Labor and Eq UF and Productivity Norms Final Report

Bahir Dar University
Bahir Dar Institute of Technology

Faculty of Civil and Water Resource Engineering
To
Ethiopian Construction Authority
Final Study Report
‘’Preparation of Standard Manuals for Labour and

Equipment Utilization Factor and Productivity Norms in
Building Construction Works in Ethiopia’’
Procurement Ref No: CWRA/LB/12/2013
March, 2022
Bahir Dar, Ethiopia
Bahir Dar Institute of Technology March, 2022 G.C
Table of Contents
LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................................... iv
LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................................. iv
1. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1
1.1 General Background of the Ethiopian Construction Industry ..................................... 1
1.1.1 Project Performance ............................................................................................. 2
1.1.2 Project Success..................................................................................................... 3
1.1.3 Cost Overrun ........................................................................................................ 4
1.1.4 Causes of Cost Overrun ....................................................................................... 4
1.2 Objective of Study....................................................................................................... 5
1.3 Scope of study ............................................................................................................. 5
1.4 Deliverables ................................................................................................................. 6
2. PRODUCTIVITY IN CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY .................................................... 7
2.1 Labor Input in Productivit y ............................................................................... 8
2.2 Labor Productivity in Construction Industry ................................................................... 9
2.3 Construction Productivity in Ethiopia ............................................................................ 10
2.3.1 National Output Norms ........................................................................................... 14
2.4 Construction labour productivity measurement ........................................................ 15
2.5 Concepts of Crew, Labour Hours and Daily Output ...................................................... 16
2.6 Factors Affecting Labor and Equipment Productivity ................................................... 17
2.7 Methods of Measuring Labour and Equipment Productivity ......................................... 21
3. METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY .............................................................................. 23
3.1 Data Collection .......................................................................................................... 24
3.1.1 Document Review ................................................................................................... 24
3.1.2 Interviews ................................................................................................................ 25
3.1.3 Questionnaires ......................................................................................................... 25
4. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION .................................................................................. 27
4.1 Respondents Profile................................................................................................... 27
4.1.1 Stakeholders Participation ................................................................................. 27
4.1.2 Experience of Respondents ................................................................................... 27
4.1.3 Academic Level of Respondents ....................................................................... 27
4.2 Factors affecting productivity of labor and equipment in building construction ..... 28
4.2.1 Factor affecting Productivity of Labor .............................................................. 28
4.2.2 Factors Affecting Productivity of Equipment .................................................... 34
4.3 Crew Composition and Labor and Utilization Factor ............................................... 39
ii
4.4 Labor and Equipment Productivity Norm of Building Construction ........................ 56

4.5 Base Development................................................................................................... 118
5. CHALLENGES OF THE PROJECT ............................................................................. 119
6. REFERENCE ................................................................................................................. 120
iii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Summary of construction labour productivity in real (PPP-converted) international

dollars and nominal US dollars ................................................................................................ 11
Table 2. Factors affecting labor productivity in construction projects .................................... 19
Table 3. Factors affecting equipment productivity in construction projects ........................... 20
Table 4. Impact rating scale ..................................................................................................... 26
Table 5. Rank of Factors affecting Labor Productivity ........................................................... 33
Table 6. Rank of Factors affecting Equipment Productivity ................................................... 38
Table 7. Crew Composition and Utilization Factor of Building Construction ........................ 39
Table 8. Labor and Equipment Productivity Norm of Amhara Region ................................... 57
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Methodology Flow Chart ...................................................................................................... 23

Figure 2: Data Collection Tools to be used........................................................................................... 25
Figure 3. Stakeholders Participation ..................................................................................................... 27
Figure 4. Respondents Experience ........................................................................................................ 28
Figure 5. Respondents Academic Level .............................................................................................. 28
Figure 6. Management related labor factors ......................................................................................... 29
Figure 7. Motivation Related Labor Factor .......................................................................................... 30
Figure 8. Human related labor factors .................................................................................................. 30
Figure 9. Technical Related Labor Factors ........................................................................................... 31
Figure 10. Safety Related Labor Factor ................................................................................................ 32
Figure 11. External Labor Factors ........................................................................................................ 32
Figure 12. Operator Related Equipment Factors .................................................................................. 34
Figure 13. Resource Related Equipment Factors .................................................................................. 35
Figure 14. Communication Related Equipment Factor......................................................................... 35
Figure 15.Technical Related Equipment Factors .................................................................................. 36
Figure 16. Safety Related Equipment Factors ...................................................................................... 37
Figure 17. External Equipment Factor .................................................................................................. 37
Figure 18. Interface of Software ......................................................................................................... 118
iv
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 General Background of the Ethiopian Construction Industry
Ethiopia is one of the fastest-developing countries in the horn of Africa. The country is the second populous
country in Africa next to Nigeria, with over 105 million inhabitants which the majority of the population
is young and lives in rural areas. The construction industry in Ethiopia had seen up and downs since the
late 1950s. According to, the Ethiopian construction industry can be viewed in six distinct periods for its
evolution. The Pre 1968 (Foreign Company Domination) period is where almost all construction activities
in the country were undertaken by international construction companies. Then in the late 1968 up to 1990,
small-scale domestic construction companies emerge to undertake projects mainly in the capital Addis
Ababa. During this period, there had been an encouragement for private sector development in major
sectors of the economy such as construction; which results in establishment of small to medium scale
domestic construction companies though out the country. The 1992-1987 period was known as parastatal
company domination period since the government has taken the private construction company that was
established earlier and those state-owned construction firms undertook almost all construction activities.
The growing construction sector had taken to a new dimension during the period between 1987 and 1991.
During this period, design services and construction phases was introduced as a separate phase to Ethiopian
construction industry. Whereas in 1991, privatization in the construction sector improved, and continue
improving to the year 2001. The year 1991 also bring another change in government with completely
different policies that re-emerge private sector development. As a result of this a number of private
construction companies were established in the country and started taking parts in many construction
activities.
The Ethiopian government has introduced the concept of integration and capacity building in 2001. Since
then, the government has been allocating large amount of the country’s budget to infrastructure, advocating
Integration of stakeholders and capacity building for local and domestic construction firms. Which in turn
helps the industry to grow in an unprecedented rate. A recent study by indicated that the GDP contribution
of the industry has been raised to 5.6% and approaches to the sub Saharan average (6%). Meanwhile, the
Gross Domestic Capital Formation (GDCF), which was about 60 percent in 1996/97, has reached nearly
1
75% in 2002/03. Beyond its contribution to the nation, the industry is also the 6th major contributor of the
content infrastructure stock following South Africa, Egypt, Morocco, Algeria and Nigeria.
The construction industry in the sub Saharan region shares many of the problems and challenges the
industry is facing in other developing countries, perhaps with greater severity. Given the critical role, the
construction industry plays in Ethiopia and other developing countries, and the poor level of performance
of the industry in those countries, improving the performance of the industry ought to be a priority. As
contractors are one of the key players in the industry and the makers of the final product, any development
and improvement initiatives in the industry has to consider ways of improving the capacity and capability
of the contractors. However, material waste is a major problem in the Ethiopian construction industry that
has important implications both for the efficiency of the industry and for the environmental impact of
construction projects due to lack of effective management and planning.
One of the most important aspects to consider to enhance the project management performance and the
overall performance of construction projects is studying and understanding the critical success factors for
construction projects including stakeholders undertaking those projects. Critical success factors can be
defined as those limited events or activities in which promising results are vital for a particular manager to
reach the company’s objectives. Success of a construction project is subjected to a combination of several
factors such as: external environment and internal project related factors, human related factors and project
management related factors.
1.1.1 Project Performance
Performance is defined as the degree of fulfilling primary measures or performance objectives to meet the
needs of customers (Salaheldin, 2009). The other definition of performance described as a valued,
productive output of a system in the form of goods and services or works with units of performance
describing the actual fulfillment of the goods and services relating to performing production, quality and
or time (Kassaye, 2016). Getahun (2016) states that performance is the accomplishment of a given task
measured against preset known standards of accuracy, completeness, cost, and speed. In a contract,
performance is the fulfillment of an obligation, in a manner that releases the performer from all liabilities
under the contract (Ibid).
2
Project performance can be investigated and evaluated using a large number of performance indicators or
performance measures, expressed by factors such as time, cost, quality, client satisfaction, client changes,
and health and safety (Cheung, Suen, & Cheung, 2004). Performance measurement is also defined as the
process of evaluating performance relative to a defined goal (Nathaniel & Oluwaseyi, 2017). Performance
measures used to identify the strong and weak side of the management system which is very helpful to
improve the effectiveness of the company. Performance measurement also describes the feedback or
information on activities with respect to meeting customer expectations and strategic objectives (Dawd,
2015).
1.1.2 Project Success
Success means different things to different people. An architect may consider success in terms of aesthetic
appearance, an engineer in terms of technical competence, an accountant in terms of dollars spent under
budget, a human resources manager in terms of employee satisfaction, etc. (Shenhar, Dvir, Levy, & Maltz,
2001). Success also defined as the degree to which project goals and expectations are met (Chan, Scott, &
Lam, 2002). The success of construction projects depends mainly on the success of performance ( Haile,
2016). Most of the time in the construction industry a project is successful when it has met its time and
budget goals where time and budget are traditionally used as the main indicators for project success
(Shenhar, Dvir, Levy, & Maltz, 2001; Rahman, Memon, Nagapan, Latif, & Aziz, Time and Cost
Performance of Construction Projects in Southern and Central Regions of Peninsular Malaysia, 2012).
The success of any project can be measured by various norms like time performance, cost performance,
quality standards, achieving safety and health, etc. (Memon, Rahman, Zainun, & Karim, 2014). Success in
a construction project is indicated by its performance in the achievement of project time, cost, quality,
safety and environmental sustainability objectives (Gitau, 2015). The criteria for success are not only cost,
time & quality but it also includes the performance of stakeholder, evaluating their contribution and
understanding their expectation are also the criteria for success (Atkinson, Waterhouse, & Wells, 1997).
The success and failure criteria change from project to project depending on participants, scope, project
size, technological implications, and many other factors. It is necessary for stakeholders to identify all the
factors that may oppose the project success and leads to failure (Getahun, 2016).
3
1.1.3 Cost Overrun
A cost overrun is known as budget overrun or cost increase (Nabil, Zaydoun, & Hesham, 2017). Cost
overruns are defined as the excess of actual project costs over budgeted costs. The cost overburden is
obtained by the estimated cost, final cost and the contract between a contractor and an owner. The
difference between estimated and final cost is termed as the magnitude of the cost overrun. In other words,
Cost overrun can be defined as the positive difference between the final cost of a construction project at
completion and the contract amount agreed by the client and the contractor during the signing of the
contract (Torpa, Belaya, Thodesena, & Klakegga, 2016). The difference between agreed contract sum and
final project cost can be expressed as a Cost Ratio (CR) = (Final Cost ∕ Contract Cost) the ideal CR is 1.0;
so, any value above this can be considered as a cost overrun. (Shehu, Endut, Akintoye, & Holt, 2014). Cost
overrun is also called Cost escalation which refers to the increase in the amount of money required to
construct a project over and above the original budgeted amount (Kaliba, Muya, & Mumba, 2009).
1.1.4 Causes of Cost Overrun
Previous studies indicated that the key critical causes for construction cost overrun in developing countries
are corruption, delay in progress payment by owner, difficulties in financing project by contractors, change
order by owner during construction and market inflation (Niazi & Painting, 2017). For instance, in the
Malaysian construction industry, among 359 completed construction projects 55% of projects face cost
overrun (Shehu, Endut, Akintoye, & Holt, 2014). The following major cause of cost overruns in public
construction projects was also identified by Kasimu, (2012); market conditions, personal experience in the
contract work, insufficient estimated time for construction items, material fluctuation, and political
situations. Awarding contracts to the lowest bidder; site conditions; incompetent subcontractors and poor
site management; and inaccurate estimates and client-led change orders are also the causes for cost
overruns (Papadopoulou & Park, 2012).
Research conducted by Abera, (2016) on the performance of Building construction projects in Bahir Dar
revealed that almost all building projects in Bahir-Dar are affected by the large cost overrun. Also from
his investigation from the total projects 93.75 % were subjected to extra construction cost overruns with
different cost percentage Variance. From the researcher finding, building construction projects in Bahir-
Dar were affected by 116.64% schedule overruns and 60.02% cost overrun on the average scale (Ibid).
Studies on the performance of public building projects in Addis Ababa revealed that escalation of material
4
price, the incompleteness of design, variation order, late decision making, and inaccurate initial cost
estimation are the top five causes of cost overrun (Yohannes, 2017).
1.2 Objective of Study
The major objectives of this study are to:-

 To prepare standard manual for labour and equipment productivity norms of construction work in
Ethiopia.
 To prepare standard manual for labour and equipment Utilization Factor of construction work in
Ethiopia.
 To study the major factors affecting labour productivity
 To study the major factors affecting Equipment productivity
 To prepare internationally and locally accepted standard manual for labor and equipment
productivity norms and UF of construction work which will be the main input for price setting
formula in Ethiopia.
 To formulate software this makes flexible formula to gate different output with location parameter.
1.3 Scope of study

 Survey on the existing Utilization Factor, Equipment and Labor Productivity norms of
construction works in the Ethiopia construction industry.
 Prepare standard manual for Labor and Equipment Productivity Norms of construction
work of Ethiopia.
 Prepare standard manual for labor and equipment Utilization Factor of construction work
in Ethiopia.
 Formulate the location factors to identify the productivity norm for labor and machinery
in different places of the country especially at zonal (68 + Zones) or regional (10
Regional state) level.
 Make a conformity of the standard manual for Labor and Equipment Productivity Norms
and Utilization Factor with International and Local practices of construction works
which will be used as main input for price setting formula in Ethiopia.
5
 Formulate an application software for ease of flexible formula output with consideration
of different parameters and to foster the applicability of the manuals.
 Provide a training for the adaptability of the already develop software and manuals for
the end users.
1.4 Deliverables
Report about the study
First phase Deliverable will be guiding manuals for Labor & Equipment Utilization
Factor and Productivity norms in Building construction works in Ethiopia.
Second phase Deliverable will be Standards Manual for Labor & Equipment Utilization
Factor and Productivity norms in Building construction works, in different areas of
Ethiopia.
Labor & Equipment Utilization Factor and Productivity norms in Building construction
works in Ethiopia, calculation formulas and software for for Building construction work
in Ethiopia
6
2. PRODUCTIVITY IN CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY
Construction process involves various activities in which productivity of each tasks afectthe overall
performance of the project. Productivity in construction projects measures the effectiveness in
utilization of resources and is expressed as a ratio of output to input or vice versa (CII 2013). The
input utilized in construction process can be as a form of labour, material, equipment, energy and
capital. Depending on the type of input used in quantifying productivity there are two major
classifications of productivity measurement: Single factor productivity and Multi-factor productivity.
Single-factor productivity measurement considers only one input such as labour, whereas multi-
factorproductivity measurement methods take into account more than one input.
Productivity measurement in the construction industry can be performed at three levels: activity,
project, and industry-level productivity (Huang et al. 2009). Activity-level productivity measures are
the most commonly used productivity measure in the construction industry; it measures performance
of individual construction activities, such as concrete placing, steel erection, etc. Project-level
productivity measures consider theperformance related to a collection of activities required for the
construction of a particular facility. In contrast industry-level productivity measures represent an
overall assessment of the state of productivity in the industry sector.
The purpose of productivity measurement can vary depending on the area of application. In relation
to project implementation construction productivity data can be used for selecting suppliers, and
contractor, equipment, assessing resource utilization,to perform labour pool analysis and to prepare
a detail schedule and cost estimation.For project execution construction productivity values can
be essential supervision,work planning, asses the working rules and conditions (Thomas et. al.
1990).
In order to increase productivity in construction, identification and management of factors that affect
productivity should be developed and implemented. In the effort to understand construction
productivity as a whole, understanding and determining the productivity factors will provide a
more complete picture that will facilitate in implementing effective productivity improvement
measures.
In construction projects, typically two types of primary driving forces are recognized: labour or
equipment. For construction production systems that rely on labour as a primary forces of the
7
conversion process (e.g. Concreting pouring), the input in calculating productivity is assigned to the
total number of worker hours. Such productivity values are commonly regarded as construction
labour productivity. While forconstruction production systems that rely on equipment as a primary
forces of the conversion process (e.g. Bulk excavation), the input in calculating productivity is
assigned to the total number of equipment hours. Furthermore, the most basic construction
production process is usually observed at an activity level (e.g. plastering of internal wall).
Accordingly, in this study, the focus was on activity level construction labour productivity
measurement, which was also abetted by the documentation of factors influencing productivity and
examination of labour time utilization via work sampling studies.
2.1 Labor Input in Productivit y
Construction companies depend on both inputs and outputs for the successful completion of projects
(Too & Weaver, 2014). The construction industry needs various inputs to generate a value-driven
output (Too & Weaver, 2014). The combination of labor, material, equipment, capital, and
technology are the inputs that drive construction companies to generate outputs (Too & Weaver,
2014). Hwang and Soh (2013) posited that labor is the core input for producing optimum value to
construction companies. For some construction company leaders, capital availability is an essential
component that enables construction companies to achieve optimum value (Hwang & Soh, 2013).
Jarkas (2012) concluded that labor input is one of the fundamental inputs that leaders of
laborintensive businesses use to generate an efficient and value-driven output. Despite the
advancement of technology in the construction industry, the construction sector remains labor-
intensive (Jarkas, Radosavljevic, et al., 2014). The construction industry is labor-intensive by nature
(Ghoddousi, Alizadeh, Hosseini, & Chileshe, 2014; Jarkas, Radosavljevic, et al., 2014; Yi & Chan,
2014). Because of the labor-intensive characteristics of the industry, labor is the key productive
resource (Jarkas, 2012). The measurement of labor productivity is one way to evaluate and assess the
overall performance of a construction company (Hwang & Soh, 2013). In most countries,
construction labor costs accounted for 30% to 60% of the total project costs (El-Gohary & Aziz,
2014). El-Gohary and Aziz (2014) provided an explanation similar to that of Hwang and Soh (2013),
and stated that because the construction industry has labor-intensive characteristics, labor
productivity is important13 to the success and profitability of construction companies. Jarkas (2012)
believed focusing on labor productivity would enable construction companies to monitor and control
8
their performance and have higher levels of successful project completion.

2.2 Labor Productivity in Construction Industry
Because the construction industry is a labor-intensive industry, researchers can use the measurement
of labor productivity to evaluate and assess the overall performance of a construction company
(Hwang & Soh, 2013). Researchers believe construction companies should track labor productivity
to ensure long-term sustainability (Hwang & Soh, 2013). According to Jarkas and Haupt (2015),
construction company leaders use labor productivity figures to estimate the labor cost of the project
when making a bid. Meeting the estimated labor productivity cost is crucial to ensure that the project
proceeds within the given budget and timeline (Jarkas & Haupt, 2015). Researchers defined labor
productivity in different ways (Moselhi & Khan, 2012). Most researchers defined labor productivity
as a relationship between human hours and work accomplished (Moselhi & Khan, 2012). The result
of labor productivity measures only a single output with a single measure of input and does not
represent overall performance (Moselhi & Khan, 2012). Hwang and Soh (2013) and Yi and Chan
(2014) defined labor productivity as the relationship between the output produced and the inputs used
during the production process period. Moselhi and Khan (2012) and Nguyen and Nguyen (2013)
defined labor productivity as a ratio of output to input while producing a product.
Measuring, monitoring, and controlling labor productivity is vital to any construction company’s
success (Yi & Chan, 2014). Measuring productivity enables construction company leaders to plan,
control, and manage time, costs, and projects (Hwang & Soh, 2013). Hwang and Soh (2013)
explained that productivity measurement may help in evaluating and motivating the workforce.
Measuring productivity is challenging because there are few widely accepted metrics, benchmarks,
and credible productivity data (Hwang & Soh, 2013). Some construction leaders think that measuring
productivity consumes too much paper, time, and money (Hwang & Soh, 2013). Lingard, Turner,
and Charlesworth (2015) indicated that optimum labor productivity occurs by reducing the number
of working hours and by avoiding overtime. Lingard et al. recommended that construction company
leaders review the number of hours worked and regulate schedules to improve labor productivity.
Several issues affect construction labor productivity, including the level of workforce skill, job
satisfaction, leadership, organizational commitment, and work engagement (Jarkas & Haupt, 2015;
Jarkas, Radosavljevic, et al., 2014; Jurf & Beheiry, 2012). Identifying and understanding the issues
affecting labor productivity enable construction company leaders to take advantage of what works
9
best and improve what does not work (Alazzaz & Whyte, 2015).
2.3 Construction Productivity in Ethiopia
The construction industry is a sector of the economy that transforms various resources into
constructed physical economic and social infrastructure necessary for socio economic development
(MoUD 2012). Construction industry development is adeliberate and managed process to improve
the capacity and effectiveness of the construction industry to meet the national economic demand for
buildings and other physical infrastructure facilities. The industry involves huge numbers of people
forperforming various tasks, due to that all the related stakeholders including the government should
work towards improving the construction labor productivity (MoUD 2012).
Developing country’s construction projects fall short in general with regard to productivity, quality,
safety and health and environmental performance (Ayalew et. al. 2016). Chia et al. (2010) made a
comparison between 79 countries based on real and nominal construction expenditure from report of
2005 International Comparison Program published by the World Bank and International Labour
Office (ILO) database (LABORSTA). Ethiopia was ranked 76th and 77th on real and nominal
measurement respectively. This position indicates that Ethiopia has invested higher in construction
without paying attention to productivity. It also shows that the productivity of labor in the Ethiopian
construction industry is critically low as compared to other countries. Amanuel (2016) studied labor
productivity measurement practices in the Ethiopian construction industry. Based on his study, 88%
of the contractors do not measure productivity on their project. The respondents pointed out the
reasons to be negligence, lack of awareness, and difficulty in measurement. Mengistu et. al. (2016)
labels the productivity measurement practice in Ethiopia construction industry to be at a very early
stage that requires due attention.
Construction companies should track labor productivity to ensure long-term sustainability. Labor
productivity figures are used to estimate the labor cost of theproject when making a bid. Meeting
the estimated labor productivity cost is crucial to ensure that the project proceeds within the given
budget and timeline.
10
Table 1. Summary of construction labour productivity in real (PPP-converted) international dollars and
nominal US dollars
11
For local Contractor’s and consultant’s productivity level and quality of service they provide will
have huge effect on international competitions. The local construction industry must mount a
productivity and quality improvement revolution to achieve international competitiveness (MoUD
2012).To improve quality and productivity of constructed facilities and services one of the remedies
put forward by the construction industry policy is to promote the application of best practice
standards on productivity, quality and management (MoUD 2012).
The crucial step in improving the construction labor productivity is identifying the main factors that
influence it. The external and internal factors influencing labors productivity should be studied in
order to minimize its effect on the overall achievement of the project goals. Amanuel (2016)
identified top ten critical factors influencing labor productivity in Ethiopian building projects with
respect to their level of effect and frequency of occurrence. The factors are shortage of material,
delays in decision making, incomplete and inaccurate drawings, lack of follow up on the work
progress, financial difficulties of the owner /payment delay, incomplete facilities (water, power and
sanitary facilities), inspection and instruction delays, lack of motivation, frequent damage/breakdown
of equipment, and change of work order/ variation (Amanuel 2016). For road projects, Mengistu et.
al. (2016) listed eleven factors related to manpower, management, motivation, schedule, material and
equipment, supervision, safety, environmental, culture, quality and politics to be the influential in
affecting labour productivity. Most of these factors lead to idle time for the laborer which in turn
decreases overall labor productivity.
The Ethiopian construction industry continues to use foreign standards to a large extent without any
formal evaluation of their appropriateness because formation of its own standard has been very
difficult due to lack of sufficient human and financial resources and lack of direct commitment by
the industry in standardization work (MoUD 2012).TheMinistry of Works and Urban Development
prepared a document entitled Building Construction output norms in Ethiopia (ECPN-3) in 1995
aimed at assisting and providing information and data needed for those involved in the construction
industry. The preparation of this standard norm was carried out through engineering estimation
12
by analysis of the time and effort required to perform a certain activity and comparing
this activity with the output commonly used for bids (Amanuel 2016).
The following were believed to have major influence on labor productivity in preparation
of ECPM-3 norm, however, it is not made clear how these influencing factors were taken
into account in developing the norm:
a. Actual crew size,
b. The labour time utilization of the crew,
c. Skill of tradesmen or equipment operators,
d. Degree of motivation and incentive schemes,
e. Working condition such as site layout and access for workmen,
f. Scale of operation,
g. Climatic condition,
h. Support activities which include supply of materials and right tools for
workmen,transport facilities, food, etc.,
i. Quality of management, and
j. Human factors such as interest in the given work, effectiveness and attitude.
The norm also did not take into consideration the following factors affecting output of
laborers because these factors were believed to be difficult to evaluate in establishing
daily net outputs:
a. Difference in wages and motivation payments in different companies,
b. Local and regional skill,
c. Shortage of construction material and tools, and
d. Quality of work.
It is stated in the document that these norms are not to be taken as final nationwide accepted
standards and depending on changes in method and technology the norms must be updated
from time to time (MoUD 1995).Furthermore, building regulations currently in use in
13
Ethiopia, though recently updated, their enforcement is weak. Lack ofappropriate building
regulations and standards is one of the contributing factors to poor quality of products and
services in Ethiopia (MoUD 2012).
2.3.1 National Output Norms
Ethiopia does not have a nationwide output standard assisting for estimation of project
costs and completion time. Previous attempts were made to develop a national
construction output norm through former Ministry of Works and Urban Development, in
1995 ECPN-3 and in 1999 ECPN-5 (Attached in appendix A) (MoUD 1995, MoUD
1999). The second version made a little adjustment and difficult to notice changes, over
the first version.
These previous output norms were taken from local contractor’s estimates or bid files as
well from engineering estimating standards, and were not from actual site measurement.
The norms were not to be taken as final nationwide accepted standards, but as the
minimum acceptable output that are to be used for “labor and equipment output norms”
and expected crew production (MoUD 1999).
These output norms are currently being used as is in current Ethiopian construction
industry. In the dynamic nature of construction industry, it’s not acceptable to use the
same norms for over 20 years; in addition these norms had a limitation at the preparation.
Within this period, numerous advancements in construction method, skill of laborer,
construction materials and construction equipment exist, which directly enhance the
output are expected.
Therefore, at this moment it is very important to upgrade/update these national norms to

ensure successful completion of project with respect to time, cost, quality and safety.
Nevertheless, the previously developed national output norms provide information and
data needed for those engaged in construction works, contractors, owners and consultants,
it assisted them in allocating resources, scheduling and financing of construction projects,
though the current construction practice has incorporated numerous technological
advancement.
14
2.4 Construction labour productivity measurement

Different measures of productivity serve different purposes. It is important to choose a measure
that is appropriate to the purpose (Thomas et al., 1990).
Thomas et al.(1990), defined different aspects of measures as follows:
A. Economic models
The department of Commerce, Congress, and other governmental agencies use a productivity
definition in the following form:
𝑻𝒐𝒕𝒂𝒍 𝑶𝒖𝒕𝒑𝒖𝒕
Total factor productivity (TFP) = 𝑳𝒂𝒃𝒐𝒓+𝑴𝒂𝒕𝒆𝒓𝒊𝒂𝒍+𝑬𝒒𝒖𝒊𝒑𝒎𝒆𝒏𝒕+𝑬𝒏𝒆𝒓𝒈𝒚+𝑪𝒂𝒑𝒊𝒕𝒂𝒍……(Eq-1)
B. Project-specific models
A more accurate definition that can be used by governmental agencies for specific program
planning and by the private sector for conceptual estimates on individual projects is:
𝑶𝒖𝒕𝒑𝒖𝒕
Productivity = ……………………..(Eq-2)
𝑳𝒂𝒃𝒐𝒓+𝑴𝒂𝒕𝒆𝒓𝒊𝒂𝒍+𝑬𝒒𝒖𝒊𝒑𝒎𝒆𝒏𝒕
During this methods of productivity determination techniques, design professionals use

productivity data in this form.
C. Activity-oriented models
A contractor is more likely to define productivity using a narrowly defined version of Eq. (2),
where the units of output are specific for generic kinds of work. Typical units are cubic yards,
tons, and square feet. Various related activities, such as formwork, steel reinforcement, and
concrete placement, can be combined using the earned-value concept (Thomas and Kramer,
1990). Productivity is expressed as units of output per dollar or work-hour.
At the project site, contractors are often interested in labor productivity. It can be defined in
one of the following ways (Thomas and Mathews, 1990):
Productivity = ……………………..(Eq-3) or
𝑳𝒂𝒃𝒐𝒓 𝑪𝒐𝒔𝒕
Productivity = …………………...(Eq-4)
𝑾𝒐𝒓𝒌−𝒉𝒐𝒖𝒓
There is no standard definition of productivity and some contractors use the inverse of Eq. (4):
𝑳𝒂𝒃𝒐𝒓 𝑪𝒐𝒔𝒕 𝒐𝒓 𝑾𝒐𝒓𝒌−𝒉𝒐𝒖𝒓𝒔
Eq. (5) is often called the unit rate. Still other contractors rely on the performance factor as a
measure of productivity.
15
𝑬𝒔𝒕𝒊𝒎𝒂𝒕𝒆𝒅 𝑼𝒏𝒊𝒕 𝑹𝒂𝒕𝒆

𝑨𝒄𝒕𝒖𝒂𝒍 𝑼𝒏𝒊𝒕 𝒓𝒂𝒕𝒆
Other terms, such as efficiency, are often used synonymously with labor productivity. The
Construction Management Research Unit at Dundee University measures labor productivity in
three different ways (Horner and Talhouni ,1998):
𝐎𝐮𝐭𝐩𝐮𝐭
1. , where total time is total paid time.
𝐓𝐨𝐭𝐚𝐥 𝐓𝐢𝐦𝐞
2. , where available time is total time minus unavoidable delays,
𝐀𝐯𝐚𝐢𝐥𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐞 𝐓𝐢𝐦𝐞
principally meal breaks and weather.

3. , where productive time is available time minus avoidable delays
𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐓𝐢𝐦𝐞
D. The baseline productivity
According to Thomas etl, (2000) stated that because of the adverse effect of disruptions on
labor productivity, the best productivity occurs when there are few or no disruptions. Here
within, this best productivity is called the baseline productivity.
The baseline productivity is calculated by applying the following steps to the daily productivity
values:
a) Determine the number of workdays that comprise 10% of the total workdays.
b) Round this number to the next highest odd number; this number should not be less than
5. This number, n, defines the size of (number of days in) the baseline subset.
c) The contents of the baseline subset are the n workdays that have the highest daily
production or output.
d) For these days, note the daily productivity.
e) The baseline productivity is the median of the daily productivity values in the baseline
subset.
2.5 Concepts of Crew, Labour Hours and Daily Output
According to Olomolaiye et al (1998), the term crew refers to a unique grouping of workers
and equipment, identified by letter and number. The crew on each line includes the labor trade
or trades and equipment required to efficiently perform the indicated task.
The number of units of a defined task that a designated crew will produce in one eight-hour
workday is referred to as the daily output. Daily output represents an average figure, which will
vary with job conditions. Daily output is measured in the units specified in the unit column.
16
Labour Hours represents the total number of labor hours it takes to produce one unit of an
activities using the specified crew. Labor hours per unit is calculated by dividing the crew labor
hours (found in the crew detail) by the daily output:
𝐃𝐚𝐢𝐥𝐲 𝐂𝐫𝐞𝐰 𝐋𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐫 𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐬

Labor hours/Unit = …………..Eq(7)
𝐃𝐚𝐢𝐥𝐲 𝐨𝐮𝐭𝐩𝐮𝐭
2.6 Factors Affecting Labor and Equipment Productivity
Olomolaiye et al. (1998), classified productivity factors into two categories: external factors
are outside the control of organization management and internal factors relate to productivity
issues originating within the organization. C.O Seung etl (2006), developed ideas to describe
factors affecting labour productivity. One study suggested that scheduled overtime always
leads to efficiency losses because of the inability to deliver materials, tools, equipment, and
information at an accelerated rate (Ginther, 1993). Productivity in the construction industry is
not only influenced by labour, materials and equipment. However, most researchers and
construction practice to date has primarily concentrated on labour productivity, as though
labourers’ performance is the sole contributor to increased construction productivity (Alwi,
1995). Factors which affect labor and equipment productivity norms are a lack of required
materials, disputes between the major parties, weather, and changes during construction,
accidents, and other items
According to John K. Hollmann et al. (2014) reports, Job-site productivity is influenced by

many factors which can be characterized either as labor and equipment characteristics, project
work conditions or as non-productive activities.
The labor characteristics include: age, skill and experience of workforce and leadership and
motivation of workforce. The project work conditions include among other factors: Job size
and complexity, Job site accessibility, Labor availability, Equipment utilization, Equipment
Type, Contractual agreements, Local climate, and Local cultural characteristics, particularly in
foreign operations.
The non-productive activities associated with a project may or may not be paid by the owner,
but they nevertheless take up potential labor resources which can otherwise be directed to the
project. The non-productive activities include among other factors: indirect labor required to
maintain the progress of the project, rework for correcting unsatisfactory work, temporary work
17
stoppage due to inclement weather or material shortage, time off for union activities, absentee
time, including late start and early quits, non-working holidays and strikes.
A comprehensive literature review was conducted by collecting and studying relevant research
papers considering the various factors affecting labor productivity. The top influencing factors
and their classification groups of labor and equipment productivity are reported in Table 2 and
Table 3 respectively.
18
Table 2. Factors affecting labour productivity in construction projects based on the literature
study
Gr. No. Group Factor

Poor labour supervision
Delay in Payment
Poor work environment
Poor Communication between project team
Poor material or equipment management
Frequent change order
1 Management Related Crew size and composition
Inspection delay
Excessive over time
Higher ratio of subcontracted work
Clients intervention
Lack of periodical meeting
Unsuitability of storage location
Low employee satisfaction
Lack of training sessions
2 Motivational Related
Lack of job security
Lack of labour recognition programs
Low skilled labour
Poor communication with labour
3 Human Related Shortage of labour
Lack of rest during work days
labour absenteeism
Design error and changes during construction
Reworks
Poor site logistics and management
4 Technical Related
Poor construction methodology
Unclear technical specifications
Delay in responding to requests for information
Unsafe working condition
Not alloying the safety preconditions and tools
5 Safety Related
High label of noise
Lack of safety officer on construction site
Bad weather condition
Delay in approval by authorities
6 External Related Unstable local economy
Frequent changes in regulation
Unforeseen ground condition
19
Table 3. Factors affecting equipment productivity in construction projects based on the

literature study
Gr. No Group Name Factor

Lack of experience
Disloyalty
Age
1 Operator Related Personal problems
Lack of training
Working overtime
Absenteeism
Lack of required construction material and or price
increase
Availability of required equipment
Adequate and timely maintenance of equipment
2 Resource Related
Insufficient lighting
Material storage location
Shortage of water and or power supply
Inadequate transportation facilities for workers
Misunderstanding between owner, contractor and
Communication designer
3
Related Dispute with owner/designer
Dispute with operator
Implementation of standards, law and regulation
Permits delay from authorities
4 External Related
Payment delays
Adverse weather conditions
Undefined project objective
Rework
Variation and design changes
Complex /incomplete designs in drawings
5 Technical Related
Lack of supervision
Poor site condition/differing from the plan
Inadequate work method
Poor access in construction job site
Accidents during construction
6 Safety Related
Violation of safety laws
20
2.7 Methods of Measuring Labour and Equipment Productivity
There are many of productivity measurement techniques that can be utilized for measuring
construction labour productivity. Productivity measurement can be most beneficial when
various techniques are employed. The most commonly used techniques include.
a) Activity sampling technique.

b) Foreman delay surveys technique.
c) Time study technique.
d) Motion analysis technique.
e) Group timing technique.
The level of measurement is different whenever consideration of the nature of the construction
process points to a need for measures of construction productivity at three levels,
a) Task Level
b) Project Level
c) Industry Level
However, Task level productivity of Equipment and labour gives the direct efficiency for each
and every task being performed at any particular construction project and hence task
productivity is the measure for gauging project efficiency (Utilization factor and outputs).
Accordingly, the following methods are used in arriving at task productivity,
I. RS (Read Business) Means Method
II. CII ( Construction Industry Institute) Method
III. Productivity Index Method
I. RS Means Method
In this case, the denominator is the number of hours associated with a designated “crew day”.
Thus for a designated crew day higher output is better. In this case higher output equates to
higher task labor productivity. In such cases RS Means provides estimates of output that is
produced by a designated crew in a 8 hour day along with the equipment they use and these
measures can be considered multi factor.
21
II. CII Method
The CII Benchmarking and Metrics program uses a different metric to measure task labour and
equipment productivity. CII fixes the output and measures the labour hours required to produce
that output. In this method the denominator is a fixed output and the numerator is the number
of labour hours or the equipment available hours. Thus for a given amount of output, lower
labour hours is better which equates to high task productivity.
III. Productivity Index Method
A task productivity index is a dimensionless number, pegged to a reference data set, where the
reference data set establishes the base line value for one or more components of the index. For
example the denominator could correspond to the baseline value for the task’s labour
productivity and the numerator could be the value for a specific project.
Project and Industry level productivity are measures of overall efficiency of a project and the
industry itself and are macro level observations which require a separate set of detailing and
analysis.
22
3. METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY
This research investigates important factors affecting labor and equipment productivity norms
in Ethiopian construction industry. Understanding these factors is helpful for construction
professionals who work on all project phases, especially on the initial phase of construction
planning, in order to efficiently deliver project plans. The main goal of the research is to provide
essential information about utilization factor, factors affecting labor and equipment
productivity in the construction system. The research study aims to provide a guiding manual
in relation with knowledge of construction project-related factors that affect utilization factor,
labor and equipment productivity norm. The data collection instruments used in the research
are a questionnaire survey, followed by interviews with construction practitioners in different
regional state of Ethiopia. Here within is the chart flow of the study:
Background of Study and Reviewing Literature
Reviewing current manuals, Issue Identifications (Factors)

in relation with Utilization Factor, Labor and Equipment
Productivity Norms
Design of questionnaire
Utilization Factor for

labour and Equipment
labour and Equipment
Productivity Norms
Survey and Data Collection
Data Analysis using RII
Conclusion and Recommendation
Prepare user manual based Develop an application Software

on the analysis result based on the result data
Deliver Training for the end user
Figure 1: Methodology Flow Chart
23
3.1 Data Collection

The data collection methods can be classified as qualitative, quantitative and mix of both
methodologies (Huff, 2009). The most suitable method of data collection for a case study
research is qualitative data as it provides an opportunity to get access to more information that
could not be gathered through surveys (Voss, et al., 2002; Yin 2014). Which are
documentation, archival records, interviews, direct observations, participant observations, and
physical artifacts. This makes the data collection in case of studies complex because one case
is being studied from different perspectives and thus requires multiple sources of evidence
(Yin, 2014). Each of the sources of data collection has its strengths and weaknesses while
combining all the sources of the evidence is observed to provide better results instead of a
single source of evidence (Yin, 2014). More than one source of data collection validates for
the triangulation of the research method and therefore, this study considered all the possible
sources of information to strengthen the results (Voss, et al., 2002).
The primary data collection is from the qualitative data that has been obtained from various
interviews. Along with the interviews, additional data from various other sources have also
been used for this study. The data will be collected from the previous year’s historic records
data of different stakeholders that are already used before.
3.1.1 Document Review
Along with the literature review, other documents like BaTCoDA, MoUD, ACRA and ERA
manual will be reviewed in order to understand the scenario in the case setting. Therefore, the
study will consider both internal and external documents available. The current activity plans
of every construction practitioner and companies, guidelines, procedures, manuals, goals and
standards of the processes, policy documents of the construction system in relation with
utilization factor, labor and equipment productivity norms will be addressed.
Members of this study found that it is very difficult to collect primary data with the allotted
budget and time. The only way-out to achieve the goal of this study is to collect secondary data
from regions. Hence, the labor and equipment utilization factor and productivity norms of each
region will be collected from their urban development housing and construction bureau.
However, the secondary data obtained from urban development housing and construction
bureau will be validated by collecting similar data from selected construction projects in each
regions.
24
3.1.2 Interviews
Qualitative data collection suitable for this study will be collected through interview; the most
common way of obtaining qualitative data is by conducting interviews with the people working
in the focus area of the study (Yin, 2014). The interview method in qualitative studies could be
categorized into three types - structured, semi-structured and unstructured (Bryman & Bell,
2016). The structured interviews follow a common protocol where the set of questions will be
given to the respondent in advance; in semi-structured interviews, the questions are given in
advance, but the interviewer can ask follow-up questions which might lead to more information
gathering (Bryman & Bell, 2016). The unstructured interviews are more like open-minded
discussions where the interviewer uses the lists of topics and have a dialogue with the
respondent (Bryman & Bell, 2016).
Figure 2: Data Collection Tools to be used
3.1.3 Questionnaires
A questionnaire is a research instrument consisting of a series of questions and other prompts

for the purpose of gathering information from respondents. A literature review of relevant
studies from the past will be performed to identify a list of factors affecting labour and
equipment productivity in construction projects. A draft version of the questionnaire will be
shared with some professionals in the construction industry (project managers, construction
managers, and project engineers) to take into account their opinion regarding the listed factors
and questions. This step will be taken to ensure that the factors are well-understood, the listed
questions are realistic, and the questionnaire does not consume much time to be completed.
After that, the final version of the questionnaire will be disseminated to the target population
25
in order to evaluate the importance and the frequency of occurrence of the different factors. To
increase the reliability of the data the survey will be collected by the study group members
having a personal meeting with the target population. This helped achieve the aim of
identifying the top influencing factors that affect labour productivity in construction projects.
The questionnaire will composed of two sections: the respondent’s general information and the
evaluation of the factors influencing productivity. The first section aimed to obtain background
information about the participants. It will request the respondent to fill in appropriate
information related to his/her location, organization type, job designation, construction sector,
and total years of work experience in the construction field. This section would help to
categorize the respondents into different groups for the purpose of comparison. The second
section included the 37 and 31 factors affecting labour and equipment productivity
respectively. The respondents will evaluate the “importance” (how much it affects the
productivity level) on a 5-point scale (1—very low impact and 5- very high impact) with the
description shown in Table 4. Relative importance index (RII) and risk mapping techniques
will be used for analysis of the questionnaire result. The detail questionnaire for is found the
appendix part of this document.
Table 4. Impact rating scale
Impact Rating Scale

1 2 3 4 5
Very
Very low Low Moderate High
Impact high
impact Impact impact impact
impact
26
4. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
In this section the collected data in relation with labor and equipment utilization factor and
productivity norms are briefly discussed.
4.1 Respondents Profile

4.1.1 Stakeholders Participation
As shown in Figure 3, data was collected from different construction industry stakeholders
such as consultants, contractors, clients, academia and regulatory bodies.
8% Consultant
4%
14%
35% Contractor
Client
39%
Academia
Regulatory Body
Figure 3. Stakeholders Participation

4.1.2 Experience of Respondents
It can be learnt from Figure 4 that more than 60% of the respondents participated in more than
six construction projects.
4.1.3 Academic Level of Respondents
Figure 5 revealed that more than 56% of the respondents are highly qualified with a master’s
degree and above.
27
7%
29%
33%
31%
<3 Projects 3-5 Projects 6-10 Projects >10 Projects
Figure 4. Respondents Experience
PhD
8%
Degree
44%
Masters
48%
Figure 5. Respondents Academic Level
4.2 Factors affecting productivity of labor and equipment in building construction

4.2.1 Factor affecting Productivity of Labor
A questionnaire with was designed with 37 factors affecting labor productivity which were
categorized in 6 major groups. Those 37 factors are grouped under management, motivation,
human, technical, safety and external related umbrellas.
28
A. Management Related Factors
Figure 4 revealed that poor labor supervision and poor work environment have strong impact
on labor productivity while high ratio of subcontracted work and unsuitability of storage
location have moderate impact.
13. Unsuitability of storage location
12. Lack of periodical meeting
11. Clients intervention
10. Higher ratio of subcontracted work
9. Excessive over time
8. Inspection delay
7. Crew size and composition
6. Frequent change order
5. Poor material or equipment management
4. Poor communication between project team
3. Poor work environment
2. Delay in Payment
1. Poor labor supervision
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Very low impact Low impact Moderate impact Strong impact Very strong impact
Figure 6. Management related labor factors

B. Motivation Related Factors
The figure showed below attested that low employee satisfaction and lack of training have
strong impact on labor productivity while lack of labor recognition programs have moderate
impact on labors output.
29
25
20
15
10
0
Very strong Strong impact Moderate impact Low impact Very low impact
impact
1. Low employee satisfaction 2. Lack of training sessions

3. Lack of job security 4. Lack of labor recognition programs
Figure 7. Motivation Related Labor Factor

C. Human Related Factors
The figure displayed that low skilled labor has very strong impact while labor absenteeism
and poor communication with labor has strong impact on productivity of labors.
25
20
15
10
0
impact
1. Low skilled labor 2. Poor communication with labor
3. Shortage of labor 4. Lack of rest during work days
5. Labor absenteesim
Figure 8. Human related labor factors
30
D. Technical Related Factors
It can be understood from figure that poor site logistics and poor construction methodology
have very strong impact on labor productivity while unclear technical specification, delay in
responding to requests, reworks, and design error and changes strongly affect labor
productivity.
6. Delay in responding to requests for information
5. Unclear technical specifications
4. Poor construction methodology
3. Poor site logistics and management
2. Reworks
1. Design error and changes during construction
0 5 10 15 20 25
Figure 9. Technical Related Labor Factors

E. Safety Related Factors
It can be understood from Figure 8 that unsafe working condition has very strong impact on
productivity of labor while high level of noise has moderate impact.
31
30
25
20
15
10
0
Very strong impact Strong impact Moderate impact Low impact Very low impact
1. Unsafe working condition 2. Not alloying th esafety preconditions and tools

3. High label of noise 4. Lack of safety officer on construction site
Figure 10. Safety Related Labor Factor

F. External Factors
The following figure showed that delay in approval by authorities, bad weather condition, and
unstable economy and have strong impact on productivity of labors while unforeseen ground
conditions have moderate impact.
25
20
15
10
0
impact
1. Bad weather condition 2. Delay in approval by authorities
3. Unstable local economy 4. Frequent changes in regulation
5. Unforseen ground condition
Figure 11. External Labor Factors
32
The rank factors affecting labor productivity were identified by using Relative Importance
Index (RII) method. As depicted on Table 5, poor construction methodology, poor site
logistics and low skilled labor are the top 3 factors affecting labor productivity.
Table 5. Rank of Factors affecting Labor Productivity
Factor RII Rank

Poor construction methodology 0.867 1
Poor site logistics and management 0.853 2
Low skilled labour 0.840 3
Poor communication between project team 0.827 4
Delay in Payment 0.813 5
Unsafe working condition 0.813 6
Unstable local economy 0.804 7
Poor material or equipment management 0.796 8
Poor labour supervision 0.787 9
Poor communication with labour 0.787 10
Design error and changes during construction 0.778 11
Low employee satisfaction 0.773 12
Delay in responding to requests for information 0.773 13
Crew size and composition 0.769 14
Unclear technical specifications 0.769 15
Poor work environment 0.764 16
Reworks 0.751 17
Bad weather condition 0.751 18
Frequent change order 0.733 19
Lack of training sessions 0.733 20
Lack of job security 0.716 21
Delay in approval by authorities 0.716 22
Not alloying the safety preconditions and tools 0.707 23
Unforeseen ground condition 0.702 24
Inspection delay 0.684 25
labour absenteeism 0.676 26
Unsuitability of storage location 0.671 27
Lack of periodical meeting 0.662 28
Frequent changes in regulation 0.658 29
Lack of safety officer on construction site 0.653 30
Shortage of labour 0.644 31
Lack of labour recognition programs 0.636 32
Excessive over time 0.613 33
Clients intervention 0.587 34
Lack of rest during work days 0.587 35
High label of noise 0.569 36
Higher ratio of subcontracted work 0.560 37
33
4.2.2 Factors Affecting Productivity of Equipment

A questionnaire with was designed with 31 factors affecting labor productivity which were
categorized in 6 major groups. The groups were operator, resource, communication, technical,
safety and external related factors.
A. Operator Related Factor
Figure 10 clearly revealed that lack of experience, adequate training, disloyalty and
absenteeism has strong impact while personal problem and working overtime have moderate
impact.
7. Absenteesim
6. Working overtime
5. Lack of training
4. Personal problems
3. Age
2. Disloyality
1. Lack of experience
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Figure 12. Operator Related Equipment Factors

B. Resource Related Factors
It can be understood from Figure 11 that adequate and timely maintenance of equipment, lack
of required construction material and availability of required equipment have strong impact on
productivity of equipment at job site.
34
7. Inadquate transportation facilities for workers
6. Shortage of water and or power suply
5. Material storage location
4. Insufficient lighting
3. Adequate and timely maintenace of equipment
2. Availability of required equipment
1. Lack of required construction material and or price

increase
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Figure 13. Resource Related Equipment Factors

C. Communication Related Factors
It can be understood from figure 12 that adequate and timely maintenance of equipment, lack
of required construction material and availability of required equipment have strong impact on
productivity of equipment at job site.
25
20
15
10
0
impact
1. Misunderstanding between owner, contractor and designer

2. Dispute with owner/designer
3. Dispute with operator
Figure 14. Communication Related Equipment Factor
35
D. Technical Related Factors
8. Poor access in construction job site
7. Inadequate work method
6. Poor site condition/differing from the plan
5. Lack of supervision
4. Complex /incomplete designs in drawings
3. Variation and design changes
2. Rework
1. Undefined project objective
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Figure 15.Technical Related Equipment Factors
The figure revealed that lack of supervision, variation and design change and inadequate work
method has strong impact on productivity of equipment.
E. Safety Related Factors
Figure 14 publicized that violation of safety laws and accidents during construction have
moderate impact on productivity norm of equipment’s.
36
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
impact
1. Accidents during construction 2. Violation of safety laws
Figure 16. Safety Related Equipment Factors

F. External Factors
Figure 14 made known that adverse weather condition and payment delays have strong impact
on productivity norm of equipment’s.
25
20
15
10
0
impact
1. Implementation of standards, law and regulation 2. Permits delay from authorities
3. Payment delays 4. Adverse weather conditions
Figure 17. External Equipment Factor
37
The rank factors affecting equipment productivity were identified by using Relative Importance
Index (RII) method. As depicted on Table 5, lack of required material and or price increase,
availability of required equipment, and lack of operator adequate experience are the top 3
factors affecting equipment productivity.
Table 6. Rank of Factors affecting Equipment Productivity
Factor RII Rank

Lack of required construction material and or price increase 0.858 1
Availability of required equipment 0.822 2
Lack of experience 0.818 3
Payment delays 0.813 4
Complex /incomplete designs in drawings 0.787 5
Inadequate work method 0.787 6
Adequate and timely maintenance of equipment 0.778 7
Misunderstanding between owner, contractor and designer 0.773 8
Poor site condition/differing from the plan 0.773 9
Adverse weather conditions 0.773 10
Dispute with operator 0.769 11
Rework 0.764 12
Lack of supervision 0.756 13
Shortage of water and or power supply 0.751 14
Poor access in construction job site 0.751 15
Dispute with owner/designer 0.747 16
Disloyalty 0.742 17
Undefined project objective 0.729 18
Variation and design changes 0.720 19
Permits delay from authorities 0.711 20
Accidents during construction 0.702 21
Lack of training 0.698 22
Material storage location 0.689 23
Absenteeism 0.684 24
Inadequate transportation facilities for workers 0.676 25
Implementation of standards, law and regulation 0.676 26
Personal problems 0.658 27
Violation of safety laws 0.658 28
Insufficient lighting 0.636 29
Working overtime 0.587 30
Age 0.569 31
38
4.3 Crew Composition and Labor and Utilization Factor
In this first draft report, the Crew Composition and Labor and Utilization Factor of building construction in Amhara region is addresses with
interest of time. The data was collected from different contractors across the region and the regional average output (Table 4).
Table 7. Crew Composition and Utilization Factor of Building Construction
Labour and Equipment Utilization Factor

Utilization Factor (UF) National
Crew
Item Type of Work Crew Composition No Addis Dire average
Designation Amhara Oromia SNNP Sidama
Ababa Dawa UF
SETTING OUT
labor SO-1 Surveyor 1 1.00 1.00
Daily labor 4 1.00 1.00
Equipment SO-2 Surveyor 1 1.00 1.00

Daily Labor 4 1.00 1.00
Theodolite 1 1.00 1.00
DEMOLITION
Labor DE-1 Forman 1 0.50 0.10 0.50 0.37

Chiseler 3 1.00 0.67 1.00 0.89
Carpentry 2 1.00 0.33 0.67
Daily Labor 4 1.00 1.00 1.00
Equipment DE-1 Excavator 1 1.00 1.00

Excavator operator 1 1.00 1.00
Forman 1 0.05 0.05
39

Crew
Ababa Dawa UF
1. EXCAVATION - A
1.1 In Ordinary Soil
(Labour Intensive) EX-A1 Gang chief 1.0 0.63 0.10 0.43 0.30 0.20 0.34 0.33
Building Labour 2.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Forman 1.0 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10
1.2. In Ordinary Soil
(Machine intensive) EX-A2 Excavator 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Excavator Operator 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Forman 1.0 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10
1.3 In Ordinary Soil
(Machine intensive) EX-A3 Dozer H.P 1.0 1.00 1.00
Dozer Operator 1.0 1.00 1.00
Forman 1.0 0.10 0.10
1.4 In Soft Rock
(Labour Intensive) EX-A4 Gang chief 1.0 0.55 0.10 0.25 0.25 0.10 0.13 0.23
Building Labour 2.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Sledge hammer
0.83
man 1.0 0.90 1.00 0.05 1.00 1.00 1.00
Forman 1.0 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10
1.5 In Soft Rock
(Machine intensive) EX-A5 Excavator 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Excavator Operator 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Forman 1.0 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10
1.6 In Soft Rock
(Machine intensive) EX-A6 Gang chief 1.0 0.60 0.60
Building Labourer 2.0 1.00 1.00
40

Crew
Ababa Dawa UF
Sledge hammer
0.91
man 1.0 0.91
Forman 1.0 0.10 0.10
1.7 In Boulder
(Machine intensive) EX-A7 Dozer H.P 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00
Dozer Operator 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00
Forman 1.0 0.10 0.10 0.10
1.8 In Hard Rock
(Labour Intensive) EX-A8 Building labourer 2.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Sledge hammer
0.88
man 1.0 0.92 1.00 0.50 1.00 1.00
Forman 1.0 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10
1.9 In Hard Rock
(Machine intensive) EX-A9 Gang chief 1.0 0.69 0.50 0.25 0.58 0.10 1.00 0.52
Building Labourer 2.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Jack Hammer
1.00
Operator 2.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Sledge hammer
0.98
man 1.0 0.88 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Compressor 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Forman 1.0 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10
2. FILL - B
2.1. Backfill
(Labour Intensive) F-B1 Gang chief 1.0 1.00 0.20 0.25 0.13 0.13 0.17 0.31
Forman 1.0 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10
41

Crew
Ababa Dawa UF
2.2 Backfill
(Machine intensive) F-B2 Loader 1.0 1.00 1.00
Loader Operator 1.0 1.00 1.00
Forman 1.0 0.10 0.10
2.3 Selected Excavated Fill
(Labour Intensive) F-B3 Gang chief 1.0 1.00 0.50 0.35 0.30 0.35 0.50
Building Labourer 5.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Forman 1.0 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10
2.4 Selected Excavated Fill
(Machine intensive) F-B4 Loader 1.0 1.00 1.00
Loader Operator 1.0 1.00 1.00
Forman 1.0 0.10 0.10
2.5 Selected Borrowed Fill F-B5 Gang chief 1.0 1.00 0.40 0.25 0.17 0.42 0.19 0.40
(Labour Intensive) Building Labourer 6.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Hand Compactor 1.0 1.00 1.00 0.75 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96
Forman 1.0 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10
Hand Compactor
0.96
Operator 1.0 1.00 1.00 0.75 1.00 1.00 1.00
2.6 Selected Borrowed Fill

(Machine Intensive) F-B6 Grader 1.0 1.00 1.00
Grader Operator 1.0 1.00 1.00
Buller 1.0 1.00 1.00
Water Tank 1.0 1.00 1.00
Forman 1.0 0.10 0.10
3. DISPOSAL - C
42

Crew
Ababa Dawa UF
3.1. Wheel and Spread D-C1 Gang chief 1.0 0.56 0.20 0.38
Building Labourer 4.0 1.00 1.00 1.00
3.2. Load and Carta away
(Manual Loading) D-C2 Gang Chief 1.0 0.92 0.25 0.10 0.25 0.38
Building Labourer 6.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
3.3. Load & Cartaway
(Machine Loading) D-C3 Loader 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Loader Operator 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Damp Truck 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Damp Truck
1.00
Driver 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
4. HARD CORE-D
4.1. Hard core laying HC-D1 Mason 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.75 0.81 1.00 0.93
Forman 1.0 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10
4.2 Dust Blinding HC-D2 Mason 1 1.00 1.00 1.00
Forman 1.0 0.10 0.10 0.10
5.CONCRETE - E
Mixing, Hauling and
Casting
5.1 Manual Operation C-E1 Forman 1.0 0.63 0.78 0.10 0.33 0.31 0.40 0.42
Mason 2.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Carpenter 1.0 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50
Bar Bender 1 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25
43

Crew
Ababa Dawa UF
Gang Chief 1 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50
5.2 Mechanical Mix
Labour Transport C-E2 Forman 1.0 0.52 0.46 0.10 0.28 0.25 0.45 0.34
Carpenter 1.0 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50
Mason 1 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
5.3. Mechanical Mix
Crane lift C-E3 Forman 1.0 0.50 0.50 0.50
Carpenter 1.0 0.50 0.50 0.50
Crane Operator 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lower Crane 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00
Mason 1 1.00 1.00 1.00
6. FORMWORK - F
6.1. Cutting and fixing to
Position
Sawn Zigba FW-F1 Forman 1.0 0.25 0.20 0.16 0.20 0.17 0.20
Carpenter 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Helpers (D.L) 2.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
6.2. Wrought FW-F2 Forman 1.0 0.25 0.23 0.24

Carpenter 2.0 1.00 1.00 1.00
Helpers (D.L) 2.0 1.00 1.00 1.00
6.3. Patterned FW-F3 Forman 1.0 0.25 0.25

Carpenter 1.0 1.00 1.00
44

Crew
Ababa Dawa UF
Helpers (D.L) 2.0 1.00 1.00
7. STEEL
REINFORCEMENT - G
7.1 Cutting typing and placing SR-G1 Forman 1.0 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25
Bar Bender 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Helpers (D.L) 2.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
8. STONE MASONRY -
H
8.1 Common masonry ST-H1 Forman 1.0 0.25 0.21 0.16 0.20 0.46 0.30 0.25
Mason 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Helpers 2.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
8.2 Dressed stone masonry ST-H2 Forman 1.0 0.25 0.21 0.16 0.17 0.46 0.30 0.25
Mason 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Helpers 2.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
9. BRICK AND BLOCK
WORK - I
9.1 Brick and block laying BW-I1 Forman 1.0 0.25 0.20 0.17 0.30 0.50 0.25 0.25
Mason 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Helpers 2.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
10. DUMP PROOF - J

10.1 Bitumen paint DP-J1 Forman 1.0 0.25 0.25
Proofer 1.0 1.00 1.00
45

Crew
Ababa Dawa UF
Helpers 1.0 1.00 1.00
Bitumen paint with

0.25
10.2 Asphalt felt DP-J2 Forman 1.0 0.25
Proofer 1.0 1.00 1.00
Helpers 2.0 1.00 1.00
11. WATER PROOF - K

11.1 Concrete painting WP-K1 Forman 1.0 0.25 0.25 0.10 0.20
Proofer 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Helpers 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
11.2 Heavy duty coating WP-K2 Forman 1.0 0.25 0.25 0.25
Proofer 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00
Helpers 2.0 1.00 1.00 1.00
11.3 Heavy duty patching WP-K3 Forman 1.0 0.25 0.25 0.10 0.10 0.18
Proofer 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Helpers 2.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
11.4 Heat reflecting paint WP-K4 Forman 1.0 0.25 0.25 0.25
Proofer 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00
Helpers 2.0 1.00 1.00 1.00
12. ROOF AND WALL

CLADDING - L
46

Crew
Ababa Dawa UF
12.1 Corrugated Steel Sheet RWC-L1 Forman 1.0 0.25 0.17 0.17 0.25 0.17 0.17 0.20
Carpenter 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Helpers 2.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
12.2 EGA Sheet RWC-L2 Forman 1.0 0.25 0.17 0.16 0.20 0.20 0.17 0.19
Carpenter 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Helpers 2.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
12.3 Ribbed Sheet RWC-L3 Forman 1.0 0.25 0.25 0.17 0.10 0.18
Carpenter 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Helpers 2.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
12.4 Gutters and down pipes RWC-L4 Forman 1.0 0.25 0.21 0.10 0.18 0.21 0.14 0.18
Carpenter 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Helpers 2.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
13. CARPENTRY AND

JOINERY - M
13.1 Trusses & purlin CJ-M1 Forman 1.0 0.25 0.17 0.17 0.25 0.19 0.15 0.20
Carpenter 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Helpers 2.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Ceiling (chip wood

0.24
13.2 ceiling) CJ-M2 Forman 1.0 0.25 0.20 0.11 0.25 0.25 0.38
Carpenter 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
47

Crew
Ababa Dawa UF
Helpers 2.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
13.3 Doors and Window CJ-M3 Forman 1.0 0.25 0.25 0.16 0.20 0.18 0.15 0.20
Carpenter 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Helpers 2.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
13.4 Cupboards and Cabinet CJ-M4 Forman 1.0 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25
Carpenter 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Helpers 2.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
13.5 Rails and Skirting CJ-M5 Forman 1.0 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.10 0.21
Carpenter 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Helpers 2.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
13.6 Rails and balusters CJ-M6 Forman 1.0 0.25 0.25

Carpenter 1.0 1.00 1.00
Chiseler 1.0 1.00 1.00
Welder 1.0 1.00 1.00
Helpers 2.0 1.00 1.00
14. STEEL SECTIONS -

N
14.1 Steel Trusses and purlin
(Labour mounted) SS-N1 Forman 1.0 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50
Welder 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Carpenter 2.0 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50
48

Crew
Ababa Dawa UF
Welding machine 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Building Labourers 14.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Block Chains 1 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25
14.2 Steel trusses and purlin

(Crane mounted) SS-N2 Forman 1.0 0.75 0.50 0.25 0.50
Welder 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Welding machine 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Mobile crane 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Crane operator 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Building Labourers 4.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Carpenter 1 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50
Block Chains 1 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25
14.3 Anchor bolls SS-N3 Forman 1.0 0.75 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50
Carpenter 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Welder 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Helper 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
14.4 M-Bolts SS-N4 Forman 1.0 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50
Welder 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Helper 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
15. METAL WORK - O

15.1 Metal profile window MW-O1 Forman 1.0 0.25 0.20 0.17 0.25 0.17 0.19 0.20
Carpenter 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.78 1.00 1.00 0.96
Helper 2.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
49

Crew
Ababa Dawa UF
Welder 1 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50
15.2 Metal profile doors MW-O2 Forman 1.0 0.25 0.17 0.20 0.25 0.17 0.18 0.20
Carpenter 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.74 1.00 1.00 0.96
Helper 2.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Welder 1 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50
15.3 Heavy duty steel doors MW-O3 Forman 1.0 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25
Carpenter 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Helper 2.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Welder 1 .0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75
15.4 Fence grill MW-O4 Forman 1.0 0.25
Carpenter 1.0 1.00
Helper 2.0 1.00
Welder 1 0.50 0.50
15.5 Guards rails MW-O5 Forman 1.0 0.25 0.17 0.10 0.50 0.26
Carpenter 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Welder 1 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50
Helper 2.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
16. PASTERING AND

PAINTING - P
16.1 Plastering PP-P1 Forman 1.0 0.25 0.19 0.23 0.13 0.17 0.19 0.19
Plaster 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Helpers 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
16.2 Pointing PP-P2 Forman 1.0 0.25 0.19 0.25 0.10 0.19 0.17 0.19
50

Crew
Ababa Dawa UF
Plasterer 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Helpers 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
16.3 Rendering PP-P3 Forman 1.0 0.25 0.19 0.25 0.17 0.18 0.21
Plasterer 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Helpers 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
17. FLOOR AND WALL

FINISH - Q
Precast cement and

0.30
17.1 terrazzo FWF-Q1 Forman 1.0 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.30 0.30 0.30
tile Mason 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Helper 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Grinder 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Grinder Operator 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
17.2 Marble floor FWF-Q2 Forman 1.0 0.86 1.00 0.23 0.18 0.20 0.19 0.44
Tiler 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Helper 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
17.3 Marble wall cladding FWF-Q3 Forman 1.0 0.25 0.25 0.30 0.55 0.30 0.35
Tiler 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Helper 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Grinder 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Grinder Operator 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
51

Crew
Ababa Dawa UF
17.4 Cement Screed FWF-Q4 Forman 1.0 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20
Plasterer 2.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
17.5 Plastic Tile FWF-Q5 Forman 1.0 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20
Tiler 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Helper 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
17.6. Ceramic and Mosaic Tile FWF-Q6 Forman 1.0 0.20 0.20 0.25 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20
Tiler 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Helper 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
18. PAINTING - R
18.1 Painting P-R1 Forman 1.0 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25
Painter 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Helper 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
19. GLAZING - S
19.1 Cutting and fixing G-S1 Glazer 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Helper 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
20. SANITARY
INSTALLATION - T
52

Crew
Ababa Dawa UF
20.1 Steel pipe laying SI-T1 Forman 1.0 0.25 0.15 0.15 0.25 0.17 0.19 0.19
Plumber 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Building labourer 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Chiseler 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
20.2 Concrete pipe laying

Dia.10-40cm SI-T2 Forman 1.0 0.19 0.16 0.33 0.25 0.81 0.35
Mason 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Labourer 2.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Dia.40-50cm SI-T3 Forman 1.0 0.25 0.50 0.38
Mason 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00

Dia. 50cm and above SI-T4 Forman 1.0 0.25 0.25
Mason 1.0 1.00 1.00
Building Labourer 5.0 1.00 1.00
22.5 PVC pipe laying SI-T5 Forman 1.0 0.25 0.17 0.20 0.21
Plumber 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Helper 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
20.6 Fixing fixtures SI-T6 Forman 1.0 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50
Plumber 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
53

Crew
Ababa Dawa UF
Helpers 2.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Chiseler 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
20.7 Fixing valves SI-T7 Forman 1.0 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25
Plumber 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Helpers 2.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Chiseler 1.0 1.00 1.00 0.67 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.94
21.ELECTRICAL
INSTALLATION - U
Installing light and socket

1.00
21.1 points EL1-U1 Electrician 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Helper 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Forman 1 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05
Chiseler 1 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25
Mounting distribution
1.00
21.2 boards EL1-U2 Electrician 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Helper 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
21.3 Fixing fixtures EL1-U3 Electrician 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Helper 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
21.4 Laying cables EL1-U4 Electrician 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00

Helper 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00
54
55
4.4 Labor and Equipment Productivity Norm of Building Construction

The labor and equipment productivity norm of building construction was prepared for four
regional states (Amhara, Oromia, Sidama and South Nations Nationalities and Peoples) and two
federal administrative cities (Dire Dawa and Addis Ababa). Due to the current political situation
it is found difficult to collect data in the remaining areas of the country. The data was collected
from different contractors across the regions and cities and the national productivity norm was
determined by calculating the average of the individual contractors output as tabulated by Table
5.
56
Table 8. Labor and Equipment Productivity Norm of Amhara Region
Labour and Equipment Productivity Norm

Regional Productivity Norm/mhr
Item Crew National
Description Unit Addis Dire Output/mhr
No Designation
Amhara Ababa Oromia SNNP Sidama Dawa
SETTING OUT
labour m2 SO-1
Equipment m2 SO-2
DEMOLITION
labour m3 DE-1 0.63 0.60 0.62
Equipment m3 DE-2
02. Excavation & Earth work
SITE CLEARANCE
01 Remove bushes and vegetation m2 EX-A1 1.41 1.41
02 Felling of trees, diameter No EX-A1
03 Remove termite hill m3 EX-A1
04 Remove existing structure, size Ls EX-A1
EXCAVATION AND GETOUT

05 Remove top soil, depth of 20cm m2 EX-A1 2.40 2.50 2.19 2.30 1.79 2.12 2.22
m2 EX-A2 291.25 270.00 270.00 277.08
ORDINARY SOIL EXCAVATION
BULK EXCAVATION
06 Not exceeding 1.5m (by labour) m3 EX-A1 0.31 0.40 0.33 0.34 0.42 0.36 0.36
Not exceeding 1.5m (by Equipment) m3 EX-A2 28.56 38.12 31.25 33.40 48.65 14.00 32.33
07 Over 1.5m but not exceeding 3.0m (by labour) m3 EX-A1 0.25 0.33 0.24 0.33 0.16 0.30 0.27
57

Item Crew National
Description Unit Addis Dire
No Designation Output/mhr
Over 1.5m but not exceeding 3.0m (by Equipment) m3 EX-A2 26.56 27.73 28.13 19.31 45.00 15.00 26.96
08 Over 3.0 but not exceeding 4.5m (by labour) m3 EX-A1 0.17 0.29 0.17 0.29 0.23
Over 3m but not exceeding 4.5m (by Equipment) m3 EX-A2 27.56 24.00 25.00 11.00 21.89
PIT AND TRENCH EXCAVATION

09 Pit not exceeding 1.5m 1.5m (by labour) m3 EX-A1 0.26 0.34 0.29 0.30 0.32 0.31 0.30
Pit not exceeding 1.5m (by Equipment) m3 EX-A2 19.88 30.00 32.00 32.00 46.50 10.00 28.40
11 Over 3.0m but not exceeding 4.5m (by labour) m3 EX-A1 0.14 0.20 0.18 0.21 0.18 0.18
Over 3.0m but not exceeding 4.5m (by Equipment) m3 EX-A2 18.38 17.73 23.75 13.75 6.95 16.11
12 Trench not exceeding 1.5m (by labour) m3 EX-A1 0.31 0.28 0.30 0.32 0.31 0.30
Trench not exceeding 1.5m (by Equipment) m3 EX-A2 18.38 21.00 31.25 32.00 46.50 10.00 26.52
14 Over 3.0m but not exceeding 4.5m (by labour) m3 EX-A1 0.16 0.12 0.21 0.18 0.17
ROCK EXCAVATION
BULK EXCAVATION, SOFT ROCK

15 Not exceeding 1.5m (by labour) m3 EX-A4 0.17 0.19 0.19 0.23 0.11 0.18
Not exceeding 1.5m (by Equipment) m3 EX-A5 21.91 17.42 15.77 15.77 17.72
Over 1.5m but not exceeding 3.0m (by Equipment) m3 EX-A5 19.09 14.17 0.14 13.75 11.79
58

Item Crew National
17 Over 3.0m but not exceeding 4.5m (by labour) m3 EX-A4 0.11 0.14 0.16 0.13
Over 3.0m but not exceeding 4.5m (by Equipment) m3 EX-A5 18.16 11.42 0.08 9.88
PIT EXCAVATION, SOFT ROCK

Not exceeding 1.5m (by Equipment) m3 EX-A5 17.31 14.16 11.56 14.35 8.76 13.23
Over 3.0m but not exceeding 4.5m (by Equipment) m3 8.27 8.27
TRENCH EXCAVATION, ORDINARY SOIL
Not exceeding 1.5m (by labour) m3 EX-A1 0.22 0.28 0.19 0.33 0.25
Over 1.5m but not exceeding 3.0m (by labour) m3 EX-A1 0.18 0.18 0.15 0.21 0.18
Over 3.0m but not exceeding 4.5m (by labour) m3 EX-A1 0.13 0.09 0.13 0.18 0.13
Over 3.0m but not exceeding 4.5m (by Equipment) m3 EX-A2 16.88 15.75 16.31
TRENCH EXCAVATION, SOFT ROCK

21 Not exceeding 1.5m (by labour) m3 EX-A4 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.28 0.21
Not exceeding 1.5m (by Equipment) m3 EX-A4 11.25 8.76 10.01
Over 1.5m but not exceeding 3.0m (by Equipment) m3 EX-A4 10.24 10.24
59

Item Crew National
BULK EXCAVATION, HARD ROCK

Not exceeding 1.5m (by Equipment) m3 8.22 7.18 0.04 5.14
Over 1.5m but not exceeding 3.0m (by Equipment) m3 6.43 0.03 3.23
Over 3.0m but not exceeding 4.5m (by Equipment) m3 5.13 5.13
PIT EXCAVATION, HARD ROCK

Over 1.5m but not exceeding 3.0m (by Equipment) m3 EX-A9 4.13 4.90 5.23 4.65 4.73
TRENCH EXCAVATION, HARD ROCK

Not exceeding 1.5m (by Equipment) m3 EX-A9 6.10 6.07 6.08
60

Item Crew National
BULK EXCAVATION, BOULDER
33 Not exceeding 1.5m (by labour) m3 EX-A7 0.07 0.06 0.07 0.07
Not exceeding 1.5m (by Equipment) m3 EX-A8 15.63 15.63
34 Over 1.5m not exceeding 3.0m (by labour) m3 EX-A7 0.06 0.04 0.05
PIT EXCAVATION, BOULDER

36 Not exceeding 1.5m (by labour) m3 EX-A7 0.06 0.06
37 Over 1.5m not exceeding 3.0m (by labour) m3 EX-A7 0.04 0.04
38 Over 3.0m not exceeding 4.5m (by labour) m3 EX-A7 0.03 0.03
TRENCH EXCAVATION, BOULDER

39 Not exceeding 1.5m (by labour) m3 EX-A8 0.12 0.40 0.26
Not exceeding 1.5m (by Equipment) m3 EX-A7 4.38 3.90 3.90 4.06
61

Item Crew National
FILL
42 Backfill to excavation m3 F-B1 0.45 0.36 0.57 0.73 0.29 0.63 0.50
Backfill to excavation m3 F-B2 15.00 15.00
43 Selected excavated fill m3 F-B3 0.59 2.07 0.61 1.26 0.80 1.06
Selected excavated fill m3 F-B4 0.00 0.00
44 Selected borrowed fill m3 F-B5 0.85 2.00 1.41 4.00 0.82 0.80 1.65
Selected borrowed fill m3 F-B5 15.00 2.00 0.38 5.79
DISPOSAL 0.00 0.00
Wheel and Spread m3 D-C1 0.80 0.30 0.55
Load and Cartaway m3 D-C2 1.81 25.52 3.48 0.00 13.98 2.75 7.92
Load and Cartaway m3 D-C3 16.00 26.91 15.33 13.41 17.91
SUNDRY ITEMS
46 Termite solution m2
Sub Base
47 Gravel 200 mm thick m2
48 Crushed stone-200mm thick m2 4.25 4.25
49 Hard core 250mm thick m2 HC-D1 3.43 2.06 1.99 1.85 2.33
50 Dust blinding 30-50mm m2 HC-D2 7.92 7.92
51 Embankment, depth m
4. HARD CORE-D
Hard core laying m2 HC-D1 2.79 2.06 4.25 2.61 1.99 1.85 2.59
Dust Blinding m2 HC-D2 6.00 6.00 6.00
62

Item Crew National
03. CONCRETE WORK
IN, SITU CONCRETE

Mixing, Hauling and Casting
01 Plain blinding concrete C-5 m2 C-E1 9.44 18.50 6.56 31.04 5.78 22.25 15.60
Plain blinding concrete C-5 C-E1 8.89 8.89
7.50
10cm thick mass concrete pavement around the building 7.50
REINFORCED SUB-STRUCTURE CONCRETE
Placed with Direct Chute

02 C in footing m3 C-E2 1.29 0.74 1.53 1.00 1.19 1.53 1.21
03 C in sub-grade columns m3 C-E2 1.09 0.63 1.47 0.85 1.19 1.48 1.12
04 C in subgrade beams m3 C-E2 1.11 0.74 1.50 0.94 1.19 1.53 1.17
05 C in grade beams m3 C-E2 1.17 0.74 1.50 0.94 1.19 1.53 1.18
06 C in suspended slab m3 C-E2 0.91 0.76 1.88 1.00 1.19 1.68 1.24
07 C in ground slab m3 C-E2 1.44 0.76 1.91 1.00 1.19 1.73 1.34
08 C in concrete wall m3 C-E2 0.74 0.65 1.59 0.81 1.19 1.73 1.12
09 C in lift shaft m3 C-E2 0.74 0.65 1.63 0.81 1.19 1.53 1.09
10 C in stair case and landing m3 C-E2 0.92 0.59 1.28 0.96 1.19 1.48 1.07
11 C in mat foundation m3 C-E2 1.26 0.76 1.91 1.00 1.73 1.33
63

Item Crew National
Placed with Crane and Bucket

C in footing m3 C-E2 0.82 3.85 1.50 1.00 1.19 1.53 1.65
C in sub-grade columns m3 C-E2 0.89 3.48 1.47 0.85 1.19 1.48 1.56
C in subgrade beams m3 C-E2 0.86 4.16 1.50 0.94 1.19 1.53 1.70
C in grade beams m3 C-E2 0.78 4.01 1.50 0.94 1.19 1.53 1.66
C in suspended slab m3 C-E2 0.75 4.01 1.88 1.00 1.19 1.68 1.75
C in ground slab m3 C-E2 0.83 4.05 1.88 1.00 1.19 1.73 1.78
C in concrete wall m3 C-E2 0.82 3.50 1.59 0.81 1.19 1.73 1.61
C in lift shaft m3 C-E2 0.76 3.50 1.63 0.81 1.19 1.53 1.57
C in stair case and landing m3 C-E2 0.67 3.28 1.28 0.96 1.19 1.48 1.48
C in mat foundation m3 C-E2 0.79 4.16 1.88 1.00 1.19 1.73 1.79
Placed with Concrete Pump

C in footing m3 C-E2 4.50 4.50
C in sub-grade columns m3 C-E2 4.50 4.50
C in subgrade beams m3 C-E2 4.50 4.50
C in grade beams m3 C-E2 4.50 4.50
C in suspended slab m3 C-E2 4.50 4.50
C in ground slab m3 C-E2 4.50 4.50
C in concrete wall m3 C-E2 4.50 4.50
C in lift shaft m3 C-E2 4.50 4.50
C in stair case and landing m3 C-E2 4.50 4.50
C in mat foundation m3 C-E2 4.50 4.50
64

Item Crew National
REINFORCED SUPERSTRUCTURE CONCRETE

Placed with Direct Chute
C in elevation columns m3 C-E2 0.60 0.56 1.50 0.67 1.19 1.47 1.00
C in beams and lintels m3 C-E2 0.64 0.63 1.47 0.81 1.19 1.42 1.03
C in suspended slab m3 C-E2 0.68 0.66 1.50 0.88 1.19 1.47 1.06
C in ribbed slab m3 C-E2 0.70 0.56 1.50 1.08 1.19 1.47 1.08
C in concrete wall m3 C-E2 0.62 0.56 1.88 0.79 1.19 1.52 1.09
C in lift shaft m3 C-E2 0.56 0.56 1.88 0.79 1.19 1.57 1.09
C in stair case and landing m3 C-E2 0.60 0.51 1.59 0.90 1.19 1.57 1.06
C in parapet m3 C-E2 0.54 0.52 1.63 0.79 1.19 1.47 1.02
C in canopy m3 C-E2 0.57 0.52 1.28 0.79 1.19 1.42 0.96
C in transoms and mullions m3 C-E2 0.51 1.88 0.79 1.19 1.57 1.19
Placed with Crane and Bucket

12 C in elevation columns m3 C-E2 0.76 3.85 1.50 0.67 1.19 1.47 1.57
13 C in beams and lintels m3 C-E2 0.76 3.48 1.47 0.81 1.19 1.42 1.52
14 C in suspended slab m3 C-E2 0.82 4.16 1.50 0.88 1.19 1.47 1.67
15 C in ribbed slab m3 C-E2 0.80 4.01 1.50 1.08 1.19 1.47 1.68
16 C in concrete wall m3 C-E2 0.80 4.01 1.88 0.79 1.19 1.52 1.70
17 C in lift shaft m3 C-E2 0.75 4.05 1.88 0.79 1.19 1.57 1.70
18 C in stair case and landing m3 C-E2 0.74 3.50 1.59 0.90 1.19 1.57 1.58
19 C in parapet m3 C-E2 0.76 3.50 1.63 0.79 1.19 1.47 1.56
20 C in canopy m3 C-E2 0.75 3.28 1.28 0.79 1.19 1.42 1.45
21 C in transoms and mullions m3 C-E2 0.74 4.16 1.88 0.79 1.19 1.57 1.72
65

Item Crew National
Placed with Concrete Pump

C in beams and lintels m3 C-E2 4.00 4.00
C in suspended slab m3 C-E2 4.00 4.00
C in ribbed slab m3 C-E2 4.00 4.00
C in concrete wall m3 C-E2 4.00 4.00
C in lift shaft m3 C-E2 4.00 4.00
C in stair case and landing m3 C-E2 4.00 4.00
C in parapet m3 C-E2 4.00 4.00
C in canopy m3 C-E2 4.00 4.00
C in transoms and mullions m3 C-E2 4.00 4.00
FORMWORK
SUB-STRUCTURE NORMAL FINISH TO

Sawn Zigba
22 Footing m2 FW-F1 1.47 0.57 0.81 0.76 0.64 0.79 0.84
23 Sub-grade columns m2 FW-F1 1.14 0.57 0.81 0.77 0.62 0.80 0.78
24 Sub-grade beam m2 FW-F1 1.05 0.57 0.72 0.77 0.74 0.78 0.77
25 Grade bean m2 FW-F1 1.32 0.57 0.72 0.77 0.74 0.78 0.82
26 Suspended slab m2 FW-F1 1.21 0.61 0.81 0.77 0.74 0.88 0.84
27 Concrete wall m2 FW-F1 0.73 0.61 0.81 0.75 0.62 0.88 0.73
28 Lift shaft m2 FW-F1 0.78 0.61 0.81 0.75 0.74 0.88 0.76
29 Water foundation m2 FW-F1 0.81 0.61 0.76 0.74 0.73
66

Item Crew National
Wrought Formwork
Footing m2 FW-F1 0.50 0.50
Sub-grade columns m2 FW-F1 0.50 0.50
Sub-grade beam m2 FW-F1 0.50 0.50
Grade bean m2 FW-F1 0.50 0.50
Suspended slab m2 FW-F1 0.50 0.50
Concrete wall m2 FW-F1 0.50 0.50
Lift shaft m2 FW-F1 0.50 0.50
Water foundation m2 FW-F1 0.50 0.50
Patterned Formwork
Footing m2 FW-F1 0.50 0.50
Sub-grade columns m2 FW-F1 0.50 0.50
Sub-grade beam m2 FW-F1 0.50 0.50
Grade bean m2 FW-F1 0.50 0.50
Suspended slab m2 FW-F1 0.50 0.50
Concrete wall m2 FW-F1 0.50 0.50
Water foundation m2 FW-F1 0.50 0.50
Plywood Formwork
Footing m2 FW-F1 1.38 0.57 0.81 0.76 0.64 0.83
Sub-grade columns m2 FW-F1 1.06 0.57 0.81 0.77 0.62 0.79 0.77
Sub-grade beam m2 FW-F1 1.00 0.57 0.72 0.77 0.74 0.80 0.77
Grade bean m2 FW-F1 1.25 0.57 0.72 0.77 0.74 0.78 0.80
67

Item Crew National
Suspended slab m2 FW-F1 1.19 0.61 0.81 0.77 0.74 0.78 0.82
Concrete wall m2 FW-F1 0.69 0.61 0.81 0.75 0.62 0.88 0.73
Lift shaft m2 FW-F1 0.69 0.61 0.81 0.75 0.74 0.88 0.75
Water foundation m2 FW-F1 0.75 0.61 0.76 0.74 0.88 0.75
SUPER STRUCTURE NORMAL FINISH TO
Sawn Zigbab Formwork

30 Elevation columns m2 FW-F1 1.01 0.54 0.58 0.76 0.64 0.74 0.71
31 Beams and lintels m2 FW-F1 0.79 0.54 0.55 0.75 0.62 0.75 0.67
32 Slab m2 FW-F1 1.14 0.54 0.75 0.76 0.74 0.85 0.80
33 Concrete walls m2 FW-F1 0.68 0.54 0.75 0.75 0.74 0.85 0.72
34 Lift shaft m2 FW-F1 0.69 0.58 0.78 0.75 0.74 0.85 0.73
35 Stair case and landing m2 FW-F1 0.51 0.45 0.52 0.75 0.62 0.67 0.59
36 Parapet m2 FW-F1 0.64 0.58 0.78 0.75 0.74 0.85 0.72
37 Canopy m2 FW-F1 0.56 0.58 0.78 0.75 0.74 0.85 0.71
38 Transom and mullions m2 FW-F1 0.60 0.75 0.74 0.70
Wrout Formowk
Elevation columns m2 FW-F1 0.50 0.50
Beams and lintels m2 FW-F1 0.50 0.50
Slab m2 FW-F1 0.50 0.50
Concrete walls m2 FW-F1 0.50 0.50
68

Item Crew National
Stair case and landing m2 FW-F1 0.50 0.50
Parapet m2 FW-F1 0.50 0.50
Canopy m2 FW-F1 0.50 0.50
Transom and mullions m2 FW-F1 0.50 0.50
Patterned Formwork
Elevation columns m2 FW-F1 0.50 0.50

Beams and lintels m2 FW-F1 0.50 0.50
Slab m2 FW-F1 0.50 0.50
Concrete walls m2 FW-F1 0.50 0.50
Stair case and landing m2 FW-F1 0.50 0.50
Parapet m2 FW-F1 0.50 0.50
Canopy m2 FW-F1 0.50 0.50
Transom and mullions m2 FW-F1 0.50 0.50
Plywood Formwork
Elevation columns m2 FW-F1 0.81 0.54 0.58 0.76 0.62 0.74 0.67
Beams and lintels m2 FW-F1 0.72 0.54 0.55 0.75 0.74 0.75 0.67
Slab m2 FW-F1 0.88 0.54 0.75 0.76 0.74 0.85 0.75
Concrete walls m2 FW-F1 0.56 0.54 0.75 0.75 0.74 0.85 0.70
Lift shaft m2 FW-F1 0.56 0.58 0.78 0.75 0.74 0.85 0.71
69

Item Crew National
Stair case and landing m2 FW-F1 0.47 0.45 0.52 0.75 0.62 0.67 0.58
Parapet m2 FW-F1 0.56 0.58 0.78 0.75 0.74 0.85 0.71
Canopy m2 FW-F1 0.50 0.58 0.78 0.75 0.74 0.85 0.70
Transom and mullions m2 FW-F1 0.50 0.75 0.74 0.66
FAIR FACED CONCRETE FORMWORK TO
Sawn Zigbab Formwork

39 Elevation columns m2 FW-F2
40 Beams and lintels m2 FW-F2
41 Slabs m2 FW-F2
42 Concrete walls m2 FW-F2
43 Lift shaft m2 FW-F2
44 Stair case and landing m2 FW-F2
45 Parapet m2 FW-F2
46 Canopy m2 FW-F2
47 Transom and mullions m2 FW-F2
Wrout Formowk
51 Slabs m2 FW-F2
70

Item Crew National
55 Parapet m2 FW-F2
56 Canopy m2 FW-F2
Patterned Formwork
60 Slabs m2 FW-F2
64 Parapet m2 FW-F2
65 Canopy m2 FW-F2
Plywood Formwork
69 Slabs m2 FW-F2
73 Parapet m2 FW-F2
74 Canopy m2 FW-F2
71

Item Crew National
PATTERNED CONCRETE FORMWORK TO

77 Slabs m2 FW-F3
REINFORCEMENT
Cutting, bending, tying and placing of steel
reinforcement
SUB-STRUCTURE
01 Diameter 6mm kg SR-G1 9.15 7.65 14.44 14.77 9.88 20.18 12.68
02 Diameter 8mm-10mm kg SR-G1 11.39 7.65 14.44 15.50 10.38 21.75 13.52
SUPER-STRUCTURE
06 Diameter 6mm kg SR-G1 8.94 8.39 14.44 13.94 9.88 19.58 12.53
72

Item Crew National
PRE-CAST CONCRETE
SUB STRUCTURE ELEMENT IN C
01 Type size No
02 Type size No
03 Type size No
SUPER STRUCTURE ELEMENT IN C

04 Type size No
05 Type size No
06 Type size No
CONCRETE ANCILLARIES
EXPANSION JOINTS
01 In soft board, depth m 15.00 3.00 9.00
02 In plastic, depth m 15.00 15.00
03 In metal, depth m 15.00 15.00
WATER STOPS
01 In metal, size
02 In plastic, size
73

Item Crew National
04. MASONRY WORK
STONE WALL
01 Concealed from view m3 SM-H1 0.34 0.50 0.36 0.26 0.25 0.31 0.34
02 Exposed face lift for further finish m3 SM-H1 0.27 0.42 0.33 0.24 0.24 0.29 0.30
ROUGH DRESSED STONE WALL FACING

03 Both sides roughly dressed m3 SM-H1 0.15 0.32 0.27 0.26 0.21 0.24 0.24
04 One side roughly dressed m3 SM-H1 0.18 0.58 0.30 0.26 0.22 0.26 0.30
DRESSED STONE WALL FACING

05 Both sides dressed m3 SM-H2 0.12 0.00 0.23 0.19 0.17 0.22 0.15
06 One side dressed m3 SM-H2 0.13 0.37 0.25 0.25 0.22 0.25 0.24
CONCRETE BLOCK WORKS
SUB-GRADE
SOLID/HOLLOW BLOCK WALLS 'AA'

07 200mm thick m2 BW-I1 0.85 1.14 1.41 0.90 0.81 0.95 1.01
08 150mm thick m2 BW-I1 1.09 1.31 1.51 0.95 0.81 1.05 1.12
09 100mm thick m2 BW-I1 1.16 1.47 1.52 1.01 0.89 1.15 1.20
ABOVE GRADE WALLS
74

Item Crew National
CLASS 'AA' IN CEMENT/COMPOMORTAR
10 200mm thick m2 BW-I1 0.87 1.14 1.41 0.90 0.81 0.95 1.01
11 150mm thick m2 BW-I1 1.04 1.31 1.51 0.95 0.81 1.05 1.11
12 100mm thick m2 BW-I1 1.13 1.47 1.52 1.01 0.89 1.15 1.19
CLASS 'B' IN CEMENT/COMPOMORTAR

13 200mm thick both faces for plaster m2 BW-I1 0.75 1.12 1.39 0.90 0.81 1.15 1.02
14 200mm thick one face for plaster m2 BW-I1 0.75 1.14 1.41 0.90 0.80 1.11 1.02
15 200mm thick both faces for pointing m2 BW-I1 0.75 1.14 1.41 0.90 0.81 1.10 1.02
CLASS 'C' IN CEMENT/COMPOMORTAR

75

Item Crew National
BRICK WALLS
SUB-GRADE BRICK WALLS IN CEMENT

MORTAR
01 60mm thick m2 BW-I1 0.72 0.80 1.33 0.72 1.18 0.78 0.92
02 120mm thick m2 BW-I1 0.75 0.67 0.93 0.66 1.01 0.78 0.80
03 250mm thick m2 BW-I1 0.52 0.48 0.58 0.47 0.79 0.55 0.57
ABOVE GRADE BRICK WORK

IN CEMENT /COMPOMORTAR
04 60mm thick m2 BW-I1 0.72 0.80 1.25 0.72 1.18 0.78 0.91
05 120mm thick m2 BW-I1 0.78 0.67 0.94 0.63 1.01 0.78 0.80
06 250mm thick m2 BW-I1 0.56 0.48 0.63 0.46 0.79 0.55 0.58
05. ROOF WATER PROOFING
WATER PROOFING AND DAMP PROOFING
HEAVY DUTY ROOF COATING

01 Concrete primer m2 WP-K1 3.56 4.63 5.50 4.56
02 Heavy duty roof coating m2 WP-K2 3.19 4.63 5.50 4.44
03 Heavy duty patching compound m2 WP-K3 3.56 4.63 5.50 4.56
04 Roof membrane m2 WP-K3 3.81 4.20 4.63 3.10 5.50 4.25
76

Item Crew National
05 Bitumen damp proof course m2 WP-K1 3.31 4.38 1.50 5.25 3.61
06 Decorative (reflective) coat m2 WP-K4 3.75 5.06 0.75 5.75 3.83
06. ROOF AND WALL CLADDING
GALVANIZED STEEL SHEET AND ACCESSORIES
GALVANIZED CORRUGATED SHEET
ROOFING
01 Gauge 32 m2 RWC-L1 5.17 3.50 2.75 5.13 2.18 2.44 3.53
02 Gauge 30 m2 RWC-L1 4.80 3.50 2.75 5.13 2.18 2.44 3.47
03 Gauge 28 m2 RWC-L1 4.35 3.50 2.75 5.13 2.18 2.44 3.39
04 Gauge 26 m2 RWC-L1 4.32 3.50 2.75 5.13 2.18 2.44 3.38
05 Gauge 24 m2 RWC-L1 4.13 3.50 2.75 5.13 2.18 2.44 3.35
GLADDING
06 Gauge 28 m2 RWC-L1 4.10 0.47 2.28
07 Gauge 26 m2 RWC-L1 4.03 0.47 2.25
08 Gauge 24 m2 RWC-L1 3.75 0.47 2.11
GALVANIZED CORRUGATED SHEET

ACCESSORIES
77

Item Crew National
RIDGE CAP
09 Gauge 32 girth M RWC-L1 5.50 4.84 4.96 3.63 4.73
EDGE GUTTER
14 Gauge 30,girth 33-100cm M RWC-L1 3.70 2.68 4.59 5.00 3.05 3.42 3.74
15 Gauge 28, girth only fixing M RWC-L1 3.70 2.68 4.69 5.00 3.05 3.42 3.76
16 Gauge 26, girth M RWC-L1 3.70 2.68 4.69 5.00 3.05 3.42 3.76
17 Gauge 24, girth M RWC-L1 3.68 2.68 4.69 5.00 3.05 3.42 3.75
VALLEY GUTTER
18 Gauge 30 girth M RWC-L1 3.52 4.44 3.80 3.05 3.42 3.65
DOWN PIPES
22 Gauge 28 size M RWC-L1 3.52 4.16 3.88 4.90 4.50 4.19
23 Gauge 26 size M RWC-L1 3.52 4.16 3.88 4.90 4.50 4.19
FLASHING TO PARAPET WALLS

78

Item Crew National
COPING
26 Gauge 28, girth M RWC-L1 4.05 5.31 3.69 2.90 5.00 4.19
27 Gauge 26, girth M RWC-L1 4.05 5.31 3.69 2.90 5.00 4.19
EDGE TRIMS TO BARGE BOARDS

28 Gage 28, girth M RWC-L1 3.80 5.60 4.70
29 Gage 26, girth M RWC-L1 3.80 3.80
ASBESTOS PRODUCT
30 6mm thick m2 RWC-L1 4.25 3.50 3.88
FLAT ASBESTOS CLADDING

31 4mm thick m2 RWC-L1 4.25 3.50 3.88
32 6mm thick m2 RWC-L1 4.25 3.50 3.88
ASBESTOS RIDGE CAPS, FLASHING AND

APRONS
RIDGE CAPS
33 Single piece M RWC-L1 4.94 6.56 3.93 5.14
34 Two piece adjustable close fitting M RWC-L1 4.94 6.56 3.93 5.14
35 Flashing M RWC-L1 4.94 6.56 3.93 5.14
36 Apron M RWC-L1 4.94 6.56 3.93 5.14
79

Item Crew National
GALVANIZED RIBBED SHEET
ROOFING
37 EGA 300 mm thick m2 RWC-L2 3.80 3.60 3.34 2.38 2.68 2.66 3.08
CLADDING
42 EGA 300 mm thick m2 RWC-L2 3.88 4.06 3.75 2.89 3.65
RIDGE CAPS, FLASHING AND ACCESSORIES
RIDGE CAPS
46 0.4mm thick, girth of 50cm M RWC-L2 4.69 0.75 5.31 5.00 4.81 4.11
FLASHING
47 0.4mm thick, girth M RWC-L2 3.33 5.17 5.00 3.88 4.34
ALUMINIUM SHEET AND ACCESSORIES
80

Item Crew National
CORRUGATED ALUMINUM SHEET
ROOFING
48 0.4mm thick m2 RWC-L2 6.07 2.00 2.56 3.54
49 0.5mm thick m2 RWC-L2 6.07 2.00 2.56 3.54
50 0.6mm thick m2 RWC-L2 6.07 2.00 2.56 3.54
51 0.7mm thick m2 RWC-L2 6.07 2.00 2.56 3.54
52 0.8mm thick m2 RWC-L2 6.07 2.00 2.56 3.54
CLADDING
53 0.4mm thick m2 RWC-L2 6.07 0.75 2.73 3.18
54 0.5mm thick m2 RWC-L2 6.07 0.75 2.73 3.18
55 0.6mm thick m2 RWC-L2 6.07 0.75 2.73 3.18
56 0.7mm thick m2 RWC-L2 6.07 0.75 2.73 3.18
57 0.8mm thick m2 RWC-L2 6.07 0.75 3.41
ALUMINUM PLAIN SHEET ACCESSORIES
RIDGE CAPS
58 0.4mm thick M RWC-L2 4.25 2.60 3.43
59 0.5mm thick M RWC-L2 4.25 2.60 3.43
60 0.6mm thick M RWC-L2 4.25 2.60 3.43
61 0.7mm thick M RWC-L2 4.25 2.60 3.43
GUTTER
62 0.4mm thick M RWC-L2 4.25 2.51 2.78 2.73 3.07
81

Item Crew National
63 0.5mm thick M RWC-L2 4.25 2.51 2.78 2.73 3.07
64 0.6mm thick M RWC-L2 4.25 2.51 2.78 2.73 3.07
65 0.6mm thick M RWC-L2 4.25 2.51 2.78 2.73 3.07
DOWN PIPES
66 0.4mm size M RWC-L2 4.25 2.33 3.50 3.36
67 0.5mm size M RWC-L2 4.25 2.33 3.50 3.36
68 0.6mm size M RWC-L2 4.25 2.33 3.50 3.36
69 0.7mm size M RWC-L2 4.25 2.33 3.50 3.36
FLASHING
70 0.4mm size M RWC-L2 4.25 2.66 2.80 3.24
71 0.5mm size M RWC-L2 4.25 2.66 2.80 3.24
72 0.6mm size M RWC-L2 4.25 2.66 2.80 3.24
73 0.7mm size M RWC-L2 4.25 2.66 2.80 3.24
COPPING
74 0.4mm size M RWC-L2 4.25 4.25
75 0.5mm size M RWC-L2 4.25 4.25
76 0.6mm size M RWC-L2 4.25 4.25
77 0.7mm size M RWC-L2 4.25 4.25
EDGE TRIMS
78 0.4mm size M RWC-L2 4.25 4.25
79 0.5mm size M RWC-L2 4.25 4.25
82

Item Crew National
80 0.6mm size M RWC-L2 4.25 4.25
81 0.7mm size M RWC-L2 4.25 4.25
CLAY ROOF TILES AND FITTINGS

82 Roofing m2
83 Ridge cup. M
NATURAL FIBER REINFORCED MORTAR

84 Roofing m2
UPVC DOWN PIPES

85 Diameter 80 mm M RWC-L4 5.28 5.78 2.61 2.31 3.75 3.95
86 Diameter 100 mm M RWC-L4 5.28 5.78 2.53 2.31 3.75 3.93
87 Diameter 100 mm M RWC-L4 5.16 1.26 5.78 2.44 2.31 3.75 3.45
07. CARPENTRY & JOINERY CARPENTRY
POST TRUSS AND RAFTER
TRUSS
01 Type No CJ-M1 1.13 0.25 0.27 0.25 0.13 0.15 0.36
RAFTER
02 Diameter 10-12mm M CJ-M1 4.03 10.00 8.75 10.00 8.11 6.33 7.87
83

Item Crew National
PURLIN
03 Diameter 5*7 cm M CJ-M1 5.94 9.48 9.06 9.38 6.80 6.33 7.83
TIMBER TRUSS AND RAFTER

04 Type Zigba No. CJ-M1 0.94 0.28 0.13 0.15 0.37
RAFTER
05 Size 5*7 cm Zigba M CJ-M1 5.31 10.00 8.75 10.00 8.11 6.33 8.08
PURLIN
06 Size 5*7cm Zigba M CJ-M1 6.13 9.48 9.06 9.38 6.80 6.33 7.86
POST AND TIMBER UPRIGHTS.

BEAMS AND BRACING
POST UPRIGHTS
07 Diameter 10-12 mm M 6.00 6.00
POST BEAMS
08 Diameter 10-12 mm M CJ-M1 3.69 3.69
POST BRACINGS
09 Diameter 8 mm M CJ-M1 3.44 3.44
84

Item Crew National
TIMBER BEAMS
10 Size 10mm M CJ-M1 5.19 5.19
TIMBER BEAMS
11 Size 12mm M CJ-M1 3.69 3.69
TIMBER BRACINGS
12 Size 8mm M CJ-M1 3.44 3.44
JOINTERY
SOFFITS NAILED TO SUPPORTS
CHIPWOOD CEILING
13 8mm thick, edges chamfered m2 CJ-M2 1.91 0.86 1.34 1.13 1.15 0.53 1.15
14 8mm thick m2 CJ-M2 0.69 1.34 0.53 0.85
SOFTBOARD CEILING
15 8mm thick m2 CJ-M2 0.99 0.56 0.78
HARDBOARD CEILING
16 8mm thick m2 CJ-M2 0.68 1.69 0.56 0.98
CHIPBOARD
17 8mm thick m2 CJ-M2 0.54 1.29 1.21 1.69 0.53 1.05
85

Item Crew National
PLYWOOD
18 10 mm thick m2 CJ-M2 0.56 1.17 1.29 0.75 1.69 0.53 1.00
ACOUSTIC
AEBESTOS, FLAT
19 8 mm thick m2 CJ-M2 0.34 0.61 0.48
MILLED TIMBER SOFFIT

20 Tid wood, 10 mm thick m2 CJ-M2 0.53 0.53
21 Kerraro wood, 10 mm thick m2 CJ-M2 0.53 0.53
22 Woira wood, 10 mm thick m2 CJ-M2 0.53 0.53
FASCIA AND BARGE BOARD

23 Kerero, size 25cm M CJ-M2 3.41 3.75 4.06 1.81 1.71 3.92 3.11
24 Tid, size 25cm M CJ-M2 3.19 4.06 1.71 3.92 3.22
25 Zigba, size 25cm M CJ-M2 3.19 4.06 1.25 1.71 3.92 2.83
MILLED TIMBER CLADDING

26 8mm thick kerrero m2 CJ-M2 0.71 1.56 1.25 1.17
27 8mm thick Tid m2 CJ-M2 0.71 1.56 1.25 1.17
28 8mm thcik Woira m2 CJ-M2 0.71 1.56 1.25 1.17
GALVANIZED SHEET CEILING SOFFITS

86

Item Crew National
29 Flat sheet, _4 mm thick m2 CJ-M2 0.63 0.63

30 Ribbed sheet, 4 mm thick m2 CJ-M2 0.63 0.63
31 Corrugated sheet, 4 mm thick m2 CJ-M2 0.63 0.63
FLOOR BOARDS
32 Kerrero, 10 mm thick m2 CJ-M2 0.47 0.47
33 Tid, 10 mm thick m2 CJ-M2 0.47 0.47
34 Woira, 10 mm thick m2 CJ-M2 0.47 0.47
SKIRTING
35 Kerrero, size 6mm M CJ-M5 3.96 3.96
36 Tid, size 6mm M CJ-M5 3.96 3.96
37 Woira, size 6mm M CJ-M5 3.96 3.96
GLAZED WOODEN DOORS

38 Type No CJ-M3 0.38 1.00 0.38 0.47 0.55
PANELED WOODEN DOORS

39 Type No CJ-M3 0.38 0.38 0.47 0.41
MATCH BOARDED DOORS

40 Type No CJ-M3 0.38 0.38 0.47 0.41
FLUSH WOODEN DOORS

87

Item Crew National
41 Kerrero, type No CJ-M3 0.38 0.46 0.31 0.56 0.47 0.43 0.43
42 Woira, type No CJ-M3 0.38 1.30 0.31 0.56 0.47 0.43 0.57
43 Mahogany, type No CJ-M3 0.38 1.30 0.31 0.56 0.47 0.43 0.57
WOODEN WINDOWS
GLAZED WINDOWS
44 Type No CJ-M3 0.33 0.46 0.38 0.39
PANELED WINDOWS
45 Type No CJ-M3 0.33 0.38 0.35
0.66 0.66
MATCH BOARDED WINDOWS
46 Type No CJ-M3 0.33 0.38 0.35
0.66 0.66
WALL PANELS
KERERO TONGUED AND GROOVED
47 10mm thick m2 CJ-M2 0.53 0.53
TID TONGUED GROOVED PANEL

48 10mm thick m2 CJ-M2 0.53 0.53
WOIRA TONGUED AND GROOVED PANEL

88

Item Crew National
49 10 mm thick m2 CJ-M2 0.53 0.63 0.58
KERERO OPEN JOINTED BOARD PANEL
50 10 mm thick m2 CJ-M2 0.53 1.00 0.77
TID, OPEN JOINTED BOARD PANEL
51 10mm thick m2 CJ-M2 0.53 0.53
WOIRA, OPEN JOINTED BOARD PANEL
52 10mm thick m2 CJ-M2 0.53 0.53
BLOCK BOARD PANEL

53 Kerrero veneer, 16 mm thick m2 CJ-M4 0.54 0.54
54 Tid veneer, 16 mm thick m2 CJ-M4 0.54 0.54
55 Woira veneer, 16 mm thick m2 CJ-M4 0.54 0.54
FLASH PANEL
56 Kerrero veneer, 16 mm thick m2 CJ-M4 0.54 0.54
57 Tid veneer, 16 mm thick m2 CJ-M4 0.54 0.54
58 Woira veneer, 16 mm thick m2 CJ-M4 0.54 0.54
89

Item Crew National
BUILT-IN CUPBOARD (FIXING)
59 Type No CJ-M4 0.26 0.63 0.44
COUNTER AND CABINETS

69 Type No CJ-M4 0.26 1.88 0.63 0.50 0.82
70 Balustrades & rails m CJ-M5 0.31 1.00 0.63 0.65
EXTRA OVER PARTITION PANELS FOR

INSULATION
72 Mineral wool, 10 mm thick m2 CJ-M4
73 Foam board, 10 mm thick m2 CJ-M4
74 Rock wood, 10 mm thick m2 CJ-M4
09. STRUCTURAL STEEL WORK
STRUCTURAL STEEL WORK
RHS STEEL
01 Stanchions, size kg SS-N1 17.97 35.42 47.92 15.00 30.83 44.06 31.87
02 Beams, size kg SS-N1 17.97 35.42 47.92 37.50 30.83 44.06 35.62
03 Trusses, size kg SS-N1 17.97 35.42 47.92 37.50 30.83 44.06 35.62
04 Purlins, size kg SS-N1 17.97 35.42 47.92 37.50 30.83 44.06 35.62
05 Ceiling support, size kg SS-N1 17.97 35.42 47.92 37.50 30.83 44.06 35.62
06 Bracing, size kg SS-N1 17.97 35.42 47.92 37.50 30.83 44.06 35.62
90

Item Crew National
07 Rails, size kg SS-N1 17.97 35.42 47.92 37.50 30.83 44.06 35.62
08 Rafters, size kg SS-N1 17.97 35.42 47.92 37.50 30.83 44.06 35.62
ERECTION kg SS-N1 18.44 18.44

09 Stanchions, size kg SS-N1 17.97 125.00 68.75 70.57
10 Beams, size kg SS-N1 17.97 125.00 68.75 70.57
11 Trusses, size kg SS-N1 17.97 125.00 68.75 70.57
12 Purlins, size kg SS-N1 17.97 125.00 68.75 70.57
13 Ceiling support, size kg SS-N1 17.97 125.00 68.75 70.57
14 Bracing, size kg SS-N1 17.97 125.00 68.75 70.57
15 Rails, size kg SS-N1 17.97 125.00 68.75 70.57
16 Rafters, size kg SS-N1 17.97 125.00 68.75 70.57
ANGEL IRON
17 Stanchions, size kg SS-N1 9.78 17.50 9.38 4.63 10.33 10.32
18 Beams, size kg SS-N1 9.78 17.50 9.38 4.63 10.33 10.32
19 Trusses, size kg SS-N1 9.78 17.50 9.38 4.63 10.33 10.32
20 Purlins, size kg SS-N1 9.78 17.50 9.38 4.63 10.33 10.32
21 Ceiling support, size kg SS-N1 9.78 17.50 9.38 4.63 10.33 10.32
22 Bracing, size kg SS-N1 9.78 17.50 9.38 4.63 10.33 10.32
23 Rails, size kg SS-N1 9.78 17.50 9.38 4.63 10.33 10.32
24 Rafters, size kg SS-N1 9.78 17.50 9.38 4.63 10.33 10.32
PLATES
25 Connection plate kg SS-N1 0.00 17.17 7.25 2.31 7.69 5.13 6.59
91

Item Crew National
26 Base plate kg SS-N1 9.00 17.17 7.25 2.31 7.69 5.13 8.09
27 Angle ties, size kg SS-N3 0.63 17.17 7.25 2.31 7.69 5.13 6.70
28 Bracket, size kg SS-N3 0.63 17.17 7.25 8.35
BOLTS
29 Anchor bolt No SS-N3 1.08 4.58 7.50 9.00 13.33 7.13 7.10
30 M 16 No SS-N4 4.13 7.92 7.50 9.00 13.33 7.13 8.17
31 M 14 No SS-N4 4.17 8.00 7.50 9.00 13.33 7.13 8.19
32 M 12 No SS-N4 4.13 8.33 7.50 9.00 13.33 7.13 8.24
33 M 10 No SS-N4 4.13 8.33 7.50 9.00 13.33 7.13 8.24
34 M8 No SS-N4 4.13 8.33 9.00 13.33 8.70
10. METAL WORK
METAL DOORS, WINDOW AND CURTAIN WALLS
CASEMENT DOORS AND WINDOWS
GALVANIZED STEEL PROFILE
DOORS
01 Type , size and thickness 4mm m2 MW-O2 0.31 0.38 0.42 0.63 0.53 0.45
WINDOWS
92

Item Crew National
02 Type , size and thickness 5mm m2 MW-O1 0.31 0.38 0.46 0.63 0.53 0.46
03 Curtain walls 6mm thick m2 MW-O3 0.21 0.47 0.13 0.50 0.33
BLACK OR PREPAINTED MILD STEEL PROFILES
DOORS
04 Type, size and thickness 4mm m2 MW-O3 0.31 0.44 0.42 0.63 0.53 0.46
WINDOWS
05 Type, size and thickness 5mm m2 MW-O3 0.31 0.41 0.42 0.63 0.48 0.45
06 Curtain walls 6mm thick m2 MW-O3 0.21 0.47 0.13 0.63 0.36
EXTRUDED ALUMINUM
PROFILES 0.63 0.53 0.58
DOORS
01 Type , size and thickness 4mm m2 MW-03 0.28 0.25 0.25 0.26
WINDOWS
02 Type , size m2 MW-O3 0.28 0.25 0.20 0.24
03 Curtain walls m2 MW-O3 0.21 0.63 0.42
SLIDING GLASS DOORS AND WINDOWS
93

Item Crew National
EXTRUDED ALUMIUM PROFILE
DOORS
04 Type , size No MW-O3 0.28 0.38 0.38 0.48 0.38
WINDOWS
05 Type , size No MW-O3 0.28 0.38 0.50 0.48 0.41
STAINLESS STEEL
DOORS
06 Type , size 0.50 0.38 0.44
WINDOWS
07 Type , size No MW-O3 0.28 0.25 0.27
HEAVY DUTY SLIDING DOORS
DOORS
08 Type , size No MW-O3 0.21 0.38 0.25 0.28
LOUVER WINDOWS
09 Type , size No MW-O3 0.33 0.33 0.25 0.31
SECURITY GRILLS
94

Item Crew National
METAL STEEL BLOCK

10 Size m2 MW-O3 0.19 0.19
GALVANIZED STEEL
11 Size m2
PRE COATED SOLID PLATES

12 m2
HOLLOW PROFILE
13 m2
SOLID PROFILE
14 m2
GUARD RAILS
15 In mild steel black, girth M MW-O5 0.50 0.61 1.50 0.90 0.88
16 In galvanized steel, girth M MW-O5 0.50 0.61 1.50 0.90 0.88
17 In aluminium, girth M MW-O5 0.50 1.50 0.90 0.97
18 In timber, girth M MW-O5 0.50 1.50 1.00
19 In timber and metal, girth M MW-O5 0.50 1.50 1.00
SOFFIT AND WALL FIXERS
SOFFIT FIXER
95

Item Crew National
20 In mild steel block m2 MW-O3 0.38 0.38
21 In galvanized steel m2 MW-O3 0.38 0.38
22 In aluminium m2 MW-O3 0.38 0.38
WALL FIXER
23 In mild steel block M MW-O3 1.25 1.25
24 In galvanized steel M MW-O3 1.25 1.25
25 In aluminium M MW-O3 1.25 1.25
WIRE NETTING AND FLY SCREEN
WIRE NETTING
26 In galvanized steel wire m2 MW-O3 0.75 0.75
27 In aluminium wire m2 MW-O3
FLY SCREEN
28 In galvanized steel wire m2 MW-O3
29 In aluminium wire m2 MW-O3
CORNER PROTECTION
30 In metal steel, size M MW-O3 1.61 1.61
31 In galvanized steel , size M MW-O3 1.61 0.63 1.12
32 In aluminium size M MW-O3 1.61 0.63 1.12
0.63 0.63
96

Item Crew National
GLAZING AND PIT COVER
GLAZING
33 In metal steel block m2 MW-O3
34 In galvanized steel m2 MW-O3
35 Chequered plate m2 MW-O3
36 Slotted plate m2 MW-O3
PIT COVER
37 In mild steel m2 MW-O3
38 In galvanized steel m2 MW-O3
39 Chequered plate m2 MW-O3
40 Slotted plate m2 MW-O3
LADDERS
41 In mild steel, girth M
42 In galvanized steel, girth M
43 In RHS, girth M
44 In solid steel, girth M
11. PLASTER AND POINTING
TWO COATS OF PLASTER

COMPOMORTAR TO INTERNAL SURFACE OF
97

Item Crew National
01 Brick walls m2 PP-P1 1.00 1.00
02 Hollow concrete block walls m2 PP-P1 1.00 1.00
03 Stone masonry surfaces m2 PP-P1 0.94 0.94
04 Concrete vertical surfaces m2 PP-P1 0.81 0.81
05 Concrete soffits m2 PP-P1 0.81 0.81
CEMENT MORTAR TO INTERNAL SURFACE OF

06 Brick walls m2 PP-P1 2.49 1.65 1.06 1.47 0.78 0.88 1.39
07 Hollow concrete block walls m2 PP-P1 3.59 1.76 1.06 1.47 0.78 0.88 1.59
08 Stone masonry surfaces m2 PP-P1 3.00 1.85 1.06 1.47 0.78 0.95 1.52
09 Concrete vertical surfaces m2 PP-P1 3.53 1.67 1.06 1.47 0.78 0.92 1.57
10 Concrete soffits m2 PP-P1 2.41 1.37 1.06 1.22 0.73 0.88 1.28
COMPOMORTAR TO EXTERNAL SURFACE OF

11 Brick walls m2 PP-P1 1.00 1.00
12 Hollow concrete block walls m2 PP-P1 1.00 1.88 1.44
13 Stone masonry surfaces m2 PP-P1 0.94 0.94
14 Concrete vertical surfaces m2 PP-P1 0.81 1.88 1.35
15 Concrete soffits m2 PP-P1 0.81 1.75 1.28
CEMENT MORTAR TO EXTERNAL SURFACE OF

16 Brick walls m2 PP-P1 2.19 1.65 1.14 1.47 0.77 0.88 1.35
17 Hollow concrete block walls m2 PP-P1 2.57 1.76 1.14 1.47 0.77 0.88 1.43
18 Stone masonry surfaces m2 PP-P1 2.55 1.85 1.14 1.47 0.77 0.92 1.45
19 Concrete vertical surfaces m2 PP-P1 2.84 1.67 1.14 1.47 0.77 0.92 1.47
98

Item Crew National
20 Concrete soffits m2 PP-P1 2.10 1.37 1.14 1.22 0.74 0.88 1.24
FINE COAT LIME PLASTER

21 Internal plastered vertical surface m2 PP-P1 1.59 1.59
22 Internal plastered soffits m2 PP-P1 1.59 1.59
23 External plastered vertical surface m2 PP-P1 1.59 1.59
24 External plastered soffits m2 PP-P1 1.59 1.59
FINE COAT GYPSUM PLASTER

25 Internal plastered vertical surface m2 PP-P1 1.54 1.83 2.25 2.85 3.45 3.00 2.49
26 Internal plastered soffits m2 PP-P1 1.54 1.68 2.25 2.30 2.85 3.00 2.27
27 External plastered vertical surface m2 PP-P1 1.54 1.75 2.25 3.45 3.00 2.40
28 External plastered soffits m2 PP-P1 1.54 1.56 2.25 2.85 3.00 2.24
FINE COAT CEMENT PLASTER

29 Internal plastered vertical surface m2 PP-P1 2.31 1.65 2.28 1.75 2.38 1.47 1.97
30 Internal plastered soffits m2 PP-P1 1.95 1.65 2.28 1.40 2.38 1.47 1.85
31 External plastered vertical surface m2 PP-P1 2.16 1.65 2.28 1.40 2.38 1.47 1.89
32 External plastered soffits m2 PP-P1 1.72 1.44 2.28 1.40 2.38 1.47 1.78
FINAL RENDER COAT

33 Internal plastered vertical surface m2 PP-P3 2.48 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.06 2.41
34 Internal plastered soffits m2 PP-P3 2.48 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.06 2.41
35 External plastered vertical surface m2 PP-P3 2.49 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.06 2.41
99

Item Crew National
36 External plastered soffits m2 PP-P3 2.49 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.06 2.41
FINAL COLOURED RENDER COAT

37 Internal plastered vertical surface m2 PP-P3 2.50 2.50 2.29 2.43
38 Internal plastered soffits m2 PP-P3 2.50 2.29 2.40
39 External plastered vertical surface m2 PP-P3 2.50 2.29 2.40
40 External plastered soffits m2 PP-P3 2.50 2.29 2.40
FLOAT FINISH
41 Concrete vertical surface m2 PP-P3 0.58 0.58
42 Concrete soffit m2 PP-P3 0.58 0.58
CEMENT POINTING
RECESSED POINTING
43 Brick wall m2 PP-P2 1.19 0.98 1.03 1.00 1.06 1.41 1.11
44 Hollow concrete block wall m2 PP-P2 1.72 1.58 1.15 1.75 1.59 1.41 1.53
45 Rough dressed stone wall m2 PP-P2 1.53 1.10 1.09 1.50 1.96 1.59 1.46
FLUSH POINTING
46 Brick wall m2 PP-P2 1.35 1.00 1.06 1.81 1.31
47 Hollow concrete block wall m2 PP-P2 1.80 1.75 1.59 1.81 1.74
48 Rough dressed stone wall m2 PP-P2 1.67 1.50 1.96 2.19 1.83
49 Dressed stone wall m2 PP-P2 1.65 1.50 1.96 2.19 1.82
100

Item Crew National
12. FLOOR & WALL FINISH
CEMENT,TERRAZZO, MARBLE AND MOSAIC

TILES
PRE-CAST CEMENT FLOOR TILES

01 Size 200 x 200 x 20mm m2 FWF-Q1 2.72 3.38 1.25 0.94 1.58 1.97
02 Size 250 x 250 x 20mm m2 FWF-Q1 2.72 3.13 1.25 0.94 1.58 1.92
03 Size 200 x 200 x 20mm but slip resistant m2 FWF-Q1 2.72 3.69 1.25 0.94 1.58 2.04
04 Size 250 x 250 x 20mm but slip resistant m2 FWF-Q1 2.72 3.13 1.25 0.94 1.58 1.92
05 Size 100 x 20mm skirting m FWF-Q1 3.30 8.44 1.25 3.75 3.13 3.97
TERRAZZO FLOOR TILES

06 Size 200 x 200 x 20mm m2 FWF-Q1 2.79 1.29 2.16 2.09 1.29 1.70 1.89
07 Size 250 x 250 x 20mm m2 FWF-Q1 2.70 1.29 2.16 2.09 1.29 1.70 1.87
08 Size 300 x 300 x 20mm m2 FWF-Q1 2.98 1.29 2.16 2.09 1.29 1.70 1.92
09 Size 300 x 300 x 30mm m2 FWF-Q1 2.98 1.46 2.16 2.09 1.29 1.70 1.95
10 Size 100 x 20mm skirting m FWF-Q1 4.13 2.67 2.97 3.19 2.75 3.40 3.18
MARBLE FLOOR TILES

11 30mm thick Harrer dalecha m2 FWF-Q2 2.92 0.80 1.19 0.94 0.73 1.00 1.26
12 20mm thick Harrer dalecha m2 FWF-Q2 2.92 0.80 1.19 0.94 0.73 1.00 1.26
13 30mm thick Gojam grey m2 FWF-Q2 2.92 0.80 1.19 0.94 0.73 1.00 1.26
14 20mm thick Gojam grey m2 FWF-Q2 2.92 0.80 1.19 0.94 0.73 1.00 1.26
101

Item Crew National
15 20mm thick Wollega grey (Daleti) m2 FWF-Q2 2.92 0.80 1.19 0.94 0.73 1.00 1.26
16 20mm thick Wollega grey (Daleti) m2 FWF-Q2 2.92 0.80 1.19 0.94 0.73 1.00 1.26
17 30mm thick Wollega white (Boka) m2 FWF-Q2 2.92 0.80 1.19 0.94 0.73 1.00 1.26
18 20mm thick Wollega white (Boka) m2 FWF-Q2 2.92 0.80 1.19 0.94 0.73 1.00 1.26
19 Size 70 x 15mm Harrer dalecha skirting m FWF-Q2 4.00 3.48 2.13 3.56 4.17 3.25 3.43
20 Size 70 x 15mm Gojam grey skirting m FWF-Q2 4.00 3.48 2.13 3.56 4.17 3.25 3.43
21 Size 70 x 15mm Wollega grey (Daleti) skirting m FWF-Q2 3.96 3.48 2.13 3.56 4.17 3.25 3.42
22 Size 70 x 15mm Wollega white (Boka) skirting m FWF-Q2 3.96 3.48 2.13 3.56 4.17 3.25 3.42
CERAMIC FLOOR TILES

23 15mm thick white m2 FWF-Q6 2.95 0.51 1.01 0.90 0.54 1.21 1.18
24 15mm thick coloured m2 FWF-Q6 2.95 0.51 1.01 0.90 0.54 1.21 1.18
MOSAIC FLOOR TILES

25 Size 25 x 25mm m2 FWF-Q6 2.83 1.50 1.01 0.54 1.21 1.42
CEMENT SCREED FLOOR FINISH AND PVC

BACKING
26 50mm thick trowel finished m2 FWF-Q4 1.88 1.69 1.34 6.97 1.62 1.86 2.56
27 50mm thick smooth finished m2 FWF-Q4 1.66 1.69 1.34 6.97 1.62 1.86 2.52
30 30mm thick trowel finished m2 FWF-Q4 2.07 1.69 1.75 6.97 1.59 2.26 2.72
102

Item Crew National
PVC TILE AND SKIRTING

36 Tile, 2mm thick m2 FWF-Q5 2.41 1.26 2.53 1.22 1.50 2.21 1.86
37 Tile, 1.6mm thick m2 FWF-Q5 2.98 1.26 2.53 1.22 1.50 2.21 1.95
38 100mm high skirting m FWF-Q5 5.98 4.69 4.66 5.31 2.54 3.84 4.50
CERAMIC AND MOSAIC WALL TILES

41 6mm thick white m2 FWF-Q6 0.76 0.81 0.91 0.84 0.48 0.81 0.77
42 6mm thick coloured m2 FWF-Q6 0.70 0.64 0.91 0.84 0.48 0.81 0.73
43 Mosaic m2 FWF-Q6 0.70 0.49 0.91 0.84 0.48 0.81 0.71
DIVIDING STRIPS FOR FLOORS

44 Metal strips M
45 Rubber strips M
46 Plastic strips M
COPPING, CILLS, STEPS AND RISERS
COPPING
47 20 x mm terrazzo M FWF-Q1 2.60 2.62 4.19 3.44 4.00 4.38 3.54
48 20 x mm Harrer dalecha marble M FWF-Q1 3.00 2.02 4.19 1.88 4.00 4.38 3.24
49 20 x mm Gojam grey marble M FWF-Q1 3.00 2.02 4.19 1.88 4.00 4.38 3.24
50 20 x mm Wollega grey marble M FWF-Q1 3.00 2.02 4.19 1.88 4.00 4.38 3.24
103

Item Crew National
51 20 x mm Wollega white M FWF-Q1 3.00 2.02 4.19 1.88 4.38 3.09
52 25 x mm Concrete M FWF-Q1 1.29 5.00 3.15
53 50 x mm dressed stone M FWF-Q1 1.79 1.79
CILLS
54 20 x mm terrazzo M FWF-Q1 2.48 1.84 2.96 1.88 4.00 2.71 2.64
55 20 x mm Harrer dalecha marble M FWF-Q1 2.88 2.07 2.96 2.25 4.00 2.71 2.81
56 20 x mm Gojam grey marble M FWF-Q1 2.88 2.07 2.96 2.25 4.00 2.71 2.81
57 20 x mm Wollega grey marble M FWF-Q1 2.88 2.07 2.96 2.25 4.00 2.71 2.81
58 20 x mm Wollega white M FWF-Q1 2.88 2.07 2.96 2.25 0.00 2.71 2.14
59 25 x mm Concrete M FWF-Q1 1.29 1.29
60 50x mm dressed stone M FWF-Q1 1.79 1.79
STEPS
TREADS
61 20 mm thick terrazzo m2 FWF-Q1 2.90 1.54 2.44 1.32 1.88 1.04 1.85
63 20 mm thick Harar marble m2 FWF-Q1 2.59 2.53 2.13 0.98 1.88 1.04 1.86
64 20 mm thick Gojam grey marble m2 FWF-Q1 2.59 2.53 2.13 0.98 1.88 1.04 1.86
65 20 mm thick Wollega grey marble m2 FWF-Q1 2.34 2.53 2.13 0.98 1.88 1.04 1.82
68 30 mm thick Wollega white marble m2 FWF-Q3 2.50 2.53 2.13 0.98 1.88 1.04 1.84
69 25 mm thick concrete m2 FWF-Q3 2.50 1.33 1.92
104

Item Crew National
70 50 mm thick dressed stone m2 FWF-Q3 2.66 1.13 1.89
RISERS
72 20 mm thick Harar marble m2 FWF-Q1 2.19 2.33 2.50 2.08 1.96 1.21 2.05
73 20 mm thick Gojam marble gray m2 FWF-Q1 2.25 2.33 2.50 2.08 1.96 1.21 2.06
74 20 mm thick Wollega marble gray m2 FWF-Q1 2.25 2.33 2.50 2.08 1.96 1.21 2.06
75 20 mm thick Wollega white marble m2 FWF-Q1 2.25 2.33 2.50 2.08 1.96 1.21 2.06
STONE PAVING
76 Rough dressed m2 SM-H1 0.49 1.50 1.50 1.00 1.12
77 Dressed m2 SM-H2 0.59 1.50 1.04
CONCRETE PAVING
78 80 mm thick in-situ concrete m2 C-E2 7.73 1.50 3.75 4.33
79 80 mm thick precast concrete m2 SM-H2 9.00 9.00
80 Carpet floor finish m2 1.88 1.88
12. PAINTING
OIL PAINT
01 Plastered vertical surface m2 P-R1 3.86 1.99 2.50 3.21 2.05 3.00 2.77
02 Pointed vertical surface m2 P-R1 3.58 1.99 2.50 3.21 2.05 3.00 2.72
03 Rendered vertical surface m2 P-R1 3.16 1.99 2.50 3.21 2.05 3.00 2.65
04 Fair faced vertical surface m2 P-R1 3.31 1.99 2.50 3.21 2.05 3.00 2.68
105

Item Crew National
05 Hammered vertical surface m2 P-R1 3.33 1.99 2.50 3.21 2.05 3.00 2.68
06 Plastered soffit m2 P-R1 2.60 1.84 2.50 3.21 1.73 3.00 2.48
07 Rendered soffit m2 P-R1 2.33 1.84 2.50 3.21 1.73 3.00 2.43
08 Fair faced soffit m2 P-R1 2.29 1.84 2.50 3.21 1.73 3.00 2.43
09 Hammered soffit m2 P-R1 2.00 1.84 2.50 3.21 1.73 3.00 2.38
10 Timber partition m2 P-R1 2.00 1.30 1.83 1.38 3.00 1.90
11 Metal surface m2 P-R1 2.23 1.48 1.96 1.31 3.00 1.99
PLASTIC EMULSION PAINT
MAT FINISH
12 Plastered vertical surface m2 P-R1 3.56 2.37 3.33 2.82 2.05 2.13 2.71
13 Pointed vertical surface m2 P-R1 3.38 2.37 3.33 2.82 2.05 2.13 2.68
14 Rendered vertical surface m2 P-R1 3.16 2.04 3.33 2.82 2.05 2.13 2.59
15 Fair faced vertical surface m2 P-R1 3.25 2.21 3.33 2.82 2.05 2.13 2.63
16 Hammered vertical surface m2 P-R1 3.13 2.21 3.33 2.82 2.05 2.13 2.61
17 Plastered soffit m2 P-R1 2.41 1.96 3.33 2.52 1.73 2.13 2.35
18 Rendered soffit m2 P-R1 2.14 1.90 3.33 2.13 1.73 2.13 2.22
19 Fair faced soffit m2 P-R1 2.23 1.90 3.33 2.13 1.73 2.13 2.24
20 Hammered soffit m2 P-R1 2.08 1.90 1.73 1.90
21 Timber partition m2 P-R1 2.08 1.25 1.28 1.54
CLOSSY FINISH
22 Plastered vertical surface m2 P-R1 2.00 2.50 2.25
23 Pointed vertical surface m2 P-R1 2.00 2.00
106

Item Crew National
24 Rendered vertical surface m2 P-R1 1.95 1.95
25 Fair faced vertical surface m2 P-R1 2.00 2.00
26 Hammered vertical surface m2 P-R1 2.00 2.00
27 Plastered soffit m2 P-R1 1.58 1.58
28 Rendered soffit m2 P-R1 1.53 1.53
29 Fair faced soffit m2 P-R1 1.58 1.58
30 Hammered soffit m2 P-R1 1.58 1.58
31 Timber partition m2 P-R1 1.58 1.58
SPECIAL PAINT
OIL BASED PAINT

32 Timber surface m2 P-R1 1.83 2.50 2.92 2.75 2.25 2.45
33 Metal surface m2 P-R1 1.72 2.50 2.92 1.88 2.25 2.25
Quartz Paint P-R1 2.58 2.58
13. GLAZING
TRANSPARENT GLASS
CLEAR SHEET
01 3 mm thick m2 G-S1 2.98 1.54 1.72 1.70 1.41 1.72 1.84
02 4 mm thick m2 G-S1 2.98 1.54 1.72 1.74 1.41 1.72 1.85
03 5 mm thick m2 G-S1 2.98 1.38 1.72 1.70 1.41 1.72 1.82
04 6 mm thick m2 G-S1 2.98 1.38 1.72 1.70 1.41 1.72 1.82
05 6 x 152mm m2 G-S1 2.83 2.83
107

Item Crew National
FIGURED
06 4 mm thick m2 G-S1 2.98 1.38 1.72 1.70 1.41 1.72 1.82
07 5 mm thick m2 G-S1 2.98 1.38 1.72 1.70 1.37 1.72 1.81
08 6 mm thick m2 G-S1 2.98 1.38 1.72 1.70 1.41 1.72 1.82
09 6 x 152 mm m2 G-S1 2.75 2.75
OPAL
10 3 mm thick m2 G-S1 2.75 1.77 1.41 1.53 1.87
11 4 mm thick m2 G-S1 2.75 1.77 1.41 1.53 1.87
12 5 mm thick m2 G-S1 2.75 1.77 1.41 1.53 1.87
13 6 mm thick m2 G-S1 2.75 1.77 1.41 1.53 1.87
14 6 x 152mm m2 G-S1 2.75 1.77 1.53 2.02
WIRED
15 3 mm thick 1.31 2.50 2.75 1.68 1.55 1.96
2 1.77
16 4 mm thick m G-S1 1.85 1.31 2.50 1.75 1.68 1.55
17 5 mm thick m2 G-S1 1.75 1.31 1.53
GLASS BLOCK
18 5 mm thick m2 G-S1 2.75 2.50 2.63
19 6 mm thick m2 G-S1 2.75 2.50 2.63
POLISHED PLATE GLASS

20 Mirror No
108

Item Crew National
14. SANITARY INSTALLATION
PIPES
GALVANIZED STEEL PIPES

01 Diameter 15-50mm M SI-T1 4.83 3.40 2.56 5.85 2.58 1.90 3.52
02 Diameter 50mm and above M SI-T1 4.58 3.40 2.50 12.50 2.47 1.91 4.56
DUCTILE IRON PIPES

03 Diameter M SI-T1 12.50 2.28 3.40 1.75 4.98
04 Diameter M SI-T1 12.50 2.78 3.40 2.06 5.18
UPVC PIPES FOR COLD WATER
05 Less than Diameter 50mm M SI-T1 3.42 3.38 2.25 1.90 2.42 2.67
06 Above Diameter 50mm M SI-T1 3.25 2.09 2.50 2.15 1.90 2.38
UPVC PIPES FOR FOUL AND SURFACE

DRAINAGE
07 Less than Diameter 100mm M SI-T1 2.08 1.50 3.25 3.00 2.63 1.96 2.40
08 Above Diameter 100mm M SI-T1 1.92 1.33 2.03 3.00 2.40 1.68 2.06
PRECAST CONCRETE PIPE

09 Less than Diameter 40 cm M SI-T2 1.59 3.00 0.59 2.83 2.76 2.25 2.17
109

Item Crew National
10 Between Diameter 40 & 80cm M SI-T2 1.38 3.00 0.56 2.50 0.89 2.00 1.72
11 Above Diameter 80cm M SI-T2 1.06 0.44 1.25 0.89 1.56 1.04
SANITARY FIXTURES
W.C UNITS
11 White vitreous china WC with low level flush/close
0.69
coupled No SI-T6 0.19 1.23 1.13 0.47 0.58 0.53
12 White vitreous china WC with high level flush cistern 0.66
No SI-T6 0.19 1.23 1.13 0.31 0.58 0.53
13 Enamelled white cast iron pedestal pan WC unit No SI-T6 0.19 1.23 1.25 0.25 0.58 0.47 0.66
14 Enamelled white cast iron squatting pan WC No SI-T6 0.13 1.23 1.25 0.25 0.58 0.47 0.65
15 Precast terrazzo squatting pan WC No SI-T6 0.13 1.23 1.25 0.31 0.58 0.47 0.66
WASH HAND BASIN

16 White vitreous china wash hand basin for cold water 0.50
No SI-T6 0.25 0.60 0.88 0.48 0.48 0.30
17 White vitreous china wash hand basin for hot a cold
0.50
water No SI-T6 0.25 0.60 0.88 0.48 0.48 0.30
18 White vitreous china wash hand basin for cold & hot
0.50
water and mixer No SI-T6 0.25 0.60 0.88 0.48 0.48 0.30
19 White vitreous china wash hand basin with white
0.50
pedestal for cold water only No SI-T6 0.25 0.60 0.88 0.48 0.48 0.30
20 White vitreous china wash hand basin with pedestal for
0.50
cold and hot water No SI-T6 0.25 0.60 0.88 0.48 0.48 0.30
110

Item Crew National
21 White vitreous china wash hand basin with pedestal for
0.50
cold & hot water and mixer No SI-T6 0.25 0.60 0.88 0.48 0.48 0.30
URINALS
22 White vitreous china urinal bowl No SI-T6 0.25 0.46 1.00 0.53 0.68 0.51 0.57
23 White vitreous china urinal bowl two unit with division 0.58
No SI-T6 0.25 0.45 1.00 0.68 0.51
BATH TUB
24 Standard white enamelled steel bath tub with flexible
0.23
tube hand spray, size No SI-T6 0.06 0.36 0.25 0.29 0.29 0.15
25 Standard white enamelled steel bath tub, with pillar top
0.23
shower spray, size. No SI-T6 0.06 0.36 0.25 0.29 0.29 0.15
26 Standard white enamelled cast iron bath, with flexible
0.23
27 Standard white, enamelled cast iron bath tub, with pillar
0.23
tap shower spray, size No SI-T6 0.06 0.36 0.25 0.29 0.29 0.15
28 Standard white, reinforce acrylic bath tub, with flexible
0.23
29 Standard white, reinforced acrylic bath tub, with pillar
0.23
tap shower spray, size No SI-T6 0.06 0.36 0.25 0.29 0.29 0.15
WATER HEATER
30 Capacity, No SI-T6 0.25 0.25 0.38 0.31 0.17 0.27
31 Capacity, No SI-T6 0.25 0.25 0.31 0.17 0.25
111

Item Crew National
SHOWER UNITS
32 Shower tray in white enamelled
steel size No SI-T6 0.13 1.75 0.72 0.28 1.42 0.29 0.76
33 Shower tray in precast terrazzo
size No SI-T6 0.13 1.75 0.72 0.31 1.42 0.29 0.77
SINKS
34 Steel sink single bowl, size No SI-T1 0.19 0.38 0.13 0.33 0.29 0.29 0.27
35 Steel sink single bowl, size No SI-T1 0.19 0.38 0.13 0.33 0.29 0.29 0.27
36 Steel sink double bowl, size No SI-T1 0.19 0.38 0.13 0.33 0.29 0.29 0.27
37 Steel sink double bowl, size No SI-T1 0.19 0.38 0.13 0.33 0.29 0.29 0.27
38 Stainless steel sink single bowl, size No SI-T1 0.19 0.38 0.13 0.33 0.29 0.29 0.27
39 Stainless steel sink single bowl, size No SI-T1 0.19 0.38 0.13 0.33 0.29 0.29 0.27
40 Stainless steel sink double bowl double drain, size No SI-T1 0.19 0.38 0.13 0.33 0.29 0.29 0.27
41 Stainless steel sink double bowl double drain, size No SI-T1 0.19 0.38 0.13 0.33 0.29 0.29 0.27
42 White glazed fire clay sink, size No SI-T1 0.19 0.38 0.13 0.25 0.29 0.29 0.25
OTHER ACCESSORIES
43 Toilet roll chromium plated No SI-T1 1.00 2.08 1.29 2.22 3.33 1.19 1.85
44 Toilet roll, white vitreous china No SI-T1 1.00 2.08 1.29 2.22 3.33 1.19 1.85
45 Soap dish, chromium plated No SI-T1 1.00 2.08 1.29 2.34 3.33 1.19 1.87
46 Soap dish, white vitreous china No SI-T1 1.00 2.08 1.29 2.09 3.33 1.19 1.83
47 Towel rail No SI-T1 1.00 1.50 1.29 2.09 2.58 1.19 1.61
48 Towel hooks No SI-T1 1.00 1.50 1.29 2.09 2.58 1.19 1.61
112

Item Crew National
49 Shower curtain track M SI-T1 1.50 1.50 1.29 2.09 1.71 0.48 1.43
50 Plastic shower curtain, 1800 high M SI-T1 1.50 1.50 1.29 2.09 1.46 1.03 1.48
51 Enamelled steel grated floor drain No SI-T1 0.75 1.50 1.13 2.09 1.46 1.19 1.35
52 Precast concrete trough No SI-T1 0.19 0.58 1.13 2.09 0.54 1.19 0.95
53 Precast terrazzo janitor sink No SI-T1 0.19 0.13 0.21 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.15
VALVES
63 Diameter No SI-T7 1.00 1.33 0.72 2.09 2.13 1.55 1.47
64 Diameter No SI-T7 1.00 1.33 0.72 1.50 2.13 1.70 1.40
15. ELECTRICAL INSTALLATION
UNDERGROUND CABLE DUCTS
PRECAST CONCRETE PIPES

01 100mm diameter M 5.00 2.13 1.00 2.71
02 120mm diameter M 5.00 2.13 1.00 2.71
03 200mm diameter M 5.00 2.13 1.00 2.71
GALVANIZED STEEL PIPES

04 15 mm M 5.17 2.00 3.58
05 20 mm M 5.17 2.00 3.58
DISTRIBUTION BOARDS
113

Item Crew National
09 Main distribution board No ELI-U2 1.88 0.05 0.06 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.39
10 Sub main distribution board No ELI-U2 1.88 0.11 0.13 0.25 0.15 0.19 0.45
11 Terminal covers No ELI-U2 1.88 1.88
PVC CABLES
Power Cables (PVC sheeted & PVC insulated)
4.01
12 4x1.5sqmm Cable M 4.50 5.38 4.88 1.30
Feeder Cables (PVC sheeted & PVC insulated)
2.90
13 4x2.5sqmm Cable M 4.50 1.30
LIGHT, POWER AND SOCKET OUTLETS
LIGHT, POINTS IN THERMO-PLASTIC CONDUITS

14 For recessed installation No ELI-UI 2.75 2.04 1.50 3.00 1.38 0.88 1.92
15 For surface installation No ELI-UI 2.75 2.04 1.50 3.00 1.38 0.88 1.92
16 For surface installation, in steel conduits No ELI-UI 2.75 2.04 1.50 3.00 1.38 0.88 1.92
17 Switch point, for recessed installation No ELI-UI 2.75 2.04 2.03 3.00 3.08 2.91 2.64
18 Switch point, for surface installation No ELI-UI 2.75 2.29 2.03 3.00 3.08 2.91 2.68
19 Switch point for surface installation, in steel conduit No ELI-UI 2.75 2.29 2.03 3.00 3.08 2.91 2.68
SOCKET OUTLETS
21 For surface installation, with steel conduits No ELI-UI 2.75 1.00 1.34 2.25 1.46 0.81 1.60
BELL POINTS
114

Item Crew National
FAN OUTLETS
POWER OUTLETS
28 For recessed installation No ELI-UI 2.42 0.50 1.41 0.50 1.00 1.16
29 For surface installation No ELI-UI 2.42 0.50 1.41 0.50 1.00 1.16
30 For surface installation, with steel conduits No ELI-UI 2.42 0.50 1.41 0.50 1.00 1.16
TELEPHONE OUTLETS
31 Diameter 19mm No ELI-UI 1.29 1.06 1.47 0.50 1.08
32 Diameter 21mm No ELI-UI 1.29 1.06 1.47 0.50 1.08
TELEVISION ANTENNA OUTLETS

33 For recessed installation No ELI-UI 1.29 1.00 1.09 0.50 1.08 0.99
34 For surface installation No ELI-UI 1.29 1.00 1.09 0.50 0.97
35 For surface installation, with steel conduits No ELI-UI 1.29 1.09 0.50 0.96
FIXTURES
115

Item Crew National
BELL SYSTEMS
36 For recessed installation No ELI-U3 6.25 2.13 0.63 0.63 0.81 2.09
37 For surface installation No ELI-U3 6.25 2.13 0.63 0.63 0.81 2.09
FANS
CEILING MOUNTED
38 Type No 6.25 1.00 1.00 2.75
AIR CONDITIONERS
WALL MOUNTED
Type, split; Sector: commercial; Function: reversible;
39 Heat output. Min.: 6,100 BTU/h. Max.: 37,000 BTU/h. No 0.25 0.25
Cooling
LIGHT FIXTURES
40 Light detection fixtures No ELI-U3 1.34 0.50 1.54 3.25 1.66
2.05
41 Ceiling Fixtures No ELI-U3 1.34 3.25 1.54
42 Fluorescent Lights No ELI-U3 1.34 1.54 1.44
1.44
43 Recessed Lights No ELI-U3 1.34 1.54
SUNDRY ITEMS
POLES
116

Item Crew National
44 Impregnated wooden poles, height
45 Galvanized steel poles, height
CONDUCTORS
46 Bare copper M ELI-U4 21.88 2.30 1.38 3.44 1.88 6.17
47 Insulated copper M ELI-U4 21.88 1.38 3.44 1.88 7.14
48 Lightning terminal No ELI-U4 1.25 0.50 0.13 0.63
49 Test point junction box No ELI-U4 1.25 3.00 2.13
50 Earthling plate No ELI-U4 1.25 0.38 0.13 0.58
51 Earthling road No ELI-U4 1.25 0.38 0.19 0.60
52 Photo electric cell No ELI-U4 1.25 1.25
117
4.5 Base Development
A database is developed to manage regional and national labor and equipment utilization factor
and productivity norms. The interface of the database is shown below.
Figure 18. Interface of Software
118
5. CHALLENGES OF THE PROJECT
The major challenges of the project team members to develop this manual are listed below.
i. Contractors’ poor output data recording experience
ii. Unwillingness of contractors’ to give data
iii. The country’s political instability and Election
119
6. REFERENCE
Amanuel, M. 2016. A Study on Factors Affecting Labour Productivity on Building

Construction Projects in Addis Ababa, Addis Ababa institute of Technology, AAU,
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Ayalew,T. Dakhili,Z. Lafhaj, Z. 2016. Assessment on performance and challenges of
Ethiopian construction industry, Journal of Architecture and Civil Engineering,
Volume 2, Issue 11, pp. 01-11.
Bergman, B. & Klefsjö, B., 2010. Quality from Customer Needs to Customer Satisfaction.
3rd ed. Lund: Student literature AB.
Bryman, A. & Bell, E., 2016. Social research methods. 5ed. New York: Oxford University
Press.
Building Construction Output Norms in Ethiopia, ECPN-3, Ministry of Works and Urban
Development (MoWUD), Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 1995.
Building Construction Output Norms in Ethiopia, ECPN-5, Ministry of Works and Urban
Development (MoWUD), Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 1999.
Construction Industry Institute (CII). 2011. Productivity Benchmarking Summary Report.
(Implementation Resource 252-2d). University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA.
Construction Industry Institute (CII). 2013. The construction productivity handbook.
(Implementation Resource 252-2d). Edited by Jacqueline Thomas. University of
Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA.
C.O. Seung, and K.S. Sunil, "Construction equipment hourly production estimation
using artificial neural network model", Construction Management and Economics,
vol. 24, pp. 1029-1044, December 2006.
Chia, Fah Choy and Skitmore, Martin and Runeson, Goran and Bridge, Adrian,
2010.International comparisons of Malaysian construction labour productivity. In:
Full Paper Proceedings: CIB 2010 World Congress, 10-13
David W. Halligan, Laura A. Demsetz, James D. Brown, Clark B. Pace, Action-response
model and loss of productivity in construction, Journal of Construction Engineering
and Management, ASCE 120 (1) (1994) 47–64.
David Stiedl, (1998). Productivity Norms for labor based construction, Nairobi, Kenya
Jarkas, A. M. (2012). Influence of buildability factors on rebar installation: Labor 97
productivity of columns. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 138,
258-267. doi:10.1061/(ACSE)CO.1943-7862.0000425.
120
Jarkas, A. M., & Haupt, T. C. (2015). Major construction risk factors considered by general
contractors in Qatar. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, 13, 165-194.
doi:10.1108/JEDT-03-2014-0012.
Jarkas, A. M., Kadri, C. Y., & Younes, J. H. (2014). A survey of factors influencing the
productivity of construction operatives in the State of Qatar. International Journal of
Construction Management, 12(3), 1-23. doi:10.1080/15623599.2012.10773192.
John K.Hollmann and Rashmi Prada, (2014). Establishsing Labor Productivity Norms,
AACE International Report.
Huff, A. S., 2009. Designing Research for Publication. California: SAGE Publications.
Hwang, B., & Soh, C. K. (2013). Trade-level productivity measurement: Critical challenges
and solutions. Journal of Construction Engineering & Management, 139(11), 1-11.
doi:10.1061/(ACSE)CO.1943-7862.0000761.
Mengistu, M. Quezon, E. Kebede, G. 2016. Assessment of Factors Affecting Labor

Productivity on Road Construction Projects in Oromia Region, Bale Zone
InternationalJournal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 7, Issue 11, 899
ISSN 2229-5518
Ministry of Urban Development and Construction (MoUDC). 2012. Construction
industrypolicy (First Draft), Ethiopia.
Moselhi, O., & Khan, Z. (2012). Significance ranking of parameters impacting construction
labor productivity. Construction Innovation, 12, 272-296.
doi:10.1108/14714171211244541.
Martin S.S Van Vliex, (2011). DACE Labor Productivity Norms –The New Gulf Coast.
Mukori Samuel: (2013) Property Management in the public sector has specific
characteristics which differentiates it from the private sector: evidence from an
analysis of the South African market, Faculty of Engineering and the Built
Environment.
Merriam, S. B., 2009. Qualitative Research - A guide to design and Implementation. 2 ed.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Winston W. Royce (1970). "Managing the Development of Large Software Systems" in
Technical Papers of Western Electronic Show and Convention (WesCon) August 25–
28, 1970, Los Angeles, USA.
Nair, (1994). Purchasing and Materials Management, viks publishing house PVT LTD New
Delhi.
R.M.W. Horner, B.T. Talhouni, Effects of Accelerated Working, Delays and Disruption on
Labor Productivity, The Chartered Institute of Building, 1998, pp. 1–37.
121
Randolph H. Thomas, Principles of Construction Labor Productivity Measurement and

Processing, Report Number PTI 2K14, Pennsylvania Transportation Institute, The
Pennsylvania State University, Transportation Research Building, March, 2000, pp. 1–
54.
Ruch, W.A., and J.C. Hershauer. 1974. Factors Affecting Worker Productivity. Tempe:
Arizona State University.
Randolph H. Thomas, William F. Maloney, R. Malcolm, W. Horner, Gray R. Smith, Vir
K. Handa, Steve R. Sanders, Modeling construction labor productivity, Journal of
Construction Engineering and Management, ASCE 116 (4) (1990) 705–726.
Too, E. G., & Weaver, P. (2014). The management of project management: A conceptual
framework for project governance. International Journal of Project Management,
32, 1382-1394. doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2013.07.006
Voss, C., Tsikriktsis, N. & Frohlinch, M., 2002. Case Research in Operations Management.
International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 22(2), pp. 195-219.
Yin, R. K., 2014. Case Study Research - Design and Methods. 5th ed. Los Angeles: SAGE
Publications.
Yi, W., & Chan, A. P. C. (2014). Critical review of labor productivity research in
construction journals. Journal of Management in Engineering, 30, 214-225.
doi:10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000
122
123

Labor and Eq UF and Productivity Norms Final Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Labor and Eq UF and Productivity Norms Final Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Labor and Eq UF and Productivity Norms Final Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Bahir Dar University

Bahir Dar Institute of Technology

Ethiopian Construction Authority

Final Study Report

‘’Preparation of Standard Manuals for Labour and

Procurement Ref No: CWRA/LB/12/2013

4.4 Labor and Equipment Productivity Norm of Building Construction ........................ 56

Table 1. Summary of construction labour productivity in real (PPP-converted) international

Figure 1: Methodology Flow Chart ...................................................................................................... 23

1.1.1 Project Performance

1.1.2 Project Success

1.1.3 Cost Overrun

1.1.4 Causes of Cost Overrun

1.2 Objective of Study

The major objectives of this study are to:-

1.3 Scope of study

2. PRODUCTIVITY IN CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY

their performance and have higher levels of successful project completion.

a. Actual crew size,

b. The labour time utilization of the crew,

c. Skill of tradesmen or equipment operators,

d. Degree of motivation and incentive schemes,

e. Working condition such as site layout and access for workmen,

a. Difference in wages and motivation payments in different companies,

b. Local and regional skill,

c. Shortage of construction material and tools, and

Therefore, at this moment it is very important to upgrade/update these national norms to

2.4 Construction labour productivity measurement

Thomas et al.(1990), defined different aspects of measures as follows:

During this methods of productivity determination techniques, design professionals use

𝑬𝒔𝒕𝒊𝒎𝒂𝒕𝒆𝒅 𝑼𝒏𝒊𝒕 𝑹𝒂𝒕𝒆

principally meal breaks and weather.

D. The baseline productivity

𝐃𝐚𝐢𝐥𝐲 𝐂𝐫𝐞𝐰 𝐋𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐫 𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐬

2.6 Factors Affecting Labor and Equipment Productivity

According to John K. Hollmann et al. (2014) reports, Job-site productivity is influenced by

Gr. No. Group Factor

Table 3. Factors affecting equipment productivity in construction projects based on the

Gr. No Group Name Factor

2.7 Methods of Measuring Labour and Equipment Productivity

a) Activity sampling technique.

I. RS (Read Business) Means Method

II. CII ( Construction Industry Institute) Method

III. Productivity Index Method

II. CII Method

III. Productivity Index Method

3. METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY

Background of Study and Reviewing Literature

Reviewing current manuals, Issue Identifications (Factors)

Utilization Factor for

Survey and Data Collection

Data Analysis using RII

Conclusion and Recommendation

Prepare user manual based Develop an application Software

Deliver Training for the end user

Figure 1: Methodology Flow Chart

3.1 Data Collection

3.1.1 Document Review

Figure 2: Data Collection Tools to be used