1. Integrity  Service  Excellence On Work Measurement Relevance in the 21 st Century Mr. Joe Crance HQ AFMC/A1MR May 2010 Joseph.Crance@wpafb.af.mil Air Force Materiel Command

2. Purpose To explain the importance of work measurement and its use within the US Air Force (USAF) Management Engineering Program (MEP)

3. Overview Why Work Measurement? Opportunities and Challenges with Work Measurement The USAF Management Engineering Program (MEP) –History and Executive Agent –Guidance and Goals –Traditional Versus Non-Traditional Approaches –Tools and Techniques Conclusion

4. Disclaimer 4 The mention (written or verbal) of any commercial software in this presentation does not constitute official endorsement by the US Government, the USAF, or any of its subordinate units

5. Why Work Measurement? Skills and mastery of performing work measurement as relevant now as when Frederick Taylor first began the age of modern work measurement (1885, Midvale Steel Corporation) Context: work measurement establishes the workload content of the most efficient method to perform a given task –Determining the most efficient /safe/ergonomic method possible is always the primary goal of any study of workload content –Thus, work measurement is subordinate and subsequent to solid methods engineering Work measurement provides key information for: –Establishing labor standards (i.e., total manpower required) –Product costing –Production and Inventory Control (work scheduling and line balancing) –Data for discrete event simulation modeling 5

6. Why Work Measurement? A global economy has also created global competition Although many factors come into play with product placement (e.g., product quality, features, governmental regulation, etc.), the most efficient processes, and truly knowing the workload content, is clearly a competitive advantage The “dirty little secret” per Mr. Larry Aft’s article in Industrial Engineer (March 2010) issue on work measurement: many academic Industrial Engineering programs have dropped courses dedicated to work measurement (!) 6

7. The USAF MEP History and Executive Agent The objective of the Management Improvement Program is to obtain the most effective Air Force possible with the resources made available. Emphasis is placed upon achieving improved quality, economy, and efficiency whenever such results will in fact increase the overall effectiveness of the Air Force. —Air Force Regulation 25-2, 6 October 1953 7

8. The USAF MEP History and Executive Agent Genesis of the USAF MEP can be traced back prior to the official birth of the USAF (1947)—back to U.S. Army Air Corps! 1970s and 1980s—USAF MEP recognized twice by Congress as best in government –Since then, the USAF MEP has lost some of its prominence—however, current goals are to return AF MEP to former capability and more (!) USAF employs Management Analysts (i.e., Manpower and Personnel Officers) and Industrial Engineers Manpower Officers specifically dedicated to determining manpower requirements for functions across the USAF The AF Manpower Agency (AFMA--Randolph Air Force Base, TX) is the executive agent for the AF MEP –Establishes AF MEP policy –Creates and posts (publishes) USAF-wide manpower standards 8

9. The USAF MEP History and Executive Agent (cont’d) AFMA employs five Manpower Requirements Squadrons (MRSs) and an additional operating location –1 MRS: Randolph AFB, TX (San Antonio) –2 MRS: NASA Langley, VA (Hampton) –3 MRS: Scott AFB IL (St Louis) –4 MRS: Buckley AFB, WY* (Cheyenne) –5 MRS: Tinker AFB, OK (Oklahoma City) –Operating location: Germany (Pending) –7 th Manpower Requirements Flight (San Antonio) Each Major Command (MAJCOM) and installation also employs Manpower personnel to review and develop manpower (labor) standards AF Materiel Command (AFMC) also has industrial engineering/technician staffs at its depots

10. The USAF MEP History and Executive Agent (cont’d) HQ AFMA Randolph AFB, TX 1 MRS Randolph AFB, TX 4 MRS Denver, CO 2 MRS NASA - Langley, VA 3 MRS Scott AFB, IL 5 MRS Tinker AFB, OK OL

11. The USAF MEP Guidance and Goals Guidance for the USAF MEP driven by AF Manual 38-255, Air Force Management Engineering Program, covering such topics as: –Chapter 2: Manpower Standard Development –Chapter 7: Work Measurement Concepts –Chapter 8: Operational Audit (Non-engineered work measurement approaches) –Chapter 9: Work Sampling –Chapter 10: Time Study –Chapter 13: Queuing Analysis –Chapter 14: Predetermined Time Study Systems and Standard Data –Chapter 17: Lead Team Analysis –Chapter 18: Descriptive Statistics and Statistical Process Control –Chapter 19: Process Flowcharting –Chapter 26: Manpower Model Development Using Correlation & Regression Analysis

12. The USAF MEP Traditional and Non-Traditional Approaches Traditional Standard Program R&D Industrial Repeatable Management Traditional work measurement “Out of the Box” Time Study Work Sampling Operational Qualitative Predetermined Audit Modeling Time Study

13. The USAF MEP Tools and Techniques—Process Mapping A clear understanding of work measurement plays a pivotal role in process mapping!

14. The USAF MEP Tools and Techniques—Discrete Event Simulation Discrete simulation modeling benefits from (accurate!) work measurement data!

15. The USAF MEP Tools and Techniques—Equation Development Due to many large operating locations, the AF MEP attempts to create universal manpower models for ease of application and planning purposes Correlation and regression analysis often used to quantify the relationship between required manpower and key workload factors The ultimate accuracy of these equations is based on the underpinning work measurement data used to create them!

16. Conclusion A solid understanding of work measurement approaches key to understanding the process Understanding workload content through solid work measurement is a competitive advantage Although always subordinate to methods engineering, solid work measurement provides the foundational data for product costing, production control, and discrete event simulation The USAF, through the AF MEP, employs a variety of tools and techniques to determine manpower and create manpower models

17. Back Up Slides 17

18. References AFMAN 38-255 (DRAFT), Air Force Management Engineering Program “Don’t Abandon Your Work Measurement Cap” by Mr. Larry Aft, Industrial Engineer, March 2010 Methods, Standards, and Work Design, 11 th ed., by Mr. Benjamin Niebel and Andris Freivalds (McGraw-Hill, St. Louis) 2003 pp. 747 “If The Air Force Knew What It Already Knows About Management Improvement: Implications For Manpower And Quality Management” by Brian S. Norman, Major, USAF (Air Command and Staff College, Maxwell AFB, Alabama) 1998 18

19. Disclaimer 19 The mention (written or verbal) of any commercial software in this presentation does not constitute official endorsement by the US Government, the USAF, or any of its subordinate units