Toolbox Talk Series Recap – Using a Measured Mile Analysis to Compare Productivity on a Construction Project

In the October 26, 2023 edition of Division 1’s Toolbox Talk Series, Andrew Vicknair and David Ponte gave an informative presentation on measuring productivity loss on construction projects. Specifically, they covered the factors that lead to productivity loss, the various options available to calculate productivity loss, and when a measured mile approach can be used. 

As covered by Vicknair’s slides from the presentation, factors leading to productivity loss on construction projects include:

• Schedule Compression
• Multiple contractors working in same space
• Defective Design
• Change Orders
• Out of Sequence Work
• Changes in crew size
• Poor workmanship
• Excessive overtime
• FM events
• Scheduling issues
• Weather – not enough to stop work, but enough to slow progress

When a construction project incurs any of the above impacts, a claim for production loss needs support from a quantitative analysis. Ponte described how a measured mile analysis, if possible, is the “gold standard.” A measured mile analysis is a comparison of production in an unimpacted period to the productivity in an impacted period. The primary requirement for a measured mile approach is the existence of an unimpacted period of time to establish a baseline productivity for the given construction project. Ponte explained how there is typically a learning curve in the initial work performed, regardless of how typical the work is or how experienced the workers. In the initial days, weeks, or even months of a project, productivity increases until it reaches a plateau. The unimpacted period needs to be sufficiently large to get beyond the learning curve and reach the plateau in order to be representative.

In addition to the duration of the unimpacted period, a measured mile analysis also requires adequate documentation to establish productivity. Vicknair and Ponte highlighted records showing labor hours in specific areas with specific quantities as a prerequisite to allow the analyst to determine how much time was spent and how much production was achieved in each area for each day.

In Ponte’s experience, a measured mile analysis is not possible the majority of the time. Smaller subcontractors and general contractors often do not keep sufficient records and might not realize they have been impacted until it is too late. In these cases, alternatives included a Total Cost approach or a Modified Total Cost approach. In a Total Cost approach, which courts frown upon, the claimant compares the total cost of the work performed to the estimated cost of the same. A Modified Total Cost approach has the same starting point as a Total Cost approach, but makes adjustments for underbidding, other bid corrections, change orders, and other factors impacting productivity. For either approach, courts generally require, among other things, that a party establish that a measured mile could not be used, that the estimated cost (often the bid) was reasonable, and that the costs incurred were reasonable.

Thank you to Vicknair and Ponte for the valuable information on measuring productivity loss. 

Click here to view the discussion in its entirety.  

---

Author Douglas J. Mackin is a construction attorney with Cozen O’Connor in Boston, Massachusetts. Douglas counsels owners, developers, contractors, and subcontractors in all phases of a construction project, from contract negotiation through to completion, including disputes, litigation and arbitration. Douglas can be contacted at dmackin@cozen.com.