You are on page 1of 9

What is Method Study?

Method Study is the systematic recording and critical examination of ways of doing
things in order to make improvements.

Method Study Flow Chart

Process of a Method Study

METHOD STUDY
Method study is the process of subjecting work to systematic, critical scrutiny in order to
make it more effective and/or more efficient.
It was originally designed for the analysis and improvement of repetitive, manual work,
but it can be used for all types of activity at all levels of an organisation.
The process is often seen as a linear, described by its main steps of:
- Select (the work to be studied).
- Record (all relevant information about that work).
- Examine (the recorded information).

- Develop (an improved way of doing things).


- Install (the new method as standard practice).
- Maintain (the new standard proactive).
Although this linear representation shows the underlying simplicity of method study, in
practice the process is much more one of iteration around the above steps with each
dominating at a different stage of the investigation.
The cyclic process often starts with a quick, rough pass in which preliminary data are
collected and examined, before subsequent passes provide and handle more
comprehensive and more detailed data to obtain and analyse a more complete picture.
Work is selected for method study on the basis of it being an identified problem area or
an identified opportunity (resulting from a systematic review of available data, normal
monitoring or control processes, high levels of dissatisfaction and complaint or as part of
a management-derived change in policy, practice, technology or location), and usually
because it meets certain conditions of urgency and/or priority.
Before any method study investigation is begun, it is necessary to establish clear terms of
reference which define the aims, scale, scope and constraints of the investigation. This
should also include an identification of who "owns" the problem or situation and ways in
which such "ownership" is shared. This may lead to a debate on the aims of the project,
on reporting mechanisms and frequencies, and on the measures of success. This process
is sometimes introduced as a separate and distinct phase of method study, as the "define"
stage. It leads to a plan for the investigation which identifies appropriate techniques,
personnel, and timescale.
The Record stage of method study is to provide sufficient data (in terms of both quality
and quantity) to act as the basis of evaluation and examination. A wide range of
techniques are available for recording; the choice depends on the nature of the
investigation and the work being studied, and on the level of detail required. Many of the
techniques are simple charts and diagrams, but these may be supplemented by
photographic and video recording, and by computer based techniques.
Especially with "hard" (clearly defined) problems, method study often involves the
construction and analysis of models, from simple charts and diagrams used to record and
represent the situation to full, computerised simulations. Manipulation of and
experimentation on the models leads to ideas for development.
The recorded data are subjected to examination and analysis; formalised versions of this
process are critical examination and systems analysis. The aim is to identify, often
through a structured, questioning process, those points of the overall system of work that
require improvements or offer opportunity for beneficial change.
The Examine stage merges into the Develop stage of the investigation as more thorough
analysis leads automatically to identified areas of change. The aim here is to identify
possible actions for improvement and to subject these to evaluation in order to develop a
preferred solution.
Sometimes it is necessary to identify short-term and long-term solutions so that
improvements can be made (relatively) immediately, while longer-term changes are
implemented and come to fruition.
The success of any method study project is realised when actual change is made 'on the
ground' - change that meets the originally specified terms of reference for the project.

Thus, the Install phase is very important. Making theoretical change is easy; making real
change demands careful planning - and handling of the people involved in the situation
under review. They may need reassuring, retraining and supporting through the
acquisition of new skills. Install, in some cases, will require a parallel running of old and
new systems, in others, it may need the build-up of buffer stocks, and in others ..... what
matters is that the introduction of new working methods is successful. There is often
only one chance to make change!
Some time after the introduction of new working methods, it is necessary to check that
the new method is working, that it is being adhered to, and that it has brought about the
desired results. This is the Maintain phase. Method drift is common - when people start to
either revert to old ways of working, or introduce new changes. Some of these may be
helpful (and should formally be incorporated); others may be inefficient or unsafe. A
methods audit can be used to formally compare practice with the defined method and
identify such 'irregularities'.

TIME STUDY
Time study is a structured process of directly observing and measuring (using a timing
device) human work in order to establish the time required for completion of the work by
a qualified worker when working at a defined level of performance.
It follows the basic procedure of systematic work measurement of :
analysis (of the work into small, easily-measurable components or elements);
measurement (of those components); and
synthesis (from those measured components to arrive at a time for the complete job).
The observer first undertakes preliminary observation of the work (a pilot study) to
identify suitable elements which can be clearly recognised on subsequent occasions and
are convenient, in terms of their length, for measurement.
Subsequent studies are taken during which the observer times each occurrence of each
element (using a stopwatch or other timing device) while at the same time making an
assessment of the worker's rate of working on an agreed rating scale. (One of the prime
reasons for measuring elements of work, rather than the work as a whole is to facilitate
the process of rating. The rate at which a worker works will vary over time; if elements
are carefully selected, the rate of working should be consistent for the relatively short
duration of the element. More information on rating is given within the entry on work
measurement.) This assessment of rating is used to convert the observed time for the
element into a basic time - a process referred to as "extension". It is essential that a time
study observer has been properly trained in the technique and especially in rating.
Time study, when properly undertaken, involves the use of specific control mechanisms
to ensure that timing errors are within acceptable limits. Increasingly, timing is by
electronic devices rather than by mechanical stopwatch; some of these devices also assist

in subsequent stages of the study by carrying out the process of "extending" or converting
observed times into basic times.
The number of cycles that should be observed depends on the variability in the work and
the level of accuracy required. Since time study is essentially a sampling technique in
which the value of the time required for the job is based on the observed times for a
sample of observations, it is possible using statistical techniques to estimate the number
of observations required under specific conditions. This total number of observations
should be taken over a range of conditions (where these are variable) and, where possible,
on a range of workers.
Once a basic time for each element has been determined, allowances are added (for
example, to allow the worker to recover from the physical and mental effects of carrying
out the work) to derive a standard time.
Time study is a very flexible technique, suitable for a wide range of work performed
under a wide range of conditions, although it is difficult to time jobs with very short cycle
times (of a few seconds). Because it is a direct observation technique, it takes account of
specific and special conditions but it does rely on the use of the subjective process of
rating. However, if properly carried out it produces consistent results and it is widely
used. Additionally, the use of electronic data capture devices and personal computers for
analysis makes it much more cost effective than previously.
WORK MEASUREMENT
Work measurement is the process of establishing the time that a given task would take
when performed by a qualified worker working at a defined level of performance.
There are various ways in which work may be measured and a variety of techniques have
been established. The basic procedure, irrespective of the particular measurement
technique being used, consists of three stages ;
? an analysis phase in which the job is divided into convenient, discrete components,
commonly known as elements;
? a measurement phase in which the specific measurement technique is used to establish
the time required (by a qualified worker working at a defined level of performance) to
complete each element of work;
? a synthesis phase in which the various elemental times are added, together with
appropriate allowances (see below), to construct the standard time for the complete job.
The techniques used to measure work can be classified into those that rely on direct
observation of the work, and those that do not. For example, some techniques, such as
predetermined motion-time systems and the use of synthetic or standard data can provide
times from simulation or even visualisation of the work. However, the data on which
such techniques are based were almost certainly based on earlier observation of actual
work.

Rating
Direct observation techniques (such as time study and analytical estimating) include a
process for converting observed times to times for the "qualified worker working at a
defined level of performance." The commonest of these processes is known as rating.
This involves the observer (after appropriate training) making an assessment of the
worker's rate of working relative to the observer's concept of the rate corresponding to
standard rating. This assessment is based on the factors involved in the work - such as
effort, dexterity, speed of movement, and consistency. The assessment is made on a rating
scale, of which there are three or four in common usage. Thus on the 0-100 scale, the
observer makes a judgement of the worker's rate of working as a percentage of the
standard rate of working (100).
The rating is then used (in a process known as "extension" in time study) to convert the
observed time to the basic time using the simple formula:
Basic time = observed time x observed rating/standard rating
Rating is regarded by many as a controversial area of measurement since it is a subjective
assessment. Where different observers rate differently, the resulting basic times are not
comparable. However, practised rating practitioners are remarkably consistent. It is
important that those undertaking the rating are properly trained, and that this training is
regularly updated (to maintain a common perception of standard rating) through rating
'clinics'.
Allowances
When carrying out work over a complete shift or working day, workers obviously suffer
from the fatigue imposed both by the work undertaken and the conditions under which
they are working. The normal practice is to make an addition to the basic time
(commonly referred to as an "allowance") to allow the worker to recover from this
fatigue and to attend to personal needs. The amount of the allowance depends on the
nature of the work and the working environment, and is often assessed using an agreed
set of guidelines and scales.
It is usual to allow some of the recovery period inherent in these allowances to be taken
away from the workplace (and it is essential in adverse working conditions). Thus, work
design should include the design of an effective work-rest regime. The addition of
allowances should never be used to compensate for an unsafe or unhealthy working
environment.
One minority school of thought suggests that relaxation allowances are unnecessary. With
work which involves, say, the carrying of heavy weights, this school suggests that the
observer automatically adjusts the concept of standard rating to allow for the weight.
Thus, if the standard rate of performance for walking on level ground carrying no weight

is equivalent to four miles per hour, then an observer rating a worker walking while
carrying a weight will not expect the equivalent rate. Thus, it is argued that the weight
has been allowed for in the adjustment of standard rating and any relaxation allowance is
simply a duplication of this adjustment.
In many jobs there are small amounts of work that may occur irregularly and
inconsistently. It is often not economic to measure such infrequent work and an additional
allowance is added to cover such work and similar irregular delays. This allowance is
known as a contingency allowance and is assessed either by observation, by analysis of
historical records (for such items as tool sharpening or replacement), or by experience.
The end result is a standard time which includes the time the work "should" take (when
carried out by a qualified worker) plus additional allocations in the form of allowances,
where appropriate, to cover relaxation time, contingency time and, perhaps, unoccupied
time which increases the overall work cycle (such as waiting for a machine to finish a
processing cycle).
Choosing a measurement technique
The choice of a suitable measurement technique depends on a number of factors
including:
- the purpose of the measurement;
- the level of detail required;
- the time available for the measurement;
- the existence of available predetermined data;
- the cost of measurement.
To some extent there is a trade off between some of these factors. For example,
techniques which derive times quickly may provide less detail and be less suitable for
some purposes, such as the establishment of individual performance levels on short-cycle
work.
The advantage of structured and systematic work measurement is that it gives a common
currency for the evaluation and comparison of all types of work. The results obtained
from work measurement are commonly used as the basis of the planning and scheduling
of work, manpower planning, work balancing in team working, costing, labour
performance measurement, and financial incentives. They are less commonly used as the
basis of product design, methods comparison, work sequencing, and workplace design.

Work Measurement
Determination of the length of time it should take to complete a job.
Job times are vital inputs for manpower planning, estimating labor
costs, scheduling, budgeting, and designing incentive systems. In
addition, from the workers' standpoint, time standards provide an

indication of expected output. Time standards used under Standard


Cost Systems reflect the amount of time it should take an average
worker to do a job under typical operating conditions. The standards
include expected activity time plus allowances for probable delays. The
most commonly used methods of work measurement are: (1)
stopwatch time study; (2) historical times; (3) predetermined data; and
(4) work sampling.

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 Components
A work measurement system has three components: preferred
methods, time values, and re porting. Preferred methods are not
always the most efficient or fastest way to do a task. They should
enhance safety, quality, and productivity. Safety for the employee and
for the product should be considered. Quality is equally important; it
has been proven that good performance and good quality go hand in
hand. People who are trained in the proper method and follow that
method will produce high-quality work and per form at an acceptable
performance level. Time values and reporting should also be
considered. The time that a job should take is determined not on the
basis of speeding up the motions a worker normally makes but on the
normal pace of the average worker, taking into consideration
allowances for rest periods, coffee breaks, and fatigue. A reporting
system is important to the success of any work measurement method.
Supervisors and managers must have access to labor-management

information that is both timely and complete. Timely information can


be used to manage and shift labor hours to areas where they are
needed and to correct problems or at least prevent them from
becoming a crisis. Personal computers help to apply work
measurement more effectively and more cheaply and provide
immediate feedback to the workers, supervisors, and managers.
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 highvolume 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.
http://www.citehr.com/search_new.php?
q=work+measurement&submit=Go

http://www.citehr.com/search_new.php?q=work+measurement&submit=Go

You might also like