explain further...

I believe I understand what you are wanting, but I do not believe that it's a relevant metric to even think about measuring. The level of compexity of a design does matter, but equating that to productivity is not really measuable. There are far to many variables, especially as you earlier noted that "we have different equipment all the time". If each design problem is a unique one-off exercise, then the inherent strength of CAD (re-use) is rather meaningless. Productivity then becomes a matter of individual expertise and the (rare) ability to develop a workable design in a single go-round, or a minimal number of design changes.

further, your thinking does not seem to consider the iterative nature of both engineering design and the communication of that design concept through drawings. Designs change and evolve during the course of a project - new ideas come up, problems that were not thought of are identified and resolved, all through the iterative, back-and-forth process of design, drafting, checking, review. rinse and repeat... Hours spent in CAD do not really count, if the design is in a state of flux.

If you are in an AEC industry, I would suggest going back through the past 20 years, and determine the number of hours charged to each job, and the number of sheets in each of those jobs, and average the hours/sheet for each year, and the overall average hours per sheet. I suspect that the average of engineering and cad/drafting hours per sheet has changed little over those twenty years, and should give you a rough approximation of what to expect.

If you are in the widget business, then do something similar based on whatever the final product of your engineering department is. Take a 20 year history of hours per project, and average that out in terms of hours per project, and however you can quantify the project components.

[donalcommane]

While you could compare the time taken to draw said square and rectangle you are overlooking a thousand and one other variables such as the quality of information supplied, is the drawing/sketch to scale, clear and unambiguous, the repetitiveness of information on the drawing, the basic or intricate nature of the final image (despite the tag of Cad Monkey, your operatives are human and need to be able to get their head around what they're drawing) I could go on for hours.
In addition unless your best employees are brainless idiots they will leave for a work environment where it is recognised that they are not robots, you wish to punish them for not meeting your arbitrary targets? the end result will be that you are left employing people who will not be able to recognise that an engineer has made an error, fix it on the fly and give valuable feed back.

[donalcommane]

Cadtag, missed your reply says all that's required brilliantly

[Hans_2011]

Dear Donalcommane and Cadtag,

Thank you very much for your observations.
I am very aware of the extreme simplification I am trying to make.
But the situation is that we have a poor performing engineering drafting team, we know it! They talk to each other and they even plan to delay the work so then they get paid extra when we are running out of time to meet the schedule. WE have no way to measure in the beggining how long the work should take in the first place, so then it is difficult to control this...
I know we should try to benchmark with other companies, and we will try to do that, but I am somehow trying to find a way to measure the productivity to then be able to improve it.

This situation is costing us hundreds of thousands of dollars on our projects.
If you have any additional comments I would appreciate them...
Regards,
---
Hans

[BlackBox]

But the situation is that we have a poor performing engineering drafting team, we know it! They talk to each other and they even plan to delay the work so then they get paid extra when we are running out of time to meet the schedule. WE have no way to measure in the beggining how long the work should take in the first place, so then it is difficult to control this...
I know we should try to benchmark with other companies, and we will try to do that, but I am somehow trying to find a way to measure the productivity to then be able to improve it.

This situation is costing us hundreds of thousands of dollars on our projects.

Admittedly, we've only been offered one side of this story.

However, I find it interesting that the workers (by your description) are so compelled to make more $$$ that they're willing to risk their employment with your company by conspiring together to slow down production levels, so that the company will have to pay them more!?

... Do any of them have family members that are part of OPEC? (<- I'm kidding).

Look, having a schmucky employee is common, there's one in nearly every group... but to have the lot of them allegedly conspiring!? That's a whole other host of issues.

That suggests to me that the employees don't feel that there is any real-world consequences for their negative behavior, and that in doing "the right thing" by finishing their work on time (if not early) has no incentive at all. It's as true for humans, as it is dogs... bad behavior that is not corrected, is repeated.

If initial estimation is an ongoing issue, then you don't have the right individuals in that group's leadership positions. For example, a Senior Designer *should* be capable of estimating the man-hours needed to complete a job (to the initial scope), by combining their work experience, and their knowledge of the junior CAD staff that will be working on the project with them.

Sound like you're management team needs to ask some tough questions, and perhaps give Sun Tzu's "The Art of War" a read:

As Sun Tzu says (and I paraphrase):

"If the [instructions] are unclear, then it is the fault of the [CAD Manager], but if the [instructions] are clear, then it is the fault of the [CAD User]."

... Food for thought.

[jaberwok]

In the real world (that's not meant to sound dismissive), IME, an estimator provides a figure for man-hours. If the figure is exceeded, it's the drafters' fault no matter how unrealistic the figure might be. :shrug: It's part of the job.

Anyway, getting back to the subject - the historical approach is the only one and now is a good time to start recording history OR employ someone in the estimating job who already knows how the job is done - one of your drafters, perhaps.

[BlackBox]

In the real world (that's not meant to sound dismissive), IME, an estimator provides a figure for man-hours.

No worries.

I've only had one employer which staffed a full-time estimator... and that was back when I worked for a Civil Contractor. Whereas now I work on the Design side of projects.

Admittedly, I've been working for the same employer for the last 5 years. Despite the organazational structure changes, they never had, nor seek to implement such a position. Perhaps our group is just too small?

I guess having enough work for someone to do that full-time makes all the difference! lmao

If the figure is exceeded, it's the drafters' fault no matter how unrealistic the figure might be. :shrug: It's part of the job.

Huh... so it's the "Heads I Win, Tails You Lose" kind fo thing.