Efficiency: Doing Things Right…and Doing the Right Things

Most days, our team is working on efficiency analyses in one form or another-that’s our gig: measuring and improving operational efficiency at waste facilities.

So we spend lots of time evaluating field activities-focusing specifically on those repetitive processes that represent most of the work …and most of the money. For landfills, that means Push, Pack and Cover. For transfer stations, it’s Payload, Cycle Time, and Material Flow. And for recycling facilities such as MRFs and compost operations, it’s always…always about Cost versus Material Handling-don’t touch it more than you have to!

Sure, there are other considerations, things such as machine owning-and-operating costs, production rates, market development, traffic flow, and labor. But in the end, the most significant improvements always come about through streamlining those repetitive processes.

In doing those evaluations, we perform an array of analyses along the lines of Six Sigma, Lean, and Value Stream Mapping. And through it all, there are some key lessons to be learned in regard to efficiency.

We’ll talk about some of those lessons in just a moment, but I want to begin by confronting a couple of commonly held beliefs …and in doing so, explain what efficiency is not.

It’s Not Busy-ness
Efficiency does not necessarily occur when every machine is busy-which for many facilities is simply Busyness-as-Usual. Three hard-working loaders at the transfer station when the workload only requires one, is not efficient-it’s just busy.

It’s Not Last Year’s Budget
Efficiency is not always a given when the budget balances at the end of the year. Many budgets are developed by looking at how much was spent last year…and then assuming that next year will cost the same amount…and maybe throw in an another $100,000 for good measure! This re-run approach to budgeting assumes that we’ll do the same thing we did last year…without any consideration as to whether or not we were efficient last year.  A much more accurate budget will result from evaluating the actual workload and then developing a budget based on real production rates and true resource requirements.

True efficiency happens when a team is doing things right…and doing the right things.

One of the key lessons we’ve learned is to get past first impressions and dig deep. After working on hundreds of these projects, I’m still fooled-occasionally-by the sheer magnitude of busy-ness that can occur at some waste facilities. This phenomenon is a typical catch-22. Busy-ness is often the result of a high work ethic, where individuals, and often the entire crew, will find things to do (i.e., to keep busy) even when no action is necessary.

One classic example is wheel-loader activity at a greenwaste compost operation. Granted, there is a minimum quantity of (wheel-loader) work required-with the workload being directly related to the volume of material processed. And though it’s not a true linear relationship, the workload will increase as inbound tonnage increases, until an individual loader is fully utilized.

However, it is rare for a machine to be fully utilized, because in most cases, once a machine approaches that point, another machine is added-for backup and to help during those occasional hectic periods. This then provides two machines that are not (should not) be fully utilized.

Now enter the human factor. When an equipment operator is assigned to a specific machine, the first work that gets done is that which has to be done. These “gotta-happen” activities include clearing the tipping area, feeding the grinder, etc. But once the necessities are taken care of, most operators will look around for something else to do. They will “keep busy.” This is a result of most individuals having a strong work ethic, whereby they choose to do something rather than do nothing.

The resulting problem is that too many managers will interpret this busy-ness as efficiency…and jump to the conclusion that if the current machines are busy-and appear to be fully utilized-then maybe we don’t have enough machines. Let’s get another loader!

To avoid getting into this chasing-your-tail cycle, managers must step back and consider the quantity of work required and not just focus on how busy the crew is.

One quick method for determining the level of true efficiency versus busy-ness is to look at individual machines, or groups of machines, and then ask: “Could the existing machine(s) handle additional work?”  If the answer is, “Yes,” then clearly the machine(s) are not working to their full potential…and so don’t need to work full time.  Here is a typical example.

Say your landfill receives 250 tons of trash per day, and a D7 is used to push it from the tipping pad to the active face. By reviewing fuel records and through simple observation, you determine that the dozer is logging eight hours per day and always appears to be “busy.”  However, a friend of yours-the manager of another landfill-also utilizes a similar D7 dozer that also works eight hours per day…and his machine also appears to be “busy” all the time. Same machine, same utilization. The only difference is that his landfill receives 450 tons of waste per day.

In this comparison-assuming all other things being equal-your dozer may be just as busy but considerably less efficient.

For a high-level look at how your operation ranks, compare it to the operation of other facilities, paying special attention to workload (i.e., tons per day) versus machine hours. Because, remember, comparing current performance to historical performance does not provide the perspective needed to truly increase efficiency.

Okay, this high-level comparison has identified that your dozer is not as efficient as it could be.  It’s a relative evaluation based on comparison to another, similar landfill.  But in order to determine peak efficiency at your landfill, you need an absolute evaluation.

This requires that you dig even deeper.  There are several ways to do this.

One way is to actually conduct a productivity analysis, determine the machine’s maximum sustainable production rate, and then apply it to the workload (i.e., the inbound tonnage). This will define the minimum (ideal) machine utilization required each day. Such an analysis might begin with measuring the average duration of a single task-say, pushing a load, (See Figure 3.)

Another way is to perform some type of activity sampling. This is a method of identifying the specific activities of a machine, person, or process. Expressed here as a pie chart, the results of activity sampling give a clear, concise image of useful work (green) versus busy-ness (red).

Efficiency is a common goal-but rarely achieved, because it requires a bit of science and persistence. But once you understand how measure it and achieve it, you’ll wonder why you waited so long to get started.