Final Sept Redacted

FACTORS AFFECTING EMPLOYEE
PRODUCTIVITY IN THE UAE

CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY
NABIL AILABOUNI
A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the

requirements of the University of Brighton for the
degree of Doctor of Philosophy
September 2010
School of Environment and Technology

University of Brighton
Factors Affecting Productivity in the UAE Construction Industry, Nabil Ailabouni, 2010
ABSTRACT
Reliable productivity rates for construction trades are essential for contractors to
accurately estimate the time and cost of construction projects. These rates vary
considerably based on the complexity of the structure, project site constraints, and
other technical, managerial, social and cultural factors. Predicting the effect of these
factors will enhance the ability of the contractor to optimally utilize resources. This
research therefore aims to evaluate the most significant factors that affect productivity
of key construction activities namely: excavation, formwork, reinforcement,
concreting, blockwork, plastering and tiling. The research focuses on the construction
industry in the UAE (United Arab Emirates).
Literature review of the classical management theories and contemporary works on
construction productivity led to the identification of four generic factors affecting
productivity: Environmental, Organizational, Group Dynamics and Individual
Factors. Three questionnaire surveys were undertaken to identify the most significant
factors and the magnitude of their effect on productivity. The first survey identified the
most significant factors after ranking them according to a severity index. The other
two surveys identified the magnitude of the effect of these factors on productivity.
The research used Chi Square Test for Significance, which identified - Work Timings,
Control by Supervision, Group Dynamics, Control by Procedures, Climatic Conditions
and Material Availability as the most significant factors affecting productivity. Six
sites were selected for data collection for productivity rates of the key construction
activities. The significant factors were varied at three ordinal levels that afforded
practical variations at site. The increase or decrease in productivity obtained was
compared to the actual site average productivity and then subjected to regression
analysis using MINITAB 15 – Statistical Software. This resulted in the development
of a regression model for each of the seven key construction activities.
Four other construction sites were selected and used for validation of the developed
models. The developed models have been used to evaluate the variability in
productivity of construction activities and to predict the percentage change in
productivity of the selected activities when the underlying variables are varied.
Review of the coefficients of the factors in the individual regression models afforded
insight into those that most affect productivity of the selected construction activities.
This intelligent information can help site management to create favourable conditions
on site aimed at enhancing productivity rates and therefore optimal utilization of
resources.
***
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
No Description Page No.

ABSTRACT……………………………………………………………………… ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS…………………………………………………………. iii
1 RESEARCH INTRODUCTION………………………….…………….. 1
1.0 Chapter 1 – Introduction……………………………………………. 2
1.1 Need for Research …………….……………………………………. 3
1.1.1 Gap in Knowledge…………………………………………………........ 4
1.2 Research Aim……………………………………………………….. 9
1.2.1 Research Objectives………………………………………………… 9
1.3 Scope of Research …………………………………………………. 9
1.3.1 Definition of Productivity………………………………………………… 10
1.4 Brief Outline of Research ….………………………………… 12
1.4.1 Review of Existing Literature and Publications………………………. 15
1.4.2 Data Collection: Survey for Significant Factors……………………… 16
1.4.3 Data Collection: Surveys for Effect of Significant Factors…………. 17
1.4.4 Data Collection: Statistical Tests for Significance using Chi Square 18
1.4.5 Field Data Collection………………………………………………………. 18
1.4.6 Homogenization of Data…………………………………………………… 20
1.4.7 Regression Analysis using MINITAB 15 software……………………… 21
1.4.8 Validation of the Models…………………………………………………... 22
1.4.9 Model Application……..…………………………………………………… 23
1.5 Chapters Summaries ……………………………………………………… 24
1.6 Conclusion……………………………………………………………... 28
2 LITERATURE REVIEW………………………………………………… 30
2.0 Chapter 2 – Introduction…………………………………………….. 31
2.1 Management Theories……………………………………………….. 35
2.1.1 The Classical Approach…………………………………………………. 35
2.1.2 The Human Relations Approach……………………………………….. 37
2.1.3 The Systems Approach…………………………………………………… 38
iii
2.1.4 The Contingency Approach……………………………………………... 39

2.2 Common Factors in Organizations…………………………………... 39
2.3 Theories of Motivation………………………………………………. 41
2.3.1 Early Theories…………………………………………………………….. 43
2.3.2 Modern Theories: Content Theories of Motivation………………….. 44
2.3.3 Modern Theories: Process Theories of Motivation……………......... 49
2.4 Construction Industry Related Productivity Studies…………………. 52
2.4.1 Factors Affecting Productivity (A review of contemporary
publications)………………………………………………………………. 53
2.4.2 Factors Affecting Motivation of Construction Operatives
(A review of contemporary publications)…………………………….. 61
2.5 Background to the UAE Construction Industry ……………………... 71
2.5.1 Economic Characteristics of the UAE Construction Industry……… 71
2.5.2 UAE Labour Market……………………………………………………… 77
2.5.3 Demographic Influence and Cultural Backgrounds………………… 78
2.5.4 Environmental Conditions……………………………………………….. 79
2.5.5 UAE Statutory Laws……………………………………………………… 79
2.5.6 No Trade Unions………………………………………………………….. 80
2.5.7 UAE National Workplace Employment Relations Survey….............. 81
2.6 Factors Affecting Productivity in the UAE Construction Industry…. 84
2.6.1 Environmental Factors…………………………………………………... 87
2.6.2 Organizational Factors………………………………………………….. 89
2.6.3 Group / Team Factors………………………………………………….... 94
2.6.4 Personal Factors…………………………………………………………. 95
2.7 Conclusion ……….…………………………………………………. 97
3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY………………………………………. 99
3.0 Chapter 3 – Introduction………………………………....................... 100
3.1 Outline of Research Methodology…………………………………… 100
3.2 Development of Methodology………………………………………. 102
3.3 Survey Questionnaire Design………………………………………... 104
3.4 Identification of the Significant Factors Affecting Productivity in the
UAE...................................................................................................... 104
iv
3.5 Perception Surveys for the effect on productivity

(Survey No’s 2 & 3)…………………………………………………. 112
3.6 Analysis of the Results of the Perception Surveys (2) and (3)…….. 121
3.7 Chi-Square Test for Significance …………………………………… 122
3.7.1 Chi-Square Test for Significance (Internal Perception Survey)….. 122
3.7.2 Chi-Square Test for Significance (External Perception Survey ….. 123
3.8 Field Data Collection………………………………………………… 127
3.8.1 Case Study Company ……………………………………………………. 127
3.8.2 Field Data Collection ………………………………………….………... 127
3.9 Technical Factors Affecting Productivity…………………………… 133
3.9.1 Type of Projects…………………………………………………………... 134
3.9.2 Technical Nature of the Trades ………………………………………… 134
3.10 Conclusion…………………………………………………………… 137
4 DATA COLLECTION, DATA ANALYSIS AND THE

DEVELOPMENT OF PRODUCTIVITY EVALUATION MODEL... 139
4.1 Productivity Model: Overall Versus Individual Construction Trades … 141
4.2 Data Collection and Analysis………………………………………... 143
4.3 Definition of Statistical Parameters Used…………………………… 147
4.3.1 R2 – Coefficient of Determination ....………………………………….. 147
4.3.2 d – Durbin Watson Statistic ………………….……………..…….……. 147
4.3.3 Alpha (α) – Level of Significance……………………….....…………... 148
4.3.4 p-Value ……………………….………………….………………………. 149
4.4 Model Formulation ………………….………………………………. 149
4.4.1 Homogenization of Field Data………………………………………….. 150
4.4.2 Statistical Modelling Using MINITAB 15 Software…………………. 153
4.5 Regression Models For Productivity of Construction Trades……….. 157
4.5.1 Regression Model for the Excavation Trade…………………………. 158
4.6 Conclusion…………………………………………………………… 180
v
5 MODEL VALIDATION AND EVALUATION OF VARIABILITY

OF PRODUCTIVITY ….……………………………...........................… 182
5.1 Background Considerations…………………………………………. 183
5.2 Sites Used for Model Validation……………………………………. 185
5.3 The Validation of the Model ………………………………………… 186
5.4 Validation Excavation Productivity Model –ARS Site …………….. 191
5.5 Validation Results ……………………….…………………………... 198
5.6 Evaluation of Factors Affecting Productivity……………….………. 201
5.7 Conclusion …………………………………………………………... 205
6 CONCLUSION...............………………………………………………….. 207
6.0 Chapter 6 – Introduction……………………………………………….. 208
6.1 Work Accomplished & Challenges Faced …………………………….. 208
6.1.1 Data Collection Techniques and Accuracy …………………………... 210
6.1.2 Broad Topic of Construction Productivity and Several
Factors in Combination ………………………………………………….. 211
6.1.3 Understanding Technical Issues with Productivity Numbers ………. 212
6.1.4 Short Term Nature of Construction Projects …………………………… 212
6.2 Fulfilment of Research Aim and Objectives …………….…………….. 213
6.3 Practical Utilization of Model …………………………………………. 214
6.4 Possible Improvements in the Model ………………………………….. 216
6.5 Conclusion……………………………………………………………... 220
6.6 Areas for Future Research …………………………………………….. 227
REFERENCES………………………………………………………………………230
BIBLIOGRAPHY………………………………………………………………….. 237
LIST OF APPENDICES…………….................…………………………………. 245

Appendix 1 Master Field Data for Model Formulation ....................... 246 - 263
Appendix 2 Master Field Data for Model Validation ......................... 264 - 285
Appendix 3 Questionnaire Formats Used ............................................ 286 - 294
vi
Appendix 4 Collection of Productivity Modelling Data & Graphs….. 295 - 323

For Excavation, Formwork, Reinforcement, Concreting,
Blockwork, Plastering and Tiling Works
Appendix 5 Collection of Validation Data & Graphs ................................. 324 - 348
Appendix 6 Predicted Productivity for all Possible Combinations
of Factor Levels ................................................................. 349 - 383
Appendix 7 Statistical Tables and Definitions ..................................... 384 - 396
Appendix 8 Project Profiles ................................................................. 397 - 407
***
vii
LIST OF TABLES
CHAPTER 1
Table 1.1 Construction Trades and Productivity Factors
for Field Data Collection…………………………………………. 19
CHAPTER 2
Table 2.1 Factors Affecting Job Satisfaction………….…………………….. 48
Table 2.2 Literature Review Matrix: Collection Of Factors Affecting
Construction Productivity (General) …………………………….. 59
Table 2.3 Motivating Factors in Construction Industry…….……………….. 63
Table 2.4 Motivators and De-Motivators Ranked By Workers in Thailand…. 64
Table 2.5 Differences in Project Characteristics with High/Low Productivity 66
Table 2.6 Literature Review Matrix: Motivating Factors in the Construction
Industry……………..……………………………………………… 68
Table 2.7 Literature Review Matrix: Factors Affecting Construction
Productivity across Countries……………………………………… 70
Table 2.8 Construction Industry Characteristics…………………………...… 76
Table 2.9 2001 UAE National Workplace Employment Relations Survey
Results……………………………………………………………… 83
Table 2.10 Comprehensive List of Factors Affecting Productivity: UAE
Construction Industry……………………………………….……... 86
CHAPTER 3
Table 3.1 Survey(1) Response Reckoner…………………………………….. 105
Table 3.2 Significant Factors Affecting Productivity (First 8 within Groups). 110
Table 3.3 Significant Factors Affecting Productivity in Matrix Form……….. 111
Table 3.4 Significant Factors Affecting Productivity (Fourteen Factors
with Highest Ranks)………………………………………………... 112
Table 3.5 Perception Survey (2) (Internal): Summary Results……………… 114
Table 3.6 Perception Survey (2) (Internal) : Summary Percentages…..…….. 115
Table 3.7 Perception Survey (2) (Internal): Weighted Averages…………… 116
Table 3.8 Perception Survey (3) (External): Summary Results……………… 117
Table 3.9 Perception Survey (3) (External): Summary Percentages………… 118
Table 3.10 Perception Survey (3) (External): Weighted Average Result…….. 119
viii
Table 3.11 Combined Analysis % Wise – Perception Surveys (2) & (3) ……... 120
Table 3.12 Chi-square Computations: Survey Data – Productivity Factors
And Their Effects – Internal Survey……………………………... 124
Table 3.13 Chi-square Computations: Survey Data – Productivity Factors and
their Effects – External Survey…………………………….............. 125
Table 3.14 Field Variables Using Weighted Averages from Survey 2 & 3…… 126
Table 3.15 Sample Sites and Activities under Study for Productivity……….. 129
Table 3.16 Range Of Productivity Values – Trade Wise / Site Wise……….. 132
Table 3.17 Factor Levels Used For Data Collection…………………………. 133
CHAPTER 4
Table 4.1 Brief Profile of Construction Projects Used For Field Data
Collection…………………………………………………………. 144
Table 4.2 Summary of Data Collected and Used For Formulating Model… 146
Table 4.3a Excel Sheet Used For Model Formulation – Excavation………… 159
Table 4.3b Regression Models – Iteration Summary for Excavation………… 170
Table 4.4 Final Regression Models…………………………………………... 173
Table 4.5 Major Productivity Contributing Factors…………………………. 174
Table 4.6 Extracts from Appendix 5-8a: Excavation
Trade productivity at Various Runs /Levels of Factors………….. 179
CHAPTER 5
Table 5.1 Construction Sites Used For Model Formulation and Validation… 185
Table 5.2 Validation Data for Excavation - ARS Site………………………... 192
Table 5.3 Grand Summary of Validation Data and Results………………….. 200
Table 5.4 Summary of Productivity Models………………………………….. 201
Table 5.5 Major Productivity Contributing Factors per Construction Trade… 202
***
ix
LIST OF FIGURES
CHAPTER 1
Fig. 1.1 Overview of the Research ………………………………………… 14
CHAPTER 2
Fig. 2.1 Organizational Sub- Systems……………………………………… 40
Fig. 2.2 Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs Pyramid…………………………… 45
Fig. 2.3 Factor Model of Construction Labour Productivity………………. 57
Fig. 2.4 General Categories of Factors Affecting Productivity……………. 84
CHAPTER 3
Fig. 3.1 Overview of the Research………………………….. …………….. 101
Fig. 3.2 Snapshot of Survey (1) Questionnaire……………………………. 104
Fig. 3.3 Extract of Survey (1) Results For Sample Computation………….. 107
Fig. 3.4 Questionnaire Design for Survey 2 & 3…………………..………. 113
CHAPTER 4
Fig. 4.1 Snapshot of Excel Sheet for Model Formulation - Excavation
Trade………………………………………………………………. 151
Fig. 4.2 Flow Chart : Homogenization of Field Data……………………… 153
Fig. 4.3 Grab of Minitab 15 Menu- Stat-Regression- Graphs …………….. 155
Fig. 4.4 Flow Chart : Statistical Modelling Using MINITAB 15 Software.. 156
Fig. 4.5a Iteration 1- Excavation Modelling Graphs………………………… 163
Fig. 4.5b Iteration 2- Excavation Modelling Graphs………………………… 165
Fig. 4.5c Iteration 3- Excavation Modelling Graphs………………………… 167
Fig. 4.5d Iteration 4- Excavation Modelling Graphs………………………… 169
Fig. 4.6a Graphical Representation of Factors affecting Excavation ………. 175
Fig. 4.6b Graphical Representation of Factors affecting Formwork …………175
Fig. 4.6c Graphical Representation of Factors affecting Reinforcement …… 176
Fig. 4.6d Graphical Representation of Factors affecting Concreting ……….. 177
Fig. 4.6e Graphical Representation of Factors affecting Blockwork ……….. 177
Fig. 4.6f Graphical Representation of Factors affecting Plastering….……… 178
Fig. 4.6g Graphical Representation of Factors affecting Tiling…….……….. 178
x
CHAPTER 5
Fig. 5.1 Flow Chart Showing Computation of Errors for Validation ……… 186
Fig. 5.2 Flow Chart Showing Computation of Errors for Validation ……… 189
Fig. 5.3a Error Chart For Excavation For The ± 2 Sigma Limits
(For Minitab 15)………………………….........................................195
Fig. 5.3b Error Chart for Excavation For The ± 15% Band
(For Minitab 15)………..…………………………………………...196
Fig. 5.3c Histogram of Errors (For Minitab15)……………………………… 197
Fig. 5.3d Scatter plot (For Minitab 15)………….………................................ 197
Fig. 5.3e Four in One Excavation Validation Graph ………………………... 198
***
xi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I would like to express my gratitude and appreciation to my supervisors - Dr.

Kassim Gidado, Mr. Noel Painting and Dr. Phil Ashton from the University of
Brighton for their patience and support, evaluation and direction and mostly their
encouragement right from the time I set out the research outline to the final
submission.
Then I would thank my partners and employees in Target Engineering

Construction Co. for their help and participation in the surveys, data collection
and positive encouragement throughout the study period. I would also like to
thank the members of my family for their help and support during my study.
***
xii
AUTHORS DECLARATION
I declare that the research contained in this thesis, unless otherwise formally
indicated within the text, is the original work of the author. The thesis has not
been previously submitted to this or any other university for a degree and does
not incorporate any material already submitted for a degree.
Signed _______________________
Nabil Ailabouni
Dated September, 2010
***
xiii
ABBREVIATIONS
ARCOM - Association of Researchers in Construction Management

ERG - Existence, Relatedness and Growth
GCC - Gulf Cooperation Council
GDP - Gross Domestic Product
ILO - International Labour Organization
MOLSA - Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs, UAE
OECD - Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
PASW - Predictive Analytics Software
PPCM - Percentage Productivity as Measured
PPCP - Percentage Productivity as Predicted
SAS - Statistical Analysis Software
SPSS - Statistical Package for Social Sciences
UAE - United Arab Emirates
***
xiv
CHAPTER 1 – RESEARCH INTRODUCTION
1
CHAPTER 1 – RESEARCH INTRODUCTION
1.0 CHAPTER INTRODUCTION
‘Productivity rate’ of construction trades is one of the elements required to

accurately estimate time and costs required for the construction processes.
Projects can be better controlled if the variability in productivity of construction
trades is known, and actions taken to enhance productivity. This research is,
therefore, aimed at identifying and evaluating the factors affecting productivity
of construction trades; developing a construction productivity change model for
predicting changes in productivity as the underlying factors are varied and using
this information to create favourable conditions for enhanced productivity.
This chapter introduces the research title, aim, objectives, and definitions of
productivity while establishing the need for research against the background of
productivity of construction trades and its importance in the construction
industry, with a primary focus on the United Arab Emirates (UAE).
In fulfilment of the research objectives, a literature review was conducted to

determine the factors that affect productivity. Having identified the broad factors
affecting productivity, the most significant factors and quantification of the
magnitude of their effect in productivity rate were identified utilizing a specially
designed questionnaire that was distributed to key players in construction
industry. Field data was collected from six sites of the case study company and
was used to develop the regression models for key construction activities. The
models were validated using data from four other sites of the case study
company.
After a brief discussion on applicability of the models, the chapter concludes with
summaries of each chapter to give the reader a general outline of the research.
2
1.1 NEED FOR RESEARCH
Knowing productivity rates of various trades in the construction industry is

critical for an accurate estimation of the time and cost of a job. An improved
productivity rate helps contractors not only to be more efficient and profitable
during project execution, but also helps them to be more competitive during the
bidding stage of the projects.
The construction industry in the UAE is a multibillion dollar industry,

contributing approximately 8% to the UAE Gross Domestic Product (GDP).
(Reference UAE Yearbook 2009). Until the global economic slowdown affected
the region, the industry was buoyed by high liquidity owing to the high oil prices,
government spending and stable political environment. There is a continued
supply of comparatively cheap labour from the Asian countries. The workforce is
subject to several influences such as - different management styles, language
barriers, customs, separation from families, level of supervision, quality of
accommodation and climate. Such influences have direct impact on productivity
rates.
All contractors within the UAE face similar amount of constraints; same
specifications apply and therefore the bottom line performance of contractors is
influenced by how effective & well planned, the construction methods are, and
whether the construction operatives work at optimal productivity levels or not.
Achieving quantity and quality of results while controlling the inputs is therefore
a key challenge for all contractors. This research therefore is important as the
knowledge of factors affecting productivity will aid supervision staff to ensure
optimal conditions on site; namely ensure favourable factors for achieving
maximum productivity of operatives on their sites. This would help keeping costs
within budget, keep employee morale high and help projects to be completed on
time; help companies run their businesses profitably.
3
1.1.1 Gap in Knowledge
Review of contemporary works on the subject of productivity revealed that the

studies undertaken generally involved one construction trade (for example
masonry by some and bricklaying by others) and or one variable at a time (for
example some studied the effects of only motivation on productivity), some
studied the variables in isolation without interaction between variables and most
were generally qualitative rather than quantitative suggesting trends or
relationship but stood short of quantifying this relation.
The works of contemporary writers is briefly mentioned in this section leading to

the identification of the gap in knowledge.
Herbsman and Ellis (1990) studied the effects of project conditions termed by
them as Construction Influence Factors on the variation of productivity rates for
construction items and described the development of a statistical model that
illustrated quantitative relationships between influence factors and the
productivity rates. However the study was conducted on past records from site
and not freshly collected data. They concentrated on the construction influence
factors classified into technological and administrative factors. These were
project based conditions. Effects of the company wide environment were not
considered.
Further, the influence factors were quantified using three methods: direct, indirect
using alternate indicators (such as labour turnover for measuring motivation) and
quantification using non parametric ranking. The non parametric ranking
involved ranking the elements to a scale of 1 to 10 based on an individual’s
experience, knowledge and judgment. Also the construction industry influence
factors were based on interviews with various participants in the construction
industry, determined by a group of experts and not through questionnaires.
Finally, a stepwise effect of the influence factors was adopted where each of the
factors was introduced in the model one at a time and the resultant R2 – the
4
coefficient of determination - was reviewed for model adequacy. The SAS

(Statistical Analysis Software) software was used for model formulation. The
productivity model they presented contained a regression equation that utilized
the identified influence factors and gave the productivity of the particular
activity. The study however did not contain validation of the models, and it was
only suggested that the models could predict the productivity for that activity in
future projects.
Sanders and Thomas (1991) in their study of the factors affecting masonry labour
productivity identified inadequacies in previous similar studies to accurately
identify the factors. Their methodology involved the data collected from 11
masonry projects between 1986-1988 in central Pennsylvania. Data collection
was standardized in a procedures manual for consistency. Data sets were
converted to equivalent units to take care of different sizes of bricks being laid
and regression analysis was performed to develop models to relate the
productivity to the physical characteristics of the masonry units. Potential factors
identified and used in the models were based on experience, observations and
data reconciliation procedure. The project related factors identified were ‘work
type, building elements, construction methods, and design requirements. Further
analysis of variance was done on each of these factors. The conclusions included
that 30% improvement is expected if the design is repetitive and 40%
improvement could be realized if design is improved. Expected percentage
improvement resulting from each parameter in isolation was suggested; the
combination effect of all the parameters was not studied.
Ogunlana and Chang (1998) studied worker motivation on selected construction

sites in Bangkok, Thailand. Here the data was collected from seven accessible
high rise building construction sites out of the twenty five selected. A two stage
questionnaire was used - the first being a list of needs, while the second one
contained a list of motivators and de-motivators. Further, the needs, motivators
and de-motivators were ranked by workmen as against those by supervisors and
a further cross analysis of the combined needs, motivators and de-motivators was
carried out. The final results showed that the needs of the Thai workers – higher
5
pay, better accommodation, good welfare and safety compared lower to the felt
needs of fringe benefits, good relations and safe sites. It was also proved that the
needs, motivators and de-motivators of the Thai workers and those of Nigeria
were similar. The study suggested that motivation methods need to be adjusted
to the situational effects and the personal traits of the national people. The study
was limited to few factors.
Proverbs et al (1998) did a comparative evaluation of reinforcement fixing

productivity rates amongst the French, German and UK construction contractors.
The productivity rates given by the respective planning engineers formed the
basis of the research. The planning engineers from each of the 31 contractors
from UK, 13 contractors from France, and 10 contractors from Germany were
given a set of project drawings and a questionnaire. Productivity rates of the
erection of formwork, reinforcement fixing and concrete placing were asked for
but the paper focused only on one operation - ‘reinforcement fixing’ for beams,
columns, floor slabs and for the entire project. The study concluded that
significant differences existed between the productivity rates used by French,
German and the UK contractors using coefficients of variation and ranks. No
models were developed. The study presented a comparison of the rate of
productivity for specific construction trades but did not suggest how to change or
improve productivity.
Mohamed and Srinavin (2002) in their study of thermal environment effects on

the construction workers productivity argued that further to air temperature,
relative humidity and wind velocity, additional thermal environment parameters
should be accounted for to enhance the predictive power of forecasting the
construction workers productivity. These factors included the mean radiant
temperature, clothing insulation, and metabolic rate. Amongst the various
techniques used to determine the effect of climatic conditions on workers’
productivity, the multiple regression technique was commonly used. The study
resulted into a regression equation developed from data gathered from literature;
the equations were further validated using correlation analysis. The study was
devoted only to thermal effects on productivity.
6
Chan P (2002) in his study of the factors affecting labour productivity in the UK
construction industry discussed the various aspects affecting productivity through
a series of focus group interviews engaged in the Personal Construct Theory
(PCT). Personal Construct Theory offers the prospect of unlocking the vital
experience of people and breaks down the barrier between researchers and
research subjects. This study comprised a series of semi structured hour long
focus group interviews with construction operatives. The focus group interviews
had three main stages - construct explication, construct review and construct
validation. By engaging in the personal constructs of site management staff, four
key areas were identified as aspects leading to productivity improvements. These
are planning, teamwork, welfare, and job security. The study did bring in human
factors affecting productivity levels but did not magnify their contribution and the
measures to improve them were not discussed.
Kazaz and Ulubeyli (2006) studied the organizational factors influencing

construction manpower productivity in Turkish Construction Industry. Data was
collected using a survey questionnaire with a combination of face to face
interviews, email responses, and telephone interviews. Statistical methods were
used to analyze the data using the Relative Importance Index. A rating scale of 1
to 5 was adopted with 1 being the lowest and 5 being the highest level of effect.
Using significance intervals, the survey results showed the site management,
material management, and systematic flow of work were ranked by participants
as the three most effective organizational factors affecting the productivity. The
study ends with a detailed discussion on all the factors affecting the productivity.
No model to measure the effect of these factors on productivity was introduced.
Aiyetan and Olotouah (2006) studied the impact of motivation on workers’

productivity in the Nigerian Construction Industry. Questionnaires were used in
the research which addressed the relationship between motivation and
performance. No other factors were considered. The study was limited to the
perception survey of the management staff and the operatives. The overall
recommendations included adjusted salary structure, increased welfare, increase
in salary; promotion, overtime and holiday with pay – financial incentives that
7
increased motivation and therefore the productivity. There was no model

formulated and only subjective recommendations were given.
Alinaitwe et al (2007) studied the factors affecting the productivity of building

craftsmen in Uganda. The survey consisted of a questionnaire to Project
Managers from selected buildings sites, where they were asked to rank the 36
factors affecting productivity taking into account effects of time, cost and quality.
The research resulted in identifying the five highest ranked factors as –
incompetent supervisors, lack of skills, rework, lack of tools / equipment and
poor construction methods. No model was proposed to measure the effect of
variability in these factors on the productivity rate. Only a subjective conclusion
was arrived at suggesting that these factors have an important effect on
productivity.
Following a review of the above referred works, a need was therefore felt for a
study involving multiplicity of factors affecting construction trades and
establishing a regression model for accurately predicting changes in productivity
with the aim of increasing the productivity so that time and cost factors are better
controlled in the project; in other words resources are optimally utilized in the
project.
After identifying the broad categories of factors affecting productivity as

Environmental, Organizational, Group Dynamics and Individual Factors, this
research for the first time closed in on six factors affecting productivity over
seven construction trades of excavation, formwork, reinforcement, concreting,
blockwork, plaster and tiling and attempts to quantify the predicted change in
productivity vis-à-vis the change in the factors themselves. These six factors
selected for modeling including - Timings, Supervision, Group Dynamics,
Materials, Procedures and Climate; these being selected based on three surveys
leading to the identification of the most significant factors affecting construction
productivity in the UAE.
8
Similar works involving statistical models giving predicted construction

productivity for changes in factors such as – Work Timings, Level of Supervision,
Group Dynamics, Control by Procedures, Availability of Materials, Climatic
Conditions, were not come across during the literature review. In this context,
this research is thought to be a first of its kind at least in the UAE
1.2 RESEARCH AIM
The aim of this research is to evaluate factors that would affect productivity of
construction trades in order to optimize output.
1.2.1 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
The objectives to fulfill the research aim are:

a) Identify the factors affecting productivity of the construction industry in
the United Arab Emirates.
b) Establish the significance of a selection of construction trades upon the
productivity of the construction industry in UAE
c) Develop a methodology for measuring the factors that affect productivity
of the construction industry in the UAE.
d) Develop a model for predicting changes in productivity.
e) Measure the changes in productivity.
1.3 SCOPE OF RESEARCH
This research has been conducted at construction sites in the UAE as sources of
field data, though the research aim and the findings thereof are of a general
nature.
The construction industry is characterized by multiple site conditions having

significant varying effects on the productivity rates of standard construction
trades. (Herbsman and Ellis, 1990).
9
The literature review provided the basis for classifying the four main categories
of factors affecting productivity; these being - the Environmental Factors, the
Organizational Factors, the Group Factors and the Individual Factors.
Construction trades are subject to a variety of factors that would determine the
productivity of that trade on the day; to study all of these at the same time, would
be complex; therefore the research undertakes three surveys to determine the
significant factors which are more manageable and amenable to study. The most
significant factors taken for further study include the – Work Timings,
Supervision, Group Dynamics, Procedures, Material, and Climate. The reduced
number of factors means the construction industry can concentrate on controlling
them in order to improve the productivity.
These factors are very much relevant to the UAE economy as construction is the
predominant activity driving the economy after oil. The construction operatives
come from diverse background, and the caliber of supervision differs and is based
on nationality, education and experience. Procedures play an important role in
controlling the safe execution of the project and therefore affect productivity as
compliance with procedures would mean safety protection systems in place and
waiting for clearance or approval. The climate factor is obviously relevant, the
UAE having a hot humid climate; and the fact that the construction trades of
excavation, formwork, steel and concreting are out in the open.
1.3.1 Definition of Productivity
Different versions of the definition of productivity exist; some are listed in this
section with discussion leading us to the “definition” accepted for this research.
The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD, 2001)
defines productivity as the ratio of a volume measure of output to a volume
measure of input used.
As per the OECD, the objectives of productivity measurement include:

a) Technology - to trace technological changes improvements
10
b) Efficiency – to check if maximum output that is physically achievable with

current technology , give a fixed amount of inputs
c) Real cost savings – a quest to identify real cost savings in production
d) Benchmarking production processes – comparison of productivity measures
in specific production processes can help to identify inefficiencies.
e) Living Standards – a simple example is per capita income of a country.
According to Sibson (1994), productivity means doing high quality work with
great efficiency. In essence it is some output per man hour. Output must be
saleable and usable and of good quality. Other simple definitions include the
amount of output per unit of input (labour, equipment, and capital).
There are many different ways of measuring productivity. For example, in a

factory, productivity might be measured based on the number of hours it takes to
produce a good, while in the service sector, productivity might be measured
based on the revenue generated by an employee divided by his/her salary.
Productivity measures could be single factor or multi-factor; the choice between
them depends on the purpose of the productivity measurement and in most
instances, on the availability of data. Productivity traditionally, refers to the
quantifiable ratio between outputs and inputs in physical terms. In the
construction industry, the quantitative measure widely used in the UAE
Construction Industry relates to the amount of construction activity for the man
hours that have been put in.
For the purpose of this research, productivity is defined as “the ratio of output of
required quality to the inputs for a specific production situation.” In the
construction industry; it is generally accepted as “work output per man-hours
worked”. This unit is generally used by most contractors in the UAE. It reflects
the measure of manual production which is being studied and also gives an
established factor for comparison over construction trades over time and over
project sites.
11
For example, ‘excavation’ is measured in cubic meters of soil excavated per man
hour and ‘plastering’ is measured in square meters of plaster per man hour.
Excavation and Plastering are manual operations involving a high degree of
manual labour and zero or limited mechanized assistance. This is due to the fact
that cheap labour is available in the country and in some of the projects; hand
excavation is a must because of the presence of live utilities underground.
The above definition takes into account quality and efficiency; however,
effectiveness is not covered by this definition; namely the cost benefit analysis of
the resources employed versus the output achieved is considered outside the
scope of this research.
Every management initiative strives to ensure optimal utilization of resources;

one way to do this is to increase the productivity that is to seek ways and means
to increase output.
Government, politicians, academics and economists all stress the importance of

productivity because it is an indicator of the general economic health of a
country. On the other hand, corporate management is concerned with
productivity because productivity is regarded as a main indicator of efficiency
when comparisons are made with competitors in local and global markets.
1.4 BRIEF OUTLINE OF RESEARCH
The following section briefly explains how the research data was generated,
analyzed and conclusions drawn from this data; the rationale behind the methods
chosen, the anticipated problems and how these were tackled during the research.
According to Fellows and Liu (2003), the critical consideration for selecting a
most appropriate research method is the logic that links the data collection and
analysis to yield results and thus the conclusions. Research designs therefore
must take into account the research questions; determine what data are needed
and how the data will be organized to maximize the chance of the research
12
realizing its objectives. They highlighted Survey, Experiment, Archival Analysis,

History and Case Study as the five research styles.
Research studies in the construction industry are generally conducted through

experiments, surveys or case studies. Experiments for productivity factors in
construction would mean long waiting time for results. Surveys through
questionnaires afforded relative ease of obtaining data for analysis. Random
sampling allows a small number of people to give opinions and characteristics
that can be representative of the general population. Alinaitwe et al (2007).
In section 1.1.1, pg. 3, contemporary works on productivity were outlined briefly

leading to the identification of gap in knowledge and establishing the need for
research. The research methods used by the contemporary authors include non
parametric ranking using face to face interviews, email responses, telephonic
interviews, focus group interviews, expert opinions, use of questionnaires,
followed by statistical analysis including significance testing or subjecting to
multiple regression analysis. Specialist statistical software’s such as SAS, SPSS
were utilized. Obviously, all these were preceded by a detailed literature review
of the relevant topics on productivity using classical management theories as well
as the contemporary writers. This research also undertakes a similar methodology
which is a combination of the literature review, surveys followed by significance
testing and finally case study for data collection for both model formulation and
model validation. The MINITAB 15 software was used for regression analysis
and modelling. The following subsections give an outline of the methodology
undertaken for this research.
13
Fig. 1.1: Overview of the Research
14
1.4.1 Review of Existing Literature & Publications
In order to identify the factors affecting productivity in the UAE construction

industry, it was important to first do a literature review of credible publications –
of works already done in the field and acceptable to the academics. Accordingly
key authors and notable journals in the field of management and especially
construction engineering and management were reviewed and the ideology was
captured in three matrices. The reason for selecting the key authors and journals
include amongst others, credibility and wide acceptance in the field of
construction research.
Key words such as productivity, construction industry, productivity rates, UAE,

factors affecting productivity were used in search of the documents. The
literature review was confined to factors that would affect productivity in the
construction industry only as this was the subject of the research. Further
productivity in a purely manufacturing set up is different than in productivity in
construction industry. Manufacturing generally includes mass or continuous
production, and factories are stationary unlike construction projects with different
locations and constraints. Productivity rate for other sectors such as financial,
educational were not considered as part of this research. Accordingly, the
boundaries of this study are those factors that influence productivity rates in
construction industry.
The contemporary works on productivity were reviewed and three matrices were
established – 1) indicating the factors affecting construction productivity, 2)
indicating the motivational factors affecting construction industry and 3)
indicating the factors affecting productivity across countries.
The classical theories, together with the information from these matrices and
experience of the researcher in the UAE construction industry led to the broad
categorization of factors affecting productivity of the construction industry in the
UAE.
15
1.4.2 Data Collection: Survey for Significant Factors
A number of research methods were considered ranging from interviews, survey

questionnaires, case studies, opinion polls and so on. Survey questionnaires
though difficult to design, can have wider coverage, are relatively cheap, avoid
embarrassment for the respondent and carries no interview bias. Interviews are
time consuming, costly, limited in coverage but can get in-depth probing during
interviews (Kothari, 2004).
For this research, the questionnaire and case study were selected as this offered
the possibility of having wider prospective respondents, elimination of any
personal bias that might develop during the interview and giving equal chances
for answering the questions under similar conditions.
The case study on the other hand was mandatory to provide the huge quantity of
data that was required for the study – especially the model formulation and
validation later. Also the case study company had 30 years of productivity record
that could be used for comparison. The company also had undertaken projects
that were running concurrently, which could be used for data collection.
Accordingly three research surveys were undertaken. This was followed up by a

case study – on site field data collection for measuring changes in productivity
leading to the formulation of a model and once again a case study validation of
data.
Survey 1 for Significance- The list of factors derived from literature review
were transformed into a survey questionnaire that was circulated to the key
industry players – engineers, foremen and the operatives themselves. This served
as the first set of primary data which was analyzed using the Severity Index
(= Importance Index x Frequency Index). A list of significant factors affecting
productivity in the UAE construction industry was then established.
16
The results of this survey were reported at the PROBE (Post Graduate
Researchers in the Built & Natural Environment) conference, Glasgow,
Caledonian University, Scotland, November 20-22, 2007.
The survey questionnaire had a total of 61 questions and was sent to 500
participants out of which 238 responded. The questions were formulated from the
list of significant factors established by literature review. The respondents had to
answer the questions to a LIKERT scale (Kothari, 2004), as further explained in
Chapter 3.
The results were then ranked using the severity index and factors within each of
the four main categories of Environmental, Organizational, Group and Personal
Factors were presented.
Finally the highest ranked 14 factors were presented sorted in descending order.
Those were ultimately subjected to two more perception surveys – Survey 2 and
Survey 3; results of which led to seven major factors of Timings, Competence of
supervisors, Salaries, Materials, Systems and procedures, Group dynamics and
Climatic conditions. The Salaries and Timings factor were merged into one factor
of Timings making the total factors that will be studied as six factors.
1.4.3 Data Collection: Surveys for Effect of Significant Factors
Two more sets of primary data were generated by conducting a perception survey
of the effect on productivity of the six factor groups; one using participants from
within the case study contracting company (Survey 2) and second using
participants external to the company (Survey 3). These were kept separate as the
results were expected to be different and reviewed at a later stage if required.
The perception survey was needed to establish the magnitude of the effect of each
of the significant factors following survey 1 and to help establish the field
variables for data collection. The effect was set at ± 25% as from practical
experience in the construction field, changes to the productivity by design is
seldom.
17
The survey results were presented in counts, percentages and weighted averages.
A combined analysis was also presented, which gave a percentage of the
respondents establishing the magnitude of the effect of the factors – timings,
supervisor competence, salaries, materials, systems and procedures, group
dynamics, and climatic conditions for both the internal and the external survey.
Survey 2 and 3 analysis helped establish the magnitude of the effect of the
significant factors of productivity; which combined with the results of
significance testing described in 1.4.4 below, led to the establishing actual field
controllable factors affecting productivity.
1.4.4 Data Collection: Statistical Tests of Significance Using Chi –Square
The results of the two perception surveys discussed above were then summarized
into a Chi Square matrix and tests of significance was conducted for both cases
separately. The factors were considered statistically significant in both cases.
The Pearson Chi Square test can be used to check goodness of fit and tests for
independence. Here the test was used to check for significance or independence.
These tests whether paired observations on variables expressed in a contingency
table are independent of each other; in this case the factors affecting productivity.
1.4.5. Field Data Collection
Three levels of variations were chosen for each of the seven factors described in
1.4.2 and 1.4.3 above using the calculated weighted averages. The three levels
have been chosen to afford a practical mechanism for variation and recording of
productivity changes. For example,
Work Timings (T) was varied at : Level 1 - Normal 8 hours work

Level 2 - 8 hours + 4 hours overtime
Level 3 - Contract Work, Fixed volumes of
work done for agreed compensation
18
Thus these three levels helped to establish a mechanism to vary conditions on site
and record productivity changes. Table 1.1 summarizes the construction trades
and the seven factor variables chosen for field data collection. These construction
trades were chosen as they are mostly done manually and offer tremendous scope
for improvement in productivity; besides being the significant activities at the
start of the project other than the mechanical, electrical and plumbing services
coming up later in the project.
Activities under Factors varied during data

study collection
1 Excavation Timings
2 Formwork Salaries
3 Reinforcement Supervision
4 Concreting Group Dynamics
5 Blockwork Procedures
6 Plastering Material Availability
7 Tiling Climate
Table 1.1 – Construction Trades and Productivity Factors

for Field Data Collection
The productivity was measured for the seven trades of Excavation (cubic metres /
man-hour), Formwork (square metres / man-hour) Reinforcement (tonnes / man
hour), Concreting (cubic metres / man-hour), Blockwork (square metres / man-
hour), Plastering (square metres / man-hour) and Tiling Works (square metres /
man-hour).
As the trades have different units of measurement, the output variable to be

measured and used in further statistical analysis was “the difference in actual
productivity measured to the average productivity specific to the site”, expressed
as a percentage productivity change. Expressing this as a percentage, achieved
getting a “unit free” figure and as such removed the problem of different units of
measurement.
19
The factors taken for data collection from the survey results were reduced to six
because it was not logical to change the salary during data collection, as this
would first make the operatives aware of the study, they could then be biased,
while other operatives not treated equally might not perform their best. Hence it
was merged with the ‘Timing’ factor.
1.4.6 Homogenization of Data
Data as received from sites was reviewed and outliers were removed to ensure the
sample readings received represented a normal population. Further the site data
could include possible errors of recording, possible manipulation, computation
errors productivity outputs may have been subjected to unaccounted for factors
such as isolated activities of stoppage, waiting for inspection, unusually confined
spaces to work, varying complexities of the construction trade itself. The
technical constraints together with the size and complexity of the structure being
constructed made it difficult to fix a productivity level and therefore varying
levels of productivity were seen in the data.
A total of 1090 data sets were collected from sites. As expected; a wide variation
of measured productivity was observed. Some of the results seemed abnormal
and out of bounds, which in statistics are termed as outliers (those data that were
below the 25th percentile and above the 75% percentile). In this research, a band
of ± 40% was applied to retain data for further analysis. So the percentage
productivity change as measured (PPCM) values were reviewed and any values
out of ± 40% of the Site Average were discarded.
A band of ± 40% was considered an appropriate band to retain the data to first
ensure significant number of data sets remain, whilst on the other hand, to ensure
practical variation expected on site ascribed to the factors described in the last
paragraph. The band of ± 40% was selected based on the variations seen in actual
productivity on site and the known presence of several factors (not subject of this
study) other than the six ones under study.
20
This consideration is also in line with removing of outliers using the first and
third percentiles, ensuring at least 50% of the data sets more representative of the
population are used. In this research, total data sets of 1090 was collected as
against 812 (74 %) data sets used after the discarding those out of the ± 40%
band.
1.4.7 Regression Analysis using MINITAB 15 software
The MINITAB 15 software was utilized in this research as the researcher had
previous experience in using it and moreover the MINITAB 15 and the other
software’s available – the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) software
(now rebranded as Predictive Analytics Software (PASW), March 2009) offer
similar outputs. MINITAB 15 was found simpler to use. Distinctive beneficial
features of MINITAB include comprehensive and powerful statistical methods,
effective and editable graphs, and user-friendly interface. MINITAB has been
used in several textbooks spanning a broad range of categories including
archaeology, behavioural / social sciences, biological sciences, business, earth
sciences, engineering, environmental science, general statistics, health science,
mathematics, quality control, and six sigma topics. (Reference
www.minitab.com).
Data sets homogenized as above were then fed into the MINITAB 15 software
and regression analysis was performed. The output variable was the percentage
productivity change as measured (PPCM), while the input variables were the
group factors of 1) Timings, 2) Supervision, 3) Group, 4) Procedures, 5)
Availability of material and 6) Climate.
The first attempt was to find an overall model for productivity change. However
the coefficient of determination (R2) returned was very low for accepting the
model. The low value of R2 was understandable as there are several factors in
combination affecting the productivity; and one model may not fit all the trades.
This problem was overcome by opting for individual models for productivity of
21
six trades considered during data collection, namely Excavation, Formwork,

Reinforcement, Concreting, Blockwork, Plastering and Tiling.
The models formulated with a preliminary validation of models were reported at

the 25th Annual ARCOM Conference, September 7-9, 2009, Nottingham.
1.4.8 Validation of the Models
The validation of the models was done using eleven data sets from sites for the
different activities. Chapter 5 deals with validation. The process of validation
includes reviewing the data, computing the percentage productivity change as
measured (PPCM), using the appropriate site averages, using the model for
computing the percent productivity change as predicted (PPCP) and finally
computing the error which is the difference between PPCP and PPCM.
The data retained for final validation against the acceptance band of ± 15% was
determined from removing first the outliers within the ± 2 sigma limits for the
errors. Sigma is the standard deviation of the readings and from the statistical
normal curve / distribution study, it is expected that 95% of the values lie within
± 2 sigma bands. For the convenience of the reader, 68% lie within the ± 1sigma
band, while 99.7 % of the readings are expected to lie within the ± 3 sigma bands.
(Mendenhall et al, 2001, pg. 33)
The reasons for the ± 15% band are that the regression models chosen were a
straight line linear regression as against possible curvature or logarithmic
relationships. Interactions between factors were not considered. After the
removal of outliers, the regression line fitted was the optimal chosen to give as
high a value of R2 of over 70%. It was therefore expected that the predicted
increase or decrease in productivity will also follow a similar trend – that is the
data points are expected to lie within an upper and lower band limits of error.
Other considerations include the broad range of complex relationships between
the model and the data, the numerous technical constraints on site with regards to
22
the expected productivity in each of the activities, the subjectivity of the factors
themselves & therefore the allocation of factor levels chosen for research.
The threshold of ± 15% also makes sense as actual data from time sheets, cost
control charts and productivity figures from the case study company sites over
the last 34 years indicate that the maximum increase or decrease in productivity
would be in the broader range of ± 40%.
Further taking into consideration the possible inaccuracies of reporting data itself
from the sites, and considering the wide variation in productivity measurement on
sites, the presence of additional technical factors not covered in the models and
review of the wide variation that was possible in productivity values for the
construction trades in actual practice; the acceptance criteria for accepting the
model to be accurate for practical use on site was set at ± 15%.
1.4.9 Model Application
The models can be used by construction personnel – Project Managers, Engineers

and Supervisors to understand the dynamics involved in productivity of the
construction trades and investigate what best they can do to improve the
conditions that affect productivity on site.
The models provide reasonable quantification of the predicted productivity, when

the underlying factors are varied. The models are to be used judiciously,
complimented with a thorough understanding of the ground realities on the
construction site, the demography, age, training and skills of the people
themselves, the mental situation of the workers, their motivation levels; the
nature, detail and complexity of the work activities themselves.
The research and the models underlined therein therefore require the supervisors
and the site construction management in general understand that their
responsibility lies in providing favourable conditions of timings, supervision,
group dynamic, materials, procedures and of course amiable weather bringing out
23
the best in people; thus effectively increasing the output and therefore the
efficiency and productivity of the works. This will ensure construction operatives
perform at higher levels of motivation; work produced will be of acceptable
quality and at a good productivity rate; helping the activities to complete faster
and therefore the project.
Limitations if any arise because of simplifying assumptions used in the research,

the subjectivity of factor levels, the accuracy of the data itself, the existence of a
combination of several factors besides the significant factors; the possible errors
of recording and analyzing data, and the presence of human motivation. Thus the
models need to be used judiciously with caution, understanding the contribution
of each of the factor variables; but at the same time understanding the ground
realities of site execution.
1.5 CHAPTER SUMMARIES
The outline of the chapters 1-6 is included here to give a summary indication of
the contents of each chapter.
Chapter 1 – Research Introduction

Chapter 1 is the introductory chapter to this research work. This chapter
introduces the research title, aim, objectives, and definitions of productivity
while identifying the gap in knowledge and establishing the need for research,
its importance in the construction industry and especially in the United Arab
Emirates (UAE). This is followed by a brief research methodology applied to
determine the factors affecting productivity; identify the most significant
factors using three surveys and then use actual productivity data to establish
and validate a regression model which can predict productivity changes in the
construction industry. After a brief discussion on applicability of the models,
the chapter concludes with summaries of each chapter to give the reader a
general outline of the research.
24
Chapter 2 – Literature Review

Chapter 2 establishes the ground for this research based on the findings of the
literature review of classical management including theories on motivation,
together with published literature on subjects related to productivity.
Motivation theories such as the content theories of Maslow, McGregor,
McClelland and Herzberg are discussed followed by the process theories
namely – Adam’s Equity Theory, Victor Vroom’s Expectancy Theory and the
Porter Lawler Model on Motivation vis-à-vis their application in the
This chapter also gives background information and typical characteristics of

the UAE construction industry, the UAE labour market and survey results of
workplace employment relations in the UAE, the demography of the
workforce, the diversity of cultural backgrounds, absence of labour unions,
and the general environmental conditions of work and statutory laws prevalent
in the UAE. Further a discussion indicating the similarities and uniqueness of
conditions elsewhere in the world; and the need for improvement in
productivity. This discussion helps the reader to understand the context of the
project construction sites, at which the productivity data will be measured to
develop the models.
This is followed by a review of existing publications on productivity by

contemporary authors; this discussion culminates into matrices of factors
affecting productivity and motivating factors affecting productivity and finally
a matrix of factors affecting productivity over several countries.
These matrices form the basis for a comprehensive listing of the factors
affecting productivity. The factors affecting productivity are grouped into four
major categories of Environmental, Organizational, Group Dynamics and
Personal Factors.
25
Chapter 3 – Research Methodology

Chapter 3 details the research methods applied together with a justification of
their utilization. It outlines the research process starting with the aim, the
literature review, the three surveys conducted, and the field data collected for
establishing the models, the MINITAB 15 software used for statistical
modeling and finally the validation process.
Further it also discusses the technical aspects of the construction trades

involved in the field data collection, for which, the productivity models or the
regression equations will be established. The construction trades of
Excavation, Formwork, Reinforcement, Concreting, Blockwork, Plastering
and Tiling Works have been discussed, together with other technical factors
affecting productivity of these trades. These technical factors are related to the
complexity of work, location of the site, soil strata, materials used, climatic
conditions, project specific requirements, and client involvement in the
project.
And finally, this is followed up by a brief introduction of the case study on

one contracting company, whose sites have been used for field data collection
for establishing the models and their validation.
Chapter 4 – Data Collection, Data Analysis and Development of

Productivity Evaluation Model
Chapter 4 deals with the analysis of field data on productivity collected from
case study projects, removing outliers and subjecting the homogenized data to
regression analysis using the MINITAB 15 software. Regression models have
been established with an acceptable threshold of R2, the coefficient of
determination at 70% and above. Straight Line Regression has been
considered for practical application of models on the site.
The six factors affecting productivity which were used for modelling are the
Work Timings (T), Level of Supervision (S), Group Dynamics (G),
26
Availability of Materials (M), Control by Procedures (P), and the Climatic

Condition (C). The chapter summarizes the models established for each of the
seven trades of excavation, formwork, reinforcement, concreting, blockwork,
plastering and tiling for which the above mentioned factors were purposely
varied. Validation of the models is discussed in Chapter 5.
Chapter 5 – Model Validation and Evaluation of Variability of

Productivity
This chapter deals with the testing and validation of the trade wise
productivity models established in Chapter 4 using the MINITAB 15
software. The validation process helps us to determine if the models can be
practically used to predict productivity changes on construction sites, when
underlying factors affecting productivity are changed. Eleven data sets were
subjected to validation by finding out the error in estimating the predicted
productivity change as against that measured on site. Outliers were removed
using the two sigma band of control limits on the individual error readings.
The balance data readings were then checked against the ±15% acceptance
band. Models were accepted if the balance data readings were within this
band. Validation has been performed on eleven data sets collected from
ongoing construction sites of the case study contracting company.
For 2 sigma limits, it is seen that errors obtained between the predicted and
the actual productivity increase / decrease are within a band of 17.14% to
38.2% further justifying the initial homogenization range of ± 40%. Outliers
were removed using the upper control limits and lower control limits for the 2
sigma band. Out of the total 11 data sets (1963 No’s); eight data sets passed
validation as per set procedure. One data set for reinforcement at OAG site
was accepted on revalidation as only one out of the 42 was out of the
acceptable band of ± 15%. The other two sets which were accepted on
revalidation included data set for concreting and blockwork from the BCC
site. The revalidation used truncated data band within ± 20 % of the site
average. Overall the model validations were accepted indicating that
productivity models can be used to predict productivity changes within ± 15%
27
accuracy. The chapter further discusses the evaluation of the factors affecting
productivity. This is done by considering the coefficient terms of each of the
factors in the regression equation.
Chapter 6 – Conclusion
Chapter 6 concludes the research by verifying whether research aim and
objectives were achieved, the significant problems faced and how these were
tackled and lists the lessons learnt. The limitations of the research itself are
discussed and probable areas for future research for improving the accuracy of
the models are recommended. It is also recommended that site personnel shall
understand the contribution of the factors and provide favourable conditions
which lead to enhancement of the productivity of the people, the construction
trades and therefore of the project.
1.6 CONCLUSION
This first chapter introduced the thesis title, established the aim, objectives, and
definitions of productivity while reiterating the need for research against the
background of productivity of construction trades and its importance in the
construction industry. The research is aimed at evaluating factors affecting
productivity of construction trades in order to optimize output. One of the
objectives of the research is to develop a model that can be used in the
construction industry to evaluate the percentage change in productivity once the
underlying parameters (factors) are varied. Hence the model does not measure or
predict productivity directly; it rather predicts the percentage change of the
productivity of the studied trades in relation to variation in the variables
involved. The research methodology was depicted graphically with cross
reference to chapter numbers. The research undertakes three surveys one to
establish the significance factors affecting productivity and the other two to
establish the magnitude of the effect of these factors on productivity. The field
data was collected using three levels of variation, and regression models for
28
productivity of construction trades were developed. The chapter concludes with

summaries of each chapter to give the reader a general outline of the thesis.
***
29
CHAPTER 2 – LITERATURE REVIEW
30
CHAPTER 2 – LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter reviews classical and contemporary theories related to management

together with published literature on productivity. The content theories of
Maslow, McGregor, McClelland and Herzberg are discussed followed by the
process theories namely – Adam’s Equity Theory, Victor Vroom’s Expectancy
Theory and the Porter Lawler Model on Motivation vis-à-vis their application in
the construction industry. Those have provided the study with the three matrices
containing most relevant factors that are believed to affect productivity.
The previous studies on productivity studied one trade and / or one variable at a
time, or studied the variables in isolation without interaction between variables.
Herbsman and Ellis (1990) described the development of a statistical model that
illustrates the quantitative relationships between the construction productivity
influence factors (CPIF) and the productivity rates. Most of the other studies were
qualitative rather than being quantitative.
The research by contemporary authors has been reviewed which culminates into
matrices of 1) Factors affecting productivity, 2) Motivating factors affecting
productivity and finally 3) Matrix of factors affecting productivity over several
countries.
These matrices form the basis for a comprehensive listing of the factors affecting
productivity. The factors affecting productivity are grouped into four major
categories of Environmental, Organizational, Group Dynamics and Personal
Factors.
Organizations and Individuals

Any organization is composed of individuals (people) who are organized in some
way or form in order to achieve certain objectives. In a construction company, the
general organization consists of people in the head office and people at the
construction site. The objective of a construction company are to first secure a
31
project and then execute it to clients satisfaction, giving value to the client and at
the same time, making a profit for the company.
People on site include staff such as the Project Managers, Site Engineers,
Foremen and Workmen. This research focuses on people on site - the lower tier
workmen – that group of people including skilled, semi-skilled tradesmen and
labourers.
Given a construction site, these workmen are either grouped – trade wise such as
carpentry group, masonry group, block or brick layer group etc. or they are
grouped into multi-skill / multi-trade groups such as a maintenance group, which
would include a mix of all relevant multi-discipline, multi-trades workmen.
Most of the construction operatives come from a varied background. They

normally have an agreed wage rate; but their performance on site, regardless of
the individual’s work or cultural background, is through the process of
management, whereby the efforts of workmen are coordinated, directed and
guided towards the project objectives and hence the overall organization goals.
Mullins (2007) says effective management is the cornerstone of organizational
effectiveness. He further says that organization’s aim can be achieved only
through the coordinated efforts of human resources.
The interrelated influences affecting the behaviour of people can be grouped into
those related to -
• The environment – technical and scientific, economic, social and
cultural, government
• The organization – objectives and policy, technology and methods of
work, formal structure, styles of leadership
• The group – structure and functions, role, relationships, group
influences and pressure
• The individual – personality, skills, values and attributes needs and
expectations.
32
Mullins further states that there are a series of mutual expectations of rights and
privileges, duties and obligations, which although, not formally documented, but
have an important influence on people’s behaviour. He calls it the psychological
contract.
The individual and organizational expectations forming the psychological

contract listed are significant as most of them affect the performance of the
individual; they are relevant to all industries, especially the labour intensive
construction industry. That is the reason - some of these are later grouped into the
factors affecting productivity.
The Individual’s Expectations of the Organization are:

• Provide safe and hygienic work conditions
• Make every reasonable effort to provide job security
• Attempt to provide challenging and satisfying jobs and reduce
alienating aspects of work
• Adopt equitable human resource management policies and procedures
• Respect role of trade union officials and staff representatives
• Consult fully with staff and allow genuine participation in decisions
which affect them.
• Implement best practice in equal opportunity policies and procedures
• Reward staff fairly according to their contribution and performance
• Provide reasonable opportunities for personal development and career
progression
• Treat members of staff with respect
• Demonstrate an understanding and considerate attitude towards
personal problems of staff
On the other hand, the Organizational Expectations of the Individual

• Work to the best of abilities
• Uphold the ideology of the organization and the corporate image
• Work diligently in pursuit of organizational objectives
33
• Adhere to the rules, policies and procedures of the organization,

especially the safety regulations at site
• Respect authority and other colleagues
• Not take advantage of goodwill by management
• Be responsive to leadership influence
• Demonstrate loyalty, not betray trust
• Maintain harmonious relationships with work colleagues
• Not abuse organizational facilities and equipment
• Observe reasonable and acceptable standards of dress and appearance
• Show respect and consolidation to customers and suppliers
Although it is unlikely that all the expectations of the individual and the
organizations will be fully met at all times, there is a continual process of
balancing, explicit and implicit bargaining, until both parties settle out at a
perceived fair treatment. Several authors have correctly hinted at the dynamic
nature of the psychological contract, the underlying factors are no guarantee of
lifetime employment, promotion from within, part time contracts, subcontract or
outsourcing, retrenchment in light of economic crisis and so on.
The comprehensive list of factors affecting the productivity on site was arrived at
by:-
• Review of the classical management theories
• Review of the published literature related to productivity on construction
sites
• Establishing a Literature Review Matrix listing the factors affecting
motivation and consequently - productivity
• Experience of the researcher. The researcher has had 38 years of
construction experience and has moved through the rank over a
multiplicity of projects, especially in the United Arab Emirates.
34
2.1 MANAGEMENT THEORIES
The developments in management theories and organizational behaviour can be

categorized through four approaches:
• The classical approach including scientific management and bureaucracy
• The human relations approach
• The systems approach
• The contingency approach
2.1.1 The Classical Approach
The classical approach placed emphasis on planning of work, the technical

requirements of the organization, principle of management and the assumption of
rational and logical behaviour. Focus was on clear purpose and an effective
structure, division of work, clear definition of duties and responsibilities and
maintaining specialization and coordination; emphasis was on hierarchy of
management and formal organizational relationships.
The scientific management emphasized increasing productivity from

individual workers through the technical structuring of the work
organization and the provision of monetary incentives as the motivator for
higher levels of output. The scientific approach is based on the twin goals
of productivity and efficiency as advocated by Fredrick Taylor. His
principles of scientific management comprised of three central elements -
a systematic collection of knowledge about work processes by managers;
the removal of worker discretion and control over their activities and the
creation of standard procedures and times for performing certain tasks. He
saw his methods as benefiting both worker and manager, since the worker
was encouraged to attain his peak performance and receive payment in
relation to this, but on the other hand, management obtained increased
output. (Taylor 1947)
35
Henri Fayol, a mining engineer based his writing on his experience as a

French coal mining manager. He was concerned with developing a
universal approach to management and set this out in his Fourteen
Principles of Management (Fayol 1949). These are:
• Division of Work - more and better work from the same effort
through the benefits of specialization
• Authority and Responsibility – authority brings in responsibility
and so generates useful actions
• Discipline – essential for the efficient operation of the
organization
• Unity of Command – employees should receive orders from only
one supervisor
• Unity of Direction – effective coordination requires that there
should be one leader
• Subordination of individual / group interests – interest of the
organization takes precedence over those of the individual
• Remuneration – methods of payment should be fair and reward
well directed effort
• Centralization – this will vary across organizations
• Scalar Chain – respect for line authority needs to be reconciled
with the need for initiative at lower levels
• Order – a place for everything and everything in its place
• Equity – fairness in dealing with all employees at all levels
throughout the scalar chain
• Stability – prosperous organizations have stable managerial
personnel
• Initiative – a source of strength which should be encouraged
• Espirit de corps – harmony and unity are a great strength for the
organization.
Thus, it is management, who has the responsibility to plan, organize,

control and coordinate the activities of the organization.
36
Max Weber believed that power and domination were at the heart of the
rise of modern civilization. He believed bureaucratic approach to
organization were the most efficient and appropriate. Bureaucracy stresses
laws, rules, procedures, and pre-defined routines as giving form to a clear
and explicit system of administration. Bureaucracy can thus be
characterized by a division of labour, a clear authority structure,
formalized procedures and rules as well as an impersonalized structure
(Weber, 1947). Bureaucracy is still relevant today as a major form of
management structure; however there is more reliance on professional
discretion and self regulation than on control through rules and regulation.
The classical approach was the earliest attempt of creating and managing
organizations and was designed to meet the particular circumstances of the time.
Somehow it incorporated a negative view of human nature common at the time –
one of the main elements being the idea of workers as simply parts of a greater
machine. This led to the contrasting view point that it is impossible to remove
human variability from organizations which gave rise to the human relations
approach.
2.1.2 The Human Relations Approach
The human relations approach was a stark contrast to the mechanistic view of
organizations by the classical approach. It introduced the human element into
organizational life. This approach paid greater attention to social factors at work
and to the behaviour of employees within an organization. The human relations
approach considers that truly effective control comes from within the individual
worker rather than from strict, authoritarian control. It combines the prescription
for design of job tasks with theories of motivation. (Tausky C, 1978)
Whilst the classical approach sought to increase production by rationalization of

the work organization, the human relations approach focused on increasing
production by humanizing the work organization. The human relations approach
strove for a greater understanding of people’s psychological and social needs at
37
work as well as improving the process of management. Authors of the human

relations approach demonstrated that people went to work to satisfy a complexity
of needs and not simply for monetary reward. It forced managers to consider the
effects of organization structure and job design on work groups, employee
attitudes and relations in general.
Further to the Hawthorne experiments by Elton Mayo, new ideas emerged on

management theory and a major focus of concern was the personal adjustment of
the individual within the work organization and the effects of group relationships
and leadership styles.
Detailed descriptions of the motivation theories advocated by the selected authors

are covered in section 2.3 – Theories of Motivation.
2.1.3 The Systems Approach
The systems approach attempts to combine the scientific and the human relations
approach. The focus is on the total work organization and the interrelationships of
structure and behaviour together with the range of variables within the
organization. It views the organization both as a whole and as part of a larger
environment – including the relationships between the technical and social
variables within the system. The systems view of an organization criticizes the
‘one best way’ assumptions of classical approaches. It believed that technology
was a critical factor affecting the organizational design. The systems theory of
organization consists of five components (Daft, 2000) -
• Inputs are the material, human, financial and the information resources
• Transformation Process is the management’s use of production
technology to change the input into outputs
• Outputs include the organization’s products and services
• Feedback is the knowledge of results that would influence the selection
of inputs
• Environment is the social, political, and economic forces influencing the
organization.
38
2.1.4 The Contingency Approach
The contingency approach (Luthans, 1973) emphasizes the need for flexibility
and says that there is no one best way to structure or manage organizations but
management decisions should take situational and contextual factors into
account. Management’s job is to learn and identify the specific characteristics of
the situation and then fit solutions to overcome these contingencies. (Daft, 2000)
Contingency factors influencing organizational design and effectiveness are:

- the size of the organization
- the technology employed and the industry characteristics
- the environment in terms of external changes and uncertainty
Some of the criticisms of the contingency theory include a clear definition of the
environment for the organization. Furthermore the distinction between
organization and its environment is not necessarily as distinct in practice as
contingency theory suggest as big businesses can create their own environments.
Despite some criticisms and limitations, the contingency approach draws

attention to the possibilities of different structures for different activities of the
organization and varying structures based on nature of projects, the economy and
the cyclical nature of specific industry such as construction. (Mullins, 2007)
2.2 COMMON FACTORS IN ORGANIZATIONS
Four factors are common to any organization – people, objectives, structure and
management. It is the interaction of people in order to achieve the objectives
which forms the basis of an organization; some sort of structure is needed by
which peoples interactions and efforts are channeled and coordinated; and finally
some process of management is required by which the activities of the
organization, the efforts of its members are directed and controlled towards the
pursuit of objectives.
39
Fig. 2.1: Organizational Sub-Systems (Mullins, 2007)
Mullins (2007) suggested five main interrelated sub-systems as a basis for the
analysis of work organizations as depicted in Fig. 2.1 above.
• Task – the goals and objectives of the organization. The nature of inputs
and outputs and the work activities to be carried out in the transformation
or conversion process.
• Technology – the manner in which the tasks of the organization are
carried out and the nature of work performance. The materials, systems
and procedures and equipment used in the transformation or conversion
process.
40
• Structure – patterns of organization, lines of authority, formal

relationships and channels of communication amongst members. The
division of work and coordination of task by which these activities are
carried out.
• People – the nature of the members undertaking the series of activities.
For example, their attitudes, skills and attributes; need and expectations,
interpersonal relations and patterns of behaviour, group functioning and
behaviour, informal organization and styles of leadership.
• Management – coordination of task, technology, structure and people,
policies and procedures for the execution of work. Corporate strategy,
direction of the activities of the organization as a whole and its interaction
with the external environment.
The overall effectiveness of the organization depends upon sound structural

design and by the individuals filling the various positions within the structure.
The operations and actual working arrangements will be influenced by the style
of management, personalities of members and the informal organization. The
informal organization arises from the interaction of people, their psychological
and social needs, the development of groups with their own relationships and
norms of behaviour, irrespective of those defined within the formal structure.
Mullins (2007) states that the attention should be focused on the total work
organization and on the interrelationships between the range of variables, which
affect organizational performance.
2.3 THEORIES OF MOTIVATION
Businesses exist to be successful. However business objectives are to be achieved

through people; and people are the most difficult resource to manage. People or
employees in the organization may not perform in the way they are expected to if
they are not interested and are not driven into action from within. That is - they
need to be motivated.
41
Motivation is a core managerial process of engaging employees into activities

aimed at effectively achieving organizational objectives. Motivation can also be
defined as a process that is initiated by a physiological or psychological need,
which causes a specific behaviour or drive in order to achieve a goal or incentive.
It consists of three interacting and interdependent elements - needs, drives and
incentives. Most authors agree that motivation symbolizes the drive behind
human behaviour. (Hollyforde and Whiddett, 2002)
Mitchell (1982) defines motivation as the ‘degree to which an individual wants

and chooses to engage in certain specified behaviours’. The underlying concept
of motivation is some driving force within individuals by which they attempt to
achieve some goal in order to fulfill some need or expectation. People’s
behaviour is determined by what motivates them. Their performance is a product
of both ability level and motivation (Mullins, 2007).
The relationship between organization and its members is influenced by what

motivates them to work and the rewards and fulfillment they derive from it. The
work organization, and the design and content of jobs can have a significant
effect on the satisfaction of staff and their levels of performance. The manager
needs to know how best to elicit the cooperation of staff and direct their efforts to
achieving the goals and objectives of the organization.
Motivation could be extrinsic motivation or intrinsic motivation. Extrinsic

Motivation is related to tangible rewards such as salary and fringe benefits,
security, promotion, contract or service, the work environment and conditions of
work. Such tangible rewards are determined at organizational level and may be
outside the control of individual managers. Intrinsic Motivation is related to
psychological rewards such as opportunity to use one’s ability, a sense of
challenge and achievement, receiving appreciation, positive recognition and
being treated in a caring and considerate manner. These are under the direct
control of individual managers.
42
There are no general or unified theories of motivation; alternate competing

theories vis-à-vis the relevant aspects of human behaviour are discussed in this
section. The theories of motivation could be divided into two parts: - the early
and the modern. The modern part is attributed to authors from the 20th century
onwards; while the ancient is before the start of the 20th century.
2.3.1 Early Theories

• Fredrick Taylors – Scientific Management
Scientific management, as discussed in section 2.1.1, was based on the
thesis, that workers were primarily motivated by monetary incentives;
although a gross simplification of human motivation; it is quite common
to find “payment schemes based on results” in the construction industry,
which conform to the scientific management theory.
Taylor’s work on scientific management is often referred to as the
traditional approach to motivation. His systems are based are based on
employee pay – those who produced the best in quality and quantity
received the best remuneration. It was believed that these rewards would
improve motivation and consequently greater productivity and efficiency
at the work place.
• Elton Mayo’s Social Relations as a motivating force

Elton Mayo is famously known for his “Hawthorne Experiments”, where
he conducted behavioral experiments at the Western Electric Company in
Chicago, on the basis of which, he drew the conclusions, that motivation
was a very complex subject. Mayo’s work questioned Taylor’s work and
concluded that motivation was not only about pay, work conditions and
morale but also included psychological and social factors. Although this
research has been criticized from many angles, the central conclusions
drawn were that people are motivated by other conditions than pay; the
need for recognition and a sense of belonging were very important and
attitudes towards work are strongly influenced by the group. Social
relations in the workforce could be a powerful motivating force; Mayo
stressed on the vital role of supervisor in influencing relationships within
43
a group and how these relationships affected communications, which in

effect, influenced motivation (Roethlisberger & Dickson, 1939). Mayo’s
understanding of the workplace as a social environment and of people
within this social environment brings in conditions similar to that in a
2.3.2 Modern Theories: Content Theories of Motivation
Modern motivation theories can be broadly classified as Content Theories which

focus on ‘WHAT’ motivates and the Process Theories which focus on ‘HOW’
motivation occurs. Content theories define motivation in satisfaction of needs.
Such theories identify the needs and factors that provoke the right behaviour and
galvanize the employees into action. The content theories include the Needs
Hierarchy Theory, the Herzberg’s Two Factor Theory and the Needs Acquired
Theory:
• Needs Hierarchy Theory by Abraham Maslow
Abraham Maslow (1943) proposed a theoretical framework of individual
personality development and motivation based on a hierarchy of human
needs – the physiological, safety, love/belonging, self esteem, and self
actualization. He detailed five fundamental human needs:
o Physiological needs essential for survival, which includes food,
water, sleep, shelter, health, rest and so on.
o Safety and Security needs for protection from physical and
psychological dangers and the continuity for the physiological
needs to be satisfied in future.
o Love and Belonging – need for social interaction, support,
interaction and communication
o Esteem needs related to self esteem, esteem from others, self
achievement, adequacy respect, recognition, sense of
belongingness etc.
o Self Actualization – needs which include achieving an
individual's potential, implementation of individual ideas,
empowerment and so on.
44
SELF
ACTUALIZATION
personal growth,
achieving
potential,
empowerment
ESTEEM NEEDS
achievement, status,
responsibility, reputation
LOVE and BELONGINGNESS

family, affection, relationships, social
interaction
SAFETY and SECURITY NEEDS

protection, security, order, law, stability
PHYSIOLOGICAL NEEDS
basic life needs ‐ food, water, shelter, health, rest
Fig. 2.2 : Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs Pyramid
Maslow arranged these by order of importance and introduced the

pyramidal hierarchy of needs. Reference Fig. 2.2. The hierarchy of needs
reflects the importance levels of human needs. According to Maslow’s
theory, unsatisfied needs influence people’s behavior. Human behavior is
primarily driven by wants and desires to satisfy physiological and safety
and security needs, namely primary needs. When these needs are at least
minimally satisfied, the person advances to the higher levels, namely
secondary needs. The highest need, the need of self actualization, can
never be completely satisfied.
Maslow placed money at the lowest level of the pyramid. According to

him money is a tool used to satisfy primary needs of employees. His
ideas find wide application in modern management. Knowing ones
employees and determining their most urgent needs and meeting his
wants and desires, managers would be able to increase the efficiency of
his employees. However Maslow’s theory is criticized also for not
providing any empirical evidence for it (Robbins, 1993).
45
• “Theory X and Theory Y” of Douglas McGregor

McGregor (1960) argued that the style of management adopted is a
function of the manager’s attitudes (Theory X & Y) towards human
nature and behaviour at work. McGregor concluded that a manager’s view
of the nature of human beings is based on a certain grouping of
assumptions and that he or she tends to mold his or her behavior towards
subordinates according to these assumptions.
Under the assumptions of theory X:

• Employees inherently dislike work and will avoid it if they can
• Most employees need to be forced, coerced, controlled, directed
and threatened with punishment to get them to contribute adequate
effort
• Average human being prefers to be directed, avoids responsibility,
has relatively little ambition and wants security above all things.
In contrast under the assumptions of theory Y were

• There is no inherent dislike of work
• People do exercise self-control and self-direction and if they are
committed to those goals.
• Average human beings are willing to take responsibility and
exercise imagination, ingenuity and creativity in solving the
problems of the organization.
• Industrialization has meant that capabilities are under employed.
On analysis of the assumptions it can be detected that theory X assumes

that lower-order needs dominate individuals and theory Y assumes that
higher-order needs dominate individuals. An organization that is run on
Theory X lines tends to be authoritarian in nature, in contrast Theory Y
organizations can be described as “participative”, where the aims of the
organization and of the individuals in it are integrated; individuals can
achieve their own goals best by directing their efforts towards the success
46
of the organization. However, this theory has been criticized widely for
generalization of work and human behavior.
• Clayton Alderfer’s Modified Need Hierarchy Model or ERG Theory

Alderfer (1972) presented a modified hierarchy of needs similar to
Maslow condensing the needs into only three levels based on the core
needs of existence, relatedness and growth (ERG). The existence needs
are concerned mainly with providing basic material existence, whilst the
relatedness needs are the individual needs to maintain interpersonal
relationship with other members in the group and the final group is the
intrinsic desire to grow and develop personally. This theory suggests that
an individual is motivated to satisfy one or more basic sets of needs.
Unlike the Maslow’s theory though, Alderfer’s work suggests that lower
level needs need not be satisfied before a higher level need emerging as
the motivating influence. (Mullins, 2007)
• Fredrick Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory

According to Fredrick Herzberg’s (1959) theory, people have basic needs
which he called as hygiene factors. Hygiene factors are geared to the
intrinsic needs of a person (namely physiological needs and need for
security and safety). At the same time they are connected with the
working environment. According to Herzberg, hygiene factors do not
motivate; if present, they prevent employees from becoming dissatisfied.
On the other hand, absence of hygiene factors results in dissatisfaction
and de-motivation. The second set of needs includes motivators. If
resolved, motivators cause satisfaction of employees. Thus, to effectively
motivate employees a manager must not only balance hygiene
environment of a company, but ensure some motivators are available.
47
Motivators Hygiene Factors

Achievement Company Policy & Administration
Recognition Supervision
Work Salary
Responsibility Interpersonal Relationship
Advancement Working Conditions
Security
Table 2.1: Factors Affecting Job Satisfaction
Implicit in Herzberg’s model was the belief that job satisfaction would
lead to higher levels of motivation. The most surprising factor was that
salary was a hygiene factor and therefore would not act as a motivator
unlike in the scientific approach, however many managers believe that
pay is a most important motivator. Herzberg’s theory was criticised
regarding its validity of work settings and generalization for all industries
(Robbins 1993); however his hygiene and motivators do find relevant
application in the construction industry.
• David McClelland’s Need Acquired Theory

Like Maslow, David McClelland (1985) also believed human behavior is
driven by different types of needs. His acquired needs theory proposes
that certain types of needs are acquired during the individual’s lifetime; in
other words, people are not born with these needs, but may learn them
through their life experiences. These three needs are –
o The Need for Achievement – the desire to accomplish something
difficult, attain a high standard of success, master complex tasks,
and surpass others
o The Need for Affiliation – the desire to form close personal
relationships, avoid conflict and establish friendships, and
o The need for Power – the desire to influence or control others, be
responsible for others and have authority over others
48
2.3.3 Modern theories - Process theories of Motivation
Whilst the content theories are based on needs and factors that drive human
behaviour, process theories define motivation in terms of rational cognitive
processes. The authors of process theories accept existence of human needs, but
they adhere to the opinion that there are other kinds of motivators to drive human
behaviour. Behaviour of people is considered to be a result of their perceptions
and expectations tied to specific situations.
• The Equity Theory as a Process Theory of Motivation

The Equity Theory is based on strong social norms about fairness and
accepts that people compare efforts and rewards. According to the equity
theory of J. Stacy Adams (1963), people are motivated by their perception
of a fair or unfair reward structure, relative to their inputs. Most people
have a tendency to use subjective judgment to balance the outcomes and
inputs in the relationship for comparisons between different individuals.
The equity theory suggests that the degree of motivation can be affected
by the comparisons made between the efforts put into a job and the
reward. An employee is most satisfied in situations when there is
equitable effort and reward. If comparison shows imbalance and
unfairness (namely an employee thinks his or her co-worker has been paid
more or less for the same job), the worker is inevitably brought to
psychological tension. In accordance with the Equity Theory, to overcome
the tension employees will try to restore equity.
A state of equity exists whenever the ratio of one person’s outcomes to

inputs equals the ratio of another person’s outcome to inputs. Inequity
occurs when the outcomes/inputs ratios are out of balance. Perceived
inequity creates tensions within individuals that motivate them to bring
equity into balance. Thus a prudent management strategy would be to
keep feelings of equity in balance in order to keep the workforces
motivated.
49
• The Expectancy Theory as a Process Theory of Motivation

Vroom (1964) proposed the Expectancy Theory that enabled human
motivation to be measured and assessed on the basis of expectation about
future events. It suggests that employees constantly predict likely future
rewards for successfully completing tasks and if the rewards seem
attractive, people become motivated to do the job to get expected rewards
and suggested that the opposite is true as well.
The theory suggests that motivation is a combination of three interrelated

elements – instrumentality, expectancy and valence.
Vroom regarded instrumentality as worker’s belief that they will
achieve a certain reward after they complete certain actions. He
argued that workers become motivated only if they know the
reward is guaranteed.
Further expectancy is worker’s hope that they will be able to
complete the task and that the workers are driven into action only
if they feel they are capable of completing the task.
Whereas valance is the value of the perceived reward to
employees and that employees are motivated only in case the
reward promised is really attractive and valuable to them.
Vroom considered valance as the most significant driver. Thus, when the
reward is perceived to be pleasant, employees perform better. In case an
expected outcome is regarded as unpleasant, motivation takes a backward
direction. This theory finds extensive application in designing incentive
schemes fitting in with the organization’s desired outcomes and the
employee’s abilities and needs.
• The Porter-Lawler Model as a Process Theory of Motivation

Porter and Lawler (1968) developed a complex model of motivation that
integrated ideas of Equity and Expectancy Theories. They suggest five
components that affect motivation: efforts, perception, performance,
reward and satisfaction. When value of expected rewards is perceived,
50
efforts are followed by performance. Performance is admitted by rewards

(both intrinsic and extrinsic). If rewards equal desired ones, they lead to
satisfaction. A satisfied employee is motivated to perform well in the
future and increase his or her efforts. If rewards are regarded as unequal
or unfair, they make an individual unsatisfied, and thus less motivated to
perform well in the future. The authors argue that motivation is a cyclical
process and presented the model reflecting interdependence of its basic
components.
The model provides managers with visual explanation of how a person is

motivated. Employees perform well when they can reasonably expect that
their performance will be fairly and desirably rewarded. Managers should
understand from the viewpoint of employees – a just reward, reasonable
efforts and the employee’s perception of the probability that they will get
their desired reward.
As the motivation theories are so divergent, it may be more practical to use a

mixture of the best parts of all the theories rather than any one single motivation
theory. ‘Paying off people’ isn’t the only criterion to make people happy.
Managers need to recognise talents and abilities in their staff and put them in a
position where they can benefit the company the most.
Equity theory could be used to gauge how fairly people think they are being
rewarded and work out a fair pay scale. This reward can be either monetary or
intangible. Vroom’s expectancy theory could be explained to employees to get
them to realise where they need to improve to become more motivated. This will
help staff find specific areas they can work on to be happy on the job.
Using Maslow’s theory, it can be made sure that the staff are being paid enough
to cover the first step of the needs pyramid (like food, rent etc). This theory is too
rigid mainly because it doesn’t leave any space for cultural values.
51
Not everyone has the same ‘needs pyramid’ as Maslow believed. McClelland
recognised this and his theory could be used to put people where they will be
most suited. Employees would be happier when working where they are most
suited rather than where they are just being paid the most.
2.4 CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY RELATED PRODUCTIVITY STUDIES
The construction industry is a key contributor to both the developing and

developed economies. Productivity in construction related activities is therefore
important: for the developed countries – it is a matter of economic growth and
social welfare and investigating further improvements if possible, whilst for the
developing countries, it is a matter of efficient utilization of resources.
According to Lowe (1987) “the importance of productivity growth to an

individual enterprise, an industry or an economy is something on which most
economists would agree”. Arditi and Mochtar (2000) reaffirm that “the output of
the construction industry constitutes one-half of the gross capital and (3-8) % of
the gross domestic product (GDP) in most countries”. Chau and Walker (1988)
stated “advances in productivity are one of the means to achieve economic
growth”.
This section briefly reviews the works of contemporary authors on the subject of
construction productivity. No specific studies on productivity in any industry
sector could be traced for the United Arab Emirates (UAE). This was verified
with Chambers of Commerce in Abu Dhabi. However, several studies and
researches were carried out in US, European nations, and South East Asian
nations.
Much research in the area of construction productivity focused on the factors

affecting labour. Several eminent personalities and researchers have contributed
to the study on productivity and in general the motivation of an individual to do
work more efficiently and in a more effective manner. However many of them
tend to look at these factors in isolation and thus seem inadequate in their
52
recommendations for productivity improvements, this is because labour

productivity, especially in a construction industry, is a complex and multifaceted
issue.
Although, several researches about productivity in different sectors have been

carried out to define the factors affecting productivity, the characteristics of the
construction industry as opposed to manufacturing industry, limit the application
of the recognized literature in other industries, especially manufacturing
industries. This is because; the construction industry has a constantly changing
business environment and has a project based nature of workload. Firms within a
construction industry have an irregular flow of work, experience significant
pressures to reduce the core workforce and to create and sustain alternative
working arrangements catering to this workload. The scope for technological
innovations is comparatively less; although there has been a considerable
improvement in quality of building materials, repair materials, formwork and
shuttering, use of precast – offsite fabrication, it is still very much labour
intensive. As much as 30% of the cost of any project is on labour. {Source: Case
Study Company Records}. The human resource (HR) practices within a
construction industry depend on the ownership, size, strategy and structure,
prevailing market conditions, and legacy of the past. There is considerable
diversity within the construction sector. The construction industry exists in a
volatile situation in which demand fluctuation and highly competitive contractual
market require firms to be flexible in their organization structure, method of
operation, while at the same time retain control of costs.
2.4.1 Factors Affecting Productivity (a review of contemporary publications)
Olomolaiye et al (1998) stated that factors affecting construction productivity are

rarely constant, and may vary from country to country – project to project, and
even within a project based on circumstances. They classified the factors into two
categories – external factors included nature of the industry, construction client
knowledge of construction procedures, weather, and level of economic
53
development; and the Internal factors included management, technology, labour

and labour unions.
Herbsman and Ellis (1990) classified the critical factors affecting construction
productivity as technological and organizational influence factors. Technological
factors include specifications, design, location (geography, topography, climate
and layout) and materials, while the organizational factors comprise of
production, labour (wages, relations, manager, and employee) and social factors.
They also suggested a statistical model that establishes a quantitative relationship

between the influence factors and the productivity rates. However the model was
formulated for a combination of nine mixed value variables such as area, number
of elements, number of stories, supervisor performance, length of wall, openings,
daily temperature, working hours, and transportation distance.
Alinaitwe et al (2007) conducted a survey of building projects in Uganda and

ranked factors affecting productivity, taking into account the effects of time, cost
and quality. The ten most significant problems affecting labour productivity listed
by them are:
• incompetent supervision
• lack of skills
• rework
• lack / breakdown of tools / equipment
• poor construction methods
• poor communication
• inaccurate drawings
• stoppages because of rejected work
• political insecurity
• harsh weather conditions
Enshassi A (2007) in his study of factors affecting the labour productivity in

building projects in Gaza strip, grouped factors - negatively affecting productivity
and ranked them in order of their importance. These are:
54
• Materials and Tools Factors

• Supervision & Leadership Factors
• Quality Factors
• Time Factors
• Manpower Factors
• Project Factors
• External Factors
• Motivation Factors
• Safety Factors
Horner (1982) identified ten factors which affect construction productivity –

quality, number and balance of workforce, motivation of labour force, degree of
mechanization, continuity of work, complexity of work, required quality of
finished work, quality and number of managers, and weather.
Snow and Alexander (1992) summarized all the productivity influencing factors
into seven logical broad sensed variables. These are equipment, skills, placement,
standards, physical environment, supervision and materials.
Lim et al (1995) studied factors affecting productivity in Singapore – construction

industry. They found that the most important factors were difficulty with
recruitment of supervisors, high rate of labour turnover, absenteeism from work
site, communication problems with foreign workers.
Sanders and Thomas (1993) identified factors affecting productivity of masonry

type works in the USA - the project related factors – the work type, the physical
buildings elements, the construction methods, the design requirements, weather
and crew size.
Kazaz and Ulubeyli (2006) ranked ten organizational factors based on a survey of
construction companies in Turkey. These are:
• Site management
• Material management
55
• Systematic flow of work (planning)

• Supervision
• Site layout
• Occupational education and training
• Crew size and efficiency
• Firm reputation
• Camps
• Relaxation allowances
Dejahang (2004) analyzed determinants of productivity on construction sites in

the UK as part of his PhD thesis and concluded the following factors have a
strong influence on improving the construction productivity –
• Preconstruction Activities
• Site / Project Management characteristics
• Management factors
• Management system
• Labour characteristics
• Resource management
• Motivating and Hygiene factors
Heizer and Render (1990) classified factors influencing site productivity into
three groups – labour characteristics factors, project work conditions, and non
productive activities.
Bishop (1968) suggested that site productivity could be improved by changes in

the design. Low (2001) paper on quantifying the relationships between
buildability, structural quality and productivity in construction concluded that
there is a positive correlation between buildability and productivity in
construction. Fox et al (2002) reported that customer led design and location
specific construction projects provide inherent difficulties for productivity
improvement. Construction operation / activity itself were also found to be an
important factor as evident in analysis carried out by Tavakoli (1985).
56
Borcherding (1986) classified causes of reduced productivity in construction into

five categories – waiting or idling time, travelling, working slowly, doing
ineffective work, and doing rework.
Thomas et al (1989) stated that many researches seemed to be searching for

factors in an isolated manner. In reality, construction activities are more
coordinated, rather than isolated. Thomas and Zavrski (1999) consolidated the
various factors and developed the factor model of labour productivity as
illustrated in the Fig. 2.3 below.
Fig. 2.3: Factor Model of Construction Labour Productivity

(Thomas & Zavrski, 1999)
Enshassi et al (2007) refer to a United Nations Report of 1995, which lists two
major sets of factors that affect the site labour productivity requirements -
organizational continuity and execution continuity. Organizational continuity
encompasses physical components of work, specification requirements, design
details, etc. Execution continuity relates to the work environment and how
57
effectively a job is organized and managed. Management aspects include weather,

material, and equipment availability, congestion and out of sequence work.
Studies carried out by the Centre for Construction Industry Studies (1970-1998),
(Haas C T et al, 1999), have indicated that technological advances appear to have
a big role in increasing productivity rates. The studies tackled historical
comparison of technological innovation in manufacturing and construction and its
impact on productivity. The outcome is that there is significant value to be
gained for the construction industry if technology could be more effectively
leveraged to improve construction productivity.
Olomolaiye (1990) found that good supervision was the most significant variable
influencing percentage productive time and that fluctuations in productivity are
primarily the responsibility of on site management. This would mean that site
supervisors have a powerful influence on the behaviour of the site employees and
management relations with the site team could be source for positive or negative
influence.
Reinshmidt (1976) stated that accurate information will help faster decision
making, and will prevent delays, rework, low motivation, and therefore improve
productivity.
Stukhard (1987) suggested that good project performance hinges on the

attainment of forecasted productivity and manpower levels with minimized
construction interferences, effective field coordination, proper control of site
activities.
Parker (1980) suggested that the amount and quality of communication that flows
between the managers and those executing the work could alter productivity
levels.
The works of the above mentioned authors have been summarized into a matrix.
Reference Table 2.2.
58
Factors affecting Authors Reference (Reference Legend : Table 2.2)

construction
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Frequency
productivity
Nature of Industry x 1
Nature of client x 1
Weather / Climate x x x x x x x 7
Economic Development / x x 2
Job security
Management / Supervisor x x x x x x x x x 9
Technology / level of x x 2
mechanization
Workmen and Unions / x x x x x x x 7
Worker Characteristics
Organization Influence x 1
Specification / Drawings x x 2
Design x x x x x 5
Location / Project factors x x x x x x 6
Actual work type x x x x x 5
complexity / buildability
Wages x 1
Labour Relations x x 2
Skills x x 2
Rework x x 2
Construction methods & x x x x x 5
work planning
Table 2.2: Literature Review Matrix: Collection of Factors affecting construction productivity (general)
59
Factors affecting Authors Reference (Reference Legend : Table 2.2)

construction
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Frequency
productivity
Political insecurity x 1
Material and Tools x x x x 4
Leadership
Quality of work x 1
Safety whilst working x 1
Motivation x x x 3
Motivators & Hygiene
Factors
Absenteeism x 1
Communication / x x x x 4
language / information
Crew size x x 2
Education & Training x x 2
Brand Name x 1
Camps / Welfare x x x 3
Recreation x 1
Preconstruction activities x 1
Interruptions and Non x 1
Productive work
Changes x x 2
Overtime x 1
Table 2.2: Literature Review Matrix: Collection of Factors affecting construction productivity (general) contd./-
60
1. Olomalaiye et al (1998) 8. Kazaz and Ulubeyli (2006)

2. Herbsman & Ellis (1990) 9. Dejahang (2004)
3. Alinaitwe et al (2007) 10. Heizer and Render (1990)
4. Enshassi (2007) 11. Bishop (1968), Low (2001), Fox et al (2002)
5. Horner (1982) and Fox et al (2002)
6. Snow and Alexander (1992) 12. Thomas et al (1989)
7. Sanders and Thomas (1993) 13. Smithers and Walker (2000)
14. Reinshmidt (1976), Stukhard (1987), Parker
(1980)
Legend (Table 2.2) : Reference of Authors :

Literature Review Matrix : Collection of Factors Affecting Construction
Productivity
2.4.2 Factors Affecting Motivation of Construction Operatives (a review of

contemporary publications)
The motivation theories discussed in section 2.3 are often criticized in that they
don’t sufficiently address the effect of job and work related variables. Price
(1992) argues that a number of early theories were primarily based on
individual’s motivation, emphasis being on the individual’s personality and role
played by personal need in determining work behaviour. However these theories
provide a baseline for further research. The one-off nature of the construction
processes limits the application of Taylor principles both in terms of work process
and associated payment systems.
For the workmen and supervisors working on site in construction industries,

Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and Fredrick Herzberg’s hygiene and motivator
theories seem more relevant and have been efficiently used by researchers.
Research undertaken by Ruthankoon and Ogunlana (2003), Gilbert and Walker
61
(2001), Price (1992) and Hague (1985) used the motivation theories as a
framework for their research.
Ruthankoon and Ogunlana (2003) state that the construction industry has unique
characteristics and may have specific effects on employee motivation. Price
(1992) highlighted that the transient nature of the construction industry with short
term projects is a major factor in employee’s motivation as compared to other
industries.
Extensive research has been conducted into construction operatives’ motivation

by Olomolaiye, who investigated the work of bricklayers in UK and Nigeria.
Olomolaiye (1990) measured the influence of variables by the perceived presence
and importance and ranked these variables. A good relationship with work
colleagues was found to be the most important in UK along with the level of pay;
however, the level of pay was found to be the most important in Nigeria.
Laufer and Borcherding (1981) indicated that financial incentives for the
construction labour force are practical; they could raise productivity, lower
production costs, shorten the construction time and increase the earnings of the
workers. On the other hand, Olomolaiye did not find a significant relationship
between motivation and the work rate.
Nichols and Langford (1987) empirical study confirmed application of

Herzberg’s two factor theory on motivation. The hygiene factors such as money,
supervision, status, security, working conditions, policies, and interpersonal
relations prevent dissatisfaction but do not necessarily motivate whilst the
motivator factors such as the work itself, recognition, advancement, possibility of
responsibility and achievement can have a positive effect on job satisfaction
leading to higher productivity. More importantly they consider autonomy and
responsibility as a powerful motivator; a positive quality of life leads to a reduced
absenteeism and turnover, greater job satisfaction.
62
Aiyetan (2006) conducted a research aimed at establishing a relationship between

motivation and performance of workers in the Nigerian construction industry.
Table 2.3 below lists a set of motivating factors in the construction industry as
ranked by Aiyetan.
1 Overtime 8 Working Conditions

2 Health Care 9 Relation with Co-workers
3 Provision of Transport 10 Work Itself
4 Promotion 11 Responsibility
5 Increase in salary 12 Holiday abroad with pay
6 Recognition 13 Achievement
7 Company Policy 14 Telephone Services
15 Sharing Profit
Table 2.3: Motivating Factors in Construction Industry (Aiyetan, 2006)
Ogunlana and Chang (1998) studied the needs of both workers and supervisors
and ranked motivators and demotivators in Thailand using the framework of
Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and Herzberg’s two factor theory of hygiene and
motivators.
Table 2.4 shows the ranked motivators in their order of importance –
63
Motivators ranked by Workers De-motivators ranked by

Workers
Fringe benefits Bad treatment by supervisors
Good relationships with Unsafe conditions
workmates
Good safety provision Lack of recognition of effort
Job security Incompetence of crew members
Reduction instruction changes Redoing work
Good orientation programmes Lack of communication
Participation in decision making Poor inspection and supervision
Recognition on the job Productivity urged but no one
cares
Challenging task Underutilization of skill
Lack of participation in decision
making
Table 2.4: Motivators and De-motivators ranked by Workers in Thailand
However a cross country comparison of motivators for the UK, Nigeria and
Thailand using the Maslow’s need based categorization showed that the ranking
differed based on whether the workers were from developed countries such as
UK or those from developing economies such as Thailand. For example workers
from Nigeria and Thailand ranked fringe benefits as the most important
motivator whiles it was not the case with UK, perhaps because they are
comparatively better paid and are able to take care of their basic needs. They
conclude also that motivators are not to be treated universally but must be seen in
proper cultural backgrounds. This was in relation to the Nigerian workers opting
to rank challenging task as opposed to the Thai counterpart.
In the UAE, a similar phenomenon is noticed. Workers being predominantly

from the Asian countries and especially not being highly educated, they are
more motivated to have a stable job, salaries on time, welfare related issues
such as camp accommodation, food, transport, laundry and leave on time.
64
Price (1992) indicates that there is a distinct relationship between remuneration,

motivation and site efficiency.
Chan (2002) identified the human factors influencing productivity levels – these
are planning, teamwork, welfare, and job security. Chan (2005) in his PhD thesis
established the importance of workforce factors such as communication, site
welfare, skills and job prospects in under pinning the factors affecting
construction labour productivity. He also asserted that work content and work
environment factors dealt with short term labour productivity improvements.
Hanna et al (2005) analyzed the impact of extended duration overtime on the

construction labour productivity and found that the productivity decreased as the
number of hours worked per week increases or the project duration increases.
Empirical evidence seems to suggest that there is a relationship between training

and productivity. Clarke (1992) defines training as “The individual experience
or transmission of knowledge of specific tasks”. Extensive researches were
conducted about the effects of training. Many of them compiled comparisons
among different countries or different sections of the industry. Clarke and Wall
(1998) studied the house building sectors in Britain, Germany and the
Netherland. The outcome of the study is that cost of supervision is better
manifested in Germany and the Netherlands over Britain and suggested that this
was due to difference in training provisions.
Naoum and Hackman (1996) studied the management factors, employee

motivation factors and experience and training factors as perceived by head
office personnel and those by the site personnel.
According to Smithers and Walker (2000) “The construction process is largely a

people management business. Therefore analysis of the factors related to
employees, employment conditions would provide a useful insight about factors
affecting productivity level”. The outcome of their study on projects with high
and low productivity is summarized in Table 2.5.
65
Projects with high Projects with low productivity

productivity
• Well-thought out, • Poor planning, inexperienced
realistic plan planner
• Building design that • Repetitive, simple design that
enables the use of trade uses very little or none of the
skills trade skills
• Good communication • ‘Them’ and Us’ attitude
between senior between senior management
management and and operatives
operatives • Lack of training
• Training investment • Inexperienced staff
• Experienced staff • Low staff morale
• High staff morale • Little or no welfare
• Good welfare • Inexperienced site manager
• Experienced and self- • Site far away from home
motivated site manager • Subcontractors or Labour only
• Site near to home subcontractors
• Job security and
retention of staff
Table 2.5: Differences in project characteristics with high / low productivity
Riddle (1976) suggested that productivity is closely related to skill and without
skill it is difficult for a worker to be productive. Skill can be increased by
training and experience.
Abdel-Wahab et al (2008) agrees with other researchers that there is a general

consensus on skills development and training as being important factors to
improving productivity and concludes that effective utilization of skills rather
than mere increase in the supply of skills is a key to productivity improvements.
66
Schriver and Bowlby (1984) and Chang (1991) emphasized morale of workers as
a key factor in measuring construction productivity. Employee moral can decline
due to material shortages, frequent foremen turnover, absenteeism, substandard
employee facilities, management labour conflicts.
Ankrah (2007) identified five principal dimensions of culture along which

project organizations differ. These dimensions are workforce orientation,
performance orientation, team orientation, client orientation and project
orientation.
Putz (1991) stated while considering productivity, more emphasis should be

given to values, beliefs, philosophies and less emphasis should be placed on
programmes, techniques and methods.
Many researchers have studied the impact of thermal environment or heat on

workers productivity. (Oglesby et al, 1989, Adrian, 1987, Hanna and Donald,
1994, Hancher and Abd-Elkhalek, 1998). Mohamed and Srinavin (2002) studied
in detail the effect of climatic conditions, task and clothing parameters using the
thermal comfort index. Here in the UAE, the climate being hot and humid, the
Federal Law stipulates that no work be conducted in the sun between 12-3 pm,
during the two hottest months of July and August. From the case study
company’s available safety data, there have several cases of heat stresses and
review of the productivity data generally indicate lower productivity values
during the summer months.
The literature review in this sub section has been summarized in Table 2.6.
67
Factors affecting Authors Reference (Reference Legend : Table 2.6) Frequency

construction productivity
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Good relationship with x x x 3
colleagues
Level of Pay x 1
Financial Incentives x 1
Autonomy and x x x 3
responsibility
Overtime x x 2
Health Care x 1
Transport Facilities x 1
Promotion x 1
Increment in Salaries x 1
Recognition x x 2
Working conditions x 1
Work Itself / content x x 2
Fringe Benefits x x 1
Safety provisions x 1
Job security x x 1
Less Interruptions x 2
Good orientation / x 1
induction
Challenging task x 1
Table 2.6: Literature Review Matrix: Motivating Factors in the Construction Industry
- 68 -
Factors affecting Authors Reference (Reference Legend : Table 2.6) Frequency

construction productivity
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Good planning x 1
Teamwork x 1
Welfare x 1
Communications x 1
Skills x x 2
Training x x 2
Experience x 1
Morale of workers x 1
Culture x 1
Values, Beliefs and x 1
Philosophies
Heat x 1
Climatic conditions x 1
Legend: (Table 2.6)
1. Olomalaiye et al (1990) 7. Hanna et al (2005)

2. Laufer and Borcherding (1981) 8. Clarke and Wall (1998)
3. Nichols and Langford (1987) 9. Riddle (1976), Abdel-Wahab et al (2008)
4. Aiyetan (2006) 10. Shriver and Bowlby (1984) and Chang (1991)
5. Ogunlana and Chang (1998) 11. Ankrah (2007)
6. Chan (2002) and (2005) 12. Putz (1991)
13. Oglesby et al (1989), Adrian (1987), Hanna and
Donald (1994), Hancher and Abd-Elkhalek (1998),
Mohamed and Srinavin (2002)
Table 2.6: Literature Review Matrix: Motivating Factors in the Construction Industry contd./-
- 69 -
Countries Thailand Indonesia Nigeria Iran Singapore Tanza- Ugan- Gaza Malay Frequency
nia da Strip -sia
Authors Reference 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 -
Factors affecting productivity
Lack of Materials x x x x x x 6
Incomplete x x x 3
drawings
Incompetent x x 2
Supervisors
Lack of Tools / x x x x x x x 7
Equipment
Absenteeism x x x x 4
Poor x x x 3
Communication
Instruction time x 1
Poor site layout x 1
Inspection delay x x x 3
Rework x x x x x 5
Interference x x x 3
Lack of Supervision x x x x 4
Lack of workmen x x x 3
Weather x x x 3
Site Conditions x 1
Safety x 1
Improper Planning x x x 3
Changing Crew size x 1
Labour Turnover x x 2
Leadership x 1
Lack of Skill x x 2
Wages x x 2
Level of x 1
Mechanization
Monetary x 1
Incentives
Political Insecurity x 1
Change of drawings x x 2
Non payment to x 1
suppliers
Table 2.7: Literature Review Matrix : Factors affecting construction

productivity across countries
Further a comparison has been made to list the factors affecting construction
productivity across countries based on the works of the above referred authors
(Reference Table 2.7 above). The countries are so chosen where similar
conditions as in the UAE exist – the economy is developing, workmen social and
70
financial statuses are similar. Although there are related studies in the UK and in
the USA, these were kept out for obvious differences in the constitution of the
workmen and their status in these countries.
1- Makulsawatudom et al (2002)
2- Kaming et al (1997) 6- Lema (1996)
3- Olomolaiye et al (1987) 7- Alinaitwe et al (2007)
4- Zakeri et al (1996) 8- Enshassi (2007)
5- Lim and Alum (1995) 9- Kadir et al (2005)
Legend (Table 2.7): Authors Reference

Literature Review Matrix: Factors affecting construction productivity across
countries
2.5 BACKGROUND TO THE UAE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY
2.5.1 Economic Characteristics of the UAE Construction Industry
The United Arab Emirates is a federation of seven emirates founded in 1971 -

Abu Dhabi, Dubai, Sharjah, Ajman, Fujairah, Umm Al Quwain and Ras Al
Khaimah, with Abu Dhabi being the capital of the country. Each emirate enjoys
considerable level of independence with a ruler for local government that
runs/controls economic and financial affairs.
The UAE is the most dynamic and a highly emerging economy in the Middle
East. There is no income tax in the UAE. Driven by its oil wealth, the country has
witnessed an unmatched development and transformation over a period of time.
Oil exports and foreign investments are the two important aspects which have
completely changed the face of the UAE in the region.
The UAE is now one of the most competitive economies in the region when it
comes to attracting foreign investments. The rapid economic development of
UAE has been fuelling an unprecedented construction boom and infrastructure
71
development in all corners of the country that attracted investors from around the
world. Most of the investments are directed in developing infrastructure for
tourism, hospitality, retail and healthcare industry. The government’s efforts to
diversify from oil-based income to other industries will drive the infrastructure
investments in the country in coming years (UAE Yearbook 2009).
Despite the economic slowdown all over the world, the UAE seems to be
committed to develop several projects in housing, tourism, industrial and
commercial facilities, education and healthcare amenities, transportation, utilities,
communications, ports and airports. The regional effect of the economic situation
has however led to a credit squeeze, credit has become costlier and some of the
large projects are reportedly under hold. Despite this, the construction industry in
the UAE is one of the most buoyant and dynamic industry of approximately AED
(Arab Emirate Dirhams) 500 billion annual revenues and a growth rate of 7-8 %.
The industry is the key source for employment and is only 38 years old since the
oil boom in the 1970’s and the birth of the UAE Federation. Construction plays a
dynamic role in the process of economic growth and development of the UAE
accounting for approximately 8% of its GDP (UAE Yearbook 2009). Related
trading and ancillary industries depend upon construction industry, which
employs a large number of expatriate workforce. In the UAE, oil and gas account
for approximately 40 % of the exports, and with a long stint of high oil prices,
there was a massive wave of liquidity fuelling the construction and equities boom
further; until the global economic crisis affected the region.
The typical features of the UAE construction industry are:

• Physical Nature of the product is large, heavy and expensive.
• Construction activity is cyclical in nature; there are periods of high
activity followed by lows.
• Construction projects are one off and are not standardized
• Industry profitability ranges from 2% on civil building projects to upto
20% for oil field projects and special projects. Some of the special projects
72
are at cost plus giving rise to super normal profits. (Source : Case study
company profit and loss statements)
• Its size is significant and is fourth largest contributor Oil & Gas (~35%),
Government Activities (13.5%), Tourism & Finance each 12% (Source
Gulf News)
• Vast and disparate set of activities whose final output ranges from villas,
offices, housing complexes, hotels, sports authorities, power plants,
petrochemical factories, marine construction works such as harbours,
jetties, marinas, breakwaters, sea water intakes, pipelines, roads and
airports.
• Intermittent demand on the construction industry is on one hand for the
large value capital investment infrastructure projects while on the other it
is for their maintenance, repair, rehabilitation and eventual demolition and
rebuilding (smaller value).
• It is predominantly public sector oriented, products require a long time to
plan and build, on an average around 2 years, and its products are long-
term capital investments and are fixed structures.
• Financing is subject to special economic and financial considerations and
government approvals and is invariably related to the oil price and
subsequent revenues.
• There are many players overall in the industry, but get limited by the
classification / categorization by the Town Planning Department
prequalification / registration process required by authorities and oil
companies
• Final assembly process is site specific, although the component parts may
be coming from different parts of the world. This places clear limits upon
the process of centralized mass production of component parts or
prefabrication for the scale economies to be gained from mass production
and must always be balanced against the subsequent costs of transporting
component parts or sections of structure to the construction site. Scale
economies in terms of reduced costs due to apportioning of overheads to a
large number of projects does exist.
73
• Degree of lateral integration – Most of the relevant competitors have

backward integrated in so far as to have the major electromechanical
service works now done by their in-house divisions, previously being
undertaken by specialist subcontractors.
• Because of the physical nature of the project, the structure of the industry
and the characteristics of demand, the method of price determination is
usually a discrete process for each project and for each piece of work
subcontracted by the process of tendering, negotiation or their
combination.
• Products by contractors can be differentiated by use of superior
technology, e.g. use of specialized quick fix formwork and shuttering and
precast alternatives; or by the presence of highly skilled and efficient
workmen resulting in faster work progress.
• Competitive advantages accrue to local players with long-term expertise
(experience curves) of local market, preferential deals and contacts; skilled
and experienced workmen; and better productivity.
• It is the researcher’s experience, that corruption is not predominant in the
UAE construction industry; however it is possible to have influential
lobbies within client representatives, which could favour one bidder over
the other citing technical reasons. The bid documents clearly indicate that
the award need not be given to the lowest bidder.
• Construction industry in the UAE is labour intensive, depends on cheap
expatriate labour from Asia, Arabic regions with Europeans / South
Africans at higher levels.
• There are constant changes in labour and immigration laws, placing great
financial constraints on contractors. Entry and Exit of labour / operatives
are both therefore difficult as a large amount of cash deposit has to be
deposited in the government exchequer.
• Although, it is common to have migrant workers in the construction
industry in almost all parts of the world, the UAE Labour Market is made
up of a mix of almost 110 nationalities, common to the Gulf region and
has unique characteristics; which affect the construction teams and their
74
productivity; as the nationality factor has to be factored in making groups

and in camp accommodations.
• Expatriate working class amount to approximately 90% of the population;
they come from diverse background and culture from the Asian and the
African subcontinent. UAE law does not allow organized unions for
workmen, nor has statistics on standard productivity rates, except for
some surveys on National Workplace Employment Relations (2001).
• The UAE Labour law does not allow free movement of labour, except for
some exempt categories such as Engineers, Doctors, and Accountants.
Change of jobs is not an easy option for workmen.
Oil production and revenues from the sale of oil still constitutes the largest single
component of GDP. In 2001 this share was 29.4% showing steady decline in the
past 2 decades. This reflects the volatility of oil prices (touching $100 a barrel) in
international market and the diversification underway across the UAE economy.
The U.A.E. Government has driven a diversification strategy in the economy
through direct investment and micro economic policies. Accordingly the share of
the non oil sector has been constantly rising. At present levels of production, oil
and gas reserves should last for more than 100 years. The government has
increased spending on job creation and infrastructure expansion and is opening up
its utilities to greater private sector involvement. Higher oil revenue, strong
liquidity, and cheap credit in 2005-2007 led to a surge in asset prices (shares and
real estate) and consumer inflation.
The fast and vast economic transformation has resulted in dramatic changes to the
labour market which has affected the work, employment and employees in many
ways. Such implications involve wages, income regulations of wages and
income, and employer/employee relationship. The result is that the labour market
is subjected to influences from a variety of sources that are changing rapidly and
drastically.
Table 2.8 summarizes the unique characteristics of the UAE Construction

Industry vis-a-vis the typical characteristics of a construction industry.
75
Unique to the UAE Typical of Construction Industry

• UAE is composed of seven • Profitability differs 2% for Building
emirates, who have subtle Projects and upto 30% for Oil and Gas
differences in handling visa and Projects
immigration formalities, • Significant contributor to GDP around 8%.
contractor registration • Constant changes in labour laws,
• Contractors from one emirate immigration rules
cannot undertake major • Mix nationalities and diverse culture,
contracts unless registered in language barriers
the emirate; • Comparatively cheap labour from Asian
• Contractor personnel with other countries
emirates visa cannot work in • Product is large, heavy and expensive
the Oil & Gas Projects of Abu • Cyclical nature of projects, period of highs
Dhabi and lows
• Equipment and Vehicles for • One off projects, mostly non standardized
Projects cannot move freely • Wide range of projects, complexity and
from one emirate to another, value wise
unless the equipment / vehicles • Predominantly public sector oriented
have that emirate registration • Average project duration around 2 years
• No income tax
• Authority classification limit types of
• Family sponsorship is easier projects that can be executed by
than in other neighbouring Gulf contractors
countries
• Final Assembly has to be on site; off site
• No exit visa requirements as in fabrication done e.g. precast elements and
other neighbouring Gulf installed on site
countries
• Degree of vertical integration e.g. having
own in-house Mechanical and Electrical
Services
• Pricing is Project Specific
• Differentiation by reputation of
contractors, and the methods used for
construction
• Labour intensive
• Competitive advantages for local players
Table 2.8: Construction Industry Characteristics
76
2.5.2 UAE Labour Market
The total labour force is more than 3.3 million and this is dominated by foreign
workers. Expatriate workers make up approximately 90 percent of the UAE labor
force, and 98 percent work in the private sector. Unemployment among UAE
nationals was noticeably high, especially for female UAE nationals, as most
prefer to be in the public sector.
Due to the heavy dependence of expatriate labour force, the government

regularizes the movement of this huge influx of work-force between different
employees and to ensure acceptable welfare level for them. All workers in the
UAE are generally working under the umbrella of unified labour laws issued by
Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs (MOLSA). UAE Federal Law No. 8 applies
to all labour issues and there is no scope for collective dispute arbitrations in
short, no trade unions are allowed.
Expatriate employees who come to the UAE for a job must be sponsored by the
employer. A minimum salary of AED 4000/- must be maintained to enable the
employee to sponsor his wife and children. There is further a proposal now to
increase this minimum threshold to AED 10,000/-. This is the reason why most
expatriates reside as bachelor resulting in a gender imbalance in the U.A.E.
Moreover, the average educational profile of migrant labour force was a little
lower than their UAE national counterpart (Abdelkarim, 2001). To be consistent
with the UAE deve1opment strategy, MOLSA recently announced that all
incoming foreign workers must have at least a high school certificate. Those with
low educational qualification will gradually be asked to leave when their contracts
expire - although this was not implemented.
Emiratisation measures have been constantly taken up to increase UAE national’s

participation in the labour market, especially in private sector. Overall
emiratisation is confronted by both supply and demand side problems. More and
more young UAE nationals, mostly University and College graduates, are
77
entering the labour market. Although their expectations are different than their
counterpart prospective expatriate employees, their role in labour market has
increased within the oil sector, governmental jobs, and banking, being the main
sectors of the economy.
UAE specific data on productivity of construction trades could not be traced,

except for some surveys on National Workplace Employment Relations (2001).
Each contractor has his own experience and database to go by.
Recent media reports on welfare conditions of labourers housed in the camps

around UAE are debatable. It is the researcher’s opinion, based on seeing the
changes and improvements over the last 30 years, that much is being done now
than before to ensure the labourer’s welfare is taken care of by the employers.
This includes stipulation of minimum living space, provision of facilities and
ensuring that wages are paid on time and a more effective grievance handling cell
within the Ministry of Labour.
2.5.3 Demographic Influences & Cultural Backgrounds
The UAE Labour market is made up of a mix of different nationalities, common

to the overall Gulf region. The total labour force is more than 3.3 million (UAE
2009 Handbook) and this is dominated by foreign workers, especially from the
Asian countries. The distribution of nationalities from the case study contracting
company is approximately Indians (45%), Pakistanis (20%), and Bangladeshis
(15%) and from Arabic countries (20%) such as Jordan, Egypt, Lebanon and
Syria.
The labour force from these countries have a varied background in terms of
culture, education, family background, and individual cases of the need to work
overseas to care for specific requirements back home. Some are skilled, some are
semi skilled; some have GULF experience, some do not.
78
Productivity from a set of people with similar background also varies. This
demographic mix makes it difficult to formulate teams on sites, places constraints
in housing the workmen separately based on nationalities and generally stifles
productivity initiatives as nationality issues have to be considered in setting up
best teams based on skills.
2.5.4 Environmental Conditions
The UAE has basically six months of summer and six months of winter. The
summers are hot and humid with temperatures reaching upto 45-47 degrees
centigrade and relative humidity, varying from 40-85% in general and in some
cases as high as 95%. The UAE Labour Law stipulates midday break from 12.30 -
3.30 pm during the hottest months of July and August every year. Winters are
pleasant and coldest winter day does not really affect the work men as much as
the summer. Winters come with dense fog though which might result in
disruptions to work. Hot humid climate makes the workmen perspire and they get
tired soon; which requires break from work and consequent effect on productivity.
2.5.5 UAE Statutory Laws
UAE Labour laws require a workman to be sponsored by a company and does not
allow free movement of labour, except for some exempt categories such as
Engineers, Doctors, Accountants, that too only after they have served at least one
year with the current sponsor. Reference: UAE Ministry of Labour Notifications.
These laws are beneficial to the employer since the workmen cannot freely
change jobs to their liking and give no option than then to accept these tough
conditions. This might lead to a lack of motivation on site and consequent effect
on productivity. Having said that the UAE Labour law is quite protective in terms
of end of service payments to workmen, air ticket to country and now recently the
authorities have made it mandatory for employers to give medical insurance to the
workmen / staff and their families. Almost all of the workmen are working at
single status and stay in company camps.
79
For the sake of this research, it is assumed that there has been achieved a certain
amount of balance in accepting the psychological contract (Mullins, 2007), more
objectively addressed and documented by the “UAE Labour Contract”, under the
Federal Law No 8, 1980 (Reference section 2.1.6); where there is a clear
statement of responsibilities of the employer (organization) and the
responsibilities of the employee (individual). An amount of wage is agreed based
on the category of trade; overtime rates are known, weekly and yearly holidays
are known. The overtime rates are paid at the rate of 25% over and above the
normal rate for ordinary overtime and at the rate of 50% over and above for
Fridays and other Holidays. This is the background context for the employee-
employer relationship existing on the construction sites in the UAE.
2.5.6 No Trade Unions
The UAE Labour Law No. 8 caters to all the welfare, salaries, leave, disciplinary
actions both for daily paid and for the monthly paid expatriate population in the
UAE. The issues regulated by this law are:-
• Employment of Workers, Young Persons, and Women
• Contract of Employment
• Hours of work and Leave
• Industrial Safety , Preventive Measures, Health and Social Care for
Workers
• Disciplinary rules
• Termination of Contracts of Employment Severance Pay
• Compensation in respect of Employment Accidents and Occupational
Diseases
• Collective Labour Disputes
• Labour Inspection
• Penalties
UAE laws prohibit collective representation and bans labour / trade unions. Even
consultation between and collusive representation within a company are not
encouraged. However welfare of the workmen is overseen by the Ministry of
80
Labour Welfare Section, Reference the UAE Federal Labour Law no 8; and any
complaints regarding welfare or mistreatment or against the rights of workers is
taken up seriously with recourse to court settlement if required. Thus there are no
established productivity rates duly recognized by company management and
labour unions alike. Every company have their own database to go by.
2.5.7 UAE NATIONAL WORKPLACE EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS SURVEY
TANMIA is a Federal Government Independent Authority, whose main

objectives are to create job opportunities for the UAE National workforce, reduce
the unemployment ratio, enhance the skills and productivity of the national
workforce and recommend relevant policies to the UAE Federal Government. A
survey, Reference Table 2.9, was conducted in 2001 in the UAE by TANMIA and
the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs (MOLSA) indicating the key elements
of the existing labour relations practice across the enterprises participating in the
survey. This survey has covered a number of variables such as workplace, wage
strategy, health and safety at work, dispute settlement, and a number of other
variables.
With respect to human resources management and development strategies, the

survey showed a good percentage of about 41.4% of the enterprises having formal
strategies. The picture with respect to workplace training was less impressive and
was as low as 20%. The organizations do not have designed programme for
workplace – based employee training. This low percentage is indicative of a
labour market with a high level of expatriates on short term basis or on temporary
contracts. International evidence strongly point towards workplace centered
training being a key indicator of productivity and international competitiveness
(ILO, 1998). Table 2.9 summarizes the outcome of the survey conducted in 2001
There are strong evidences from International survey results indicating that higher
productivity is gained from increased labour management consultation at
workplace (Tolentino 2000). In the National survey conducted in 2001 in the
UAE focused on the presence or lack of employee/employer consultative and
information sharing mechanisms. On the productivity question, thus the emphasis
81
of this survey was on the relations variables that have an internationally

demonstrable potential to promote productivity increases.
Overall, less than 30 percent of the enterprises surveyed had any kind of
productivity committee or a related mechanism. Over half of the very large
enterprises (with 200 plus employees), did have productivity committees in
operation. It is extremely significant that such committees were most likely to
operate in the federal government, local government sectors. In both the public
and private enterprise sectors, such committees were very significantly less
prevalent; rather non existent. Only in the manufacturing and construction sectors
was this figure higher than 30 percent. In all the other sectors, productivity
committees operated in less than 30 percent of responding enterprises.
Within enterprises reporting the presence of productivity committees, 41 percent

of enterprises reported that employee and management consultation on
productivity matters was extensive. Overall, the survey suggests some tentative
policy suggestion for the UAE. A platform for rapid productivity improvements
already exists in many UAE enterprises across all sectors. These have a high
demonstration effect already. National efforts to promote productivity have
already increased the visibility of productivity initiatives. Industry awards such as
the Dubai Quality Awards and Sheikh Khalifa Award for Excellence have also
helped improve the visibility and commitment to productivity.
82
Variables Variable description Total Percent of

responses enterprises have
(N) such a practice
HR Practices
1) Strategic HR Employee development and/or manpower planning are 699 44.8 %

covered in the enterprise’s strategic plan
2) Extensive Over 60% of employees received formal on-the job 364 34.3%
employee training and/or off-the-job training
3) Extensive Over 60% of employees had their work performance 639 44.1 %
performance formally appraised
appraisal
4) Briefing system Does your establishment have a formal system of 671 55.6 %
briefings for any section or all sections
5) Employee Employees are fully committed to the value of the 661 93.3 %
commitment enterprise
6) Grievance Does your organisation clearly lay out procedures for 558 45.5 %
handling handling staff grievances
7) Health and safety Does your organisation have its own written health and 675 50.4 %
safety guidelines and manuals
Wage and remuneration
8) Wage set by Are wages/salaries and remuneration set by 688 92.4 %

management management for all employees management for all
employees
9) Profit related pay Does your enterprise have a profit related pay incentive 698 40.7%
scheme
10) Performance Does your enterprises have employee performance 681 54.6%
related pay related pay incentive
Management and
employee consultation
11) Consultative Any formation or informal consultative committees of 646 27.4%
committee managers and employees at your workplace
12) Consultation Do not introduce any changes without first discussing 650 73.7%
the implications with employees
Productivity
development
13) Productivity Does your organization have a productivity 586 27.0%
committee development committee
14) Organisation Has your organization actively considered (or is 611 29.6%
restructuring implementing ) any programme to restructure the
organization
Nationalization
15) Has your organization taken specific measures over the 409 29.6%
Nationalization past 12 months to increase the number of nationals
effort employed in organization
Table 2.9: 2001 UAE National Workplace Employment Relations Survey Results
83
2.6 FACTORS AFFECTING PRODUCTIVITY IN THE UAE

CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY
From the study of the classical theories of management and motivation as

discussed in sections 2.1-2.4, a review of the contemporary works on productivity
(section 2.5), the literature review summary matrices (table 2.2, 2.6 and 2.7) and
the number of times the factors have been referred by authors, together with the
researcher’s experience of last 38 years in the construction industry in the UAE,
four major category classification of factors affecting productivity in the UAE
construction industry have been established.
Environmental Factors
Organization
Factors
Group Fac tors
Individual
Factors
Fig. 2.4: General Categories of Factors affecting productivity
These four major categories of factors are depicted in Fig. 2.4. They are:
1. Environmental Factors
2. Organizational Factors
3. Group Factors
4. Individual Factors
84
The above categorization of factors also falls in line with Mullins (2007), who
categorized the interrelated influences affecting behaviour of people into
environmental, organizational, group and individual factors.
As depicted in Fig. 2.4, the four categories of factors are interrelated,

interdependent and overlap each other to a certain extent. The environmental
factors do affect the organization as a whole, leading it to operate in a particular
way to suit the environment.
The organizational factors affect the group factors – affecting especially the
composition and welfare related environment factors. And finally the individual
factors especially the attitude and approach to work of workmen, are overall
affected by the group, the organization and the overall environment in which the
organization functions.
The matrices resulting from the literature review of classical and contemporary
works along with the researchers experience about factors that might affect labour
productivity were summed up in three matrices (Table 2.2, Table 2.6 and Table
2.7) totaling upto 110 factors. Since it is practically impossible to conduct a study
on the 110 factors, a need arose to short list them into fewer factors that will be
used in the survey questionnaire. These 110 factors have been reduced to 42
factors as shown in the Table 2.10, using the ones that have scored the higher
frequencies in the above mentioned matrices.
Table 2.10 also lists the sub-factors within each of the four major categories listed
at the start of this section.
A brief discussion follows thereafter on each of the factors as applicable to the

UAE Construction Industry and to the “case study” project sites selected for field
data collection and analysis.
85
Environmental Factors Group Factors

• labour market characteristics • group structure or composition
• economic situation • individual skills within the group
• safety and job security • overall skills of the group
• minimum wages, salary payments • nature of work / assignment
• use of technology / level of • demography of team / nationalities
mechanization • cultural differences
• climate & weather conditions • language barriers
• client requirements / project • frequency of changes
specific requirements
• site layout
• political situation
Organizational Factors Personal Factors

• work timings / working hours • level of academic / technical
• discipline / hierarchy order education
• policies and procedures, method • past training
statements • past experience
• management involvement, • overall competence and skills
accountability, transparency • age
• availability of materials / tools and • individual culture
equipment • individuals attitude
• construction work complexity • individuals creativity
• interruptions of work • absenteeism
• competencies of supervisors • motivation
o leadership skills • overall job satisfaction
o systematic delegation • overall communal feeling /
o level of communication belongingness
• reward schemes • overall appreciation
o attainable goals and targets
o overtime
o instant cash award schemes
o contract system of work
o fair treatment of employees
o fulfillment of promises
• appraisal / feedback schemes
o freedom of expression and
grievances
o experience is valued
• welfare schemes
o camp conditions
o lunch breaks / packets
o recreation
• brand name of company
Table 2.10: Comprehensive List of Factors affecting Productivity: UAE

Construction Industry
86
2.6.1 Environmental Factors
Environmental Factors are those that are external to the organization and they are
characteristic of the overall construction industry in the UAE.
Labour market characteristics

Workmen in the UAE are covered by the UAE - Federal Labour Law No. 8 of
1980, which lays down conditions of contract for daily paid workmen and for
monthly paid staff. All workmen in the country have to have a labour permit to
work followed by a visa to enter the country. This is arranged and paid for by the
employer. Workmen can change jobs only under certain conditions such as close
down of the company, and those who wish to leave are slapped with a six month
to one year ban of employment in the UAE. Most workmen come through
employment agencies within their home country, licensed to recruit and send
people abroad by their governments. The workmen pay upto 12 times their
monthly salary in terms of fees for the agent. Switching costs for workmen are
therefore very high. The fallout of this factor is that the employee sort of gets
fixed with the job for at least the first three years and financial incentives, job
security and good welfare conditions are good motivating factors for him to
perform more productively.
Economic situation
Although the Middle East is not as affected by the liquidity crisis as is the US and
other countries, there has been a fallout of the economic crisis; major projects
have been kept on hold; major clients are not paying up, cash flow has been
affected and this could mean holding back on salaries and increments. This could
affect productivity. However the conditions in Abu Dhabi are much better as
compared to Dubai.
Safety and Job Security

Labour contracts are of two types – open and limited. Open labour contract is one
where the contract is meant for an unlimited period, visa being renewed every
three years. Limited type contract means the contract is fixed for a year or two
87
depending on the length of contract. The most common type of contract is the
open ended one. Safety in terms of risk to life is considered normal as on any
other construction site; but the law enforcement is not as stringent as might be in
Europe. This is however changing. Job security depends upon the construction
cycle of highs and low. Some workmen do get caught in the wrong cycle. This is
particularly painful when they have no idea of which cycle the construction
industry is in and they have to spend money – given to agents to get them a job in
the UAE. This is one of the reasons why workmen generally don’t risk losing
their job in the first two to three years; some don’t go on leave saving as much to
square up on loans incurred to join here. On the other hand, some of the good
skilled workmen are retained by companies even during lean times, by shifting
them on to other trades, or seconding them to other companies (although not fully
legal) and sending them on long leaves.
Minimum Wages and Payment of Salaries

There is a minimum wage requirement for workmen in the UAE and a general
market trend is followed to fix wages for skilled tradesmen and labourers. Over
and above the minimum wage, an allowance for food is provided and
accommodation is provided free of charge. However accommodation standards
are not the best in the industry. On the other hand, salary payments are held back
upto 2 months as a retainer, lest workmen abscond and work with other
contractors. This is not legal but most of the contractors do this.
Climate
It is generally understood that extreme climate does have an influence on one’s
productivity. UAE has an extremely harsh summer with temperatures soaring
almost up to 49 degrees Celsius, while winters are pleasant with intermittent
foggy weather in the mornings. During the peak summer months of July and
August the workmen are given rest for two and a half hours from 12.30 to 3 pm.
No body is allowed to work outside in the sun during these times and authorities
have slapped penalties on violators. Besides having a hot climate in summer,
there is a high humidity whose combined effect leads to sweating, fatigue and a
consequent loss in productivity.
88
Client / Project Specific Requirements

Client / Project requirements vary depending upon whether the client is an oil
company or government body with stringent procedures for contractual
compliance. Oil and gas field projects for example have an extensive health,
safety and environment compliance requirement. On the other hand, private
clients and commercial developers may have less cumbersome procedures to
follow. Also rigid procedures, inspection regimes means waiting or idling time
for inspection and approvals which could make workmen frustrated affecting
productivity.
Site Layout
Site layouts could affect productivity – a constrained site with very limited space
for execution could act as demotivators for workmen within the confined spaces.
Workmen could be more productive on open green land construction sites. Some
of the oil and gas field project sites may be subjected to toxic gas and fumes and
suspensions which might physically impair workmen’s productivity.
Political Situation
UAE has a very stable and progressive political situation and rulers are generally
found to be people oriented – for their own countrymen as well as the majority of
the working expatriates. The government of UAE is on good terms with its
neighbours and other major superpowers. UAE is also safe in terms of social
crimes as very strict laws are in place and enforced. UAE therefore is a safe place
to work in current times.
2.6.2 Organizational Factors
Organizational Factors are those that are internal to the organization and
characterises the management strategy and policies of the organization.
Work Timings and Work Hours

Contracting or construction companies work minimum 10 hours a day. Additional
works after the first eight hours are compensated by overtime. Daily paid
89
workmen are paid overtime calculated at 1.25 times for normal overtime hours
and 1.5 times for Friday working and on other public holidays. Staff are not paid
overtime, but are covered by an annual bonus scheme. During peak times, work
continues through the nights, although special work permit is required form
authorities. Although Friday is a weekly off, a half day work is done before the
prayers start on a Friday. The labour law requirements of work timings and hours
worked are complied with by the construction company on whose sites – the field
study has been done. Although cash incentives are given for special accelerated
work assignments, most financial incentives come in the form of overtime to
workmen.
Discipline/hierarchy order
The normal organization typical to the UAE is: “the Workmen report to Charge
hands, who in turn report to the Foremen. The Foremen report to a General
Foreman, who in turn reports to the Project Engineer. The Project Engineer
reports to the Project Manager who represents the organization’s management.
The labour relations are also managed through the same hierarchy; although when
there is no much progress, workmen do cut the red tape and approach the Project
Manager and in some cases they approach the Human Resource Department in
the Head Office.
Policies, Procedures and Method Statements

Most of the construction companies in the UAE do have established policies,
procedures and method statements depicting the sequence of work are demanded
by consultants and client representatives. Presence of systematic procedures /
method statements leads to work done right the first time as against when work
needs to be reworked. Productivity during rework is not the same as during
normal production. On the other hand, productivity is sometimes affected by
procedural constraints such as waiting for approval by client as in the case of oil
and gas projects for the company.
90
Management Involvement, Accountability and Transparency

The level of transparency and accountability of management in the UAE
companies varies depending upon how mature the company is and in which
category classification (by the Town Planning Department) they belong.
Corporate Governance is picking up in the UAE. Generally most companies are
being managed by first generation entrepreneurs unlike the case of multinational
companies where all people in the hierarchy are employees. In terms of actual
work, it is generally seen that workmen and their teams together with their
foremen are left to themselves to undertake the technical task at hand, once the
work is explained and current drawings, specifications and safe working method
is explained by the Engineer or Supervisor. Further management commitment
demonstration involves visit to sites and meeting with the people on site.
Workmen do take these occasions to share their grievances to the visiting officer.
Availability of Materials & Tools / Equipment

Productivity is affected by not having materials in time lined up for use during
normal production. Any wait leads to disruption, which affects productivity.
Similarly not having the right tools and equipment, or waiting for them affects
quality and progress of the works and therefore the productivity.
Construction Work Complexity

Productivity rates exhibited by workmen differ depending upon how complex the
construction job is. For example, technical work in a live plant would entail
careful opening up of the space for work, fixing temporary supports and then
executing the work. This will return a productivity which is lower than the
normal. Also productivity rate may differ the first time the job is undertaken and
may subsequently improve as the same job is repeated elsewhere. Construction
activities although similar do differ in their applicable scope, and specification
and client requirements.
Competencies of supervisors/seniors/managers
In many cases superiors represent the example to be followed by the subordinates
or give an example to the degree of achievement one can reach. The degree of
91
competence of the supervisors and managers shape in many ways the employees
performance whether positive or negative. Numerous differences are present on
this issue as supervisors may not have been placed on merit; but because of
influence and preference of certain nationalities over the other due to valid
reasons.
It is broadly accepted that delegation leads to success and proper expansion of

organizations. A hierarchal orientation can lend itself to the making of unilateral
decisions and efficiency in dealing with a crisis situation, delegation orientation
will naturally cause managers to foster team work and an individual sense of
autonomy and responsibility.
Reward Schemes
It is natural for employees to expect rewards from their employers. Reward
schemes play an important role in employee’s performance and achievement of
the feel of care and fair treatment. Company data reveals large improvements in
productivity when additional cash incentives are offered on sites during the
process of accelerated activities to control slippages in progress.
Rewards are in the form of overtime, instant cash given at the end of the job, a
contract type work where an agreed amount or quantity of work is completed in
whatever time; but the employee takes the agreed number of overtime hours and
so on. The role of organization justice in the reward given to employees plays an
important part in employee /organization relationship. Moreover non financial
reward schemes are in some cases more effective. A pat on the back, maintaining
equitable wage rates based on experience, training and skills, a sociable peers and
staff, giving a good listening ear to the employee’s problems, an advance of
salary, a sick leave here go a long way to make the employee comfortable and
motivates him to do more productive work.
It is also understood that the rewards shall be based on realistic, and attainable
goals and targets and that all promised rewards shall be promptly disbursed, so as
to complete the cycle of motivation and satisfaction for the workmen.
92
Appraisal & Feedback Schemes

Performance appraisal and evaluations are done resulting into appropriate
increment once a year. Generally employee does not get to know his rating,
unless it is time to resign or he requests an audience with the supervision team.
Other contractors are keen to get experienced people and steal them by offering
higher wages. On the other hand, some of the good workmen are highlighted
during normal working times and they are promoted as charge-hands and later as
foremen. This is an area of improvement for most contractors in the UAE.
Based on how effective the HR department works and how considerate the
supervision team is on site, there are very few avenues for workmen to air their
opinions and grievances. The only option left for the employee is to travel back to
Head Office and use contacts or find somebody who will listen to their problems
and help them out to find a redress for their problems.
Welfare Schemes
Welfare schemes in the UAE include accommodation for workmen, providing a
room for recreation with a large TV, providing free food or allowance, providing
medical insurance, life insurance and an air ticket once every two years. There is
general compliance with the mandatory requirements of the UAE Federal Labour
Law. Camp conditions differ based upon how strict the client is on enforcing the
camp condition requirements. City camps are comparatively less friendly than say
the camp in an oil field area, where the oil company representatives have a higher
standard for accommodation, recreation and catering. This does affect the
workmen. Improvement in the living conditions could contribute to an overall
sense of well being and appreciation.
Brand Name of the company

Working for a renowned company known in the market for its strong
performance, able management and solid financial position brings in a new
confidence in the employee. This is seen in the body language and the mental
situation of the employee. For those companies who are doing bad or have filed
for bankruptcy; one can imagine the state of the employees mind and his overall
93
performance or productivity may be below normal. The brand name also helps
the company to get repeat projects.
2.6.3 Group/Team Factors
Group/Team structure or composition

Working in a group or team does not mean over shadowing individual or personal
skills but rather enhancing them by integrating them with other individuals’ skills.
A work group is two or more people in a work setting with a common goal. In the
UAE, this is very important to consider the constitution of the team as the
workmen come from various countries and cultures. For example a concreting
team might be from Pakistan; so is an excavating team because of the hard work
involved. On the other hand, shuttering work could be better done by Indians.
Individual & Overall skills within the group

Human beings have different talents or skills in exactly the same manner as they
have different physical attributes. These skills can be congenital or acquired.
Ensuring that these are pooled in the best interest of the group and hence the
organization is one way of effectively utilizing the manpower resources on site
and ensuring improved productivity. Effective supervision is therefore an effort to
know the individual workmen in their team, know their strengths and weaknesses
and combine them to utilize them optimally on site.
Nature of work/assignment
The nature of the job and type of assignment given to an employee has much to
do with his performance. Although most work in construction looks similar, there
are subtle differences, which the workmen / group understand. There could be a
change in the soil strata, or a change in the specification. The situation could be
different from that realized in another project before. Also the supervisory staff
are responsible to set realistic and attainable targets.
94
Demography of team / nationalities, cultural differences and language

barriers
The Asian workforce within the company comes from India, Pakistan, and
Bangladesh – namely countries which have fought wars with each other.
Although there is no real life animosity between common people, there are subtle
overtures, remarks, comments which antagonize people at work and this could be
a factor which could influence behaviour and performance at work. Language
barrier comes in as most supervisory staff are Arabic and the workforce are
predominantly of Asian origin.
Frequency of Changes
Frequent changes in teams affect the team cohesiveness and disrupts work flow.
Once the work flow is disturbed, the workmen naturally have a tendency to slow
down, recoup and restart which affects productivity. Change in the team
composition would mean time for adjustment and understanding, the synergy of
the team is affected and therefore the productivity. Depending upon nature and
urgency of concurrent projects, the contractors in the UAE may opt for moving
people to other sites, where there is a need to accelerate progress.
2.6.4 Personal Factors
Level of academic achievements or education & training

Level of academic achievement or education plays an important role in
performance. It starts by giving the first and common ground for communication
between people. Although academic level is important in employee’s
performance yet it is not always a decisive factor on how well the employee
performs as experience together with accumulated training determines the
competence of an individual. Most of the workmen are uneducated and have
learnt the skills through family traditions. Some have taken trade tests only to be
tested and to be offered a job. The government authorities keep experimenting in
changing the minimum schooling level for tradesmen, but are often lenient
looking the shortage of labour (as was the case before the economic crisis
happened).
95
Past experience
Although it could be argued that that basic ability, attitude of mind, current and
future potential together with specific technical skills could be a deciding factor
in selection, there can be no substitute for experience. Past experience of the
employee which involves knowledge, skills, practice and situational familiarity.
Many contractors in the UAE prefer those who have UAE or at least other Gulf
Cooperation Council (GCC) states.
Overall competence and skills

As explained above overall competence of an employee is a sum total of his
education, experience and training and the specific experience he has gained
being with his current employer and the UAE environment. A mix of competence
is retained within the group by management to ensure optimal utilization of
company resources.
Age
Age plays an important role in performance. Generally, there is a direct
relationship between age and performance, however with some specific jobs that
need physical attributes the performance could be generally inversely related to
age. Age also inhibits ambition and could make man complacent. Some aged
workmen either want to move back to their countries or opt for light duty jobs of
cleaning and watching.
Individual culture, attitude and creativity

Because of the socio-economic conditions in certain countries or environment
conditions, we note that some people are more knowledgeable, fit or experienced
for certain type of work than others. In the UAE, there are Indians from say
Punjab area being good carpenters and masons and heavy duty operators. Most of
the drivers in the company are Pakistanis. However coming from different
cultural backgrounds, there are sometimes tense situations at sites or in camps.
Individual attitude to work determines the level of motivation and creativity a
workman could bring to a job. This is one of the challenging tasks to understand
the vast and diverse cultural background of workmen in the UAE.
96
Motivation & Job Satisfaction

Human beings have an innate tendency to move towards higher levels of health,
creativity and self fulfilment. Performance is goal oriented, this means that
individuals are generally motivated to perform. The level of motivation therefore
differs in individuals and affects productivity. Moreover, motivation is not related
to the nature of the individual only, but also related to the situation or
environment in which the individual finds himself/herself in. Human beings
behave differently under different environmental conditions. Motivating factors
as listed in Table 2.6 are the ones generally being used by management subtlety
to ensure workmen are retained satisfied and motivated to work.
Overall Appreciation
This factor is a human requirement and is a characteristic of all ages, races, men
or women, daily paid workmen or monthly staff. Respect for the workman as a
human being and treating him as such; his needs could be the simple call for a
patient ear, leave on time, salary on time, some advance needed for work back
home, emergency leave for somebody sick back home and necessary paperwork
for medical treatment when he is sick. The UAE government and the
management of the “case study” company both fall on the right side on this. This
can be evidence by long serving employees with the company and the general
feeling of safety and well being for workmen working in the UAE.
2.7 CONCLUSION
A literature review of the management theories and published literature on

productivity was carried out. The classical theories included the scientific
management, bureaucracy, human relations, systems approach and contingency
approach. Further management theories on motivation were reviewed – those that
affect the behaviour patterns of individuals. Both content and process theories
were reviewed.
Further this chapter gave the background information of the UAE Construction
97
industry in which the case study will be conducted; namely the data collection for
modeling, validation and the evaluation of the factors affecting productivity.
The construction industry in the UAE is dynamic and has estimated annual
revenues of AED 500 billion and profitability ranges from 2% to 20% depending
upon type of projects; has many contractors of various sizes; competition is tough
and the industry is labour intensive with the construction operatives mostly
coming from the Asian subcontinent. It was explained that all contractors face
similar conditions and the bottom line performance is dependent upon how
effective and productive the construction processes are. There is therefore scope
for productivity improvements and thus the study of productivity and ways and
means to increase the productivity is important for contractors in the UAE
This review was combined with the published literature by contemporary authors
to give three matrices – the first showing factors affecting construction
productivity in general, the second matrix gave the motivation factors in the
construction industry and the third matrix gave the factors affecting construction
productivity over different countries. These were then combined into four major
categories of Environmental, Organizational, Group and Individual factors.
Reference Table 2.10. Each of the sub factors were then briefly described.
These sub factors from Table 2.10 were then transposed into a survey
questionnaire; results of which were used to close in on the most significant
factors affecting productivity. The survey results and analysis together with an
overview of research methods and their justification are discussed in later
chapters.
***
98
CHAPTER 3 – RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
99
CHAPTER 3 – RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Chapter 3 details the research methods applied together with a justification of

their utilization. It outlines the research process starting with the aim, the
literature review, the three surveys conducted, the field data collected for
establishing the models, the MINITAB 15 software used for statistical modeling
and finally the validation process.
Further it also discusses the technical aspects of the construction trades involved
in the field data collection, for which, the productivity models or the regression
equations will be established. The construction trades of Excavation, Formwork,
Reinforcement, Concreting, Blockwork, Plastering and Tiling Works have been
discussed, together with other technical factors affecting productivity of these
trades. These technical factors are related to the complexity of work, location of
the site, soil strata, materials used, climatic conditions, project specific
requirements, and client involvement in the project.
This is followed up by a brief introduction of the case study on a well known

contracting company, whose sites have been used for field data collection for
establishing the models and their validation.
3.1 OUTLINE OF RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The research process details the series of overlapping sequential steps starting
from determination of the ‘aim’ of the research to the point of establishing the
regression models and finally the validation and acceptance of the accuracy of the
models. This is depicted in Fig. 1.1 and is reproduced here for convenience.
100
Fig. 3.1: Overview of the Research
101
In social sciences both the qualitative and quantitative methods of research are
applied based on the subject matter and on the objective of the research. This
research approach is a quantitative one and is a combination of the ‘survey’
method and ‘experiment’ method involving variation of variables (factors) and
recording the change in output (productivity). Quantitative measures were
required for productivity modelling at later stages.
The survey method has been employed for the initial survey done to establish the
significant factors affecting productivity in the UAE construction industry.
Further, two additional surveys were conducted to determine the effect or the
magnitude of these factors on productivity.
Survey data has been collected through the use of a questionnaire. The
experimental approach involved the generation of data in measurable form, which
can be subjected to rigorous quantitative analysis in a formal and rigid fashion.
The field data collected for establishment of the regression models involved the
experimental approach, which included recording the productivity achieved while
the underlying factors were varied. The change in productivity was then analyzed
using statistical methods and subjected to regression analysis. The research stages
were planned with the aim of minimizing bias and maximizing the reliability of
the data collection and subsequent analysis.
3.2 DEVELOPMENT OF METHODOLOGY
For the purpose of this study, a methodology of surveys and case study has been
developed for this research. Having established the comprehensive list of factors
affecting productivity in Table 2.10, pg. 86, it became necessary to limit the
factors to few which could be subjected to variation on site. That is why the first
step was to identify the most significant factors affecting productivity. This was
achieved by undertaking three surveys as indicated further in this section.
102
The three surveys were done as indicated below:
• Survey 1 – Establishing Significant Factors affecting Productivity

This first significance survey gave the significant factors affecting
construction productivity in the UAE construction industry.
• Survey 2 – Establishing Effect or Magnitude of the Factors using

internal company participants
This perception survey identified the magnitude of the effect of the factors
on construction productivity. This was conducted on the internal members
of the case study company.
• Survey 3 – Establishing Effect or Magnitude of the Factors using

external participants
This perception survey together with survey 2 identified the magnitude of
the effect of the factors on construction productivity. This was conducted
on external members not belonging to the case study company.
Fellows and Liu (2003) states that surveys operate on the basis of statistical
sampling aimed at speed and economy; very rarely are full population surveys
possible, practical or desirable; whilst the most common method of surveys is
through the use of questionnaire.
Although surveys can be accomplished by observation, personal interviews,

telephone interviews, mailing of questionnaires, the surveys in this research were
done using the questionnaire method which besides being simple to administer, is
inexpensive and respondents have ample time to answer the questions. The
demerits could be the low return rate of the duly filled in questionnaires; the
questionnaires could be used only for those who can read them, no flexibility of
amending questions as in an interview, time of response and the difficulty in
knowing whether the respondents truly understood the questions and whether
their response has been truly representative. The questionnaire used for the
Survey 1 can be found in Appendix 3-1. The questionnaire for Survey 2 and 3 are
103
the same except that the respondents for Survey 2 were internal from the case
study company and those for Survey 3 are from outside the case study company.
Appendix 3-2 shows the questionnaire used for Surveys 2 & 3.
3.3 SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE DESIGN
The questionnaire was drawn up using a five / three degree Likert scale type
modified to suit degree of importance and the frequency of occurrence as
explained below.
Fig. 3.2: Snapshot of Survey (1) Questionnaire
The Likert type scale is easy to understand and construct; it is considered more
reliable as respondents answer statements included in the questionnaire. The
limitations are that the scale can be used only to simply examine whether
respondents are more or less favourable to a topic, but not how much more or less
that is magnitude cannot be determined (Kothari, 2004). Also the equal spacing
of the 5 levels may not necessarily be true; that is the levels do not reflect the
actual magnitude of change between these levels.
3.4 IDENTIFICATION OF THE SIGNIFICANT FACTORS AFFECTING

PRODUCTIVITY IN THE UAE
Following the literature review described in Chapter 2, the factors affecting

productivity were classified within the four broad categories as applied in section
2.5. The first point of research was then to establish the most significant factors
affecting productivity, given the unique nature of the UAE construction industry.
104
This was achieved by conducting a survey amongst the industry players in the
UAE.
The construction industry players consist of:-

a) Clients - Major Property Developers / Oil Companies / Private Owners
b) Consultants / Engineers
c) Contractors – of different categorizations from the Town Planning
Department
d) Subcontractors – specialist trades
A Survey Questionnaire (1) as shown in Appendix 3-1 - was sent to different

levels of personnel amongst the players identified above. Efforts were made to
follow up on the survey response and secure around 50% response to the survey.
One would question the adequacy of sending the opinion of Clients and
Consultants in a survey that is conducted on activities carried out by Contractors,
as this may seem to be illogical. However a close look at the construction
industry in the UAE reveals that the key personnel (CEO, Project Managers,
Senior Engineers) normally interchange positions. It is quite normal and expected
to have an Engineer working one day for the Client or consultant, then later on
moves to join a contractor or vice-versa. The participants were selected as per the
reckoner below, Table 3.1.
CEO / Sr. Project Sr. Foremen / Operatives

Management Managers Engineers Charge
hands
Clients x 3 X1 X2 X3 - -
Consultants x 3 X1 X2 X3 - -
Contractors x 3 X1 X2 X3 X3 X5
Subcontractors x 3 X1 X2 X3 X3 X5
4 8 12 6 10
= 12 = 40
= 480 responses ~ 500 respondents envisaged
Table 3.1: Survey (1) Response Reckoner
105
The participants selected for the three surveys were selected from a mix of
deliberate judgment sampling and simple random sampling. The deliberate
judgment sampling was used to ensure participants were representative of the
population.
Other reasons for adopting deliberate judgment sampling was because the chosen
population was around 1000 people within the case study company, its
employees and subcontractors. Another reason was to ensure that participants
were of the right calibre and disposition to understand the questions posed; the
importance of the research and to answer freely without fear of reprisal.
The randomness was ensured by using Random Number Tables (Mendenhall,

2001, Table 13, pg. 631 attached in Appendix 7-1) for 500 random numbers from
1 to 999, using 3 last digits from the first 10 columns. This ensured that bias was
eliminated and sampling error estimate is possible using the statistical tables.
The questions asked were related to the four factor groups identified in Chapter 2,
Table 2.10, pg. 86, which are:
• Environmental Factors
• Organizational Factors
• Group / Team Dynamics Factors
• Individual Factors
Following formulas have been used to determine the importance index, frequency
index and severity index. (Kadir et al, 2005)
Importance Index = 5n1 + 4n2 + 3n3 + 2n4 + n5

5(n1 + n2 + n3 + n4 + n5)
Frequency Index = 3m1 + 2m2 + m3

3(m1 + m2 + m3)
Severity Index = Importance Index x Frequency Index
106
where,
n1 = number of responses for “Very Important” degree of importance

n2 = number of responses for “Important” degree of importance
n3 = number of responses for “Neutral” degree of importance
n4 = number of responses for “Not Important” degree of importance
n5 = number of responses for “Strongly Not Important” degree of importance,
and n1, n2, n3, n4, and n5 each have a weight of 5, 4, 3, 2, and 1 respectively
m1 = number of responses for “High” frequency of occurrence
m2 = number of responses for “Medium” frequency of occurrence
m3 = number of responses for “Low” frequency of occurrence, and
m1, m2, m3 each have a weight of 3, 2 and 1 respectively.
Results / Analysis Survey (1)

Following is a summary of the results of the survey (1) conducted for establishing
the significant factors affecting the construction industry in the UAE.
Total Questionnaires sent = 500
Medium = hard copies
Time taken to respond = 1 month
Total Responses Received = 238
% Response = 48%
Sample Computation
Sample Computation - Survey (1)

Degree of Im portance Frequency of Occurrence
5 4 3 2 1 3 2 1
Rank
Importance Frequency
Ref. No. Probable Factors affecting productivity Strongly (Severity
Very Not Index Index
Important Neutral Not High Medium Low Index)
Important Important
Important
Proper Work Timings giving a balance

1 betw een w ork and recreation and time 33 26 3 1 28 23 5 0.8889 0.8036 0.7143
w ith family ?
A job w here your voice is heard and
2 28 33 2 26 25 5 0.8825 0.7917 0.6987
experience is valued ?
Fig. 3.3: Extract of Survey (1) Results for Sample Computation
107
Reference Survey (1), item 1

Here, n1 = 33 for “Very Important” degree of importance
n2 = 26 for “Important” degree of importance
n3 = 3 for “Neutral” degree of importance
n4 = 1 for “Not Important” degree of importance
n5 = 0 for “Strongly Not Important” degree of importance,
m1 = 28 for “High” frequency of occurrence
m2 = 23 for “Medium” frequency of occurrence
m3 = 5 for “Low” frequency of occurrence, and
Importance Index = 5n1 + 4n2 + 3n3 + 2n4 + n5

5(n1 + n2 + n3 + n4 + n5)
Therefore,
Importance Index = 5x33 + 4x26 + 3x3 + 2x1 + 1x0
5(33 + 26 + 3 + 1 + 0)
Importance Index = 0.8888888
Frequency Index = 3m1 + 2m2 + m3

3(m1 + m2 + m3)
Therefore,
Frequency Index = 3x28 + 2x23 + 1x5
3(28+23+5)
Frequency Index = 0.8035714
Severity Index
= Importance Index x Frequency Index
(Rank)
Therefore,
Importance Index = 0.888889 x 0.803571
Importance Index = 0.714285
Table 3.2 gives the results of the Survey (1). The factors have been sorted for
ranks within the group for identifying the most significant of the group. As the
108
rank scores differed within each group, it was difficult to put a threshold value; so
the first 8 within each group have been retained in the table.
Table 3.3 has been reproduced as a matrix from Table 3.2 for summarizing
significant factors in each category.
Thus the most significant factors affecting productivity listed above are related to
the players involved – the supervisors and their leadership skills, the workmen
themselves – their competency and attitude, work timings and whether salaries
are paid on time and how transparent and accountable the management is. Other
factors within the environmental group affecting productivity are related to
whether the workmen is paid well, feels a sense of security and feels appreciated
and has effective appraisals.
Organizational factors include whether overtime is paid, whether materials are

made available, known management policies, procedures and method statements,
set goals and targets, how competent the supervisors are and whether goals are
set. Group factors also include the team skills, self initiative, achievable targets,
and nature of work, whether teams are changed frequently and work allocation is
disturbed. The personal factors further include overall appreciation of ones work,
previous experience, overall job satisfaction, training, motivation and overall
competence of the workman himself.
On the other hand a review of the factors which did not return high rankings are
also worth a mention – For example – political situation, high temperature /
humidity or in general climate conditions scored low – giving a possible
indication of the mindset of most of the expatriates in the UAE. Giving
consideration to the extreme temperature and humidity level during summer
period lasting 4-6 months in the UAE, the climate factor has been added to the
Perception Survey, discussed further in section 3.5, pg. 112.
However, it will be seen later on that climate as one of the major factors affecting
the excavation trade and contributed to almost 32% of the change in productivity
of the excavation trade when the other underlying factors were varied.
109
Rank
Ref Importance Frequency
Factors affecting productivity (Severity
No Index Index
Index)
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS
Proper Work Timings giving a balance between
1 0.9025 0.7339 0.6624
work and recreation and time with family
2 Salaries on time 0.8496 0.7507 0.6378
3 Reasonably well paying job 0.8462 0.7465 0.6317
4 Safe Secured Job 0.8412 0.7479 0.6291
A job where your voice is heard and experience is
5 0.8361 0.7297 0.6101
valued
Employee Welfare oriented schemes.. Health,
6 0.8361 0.7101 0.5937
Recreation, Vacation
Appraisals where improvements needed are
7 0.8067 0.7269 0.5864
identified
Free and Frank Two Sided Performance
8 0.8202 0.7087 0.5812
Appraisals
ORGANIZATIONAL FACTORS
1 Leadership Skills of supervisors 0.8437 0.7619 0.6428
Transparency and Accountability of each level of
2 0.8555 0.7283 0.6230
management
Overtime Paid for work done beyond normal
3 0.8353 0.7381 0.6165
Working hours
4 Materials available on time 0.8580 0.7185 0.6165
5 Defined policies and procedures by management 0.8185 0.7521 0.6156
6 Competence of supervisors 0.8244 0.7451 0.6142
Systematic method statements / procedures in
7 0.8345 0.7353 0.6136
place and known?
8 Setting of goals and targets 0.8496 0.7115 0.6045
GROUP DYNAMICS
1 Individual or Personal Skills 0.8050 0.7633 0.6145
2 Knowledge of Work 0.8261 0.7423 0.6132
3 Overall Work Group / Team Skills 0.8126 0.7395 0.6009
4 Self Initiative and Competence 0.8118 0.7157 0.5810
5 Reasonable / Achievable targets given 0.7975 0.6961 0.5551
6 Nature of work given 0.7815 0.7059 0.5517
7 Frequent changes in teams 0.7412 0.7129 0.5284
8 Frequent changes in work allocation 0.7496 0.6961 0.5218
PERSONAL FACTORS
1 Technical qualified / educated for the trade 0.8437 0.7507 0.6334
2 Overall appreciation of ones work 0.8925 0.7164 0.6394
3 Attitude of person 0.8210 0.7255 0.5956
4 Overall appreciation of ones work 0.8303 0.7101 0.5895
5 Previous Experience 0.8143 0.7199 0.5862
6 Overall job satisfaction 0.8017 0.7269 0.5827
7 Accumulated Training 0.8151 0.7087 0.5777
8 Motivation of the Operative 0.7849 0.7269 0.5705
Table 3.2: Significant Factors Affecting Productivity (First 8 within groups)
110
Environmental Factors Organizational Factors Group Factors Personal Factors

1 Proper Work Timings giving Leadership Skills of Individual or Technical
a balance between work and supervisors Personal Skills qualified /
recreation and time with educated for the
family trade
2 Salaries on time Transparency and Knowledge of Attitude of person
Accountability of each Work
level of management
3 Reasonably well paying job Overtime Paid for work Overall Work Overall
done beyond normal Group / Team appreciation of
Working hours Skills ones work
4 Safe Secured Job Materials available on Self Initiative Previous
time and Competence Experience
5 A job where your voice is Defined policies and Reasonable / Overall job
heard and experience is procedures by Achievable satisfaction
valued management targets given
6 Employee Welfare oriented Competence of Nature of work Accumulated
schemes ? Health, Recreation, supervisors given Training
Vacation
7 Appraisals where Systematic method Frequent Motivation of the
improvements needed are statements / procedures changes in teams Operative
identified in place and known
8 Free and Frank Two Sided Setting of goals and Frequent Overall
Performance Appraisals targets changes in work appreciation of
allocation ones work
Table 3.3: Significant Factors Affecting Productivity in Matrix form
Again on organizational front, contract system of getting a fixed volume of work

in a day scored low as against what is normally practiced on the sites, which is -
work on overtime basis i.e piece meal contracts. Further financial and non
financial incentives scored lowly compared to the systematic delegation of tasks
and a demonstration of management commitment.
On the group / team front, the cultural differences seem not to matter as is the
nationality of the team members, structure and the language. Again on the
personal front, the age of person, creativity, overall communal feeling and camp
conditions seemed not to matter much in productivity.
111
Importance Frequency
No Factors affecting productivity Rank
Index Index
Proper Work Timings giving a balance between
1 0.9025 0.7339 0.6624
work and recreation and time with family
2 Leadership Skills of supervisors 0.8437 0.7619 0.6428
3 Salaries on time 0.8496 0.7507 0.6378
4 Technical qualified / educated for the trade 0.8437 0.7507 0.6334
5 Reasonably well paying job 0.8462 0.7465 0.6317
6 Safe Secured Job 0.8412 0.7479 0.6291
Transparency and Accountability of each level of
7 0.8555 0.7283 0.6230
management
Overtime Paid for work done beyond normal
8 0.8353 0.7381 0.6165
Working hours
9 Materials available on time 0.8580 0.7185 0.6165
10 Defined policies and procedures by management 0.8185 0.7521 0.6156
11 Individual or Personal Skills 0.8050 0.7633 0.6145
12 Competence of supervisors 0.8244 0.7451 0.6142
Systematic method statements / procedures in
13 0.8345 0.7353 0.6136
place and known
0.6132
14 Knowledge of Work 0.8261 0.7423
Table 3.4: Significant Factors Affecting Productivity (Fourteen Factors with

Highest Ranks)
The factors were then resorted and the top fourteen factors as detailed in Table
3.4 have been retained to enable field data collection. Then factors of similar
nature were regrouped to form the broad factors of Timings, Competence of
Supervisors, Salaries, Materials, Systems and Procedures, Group Dynamics with
the added factor of Climate accounting for the extreme temperature and humidity
level in the UAE. These form the contents of the Perception Survey discussed
below. Factors that afforded practical variation were kept while others were
dropped.
3.5 PERCEPTION SURVEYS FOR THE EFFECT ON PRODUCTIVITY

(SURVEY NO’S 2 & 3)
Two additional surveys were conducted – Survey 2 – within the company and
Survey 3 for participants external to the company. These surveys were
undertaken to determine the magnitude of the effect of the significant factors of
productivity returned from Survey 1, especially those listed in Table 3.3. Further
112
the results of these surveys were subjected to statistical tests of significance and
formed the basis of the factor variables used for Field Data Collection. They
helped formulate the actual site factors that could be varied during the progress of
the construction trades along with the corresponding change in productivity.
Fig. 3.4 gives a snapshot of the Questionnaire format for both Survey (2) and (3).
Fig. 3.4: Questionnaire design for survey 2 & 3
Perception Survey (2)

Table 3.5 - 3.7 indicate the results of the Perception Survey (2), first the summary
count (Table 3.5), then the percentage count (Table 3.6) and finally the weighted
average (Table 3.7).
The respondents in this survey were within the case study company and hence the
title – internal; the respondents were chosen in the same way as in Survey (1). A
total of 158 responses were received against the 250 no’s questionnaires given.
Perception Survey (3)

Similarly Table 3.8 – 3.10 indicate the results of Perception Survey (3), first the
summary count (Table 3.8), then the percentage count (Table 3.9) and finally
the weighted average (Table 3.10).
The respondents in this survey (3) were from outside the case study company and
hence the title – external the respondents were chosen in the same way as in
Survey (1). A total of 176 responses were received against the 250 no’s
questionnaires given.
113
Analysis of the perception surveys (2) and (3) follows.
Table 3.5: Perception Survey (2) (Internal): Summary Results
114
Perception Survey (2) - Summary Percentages

Percent Effect in Productivity for Different Parameters
Factors Affecting Productivity Negative Effect Neutral Positive Effect Totals
-25% -20% -15% -10% -5% 0% +5% +10% +15% +20% +25%
Timings
8+2 Normal 0.0% 0.0% 1.3% 3.2% 4.4% 53.2% 17.1% 12.7% 5.1% 3.2% 0.0% 100%
8+4 1.3% 0.0% 1.9% 2.5% 12.0% 6.3% 12.0% 26.6% 21.5% 10.8% 5.1% 100%
8+6 1.9% 2.5% 7.0% 10.1% 7.6% 2.5% 7.0% 12.0% 13.3% 18.4% 17.7% 100%
Morning Shifts 2.5% 0.0% 0.0% 0.6% 4.4% 15.2% 14.6% 25.3% 15.2% 7.6% 14.6% 100%
Afternoon Shifts 1.9% 1.3% 1.3% 10.1% 15.2% 24.7% 24.7% 8.9% 8.2% 3.2% 0.6% 100%
Night Shifts 2.5% 8.9% 11.4% 12.7% 11.4% 17.7% 9.5% 13.3% 5.1% 4.4% 3.2% 100%
Fixed Work at Any Hours 1.3% 0.0% 1.3% 1.9% 5.7% 23.4% 13.9% 13.9% 15.8% 13.3% 9.5% 100%
Competence of Supervisors
Team with Classified Supervisor 1.9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.6% 0.6% 3.8% 5.1% 22.8% 25.3% 25.3% 14.6% 100%
Known Team Members 0.6% 0.6% 1.3% 0.0% 1.3% 4.4% 6.3% 28.5% 19.6% 24.1% 13.3% 100%
Supervisor Change 3.8% 7.0% 7.0% 24.1% 22.2% 18.4% 6.3% 5.7% 3.2% 1.3% 1.3% 100%
Team Member Change 4.4% 7.6% 14.6% 19.6% 20.9% 13.3% 8.9% 7.6% 1.3% 1.3% 0.6% 100%
Salaries
Fixed Daily Rates 1.3% 0.6% 0.6% 1.3% 5.7% 56.3% 11.4% 7.6% 7.6% 3.8% 3.8% 100%
Increase Rates 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.3% 0.6% 7.0% 18.4% 31.0% 19.0% 13.9% 8.9% 100%
Incentive Given for Specific Amount
1.9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 3.8% 3.2% 12.7% 17.7% 25.3% 35.4% 100%
of Job
Materials
Materials Available and Tracked 1.3% 0.0% 1.9% 0.0% 0.6% 10.8% 9.5% 17.1% 14.6% 22.8% 21.5% 100%
Materials Not Available / Tracked 24.1% 19.6% 11.4% 17.7% 8.9% 7.6% 3.8% 1.9% 3.2% 1.3% 0.6% 100%
Systems & Procedures
Systematic Procedures and Work

0.6% 0.0% 0.6% 0.0% 2.5% 11.4% 8.9% 19.0% 12.0% 23.4% 21.5% 100%
Instruction available
Specific / Stringent HSE

5.1% 1.9% 6.3% 5.1% 17.1% 27.2% 5.7% 10.1% 10.8% 5.1% 5.7% 100%
Requirements
Specific / Stringent Quality 0.6% 1.9% 7.6% 13.9% 15.8% 17.7% 7.6% 10.1% 9.5% 7.6% 7.6% 100%
R i t
Group Dynamics
Groups with all Skilled Members 3.8% 1.3% 0.6% 0.6% 3.2% 6.3% 1.9% 15.8% 15.2% 29.1% 22.2% 100%
Groups with Unskilled Members 13.3% 13.9% 16.5% 19.6% 13.9% 8.9% 6.3% 5.1% 0.6% 1.9% 0.0% 100%
Groups with Mix of Skilled and

0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 1.9% 8.9% 40.5% 14.6% 10.8% 12.7% 4.4% 4.4% 100%
Unskilled Members
Climatic Conditions
Hot / Humid Weather 7.6% 10.8% 25.3% 17.7% 10.8% 13.9% 6.3% 1.9% 5.1% 0.6% 0.0% 100%
Cold / Windy Weather 1.3% 4.4% 6.3% 15.8% 29.1% 13.3% 12.0% 7.6% 7.0% 3.2% 0.0% 100%
Pleasant Weather 0.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.6% 2.5% 9.5% 13.9% 28.5% 15.2% 11.4% 17.7% 100%
Table 3.6: Perception Survey (2) (Internal): Summary Percentages
115
Table 3.7: Perception Survey (2) (Internal): Weighted Averages
Sample Computation for Weighted Average

For 8+2 normal factor, the computations involve multiplication of the weight and the
number of data observed. From table 3.5 (for 8+2 normal factor), the data observed for
-5% effect in productivity is 7, the weight is 0.95. Therefore the weighted data is
7x0.95=6.65. Such weighted data for all columns added gives 162.40; divided by 158
total responses gives the average as 1.0278.
116
Perception Survey (3) - Summary

-25% -20% -15% -10% -5% 0% +5% +10% +15% +20% +25%
Timings
8+2 Normal 0 0 0 3 7 125 13 19 3 2 4 176
8+4 4 25 11 0 8 8 9 16 23 69 3 176
8+6 2 8 23 10 12 11 25 44 33 6 2 176
Morning Shifts 0 10 18 7 4 18 10 32 46 26 5 176
Afternoon Shifts 0 0 1 8 15 111 22 9 3 7 0 176
Night Shifts 3 25 41 30 17 11 8 7 28 6 0 176
Fixed Work at Any Hours 3 1 0 6 18 105 22 15 2 2 2 176
12 69 94 64 81 389 109 142 138 118 16
Team with Classified Supervisor 0 4 16 9 7 8 8 42 47 21 14 176
Known Team Members 0 3 16 10 11 6 8 49 49 18 6 176
Supervisor Change 2 4 10 13 38 35 48 11 5 5 5 176
Team Member Change 2 3 8 15 38 38 44 11 5 5 7 176
4 14 50 47 94 87 108 113 106 49 32
Salaries
Fixed Daily Rates 0 0 2 8 23 113 16 10 2 2 0 176
Increase Rates 0 19 16 8 4 4 9 26 51 33 6 176
Incentive Given for Specific Amount 2 20 12 6 0 2 7 21 34 47 25 176
of Job
2 39 30 22 27 119 32 57 87 82 31
Materials
Materials Available and Tracked 2 8 25 4 1 10 0 31 67 15 13 176
Materials Not Available / Tracked 17 26 56 24 10 1 0 9 27 5 1 176
19 34 81 28 11 11 0 40 94 20 14
Systematic Procedures and Work 0 0 2 3 8 94 18 19 7 10 15 176
Specific / Stringent HSE 0 0 8 25 52 41 16 21 3 3 7 176
Requirements
Specific / Stringent Quality 0 0 6 28 47 45 16 14 7 6 7 176
Requirements
0 0 16 56 107 180 50 54 17 19 29
Group Dynamics
Groups with all Skilled Members 3 6 26 8 0 0 4 12 69 35 13 176
Groups with Unskilled Members 12 27 53 26 14 1 1 6 29 4 3 176
Groups with Mix of Skilled and 1 0 0 9 15 113 14 17 5 1 1 176
Unskilled Members
16 33 79 43 29 114 19 35 103 40 17
Climatic Conditions
Hot / Humid Weather 6 13 44 45 17 6 16 10 14 5 0 176
Cold / Windy Weather 1 5 9 37 41 38 21 17 6 1 0 176
Pleasant Weather 1 10 19 5 5 14 6 30 34 43 9 176
8 28 72 87 63 58 43 57 54 49 9
Table 3.8: Perception Survey (3) (External): Summary Results
117
Perception Survey (3) - Summary Percentages

-25% -20% -15% -10% -5% 0% +5% +10% +15% +20% +25%
Timings
8+2 Normal 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.7% 4.0% 71.0% 7.4% 10.8% 1.7% 1.1% 2.3% 100%
8+4 2.3% 14.2% 6.3% 0.0% 4.5% 4.5% 5.1% 9.1% 13.1% 39.2% 1.7% 100%
8+6 1.1% 4.5% 13.1% 5.7% 6.8% 6.3% 14.2% 25.0% 18.8% 3.4% 1.1% 100%
Morning Shifts 0.0% 5.7% 10.2% 4.0% 2.3% 10.2% 5.7% 18.2% 26.1% 14.8% 2.8% 100%
Afternoon Shifts 0.0% 0.0% 0.6% 4.5% 8.5% 63.1% 12.5% 5.1% 1.7% 4.0% 0.0% 100%
Night Shifts 1.7% 14.2% 23.3% 17.0% 9.7% 6.3% 4.5% 4.0% 15.9% 3.4% 0.0% 100%
Fixed Work at Any Hours 1.7% 0.6% 0.0% 3.4% 10.2% 59.7% 12.5% 8.5% 1.1% 1.1% 1.1% 100%
Team with Classified Supervisor 0.0% 2.3% 9.1% 5.1% 4.0% 4.5% 4.5% 23.9% 26.7% 11.9% 8.0% 100%
Known Team Members 0.0% 1.7% 9.1% 5.7% 6.3% 3.4% 4.5% 27.8% 27.8% 10.2% 3.4% 100%
Supervisor Change 1.1% 2.3% 5.7% 7.4% 21.6% 19.9% 27.3% 6.3% 2.8% 2.8% 2.8% 100%
Team Member Change 1.1% 1.7% 4.5% 8.5% 21.6% 21.6% 25.0% 6.3% 2.8% 2.8% 4.0% 100%
Salaries
Fixed Daily Rates 0.0% 0.0% 1.1% 4.5% 13.1% 64.2% 9.1% 5.7% 1.1% 1.1% 0.0% 100%
Increase Rates 0.0% 10.8% 9.1% 4.5% 2.3% 2.3% 5.1% 14.8% 29.0% 18.8% 3.4% 100%
Incentive Given for Specific Amount 1.1% 11.4% 6.8% 3.4% 0.0% 1.1% 4.0% 11.9% 19.3% 26.7% 14.2% 100%
of Job
Materials
Materials Available and Tracked 1.1% 4.5% 14.2% 2.3% 0.6% 5.7% 0.0% 17.6% 38.1% 8.5% 7.4% 100%
Materials Not Available / Tracked 9.7% 14.8% 31.8% 13.6% 5.7% 0.6% 0.0% 5.1% 15.3% 2.8% 0.6% 100%
Systematic Procedures and Work 0.0% 0.0% 1.1% 1.7% 4.5% 53.4% 10.2% 10.8% 4.0% 5.7% 8.5% 100%
Specific / Stringent HSE

0.0% 0.0% 4.5% 14.2% 29.5% 23.3% 9.1% 11.9% 1.7% 1.7% 4.0% 100%
Requirements
Specific / Stringent Quality

0.0% 0.0% 3.4% 15.9% 26.7% 25.6% 9.1% 8.0% 4.0% 3.4% 4.0% 100%
Requirements
Group Dynamics
Groups with all Skilled Members 1.7% 3.4% 14.8% 4.5% 0.0% 0.0% 2.3% 6.8% 39.2% 19.9% 7.4% 100%
Groups with Unskilled Members 6.8% 15.3% 30.1% 14.8% 8.0% 0.6% 0.6% 3.4% 16.5% 2.3% 1.7% 100%
Groups with Mix of Skilled and 0.6% 0.0% 0.0% 5.1% 8.5% 64.2% 8.0% 9.7% 2.8% 0.6% 0.6% 100%
Unskilled Members
Climatic Conditions
Hot / Humid Weather 3.4% 7.4% 25.0% 25.6% 9.7% 3.4% 9.1% 5.7% 8.0% 2.8% 0.0% 100%
Cold / Windy Weather 0.6% 2.8% 5.1% 21.0% 23.3% 21.6% 11.9% 9.7% 3.4% 0.6% 0.0% 100%
Pleasant Weather 0.6% 5.7% 10.8% 2.8% 2.8% 8.0% 3.4% 17.0% 19.3% 24.4% 5.1% 100%
Table 3.9: Perception Survey (3) (External): Summary Percentages
118
Weighted Average Result - Perception Survey (3)

Factors Affecting Productivity Negative Effect Neutral Positive Effect WA
0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10 1.15 1.20 1.25
Timings
Morning Shifts 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.70 6.65 125.00 13.65 20.90 3.45 2.40 5.00 1.0213
8+4 3.00 20.00 9.35 0.00 7.60 8.00 9.45 17.60 26.45 82.80 3.75 1.0682
8+6 1.50 6.40 19.55 9.00 11.40 11.00 26.25 48.40 37.95 7.20 2.50 1.0293
Night Shifts 0.00 8.00 15.30 6.30 3.80 18.00 10.50 35.20 52.90 31.20 6.25 1.0651
Afternoon Shifts 0.00 0.00 0.85 7.20 14.25 111.00 23.10 9.90 3.45 8.40 0.00 1.0122
8+2 Normal 2.25 20.00 34.85 27.00 16.15 11.00 8.40 7.70 32.20 7.20 0.00 0.9474
Fixed Work at Any Hours 2.25 0.80 0.00 5.40 17.10 105.00 23.10 16.50 2.30 2.40 2.50 1.0077
Team with Classified Supervisor 0.00 3.20 13.60 8.10 6.65 8.00 8.40 46.20 54.05 25.20 17.50 1.0847
Known Team Members 0.00 2.40 13.60 9.00 10.45 6.00 8.40 53.90 56.35 21.60 7.50 1.0750
Supervisor Change 1.50 3.20 8.50 11.70 36.10 35.00 50.40 12.10 5.75 6.00 6.25 1.0028
Team Member Change 1.50 2.40 6.80 13.50 36.10 38.00 46.20 12.10 5.75 6.00 8.75 1.0063
Salaries
Fixed Daily Rates 0.00 0.00 1.70 7.20 21.85 113.00 16.80 11.00 2.30 2.40 0.00 1.0014
Increase Rates 0.00 15.20 13.60 7.20 3.80 4.00 9.45 28.60 58.65 39.60 7.50 1.0659
Incentive Given for Specific Amount 1.50 16.00 10.20 5.40 0.00 2.00 7.35 23.10 39.10 56.40 31.25 1.0926
of Job
Materials
Materials Available and Tracked 1.50 6.40 21.25 3.60 0.95 10.00 0.00 34.10 77.05 18.00 16.25 1.0744
Materials Not Available / Tracked 12.75 20.80 47.60 21.60 9.50 1.00 0.00 9.90 31.05 6.00 1.25 0.9173

Systematic Procedures and Work 0.00 0.00 1.70 2.70 7.60 94.00 18.90 20.90 8.05 12.00 18.75 1.0489
Specific / Stringent HSE 0.00 0.00 6.80 22.50 49.40 41.00 16.80 23.10 3.45 3.60 8.75 0.9966
Requirements
Specific / Stringent Quality 0.00 0.00 5.10 25.20 44.65 45.00 16.80 15.40 8.05 7.20 8.75 1.0009
Requirements
Group Dynamics
Groups with all Skilled Members 2.25 4.80 22.10 7.20 0.00 0.00 4.20 13.20 79.35 42.00 16.25 1.0872
Groups with Unskilled Members 9.00 21.60 45.05 23.40 13.30 1.00 1.05 6.60 33.35 4.80 3.75 0.9256
Groups with Mix of Skilled and 0.75 0.00 0.00 8.10 14.25 113.00 14.70 18.70 5.75 1.20 1.25 1.0097
Unskilled Members
Climatic Conditions
Hot / Humid Weather 4.50 10.40 37.40 40.50 16.15 6.00 16.80 11.00 16.10 6.00 0.00 0.9366
Cold / Windy Weather 0.75 4.00 7.65 33.30 38.95 38.00 22.05 18.70 6.90 1.20 0.00 0.9744
Pleasant Weather 0.75 8.00 16.15 4.50 4.75 14.00 6.30 33.00 39.10 51.60 11.25 1.0761
Table 3.10: Perception Survey (3) (External) Weighted Average Result
119
Factors Internal (Survey 2) External (Survey 3)

upto upto - upto upto -
< -15% Neutral >15% < -15% Neutral >15%
-15% +15% -15% +15%
Timings
8+2 Normal 0% 9% 53% 35% 3% 0% 6% 71% 20% 3%
8+4 1% 16% 6% 60% 16% 16% 11% 5% 27% 41%
Morning Shifts 3% 5% 15% 55% 22% 6% 16% 10% 50% 18%
Fixed W ork at Any Hours 1% 9% 23% 44% 23% 2% 14% 60% 22% 2%
Afternoon Shifts 3% 27% 25% 42% 4% 0% 14% 63% 19% 4%
8+6 4% 25% 3% 32% 36% 6% 26% 6% 58% 5%
Night Shifts 11% 35% 18% 28% 8% 16% 50% 6% 24% 3%
Competence of
Supervisors
Known Team Members 1% 3% 4% 54% 37% 2% 21% 3% 60% 14%
Team with Classified 2% 1% 4% 53% 40% 2% 18% 5% 55% 20%
Supervisor
Team Member Change 12% 55% 13% 18% 2% 3% 35% 22% 34% 7%
Supervisor Change 11% 53% 18% 15% 3% 3% 35% 20% 36% 6%
Salaries
Increase Rates 0% 2% 7% 68% 23% 11% 16% 2% 49% 22%
Incentive Given for Specific 2% 0% 4% 34% 61% 13% 10% 1% 35% 41%
Amount of Job
Fixed Daily Rates 2% 8% 56% 27% 8% 0% 19% 64% 16% 1%
Materials
Materials Available and 1% 3% 11% 41% 44% 6% 17% 6% 56% 16%
Tracked
Materials Not Available / 44% 38% 8% 9% 2% 24% 51% 1% 20% 3%
Tracked

Systematic Procedures and 1% 3% 11% 40% 45% 0% 7% 53% 25% 14%
Work Instruction available
Specific / Stringent Quality 3% 37% 18% 27% 15% 0% 46% 26% 21% 7%
Requirements
Specific / Stringent HSE 7% 28% 27% 27% 11% 0% 48% 23% 23% 6%
Requirements
Group Dynamics
Groups with Mix of Skilled and 1% 11% 41% 38% 9% 1% 14% 64% 20% 1%
Unskilled Members
Groups with all Skilled 5% 4% 6% 33% 51% 5% 19% 0% 48% 27%
Members
Groups with Unskilled 27% 50% 9% 12% 2% 22% 53% 1% 20% 4%
Members
Climatic Conditions
Pleasant Weather 1% 3% 9% 58% 29% 6% 16% 8% 40% 30%
Cold / Windy Weather 6% 51% 13% 27% 3% 3% 49% 22% 25% 1%
Hot / Humid Weather 18% 54% 14% 13% 1% 11% 60% 3% 23% 3%
Table 3.11: Combined Analysis % wise – Perception Surveys (2) & (3)
120
3.6 ANALYSIS OF THE RESULTS OF PERCEPTION SURVEYS (2) & (3)
The outcome of perception surveys 2 & 3 has been presented in Table 3.5 to
Table 3.8 for the INTERNAL Perception Survey and in Table 3.8 – Table 3.10
for EXTERNAL Survey.
The combined outcome and narrative is presented in this section with reference to
Table 3.11 which gives the combined summary of both INTERNAL and
EXTERNAL surveys. The survey response was divided into three bands – band
1: neutral, band 2 – below 15% and band 3 – above 15%.
Timings – The internal survey indicates that as much as 60% of the respondents
agreed that productivity could be increased by upto 15% if 8+4 over time hours
are given. On the other hand, the external survey reveals that 58% of the
respondents believe 8+6 over time hours could give as much as 15 % increase in
productivity. Night work obviously would have reduced productivity as both
surveys indicate; 46% of the internal respondents agreed that productivity would
be reduced, while 66% of the external respondents believed the same.
Competence of Supervision – Both the internal and external respondents seem

to agree that productivity would be enhanced 15% and more by having known
team members and a more competent supervisor.
Salaries – Around 68% of the internal respondents believe that productivity

could be enhanced by 15% if salaries are increased, while 49% of the external
respondents seem to agree. However practically, it is difficult to change salary or
wage rate of operatives; hence this factor has been merged with the timings factor
in actual field data collection.
Materials – The surveys return logical results – 85% of the internal respondents
agree that productivity can be enhanced if materials are available for the
construction trade; whereas 72% of the external respondents agree.
121
Systems and Procedures – 85% of the internal respondents agree that having
systematic procedures can enhance productivity while surprisingly only 39% of
the external respondents agree. However there seems to be an agreement, that
stringent quality and HSE procedures does produce marginal effects on
productivity change. Examining findings on table 3.14 shows that according to
the internal survey the effect of stringent quality procedures is only 2% higher
than the average productivity and only 0.1% higher than the average as reported
by external surveys. While the stringent HSE requirements results in 1% higher
productivity rates according to the internal survey it is suggested by the external
surveys that this will decrease productivity by about 0.3%. At any rate, it is
obvious that all the above percentages are of minor nature confirming the
marginal effect of these procedures.
Group Dynamics – 84% of the internal respondents agree that having skilled
members within the groups can lead to enhanced productivity, while 75% of the
external respondents agree. Both groups agree that having unskilled members in
the group could reduce the productivity.
Climatic Conditions – 87% of the internal respondents agree that pleasant

climate can enhance productivity, while 70% of the external respondents agree.
Moreover both groups seem to agree that having both cold / windy conditions and
hot / humid conditions can lead to reduced productivity.
3.7 CHI-SQUARE TEST FOR SIGNIFICANCE
3.7.1 Chi-Square Test For Significance (For Internal Perception Survey)
The internal survey response was then summarized for each factors and a Chi
Square Test for Significance was conducted. The null hypothesis is that there is
no significant difference in the effects of each of the factors affecting productivity
– the ones which were used in the survey.
Computation Parameters for Chi Square Test of Significance
122
Number of Rows = 7; Number of Columns = 11

Therefore Degrees of Freedom = (7-1) x (11-1) = 60
For Degrees of Freedom = 60, at a probability of 5%, Chi-Square value from
Statistical Tables = 79.0819 (Reference Appendix 7-2, for p = 0.05 and degrees
of freedom = 60)
The computations for the calculated Chi Square is shown in Table 3.12 which
returns the calculated value of Chi Square of 777.19 which is greater than the
statistical value of 79.0819. Hence the null hypothesis is rejected. Therefore it
means that there is significant difference in the effects of each of the factors on
productivity.
3.7.2 Chi-Square Test For Significance (For External Perception Survey)
Similar to the Chi Square computations for the internal survey a Chi Square Test
for Significance was conducted on the summary responses for all the different
factors of the survey. Once again the null hypothesis is that there is no significant
difference in the effects of each of the factors affecting productivity – the ones
which were used in the external survey.
The computations for the calculated Chi Square is shown in Table 3.13 which
returns the calculated value of Chi Square of 1121.03 which is greater than the
statistical value of 79.0819. Hence the null hypothesis is rejected. Therefore it
means that there is significant difference in the effects of each of the factors on
productivity.
The Chi Square Tests for Significance both for the internal and external survey
indicated that the factors have significant effects on productivity. This
information coupled with the previous survey giving out the most significant
factors then became the main areas of research.
123
Factors Negative Effect Neutral Positive Effect

Affecting
-25% -20% -15% -10% -5% 0% +5% +10% +15% +20% +25%
Totals Σ(O - E)2/E
Productivity
Observed = O 18 20 38 65 96 226 156 178 133 96 80 1106 66.11382097
Timings
Expected = E 37.240 36.680 55.160 80.080 99.680 184.520 110.040 157.640 125.440 117.880 101.640
Competence Observed = O 17 24 36 70 71 63 42 102 78 82 47 632 49.68547944
of
Supervisors Expected = E 21.280 20.960 31.520 45.760 56.960 105.440 62.880 90.080 71.680 67.360 58.080
Salaries and Observed = O 5 1 1 4 10 106 52 81 70 68 76 474 141.286388

Rates Expected = E 15.960 20.960 31.520 45.760 56.960 105.440 62.880 90.080 71.680 67.360 58.080
Observed = O 40 31 21 28 15 29 21 30 28 38 35 316 299.1060312
Materials
Expected = E 10.640 20.960 31.520 45.760 56.960 105.440 62.880 90.080 71.680 67.360 58.080
Systems and Observed = O 10 6 23 30 56 89 35 62 51 57 55 474 52.05123128

Procedures Expected = E 15.960 20.960 31.520 45.760 56.960 105.440 62.880 90.080 71.680 67.360 58.080
Group Observed = O 28 25 28 35 41 88 36 50 45 56 42 474 65.76333561

Dynamics Expected = E 15.960 20.960 31.520 45.760 56.960 105.440 62.880 90.080 71.680 67.360 58.080
Climatic Observed = O 15 24 50 54 67 58 51 60 43 24 28 474 103.1851212

Conditions Expected = E 15.960 20.960 31.520 45.760 56.960 105.440 62.880 90.080 71.680 67.360 58.080
Row Totals 133 131 197 286 356 659 393 563 448 421 363 3950 777.191408
Table 3.12: CHISQUARE COMPUTATIONS: Survey Data - Productivity Factors and their effects – Internal Survey
124
Factors Negative Effect Neutral Positive Effect

Affecting
Productivity -25% -20% -15% -10% -5% 0% +5% +10% +15% +20% +25%
Totals Σ(O - E)2/E
Observed = O 12 69 94 64 81 389 109 142 138 118 16 1232 106.5027337
Timings
Expected = E 17.080 60.760 118.160 97.160 115.360 268.240 101.080 139.440 167.720 105.560 41.440
Competence Observed = O 4 14 50 47 94 87 108 113 106 49 32 704 125.9967711
of
Supervisors Expected = E 9.760 34.720 67.520 55.520 65.920 153.280 57.760 79.680 95.840 60.320 23.680
Salaries and Observed = O 2 39 30 22 27 119 32 57 87 82 31 528 104.9407851

Rates Expected = E 7.320 34.720 67.520 55.520 65.920 153.280 57.760 79.680 95.840 60.320 23.680
Observed = O 19 34 81 28 11 11 0 40 94 20 14 352 343.4915236
Materials
Expected = E 4.880 34.720 67.520 55.520 65.920 153.280 57.760 79.680 95.840 60.320 23.680
Systems and Observed = O 0 0 16 56 107 180 50 54 17 19 29 528 215.2880352

Procedures Expected = E 7.320 34.720 67.520 55.520 65.920 153.280 57.760 79.680 95.840 60.320 23.680
Group Observed = O 16 33 79 43 29 114 19 35 103 40 17 528 106.225467

Dynamics Expected = E 7.320 34.720 67.520 55.520 65.920 153.280 57.760 79.680 95.840 60.320 23.680
Climatic Observed = O 8 28 72 87 63 58 43 57 54 49 9 528 118.5844948

Conditions Expected = E 7.320 34.720 67.520 55.520 65.920 153.280 57.760 79.680 95.840 60.320 23.680
Row Totals 61 217 422 347 412 958 361 498 599 377 148 4400 1121.02981
Table 3.13: CHISQUARE COMPUTATIONS: Survey Data - Productivity Factors and their effects – EXTERNAL Survey
125
Table 3.14 gives the seven factor variables with their weighted averages for both
internal and external perception surveys. These are Timings, Competence of
supervisors, Salaries, Procedures, Group dynamics, Individual factors,
Availability of material and Climate conditions.
Weighted Average
Factors Affecting Productivity
Internal External
8+2 1.030 1.021
Timings 8+4 1.080 1.068
Fixed work at any hours 1.090 1.008
Team with Classified Supervisor 1.140 1.085
Competence of
Known Team Members 1.140 1.075
Supervisors
Supervisor Change 0.950 1.003
Fixed Daily Rates 1.032 1.001
Increase Rates 1.117 1.066
Salaries
Incentive Given for Specific Amount of
1.175 1.093
Job
Materials Available and Tracked 1.140 1.074
Materials
Materials Not Available / Tracked 0.870 0.917
Systematic Procedures and Work
1.140 1.049
Systems &
Specific / Stringent Quality
Procedures 1.020 1.001
Requirements
Specific / Stringent HSE Requirements 1.010 0.997
Groups with all Skilled Members 1.140 1.087
Group Groups with Mix of Skilled and
1.050 1.010
Dynamics Unskilled Members
Groups with Unskilled Members 0.901 0.926
Pleasant Weather 1.122 1.076
Climatic
Cold / Windy Weather 0.979 0.974
Conditions
Hot / Humid Weather 0.912 0.937
Table 3.14: Field Variables using Weighted Averages from Survey 2 & 3
The analysis of Perception Survey (2) and (3) together with the Chi Square
Significance tests described in section 3.8 and 3.9 and the weighted average
126
results in Table 3.14 formed the basis to establish the field factor variables for
practical variation on site.
3.8 FIELD DATA COLLECTION
3.8.1 Case Study Company
The case study company selected for field data collection is one of the leading
contracting companies based in Abu Dhabi. It was chosen because of the large
number of construction contracts, the company is executing and the fact that the
researcher has full access to the baseline productivity data base of the company
and to the construction sites for the field data collection. Established in 1975, the
case study company offers a broad range of products and services for the
construction industry, the scope of which includes Civil, Mechanical, Electrical
and Marine Works. The expansion and growth of the company has been
supported by management initiatives from each of its partners aimed at controlled
growth vis-à-vis the cyclical construction market. As of December 2009, the
company has around 9600 employees - all expatriates from the Middle East,
European, and Asian continents with varied educational backgrounds, social
culture, age, language and consequent productivity / efficiency levels.
3.8.2 Field Data Collection
Although quantitative approach involves three types of research – experimental,

inferential and simulation, the experimental approach is characterized by greater
control over the research environment and in this research the variables involved
have been purposefully varied to observe the effect on the dependent variable.
Inferential approach includes forming a database from which characteristics or
relationships of a population are inferred, while the simulation approach involves
the construction of an artificial environment within which relevant information
and data can be generated. As both these methods cannot be practically employed
for a construction site and the need for continuous data for establishing the
regression model, the experimental approach of field data collection is chosen.
127
While it is acknowledged that it is difficult to conduct experimental study in the

construction industry due to the huge constraints - such as job needs and
requirement, control on the sample under study, access to job site and
relationship with supervisors and ability to vary the factors to suit the study
requirement, yet the researcher had the unique opportunity of being able to do so
due to his position within the case study Company.
The process of data collection and reporting from sites took time as the site
personnel had to be briefed on the whole process of data collection, its
importance to the research and to the project and the company; while still not
letting the actual personnel working namely the workmen know that they were
being monitored to eliminate bias as much as possible.
Construction sites are typically subjected to the following constraints related to

data collection:
• Priority of work progress against writing out productivity data

• Day to day and hour to hour frequency of work activities based on
progress schedule and the priority tasks for the day
• Change of workmen, supervisors or both leading to constitution of the
team
• Varying crew size
• Varying timings in terms of 8, 8+2, 8+4 and contract type of works
• Less than accurate measurement of whether any delays occurred due
to waiting for materials
• Variation of productivity levels over site to site and within site –
activity to activity
• Some of the sites closed down on completion – others had most of the
activities subcontracted
Data has been recorded on sites for the basic construction trades selected. The
forms used in data collection had to be modified to make it easier for the user and
128
to incorporate bodies of learning as the research progressed further. Appendix 3-3

shows the collection of formats used in data collection.
Table 3.15 shows the list of construction sites and the general activities which
were used in data collection. As per the initial plan, the data collection was to be
carried out on three current (running) projects being executed at different cities
(site locations), varying the parameters, then comparing the results and trying to
find out correlations.
Site / Project Codes Activities / Trades studied

for productivity
1 Jumeirah Island Clusters (JIC) Excavation
2 Ruwais Industrial Harbour (RIH) Formwork (Shuttering)
3 New Lab Building (NLB) Reinforcement Works
4 Offshore Associated Gas (OAG) Concreting Works
5 Saadiyat Island Substation (SIS) Block Work
6 Anode Roding Shop (ARS) Plaster Works
7 Baniyas Commercial Complex (BCC) Tiling Works
Note: Brief project highlights can be found in Chapter 4, Table 4.1, pg. 144 and
Project Profiles can be found in Appendix 8.
Table 3.15: Sample Sites and Activities under study for productivity
However due to the constraints listed above, new projects were added to the list
to maintain the data collection for the selected activities. New sites are also
required for validating the models, as current sites from which models were
formulated would not have those particular activities still ongoing; in other
words, those would have been completed.
Following care was exercised during data collection:
a) Responsibility given to one site representative for ensuring minimum

disruptions to the team and the data is collected and reported to the Head
Office.
129
b) The team members / workmen were not informed about the study or of
the fact that they have been selected for this experiment. This is meant to
remove and personal bias and to be able to measure as accurately as
possible the effect of the change in the factors / parameters affecting
productivity rates.
c) Special care was taken on site to ensure team members remain together
and are not given other work as so far as is reasonably practical. As is
understood; if the trades are changed there would be a partial dip in the
productivity of the preceding and the following trades.
Table 3.16 gives the summary range of the minimum, maximum, range and the
average productivity obtained at the sample sites. The variation is evident and is
generally supportive of the fact that it may not be practical to assign a baseline
productivity figure attached to an activity as there are several factors interacting
with each other and affecting the overall productivity. Comparison of the
percentage productivity change for the variation in factors of Timings,
Supervision, Group Dynamics, Procedures, Materials and Climate revealed
abnormally large variations and units of change.
This was controlled by using the site average as the basis for comparison. The
site average thus turned out to be a better indicator than the base line productivity
data with the company. The technical reasons / factors affecting productivity are
discussed in section 3.9.
Field data has been collected from six construction sites of the “case study”
contracting company in Abu Dhabi as discussed in 3.8.1. To remove any possible
bias in the productivity results, the workmen involved in the productivity studies
on sites, are unaware that their work was being recorded. Further, practical
difficulties of raising wages to vary the factor on Salaries led to its inclusion
within the Timings factor. The remaining six factor variables were subjected to
three levels of variation. Refer Table 3. 17.
Productivity was measured for the seven construction trades of Excavation (cubic
metres/man-hour), Formwork (square metres/man-hour) Reinforcement
(tonnes/man-hour), Concreting (cubic metres/man-hour), Block-work (square
130
metres/man-hour), Plastering (square metres/man-hour) and Tiling Works (square

metres/man-hour). Excavation, Formwork, Reinforcement, Concreting are the
basic – start on activities of any construction site finishing the substructure and
superstructure work, while blockwork, plastering and tiling works are the
precursors for finishing work. These seven activities could be considered critical
as they take time and need to be done as scheduled as any delay would have a
knock on effect on other subsequent activities. Thus these activities can be
considered significant in affecting the overall productivity of the construction
site.
131
Measured values during data collection Unit of Baseline values over last 10 years
Site Code Activity
Minimum Maximum Range Averages Measurement Minimum Maximum Range Averages
OAG Excavation 0.0100 0.1700 0.1600 0.0882165 cu.m./mhr
0.010 0.470 0.460 0.3750
ARS Excavation 0.0400 0.0830 0.0430 0.0652833 cu.m./mhr
ARS Formwork 0.1100 0.2270 0.1170 0.1649444 sq.m./mhr
BCC Formwork 0.1670 0.3300 0.1630 0.2002500 sq.m./mhr
OAG Formwork 0.1500 0.5800 0.4300 0.4300000 sq.m./mhr 0.300 3.000 2.700 0.3380
NLB Formwork 0.1520 1.2000 1.0480 0.6985657 sq.m./mhr
JIC Formwork 0.3600 1.1500 0.7900 0.8435600 sq.m./mhr
NLB Reinforcement 0.0030 0.1100 0.1070 0.0646364 M tonnes/mhr
BCC Reinforcement 0.0200 0.0394 0.0194 0.034148 M tonnes/mhr
ARS Reinforcement 0.0100 0.0300 0.0200 0.0180333 M tonnes/mhr 0.100 0.400 0.300 0.2670
OAG Reinforcement 0.0100 0.1300 0.1200 0.0790656 M tonnes/mhr
JIC Reinforcement 0.0150 0.0700 0.0550 0.0421250 M tonnes/mhr
RIH Concreting 0.0800 0.3000 0.2200 0.1921053 cu.m./mhr
NLB Concreting 0.1490 3.1600 3.0110 0.7384000 cu.m./mhr
ARS Concreting 0.1500 0.4010 0.2510 0.3032000 cu.m./mhr
OAG Concreting 0.0500 0.2800 0.2300 0.1792000 cu.m./mhr 0.100 2.000 1.900 0.1430
OAG Concreting 0.7500 2.6400 1.8900 1.6482759 cu.m./mhr
BCC Concreting 0.2980 0.6200 0.3220 0.4419726 cu.m./mhr
JIC Concreting 1.5830 3.2800 1.6970 2.2610000 cu.m./mhr
NLB Blockwork 0.1120 0.5290 0.4170 0.3292143 sq.m./mhr
ARS Blockwork 0.1690 0.2780 0.1090 0.2034110 sq.m./mhr 0.350 0.450 0.100 0.3780
JIC Blockwork 0.2500 0.4990 0.2490 0.3708611 sq.m./mhr
NLB Plasterwork 0.0480 1.1960 1.1480 0.3956667 sq.m./mhr
0.035 1.200 1.165 0.7260
JIC Plasterwork 0.2760 0.4160 0.1400 0.3151111 sq.m./mhr
NLB Tiling 0.0960 0.6700 0.5740 0.3291530 sq.m./mhr
NLB Tiling 0.1250 0.4100 0.2850 0.3068571 sq.m./mhr 0.125 0.830 0.705 0.3830
JIC Tiling 0.1620 0.2360 0.0740 0.1938000 sq.m./mhr
Table 3.16: Range of Productivity Values - Trade Wise / Site Wise
132
The field data collection included recording the change in productivity values in
the construction trades of excavation, formwork, reinforcement, concreting,
blockwork, plastering and tiling works, when the levels of the factors (variables)
- namely the TIMINGS, SUPERVISION, GROUP DYNAMICS,
PROCEDURES, MATERIALS, and CLIMATE were intentionally varied. The
factors have been varied at three levels as explained in Table 3.17 below. Chapter
4 is dedicated to field data Collection, analysis and model formulation.
Factors affecting Levels / Values
No Productivity 1 2 3
1 Work Timings (T) 8+2 8+4 Contract

(Normal) (Good) (Fixed Qty.)
2 Level of Supervision (S) Average Good Excellent
3 Group Dynamics (G) Unskilled Mixed Skilled
4 Availability of Material (M) Not available Normally Ideal

available Situation
5 Control by Procedures (P) Lack of Normal Tight
Procedures Control Control
6 Climate Conditions (C) Extreme Normal Pleasant
Table 3.17: Factor Levels used for Data Collection
3.9 TECHNICAL FACTORS AFFECTING PRODUCTIVITY
It is appropriate to mention that apart from the significant factors (affecting

productivity) selected for further establishing a regression model, there are other
multiple factors which effect overall productivity for different trades and
depending upon project types, nature of client and other factors as described in
the next section. Some of these factors have been indicated in the literature
review matrices. Reference Chapter 2, Tables 2.2, 2.6 and 2.7, pg. 59, pg. 68 and
pg. 70 respectively.
133
3.9.1 Type of Projects

a) Complexity of Projects – Productivity is affected by the complexity of
construction, repetitive structures, rooms, and similar finishes. E.g.: Sahil
Das Island project - where each building and room layout was identical
and may be conducive for better productivity.
b) Type of Projects – Oil & Gas projects and industrial projects require
more coordination and are subjected to rigorous inspection schemes,
which may affect productivity. E.g. Industrial Equipment foundations can
not be poured till anchor bolts are laid with accuracy, and earthing /
grounding of structure completed. Offshore Associated Gas (OAG), Das
Island project form work, rebar and concrete productivity are almost
uniform since the type of equipment, pipe rack support is almost uniform
and each group were allocated same number of structures. Such projects
are also covered by method statements and other procedures and include
coordination and approvals for proceeding with further work; which
impair productivity. Work around live plants requires careful planning
and work in constrained areas therefore affecting productivity.
c) Projects with multiple subcontractors – Some projects involve

concurrent works by other specialist subcontractors. This involves waiting
time and hence affects productivity.
d) Projects subject to Climatic conditions E.g.: Ras Abu Fontas Projects

subject to extreme marine environment, waves, and where material
delivery and construction is constrained by climatic conditions. Works
cannot be done if wind speed or wave height is above the maximum
specified for safe work.
3.9.2 Technical Nature of the Trades
Further the trade themselves have inherent factors which affect work
productivity. These are:
134
Excavation Work is constrained by:

Method of Excavation - Machine Excavation / Hand Excavation
Capacity of the equipment
Distance of cart away
Earthwork on live plant / refinery / area with or without as-built or
existing services details
Size of Excavation e.g. trench excavation, excavation for raft
foundation
Depth of excavation
Type of protection / shoring required
Type of soil e.g. Cohesive or Cohesion less soil, soft rock etc
Excavation below and above water table
Excavation near to existing structure or facilities
Backfilling Work is constrained by:

Type / capacity of Equipment used for filling
Type of fill namely backfilling for trenches, around structure,
embankment and large / open areas
Depth of fill
Thickness / depth of the layers
% Compaction required for the layers
Type of material / soil used for the backfill
Formwork and Reinforcement Works are constrained by:

Type of structure e.g.: footings / base, pedestal, column, base / ground
slab, slabs for other floors / decking, walls, tie beam / lintel.
Design criterion / specialized construction. E.g.: hollow core slabs,
post tension slabs, water retention structure, equipment foundations
Level of coordination required. E.g.: Equipment foundations with
various inserts / anchors, slabs with built-in services.
Accuracy required / level of tolerance for the structure. E.g. blinding
concrete, column, pump /equipment foundations
Type / system of forms used
Type and arrangement of props, height of structure
135
Reinforcement layout / arrangement

Sizes of reinforcement
Concrete Works are constrained by:

Type of concrete mix. E.g.: Blinding / structural concrete, concrete
with micro silica or slag cement
Method of mixing. Ready mix, site mix, hand mix or dry mix
Method of poring. Concrete with or without pump
Type of casting. Cast-in-situ or pre-cast concrete
Type of structure: footings / base, pedestal, column, base / ground
slab, slabs for other floors / decking, slabs with or without droop
beam, walls, tie beam / lintel.
Quantity of pour e.g. mass concrete
Height of structure. E.g.: Wall / retaining wall require window for
uniform pouring / compaction
Layout / arrangement of structure. e.g.: Pipe rack foundations
Types and level of compaction / consolidation required. E.g.: Pokers,
Mechanical Float, Screed Vibrators
Type of finishes on concrete surface. E.g. fair face concrete, plaster
Blockwork activity is constrained by:

Area of block work. Partition wall or Toilet area where various in
built services applicable
Types of block work namely load bearing or non load bearing, hollow
or solid block.
Thickness of wall
Type of finishes on block work. Plaster, tiling or fair face
Block work height, level / height of structure
Type of layout
Plaster Work is constrained by:

Thickness of plaster
Number of layers
Type of mix. E.g.: Mix with lime, fiber
136
Type of substrate
Type of finishes on plaster surface
Tiling Work is constrained by:

Type of tiles. Ceramic, porcelain, granite
Fixing method, height of installation, type of substrate
Area / location of installation. External, internal, wet areas, skirting,
decorative etc.
Type of joint, type of grouting
Floor / wall tile
Due to the above, it is expected that the regression models to be established may
not be able to explain all the variation in the data sets.
3.10 CONCLUSION
This chapter detailed the research methodology and utilized the results of three
surveys to establish the basis of setting up the on site factor variables for
productivity data collection.
These three surveys were the Significance Survey giving a comprehensive listing
of factors affecting productivity followed by two perception surveys giving the
magnitude of the effect of the factors on productivity. The results of the
significance survey gave the fourteen factors affecting productivity. The
perception surveys using these fourteen factors helped identify the seven most
significant factors namely - Work Timings, Supervision, Salaries, Group
Dynamics, Control by Procedures, Material, and Climate. Later on the salary
factor was merged with the Timings factor for practical application at site. These
six factors were then given three levels 1, 2 and 3 with ideal conditions at level 3.
These three levels of variation helped to vary the factor practically at the
construction sites of the case study company. Seven construction sites were
identified for data collection.
137
Finally other multiple technical factors were highlighted for each of the
construction trades of excavation, formwork, reinforcement, concreting,
blockwork, plastering and tiling works.
Chapter 4 deals with the actual data collection on site analysis and model
formulation and Chapters 5 is dedicated to the validation of the models. Further
Chapter 6 gives the possible improvements to the model and concludes the
research.
***
138
CHAPTER 4 – DATA COLLECTION, DATA ANALYSIS

AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF PRODUCTIVTY
EVALUATION MODEL
139
CHAPTER 4 – DATA COLLECTION, DATA ANALYSIS

AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF PRODUCTIVTY
EVALUATION MODEL
This chapter details the steps in the development of the productivity evaluation
model. A total of 1090 data sets were collected from six sample sites at various
levels of progress.
The field data involved the collection of productivity data for the seven trades of
excavation, formwork, reinforcement, concreting, blockwork, plastering and
tiling on seven construction sites of the case study company in Abu Dhabi; whilst
varying the levels of the final six factors affecting productivity – Work Timings
(T), Level of Supervision (S), Group Dynamics (G), Availability of Materials
(M), Control by Procedures (P), and the Climate (C).
This data was then reviewed for outliers, analyzed and used in statistical
regression to arrive at productivity models. The modelling included removing
outliers and subjecting the homogenized data to regression analysis using the
MINITAB 15 software.
Linear Regression models were then established with an acceptable threshold of

R2, the coefficient of determination at 70% and above. Straight Line Regression
was considered for practical application of models on the site.
This chapter forms the backbone for arriving at the regression models using
quantitative data collected for the express purpose of fitting a regression model
which could explain the changes in productivity, when the level of factors was
varied.
140
4.1 PRODUCTIVITY MODEL: OVERALL VERSUS INDIVIDUAL

CONSTRUCTION TRADES
Initial trial runs were made using MINITAB 15 Software to establish an overall
model using time order productivity changes achieved whilst varying the factors
understudy namely Timings (T), Supervision (S), Group Dynamics (G), Material
(M), Procedure (P) and Climate (C).
All the factors were varied at three levels. The variation in the factors was
effected through the controlled decisions by the researcher and the job
requirements specific to the project and the availability of dedicated resources on
site.
For convenience, the coefficient of correlation R, measures the strength and

the direction of a linear relationship between two variables. The coefficient of
determination, R2 is defined as the ratio of the explained variation to the total
variation. It indicates how much variation in the response is explained by the
model. The higher the R2 , the better the model fits the data.
Work Timings (T) – this factor was varied at 1) normal 8 hours + 2 hours
overtime, 2) normal 8 hours + 4 hours and 3) fixed quantities of work assigned
irrespective of the work hours put. In the construction industry, workmen prefer
the last level as this gives them incentive to finish early, gain extra money and
rest for the remaining part of the day. This factor was controlled and constrained
by site progress conditions.
Level of Supervision (S) – this factor was varied at three levels - 1) Supervisor
with average competence, 2) Supervisor with Good Competence and 3)
Supervisor with Excellent Competence. The competence level was pre-
determined separate from this research; based on actual past performance on sites
reported by their direct in-charge’s on site. This factor was therefore controlled
directly by the researcher.
141
Group Dynamics (D) – this factor was varied at three levels - 1) Team of
unskilled workmen, 2) Team of Mixed Skilled and Unskilled workmen and 3)
Team of skilled Workmen. This factor was controlled from site and constrained
sometimes by the availability of people on a particular site.
Availability of Material (M) – this factor was planned to be varied at three

levels - 1) Material not available, 2) Material normally available and 3) Material
ideally available. There was no much variation that could be managed in this
factor, as for work to go on, the material had to be available in advance and this
was planned and ensure in advance. Later it will be seen that this factor has been
eliminated by MINITAB 15 software for no variation.
Control by Procedures (P) – this factor was varied at three levels – 1) lack of
documented procedures, 2) normal control and 3) Tight Control. For clarity sake
lack of documented procedures does not mean no procedures or no control, rather
it means the company standard procedures apply. No specific needs of
documented procedures and method statements are required in such projects. This
is more dependent on the nature of clients – for example the Oil & Gas Industry
clients would be have stringent requirements for documented procedures for all
processes, which would fit in the category of 3) Tight control; Some clients like
the commercial developers or the municipalities or the Water and Electricity
Department will have procedure requirements more fitting to 2) normal control.
This factor was therefore controlled by site conditions and nature of client
requirements.
Climatic Conditions (C) – this factor was varied at three levels – 1) Extreme 2)
Normal and 3) Pleasant. UAE experiences extreme climate conditions of heat and
humidity during peak summer months of July – August – September. The other
months could fall anywhere between 2) normal and 3) pleasant depending upon
the temperature, humidity, dust, and fog. This factor was therefore recorded on an
as is basis based on the specific conditions on the day.
In the initial attempt, the coefficient of determination R2 achieved seemed to be

very low around 17.7%. The second iteration removing the unusual observations
142
(outliers) also did not improve the R2 result which was about 22.6%. Thus the
attempt to establish an overall Productivity model which included all trades was
aborted in favour of trade wise productivity models.
The specific trade wise productivity models returned by MINITAB 15 seemed to

give a better fit giving a higher R2. Statistical texts indicate that an R2 value of
80% and above is a realistic value to accept a given regression model as the
variation in the model is explained by the factors themselves.
It was found during the regression modelling in MINITAB 15, that some of the
iterations resulted in one of the major factors of Timings (T), Supervision (S),
Group Dynamics (G) were being deleted out of the regression equation. At this
point the further iterations were stopped and the R2 accepted. Keeping in mind
the aim of the research and the significant contribution by other technical factors
related to site and the trade itself; it was decided to accept a R2 value of 70% for
accepting the model.
However, the minimum R2 value where the iterations were stopped at 75%,
73.8% and 78.5% for Formwork, Reinforcement and Concreting respectively.
4.2 DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Table 4.1 gives brief profile of the construction project sites, from which data has
been collected. The project profiles with detailed description of the projects can
be found in Appendix 8.
143
No Site Site Title and Description

1 Project Name : Offshore Associated Gas Project (OAG)
Client : Abu Dhabi Gas Liquefaction Company (ADGAS)
Location : Das Island, Abu Dhabi, UAE
Value : AED 400 Million
Duration : February 2007 to March 2010
An oil and gas industry project subject to very stringent quality and safety procedures, need for method
statements, works are generally subjected to tight control by Client and Engineer Representatives. Location
is on an island subjected to security constraints and live plant conditions.
2 Project Name : Anode Roding Shop Project (ARS)
Client : EMAL
Location : Taweelah, Abu Dhabi, UAE
Duration : April 2008 to August 2009
An industrial type of project subject to stringent quality and safety procedures, need for method statement,
works are generally subjected to tight control by Client and Engineer Representatives. Works are not in
live plant areas.
3 Project Name : Jumeirah Island Clusters (JIC)
Client : Nakheel
Location : Dubai, UAE
Duration : December 2007 to April 2010
A commercial type of project subject to less stringent control by Client and Engineer Representative.
4 Project Name : New Laboratory Building (NLB)
Client : Abu Dhabi Polymers Company Limited (Borouge)
Location : Ruwais, UAE
Duration : August 2007 – June 2009
An oil and gas industry project subject to very stringent quality and safety procedures, need for method
statements, works are generally subjected to tight control by Client and Engineer Representatives including
Operations personnel. Location is on an island subjected to security constraints and live plant conditions.
5 Project Name : Ruwais Industrial Harbour (RIH)
Client : Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (ADNOC)
Location : Ruwais, UAE
Duration : April 2006 – September 2008
An Oil and Gas project with major marine works, subject to very stringent quality and safety procedures,
need for method statements, works are generally subjected to tight control by Client and Engineer
Representatives including Marine Harbour personnel. Location is on remote oil field area, Ruwais subject
to security constraints and live plant / harbour conditions.
6 Project Name : Baniyas Commercial Complex (BCC)
Client : Baniyas Investment and Development Company
Location : Abu Dhabi, UAE
Duration : June 2008 - September 2010
A sprawling commercial complex with many villas, buildings, and recreation centres, subject to low or
normal control by Client and Engineer representatives compared to Oil & Gas Project. Location is on a
virgin area, in Abu Dhabi city.
Table 4.1: Brief Profile of Construction Projects Used for Field Data Collection
144
The field data collection consisted of recording the productivity data for the
blockwork, plastering and tiling works. These have been collected from the
project sites of the case study company as indicated in Chapter 4, section 4.2, pg.
143. Details of the data collected for model formulation has been summarized in
Table 4.2.
As can be seen the data sets remained after homogenization (checking within the
± 40% band) is 74% of the original data. Individually the data sets from sites
retained after homogenization are minimum 54% for Tiling and maximum 91%
for Blockwork. The readings are thus falling within the first and the third
percentiles band. Appendix 1 gives the Master Field Data for Model Formulation.
145
Data sets
Total Used Measured Baseline
Activity Site %
Data Average Average
± 40% band
OAG 98 66 0.088217
Excavation ARS 38 38 76% 0.065283 0.3750
136 104
JIC 25 23 0.843560
OAG 173 162 0.38308
NLB 50 25 0.698566
Formwork 85% 0.3380
ARS 16 16 0.164944
BCC 3 2 0.200250
267 228
JIC 18 10 0.042125
OAG 184 107 0.079066
Reinforcement NLB 11 6 59% 0.064636 0.0333
ARS 16 11 0.018033
229 134
JIC 4 2 2.261000
RIH 21 11 0.192105
Concreting
ARS 5 4 0.303200
BCC 48 48 77% 0.441973 0.1430
OAG 29 22 1.648276
OAG 48 32 0.179200
155 119
JIC 55 55 0.370861
NLB 22 13 0.329214
Blockwork 91% 0.3780
ARS 22 22 0.203411
99 90
JIC 57 57 0.315111
Plastering NLB 41 23 82% 0.395667 0.7260
98 80
JIC 5 5 0.193800
Tiling 0.329153
NLB 101 52 54% 0.4000
0.306857
106 57
Total 1090 812 74%
Table 4.2: Summary of Data Collected and Used for Formulating Model
146
4.3 DEFINITION OF STATISTICAL PARAMETERS USED

The statistical parameters appearing in the MINITAB 15 session printouts have
been defined in Appendix 7-3, using the : MINITAB 15 Help Menu –Methods
and Formulas. For convenience, the following are retained in this section.
4.3.1 R2 – Coefficient of Determination

The coefficient of determination is defined as the ratio of the explained variation
to the total variation. It is always positive and therefore indicates only the degree
of dependence of the dependent variable; it does not indicate the nature of
dependence, i.e. whether the correlation is positive or negative.
The Coefficient of Determination indicates how much variation in the response is
explained by the model. The higher the R2 , the better the model fits the data. The
formula is:
R2 = 1 – Σ (Yi – Ŷi) 2
Σ (Yi – Ÿ) 2
Where,
Yi = ith average productivity change reading

Ÿ = Mean Response
Ŷi = ith fitted response
It can also be calculated by squaring the Coefficient of Correlation, R which lies

between -1 and 1. There is high positive correlation if R lies between +0.75 and
1; and high negative correlation if R lies between -0.75 and -1. (Jhunjhunwala,
2008, pg. 7.15). R2 therefore for an R of ±0.75 is 56.25%. Therefore for an R2 of
70%, the coefficient of correlation is 0.8366, from which indicates high
correlation either positive or negative. The lowest valued of R2 obtained in our
model computations and MINITAB iterations is 72% which indicates an R value
(coefficient of correlation) of 0.8485 (square root of 0.72) = 0.85 indicating high
correlation.
4.3.2 d - Durbin-Watson Statistic

This statistic tests for the presence of autocorrelation in residuals by determining
whether or not the correlation between two adjacent error terms is zero. The test
147
is based upon an assumption that errors are generated by a first-order

autoregressive process. MINITAB 15 assumes that the observations are in a
meaningful order, such as time order. This has been ensured in this research data.
The formula is:

n 2
Σ (ei-ei-1)
d = i=2
n
Σ ei2
i=1
where,
ei = ith residual
ei-1 = residual for the previous observation
n = number of observations
Durbin Watson test for auto correlation is a statistic that indicates the likelihood
that the deviation (error) values for the regression have a first order auto
regression component. The regression models assume that the error deviations are
un correlated. Small values of the Durbin Watson statistic indicate the presence
of autocorrelation. However a value less that 0.80 usually indicates that
autocorrelation is likely. Statistical texts indicate that the value of Durbin Watson
statistics is close to 2 if the errors are un-correlated. (Reference. MINITAB 15
help menu.)
4.3.3 Alpha, α
Used in hypothesis testing, alpha (α) is the maximum acceptable level of risk for
rejecting a true null hypothesis (type I error) and is expressed as a probability
ranging between 0 and 1. Alpha is frequently referred to as the level of
significance.
· If the p-value is less than or equal to the α -level, the null hypothesis is rejected in
favor of the alternative hypothesis.
· If the p-value is greater than the α -level, the null hypothesis is true.
The most commonly used alpha (α) is 0.05 (Reference. MINITAB 15 help
menu). At this level, the chance of finding an effect that does not really exist is
148
only 5%. The smaller the α value, the less likely that one will incorrectly reject
the null hypothesis. However, a smaller value for α also means a decreased
chance of detecting an effect if one truly exists (lower power). (Reference.
MINITAB 15 help menu.)
4.3.4 p-Value
The p-value is calculated from the observed sample and represents the probability
of incorrectly rejecting the null hypothesis when it is actually true (Type I error).
In other words, it is the probability of obtaining a difference at least as large as
the one between the observed value and the hypothesized value through random
error alone. (Reference. MINITAB 15 help menu).
The p value determines the appropriateness of rejecting the null hypothesis. P-

values range from 0 to 1. The smaller the p-value, the smaller the probability that
rejecting the null hypothesis is a mistake. Before conducting any analyses, the
alpha, α level of significance is fixed which is commonly 0.05 (5%). If the p-
value of a test statistic is less than α, you reject the null hypothesis. Because of
their indispensable role in hypothesis testing, p-values are used in many areas of
statistics including basic statistics, linear models, reliability, and multivariate
analysis among many others. A p-value below the cut-off level (alpha value
selected), suggests that the coefficient for factor under study is significantly
different from zero and likely to be a meaningful addition to the model.
For ease of understanding; the null hypothesis in the linear regression modelling
is the assumption that data remaining after removal of outliers fits the model
well.
4.4 MODEL FORMULATION
The models were arrived at by regression analysis using MINITAB 15 software

using the homogenized field data on productivity for each of the construction
trades. Following sections detail the homogenization of the field data as received
and the sequence of steps required of for productivity model formulation. A
narrative and flow chart is used for the same.
149
4.4.1 Homogenization of Field Data
Data as received from sites was reviewed for completeness and clarity; the values
were fed into EXCEL sheet, to compute site averages and outliers were removed
to ensure the sample readings received represented a normal population.
The reason for removal of outliers is that the site data could include possible
errors of recording, possible manipulation, computation errors; productivity
outputs may have been subjected to unaccounted for factors such as isolated
activities of stoppage, waiting for inspection, unusually confined spaces to work,
varying complexities of the construction trade itself.
Further, the technical constraints listed in section 3.9, pg. 133, together with the
size and complexity of the structure make it difficult to fix a productivity level
and therefore varying levels of productivity were seen in the data. The computed
site averages were significantly different from the baseline values available from
the database of the case study company. This is the reason why separate site
productivity averages, which are more representative of the site, were used in the
computations.
The percentage productivity change as measured (PPCM) values were reviewed

and any values out of ± 40% of the Site Average were discarded. A band of ±
40% was considered an appropriate band to retain the data to first ensure
significant number of data sets remain, whilst on the other hand, to ensure
practical variation expected on site ascribed to the factors described in the last
paragraph.
This consideration is also in line with removing of outliers using the first and
third percentiles, ensuring at least 50% of the data sets are used. In this research,
Table 4.2 indicates a total data sets of 1090 as against 812 (74 %) data sets used
after the discarding those out of the ± 40% band.
Following is the sequence of steps undertaken to ensure field data is

homogenized before taking to model formulation.
150
a) Receive productivity data sheets from sites

b) Check all relevant information is filled up and is clear; Check all factor
variables are correctly marked
c) Call and clarify with site representative for any unclear information
d) Check information on the type of structure vis-à-vis the variation in site
averages that need to be used
e) Enter data on formatted EXCEL sheets as shown in Fig. 4.1 below.
f) Use previous Site Average already computed
g) Compute Site Average if Site Average for that particular activity is not
already available. Check type of sites used in model formulation have
similar characteristics. For example a horizontal spread site may have
different set of averages as compared to a congested vertical high rise
tower.
h) Compute Percentage Change in Productivity as measured (PCPM)
i) Sort data and remove outliers at ± 40%
j) Re-sort data in time series
MODEL FORMULATION FOR 'EXCAVATION'

Parameters % Productivity
Measured
Not Available=1 Lack of Productivity Site Average
Change
8+2 hrs =1 Average=1 Unskilled=1 Extreme=1
Normally Procedure=1 Ŷ =
Site
8+4 hrs =2 Good=2 Mixed=2
Available=2 Normal Control=2
Normal = 2 Yi
No Date Contract =3 Excellent = 3 Skilled=3
Ideal Situation = 3 Tight Control=3
Pleasant=3 [100 (Yi-Ŷ)] / Ŷ
Group
Tim ings Supervision Material Procedure Clim ate
Dynam ics m3 / hour m3 / hour PPCM
(T) (S) (M) (P) (C)
(G)
1 07 February 2008 OAG 2 1 2 2 1 2 0.060 0.088216495 -31.99%
2 12 February 2008 OAG 2 1 2 2 1 2 0.090 0.088216495 2.02%
3 13 February 2008 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.080 0.088216495 -9.31%
Fig. 4.1: Snapshot of Model Formulation for EXCAVATION trade
Sample Computations for Site Average and Productivity Change

Fig. 4.1 shows a snapshot of the EXCEL sheet for model formulation. This data
is part of Appendix 1 – Master Field Data for Model Formulation.
The formulae used and sample computations are:-
Site Average = Sum of all productivity values

Number of all readings
151
This has been automatically calculated in EXCEL sheet, as the column is already
fed with a formula.
The percentage productivity change as measured (PPCM) ….
PPCM = Measured Productivity (Yi) – Site Average (Ŷ) x 100

Site Average (Ŷ)
Computation sample
Reference. Sr. No. 3, Table 4.1. EXCAVATION, OAG site
PPCM = 0.080 – 0.008821649 x 100 = -9.31 %

0.008821649
152
Fig. 4.2 shows the flow chart for homogenization of data.

Check information clear
and complete;
Clarify unclear 1
information
Enter Data into EXCEL
sheets (fig.5.1)
Compute Site Average

for the Productivity 2
Compute Percentage
Change in Productivity as 3
measured (PPCM)
Sort Data Ascending and

remove data above and 4
below 40% band
Resort Data into time

5
series
Data Ready for

MINITAB 15
Fig. 4.2: Flow Chart : Homogenization of Field Data
4.4.2 Statistical Modelling Using MINITAB 15 Software

The general sequence of steps taken in handling the data, homogenizing it and
then subjecting it to MINITAB 15 regression are listed below. This is also
explained as a flow chart at the end of this section.
a) Open MINITAB 15
b) Copy relevant columns of data into MINITAB 15 Worksheet; Ensure
columns headings are correctly aligned with the data
c) Keep cursor at the end of the data on row number 1
d) In MINITAB 15 software, use the Menu – Stat(Statistics) –
Regression; For Response select ‘PCPM’ from left box. For Predictors
153
select the six factors of Timings, Supervision, Group Dynamics,

Procedures, Material and Climate. Further
e) Further click on each of the four options of Graphs, Options, Results
and Storage and select items as indicated below.
• For Graphs – Select ‘Standardized’ and ‘Four in one’ boxes
• For Options – Select all of the ‘Display’ and ‘Lack of Fit Tests’
boxes
• For Results – Select “Full table of fits’ and Residuals’
• For Storage – Select all the boxes in ‘Diagnostic Measures’ and
‘Characteristics of Estimated Equation’
f) Print MINITAB 15 Session Window and the Graphs
g) Check on Printed Session, R2 value. If R2 is 70% and above and no
outliers are indicated, accept the model; if not remove outliers as
indicated in the session printout till a minimum acceptable threshold
value of R2 is achieved.
h) Start from bottom data that needs to be removed, otherwise there could
be incorrect deletion. This is taken care of by ensuring the first column
in the MINITAB Worksheet is Sr. No. Before starting a new run, the
serial numbers should be renumbered sequentially. This will help in
further iteration and also ensure count of data for the next iteration.
i) Proceed to repeat steps p) – s) until an acceptable R2 is returned.
Reference. The iterations are continued until the minimum acceptable
threshold value of 70% is achieved. This has been fixed after review
of the iterations for all activities during model formulation. For
example Formwork Model has been accepted at 75%; the
Reinforcement model has been accepted at 73.8%.
j) In some cases, it may so happen that one of the major factor gets
eliminated. Materials factor has been eliminated in almost all the cases,
as there is not much variation observed on site. However the iterations
are stopped once the major factors – TIMINGS, SUPERVISION,
GROUP DYNAMICS, PROCEDURES, CLIMATE, get removed.
k) Appendix 1 contains the model formulation data sheets for each of the
construction trades namely, excavation, formwork, reinforcement,
concreting, blockwork, plastering, and tiling respectively.
154
l) Print out finalized data sheets and graphs. A screen grab of the
MINITAB 15 – four in one graphs is shown on the next page.
Fig. 4.3 : Grab of MINITAB 15 MENU – STAT – REGRESSION – Graphs
The flow chart of MINITAB 15 regression modelling is shown on the next page.
155
Select PPCM from left

box for RESPONSE 2-1
Copy contents of
1 homogenized data from
the EXCEL sheet into Select Factors - Timings,
MINITAB 15 w orksheet Supervision, Group
Dynamics, Procedures, 2-2
Material, Climate as
PREDICTORS
Click on GRAPHS and

2 With cursor at end of first row , in select STANDARD, FOUR 2-3
MINITAB, choose the menu - in ONE
STATISTICS -REGRESSION -
REGRESSION
Click on OPTIONS and
select all items under 2-4
DISPLAY
3 Click OK for MINITAB to Click on RESULTS and

return Session Window s select …. Full Table of 2-5
containing the Fits and Residuals
Regression Equation and
R2
Click on STORAGE and
2-6
select …. All items boxes
4
From Session Window No 5
Is R2 ≤ 80%
Are there any outliers
displayed
6 Yes 5-1
Accept Regression
Equation
Review Session Sheet
6-1 and Remove Outliers
from MINITAB Worksheet
starting from bottom 5-2
Print Session Window s,
Four in Graphs
6-2 Renumber Serial

Numbers for Remaining Complete Model 5-3
Data on MINITAB Formulation Summary
Worksheet Table
R2 value of 70%
6-3 accepted w hen major
prdictors get eliminated Model Formulation
during regression COmplete
Fig. 4.4 : Flow Chart : Statistical Modelling Using MINITAB 15 Software
156
4.5 REGRESSION MODELS FOR PRODUCTIVITY OF CONSTRUCTION

TRADES
Using the sequence of steps presented in section 4.4 and the flow chart in Fig.
4.4, the productivity models for each of the construction trades of Excavation,
Formwork, Reinforcement, Concreting, Blockwork, Plastering, and Tiling. A
number of iterations were required to reach the acceptable coefficient of
determination - R2 value. These models are later validated using data sets as
available from the other project sites of the case study company.
Appendix 4 gives the following model formulation sheets for each of the seven
construction trades, presented in the following order.
• Summary Table
• Summary of Iterations carried out to reach an acceptable model
• a MINITAB 15 ‘four in one graph’ showing the Normal Probability Plot,
Histogram of Residuals, Standardized Residuals Versus Fits and Time
line plot of the data sets used in model formulation. This is done for the
last iteration.
• a MINITAB 15 session print outs for the last iterations, giving values of
the R2, Durbin Watson Statistic and lack of fits suggesting curvature or
interactions with their respective p values.
For convenience of reading, the summary of the MINITAB 15 iterations for the
EXCAVATION trade and the accepted model along with the R2 value has been
retained in this section with all tabulations, graphs, MINITAB 15 session
printouts and field productivity data have been shifted to Appendix 4 as described
above.
It is seen that the Materials (M) factor has been removed from the regression
equations during the first MINITAB 15 iteration itself, for all the seven
construction trades. This is because the field data collection did not show any
variation, and in almost all the data sets, the material factor was considered a
normal condition. Thus the contributing factors to the productivity model are
157
limited to only five. This is one of the limitations of the models and has been
further discussed in Chapter 6.
4.5.1 REGRESSION MODEL FOR THE EXCAVATION TRADE
The procedural steps in arriving at the regression model for the excavation trade
are explained in this section. Reference to the Flow Chart shown in Fig. 4.2, the
field data has been homogenized in accordance with the steps 1-5.
Total Productivity Data Sets Received 136 no’s, 98 from OAG site, 38 from ARS
site. After homogenization (See table 4.2), the total data sets remained 104. This
is about 76% of the data sets retained from the raw data received from site.
These 104 readings (Table 4.3a) duly homogenized (within a band of ± 40%)
have been taken to the MINITAB 15 Software for conducting the regression
analysis.
Sample Computation
OAG Site Average of Excavation Productivity (Ŷ) = 0.08821649 m3/ man hour
Reference Sr. No. 1, Table 4.3a, Excavation Data, OAG Site
Measured Productivity (Yi) = 0.060 m3/ man hour

Site Average (Ŷ)
PPCM = 0.060 – 0.08821649 x 100

0.08821649
= - 31.9855 %
158

Param eters
% Productivity
Measured
Not Available=1 Lack of Site Average Change
8+2=1 Average=1 Unskilled=1 Extreme=1 Productivity
8+4=2 Good=2 Mixed=2 Normal = 2 Yi
No Date Site Available=2 Normal Control=2 [100 (Yi-Ŷ)] / Ŷ
Contract=3 Excellent = 3 Skilled=3 Pleasant=3
Group
Dynam ics m3/hour m3/hour PPCM
(T) (S) (M) (P) (C)
(G)
1 7-Feb-08 OAG 2 1 2 2 1 2 0.060 0.088216495 -31.99%
2 12-Feb-08 OAG 2 1 2 2 1 2 0.090 0.088216495 2.02%
3 13-Feb-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.080 0.088216495 -9.31%
4 14-Feb-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.070 0.088216495 -20.65%
5 14-Feb-08 ARS 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.063 0.0652833 -3.50%
6 15-Feb-08 ARS 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.061 0.0652833 -5.95%
7 15-Feb-08 OAG 2 1 2 2 1 2 0.120 0.088216495 36.03%
8 16-Feb-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.070 0.088216495 -20.65%
9 16-Feb-08 ARS 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.063 0.0652833 -2.88%
10 17-Feb-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.080 0.088216495 -9.31%
11 17-Feb-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.100 0.088216495 13.36%
12 18-Feb-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.080 0.088216495 -9.31%
13 18-Feb-08 OAG 2 2 2 2 1 2 0.110 0.088216495 24.69%
14 19-Feb-08 OAG 2 1 2 2 1 2 0.060 0.088216495 -31.99%
15 19-Feb-08 OAG 2 2 2 2 1 2 0.110 0.088216495 24.69%
16 20-Feb-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.070 0.088216495 -20.65%
17 20-Feb-08 OAG 2 1 2 2 1 2 0.110 0.088216495 24.69%
18 21-Feb-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.090 0.088216495 2.02%
19 22-Feb-08 OAG 2 1 2 2 1 2 0.090 0.088216495 2.02%
20 23-Feb-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.100 0.088216495 13.36%
21 24-Feb-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.100 0.088216495 13.36%
22 25-Feb-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.100 0.088216495 13.36%
23 26-Feb-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.100 0.088216495 13.36%
24 27-Feb-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.100 0.088216495 13.36%
25 28-Feb-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.100 0.088216495 13.36%
26 29-Feb-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.100 0.088216495 13.36%
27 1-Mar-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.100 0.088216495 13.36%
28 2-Mar-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.100 0.088216495 13.36%
29 3-Mar-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.100 0.088216495 13.36%
30 4-Mar-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.100 0.088216495 13.36%
31 5-Mar-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.100 0.088216495 13.36%
32 6-Mar-08 OAG 2 1 2 2 1 2 0.060 0.088216495 -31.99%
33 6-Mar-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.100 0.088216495 13.36%
34 7-Mar-08 OAG 2 1 2 2 1 2 0.056 0.088216495 -36.52%
35 7-Mar-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.100 0.088216495 13.36%
36 8-Mar-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.100 0.088216495 13.36%
37 8-Mar-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.100 0.088216495 13.36%
38 10-Mar-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.100 0.088216495 13.36%
39 11-Mar-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.100 0.088216495 13.36%
40 12-Mar-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.065 0.088216495 -26.32%
41 15-Mar-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.080 0.088216495 -9.31%
42 16-Mar-08 OAG 2 1 2 2 1 2 0.110 0.088216495 24.69%
Table 4.3a: EXCEL Sheet for Model Formulation - Excavation
159

Param eters
% Productivity
Measured
Group
(T) (S) (M) (P) (C)
(G)
43 17-Mar-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.110 0.088216495 24.69%
44 18-Mar-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.110 0.088216495 24.69%
45 21-Mar-08 OAG 1 2 2 2 1 2 0.100 0.088216495 13.36%
46 22-Mar-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.100 0.088216495 13.36%
47 23-Mar-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.100 0.088216495 13.36%
48 24-Mar-08 OAG 1 2 2 2 1 2 0.100 0.088216495 13.36%
49 25-Mar-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.100 0.088216495 13.36%
50 26-Mar-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.100 0.088216495 13.36%
51 27-Mar-08 OAG 1 2 2 2 1 2 0.100 0.088216495 13.36%
52 28-Mar-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.100 0.088216495 13.36%
53 29-Mar-08 OAG 1 2 2 2 1 2 0.100 0.088216495 13.36%
54 29-Mar-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.100 0.088216495 13.36%
55 30-Mar-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.100 0.088216495 13.36%
56 20-Apr-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.100 0.088216495 13.36%
57 20-Apr-08 OAG 2 2 2 2 1 2 0.120 0.088216495 36.03%
58 27-Apr-08 OAG 1 2 2 2 1 2 0.110 0.088216495 24.69%
59 4-May-08 OAG 2 2 2 2 1 2 0.110 0.088216495 24.69%
60 11-May-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.100 0.088216495 13.36%
61 18-May-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.100 0.088216495 13.36%
62 18-May-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.100 0.088216495 13.36%
63 25-May-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.100 0.088216495 13.36%
64 1-Jun-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.100 0.088216495 13.36%
65 8-Jun-08 OAG 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.100 0.088216495 13.36%
66 15-Jun-08 OAG 1 2 2 2 1 2 0.100 0.088216495 13.36%
67 22-Jun-08 OAG 2 2 2 2 1 2 0.100 0.088216495 13.36%
68 13-Jul-08 OAG 2 2 2 2 1 1 0.100 0.088216495 13.36%
69 13-Jul-08 OAG 2 2 2 2 1 2 0.110 0.088216495 24.69%
70 10-Dec-08 ARS 1 1 1 2 1 1 0.070 0.0652833 7.22%
71 11-Dec-08 ARS 1 1 1 2 1 1 0.070 0.0652833 7.07%
72 13-Dec-08 ARS 2 2 1 2 1 1 0.083 0.0652833 27.14%
73 14-Dec-08 ARS 1 1 1 2 1 1 0.040 0.0652833 -38.73%
74 15-Dec-08 ARS 1 1 1 2 1 1 0.063 0.0652833 -3.50%
75 16-Dec-08 ARS 1 1 1 2 1 1 0.065 0.0652833 -0.43%
76 17-Dec-08 ARS 1 1 1 2 1 1 0.058 0.0652833 -11.16%
77 18-Dec-08 ARS 1 1 1 2 1 1 0.061 0.0652833 -6.56%
78 20-Dec-08 ARS 1 1 1 2 1 1 0.067 0.0652833 2.63%
79 22-Dec-08 ARS 1 1 1 2 1 1 0.072 0.0652833 10.29%
80 23-Dec-08 ARS 1 1 1 2 1 1 0.070 0.0652833 7.22%
81 24-Dec-08 ARS 1 1 1 2 1 1 0.071 0.0652833 8.76%
82 26-Dec-08 ARS 1 1 1 2 1 1 0.071 0.0652833 8.76%
83 27-Dec-08 ARS 1 1 1 2 1 1 0.064 0.0652833 -1.97%
84 29-Dec-08 ARS 1 1 1 2 1 1 0.058 0.0652833 -11.16%
85 30-Dec-08 ARS 1 1 1 2 1 1 0.058 0.0652833 -11.16%
Table 4.3a: EXCEL Sheet for Model Formulation – Excavation (contd./-)
160

Param eters
% Productivity
Measured
Group
(T) (S) (M) (P) (C)
(G)
86 31-Dec-08 ARS 1 1 1 2 1 1 0.056 0.0652833 -13.91%
87 3-Jan-09 ARS 2 2 3 2 2 2 0.054 0.0652833 -16.98%
88 4-Jan-09 ARS 2 2 3 2 2 2 0.054 0.0652833 -17.13%
89 5-Jan-09 ARS 1 3 3 2 2 2 0.057 0.0652833 -12.54%
90 6-Jan-09 ARS 1 2 3 2 2 2 0.049 0.0652833 -24.94%
91 7-Jan-09 ARS 1 2 3 2 2 2 0.049 0.0652833 -24.94%
92 8-Jan-09 ARS 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.076 0.0652833 16.42%
93 10-Jan-09 ARS 2 3 3 2 2 2 0.056 0.0652833 -14.22%
94 11-Jan-09 ARS 2 3 3 2 2 2 0.056 0.0652833 -14.22%
95 12-Jan-09 ARS 2 2 3 2 2 2 0.054 0.0652833 -17.28%
96 13-Jan-09 ARS 1 2 3 2 2 2 0.051 0.0652833 -21.42%
97 14-Jan-09 ARS 1 2 3 2 2 2 0.050 0.0652833 -22.80%
98 14-Jan-09 ARS 2 3 3 2 2 2 0.059 0.0652833 -9.17%
99 17-Jan-09 ARS 3 3 3 2 2 2 0.061 0.0652833 -6.56%
100 18-Jan-09 ARS 3 3 3 2 2 2 0.059 0.0652833 -9.62%
101 19-Jan-09 ARS 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.063 0.0652833 -3.50%
102 20-Jan-09 ARS 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.066 0.0652833 1.10%
103 21-Jan-09 ARS 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.065 0.0652833 -0.43%
104 22-Jan-09 ARS 3 3 3 2 2 2 0.063 0.0652833 -3.50%
Table 4.3a: EXCEL Sheet for Model Formulation – Excavation contd./-
This data has been taken to MINITAB 15 software.
The MINITAB session printout for iteration no. 1 is reproduced below.
EXCAVATION REGRESSION - 1
Aug 29 09
DATA SET- 104
Regression Analysis: % Productivity versus Timings (T), Supervision, ...
* Material (M) is (essentially) constant

* Material (M) has been removed from the equation.
The regression equation is

% Productivity = - 0.0695 - 0.0214 Timings (T) + 0.147 Supervision (S)
- 0.275 Group (G) - 0.124 Procedure (P) + 0.342 Climate (C)
Predictor Coef SE Coef T P VIF

Constant -0.06951 0.08855 -0.78 0.434
Timings (T) -0.02144 0.03380 -0.63 0.527 1.598
Supervision (S) 0.14686 0.03894 3.77 0.000 2.958
Group (G) -0.27533 0.07488 -3.68 0.000 9.005
Procedure (P) -0.12448 0.05296 -2.35 0.021 2.442
161
Climate (C) 0.34187 0.07815 4.37 0.000 4.723
S = 0.138742 R-Sq = 33.4% R-Sq(adj) = 30.0%
PRESS = 2.13301 R-Sq(pred) = 24.74%
Analysis of Variance
Source DF SS MS F P
Regression 5 0.94775 0.18955 9.85 0.000
Residual Error 98 1.88643 0.01925
Lack of Fit 8 0.29156 0.03644 2.06 0.048
Pure Error 90 1.59488 0.01772
Total 103 2.83418
4 rows with no replicates
Source DF Seq SS
Timings (T) 1 0.02284
Supervision (S) 1 0.01124
Group (G) 1 0.08087
Procedure (P) 1 0.46444
Climate (C) 1 0.36836
Unusual Observations
Timings
Obs (T) % Productivity Fit SE Fit Residual St Resid
1 2.00 -0.3199 0.0431 0.0343 -0.3629 -2.70R
7 2.00 0.3603 0.0431 0.0343 0.3172 2.36R
14 2.00 -0.3199 0.0431 0.0343 -0.3629 -2.70R
32 2.00 -0.3199 0.0431 0.0343 -0.3629 -2.70R
34 2.00 -0.3652 0.0431 0.0343 -0.4083 -3.04R
40 1.00 -0.2632 0.0645 0.0191 -0.3277 -2.38R
68 2.00 0.1336 -0.1520 0.0657 0.2855 2.34RX
73 1.00 -0.3873 -0.0020 0.0329 -0.3852 -2.86R
92 1.00 0.1642 0.0869 0.0586 0.0773 0.61 X
R denotes an observation with a large standardized residual.

X denotes an observation whose X value gives it large leverage.
Durbin-Watson statistic = 2.05619
Lack of fit test

Possible interaction in variable Supervis (P-Value = 0.085 )
Possible curvature in variable Group (G (P-Value = 0.012 )
Possible curvature in variable Climate (P-Value = 0.062 )
Overall lack of fit test is significant at P = 0.012
Residual Plots for % Productivity
162
So in iteration step no. 1, it is seen that R2 is 33.4% and observation no’s 1, 7, 14,
32, 34, 40, 68, 73 and 92 (9 readings) are considered unusual observations which
either give large standardized residuals or have a large leverage as indicated by
MINITAB 15. See box in previous page.
Residual Plots for % Productivity- Excavation 1

Normal Probability Plot Versus Fits
99.9
Standardized Residual
99 2
90
Percent
0
50
10
-2
1
0.1
-4 -2 0 2 4 -0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2
Standardized Residual Fitted Value
Histogram Standardized Residual

Versus Order
45 2
Frequency
30 0
15
-2
0
-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 1 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Standardized Residual Observation Order
Fig. 4.5a: Iteration 1 – Excavation Modelling Graphs
163
Step 2 – These 9 readings were removed and iteration 2 is done using the
MINITAB software.
Aug 29 09
DATA SET- 95
Regression Analysis: % Productivity versus Timings (T), Supervision , ...


% Productivity = - 0.112 + 0.0600 Timings (T) + 0.0832 Supervision (S)

Constant -0.11174 0.06621 -1.69 0.095
Timings (T) 0.05995 0.02582 2.32 0.023 1.875
Supervision (S) 0.08322 0.02842 2.93 0.004 3.474
Group (G) -0.30475 0.05764 -5.29 0.000 11.949
Procedure (P) -0.11447 0.03945 -2.90 0.005 2.950
Climate (C) 0.39086 0.06119 6.39 0.000 5.981
S = 0.0912706 R-Sq = 60.5% R-Sq(adj) = 58.3%
PRESS = 0.805843 R-Sq(pred) = 57.04%
Source DF SS MS F P
Regression 5 1.13451 0.22690 27.24 0.000
Residual Error 89 0.74140 0.00833
Lack of Fit 6 0.02712 0.00452 0.53 0.788
Pure Error 83 0.71428 0.00861
Total 94 1.87591
Source DF Seq SS
Timings (T) 1 0.00091
Group (G) 1 0.07496
Climate (C) 1 0.33984
Timings
2 1.00 -0.09314 0.08919 0.01295 -0.18233 -2.02R
3 1.00 -0.20650 0.08919 0.01295 -0.29569 -3.27R
6 1.00 -0.20650 0.08919 0.01295 -0.29569 -3.27R
8 1.00 -0.09314 0.08919 0.01295 -0.18233 -2.02R
10 1.00 -0.09314 0.08919 0.01295 -0.18233 -2.02R
13 1.00 -0.20650 0.08919 0.01295 -0.29569 -3.27R
35 1.00 -0.09314 0.08919 0.01295 -0.18233 -2.02R
81 1.00 -0.12535 -0.16357 0.04012 0.03822 0.47 X

164
Lack of fit test

Possible curvature in variable Timings (P-Value = 0.070 )
Possible curvature in variable Supervision (P-Value = 0.001 )
Possible interaction in variable Group (G (P-Value = 0.044 )
Possible curvature in variable Procedure (P-Value = 0.000 )
So in iteration step no. 2, it is seen that R2 is 60.5% and observation no’s

2,3,6,8,10,13,35 and 81 (8 readings) are considered unusual observations which
either give large standardized residuals or have a large leverage as indicated by
MINITAB 15. See box previous page.

99.9 2
99
90
0
Percent
50
10
-2
1
0.1 -4
-4 -2 0 2 4 -0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2
Histogram Versus Order

40 2
Frequency
0
20
-2
0 -4
-3 -2 -1 0 1 1 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Fig. 4.5b: Iteration 2 – Excavation Modelling Graphs
165
Iteration No. 3
Aug 29 09
DATA SET- 87



Constant -0.07716 0.04296 -1.80 0.076
Timings (T) 0.05652 0.01777 3.18 0.002 2.074
Supervision (S) 0.05592 0.01938 2.89 0.005 3.469
Group (G) -0.26462 0.03750 -7.06 0.000 11.650
Procedure (P) -0.15251 0.02576 -5.92 0.000 2.823
Climate (C) 0.38685 0.03963 9.76 0.000 5.878
S = 0.0590669 R-Sq = 81.6% R-Sq(adj) = 80.5%
PRESS = 0.333954 R-Sq(pred) = 78.31%
Source DF SS MS F P
Regression 5 1.25682 0.25136 72.05 0.000
Residual Error 81 0.28260 0.00349
Lack of Fit 5 0.04472 0.00894 2.86 0.020
Pure Error 76 0.23788 0.00313
Total 86 1.53942
Source DF Seq SS
Timings (T) 1 0.01306
Group (G) 1 0.03577
Climate (C) 1 0.33245
Timings
1 2.00 0.02022 0.18376 0.01908 -0.16355 -2.93R
10 2.00 0.02022 0.18376 0.01908 -0.16355 -2.93R
30 1.00 0.24693 0.12724 0.00905 0.11969 2.05R
31 1.00 0.24693 0.12724 0.00905 0.11969 2.05R
44 2.00 0.36029 0.23968 0.01607 0.12061 2.12R
58 2.00 0.27138 0.11745 0.02215 0.15394 2.81R
61 1.00 -0.11156 0.00500 0.01481 -0.11657 -2.04R
69 1.00 -0.11156 0.00500 0.01481 -0.11657 -2.04R
70 1.00 -0.11156 0.00500 0.01481 -0.11657 -2.04R
71 1.00 -0.13914 0.00500 0.01481 -0.14414 -2.52R
166
No evidence of lack of fit (P >= 0.1).
So in iteration step no. 3, it is seen that R2 is 81.6% and observation no’s

1,10,30,31,44,58,61,69,70 and 71 (10 readings) are considered unusual
observations which either give large standardized residuals or have a large
leverage as indicated by MINITAB 15. See box previous page.

99.9
99
2
90
Percent
50 0
10
-2
1
0.1
-4 -2 0 2 4 -0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2

45
2
Frequency
30
0
15
-2
0
-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 1 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Fig. 4.5c: Iteration 3 – Excavation Modelling Graphs
167
Iteration No. 4
Aug 29 09
DATA SET- 77



Constant -0.00244 0.02657 -0.09 0.927
Timings (T) 0.08057 0.01118 7.20 0.000 2.286
Supervision (S) 0.01895 0.01176 1.61 0.111 3.769
Group (G) -0.23278 0.02179 -10.68 0.000 10.234
Procedure (P) -0.15689 0.01463 -10.72 0.000 2.757
Climate (C) 0.32849 0.02322 14.14 0.000 4.577
S = 0.0333352 R-Sq = 93.4% R-Sq(adj) = 93.0%
PRESS = 0.0958733 R-Sq(pred) = 92.04%
Source DF SS MS F P
Regression 5 1.12547 0.22509 202.56 0.000
Residual Error 71 0.07890 0.00111
Lack of Fit 4 0.00402 0.00101 0.90 0.469
Pure Error 67 0.07487 0.00112
Total 76 1.20436
Source DF Seq SS
Timings (T) 1 0.04397
Group (G) 1 0.08164
Climate (C) 1 0.22230
Timings
8 1.00 0.02022 0.13161 0.00537 -0.11139 -3.39R
40 1.00 0.24693 0.15056 0.01114 0.09637 3.07R
49 2.00 0.13357 0.23113 0.00999 -0.09755 -3.07R
53 1.00 -0.03498 0.03590 0.01005 -0.07088 -2.23R
55 1.00 -0.06561 0.03590 0.01005 -0.10152 -3.19R
57 1.00 0.10289 0.03590 0.01005 0.06698 2.11R

Possible lack of fit at outer X-values (P-Value = 0.000)
168
So in iteration step no. 4, it is seen that R2 is 93.4% and accept the model at
this R2 value. There are further unusual observations, which if removed could
lead to a better R2 value, but for practical reasons, the iterations are stopped at
this juncture.

99.9
99
2
90
Percent
50
0
10 -2
1
0.1 -4
-4 -2 0 2 4 -0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2

45 Standardized Residual
2
Frequency
30
0
15
-2
0 -4
-3.2 -1.6 0.0 1.6 3.2 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75
Fig. 4.5d: Iteration 4 – Excavation Modelling Graphs
Following is the summary for Excavation Trade Productivity Model Formulation.
Excavation Unit = m3/man hour

Total data sets = 104
Number of Sites = 2
Number of iterations = 4
2
R value in last iteration to accept model = 93.4%
Model : Percentage Productivity Change Predicted (PPCP) = …
PPCP = - 0.0024 + 0.0806T + 0.0190S - 0.233G - 0.157P + 0.328C
169
Lack of Fit Test *

Durbin
Data R2 2
Activity Steps Regression Model having best R value Watson Possible Possible Significant at p-
Set %
Statistic Curvature Interaction value
1 104 33.4 - 2.05619 G, C S p=0.012
2 95 60.5 - 1.50850 T, S, G, P, C G p=0.00

Excavation
No evidence
3 87 81.6 - 1.11372 - -
(p>=0.1)
4 77 93.4 -0.0024+0.0806T+0.0190S-0.233G-0.157P+0.328C 1.69130 - - p= 0.000
* Legend: Work Timings = T, Level of Supervision = S, Group Dynamics = G, Control by Procedure = P, Availability of Material = M, Climate = C
Table 4.3b: REGRESSION MODELS - ITERATION SUMMARY for EXCAVATION (use of MINITAB 15 software)
170
The iterations are summarized in Table 4.3b. As can be seen from the regression
model, the Excavation Trade Productivity Change is greatly influenced by the
Climate factor (32.8%) followed by Group Dynamics (23.3%) and Procedures
(15.7%), then by Timings (8.06%) and finally by Supervision (1.9%).
Table 4.4 also shows the contribution of each of the factors Timings (T),
Supervision (S), Group Dynamics (G), Procedures (P) and Climate (C).
The contributing percentages have been derived from

a) the coefficients themselves and reconfirmed as explained in b) below.
b) from actual computations using the total possible 243 runs (35) of the 5
factors variable at three levels 1-2-3. Appendix 6-1 to 6-7 shows the
EXCEL workouts of the models using all the 243 combinations possible
for the 5 factors at three levels. For each increment of any one factor, any
other combination of the other four factors gives the predicted
productivity change which is the coefficient of the factor in the model and
expressed as a percentage. The Excel sheet also shows that the difference
in productivity achieved while one factor is changed from level 1 to 2 or 2
to 3 was equal to the coefficient of each of the factors in the regression
model.
Now with reference to Table 4.4, it is seen that each factor has a unique
measurable effect (in percentage contribution) to the change in productivity. The
review following has been done in two ways first across the factors and then
across the construction trades.
Timings (T) factor seems to have a good contribution to the productivity change
in six trades of construction – Excavation, Formwork, Reinforcement,
Concreting, Blockwork, and Plastering. The effect is more than 10% in four out
of the seven trades which is around 57%. Surprisingly the effect of Timings on
the Tiling activity was below one percent. The highest contribution is seen in
Plastering with a contribution of 24.2%. This information can therefore be used
by site personnel to enhance productivity of these activities by ensuring
171
favourable work timings for the operatives to give in their best thus enhancing the
productivity of the construction trades.
Supervision (S) factor also seems to have a good contribution to the productivity
change in Formwork, Reinforcement, Concreting, Blockwork, and Tiling Works.
The supervision factor contributes 24.2% for the critical activity of
reinforcement, which if unsupervised and un-checked may lead to missing bars,
wrong bars and incorrect overlaps leading to structural instability and strength
issues after concreting. The highest contribution 35.4% is in Tiling Works which
also needs competent supervision as this activity is the final product the client
will see and use on a daily basis. It also seems quite reasonable to assume that
supervision of these activities is critical to ensure good quality of the finished
product. Thus quality work done correctly first time without rework would
definitely enhance productivity.
It is therefore obvious that competent supervision will enhance productivity on

sites.
Group Dynamics (G) factor seems to have a significant contribution only for the
activities of excavation (-23.3%) and blockwork (-12.8%) and in tiling (8.78%).
This factor contribution of 10% or more is only 2 out of 7 which is around
28.6%. The general situation on sites is a mix of skilled and unskilled personnel
on sites with an ongoing learning curve for new and unskilled personnel to pick
up relevant skills on the job. Therefore to enhance productivity one would need
more skilled personnel, but in the long run, retaining same team composition with
known team members would reduce learning curve and help enhance
productivity.
Procedures (P) factor also seems to have a good contribution to the productivity
change in Excavation, Concreting, Blockwork, and Tiling Works. This factor like
Timings (T) has more than 10% contribution in four out of the seven trades
around 57%. The highest contribution is in Tiling works (-28.2%), while it is 12.5
% on blockwork.
172
Factors Affecting Productivity and their contribution

Total 2
R
Activity Iterations Data Final Regression Model having best R2 value Timings Supervision Group Procedures Climate
% (T) (S) Dynamics (P) (C)
Sets
(G)
Excavation 4 104 93.4 -0.0024+0.0806T+0.0190S-0.233G-0.157P+0.328C 8.06% 1.90% -23.30% -15.70% 32.80%
Formwork 8 228 75 -0.661+0.195T+0.140S- 0.0196G+0.0966P+0.0057C 19.50% 14.00% -1.96% 9.66% 0.57%
Reinforce-
9 134 73.8 - 0.748+0.150T+0.242S-0.0386G+0.0301P-0.0499C 15.00% 24.20% -3.86% 3.01% -4.99%
ment
Concreting 5 119 78.5 -0.0283+0.0733T+0.143S+0.0514G-0.180P+0.0389C 7.33% 14.30% 5.14% -18.00% 3.89%
Block work 7 90 82.9 -0.480+0.138T+0.141S-0.128G+0.125P+0.0444C 13.80% 14.10% -12.80% 12.50% 4.44%
Plastering 4 80 92.6 -0.203+0.242T-0.0049S-0.0344G-0.0548P+0.0328C 24.20% -0.49% -3.44% -5.48% 3.28%
Tiling 7 57 83.1 +0.073+0.0050T+0.354S+0.0878G-0.282P-0.170C 0.50% 35.40% 8.78% -28.20% -17.00%
4/7 5/7 2/7 4/7 2/7

812 Frequency of 10% or more contribution to productivity
(57.1%) (71.4%) (28.6%) (57.1%) (28.6%)
Table 4.4 : Final Regression Models
173
Climate (C) factors has a 32.8% contribution on Excavation for obvious reasons
– as excavation is done outside and extreme climatic conditions do affect the
operatives in a negative way thus reducing their productivity. The other
contribution of -17% is seen in the Tiling Works. Obviously this factor is natural
and out of human control, the best that can be done is to plan out the activities in
such a way that outside works could be done at different times of the day when
climatic conditions are not that extreme.
Further review of the construction trades and the major factors affecting
productivity can be summarized in Table 4.5 below.
.
Trades Contributing (> 10%) Factors ranked in descending order
Excavation Climate (32.8%), Group Dynamics (-23.3%), Procedures (-15.7%)
Formwork Timings (19.5%), Supervision (14%)
Reinforcement Supervision (24.2%), Timings (15%)
Concreting Procedures (-18%), Supervision (14.3%)
Blockwork Supervision (14.1%), Group Dynamics (-12.8%), Procedures (12.5%)
Plastering Timings (24.2%)
Tiling Supervision (35.4%), Procedures (-28.2%), Climate (-17%)
Table 4.5 : Major Productivity Contributing Factors
The factor contributions are also depicted graphically in Figure 4.6 a - g
174
Contribution of Factors
Excavation Productivity Model
40.00%
32.80%
30.00%
20.00%
8.06%
10.00%
1.90%
0.00%
Timings Supervision Group Procedures Climate
‐10.00%
Dynamics
‐20.00% ‐15.70%
‐30.00% ‐23.30%
Fig. 4.6a : Graphical Representation of Factors affecting Excavation
Thus for excavation (Fig. 4.6a), climate, group dynamics and procedures are
major contributing factors. It is also seen that Climate plays an important role in
excavation productivity as this activity is normally done outside under the sun.
This would mean that excavation productivity could be enhanced by ensuring
excavation done in earlier parts of the day or late afternoons when the climatic
conditions could be more favourable. Similarly excavation productivity could be
enhanced by ensuring better group dynamics and control by procedures.
Formwork Productivity Model
25.00%
19.50%
20.00%
14.00%
15.00%
9.66%
10.00%
5.00%
‐1.96% 0.57%
0.00%
Timings Supervision Group Procedures Climate
‐5.00%
Dynamics
Fig. 4.6b : Graphical Representation of Factors affecting Formwork
175
For formwork (Fig. 4.6b), the major contributing factors seem to be Timings,
Supervision, and Procedures. It would therefore mean that ensuring favourable
work timings giving more cash incentives to operatives, competent supervision
which would result in less rework and control by procedures could result in
increased productivity. As can be seen, climate does not have a significant impact
(0.57%) on the productivity, as formwork is done partly in the carpentry shop
which is shaded and erection is done on site.
Reinforcement Productivity Model
30.00%
24.20%
25.00%
20.00%
15.00%
15.00%
10.00%
5.00% 3.01%
‐3.86%
0.00%
‐5.00% Timings Supervision Group Procedures Climate
Dynamics ‐4.99%
‐10.00%
Fig. 4.6c : Graphical Representation of Factors affecting Reinforcement
For Reinforcement (Fig. 4.6c)– the major contributing factors seem to be

Supervision, Timings and Climate and again competent supervision, favourable
work timings giving cash incentives to operatives and work under favourable
climate conditions could help enhance productivity. Reinforcement activity is
again like formwork done in the shaded Steel Shop or cut and bent steel is
purchased and only fixing is done on site.
176
Concreting Productivity Model
20.00%
14.30%
15.00%
10.00% 7.33%
5.14% 3.89%
5.00%
0.00%
Dynamics
‐10.00%
‐15.00%
‐20.00% ‐18.00%
Fig. 4.6d : Graphical Representation of Factors affecting Concreting
For Concreting (Fig. 4.6d)– the major contributing factors are Procedures,
Supervision and Timings. Again control by procedures, competent supervision
and favourable work timings giving cash incentive for operatives would enhance
productivity of the concreting operations.
Blockwork Productivity Model
20.00%
13.80% 14.10%
15.00% 12.50%
10.00%
4.44%
5.00%
0.00%

Dynamics
‐10.00%
‐15.00% ‐12.80%
Fig. 4.6e : Graphical Representation of Factors affecting Blockwork
For Blockwork (Fig. 4.6e) – the major contributing factors are Supervision,
Group Dynamics and Procedures. Therefore competent supervision, cohesive
group members and control by procedures will help enhance productivity.
177
Plastering Productivity Model
30.00%
24.20%
25.00%
20.00%
15.00%
10.00%
5.00% 3.28%
‐0.49% ‐3.44%
0.00%
Dynamics ‐5.48%
‐10.00%
Fig. 4.6f : Graphical Representation of Factors affecting Plastering
For Plastering (Fig. 4.6f) – the major contributing factors are Timings,
Procedures and Climate. Climate factor may depend whether the plastering is
done externally or is being done internally. However better work timings
resulting in cash incentives for operatives and control by procedures will
definitely enhance productivity.
Tiling Productivity Model
40.00% 35.40%
30.00%
20.00%
8.78%
10.00%
0.50%
0.00%
Dynamics
‐20.00%
‐17.00%
‐30.00%
‐28.20%
‐40.00%
Fig. 4.6g : Graphical Representation of Factors affecting Tiling
178
Sorted for Climate Levels Sorted for Procedure Levels

Factors PPCP Factors PPCP
Runs % Change Runs % Change
using model using model
T S G P C T S G P C
1 1 1 1 1 1 3.52% 32.80% 1 1 1 1 1 1 3.52% ‐15.70%

2 1 1 1 1 2 36.32% 32.80% 2 1 1 1 2 1 -12.18% ‐15.70%
3 1 1 1 1 3 69.12% 32.80% 3 1 1 1 3 1 -27.88% ‐15.70%
4 1 1 1 2 1 -12.18% 32.80% 4 1 1 2 1 1 -19.78% ‐15.70%
5 1 1 1 2 2 20.62% 32.80% 5 1 1 2 2 1 -35.48% ‐15.70%
6 1 1 1 2 3 53.42% 32.80% 6 1 1 2 3 1 -51.18% ‐15.70%
7 1 1 2 1 1 -19.78% 32.80% 7 1 1 3 1 1 -43.08% ‐15.70%
8 1 1 2 1 2 13.02% 32.80% 8 1 1 3 2 1 -58.78% ‐15.70%
9 1 1 2 1 3 45.82% 32.80% 9 1 1 3 3 1 -74.48% ‐15.70%
10 1 2 1 1 1 5.42% 32.80% 10 1 2 1 1 1 5.42% ‐15.70%
11 1 2 1 1 2 38.22% 32.80% 11 1 2 1 2 1 -10.28% ‐15.70%
12 1 2 1 1 3 71.02% 32.80% 12 1 2 1 3 1 -25.98% ‐15.70%
13 2 1 1 1 1 11.58% 32.80% 13 2 1 1 1 1 11.58% ‐15.70%
14 2 1 1 1 2 44.38% 32.80% 14 2 1 1 2 1 -4.12% ‐15.70%
15 2 1 1 1 3 77.18% 32.80% 15 2 1 1 3 1 -19.82% ‐15.70%
16 3 1 1 1 1 19.64% 32.80% 16 3 1 2 1 1 -3.66% ‐15.70%
17 3 1 1 1 2 52.44% 32.80% 17 3 1 2 2 1 -19.36% ‐15.70%
18 3 1 1 1 3 85.24% 32.80% 18 3 1 2 3 1 -35.06% ‐15.70%
19 3 2 3 1 1 -25.06% 32.80% 19 2 2 2 1 2 22.98% ‐15.70%
20 3 2 3 1 2 7.74% 32.80% 20 2 2 2 2 2 7.28% ‐15.70%
21 3 2 3 1 3 40.54% 32.80% 21 2 2 2 3 2 -8.42% ‐15.70%
22 3 3 3 3 1 -54.56% 32.80% 22 3 3 3 1 3 42.44% ‐15.70%
23 3 3 3 3 2 -21.76% 32.80% 23 3 3 3 2 3 26.74% ‐15.70%
24 3 3 3 3 3 11.04% 32.80% 24 3 3 3 3 3 11.04% ‐15.70%
Table 4.6 : Extracts from Appendix 6-1: Excavation Trade Productivity at various Runs / Levels of Factors
179
For Tiling (Fig. 4.6g) – the major contributing factors are Supervision,
Procedures and Climate. Surprisingly Timings has a very low contribution.
Competent supervision would mean the operatives would have a better direction,
control by procedures would mean patterns are known and not left to the
operatives.
Similarly, for the Procedure factor, its contribution to the excavation trade as
given by the model is -12.18-3.52 = -15.7%. This effect of the Procedure factor
change remains constant for all combination of the levels of the other factors.
The other tables in Appendix 6 can be reviewed to re-confirm this fact for all the
trades and for all the coefficients at all possible combination of factor levels.
Thus Table 4.4 and Table 4.5 and the graphical representations are critical and
need to be reviewed by site personnel to understand the role and contribution of
each of the factors and how controlling these factors for creating favourable
conditions on site will help enhance productivity.
4.6 CONCLUSION
This chapter dealt with establishing the regression models for the seven
construction trades of Excavation, Formwork, Reinforcement, Concreting,
Blockwork, Plastering and Tiling. Linear regression models were arrived at for
the above seven trades and the percentage effect of each factor was determined.
The six factors under study and used in modelling were the Timings, Supervision,
Group, Procedures, Materials and Climate.
MINITAB 15 was used to conduct regression analysis and models returned were
accepted based on the R2 value. Table 4.4 shows the summary of models so
established along with the number of iterations and the final R2 noted. The
highest R2 achieved is 93.4% for Excavation trade, while the lowest was for
Reinforcement at 73.8%
The MINITAB 15 software eliminated the materials factor as no much variation

was seen in data collection.
180
For practical application of the model on construction sites, and serving the aim
and objectives of the research, the regression involving curvature and interactions
amongst the factors themselves has been avoided. This could be part of the
further research on this topic.
The models so achieved have been subjected to validation as discussed in

Chapter 5 and the possible refinements to the model are addressed in Chapter 6.
***
181
CHAPTER 5 : MODEL VALIDATION & EVALUATION OF

VARIABILITY OF PRODUCTIVITY
182
CHAPTER 5 : MODEL VALIDATION & EVALUATION OF

VARIABILITY OF PRODUCTIVITY
This chapter deals with the testing and validation of the trade wise productivity
models established in Chapter 4 using the MINITAB 15 software. It also details
the methodology applied including the background considerations necessary to
understand the possible deviation from the productivity change actually found
and that predicted by the model.
The validation process helps to determine if the models can be practically used to
predict productivity changes on construction sites, when underlying factors
affecting productivity are changed. The validation was performed on the field
data on productivity changes collected in the same manner as that for
productivity model formulation. Field Data from six construction sites were used
for validation.
A total of eleven data sets covering the seven productivity models for the
blockwork, plastering, and tiling have been validated. These eleven data sets
were subjected to validation by finding out the error in estimating the predicted
productivity change as against that measured ones on site. Outliers were removed
using the two sigma band of control limits on the individual error readings. The
balance data readings were then checked against the ±15% acceptance band.
Models were accepted if the balance data readings were within this band.
5.1 BACKGROUND CONSIDERATIONS
Before detailing the validation process; a brief discussion on the model

formulation would be appropriate as this would help to better understand the
possible deviations between the proposed models if any, and consequently the
predicted productivity increase or decrease as against what is found actually on
site.
183
The regression models chosen were a straight line linear regression as against
possible curvilinear or logarithmic relationships. Interactions between factors
were also not considered. This was done to ensure practicality on site and due to
the fact that a broad range of possible productivity changes of ±40% and more
were possible in practice; reference also the productivity data values chosen for
the regression model after homogenization was limited to consider this band of
±40%. The data sets used in the final modelling represented overall 74%,
minimum 54% for tiling works and the maximum being 91% for blockwork,
Reference. Chapter 4, Table 4.2, pg. 146. The regression line fitted was the
optimal chosen to give as high a value of R2 of over 70%.
It is therefore expected that the predicted increase or decrease in productivity will

also follow a similar trend – that is the data points are expected to lie within an
upper and lower band limits of error.
These band limits are proposed to be set at ± 15% taking into consideration the
broad range of complex relationships between the model and the data, the
numerous technical constraints on site with regards to the expected productivity
in each of the activities reference to Chapter 3, section 3.9, pg. 133, the
subjectivity of the factors themselves & therefore the allocation of factor levels
chosen for research. Band limits less than ± 15% would be too narrow for
practical application; as the model efficiency depends upon human response
which is not exactly accurate as that can be expected from a machine. On the
other hand, a band limit more than ± 15% was thought as too loose for
verification and model reliability.
It would also be appropriate to assume possible inaccuracies of reporting data

itself from the sites. As an example, the field collection data almost included
negligible or no variation in the materials factor. This led to the removal of the
‘Material’ factor the regression models.
Further the productivity average used in the computations for the model may not
be relevant for computing predicted increase or decrease in productivity; as there
184
is a chance that site dynamics might have changed, activities completed, less
pressure of progress and that from the client, movement of workmen and so on.
The threshold of ± 15% also made sense as actual data from time sheets, cost
control charts and productivity figures from the case study company sites over
the last 34 years indicate that the maximum increase or decrease in productivity
would be in the range of ± 40%.
5.2 SITES USED FOR MODEL VALIDATION
Six sites have been used for Model formulation while four sites have been used
for validation since the other sites were completed/handed over. Table 5.1 below
shows the sites used in model formulation and those used for validation.
Activity Sites Used for Sites Used for

Model Formulation Model Validation
Excavation OAG, ARS ARS
Formwork OAG, ARS, JIC, BCC, NLB OAG, ARS, BCC
Reinforcement OAG, ARS, JIC, NLB OAG, ARS, BCC
Concreting OAG, ARS, JIC, RIH BCC
Blockwork ARS, JIC, NLB BCC
Plastering NLB, JIC ARS
Tiling NLB, JIC JIC
Table 5.1: Construction Sites Used for Model Formulation and Validation
It can be noted that the same sites were not always available for model validation
as concerned activities were completed as the project progressed further.
185
5.3 THE VALIDATION OF THE MODELS

Fig. 5.1 below shows step by step treatment of field data received for validation.
A narrative detailing the steps follows on next page.
Ensure minimum 15 readings
are available. Check
information clear and
complete; Clarify unclear
information from the sites.
Put Data on EXCEL Sheet
Compute Site Productivity

Average for data received
Is computed site
Yes productivity average
w ithin ± 15% of the
average used in model
formulation
In case no previous productivity
value exists, then use new
productivity average
No
Then Calculate Percentage Compute Percentage Productivity

Then Calculate Percentage Change Predicted (PPCP) by
Producitivity Change As
Producitivity Change As substituting factor values for
Measured (PPCM) using previous
Measured (PPCM) using the new Timings, Supervision, Group
productivity figure used in model
one Dyanmics, Procedures and
formulation
Climate
PPCM PPCP
Compute Error by subtracting

PPCM from PPCP
Error = PPCP - PPCM
Compute Errors accordingly for

all the field data sets for
validation
Data Ready for MINITAB

15
Fig. 5.1: Flow Chart Showing Computation of Errors for Validation
186
The validation process was therefore set as :-
a) Ensure minimum 15 readings are available for the validation data set for each
trade per site. This takes care of possible shortage of data from ongoing sites
for certain activities (e.g. in some sites, certain activities may have been
completed and some may not have started).
b) Further check the data for completeness and clarify any unclear data from the
concerned sites.
c) Ensure data is entered onto the preformatted EXCEL sheets. (Table 5.2 shows
the format). It is to be noted that the validation is performed per construction
trade for a given site.
d) Compute the site productivity average of the field data for the relevant
construction trade for the particular site. The next step is to check and
compare whether site productivity average is within ± 15% of the
productivity average used in model formulation. If the computed site average
is within the ± 15% of the productivity average used in model formulation,
then the percentage productivity change as measured (PPCM) is computed on
the basis of the previous productivity average used in model formulation. If
outside or if the site was not used in model formulation, then the newly
computed productivity average is used.
The band of ± 15% seemed practical to allow for variations and change in
site dynamics as affecting that particular construction trade. However if the
computed site productivity average is outside this band of ± 15%, then it
means that the data set no longer represents the one used in the model and a
fresh average needs to be worked out. It is normal to expect a different range
of productivity, as site dynamics change, personnel are changed, nature and
complexity of work gets changed and there is less pressure of work as work
has progressed, peaked and balance work activities are undertaken. Later it
is recognized that the productivity model validations seemed more accurate
and acceptable for those sites whose productivity average was within the ±
15%.
e) Once the site average to be used is fixed as explained in d), compute the
Percentage Productivity Change as measured (PPCM) for the validation data
sets.
187
f) Compute the Percentage Productivity Change Predicted (PPCP), using the

Regression Model for that activity. This is achieved by putting the values of
the factor levels in the regression equation. In the EXCEL Sheet this has been
automatically formatted.
g) Compute the Error. This difference between PPCP and PPCM. (Reference.
discussion in section 5.1 for setting acceptable limits for the error in
prediction)
h) The data is now ready to be taken to MINITAB for further steps in validating
the model.
Further steps in validation involve using graphs from MINITAB and these are
shown in Fig. 5.2, while the narrative follows in steps i) – o).
188
Copy contents of
validation data from the
EXCEL sheet into
MINITAB 15 w orksheet
Select Error from left box

2 2-1
for VARIABLES
With cursor at end of f irst row , in

MINITAB, choose the menu - 2-2
STATISTICS - CONTROL CHARTS Select I CHART OPTIONS
- VARIABLE CHART FOR
INDIVIDUALS - I CHART OPTIONS
Go to S LIMITS and type 2-2
'2' for tw o multiples of
3 standard deviation
Click OK for MINITAB to return

graph containing the error points.
Graph show s the mean error and Graph 1 - 2 sigma limits
the Upper Control Limit (UCL) and
Low er Control Limit (LCL)
4 Remove these outliers from the

Check Graphically - No MINITAB Worksheet and choose the
Are all data points w ithin menu - STATISTICS - CONTROL
the UCL and LCL CHARTS - VARIABLE CHART FOR
INDIVIDUALS - I CHART OPTIONS
Yes
6
Proceed for checking

data w ithin the ± 15%
band
7
Click on PARAMETERS,
With cursor at end of f irst row , in Type 0.05 for Standard 7-1
MINITAB, choose the menu - Deviation
STATISTICS - CONTROL CHARTS -
VARIABLE CHART FOR INDIVIDUALS - Go to S LIMITS and type
I CHART OPTIONS 3 for getting the ± 15% 7-2
band
Click OK for MINITAB to

8 13
return the graph
containing the error Graph 2 - ± 15% limits
points w ith the new ± Validation Fails
15% Model is not accepted
10 11
9
Check Graphically - No Check Graphically -
Are all data points w ithin Are all data points w ithin Are outliers w ithin 5%
the ± 15% band the ± 20% band No
12 Yes Yes Yes
Model is validated; Model is validated; Model is validated;

Accept Model Accept Model Accept Model
Using MINITAB menu GRAPH - SCATTER Using MINITAB menu GRAPH - HISTOGRAM, Using MINITAB menu EDITOR -
PLOT, plot the scatter graph for PPCM, PPCP plot the histogram w ith fit for 'Error' data LAYOUT, plot all the f our
and Error (Graph 3) (Graph 4) graphs in one sheet.
Fig. 5.2: Flow Chart Showing Computation of Errors for Validation
189
The EXCEL sheet data is then taken to MINITAB worksheet.

i) In MINITAB 15, use STAT – CONTROL CHARTS – VARIABLE CHART
FOR INDIVIDUALS – I CHART OPTIONS – S LIMITS 2. This returns
graph 1 – for the homogenization within ± 2 sigma limits. (sigma being the
standard deviation of all the error values in the validation data).
j) The next step is to remove outliers within the ± 2 sigma limits. Read off the
Mean and Upper Control Limits (UCL) & Lower Control Limits (LCL) for 2
sigma limits. This is shown in the graph returned by MINITAB. Check for
outliers. If there are outliers, then these are removed from the MINITAB
worksheet and validation proceeds to step k.
k) Given the overall intention to accept the model at ± 15% accuracy, the next
step is to check if the remaining data are within the ± 15% band. This is done
by once again plotting the Graph 2 – for ± 15% using MINITAB 15 options
as in i) above, but using Standard Deviation of 0.05 to give the ± 15% band.
In this case the new mean will be calculated by MINITAB for the data
remained after removing outliers.
l) If the remaining data is within this ± 15% band, the validation is successful
and the model is accepted.
m) If still there are outliers after this step, check the percentage outliers. If the
outlier’s percentage is within 5% of the data, then accept the model.
n) If not revalidation is reattempted one more time using a truncated data where
only data within the ± 20% of the site average are retained for validation. The
steps form i) to m) are repeated. If the reaming data is within ± 15% band as
in l), the revalidation is successful and model is accepted. If not the validation
fails and the model is rejected.
o) The remaining steps are to collect all the graphs for documenting the
validation. Two more graphs need to be made – Graph 3 : Scatter Plot and
Graph 4 – histogram of errors.
p) Once outliers are removed, then graph a scatter plot (Graph 3) for the Actual
Increase / Decrease versus the Predicted with the acceptable bands shown,
using the MINITAB 15 software. Use GRAPH – SCATTER PLOT -
REGRESSION in MINITAB 15. Fig. 5.3 shows a MINITAB 15 screen grab
for convenience.
190
q) For plotting the histogram, in MINITAB Use GRAPH – HISTOGRAM –

WITH FIT - OK
r) Plot the four in one graphs showing the 2 sigma outliers removal, the ± 15%
band, the scatter plot showing PPCM, PPCP and Error and the Error
Histogram.
In order to explain the above detailed validation process, an example of a

Validation for Excavation Productivity Model is presented in section 5.4.
Detailed validation computations and graphs for all the eleven data sets covering
all the seven construction trades are shown in Appendix 5.
5.4 VALIDATION EXCAVATION PRODUCTIVITY MODEL – ARS site
The validation data has been presented in the following order.

• Validation Set Summary
• Validation Graphs for Trade wise Productivity Model (four in one)
i. Plot of Errors with 2-sigma limits
ii. ± 15% band Revalidation Band
iii. Scatter Plot showing PPCM, PPCP and Error
iv. Error Distribution (histogram)
Validation Set 1, Reference. Table 5.2

Trade = Excavation
Unit = m3/man hour
Site = ARS
Model Used : Percentage Productivity Change Predicted (PPCP) = …
PPCP = -0.0024+0.0806T+0.0190S-0.233G-0.157P+0.328C
Mean Error = - 1.28%
Control Limits (2 sigma limits) = -16.99 to 14.43%
Outliers (2 sigma limits) = 2/27 (7.41%)
Outliers in ± 15% band = 0
Accept Model ? = Yes
191
Table 5.2: Validation Data for Excavation

192
The validation process is described below using the steps detailed in section 5.3
validation process and the flow charts shown in Fig. 5.1 and Fig. 5.2.
For the Excavation Productivity Model Validation, from ARS site, a total of 27
data sets were available. Refer Table 5.3 for the EXCEL tabulation.
Site Average of these 27 readings is (Ŷ) = 0.0652833 m3 / man-hour
Average used in Model Formulation for

ARS was (from Table 5.2) = 0.06276 m3 / man-hour
% Variance between averages used in model formulation and that from data
available for validation
= (0.06276 – 0.06528) / 0.06528
= - 0.038653
~ -3.9%
This -3.9% is within the ± 15% band and therefore it follows from 5.3 d), that we
can use the previous average used in model formulation.
Table 5.2 gives the summary of the 27 readings of data sets for validation of
excavation model and line 1 was taken as a sample computation.
Computation of PPCM, PPCP and Error

Reference. Sr. No. 1, Table 5.2, Excavation Data for Validation, ARS Site
Measured Productivity for Excavation (Yi) = 0.064 m3/ man hour
Site Average (Ŷ) = 0.0652833 m3/ man hour
Percentage Productivity Change as Measured (PPCM);

Site Average (Ŷ)
PPCM = 0.064 – 0.0652833 x 100

0.0652833
PPCM = - 1.97 %
Using the model, the percentage productivity change as predicted by model

(PPCP) ….
PPCP = -0.0024+0.0806T+0.0190S-0.233G-0.157P+0.328C
For Sr. No. 1, Reference Table 5.2, the factors levels for Timing, Supervision,
Group Dynamics, Procedures and Climate are T=3, S=3, G=3, P=2 and C=2. For
convenience the reader is reminded that the factors were varied at three levels.
Therefore,
PPCP = - 0.0024+0.0806T+0.0190S-0.233G-0.157P+0.328C
PPCP = - 0.0024+0.0806 x 3 + 0.0190 x 3 - 0.233 x 3 - 0.157 x 2 + 0.328 x 2
PPCP = - 0.0024+0.0806 x 3 + 0.0190 x 3 - 0.233 x 3 - 0.157 x 2 + 0.328 x 2
= - 0.0606
= - 6.06%
Now, Error = PPCP – PPCM

PPCM = -1.97% , PPCP = -6.06 %
Therefore, Error = PPCP – PPCM = -6.06% - (-1/97%) = - 4.09 %

Similarly the errors are found for the remaining 26 readings as shown in Table
5.2. On the EXCEL sheet, this is already formulated, therefore the error table is
automatically completed by EXCEL.
GRAPH 1 – Plot of Errors within the ± 2 sigma limits

The mean and upper + lower control limits are taken from MINITAB 15
computations and graphs. See Fig. 5.3a.
194
Error Chart for Excavation - 2 sigma limits

ARS Site
0.2
+2SL=0.1443
0.1
_
0.0 X=-0.0128
Individual Value
-0.1
-0.2 -2SL=-0.1699
-0.3
-0.4
1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25
Observation
Fig. 5.3a : Error Chart for the ± 2 sigma limits (from MINITAB 15)
Excavation Productivity Model Validation
Here the upper control limit (UCL) = 0.1443 and

lower control limit (LCL) = -0.1699.
It is seen that two data sets are out, one (data from 26) below the LCL and one
(data set no 27) above the UCL, which are then eliminated from the data set.
Data set no. 26.
In Minitab 15 Worksheet, this data set is deleted, apply the ± 15% limits by using
a standard deviation of 0.05 and 3 sigma limits.
The new mean of the remaining 25 readings is now -0.0059 and the UCL / LCL
is set at ± 15%, which gives UCL=0.1441 and LCL = -0.1559.
The reason for the selection of the ± 15% band means that the model is
acceptable at 85% accuracy. Although it is less than the 95% accuracy expected
195
at 2-sigma limits (Mendenhall et al, 2001, pg. 33); an 85% accuracy was
considered practical for field application)
It is now seen that all the 25 readings are within the limits and the model is
validated and accepted.
± 15 % Validation Band (Excavation)

ARS Site
0.15 UCL=0.1441
0.10
0.05
Individual Value
_
0.00 X=-0.0059
-0.05
-0.10
-0.15
LCL=-0.1559
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25
Observation
Fig. 5.3b : Error Chart for Excavation for the ± 15% band (from MINITAB 15)
Fig. 5.3 c shows the histogram of the errors for all the 27 sets.
196
Histogram (with Normal Curve) of Error

Mean -0.01279
9
StDev 0.09264
N 27
8
6
Frequency
0
-0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2
Error
Fig. 5.3c : Histogram of Errors (from MINITAB 15)
Scatter plot is shown in Fig. 5.3.d.
Excavation Productivity Model : Scatterplot of PPCM, PPCP and Error

0.10 Variable
A ctual I /D
Predicted I /D
0.05 Error
0.00
-0.05
Y-Data
-0.10
-0.15
-0.20
-0.25
0 5 10 15 20 25
No
Fig. 5.3d :Scatter Plot (from MINITAB 15)
197
The all in four graphs is plotted from MINITAB using the EDITOR –
LAYOUT tool, whilst on any of the graphs.
Excavation Productivity Model - Validation Graphs (ARS)

Error Chart for Excavation - 2 sigma limits ± 15 % Validation Band (Excavation)
ARS Site ARS Site
0.2 UCL=0.1441
+2SL=0.1443
0.1
_
Individual Value
Individual Value
0.0 X=-0.0128
_
0.0 X=-0.0059
-0.2 -2SL=-0.1699
-0.1
LCL=-0.1559
-0.4 -0.2
1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25
Observation Observation
Excavation Productivity Model : Scatterplot of PPCM, PPCP and Error Histogram (with Normal Curve) of Error
0.1 Variable Mean -0.01279
Actual I /D StDev 0.09264
Predicted I /D N 27
8
Error
0.0
6
Frequency
Y-Data
-0.1 4
2
-0.2
0
0 6 12 18 24 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2
No Error
Fig. 5.3e : Four in one Excavation Validation Graphs
5.5 VALIDATION RESULTS
Table 5.3 gives the grand summary of the data sets used for validation of the
productivity models and the results of the validation, including details of the data
eliminated during the homogenization within ± 2 sigma limits and whether
revalidation was required for any sets.
A total of 1963 data readings out of which 812 (74%) were utilized were taken in
11 sets for each of the seven trades considered in the model formulation. This is a
significant number for validation as compared to the model formulation, where a
total of 1090 data sets were available.
198
Out of the 11 sets, the errors from three data sets were revalidated as discussed
below.
• Data Set 3 - Reinforcement for OAG Site
1 out of the 42 readings (2.38%) was out of the ± 15% band. This is less
than the 5% band agreed for revalidation and hence the model was
accepted for practical use on site.
• Data Set 8 – Concreting and Data Set 9 - Blockwork for BCC Site
The concreting and blockwork validation data sets for BCC site did not
pass the ± 15% band after the outliers were removed using the band of 2-
sigma limits. These two sets of data were revalidated using a truncated
band of readings, which were within ± 20% of the average used in the
model. The truncated data sets thus obtained were subjected to
revalidation as before and the Concreting set passed the ± 15% band. The
Blockwork set still returned 6 out of 270 out of the ± 15% band after
truncation of the outlier readings as above. This meant 2.2% were still
out; this is less than 5% and hence the models were accepted for practical
use on site.
A review of the BCC site could possibly offer explanations of why the
models for concreting and blockwork in this particular site did not fit the
data. One reason was that BCC site concreting data was not used in model
formulation. Therefore its specific characteristics of a horizontal spread
project may not have been represented in the model formulation. It is also
significant to know that the validation data from BCC were 191 for
concreting while for model formulation the data sets used numbered 119
after homogenization.
For blockwork the total data sets used for model formulation were 90 and
the validation data from BCC were 347. It would mean that a more
efficient model would result in using more data sets.
Table 5.3 also indicates that the 2 sigma bands are well within the ± 40% band
initially considered for homogenizing data before carrying over for regression
analysis.
199
2 sigma limits ± 15 % Validation band

% Is Site
No. of Average Average as Outliers New
Variance Average Average as Mean 2 sigma limits
Data sets as Used in Computed used in Error ±2 Mean Outliers
Set Activity Site on Within (sigma = Std. ± 15 % band Accept Model
Used Model from Data Validation of indi- sigma Error of ± 15 %
Average ± 15% Deviation)
See Note 1 vidual limits remain- band
Yes/No
data ing data
D X (X1) (X1-X)/X LCL UCL LCL UCL
1 Excavation ARS 27 0.06528 0.06276 -3.9% Yes 0.06528 -1.28% -16.99% 14.43% 2 -0.59% -15.59% 14.41% 0 Yes
2 OAG 34 0.38308 0.37477 -2.2% Yes 0.38308 -2.67% -16.37% 11.03% 6 1.24% -13.76% 16.24% 0 Yes
3 Formwork ARS 51 0.16494 0.16951 2.8% Yes 0.16494 -1.74% -12.21% 8.73% 3 -4.25% -19.25% 10.75% 0 Yes
4 BCC 408 0.20025 0.25431 27.0% No 0.25431 -2.86% -16.25% 10.53% 98 -0.59% -15.59% 14.41% 0 Yes
5 OAG 54 0.07907 0.10910 38.0% No 0.10900 7.82% -5.64% 21.28% 12 11.81% -3.19% 26.81% 1/42 Yes
Rein-
6 ARS 92 0.01803 0.02530 40.3% No 0.02530 -4.89% -15.52% 5.74% 22 -5.26% -20.26% 9.74% 0 Yes
forcement
7 BCC 306 * 0.03148 - - 0.03148 0.39% -8.18% 8.96% 56 0.37% -14.63% 15.37% 0 Yes
Revalidated
8 Concreting BCC 191 0.44197 0.50211 13.6% Yes 0.44197 0.16% -18.45% 18.12% 9 -0.75% -15.75% 14.25% 27/182
±20% band
8-1 Concreting BCC 87 0.44197 0.46347 4.9% Yes 0.44197 3.77% -10.95% 18.49% 2 3.75% -11.25% 18.75% 0 Yes
Revalidated
9 Blockwork BCC 347 * 0.45465 - - 0.45465 0.19% -18.91% 19.29% 36 0.19% -14.81% 15.19% 27/311
±20% band
9-1 Blockwork BCC 298 * 0.454651 - - 0.454651 0.67% -15.14% 16.48% 29 1.03% -13.97% 16.03% 6/270 Yes
10 Plastering ARS 41 * 0.35178 - - 0.35178 -2.34% -17.38% 12.71% 3 -2.93% -17.93% 12.07% 0 Yes
11 Tiling JIC 27 0.19380 0.22120 14.1% Yes 0.19380 -0.58% -15.47% 14.30% 2 -0.57% -15.57% 14.43% 0 Yes
Note 1 -If Site Average is within the ± 15% of the average used in model formulation, then
Total 1963 * No data used during Model Formulation
previous average is used in validation; if not new computed is used
Table 5.3 : Grand Summary of Validation Data and Results
- 200 -
5.6 EVALUATION OF FACTORS AFFECTING PRODUCTIVITY
The productivity models have been used to evaluate the variability in the
productivity of the seven construction trades. Table 5.4 below is an extract from
Table 4.4 from Chapter 4. It gives a summary of the productivity models and
indicates the factors that would most introduce change in the productivity.
Activity R2 % Final Regression Model having best R2 value
Excavation 93.4 -0.0024+0.0806T+0.0190S-0.233G-0.157P+0.328C

Formwork 75 -0.661+0.195T+0.140S- 0.0196G+0.0966P+0.0057C
Reinforcement 73.8 - 0.748+0.150T+0.242S-0.0386G+0.0301P-0.0499C
Concreting 78.5 -0.0283+0.0733T+0.143S+0.0514G-0.180P+0.0389C
Block work 82.9 -0.480+0.138T+0.141S-0.128G+0.125P+0.0444C
Plastering 92.6 -0.203+0.242T-0.0049S-0.0344G-0.0548P+0.0328C
Tiling 83.1 +0.073+0.0050T+0.354S+0.0878G-0.282P-0.170C
Table 5.4 : Summary of Productivity Models
These are different for different trades. For example climate has the maximum
impact on excavation which is generally an external activity. A review of the
graphical plots (Fig. 4.5a – 4.5g) presented in Chapter 4 can help to gauge the
effect of each of the factors on productivity of the individual trades.
To enable further evaluation of the contribution of the factors, the major

contributing factors for each of the activities are summarized in Table 5.5, which
is actually a reproduction of Table 4.5 from Chapter 4.
201
Trades Contributing (> 10%) Factors ranked in descending order
Excavation Climate (32.8%), Group Dynamics (-23.3%), Procedures (-15.7%)
Formwork Timings (19.5%), Supervision (14%)
Reinforcement Supervision (24.2%), Timings (15%)
Concreting Procedures (-18%), Supervision (14.3%)
Blockwork Supervision (14.1%), Group Dynamics (-12.8%), Procedures (12.5%)
Plastering Timings (24.2%)
Tiling Supervision (35.4%), Procedures (-28.2%), Climate (-17%)
Table 5.5 : Major Productivity Contributing Factors Per Construction Trade
As can be seen from Table 5.4 and 5.5, Timings (T) factor has a good
contribution to the productivity change in six trades of construction – Excavation,
Formwork, Reinforcement, Concreting, Blockwork, and Plastering. It was found
that the effect is more than 10% in four out of the seven trades which is around
57%. Surprisingly the effect of Timings on the Tiling activity was below one
percent. The highest contribution is seen in Plastering with a contribution of
24.2%. This information can therefore be used by site personnel to enhance
productivity of these activities by ensuring favourable work timings for the
operatives to give in their best thus enhancing the productivity of the construction
trades.
Supervision (S) factor also seems to have a good contribution to the productivity
change in Formwork, Reinforcement, Concreting, Blockwork, and Tiling Works.
The supervision factor contributes 24.2% for the critical activity of
reinforcement, which if unsupervised and un-checked may lead to missing bars,
wrong bars and incorrect overlaps leading to structural instability and strength
issues after concreting. The highest contribution 35.4% is in Tiling Works which
also needs competent supervision as this activity is the final product the client
will see and use on a daily basis. It also seems quite reasonable to assume that
supervision of these activities are critical to ensure good quality of the finished
product. Thus quality work done correctly first time without rework would
definitely enhance productivity. It is therefore obvious that competent
supervision will enhance productivity on sites.
202
Group Dynamics (G) factor seems to have a significant contribution only for the
activities of excavation (-23.3%) and blockwork (-12.8%) and in tiling (8.78%).
This factor contribution of 10% or more is only 2 out of 7 which is around
28.6%. The general situation on sites is a mix of skilled and unskilled personnel
on sites with an ongoing learning curve for new and unskilled personnel to pick
up relevant skills on the job. Therefore to enhance productivity one would need
more skilled personnel, but in the long run, retaining same team composition with
known team members would reduce learning curve and help enhance
productivity.
Procedures (P) factor also seems to have a good contribution to the productivity
change in Excavation, Concreting, Blockwork, and Tiling Works. This factor like
Timings (T) has more than 10% contribution in four out of the seven trades
around 57%. The highest contribution is in Tiling works (-28.2%), while it is 12.5
% on blockwork.
Climate (C) factors has a 32.8% contribution on Excavation for obvious reasons
– as excavation is done outside and extreme climatic conditions do affect the
operatives in a negative way thus reducing their productivity. The other
contribution of -17% is seen in the Tiling Works. Obviously this factor is natural
and out of human control, the best that can be done is to plan out the activities in
such a way that outside works could be done at different times of the day when
climatic conditions are not that extreme.
Having discussed the contribution of each of the factors on the construction

trades in the paragraph above, it is important to throw some light on the factors
that have negative coefficient and analyze the reasons behind this negative
contribution.
For excavation, the Group Dynamics contributes with – 23.2 % and procedure
with -15.7%. This seems to be logical and in line with the characteristics of this
activity. This is purely non-skilled labour type of activity which is mostly directly
related to the amount of muscles that is put into it rather than the harmony and
203
dynamics of the group members. It is also noted that the procedure factor is
contributing with -15.7%. This is also reasonable since excavation activity is a
risky operation and much care must be given to underlying services, rerouting;
health and safety considerations such adequate shoring, access and ventilation
may be required for this activity. Hence the negative contribution of the stringent
procedures seems to be in line with field experience.
For concreting, procedures contributes to -18%. Again this is in line since

concreting activity is either carried out by cranes (mobile or tower cranes) or
pumps and in either case stringent safety requirements are must in this activity,
accordingly a negative coefficient is expected and well understood.
Studying the effect of the Group Dynamics on the blockwork activity reveals a -
12.8% contribution. This is well explainable due to the fact that Blockwork
activity is generally not a final finished product at practically all job sites in the
UAE. It subsequently receives either plastering, tiling, or marble cladding. Hence
high quality calibre of personal can be compromised by Managers on the account
of gaining higher productivity.
For tiling activity, both procedures and climate factors contribute negatively to
the level of productivity by -28.2% and -17% respectively. Tiling is normally one
of the last activities in a project resulting in a final finished product. This leads to
the fact that stringent quality procedures are mandatory to guarantee the
requirement of a finished product. This is very much in line and explains the
negative contribution of procedure on tiling activity. While for the climate,
severe, adverse climatic conditions normally produces negative impact on this
activity. Extremely hot and humid weather reduces the output and impacts
negatively on the productivity.
204
5.7 CONCLUSION
Validation has been performed on 11 data sets collected from ongoing

construction sites for the seven construction trades of excavation, formwork,
reinforcement, concreting, blockwork, plastering and tiling works under study
The validations of the model were performed on data collected from four sites –
namely OAG, ARS, BCC and JIC sites of the case study contracting company.
A total of 1963 data readings were reviewed and subjected to validation as per
the procedure set in section 5.2. Basically the data was plotted against the upper
control and lower control limits of ± 2 sigma limits followed by checking against
a band of ± 15% for the error in productivity change as predicted by model to that
actually measured on site when the factors are varied.
Outliers were removed using the upper control limits and lower control limits for
the 2 sigma band. Out of the 11 data sets, 8 data sets have validated the
productivity models developed for the construction trades. The three data sets
have been subjected to revalidation using a narrower band of readings within ±
20% of the average used in the model formulation. These were for reinforcement
at OAG site, and for concreting and blockwork at the BCC site. The models have
been accepted on revalidation as per the procedure in section 5.2.
For ± 2 sigma limits, it is seen that errors obtained between the predicted and the
actual productivity increase / decrease are within a band of 17.14% to 38.2%
further justifying the initial homogenization range of ± 40%.
Despite setting up ± 15% band, the majority of the data sets follow a lower band
as can be seen on the error plots. It is also found that when the site average as
measured is closer to the site average used in model formulation, then most of the
data used in validation seems to lie within the ± 15% band.
A review of the validation results vis-à-vis the construction trades shows that
simpler activities such as excavation, formwork, plastering and tiling were
205
validated easily, while concreting, reinforcement and blockwork had to be

revalidated probably indicating that the complexity involved in concreting,
reinforcement and blockwork for the particular sites and in particular the relevant
structures might have caused the higher error and thus the revalidation. However
for practical purposes, the revalidation has been acceptable.
Further the factors affecting productivity were evaluated considering the

coefficients of those factors in the regression equations. The coefficients are
indicative of the contribution of that particular factor in the overall change in
productivity.
It can thus be concluded with fair amount of confidence that the productivity
models established in Chapter 4 can be used for predicting quantifiable changes
in productivity when the factors levels are changed within an accuracy of ± 15%
This knowledge can be used by site personnel to ensure favourable conditions on

site so as to enhance the productivity of the operatives, the trade and the project.
***
206
CHAPTER 6 – CONCLUSION
207
CHAPTER 6 – CONCLUSION
This chapter presents a summary of the research undertaken indicating whether

or not the original aim and objectives of the research were achieved. It also
includes discussion of major findings, contribution to knowledge together with
the practical assumptions used in the research.
The discussions in this chapter form a basis for further refinement in the
productivity models and possible future research areas on the subject. However,
it is always important to keep in mind the practical use of the model later on by
construction industry players. In other words, there is no need to go to
exponential regression models to give results that are fairly accurate to the nth
decimal, and then try to apply this to the construction industry, where
approximations on a day to day level are mandatory.
6.1 WORK ACCOMPLISHED & CHALLENGES FACED
As indicated in Chapter 1, 1.1, this research was undertaken with the aim to
evaluate factors that would affect productivity of construction trades in order to
optimize output. The objectives to fulfill the research aim were identified and
they would now be evaluated using the models that were developed.
To start with, a comprehensive listing of factors affecting productivity in the

construction industry was identified by completing a literature review. The
significance of the early trades of excavation, formwork, reinforcement,
concreting, blockwork, plaster and tiling was understood in relation to the overall
construction productivity and progress of works.
In order to establish a mechanism for measuring the productivity changes, first

the most significant factors were identified by undertaking three surveys – the
first one was for significance of these factors and the other two surveys were for
the magnitude of the effect of the factors on productivity. Six factors at three
208
levels of variation were fixed for field data collection. These are the Work
Timings, Level of Supervision, Group Dynamics, Control by Procedures,
Availability of Material, and Climate.
Data was collected for the seven construction trades – subject of this study:
excavation, formwork, reinforcement, concreting, blockwork, plaster and tiling
works. Data was collected from six sites of at various locations in UAE with
different site constraints. A total of 1090 sets were collected. After homogenizing
the data within a ± 40% band, a total of 812 data sets were subjected to statistical
modeling using the MINITAB 15 software. Straight line regression was used for
practical application of the model. A minimum R2 – the coefficient of
determination of 70% was chosen as the threshold value to accept a model.
Thus productivity models were identified for all the seven trades. The
coefficients of each of the factors in the productivity model equation indicated
the contribution of each of the factors to the productivity change of that particular
trade.
Further the models were subjected to validation using the homogenization

process at ± 2 sigma limits of the errors obtained between the productivity change
estimated by the model and that actually measured on the site. Although, some of
the sites for data collection for model validation were new as those that were used
in model formulation were either completed or those activities were no longer
required on those sites; yet the process of validation proved to be satisfactory
confirms the robustness of the models.
After removal of any outliers, this was compared with the acceptable band of ±
15% of the errors. A total of 1963 data sets from four sites were used in the
validation process. All the construction trades were covered in the validation;
two of the data sets were revalidated after removing the outliers at the ± 15%
band. It was observed that despite setting up the ± 15% band, the majority of the
data sets follow a lower band as can be seen on the error plots. It is also found
that when the site average as measured is closer to the site average used in model
209
formulation, then most of the data used in validation seems to lie within the ±
15% band.
Thus the productivity models were acceptable and are estimated to be 85%
accurate and can be used for productivity enhancement initiatives at sites. This
can be done by reviewing the factors, which have the maximum impact and then
creating favourable conditions of those factors to attain the desired enhanced
productivity.
The challenges faced during this research were:-
6.1.1 Data Collection Techniques and Accuracy
The challenge involved the selection of the teams used in productivity data
collection especially as the team members were not aware that their work is being
recorded for further study and research. The selection of teams and the supervisor
in charge was therefore left to the discretion of site management. Other than
locations and differential client requirements, there was no much choice in the
selection of sites as the ongoing activities on site dictated the selection of sites.
The accuracy and completeness of the data collected was checked, where the data
was collated and fed into the EXCEL sheets. Odd events such as holidays,
sickness of supervisor or any of the team members, change of timings during
Ramadan Season and summer leave was not recorded. Data collection at site
required several rounds of briefing and correction, until a stable pattern of data
collection was achieved.
The factor on materials could not be varied which is one of the reasons why it got
removed from the regression equations. One of the reasons that could be
attributed for this event is that good contractors would seldom let material
availability affect site progress. Procurement is an important and critical phase of
project management, and material approvals, ordering and delivery are
coordinated so as to have the material on time on the site. Common construction
material such as sand, wood, steel, blocks, cement are ordered in bulk using
economies of scale and stored centrally in company warehouses and then
210
dispatched to sites as required. Another reason why material variation was not
seen is that any deliberate delay of material could have influenced the operatives
as they were unaware that their work was being recorded.
6.1.2 Broad Topic of Construction Productivity and Several Factors in

Combination
The construction industry is an all encompassing industry, with several activities

happening at the same time. Construction productivity is subject to various
factors – technical, motivational, organizational, environmental, group and
individual factors besides those connected with techno-commercial issues,
complexity of the job itself, unique characteristics of the project and the client.
This was evident from the wide variation seen in the construction trades.
The challenge was to define the factors that would affect productivity. The broad
categories of Environmental, Organizational, Group and Individual factors were
derived from a thorough research of the management theory literature coupled
with the study of contemporary works on productivity and studies in countries of
similar conditions.
Another part of the challenge was to combine a broad spectrum apprehension of

the effect of these factors on productivity. The broad spectrum ranged from
developers, investors, project managers, consultants, contractors and the
construction operatives.
The selected trades are those that other than MEP (Mechanical, Electrical and
Plumbing) constitute the bulk of the project and these present a challenging task
to all contractors. The seven trades selected are Excavation, Formwork,
Reinforcement, Concreting, Blockwork, Plastering and Tiling. Although other
trades exist and can be studied, yet it is believed that the selected trades for this
study represent the backbone of construction sites.
211
6.1.3 Understanding Technical Issues with Productivity Numbers
Construction sites do not always have the same characteristics. Some have unique
traits and conditions that reflect on productivity of certain trades, making them
significantly different from other sites. For example; while some sites might have
bulk excavation, others might have limited pits or trench excavations. Obviously
the productivity rates in these two cases are expected to be significantly different.
Added to that if the soil conditions are different, that is if hard strata is
encountered, then productivity rate for that site would be significantly lower than
the site having soft strata soil.
Thus the technical issues of the trades needed to be understood and this challenge
was overcome by using a site specific average of the productivity rate in the
computations to absorb such variances in productivity.
It was also important to understand the basic nature of the construction trades to
understand the wide variation and the outliers. Number crunching without
understanding the nature of work, the constraints involved and the factor
combinations will be of little use. Obvious factors of working under the direct
sun rays, while excavating against the benefits of utilizing the early hours or late
afternoons is a case in point. This would help enhance productivity of excavation
trade.
6.1.4 Short Term nature of Construction Projects
Construction projects are of normally short duration with an average span of 1.5
to 2 years. This presented the researcher with a few technical problems. Firstly
some of the construction sites on which the models were developed were
completed and thus the possibility to collect data for validation from the same
sites was not possible. Secondly the technical nature of these construction trades
possibly could have changed. Although the total work was not completed; for
some trades, the bulk of the work had been executed during data collection for
model formulation and during the process of data collection for model validation,
only limited areas or small quantities yet to be executed were available.
212
Although new sites were used for collecting data for validation of some trades
(since either sites or activities used during model formulation were completed)
the model was still proven to be valid within ±85% accuracy which adds to the
robustness of the model.
Overall; it seemed reasonable to conclude that the productivity models can be

practically used on site to enhance productivity of construction trades, thus
helping organizations to complete project activities faster and at budgeted costs
or better, eventually successfully executing the project on time and within budget.
6.2 FULFILLMENT OF RESEARCH AIM AND OBJECTIVES
As indicated in Chapter 1, section 1.2, pg. 9, the aim of this research was to
evaluate factors that would affect productivity of construction trades in order to
optimize output.
This has been achieved by first establishing a comprehensive list of factors

affecting construction productivity as a result of a detailed literature review of
classical theories of management and contemporary writings on the subject of
productivity. Table 2.10, pg. 86 listed these factors in four broad categories of
Environmental, Organizational, Group and Individual Factors.
The factors were narrowed down to six factors taken for field data collection by
utilizing the results of three surveys – one for establishing the significant factors
in the UAE construction industry and then utilizing another two perception
surveys establishing the magnitude of the effect of those factors on productivity.
The six factors are the TIMINGS, SUPERVISION, GROUP DYNAMICS,
CONTROL BY PROCEDURES, MATERIAL, and CLIMATE.
The construction trades of excavation, formwork, reinforcement, concreting,

blockwork, plastering and tiling were selected because these are the early trades
in almost all the construction projects and any delay in these preliminary but
critical activities does affect the overall progress of the project. The seven
activities considered for productivity measurement are basic and significant in the
213
sense that they constitute an important part of the construction project start up
activities and any lapse in productivity would eventually lead to decreased
productivity in the overall project itself. Moreover they generally lie on the
critical path and need to be completed before installation of services and other
finishes can start. Together they may contribute to more than 15% of the total
activities in the project, but need to be completed on time for other works to start.
In this sense they are very critical to the progress on site.
The resultant changes in productivity were recorded on case study construction

sites, statistically analyzed, subjected to regression analysis utilizing MINITAB
15 software to return regression productivity models for each of the construction
trades of excavation, formwork, reinforcement, concreting, blockwork, plastering
and tiling works.
Each of the factors has a significant contribution to the productivity depending

upon the nature of the construction trade. This has been discussed in Chapter 5,
section 5.6, pg. 201.
Chapter 4 shows the development of the productivity models for each of the
construction trades while Chapter 5 gives details of the validation of these
models.
Thus the research objectives identified in Chapter 1, were accomplished leading

to the fulfillment of the research aim.
6.3 PRACTICAL UTILIZATION OF MODEL
As indicated in Chapter, 1, section 1.4.9, pg. 23, the models can be used by
construction personnel – Project Managers, Engineers and Supervisors to
understand the dynamics involved in productivity of the construction trades and
investigate what best they can do to improve the conditions that affect
productivity on site.
214
The productivity models may be used by companies to try and vary the factors /
parameters, especially those whose coefficients are high to improve productivity
in certain trades. This will be particularly significant when the construction trades
are behind schedule and need acceleration or are on the critical path. Using the
models would also help effective budgeting and cost control and would provide a
more competitive work climate.
With some more work, the models could provide a reasonable quantification of
the predicted productivity, when the underlying factors are varied. The models
should be used judiciously, complimented with a thorough understanding of the
grounded realities on the construction site, the demography, age, training and
skills of the people themselves, the mental situation of the work, their motivation
levels; the nature, detail and complexity of the work activities themselves.
and the site construction management in general to understand that their
efficiency and productivity of the works.
This will ensure construction operatives perform at higher levels of motivation;

work produced will be of acceptable quality and at a good productivity rate;
helping the activities to be completed faster and therefore - the earlier completion
of the project. Higher productivity in the construction trades would mean less
costs of manpower; time will be saved and therefore help contractors to complete
the project on time if not earlier. Most of the construction trades chosen:
Excavation, Formwork, Reinforcement, Concreting, Blockwork, Plastering,
Tiling are key construction activities and are present in almost all civil sites and
are often on the critical path of the construction schedule, as without completing
these further activities such as installation of services, equipment, finishing will
not proceed.
215
For example, if any activity is on the critical path for completion of the project,
site management can use the factor coefficients as a guideline to the change that
might be introduced to create favourable conditions that would lead to increase in
productivity.
This would mean that site management undertake planning for productivity and
help utilize available resources of time and money at the right place resulting into
enhanced productivity and the time for completion of these critical activities
(those on the critical path) be controlled.
In brief, utilization of the model would provide an opportunity for being cost and
time effective on the construction site and help ensure projects are successfully
completed.
To ensure systematic and efficient use of the models in successfully planning and
executing construction projects, it is suggested to record initiatives by site
management to provide favourable conditions to enhance the productivity;
document productivity before and after application of the models. This will help
to further validate the efficacy and accuracy of the models.
6.4 POSSIBLE REFINEMENTS IN THE MODEL
Limitations if any in the models, arise from simplifying assumptions used in the
research, the subjectivity of factor levels, the accuracy of the data itself, the
existence of a combination of several factors besides the significant factors; the
possible errors of recording and analyzing data, and the presence of human
motivation. Thus the models need to be used with caution, understanding the
contribution of the each of the factor variables; but at the same time
understanding the ground realities of site execution. Nevertheless, these
simplifications do not affect the overall robustness of the model since it was
proven to be accurate upto 85%.
216
Similar models can be established for other critical activities and underlying
significant factors could then be controlled to ensure enhanced productivity in
those activities.
The following issues underlying the basis of establishing linear regression models
using the MINITAB 15 software give rise to possible limitations of the
application of the models. Understanding these and ways and means to overcome
these could lead to more refined and efficient productivity models for practical
use on construction sites.
a) simplifying assumptions during research

• suitability of linear regression
• omitting possible curvature and interaction amongst the factors
• removal of the outliers and the effect on the homogenization band of
± 40%
Further research could be undertaken to address possible curvature and

interaction amongst the chosen productivity factors. Study could be
narrowed down to two or three factors. The homogenization band of ± 40%
would be considered by some as a bit lenient. This could be overcome by
choosing the activities and ensuring similar nature activities are clubbed. For
example, for excavation trade, it was not classified whether the soil was hard
strata, soft soil or any other. Similarly formwork did not take complexity of
the structure into consideration. Thus streamlining and classifying activities
could result into lesser variation and may result into more robust models.
b) survey data and inferences

• effectiveness of the survey questions
• choice of respondents
• subjectivity related to understanding of questions and therefore the
response
• authenticity / sincerity of response elicited
• treatment of data
217
Any surveys are as good as they are planned and as good as the efforts put
into developing effective survey questions aimed at eliciting specific
responses to questions. The three surveys undertaken in this research were
critical as they formed the basis of identifying the significant factors
affecting productivity in the UAE Construction industry. Changes in the
survey results would mean that the factors and the magnitude of their effects
could change. It would also help to have more contractors involved in the
survey as this could help more get responses from people with similar
experiences.
c) measured data itself

• number of readings
• accuracy of data recorded
• completeness of data
• subjectivity of the Factor Levels ascribed during data collection
• external factors related to mental state or motivation of the operatives
involved
• external factors related to the work activity itself – intricate details,
live working plant
• interactions of all above factors on overall productivity recorded
Measured data from site was taken on an as is basis with the assumptions
that no horseplay or tampering is involved. However inherent in the
measurement is the subjectivity of the factor levels themselves. The three
levels of variations planned for each of the seven factors do have an overlap
between them and it is possible that unintended errors of judgment could be
expected in the data. The research also did not consider the individual mental
state or motivation levels of each operative used in the measurement of
productivity. Ones mental situation could very much affect performance on a
given day. The other aspects related to the work activity – as discussed in b)
could relate to the complexity of the work itself, and the nature of the project
itself; work in live plants generally brings in constraints of operation,
permits, health and safety issues, thus affecting the normal flow and
therefore productivity. Thus taking into account these details, the factor
218
levels allocated could be erroneous and therefore a more robust treatment of

factors could result into a better model.
d) mathematical / statistical formulae’s / inferences and their effect on

model formulation
• averages used in determining the band for PPCM – the percentage
productivity change as measured
• sensitivity of the model if the average is outside the ± 15% band.
• effect of accepting the coefficient of determination R2 at values above
70%
The effectiveness of the model and its validation is critically based on the
average used in determining the percentage productivity change as measured
(PPCM). It was also discussed how the baseline value of the productivity
from the database of the case study contracting company could not be used
in the computations for being far away from the measured productivity
average. Hence continuous efforts are required to be put to have larger sets
of data before one can accurately use the models. For practical purposes, a
run of 200 data sets would give a fairly practical average value to base the
model and utilize it to enhance productivity.
e) Technical factors affecting productivity of construction trades

This has been discussed in Chapter 3, section 3.9, pg. 133. These technical
factors are related to the complexity of work, location of the site, soil strata,
materials used, climatic conditions, project specific requirements, and client
involvement in the project. Understanding these technical constraints and the
possible variation in productivity of the construction trades is critical to
focus on those significant issues that will help create favourable conditions
for improvement in productivity.
f) Variation in productivity values for same trades across sites, contracting

companies, regions, and countries.
Every organization is unique and culture within is unique; each organization
would therefore have their own data base of values which could be different
219
than that used by the case study company. Moreover productivity of a given
trade is different on different sites – depending on the nature of the project,
the stage of the project, the constraints on site, and the factors of Timings,
Supervision, Group Dynamics, Procedures and the climatic conditions on a
given day.
g) Type of sites used in model formulation.

As explained above in f) productivity of certain sites with vertical spread
that is – towers would be different than that on sites with horizontal spread.
A case in point is during the validation of Blockwork and Concreting
Models at the BCC site which is a horizontal spread site; whilst those that
were used in model formulation were not of the same nature. Hence the
validation data from BCC was not fitting the model that too closely like in
other trades / other sites.
h) Accuracy of model is expected to be 85% (within ± 15%) when the

data readings are within the ± 20% band.
This is based on the UCL and LCL based on the two sigma limits. It was
observed that most of the mean errors were with the ± 20% band, and the
validation data fitted the model well.
6.5 CONCLUSION
This research has contributed to the knowledge of evaluating factors affecting

construction productivity using a series of factors such as Timings, Supervision,
Group Dynamics, Procedures, Materials and Climate on the construction trades
of excavation, formwork, reinforcement, concreting, blockwork, plastering and
tiling works.
The previous researches studied one trade and / or one variable at a time, or
studied the variables in isolation without interaction between variables and they
were generally qualitative rather than quantitative. Trends or a relationship were
220
suggested, but stood short of quantifying this relation and even when quantified
this was arrived at; it was still for factors in isolation or for one specific trades.
This research led to construction trade productivity models that combine the
effect of several factors to be established and validated; models which can give a
reasonable quantification of the predicted change in productivity when the factors
are purposefully varied.
The first chapter introduced the thesis title, established the aim, objectives, and
definitions of productivity while reiterating the need for research against the
background of productivity of construction trades and its importance in the
The aim of this research was to evaluate factors that would affect productivity of
construction trades in order to optimize output. The research methodology was
depicted graphically (Fig. 1.1.) with cross reference to chapter numbers.
The literature review included the management theories and published literature
on productivity by contemporary researchers. The classical theories included the
scientific management, bureaucracy, human relations, systems approach and
contingency approach. Further management theories on motivation – content and
process theories were reviewed – those that affect the behaviour patterns of
individuals. This review combined with the published literature by contemporary
authors gave three matrices showing factors affecting construction productivity in
general, the second matrix gave the motivation factors in the construction
industry and the third matrix gave the factors affecting construction productivity
over different countries.
The construction industry in the UAE is dynamic and has estimated annual
revenues of AED 500 billion and profitability ranges from 2% to 20% depending
upon type of projects. The industry has many contractors of various sizes;
competition is tough and the industry is labour intensive with the construction
operatives mostly coming from the Asian subcontinent. It was indicated that the
economy of the UAE will continue to be dependent on non-national workers.
221
Activities such as construction, transport, utilities, mechanical engineering,

electrical engineering, other labour-intensive and service-oriented industries are
dominated by foreign labour, both skilled and unskilled. Compared to the
liquidity in the region; and the value of the contracts / construction projects, the
cost of labour is relatively cheap. This sometimes stifles productivity as
contractors would rather push in more people and get the job completed rather
than go in to the hassles of increasing productivity. Thus all contractors faced
similar conditions and the bottom line performance is dependent upon how
effective and productive the construction processes are. There is therefore scope
for productivity improvements and thus the study of productivity and ways and
means to increase the productivity is important for contractors in the UAE
Four groups of factors affecting productivity in construction were established

after review of the classical management theories, works on productivity related
issues by contemporary authors and the researcher’s experience of executing
construction projects in the UAE. These four general factors were classified into
the 1) environmental, 2) organizational, 3) group dynamics and 4) individual
factors. These four categories of factors are interrelated, interdependent and
overlap each other to a certain extent. The environmental factors do affect the
organization as a whole, leading it to operate in a particular way to suit the
environment. The organizational factors affect the group factors – affecting
especially the composition and welfare related environment factors. And finally
the individual factors especially the attitude and approach to work of workmen,
are overall affected by the group, the organization and the overall environment in
which the organization functions.
Chapter 3 detailed the research methodology in detail, and utilized the results of
three surveys to establish the basis of setting up the on site factor variables for
productivity data collection. These three surveys were the Significance Survey
giving a comprehensive listing of factors affecting productivity followed by two
perception surveys giving the magnitude of the effect of the factors on
productivity. The first survey determined the significant factors affecting
productivity, using the importance index, the frequency index and the severity
222
index or rank. This survey used 61 questions based on the above four broad factor
categories which were then ranked and sorted for the first 14 factors. These
fourteen factors were then used in the other two surveys, which returned the
magnitude of the effect of the factors on productivity as perceived by the industry
personnel both within the case study company and outside the company.
The results of the significance survey gave the fourteen factors affecting
productivity. The perception surveys using these fourteen factors helped identify
the seven most significant factors namely - Work Timings, Supervision, Salaries,
Group Dynamics, Control by Procedures, Material, and Climate. Later on the
salaries factor was merged with the Timings factor for practical application at
site. These six factors were then given three levels 1, 2 and 3 with ideal
conditions at level 3. These three levels of variation helped to vary the factor
practically at the construction sites of the case study company. Seven
construction sites were identified for data collection.
Finally other multiple technical factors were highlighted for each of the
blockwork, plastering and tiling works.
Chapter 4 dealt with the actual data collection on site, analysis and model
formulation. This chapter helped establish the regression models for the seven
construction trades of Excavation, Formwork, Reinforcement, Concreting,
Blockwork, Plastering and Tiling. Linear regression models were arrived at for
the above seven trades and the percentage effect of each factor was determined.
The six factors under study and used in modeling were the Timings, Supervision,
Group, Procedures, Materials and Climate.
These factors were varied at three different levels and the corresponding change
in productivity was recorded when the factor levels were changed. The change in
productivity was then subjected to regression analysis to determine a straight line
multifactor regression model using the MINITAB 15 software.
223
However due to a combination of several factors, the complexity of job and the
nature of the construction activity / trade itself, the presence of human elements
of motivation, etc, the coefficient of determination R2 was found to be low and
hence individual models for each of the construction trades of excavation,
formwork, reinforcement, concreting, blockwork, plastering and tiling were
established successfully with a R2 value above 70%. An R2 value of 70% which
is the coefficient of determination actually relates to a coefficient of correlation R
= √0.7 = 0.836 indicating high correlation. This value of R2 was accepted because
the next iteration to establish a model with a higher R2 removed one of the six
major factors that were taken for field data collection.
MINITAB 15 was used to conduct regression analysis and models returned were
accepted based on the R2 value. The highest R2 achieved is 93.4% for Excavation
trade, while the lowest was for Reinforcement at 73.8%. For practical application
of the model on construction sites, and serving the aim and objectives of the
research, the regression involving curvature and interactions amongst the factors
themselves was avoided.
Following a number of iterations, the models were then established and accepted
for a minimum threshold value of 70% and above. The regression models
developed are summarized in Table 4.4 pg. 173. The major three contributing
factors in order of contribution are also shown in Table 4.5, pg. 174.
Chapter 5 dealt with Validation of the models developed in Chapter 4. Validation

was performed on 11 data sets collected from ongoing construction sites for the
seven construction trades of excavation, formwork, reinforcement, concreting,
blockwork, plastering and tiling works under study. The validations of the model
were performed on data collected from four sites case study contracting company
in Abu Dhabi.
A total of 1963 data readings were reviewed and subjected to validation as per
the procedure set in section 6.2. Basically the data was plotted against the upper
control and lower control limits of ± 2 sigma limits followed by checking against
224
a band of ± 15% for the error in productivity change as predicted by model to that
actually measured on site when the factors are varied.
Outliers were removed using the upper control limits and lower control limits for
the 2 sigma band. Out of the 11 data sets, 8 data sets have validated the
productivity models developed for the construction trades. The three data sets
have been subjected to revalidation using a narrower band of readings within ±
20% of the average used in the model formulation. These were for reinforcement
at OAG site, and for concreting and blockwork at the BCC site. The models have
been accepted on revalidation as per the procedure explained in Chapter 5. For ±
2 sigma limits, it is seen that errors obtained between the predicted and the actual
productivity increase / decrease are within a band of 17.14% to 38.2% further
justifying the initial homogenization range of ± 40%.
Despite setting up ± 15% band, the majority of the data sets follow a lower band
as can be seen on the error plots. It is also found that when the site average as
measured is closer to the site average used in model formulation, then most of the
data used in the validation seems to lie within the ± 15% band.
A review of the validation results vis-à-vis the construction trades shows that
simpler activities such as excavation, formwork, plastering and tiling were
validated easily, while concreting, reinforcement and blockwork had to be
revalidated probably indicating that the complexity involved in concreting,
reinforcement and blockwork for the particular sites and in particular the relevant
structures might have caused the higher error and thus the revalidation. However
for practical purposes, the revalidation has been acceptable. Other than these the
models seem to work well for the validation data’s collected from the sites.
Given the limitations of the models, mostly due to the assumptions and
simplifications during research for practical application at site, it can therefore be
concluded that in the validation trails the models returned reasonable
quantification of the predicted productivity when the factors are varied.
225
However for new sites, where average site productivity figures may not be
available, more work is required to be done to establish average site productivity
figures for trades, from baseline averages of other similar sites and applying the
corresponding models. In cases where the site productivity values are outside the
band of ±15% of the productivity value used in establishing the models, then
models would need to be re-established, using the procedure outlined in Chapter
4.
It was therefore recommended that the models shall be used judiciously,

complimented with a thorough understanding of the ground realities on the
construction site, the demography, age, training and skills of the operatives
themselves, their mental situation and motivation levels; and the nature, detail
and complexity of the work activities themselves.
Further a thorough understanding the contribution of the significant factors of

Timings, Supervision, Group Dynamics, Control by Procedures and finally the
Climate; the possible interaction between the factors themselves, the limitations
and use one’s experience, practical intuition, call of duty vis-à-vis the site
requirements is utmost required for the supervision force to enable them to
ensure favourable conditions on site enhancing productivity.
and the site construction management in general understand that their
efficiency and productivity of the works.
This will ensure construction operatives perform at higher levels of motivation;

work produced will be of acceptable quality and at a good productivity rate;
helping the activities to complete faster and therefore the project.
Further the results of this research could have wider applications in the
construction industry in the sense that such models could be developed for all
226
construction trades and if the individual parameters and technical constraints are
controlled, an overall productivity model can be developed for the construction
industry which could be comprehensively used to understand the underlying
factors and control these to achieve favourable conditions on site for enhanced
productivity.
It can thus be concluded with fair amount of confidence that the productivity
models established in Chapter 4 could be used for predicting quantifiable changes
in productivity when the factors levels are changed within an accuracy of 85%.
This knowledge can be used by site personnel to ensure favourable conditions on

site so as to enhance the productivity of the operatives, the trade and the project.
However it was not expected that the model will give 100% accurate results in
predicting the change in productivity when the underlying factors are varied as
compared to the actual change as measured on site.
Possible refinements of the models are presented in section 6.4, pg. 216.
6.6 AREAS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH
Although a number of suggestions are listed for future research, this does not
undermine or weakens the findings of this research. The research took into
consideration, the practical applications of the model and as such set certain
limits – for example the models were limited to linear regression model and
higher levels of regression and interactions were not considered. Although these
are suggested as possible future studies, this is with an idea in mind that the
findings will furthermore support the robustness of the model and the logic of
limiting it to linear regression. One may want to note the incremental
improvement in accuracy of the models and field application on construction sites
vis-à-vis the additional research that might be required for higher regression and
study of interactions. Further areas of future research may provide refinements
that would eventually lead to validation of the practical assumptions made and
227
the techniques used in this study. However, it is not anticipated that the findings
of future studies would change or affect the integrity of the findings of this study.
Based on the above discussions and those in section 6.4 and 6.5, the possible
areas for future research include:
• consideration of further research into establishing predictive

capability of the productivity models.
This refers to the utilization of models on new sites and on those sites,
which do not have baseline productivity values. Additional research in
establishing baseline productivity values from similar sites and
developing models for various productivity levels for those outside the ±
15% will help enhance the predictive capability of the models.
• consideration of non linear regression and interaction amongst the

productivity factors chosen.
This would help arrive at a more refined model. However the efforts and
the improved accuracy should be weighed against the possible economic
costs and time for such a venture.
• consideration of higher levels of variation in factors say from 3 to 5.

This will give more options for variation of the factors and could possibly
help reduce the subjectivity in allocating levels of varying the factor
levels and may help arrive at a more accurate model.
• consideration of additional factors other than the six factors of

timings, supervision, group dynamics, procedures, materials, and
climate used in this research.
This could be achieved by having a wider range survey done and
involving more contracting firms with similar experience. Thus
significant factors could be more or less based on a wider audience. Again
the benefits need to be weighed against the possible costs and time
involved in such a research.
228
• inclusion of motivation level of the group members

This would help in including the personal motivation of individual
members of the group. The constraints of understanding and measuring
and using this in research on a consistent scale amongst a large workforce
is immense and need to be considered.
• considering benchmarking productivity rates across contractors in

the region and in other countries
This will help establish range of productivity values across contractors in
the region and in other countries. However in absence of a national
database of such productivity values, individual competitiveness might
hinder such a venture and contractors would not freely and willingly
divulge such details for research.
• Interdependability of variables in concurrent construction trades.

This will be useful to establish the lateral interdependability of concurrent
trades and learn how the productivity factors will influence and interact
with each other and how this could affect the productivity of the
individual trades and therefore the project.
***
229
References
Abdelkarim (2001), “UAE Labour Market & Problems of Employment of Nationals

– An Overview and Policy Agenda”, Ministry of Planning, UAE
Abdel-Wahab M S, Dainty A R J , Ison S G, Bowen P and Hazlehurst G (2008),
“Trends of Skills and Productivity in the UK Construction Industry”,
Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, Vol. 15, No. 4, pp
372-382.
Adams J S (1963), “Toward an Understanding of Inequity” Journal of Abnormal
and Social Psychology, Nov 1963, pp 422-436.
Adrian J J (1987), “Construction Productivity Improvement” , Elsevier Science
Publishing, New York.
Aiyetan A O and Olotouah A O (2006), “Impact of motivation on workers
productivity in the Nigerian construction industry”. In Boyd D (Ed), 22nd
Annual ARCOM Conference, 4-6 September 2006, Birmingham, UK,
ARCOM, Vol. 1, pp 239-248.
Alderfer C P (1972), “Existence, Relatedness and Growth”, Collier Macmillan.
Alinaitwe H M, Mwakali J A , and Hansson B (2007), “Factors affecting the
productivity of building craftsmen – Studies of Uganda”, Journal of Civil
Engineering and Management, Vol 13 (3), pp 169 – 176.
Ankrah A N (2007), “An investigation into the impact of culture on construction
project performance”, University of Wolverhmapton,
http://hdl.handle.net/2436/14403
Arditi D & Mochtar K (2000), “Trends in Productivity Improvement in the US
construction industry”, Construction Management & Economics, Vol 18, No
1
Bishop D (1968), “Notes on Some Factors Affecting Productivity”, Report of the
Committee of Inquiry under Professor E. H. Phelps Brown into certain
matters concerning labour in building and civil engineering, HMSO, London
Borcherding J D, Sebastian S J, and Samelson N M (1980), “Improving Motivation
and Productivity on Large Projects”, Journal of the Construction Division,
106 (CO1), 73-89
Chan P, Puybaraud M C and Kaka A (2001), “Construction training: a linkage to
productivity improvements”, In Akintoye, A (Ed.), 17th Annual ARCOM
230
Conference, 5-7 September 2001, University of Salford, Association of

Researchers in Construction Management, Vol. 1, 143-55
Chan P (2002), “Factors affecting labour productivity in the construction industry”.
In: Greenwood, D (Ed.), 18th Annual ARCOM Conference, 2-4 September
2002, University of Northumbria. Association of Researchers in Construction
Management, Vol. 2, 771-80
Chan P W (2005), “An interpretivistic approach to understand the factors that affect
construction labour productivity”, PhD Thesis, Herriot-Watt University.
Chang L (1991), “A methodology for measuring construction productivity, Cost
Engineering, Vol. 3, No. 10, pp 19-25.
Chau K W and Walker A (1988), “The measurement of total factor productivity of
the Hong Kong Construction Industry”, Construction Management and
Economics, Vol. 6, No. 3, pp 209-224.
Clarke L (1992), “The Building Labour Process: Problems of Skills, Training and
Employment in the British Construction Industry in the 1980s”, The
Chartered Institute of Building.
Clarke L and Wall C (1998) “UK Construction Skills in the Context of European
Developments”, Construction Management and Economics, Vol. 16.
Daft R L (2000), “Management”, Fifth Edition, The Dryden Press, USA.
Dejahang F (2004), “Determinants of productivity on construction sites”, PhD
Thesis, South Bank University.
Enshassi A (2007), “Factors affecting labour productivity in building projects in
Gaza Strip”, Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, Vol.13, No. 4,
pp 245-254.
Fayol H (1949), “General and Industrial Management”, translated by Constance
Storrs, Pitman and Sons, London.
Fellows R and Liu A (2003), “Research Methods for Construction”, 2nd Edition,
Blackwell Scientific Publishing, Oxford.
Fox S, Marsh L, Cockerham G (2002), “How building design imperatives constrain
construction productivity and costs”. Engineering, Construction and
Architectural Management, Vol 9, No. 2, pp 378-387.
Gilbert G L and Walker D H T (2001), “Motivation of Australian white collar
construction employees: a gender issue ?”, Engineering & Construction , and
Architectural Management, Vol 88, No. 1, pg. 59-66.
231
Haas C T, Borcherding J D, Allmon E, Goodrum P M (1999), “U. S. Construction

Labor Productivity Trends, 1970-1998”, Center for Construction Industry
Studies, Report No. 7, The University of Texas at Austin, March 1999.
Hague D J (1985), “Incentives and Motivation in the Construction Industry: a
critique”. Construction Management and Economics, Volume 3, 163-170.
Hancher D E and Abd-Elkhalek H. A (1998), “The effect of hot weather on
construction labour productivity and costs”, Cost Engineering Vol. 40, No. 4,
pp. 32-36.
Hanna A S and Donald H G (1994), “Factors affecting construction productivity :
Newfoundland versus Rest of Canada”, Canadian Journal of Civil
Engineering, Vol 21, No. 4, pp 663-673.
Hanna A S, Taylor C S and Sullivan K T (2005), “Impact of Extended Overtime on
Construction Labour Productivity”, Journal of Construction Engineering and
Management, Volume 131, Issue 6, pp 734-739.
Heizer J and Render B (1990), “Production and Operations Management – Strategic
and Tactical Decision”, Prentice Hall, New Jersey.
Herbsman Z and Ellis R (1990), “Research of Factors influencing construction
productivity”, Construction Management and Economics, Vol. 8, No. 1, pp
49-61.
Herzberg F, Mausner B and Snyderman B (1959), “The Motivation to Work”,
Second Edition, Chapman and Hall.
Hollyforde S and Whiddett S (2002), “The Motivation Handbook”, Chartered
Institute of Personnel Development, London.
Horner M (1982), “The Control to Productivity”, CIOB, Technical Information
Service , No. 6.
Jhunjhunwala B (2008), “Business Statistics”, S Chand & Co. Ltd, New Delhi, First
Edition.
Kadir M R A, Lee W P, Jaafar M S, Sapuan S M, Ali A A A (2005), “Factors
affecting construction labour productivity for Malaysian residential projects”,
Structural Survey, Vol. 23, No. 1, pp 42-54.
Kaming P F, Olomolaiye P O , Holt G and Harris F (1997), “Factors influencing
craftsmen productivity in Indonesia”, International Journal of Project
Management, Vol 15,(1) pp 21-30.
232
Kazaz A and Ulubeyli S (2006), “Organizational factors influencing construction

manpower productivity in Turkey”, In : Boyd D (Ed.), 22nd Annual
ARCOM conference, 4-6 September 2006, Birmingham,, UK, Vol 1, pp 39-
48.
Kothari C R (2004), “Research Methodology – Methods and Techniques”, Second
Edition, New Age International (P) Ltd. Publishers, New Delhi
Laufer A and Borcherding J (1981), “Financial Incentives to Raise Productivity”,
Journal of the Construction Decision, ASCE, Vol 107, pp 745-756.
Lema M N (1996), “Construction labour productivity analysis and benchmarking –
the case of Tanzania”, PhD thesis, University of Loughborough.
Lim E C and Alum J (1995), “Construction Productivity : issues encountered by
Contractors in Singapore”, International Journal of Project Management,
1995, Vol 13(1) pp 51-58.
Low S P (2001), “Quantifying the relationships between buildability, structural
quality and productivity in construction”, Structural Survey, Vol. 19, No. 2,
pp 106-112.
Lowe J G (1987), “The measurement of productivity in the construction industry”,
Construction Management and Economics, 5(2), 101-13.
Luthans F (1973), “The Contingency Theory of Management : A path out of the
jungle”, Business Horizons, Volume 16, June 1973, pp 62-72.
Makulsawatudom A, and Emsley M (2002), “Critical Factors influencing
construction productivity in Thailand”, In Proc of CIB 10th International
Symposium Construction Innovation and Global Competitiveness,
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA, Sept 9-13, pp 182.
Maslow A H (1943), “A theory of human motivation”, Psychological Review, Vol.
50, pp 370-396.
McClelland D C (1985), “Human Motivation”, Scott Foresman Publishing,
Glenview, Illinois.
McGregor D (1960), “The Human Side of Enterprise”, McGraw Hill, New York.
Mendenhall W et al (2001), “A brief course in business statistics”, 2nd Edition.
Mitchell T R (1982), “Motivation: New Directions for Theory, Research and
Practice”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp 80-88.
Mohamed S and Srinavin K (2002), “Thermal Environment Effects on Construction
Workers Productivity”, Work study, Vol 51, No. 6, pp 297-302.
233
Mullins L J (2007), “Management and Organisational Behaviour”, 8th Edition ,

Pearson Education Limited, England.
Naoum S & Hackman J (1996), “Do Site Managers and Head Office perceive
productivity differently?”, Engineering, Construction and Architectural
Management, Vol 3, No. 1, 2, pp 147-160.
Nicholls C and Langford D (1987), “Motivation of Site Engineers”, Technical
Information Service, CIOB, Vol. 78.
OECD (2001), “Measuring Productivity” – OECD Manual, “Measurement of
aggregate and industry level productivity growth”.
Oglesby C H, Parker H W and Howell G A (1989), “Productivity Improvement in
Construction”, McGraw Hill, New York.
Ogunlana S O and Chang W P (1998), “Worker Motivation on Selected
Construction Sites in Bangkok”, Thailand.
Olomolaiye P, Wahab K and Price A D F (1987), “Problems influencing craftsmen
productivity in Nigeria”, Building and Environment, Vol 22(4), pp 317-323.
Olomolaiye P (1990), “An evaluation of the relationships between bricklayers
motivation and productivity”, Construction Management and Economics,
Vol 8, No. 2, pp 301-313.
Olomolaiye P, Jayawardene A, Harris F (1998), “Construction Productivity
Management”, Chartered Institute of Building, UK.
Parker H W (1980), “Communication: Key to Productive Construction”, Proceedings
of the American Society of Civil Engineers, Journal of Professional
Activities, 106 (E13), 173 – 180.
Porter L W and Lawler E E (1968), “Managerial Attitudes and Performance”, Irwin
Publishing.
Price A D F (1992), “Construction Operative Motivation and Productivity”,
Building Research & Information, Volume 20, Issue 3, pp 185-189.
Putz B (1991), “Productivity Improvement: Changing Values, Beliefs and
Assumptions”, SAM Advanced Management Journal, Vol. 56, No. 4, pp. 9-
12.
Reinshmidt K (1976), “Productivity in the Construction Industry”, Productivity in
Engineering Design, Proceedings of ASCE Conference, Lincolnshire, IL.
234
Riddle E (1976), “Effectiveness of Communications and Edition from the viewpoint

of the Owner / Constructor”, Proceedings of ADCE Conference on
Productivity in Construction Industry, Lincolnshire.
Robbins S P (1993), “Organizational Behaviour; Concepts, Controversies, and
Application”, VI Edition, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Roethlisberger F J and Dickson W J (1939), “Management and the Worker”,
Harvard University Press.
Ruthankoon R and Ogunlana S (2003), “Testing Herzberg’s Two Factor Theory in
the Thai Construction Industry”, Engineering, Construction and Architectural
Management, Vol. 10, No. 5, pp 378 -394
Sanders S R & Thomas R H, (1993), “Masonry Productivity Forecasting Model,
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol 119, No. 1. Paper
No 2638.
Schriver W, and Bowlby R (1984), “Changes in Productivity and Composition of
Output in Building Construction”, Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol.
67, pp 318-322.
Sibson R E, 1994, “Maximizing Employee Productivity – A Managers Guide”,
AMACOM, American Management Association, New York, USA
Smithers G L and Walker D H T (2000), “The effect of the workplace on motivation
and demotivation of construction professionals”, Construction management
and economics, 18, 833-841.
Snow C and Alexander M (1992), “Effort : the illustrative variables in the
productivity problem” – Industry Management , Vol. 39, No. 3, pp 31-32.
Stukhard G (1987), “Construction Management Responsibilities during design”,
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, ASCE, Vol. 113 No.
1.
Tausky C (1978), “Work Organizations : Major Theoretical Perspectives”, F. E.
Peacock, Itasca Illinois.
Tavakoli A (1985), Productivity Analysis of Construction Operations, Journal of
Construction Engineering and Management, 111 (1), 31-39
Taylor F (1947), “Scientific Management”, Harper and Row, New York.
The National Human Resource Development and Employment Authority (2001),
“National Workplace Employment Relations”, UAE
235
Thomas H R, and Zavrski I (1999), “Theoretical Model for International

Benchmarking of Labour Productivity”, Pennsylvania Transportation
Institute, Volume 4.
Thomas H R, Smith G R, Sanders S R and Mannering, F L (1989), “An Exploratory
Study of Productivity Forecasting using the Factor Model for Masonry”,
Report No. 9005, Pennsylvania Transportation Institute, University Park.
Tolentino A (2000), “Workers : Stakeholders in productivity in a changing global
economic environment”, Entrepreneurship & Management Division Branch,
ILO
UAE Year book 2009, National Media Council , Abu Dhabi
Vroom V H (1964), “Work and Motivation”, Wiley & Sons.
Weber M (1947), “The Theory of Social and Economic Organization”, edited by A
H Henderson and Talcott Parsons, Free Press, New York.
Zakeri M, Olomolaiye P, Hold G and Harris F (1996), “A survey of constraints on
Iranian construction operatives productivity”, Construction Management and
Economics, 1996, Vol. 14 (5) pp 417-426.
***
236
Bibliography
Abdel-Wahab M S, Dainty A R J and Ison S G (2006), “How productive is the

construction industry?” In: Boyd, D (Ed.), 22nd Annual ARCOM
Conference, 4-6 September 2006, Birmingham, UK. Association of
Researchers in Construction Management, Vol. 1, 9-19.
Aczel Amir D, & Sounderpandian Jayavel, (2002), “Complete Business
Statistics”, McGraw Hill Irwin
Barrow Mike, (2001), “Statistics for Economics, Accounting and Business
Studies”, Third Edition, Pearson Education Ltd.
Basilevsky Alexander, (1994), “Statistical Factor Analysis & Related Methods –
Theory and Application”, John Wiley & Sons
Baumol W and Maddela G (1990), “Quality Changes and Productivity
Measurement: Hedonics and an alternate professional adaptation
discussion”, Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Finance, Vol. 5, No. 1,
pp 105-124.
Bryman Alan, (2001), “Social Research Methods”, Oxford University Press
Chan, D W M and Kumaraswamy M M (1995), “A study of the factors
affecting construction durations in Hong Kong”, Construction
Management and Economics, 13(4), 319-33
Chan K W (1993), “Estimating industry-level productivity trends in the building
industry from building cost and price data”, Construction Management
and Economics, 11(5), 370-83
Chase Warren & Bown Fred (1997), “General Statistics”, III Edition, John
Wiley & Sons, New York
Chau K W and Lai L W C (1994), “A comparison between growth in labour
productivity in the construction industry and the economy”, Construction
Management and Economics, 12(2), 183-5.
Cheetham, D W and Lewis, J (2001), “Productivity, buildability and
constructability: is work study the missing link?” In: Akintoye, A (Ed.),
17th Annual ARCOM Conference, 5-7 September 2001, University of
Salford. Association of Researchers in Construction Management, Vol.
1, 271-80.
237
Chell E (1987), “The Psychology of Behaviour in Organizations”, Macmillan

Academic & Professional Ltd, London
Chew A T W and Ling F Y (2002) Increasing Singapore's construction
productivity through construction process re-engineering. Journal of
Construction Research, 3(1), 123-45.
Cramer D (1994), “Introducing Statistics for Social Research : Step by Step
Calculations and computer techniques using SPSS”, Routledge, London,
UK
Crawford, P and Vogl B (2006), “Measuring productivity in the construction
industry”, Building Research and Information, 34(3), 208-19.
Dawood N N, Hobbs B and Fanning A (2001), “Standardization of brickwork
construction: identification and measurement of standard processes”, In:
Akintoye, A (Ed.), 17th Annual ARCOM Conference, 5-7 September
2001, University of Salford. Association of Researchers in Construction
Management, Vol. 1, 321-9.
Denscombe Martyn (2002), “Ground Rules for Good Research – A 10 point
guide for social research”, Open University Press, Buckingham,
Philadelphia
Dooley D (2001), “Social Research Methods”, IV Edition, Prentice Hall
Druker J & White G (1996), “Constructing a new reward strategy, Reward
management in the British Construction Industry”, Employee Relations
Volume 19 No. 2, pp 128-146.
Dubois, A and Gadde, L E (2002) The construction industry as a loosely
coupled system: implications for productivity and innovation”,
Dunlop P and Smith, S D (2004), “Planning, estimation and productivity in the
lean concrete pour”, Engineering, Construction and Architectural
Management, 11(1), 55-64.
Edwards D J, Holt G D and Harris F C (2000), “A model for predicting plant
maintenance costs”, Construction Management and Economics, 18(1),
65-75.
Fagbenle, O I, Adeyemi, A Y and Adesanya, D A (2004), “The impact of non-
financial incentives on bricklayers productivity in Nigeria”,
238
Fayol H (1916), “General and Industrial Administration”, translated from

French by C Storrs, Pitman, London.
Flick Uwe, Kardorff Ernst, Steinke Ines (2004), “A companion to Qualitative
Research”, Sage Publications.
Foster G (1989), “Construction Site Studies – Production, Administration and
Personnel”, 2nd Edition, Longman Scientific & Technical, England.
Gidado K (1996), “Project complexity: the focal point of construction
production planning”. Construction Management and Economics, 14(3),
213-25.
Gowda, R, Singh, A and Connolly, M (1998), “Holistic enhancement of the
production analysis of bituminous paving operations”, Construction
Graham L D and Smith S D, (2004), “A method for effectively implementing
construction process productivity estimation models”. In: Khosrowshahi,
F (Ed.), 20th Annual ARCOM Conference, 1-3 September 2004, Herriot
Watt University. Association of Researchers in Construction
Gray C and Flanagan R (1984), “USA productivity and fast tracking starts on
the drawing board”. Construction Management and Economics, 2(2),
133-44.
Green S, Salkind N (2004), “Using SPSS for Windows and Mackintosh :
Analyzing & Understanding Data”, IV Edition, Pearson Prentice hall
Guest D and Peccei R (1994), “The nature and causes of human resource
management effectiveness”. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 32,
2, 219-242.
Gupta B M, Kumar S, Agarwal B S (1999), “A comparison of male and female
scientists of CSIR”, Springer Link – Journal Article, Scientometrics,
Hair J F, Anderson R E, Tathan R L, Grablowsky B (1984), “Multivariate Data
Analysis with Readings”, Macmillan Publishing Co.
Hakim C (1987), “Research Design : Strategies and Choices in the Design of
Social Research”
Handa V K and Abdalla Om, (1989), “Forecasting productivity by work
sampling”, Construction Management and Economics, 7(1), 19-28.
239
Hill C and Rodgers J (2000), “Project partnering arrangement for delivery of a

tight scheduled project”. In: Akintoye, A (Ed.), 16th Annual ARCOM
Conference, 6-8 September 2000, Glasgow Caledonian University.
Association of Researchers in Construction Management, Vol. 1, 413-9.
Hillebrandt P M (1974), “Economic Theory and the Construction Industry”,
Macmillan, Houndmills
Hua G B and Pin T H (2000), “Forecasting construction industry demand, price
and productivity in Singapore: the Box-Jenkins approach”, Construction
Hunt J W (1990), “Managing People at work”, III Edition.
Jarkas A M (2005), “An investigation into the influence of buildability factors
on productivity of insitu reinforced concrete construction”, University of
Dundee.
Julian S (1969), “Basic Research Methods in Social Science: The Art of
Empirical Investigation”, Random House, New York.
Kazaz A and Ulubeyli S (2006), “Physical factors affecting productivity of
Turkish construction workers”. In: Boyd, D (Ed.), 22nd Annual ARCOM
Conference, 4-6 September 2006 Birmingham, UK. Association of
Keeinbaum David G, Kupper Lawrence L, Muller Keith E (1988), “Applied
Regression Analysis and Other Multivariable Methods”, Second Edition,
PWS, Kent Publishing Co.
Kim, T-W, Yu, J-H and Lee, H-S (2003), “On-site productivity evaluation
through productivity achievement ratio”. In: Greenwood, D J (Ed.), 19th
Annual ARCOM Conference, 3-5 September 2003, University of
Brighton, Association of Researchers in Construction Management, Vol.
2, 467-76.
Kitches Lany J (1996), “Exploring Statistics – A modern introduction to Data
Analysis and Inference”, 2nd Edition, Brooks – Cole Publishing, USA
Kumaraswamy M M (1997), “Productivity matters”. In: Stephenson, P (Ed.),
13th Annual ARCOM Conference, 15-17 September 1997, King's
College, Cambridge. Association of Researchers in Construction
240
Kumaraswamy, M M and Chan, D W M (1995), “Determinants of construction

duration”. Construction Management and Economics, 13(3), 209-17.
Kumaraswamy, M M and Chan, D W M (1998), “Contributors to construction
delays”. Construction Management and Economics, 16(1), 17-29.
Langford D A, El-Tigani H and Marosszeky M (2000), “Does quality assurance
deliver higher productivity?”, Construction Management and Economics,
18(7), 775-82.
Leaman A and Bordass B (1999), “Productivity in buildings: the 'killer'
variables”. Building Research and Information, 27(1), 4-19.
Likert R (1932), “A Technique for the Measurement of Attitudes, Archives of
Psychology”, Vol 140, pp 1-55.
Lim E C (1996), “The Analysis of Productivity in building construction.
University of Loughborough”
Liu C and Song Y (2005), “Multifactor productivity measures of construction
sectors using OECD input-output database”. Journal of Construction
Research, 6(2), 209-22.
Low S P and Hui M S (1999), “The application of JIT philosophy to
construction: a case study in site layout”, Construction Management and
Economics, 17(5), 657-68.
Lowe J (1997), “Labour productivity trends for the UK construction sector”. In:
Stephenson, P (Ed.), 13th Annual ARCOM Conference, 15-17
September 1997, King's College, Cambridge. Association of Researchers
in Construction Management, Vol. 2, 674-83.
Lowe, J G (1987), “The measurement and productivity in the construction
industry”, International Journal of Construction Management and
Economics, Vol. 5 pp.101-03.
Makulsawatudom, A and Emsley, M (2001), “Factors affecting the productivity
of the construction industry in Thailand: the project managers'
perception”. In: Akintoye, A (Ed.), 17th Annual ARCOM Conference, 5-
7 September 2001, University of Salford. Association of Researchers in
Construction Management, Vol. 1, 281-90.
Maloney W F (1981), “Motivation in Construction : A Review” : Journal of
Construction Division, 107 (CO4), 641-647.
241
Maslow Abraham H (1968), “Towards a Psychology of Being”, 2nd Edition,

New York, Van Nostrand.
Maslow A and Bennis W (1998), “Maslow on management”, John Wiley and
Sons, New York.
Mason E J, Bramble W J (1989), “Understanding & Conducting Research :
Applications in Education and the Behavioral Sciences”, Second Edition,
McGraw Hill International, Singapore
Mason R D (1986), “Statistical Techniques in Business & Economics”, Sixth
Edition, Richard Irwin Inc, Illinois, USA
Mayo R, Knutson K, Barras G and Pineda J (2001), “Improving Construction
Productivity with Scheduled Overtime”. In: Kelly, J and Hunter, K
(Eds.), Proceedings of Construction and Building Research (COBRA)
Conference, 3-5 September 2001, Glasgow Caledonian University, UK.
RICS Foundation.
Motwani J, Kumar A, Novakoski M (1995), “Measuring Construction
Productivity”, A Practical Approach, Work Study, Vol. 44, No. 8, pp 18-
20.
Murray M and Zagaretos P (2001), “The influence of cultural differences on the
performance of international contractors” In: Akintoye, A (Ed.), 17th
Annual ARCOM Conference, 5-7 September 2001, University of
Salford. Association of Researchers in Construction Management, Vol.
1, 101-10.
Naoum S G, 1998, “Dissertation Research And Writing For Construction
Students”, Butterworth-Heinemann.
Ng S T, Mak M M Y, Skitmore M R, Lam K C and Varnam M (2001), “The
predictive ability of Bromilow's time-cost model”. Construction
Olomolaiye P O and Ogunlana S O (1989), “A system for monitoring and
improving construction operative productivity in Nigeria”, Construction
Omar E A A and Mangin J C (2002), “A new cost control model and indicators
to measure productivity on building sites”. Construction Innovation,
2(2), 83-101.
242
Poh P S H and Chen J (1998), “The Singapore buildable design appraisal

system: a preliminary review of the relationship between buildability,
site productivity and costs”. Construction Management and Economics,
16(6), 681-92.
Proverbs, D G and Holt, G D (1999), “The strive for productivity and quality:
views of UK project managers”. In: Hughes, W (Ed.), 15th Annual
ARCOM Conference, 15-17 September 1999, Liverpool John Moores
University. Association of Researchers in Construction Management,
Vol. 2, 375-83.
Proverbs D G, Holt G D and Olomolaiye P O (1998), “A comparative
evaluation of concrete placing productivity rates amongst French,
German and UK construction contractors”. Engineering, Construction
and Architectural Management, 5(2), 174-81.
Proverbs D G, Holt G D and Olomolaiye P O (1999), “Productivity rates and
construction methods for high rise concrete construction: a comparative
evaluation of UK, German and French contractors”. Construction
Qambar S (1999), “A systems Approach to Construction Productivity”,
University of Nottingham,
Radosaviljevic M and Horner R M W (2002), “The evidence of complex
variability in construction labour productivity”. Construction
Ryan B, Joiner B (1994), “Minitab Handbook”, III Edition, Duxbury Press.
Shohet I M and Laufer A (1991), “What does the construction foreman do?”
Sinicich T (1989), “Business Statistics by Example”, Third Edition, Dellen
Publishing Company, San Francisco
Strauss G (1955), “Group Dynamics and Intergroup Relations”, Money & Mot,
Edited William Whyte F, New York : Harper & Row
Tabachnick B G & Fidell Linda S (2007), “Using Multivariate Statistics”, V
Edition, Pearson International Edition
Talhoun B T K (1990), “Measurement and Analysis of Construction Labour
Productivity”, University of Dundee
243
Tan W (2000), “Total factor productivity in Singapore construction”

Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 7(2), 154-8.
Tan W and Elias Y (2000), “Learning-by-doing in Singapore construction”.
Journal of Construction Research, 1(2), 151-8.
Thomas J, Giddings B and Little L (2006), “An holistic evaluation of the
workplace environment”. In: Boyd, D (Ed.), 22nd Annual ARCOM
Conference, 4-6 September 2006 Birmingham, UK. Association of
Tylor R (2002), “The Future of Work Life Balance”
Usang B, Basil A, et al (2007), “Academic Staff Research Productivity : A
Study of Universities in South – South Zone of Nigeria; Educational
Research and Review Vol 2 (5) pp 103-108, May 2007
Walker D H T and Smithers G L (1996), “Motivation and Demotivation in the
Construction Industry”. Chartered Building Professional, pp 17-18.
Walker D H T (1995), “An investigation into construction time performance”,
Williams Jeremy (1998), “Don’t They Know Its Friday”, Dubai Motivate Press
Willie T (2000), “Total factor productivity in Singapore Construction”,
Engineering Construction and Architectural Management, Vol. 7 (2), pg.
154-158
Winch G and Carr B (2001), “Benchmarking on site productivity in France and
the UK: a CALIBRE approach”, Construction Management and
Economics, 19(6), 577-90.
Zhi M, Hua G B, Wang S Q and Ofori G (2003), “Total factor productivity
growth accounting in the construction industry of Singapore”,
Zikmund W G (2003), “Business Research Methods”, 7th Edition, South-
Western Cengage Learning.
***
244
APPENDICES
Appendix 1 Master Field Data for Model Formulation ....................... 246 - 263
Appendix 2 Master Field Data for Model Validation ......................... 264 - 285
Appendix 3 Questionnaire Formats Used ............................................ 286 - 294

Appendix 3-1 Survey 1 Questionnaire – Determination of Significant Factors
Affecting Productivity
Appendix 3-2 Survey 2 & 3 Questionnaire – Establishing Effect or magnitude
Of the Factors Affecting Productivity (Internal/External)
Appendix 3-3 Collection of Formats Used In Data Collection
Appendix 4 Collection of Productivity Modelling Data & Graphs….. 295 - 323

Appendix 5 Collection of Validation Data & Graphs ............................ 324 - 348

Appendix 6 Predicted Productivity for all Possible Combinations

of Factor Levels ................................................................. 349 - 383
Appendix 7 Statistical Tables and Definitions ..................................... 384 - 396

Appendix 7-1 Random Number Table
Appendix 7-2 Chi Square Values
Appendix 7-3 Statistical Parameters Appearing In Minitab
Appendix 8 Project Profiles ................................................................. 397 - 407
***
245
Factors Affecting Productivity in the UAE Construction Industry, Nabil Ailabouni, 2010 Appendix 1
Appendix 1
Master Field Data for Model Formulation
Parameters
% Productivity
Measured
No Date Site Ref Activity Contract=3 Excellent = 3 Skilled=3
Pleasant=3
[100 (Yi-Ŷ)] / Ŷ
Group
Timings Supervision Material Procedure Climate
Dynamics Unit Unit PPCM
(T) (S) (M) (P) (C)
(G)
1 7-Feb-08 OAG 9 Excavation 2 1 2 2 1 2 0.060 0.088216 -31.99%

2 12-Feb-08 OAG 19 Excavation 2 1 2 2 1 2 0.090 0.088216 2.02%
5 14-Feb-08 ARS 56 Excavation 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.063 0.065283 -3.50%
27 1-Mar-08 OAG 54 Excavation 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.100 0.088216 13.36%
32 6-Mar-08 OAG 65 Excavation 2 1 2 2 1 2 0.060 0.088216 -31.99%
56 20-Apr-08 OAG 120 Excavation 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.100 0.088216 13.36%
59 4-May-08 OAG 124 Excavation 2 2 2 2 1 2 0.110 0.088216 24.69%
246

Parameters
% Productivity
Measured
Pleasant=3
[100 (Yi-Ŷ)] / Ŷ
Group
(T) (S) (M) (P) (C)
(G)

64 1-Jun-08 OAG 133 Excavation 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.100 0.088216 13.36%
68 13-Jul-08 OAG 143 Excavation 2 2 2 2 1 1 0.100 0.088216 13.36%
70 10-Dec-08 ARS 1 Excavation 1 1 1 2 1 1 0.070 0.065283 7.22%
73 14-Dec-08 ARS 5 Excavation 1 1 1 2 1 1 0.040 0.065283 -38.73%
87 3-Jan-09 ARS 20 Excavation 2 2 3 2 2 2 0.054 0.065283 -16.98%
92 8-Jan-09 ARS 25 Excavation 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.076 0.065283 16.42%
102 20-Jan-09 ARS 35 Excavation 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.066 0.065283 1.10%
105 4-Feb-08 NLB 3 Formwork 1 2 1 2 2 2 0.711 0.698566 1.81%
106 5-Feb-08 NLB 4 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.529 0.698566 -24.30%
107 5-Feb-08 NLB 5 Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.711 0.698566 1.81%
108 6-Feb-08 NLB 6 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.620 0.698566 -11.25%
109 6-Feb-08 NLB 7 Formwork 1 2 1 2 2 2 0.711 0.698566 1.81%
110 7-Feb-08 NLB 8 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.511 0.698566 -26.91%
111 8-Feb-08 NLB 10 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.511 0.698566 -26.91%
112 8-Feb-08 NLB 11 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.766 0.698566 9.64%
113 9-Feb-08 NLB 12 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.638 0.698566 -8.64%
114 9-Feb-08 NLB 13 Formwork 1 2 1 2 2 2 0.802 0.698566 14.86%
115 10-Feb-08 NLB 14 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.511 0.698566 -26.91%
116 10-Feb-08 NLB 15 Formwork 3 2 2 2 2 2 0.948 0.698566 35.74%
117 11-Feb-08 NLB 17 Formwork 1 2 1 2 2 2 0.857 0.698566 22.69%
118 12-Feb-08 NLB 19 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.620 0.698566 -11.25%
119 13-Feb-08 NLB 21 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.565 0.698566 -19.08%
120 14-Feb-08 OAG 22 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.31 0.383080 -19.08%
121 14-Feb-08 OAG 25 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.36 0.383080 -6.02%
247

Parameters
% Productivity
Measured
Pleasant=3
[100 (Yi-Ŷ)] / Ŷ
Group
(T) (S) (M) (P) (C)
(G)
122 16-Feb-08 OAG 26 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.29 0.383080 -24.30%

123 16-Feb-08 JIC 1 Formwork 1 3 2 2 2 2 0.759 0.843560 -10.02%
124 16-Feb-08 OAG 27 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.42 0.383080 9.64%
125 17-Feb-08 OAG 29 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.31 0.383080 -19.08%
126 18-Feb-08 OAG 31 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.31 0.383080 -19.08%
127 19-Feb-08 OAG 33 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.42 0.383080 9.64%
128 20-Feb-08 OAG 35 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.25 0.383080 -34.74%
129 21-Feb-08 OAG 36 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.27 0.383080 -29.52%
130 21-Feb-08 OAG 37 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.44 0.383080 14.86%
131 22-Feb-08 OAG 38 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.25 0.383080 -34.74%
132 22-Feb-08 OAG 39 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.26 0.383080 -32.13%
133 23-Feb-08 OAG 41 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.39 0.383080 1.81%
134 23-Feb-08 JIC 5 Formwork 2 3 2 2 2 2 1.034 0.843560 22.58%
135 23-Feb-08 JIC 7 Formwork 2 3 2 2 2 2 1.034 0.843560 22.58%
136 23-Feb-08 OAG 40 Formwork 3 2 2 2 2 2 0.52 0.383080 35.74%
137 24-Feb-08 OAG 43 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.39 0.383080 1.81%
138 24-Feb-08 OAG 42 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.5 0.383080 30.52%
139 25-Feb-08 OAG 45 Formwork 1 2 1 2 2 2 0.36 0.383080 -6.02%
140 25-Feb-08 OAG 44 Formwork 1 2 1 2 2 2 0.39 0.383080 1.81%
141 26-Feb-08 OAG 46 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.28 0.383080 -26.91%
142 26-Feb-08 OAG 47 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.36 0.383080 -6.02%
143 27-Feb-08 OAG 48 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.42 0.383080 9.64%
144 27-Feb-08 OAG 49 Formwork 1 2 1 2 2 2 0.42 0.383080 9.64%
145 28-Feb-08 OAG 50 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.28 0.383080 -26.91%
146 28-Feb-08 OAG 51 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.3 0.383080 -21.69%
147 29-Feb-08 OAG 52 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.31 0.383080 -19.08%
148 29-Feb-08 OAG 53 Formwork 1 2 1 2 2 2 0.42 0.383080 9.64%
149 1-Mar-08 OAG 54 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.33 0.383080 -13.86%
150 1-Mar-08 OAG 55 Formwork 1 2 1 2 2 2 0.44 0.383080 14.86%
151 2-Mar-08 OAG 56 Formwork 1 2 1 2 2 2 0.5 0.383080 30.52%
152 2-Mar-08 OAG 57 Formwork 1 2 1 2 2 2 0.5 0.383080 30.52%
153 3-Mar-08 OAG 59 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.31 0.383080 -19.08%
154 3-Mar-08 OAG 58 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.33 0.383080 -13.86%
155 4-Mar-08 OAG 60 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.3 0.383080 -21.69%
156 4-Mar-08 OAG 61 Formwork 1 2 1 2 2 2 0.5 0.383080 30.52%
157 5-Mar-08 OAG 63 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.28 0.383080 -26.91%
158 5-Mar-08 OAG 62 Formwork 1 2 1 2 2 2 0.44 0.383080 14.86%
159 6-Mar-08 OAG 65 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.28 0.383080 -26.91%
160 7-Mar-08 OAG 67 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.28 0.383080 -26.91%
161 7-Mar-08 OAG 66 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.33 0.383080 -13.86%
162 8-Mar-08 OAG 69 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.3 0.383080 -21.69%
163 8-Mar-08 OAG 68 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.31 0.383080 -19.08%
164 9-Mar-08 OAG 71 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.31 0.383080 -19.08%
165 9-Mar-08 OAG 70 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.34 0.383080 -11.25%
166 10-Mar-08 OAG 73 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.34 0.383080 -11.25%
167 10-Mar-08 OAG 72 Formwork 3 2 1 2 2 2 0.52 0.383080 35.74%
168 11-Mar-08 OAG 74 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.34 0.383080 -11.25%
169 11-Mar-08 OAG 75 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.34 0.383080 -11.25%
170 12-Mar-08 OAG 76 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.34 0.383080 -11.25%
171 12-Mar-08 OAG 77 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.34 0.383080 -11.25%
172 13-Mar-08 OAG 78 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.34 0.383080 -11.25%
173 13-Mar-08 OAG 79 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.34 0.383080 -11.25%
174 14-Mar-08 OAG 80 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.36 0.383080 -6.02%
175 14-Mar-08 OAG 81 Formwork 1 2 1 2 2 2 0.43 0.383080 12.25%
176 15-Mar-08 OAG 82 Formwork 1 2 1 2 2 2 0.38 0.383080 -0.80%
177 15-Mar-08 OAG 83 Formwork 1 2 1 2 2 2 0.44 0.383080 14.86%
178 16-Mar-08 OAG 84 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.29 0.383080 -24.30%
179 16-Mar-08 OAG 85 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.36 0.383080 -6.02%
180 17-Mar-08 OAG 86 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.27 0.383080 -29.52%
181 17-Mar-08 OAG 87 Formwork 1 2 1 2 2 2 0.436 0.383080 13.81%
182 18-Mar-08 OAG 88 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.27 0.383080 -29.52%
248

Parameters
% Productivity
Measured
Pleasant=3
[100 (Yi-Ŷ)] / Ŷ
Group
(T) (S) (M) (P) (C)
(G)
183 18-Mar-08 OAG 89 Formwork 3 2 1 2 2 2 0.52 0.383080 35.74%

184 19-Mar-08 OAG 92 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.29 0.383080 -24.30%
185 20-Mar-08 OAG 93 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.34 0.383080 -11.25%
186 21-Mar-08 OAG 94 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.29 0.383080 -24.30%
187 21-Mar-08 OAG 95 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.34 0.383080 -11.25%
188 22-Mar-08 OAG 96 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.34 0.383080 -11.25%
189 22-Mar-08 OAG 97 Formwork 3 2 1 2 2 2 0.52 0.383080 35.74%
190 23-Mar-08 OAG 98 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.34 0.383080 -11.25%
191 23-Mar-08 OAG 99 Formwork 3 2 2 2 2 2 0.52 0.383080 35.74%
192 24-Mar-08 OAG 100 Formwork 1 2 1 2 2 2 0.39 0.383080 1.81%
193 24-Mar-08 OAG 101 Formwork 1 2 1 2 2 2 0.39 0.383080 1.81%
194 25-Mar-08 OAG 104 Formwork 2 2 1 2 2 2 0.52 0.383080 35.74%
195 26-Mar-08 OAG 105 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.37 0.383080 -3.41%
196 26-Mar-08 OAG 106 Formwork 1 2 1 2 2 2 0.48 0.383080 25.30%
197 27-Mar-08 OAG 107 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.34 0.383080 -11.25%
198 27-Mar-08 OAG 108 Formwork 1 1 3 2 2 2 0.39 0.383080 1.81%
199 28-Mar-08 OAG 109 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.34 0.383080 -11.25%
200 28-Mar-08 OAG 110 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.4 0.383080 4.42%
201 29-Mar-08 JIC 12 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.65 0.843560 -22.95%
202 29-Mar-08 OAG 111 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.34 0.383080 -11.25%
203 29-Mar-08 OAG 112 Formwork 2 2 1 2 2 2 0.52 0.383080 35.74%
204 30-Mar-08 OAG 113 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.34 0.383080 -11.25%
205 30-Mar-08 OAG 114 Formwork 1 1 1 2 1 2 0.37 0.383080 -3.41%
206 30-Mar-08 JIC 15 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 1.04 0.843560 23.29%
207 1-Apr-08 JIC 21 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 1.1 0.843560 30.40%
208 2-Apr-08 JIC 26 Formwork 2 2 2 2 2 2 1.1 0.843560 30.40%
209 3-Apr-08 JIC 29 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.9 0.843560 6.69%
210 6-Apr-08 JIC 34 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.55 0.843560 -34.80%
211 6-Apr-08 OAG 116 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.48 0.383080 25.30%
212 6-Apr-08 OAG 115 Formwork 2 2 1 2 2 2 0.52 0.383080 35.74%
213 7-Apr-08 JIC 37 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.73 0.843560 -13.46%
214 8-Apr-08 JIC 40 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.89 0.843560 5.51%
215 9-Apr-08 JIC 43 Formwork 1 3 3 2 2 2 0.79 0.843560 -6.35%
216 10-Apr-08 JIC 45 Formwork 1 3 3 2 2 2 1.03 0.843560 22.10%
217 13-Apr-08 JIC 50 Formwork 1 3 3 2 2 2 0.54 0.843560 -35.99%
218 13-Apr-08 OAG 117 Formwork 1 1 1 2 1 2 0.37 0.383080 -3.41%
219 13-Apr-08 OAG 118 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.45 0.383080 17.47%
220 20-Apr-08 OAG 119 Formwork 2 2 1 2 2 2 0.52 0.383080 35.74%
221 20-Apr-08 OAG 120 Formwork 1 2 1 2 2 2 0.53 0.383080 38.35%
222 26-Apr-08 NLB 3 Formwork 1 3 3 2 2 2 0.73 0.698566 4.50%
223 27-Apr-08 OAG 121 Formwork 1 2 1 2 2 2 0.45 0.383080 17.47%
224 27-Apr-08 OAG 122 Formwork 1 2 1 2 2 2 0.45 0.383080 17.47%
225 29-Apr-08 NLB 7 Formwork 1 3 3 2 2 2 0.65 0.698566 -6.95%
226 4-May-08 JIC 54 Formwork 1 3 3 2 2 2 0.97 0.843560 14.99%
227 4-May-08 OAG 124 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.45 0.383080 17.47%
228 4-May-08 OAG 123 Formwork 1 2 3 2 2 2 0.48 0.383080 25.30%
229 10-May-08 NLB 12 Formwork 1 3 3 2 2 1 0.553 0.698566 -20.84%
230 11-May-08 OAG 125 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.45 0.383080 17.47%
231 11-May-08 OAG 126 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.45 0.383080 17.47%
232 11-May-08 NLB 13 Formwork 1 3 3 2 2 1 0.839 0.698566 20.10%
233 17-May-08 NLB 17 Formwork 1 3 3 2 2 1 0.923 0.698566 32.13%
234 18-May-08 OAG 127 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.45 0.383080 17.47%
235 18-May-08 OAG 128 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.48 0.383080 25.30%
236 19-May-08 NLB 19 Formwork 1 3 3 2 2 1 0.825 0.698566 18.10%
237 20-May-08 NLB 20 Formwork 2 3 3 2 2 1 0.88 0.698566 25.97%
238 21-May-08 NLB 21 Formwork 1 3 3 2 2 1 0.75 0.698566 7.36%
239 22-May-08 NLB 22 Formwork 1 3 3 2 2 1 0.75 0.698566 7.36%
240 22-May-08 NLB 22 Formwork 2 3 3 2 2 1 0.921 0.698566 31.84%
241 25-May-08 OAG 129 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.45 0.383080 17.47%
242 25-May-08 OAG 130 Formwork 2 2 2 2 2 2 0.45 0.383080 17.47%
243 1-Jun-08 OAG 131 Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.29 0.383080 -24.30%
249

Parameters
% Productivity
Measured
Pleasant=3
[100 (Yi-Ŷ)] / Ŷ
Group
(T) (S) (M) (P) (C)
(G)
244 1-Jun-08 OAG 132 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.46 0.383080 20.08%

245 8-Jun-08 OAG 133 Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.28 0.383080 -26.91%
246 8-Jun-08 OAG 134 Formwork 2 2 2 2 2 2 0.52 0.383080 35.74%
247 14-Jun-08 JIC 56 Formwork 1 3 3 2 2 1 0.87 0.843560 3.13%
248 15-Jun-08 OAG 135 Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.29 0.383080 -24.30%
249 15-Jun-08 OAG 136 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.52 0.383080 35.74%
250 17-Jun-08 JIC 58 Formwork 1 3 3 2 2 1 1.15 0.843560 36.33%
251 22-Jun-08 OAG 137 Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.29 0.383080 -24.30%
252 22-Jun-08 OAG 138 Formwork 2 2 2 2 2 2 0.52 0.383080 35.74%
253 29-Jun-08 OAG 139 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.37 0.383080 -3.41%
254 29-Jun-08 OAG 140 Formwork 1 2 2 2 1 2 0.37 0.383080 -3.41%
255 6-Jul-08 OAG 142 Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.32 0.383080 -16.47%
256 7-Jul-08 JIC 60 Formwork 1 3 3 2 2 1 0.98 0.843560 16.17%
257 13-Jul-08 OAG 143 Formwork 2 2 2 2 2 2 0.52 0.383080 35.74%
258 13-Jul-08 OAG 144 Formwork 2 2 2 2 2 2 0.53 0.383080 38.35%
259 16-Jul-08 JIC 61 Formwork 1 3 3 2 2 1 0.92 0.843560 9.06%
260 20-Jul-08 OAG 145 Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.32 0.383080 -16.47%
261 20-Jul-08 OAG 1 Formwork 1 2 2 2 1 2 0.38 0.383080 -0.80%
262 20-Jul-08 OAG 146 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.5 0.383080 30.52%
263 22-Jul-08 JIC 62 Formwork 1 3 3 2 2 1 0.85 0.843560 0.76%
264 27-Jul-08 OAG 148 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.41 0.383080 7.03%
265 27-Jul-08 OAG 147 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.46 0.383080 20.08%
266 3-Aug-08 OAG 149 Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.34 0.383080 -11.25%
267 3-Aug-08 OAG 150 Formwork 1 2 3 2 2 2 0.41 0.383080 7.03%
268 4-Aug-08 JIC 63 Formwork 1 3 3 2 2 1 0.86 0.843560 1.95%
269 10-Aug-08 OAG 151 Formwork 1 2 3 2 2 2 0.4 0.383080 4.42%
270 10-Aug-08 OAG 152 Formwork 2 3 2 2 2 2 0.46 0.383080 20.08%
271 17-Aug-08 OAG 153 Formwork 1 3 2 2 2 2 0.35 0.383080 -8.64%
272 17-Aug-08 OAG 154 Formwork 1 3 2 2 1 2 0.373 0.383080 -2.63%
273 24-Aug-08 OAG 155 Formwork 1 3 2 2 2 2 0.384 0.383080 0.24%
274 24-Aug-08 OAG 156 Formwork 1 3 2 2 2 2 0.41 0.383080 7.03%
275 27-Aug-08 JIC 73 Formwork 1 3 3 2 2 1 0.7 0.843560 -17.02%
276 31-Aug-08 OAG 157 Formwork 1 3 2 2 2 2 0.38 0.383080 -0.80%
277 31-Aug-08 OAG 158 Formwork 2 3 2 2 2 2 0.46 0.383080 20.08%
278 3-Sep-08 JIC 4 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.812 0.843560 -3.74%
279 7-Sep-08 OAG 159 Formwork 1 3 2 2 1 2 0.37 0.383080 -3.41%
280 7-Sep-08 OAG 160 Formwork 1 3 2 2 2 2 0.41 0.383080 7.03%
281 14-Sep-08 OAG 162 Formwork 1 3 2 2 2 2 0.35 0.383080 -8.64%
282 14-Sep-08 OAG 161 Formwork 2 3 2 2 2 2 0.54 0.383080 40.96%
283 21-Sep-08 OAG 164 Formwork 1 3 2 2 1 2 0.37 0.383080 -3.41%
284 21-Sep-08 OAG 163 Formwork 3 3 2 2 2 2 0.54 0.383080 40.96%
285 28-Sep-08 OAG 165 Formwork 1 3 2 2 2 2 0.41 0.383080 7.03%
286 28-Sep-08 OAG 166 Formwork 1 3 2 2 2 2 0.41 0.383080 7.03%
287 5-Oct-08 OAG 167 Formwork 1 3 2 2 2 2 0.41 0.383080 7.03%
288 5-Oct-08 OAG 168 Formwork 1 3 2 2 2 2 0.46 0.383080 20.08%
289 12-Oct-08 OAG 170 Formwork 1 3 2 2 2 2 0.46 0.383080 20.08%
290 12-Oct-08 OAG 169 Formwork 3 3 2 2 2 2 0.54 0.383080 40.96%
291 19-Oct-08 OAG 171 Formwork 3 3 2 2 2 2 0.54 0.383080 40.96%
292 19-Oct-08 OAG 172 Formwork 3 3 2 2 2 2 0.54 0.383080 40.96%
293 26-Oct-08 OAG 174 Formwork 1 3 2 2 2 2 0.46 0.383080 20.08%
294 26-Oct-08 OAG 173 Formwork 3 3 2 2 2 2 0.54 0.383080 40.96%
295 2-Nov-08 OAG 175 Formwork 1 3 2 2 2 2 0.41 0.383080 7.03%
296 2-Nov-08 OAG 176 Formwork 3 3 2 2 2 2 0.54 0.383080 40.96%
297 9-Nov-08 OAG 177 Formwork 1 3 2 2 1 2 0.37 0.383080 -3.41%
298 9-Nov-08 OAG 178 Formwork 1 3 2 2 2 2 0.41 0.383080 7.03%
299 16-Nov-08 OAG 179 Formwork 1 3 2 2 2 2 0.35 0.383080 -8.64%
300 16-Nov-08 OAG 180 Formwork 1 3 2 2 2 2 0.41 0.383080 7.03%
301 23-Nov-08 OAG 182 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.31 0.383080 -19.08%
302 23-Nov-08 OAG 181 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.35 0.383080 -8.64%
303 24-Nov-08 BCC 5 Formwork 2 1 1 2 1 2 0.187 0.200250 -6.62%
304 25-Nov-08 BCC 6 Formwork 2 1 1 2 1 2 0.167 0.200250 -16.60%
250

Parameters
% Productivity
Measured
Pleasant=3
[100 (Yi-Ŷ)] / Ŷ
Group
(T) (S) (M) (P) (C)
(G)
305 30-Nov-08 OAG 183 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.28 0.383080 -26.91%

306 30-Nov-08 OAG 184 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.35 0.383080 -8.64%
307 7-Dec-08 OAG 186 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.31 0.383080 -19.08%
308 7-Dec-08 OAG 185 Formwork 2 2 2 2 2 2 0.5 0.383080 30.52%
309 10-Dec-08 ARS 2 Formwork 1 1 2 2 1 1 0.178 0.164944 7.92%
310 11-Dec-08 ARS 3 Formwork 1 1 2 2 1 1 0.17 0.164944 3.07%
311 13-Dec-08 ARS 4 Formwork 1 1 2 2 1 1 0.178 0.164944 7.92%
312 14-Dec-08 OAG 187 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.23 0.383080 -39.96%
313 14-Dec-08 OAG 188 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.26 0.383080 -32.13%
314 14-Dec-08 ARS 5 Formwork 1 1 2 2 1 1 0.12 0.164944 -27.25%
315 15-Dec-08 ARS 6 Formwork 1 1 2 2 1 1 0.11 0.164944 -33.31%
316 16-Dec-08 ARS 7 Formwork 1 1 2 2 1 1 0.12 0.164944 -27.25%
317 17-Dec-08 ARS 8 Formwork 1 1 2 2 1 1 0.13 0.164944 -21.19%
318 18-Dec-08 ARS 9 Formwork 1 1 2 2 1 1 0.119 0.164944 -27.85%
319 20-Dec-08 ARS 10 Formwork 1 1 2 2 1 1 0.118 0.164944 -28.46%
320 21-Dec-08 ARS 11 Formwork 1 1 2 2 1 1 0.121 0.164944 -26.64%
321 21-Dec-08 OAG 190 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.38 0.383080 -0.80%
322 21-Dec-08 OAG 189 Formwork 2 2 2 2 2 2 0.49 0.383080 27.91%
323 22-Dec-08 ARS 12 Formwork 1 1 2 2 1 1 0.128 0.164944 -22.40%
324 23-Dec-08 ARS 13 Formwork 1 1 2 2 1 1 0.128 0.164944 -22.40%
325 24-Dec-08 ARS 14 Formwork 3 1 2 2 1 1 0.219 0.164944 32.77%
326 25-Dec-08 ARS 15 Formwork 3 1 2 2 1 1 0.219 0.164944 32.77%
327 28-Dec-08 OAG 191 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.29 0.383080 -24.30%
328 28-Dec-08 OAG 192 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.36 0.383080 -6.02%
329 29-Dec-08 ARS 17 Formwork 2 1 2 2 1 1 0.227 0.164944 37.62%
330 31-Dec-08 ARS 19 Formwork 2 1 2 2 1 1 0.216 0.164944 30.95%
331 4-Jan-09 OAG 193 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.39 0.383080 1.81%
332 4-Jan-09 OAG 151A Formwork 1 3 2 2 2 2 0.416 0.383080 8.59%
333 4-Feb-08 OAG 3 Reinforcement 1 2 2 2 1 2 0.07 0.079066 -11.47%
334 5-Feb-08 OAG 5 Reinforcement 1 2 2 2 1 2 0.08 0.079066 1.18%
365 1-Mar-08 OAG 55 Reinforcement 1 2 2 2 1 2 0.05 0.079066 -36.76%
251

Parameters
% Productivity
Measured
Pleasant=3
[100 (Yi-Ŷ)] / Ŷ
Group
(T) (S) (M) (P) (C)
(G)
366 1-Mar-08 OAG 54 Reinforcement 1 3 2 2 1 2 0.08 0.079066 1.18%

418 30-Mar-08 JIC 16 Reinforcement 1 2 2 2 1 2 0.03 0.042125 -28.78%
422 1-Apr-08 OAG 115 Reinforcement 1 2 2 2 1 2 0.07 0.079066 -11.47%
425 8-Apr-08 JIC 39 Reinforcement 2 2 2 2 2 2 0.05 0.042125 18.69%
252

Parameters
% Productivity
Measured
Pleasant=3
[100 (Yi-Ŷ)] / Ŷ
Group
(T) (S) (M) (P) (C)
(G)
427 12-Apr-08 JIC 48 Reinforcement 1 1 1 2 1 2 0.03 0.042125 -28.78%

429 4-May-08 OAG 125 Reinforcement 3 3 2 2 1 2 0.1 0.079066 26.48%
430 6-May-08 NLB 17 Reinforcement 1 3 3 2 2 1 0.04 0.064636 -38.12%
434 18-May-08 JIC 53 Reinforcement 1 3 3 2 2 2 0.045 0.042125 6.82%
437 17-Aug-08 OAG 1 Reinforcement 1 2 2 2 1 2 0.06 0.079066 -24.11%
438 17-Aug-08 OAG 153 Reinforcement 1 3 2 2 2 2 0.11 0.079066 39.12%
441 15-Nov-08 JIC 3 Reinforcement 2 2 2 2 2 1 0.0564 0.042125 33.90%
442 20-Nov-08 JIC 4 Reinforcement 2 2 2 2 2 2 0.0585 0.042125 38.98%
443 23-Nov-08 OAG 182 Reinforcement 1 3 2 2 2 2 0.1 0.079066 26.48%
446 7-Dec-08 OAG 186 Reinforcement 1 3 2 2 2 2 0.08 0.079066 1.18%
448 14-Dec-08 OAG 187 Reinforcement 1 3 2 2 2 2 0.051 0.079066 -35.50%
450 14-Dec-08 JIC 5 Reinforcement 2 1 1 2 1 1 0.0420 0.042125 -0.18%
451 15-Dec-08 JIC 6 Reinforcement 2 1 1 2 1 1 0.0397 0.042125 -5.73%
452 15-Dec-08 OAG 190 Reinforcement 1 3 2 2 2 2 0.077 0.079066 -2.61%
454 16-Dec-08 ARS 7 Reinforcement 2 1 1 2 1 1 0.019 0.018033 5.36%
456 18-Dec-08 ARS 9 Reinforcement 2 1 1 2 1 1 0.013 0.018033 -27.91%
466 4-Jan-09 OAG 151A Reinforcement 3 3 2 2 2 2 0.11 0.079066 39.12%
467 4-Feb-08 OAG 4 Concreting-2 3 2 3 2 3 3 0.200 0.179200 11.61%
471 13-Feb-08 OAG 21 Concreting-2 1 1 1 2 3 3 0.140 0.179200 -21.88%
482 13-Mar-08 RIH 3 Concreting 1 3 3 2 3 2 0.230 0.192105 19.73%
483 20-Mar-08 RIH 5 Concreting 3 3 3 2 3 2 0.250 0.192105 30.14%
484 3-Apr-08 RIH 6 Concreting 2 1 3 2 3 2 0.180 0.192105 -6.30%
486 20-Apr-08 OAG 119 Concreting-2 1 1 1 2 3 2 0.150 0.179200 -16.29%
487 20-Apr-08 OAG 120 Concreting-2 3 2 2 2 3 2 0.180 0.179200 0.45%
253

Parameters
% Productivity
Measured
Pleasant=3
[100 (Yi-Ŷ)] / Ŷ
Group
(T) (S) (M) (P) (C)
(G)

491 1-May-08 RIH 8 Concreting 1 3 2 2 2 1 0.216 0.192105 12.30%
492 4-May-08 OAG 124 Concreting-2 2 2 2 2 3 2 0.170 0.192105 -11.51%
496 22-May-08 RIH 13 Concreting 2 2 3 2 3 1 0.190 0.192105 -1.10%
497 25-May-08 OAG 131 Concreting-2 3 2 2 2 3 1 0.200 0.179200 11.61%
498 1-Jun-08 OAG 132 Concreting-2 3 2 2 2 3 1 0.190 0.179200 6.03%
499 5-Jun-08 RIH 15 Concreting 1 3 3 2 3 1 0.240 0.192105 24.93%
505 22-Jun-08 OAG 137 Concreting-2 1 2 1 2 3 1 0.160 0.179200 -10.71%
507 6-Jul-08 OAG 141 Concreting-2 3 2 2 2 3 1 0.200 0.179200 11.61%
508 17-Aug-08 RIH 2 Concreting 1 2 3 2 3 1 0.190 0.192105 -1.10%
509 24-Aug-08 JIC 72 Concreting 1 1 1 2 1 1 1.583 2.261000 -29.99%
510 4-Sep-08 JIC 75 Concreting 1 1 1 2 1 1 1.920 2.261000 -15.08%
511 14-Sep-08 OAG 166 Concreting-1 2 1 2 2 3 1 1.540 1.648276 -6.57%
512 5-Oct-08 OAG 168 Concreting-1 1 2 1 2 3 2 1.350 1.648276 -18.10%
513 5-Oct-08 OAG 167 Concreting-1 2 2 2 2 3 2 1.650 1.648276 0.10%
514 12-Oct-08 OAG 169 Concreting-1 1 1 1 2 3 2 1.240 1.648276 -24.77%
519 2-Nov-08 OAG 175 Concreting-1 1 2 1 2 3 2 1.380 1.648276 -16.28%
521 9-Nov-08 OAG 177 Concreting-1 3 3 2 2 3 2 2.120 1.648276 28.62%
527 7-Dec-08 OAG 185 Concreting-1 1 3 2 2 3 2 2.000 1.648276 21.34%
529 13-Dec-08 ARS 4 Concreting 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.214 1.648276 -87.02%
530 14-Dec-08 OAG 187 Concreting-1 1 1 1 2 3 2 1.450 1.648276 -12.03%
533 23-Dec-08 ARS 13 Concreting 1 3 2 2 2 2 0.350 0.303200 15.44%
538 26-Feb-09 BCC 23 Concreting 2 2 2 2 2 3 0.600 0.441973 35.76%
539 26-Feb-09 BCC 23 Concreting 2 2 2 2 2 3 0.600 0.441973 35.76%
540 21-Mar-09 BCC 27 Concreting 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.320 0.441973 -27.60%
542 21-Mar-09 BCC 40 Concreting 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.520 0.441973 17.65%
254

Parameters
% Productivity
Measured
Pleasant=3
[100 (Yi-Ŷ)] / Ŷ
Group
(T) (S) (M) (P) (C)
(G)

582 1-Apr-09 BCC 359 Concreting 1 2 1 2 2 2 0.522 0.441973 18.11%
585 2-Apr-09 BCC 404 Concreting 2 1 2 2 2 2 0.440 0.441973 -0.45%
586 30-Mar-08 JIC 17 Blockwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.26 0.370861 -29.89%
587 31-Mar-08 JIC 20 Blockwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.3 0.370861 -19.11%
588 1-Apr-08 JIC 23 Blockwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.36 0.370861 -2.93%
589 2-Apr-08 JIC 24 Blockwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.38 0.370861 2.46%
600 10-May-08 NLB 12 Blockwork 2 1 2 2 3 3 0.281 0.329214 -14.65%
601 19-May-08 NLB 19 Blockwork 2 3 3 2 3 1 0.446 0.329214 35.47%
604 2-Jun-08 NLB 31 Blockwork 1 1 2 2 3 1 0.313 0.329214 -4.93%
255

Parameters
% Productivity
Measured
Pleasant=3
[100 (Yi-Ŷ)] / Ŷ
Group
(T) (S) (M) (P) (C)
(G)
610 3-Aug-08 JIC 3 Blockwork 2 3 2 2 2 2 0.31 0.370861 -16.41%

611 9-Aug-08 NLB 77 Blockwork 1 2 2 2 3 1 0.435 0.329214 32.13%
621 1-Sep-08 JIC 74 Blockwork 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.328 0.370861 -11.56%
624 8-Oct-08 JIC 83 Blockwork 1 1 3 2 2 1 0.373 0.370861 0.58%
625 14-Oct-08 JIC 84 Blockwork 1 3 3 2 2 1 0.449 0.370861 21.07%
626 6-Nov-08 JIC 88 Blockwork 2 3 3 2 2 2 0.441 0.370861 18.91%
631 1-Dec-08 JIC 99 Blockwork 2 3 3 2 2 2 0.426 0.370861 14.87%
632 8-Dec-08 JIC 103 Blockwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.25 0.370861 -32.59%
633 9-Dec-08 JIC 95 Blockwork 1 3 3 2 2 2 0.475 0.370861 28.08%
637 5-Jan-09 JIC 118 Blockwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.458 0.370861 23.50%
652 21-Jan-09 JIC 160 Blockwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.37 0.370861 -0.23%
653 22-Jan-09 JIC 161 Blockwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.37 0.370861 -0.23%
654 15-Mar-09 ARS 86 Blockwork 2 2 2 2 3 2 0.278 0.203411 36.67%
658 18-Apr-09 ARS 157 Blockwork 2 2 2 2 3 2 0.278 0.203411 36.67%
663 2-May-09 ARS 192 Blockwork 2 1 2 2 3 2 0.22 0.203411 8.16%
667 23-May-09 ARS 245 Blockwork 1 1 2 2 3 2 0.183 0.203411 -10.03%
668 24-May-09 ARS 249 Blockwork 1 1 2 2 3 2 0.203 0.203411 -0.20%
669 1-Jun-09 ARS 266 Blockwork 1 1 2 2 3 1 0.181 0.203411 -11.02%
670 2-Jun-09 ARS 267 Blockwork 1 1 2 2 3 1 0.205 0.203411 0.78%
256

Parameters
% Productivity
Measured
Pleasant=3
[100 (Yi-Ŷ)] / Ŷ
Group
(T) (S) (M) (P) (C)
(G)

676 10-Jun-08 NLB 38 Plastering 2 2 1 2 2 1 0.464 0.395667 17.27%
677 14-Jun-08 NLB 42 Plastering 1 1 1 2 3 1 0.278 0.395667 -29.74%
679 1-Jul-08 NLB 57 Plastering 2 1 1 2 2 1 0.480 0.395667 21.31%
680 31-Jul-08 NLB 70 Plastering 1 3 3 2 3 1 0.290 0.395667 -26.71%
681 2-Aug-08 NLB 71 Plastering 1 1 3 2 3 1 0.339 0.395667 -14.32%
685 14-Aug-08 NLB 82 Plastering 1 1 1 2 3 1 0.400 0.395667 1.10%
686 25-Aug-08 NLB 91 Plastering 2 3 2 2 3 1 0.400 0.395667 1.10%
691 1-Sep-08 NLB 97 Plastering 1 3 3 2 3 1 0.320 0.395667 -19.12%
692 6-Sep-08 JIC 76 Plastering 2 1 3 2 1 1 0.276 0.315111 -12.41%
694 13-Sep-08 NLB 106 Plastering 3 3 3 2 2 1 0.550 0.395667 39.01%
701 4-Oct-08 JIC 82 Plastering 2 1 3 2 1 1 0.354 0.315111 12.34%
702 2-Nov-08 JIC 87 Plastering 2 1 3 2 1 2 0.360 0.315111 14.25%
705 1-Dec-08 JIC 100 Plastering 1 1 3 2 1 2 0.294 0.315111 -6.70%
711 31-Dec-08 NLB 117 Plastering 3 2 2 2 2 2 0.535 0.395667 35.21%
712 3-Jan-09 JIC 113 Plastering 2 2 3 2 2 3 0.329 0.315111 4.41%
714 5-Jan-09 JIC 117 Plastering 1 1 3 2 2 3 0.300 0.315111 -4.80%
257

Parameters
% Productivity
Measured
Pleasant=3
[100 (Yi-Ŷ)] / Ŷ
Group
(T) (S) (M) (P) (C)
(G)

733 4-Feb-09 JIC 164 Plastering 2 2 3 2 2 3 0.377 0.315111 19.64%
741 5-Mar-09 JIC 178 Plastering 2 2 3 2 2 3 0.360 0.315111 14.25%
749 4-Apr-09 JIC 195 Plastering 2 2 3 2 2 2 0.344 0.315111 9.17%
756 29-May-08 NLB 30 Wall Tile 1 1 1 2 2 1 0.24300 0.329153 -26.17%
757 1-Jun-08 NLB 30 Wall Tile 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.36200 0.329153 9.98%
758 8-Jun-08 NLB 37 Wall Tile 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.25800 0.329153 -21.62%
759 11-Jun-08 NLB 43 Wall Tile 1 1 1 2 2 1 0.27100 0.329153 -17.67%
760 15-Jun-08 NLB 45 Wall Tile 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.27400 0.329153 -16.76%
761 30-Jun-08 NLB 57 Wall Tile 1 1 1 2 2 1 0.24100 0.329153 -26.78%
762 14-Jul-08 NLB 65 Wall Tile 1 1 1 2 2 1 0.27100 0.329153 -17.67%
763 26-Jul-08 NLB 65 Wall Tile 1 1 1 2 2 1 0.29000 0.329153 -11.90%
764 26-Jul-08 NLB 66 Wall Tile 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.29300 0.329153 -10.98%
765 27-Jul-08 NLB 69 Wall Tile 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.26500 0.329153 -19.49%
766 27-Jul-08 NLB 66 Wall Tile 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.35500 0.329153 7.85%
767 28-Jul-08 NLB 67 Floor Tile 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.34800 0.306857 13.41%
770 30-Jul-08 NLB 70 Wall Tile 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.29900 0.329153 -9.16%
771 31-Jul-08 NLB 70 Floor Tile 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.21500 0.306857 -29.93%
772 31-Jul-08 NLB 71 Wall Tile 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.33900 0.329153 2.99%
773 2-Aug-08 NLB 71 Floor Tile 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.39800 0.306857 29.70%
775 5-Aug-08 NLB 75 Wall Tile 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.27800 0.329153 -15.54%
776 6-Aug-08 NLB 75 Floor Tile 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.24500 0.306857 -20.16%
777 6-Aug-08 NLB 76 Wall Tile 1 1 1 2 2 1 0.23200 0.329153 -29.52%
780 9-Aug-08 NLB 84 Wall Tile 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.37700 0.329153 14.54%
788 17-Aug-08 NLB 85 Wall Tile 1 1 1 2 2 1 0.28000 0.329153 -14.93%
789 18-Aug-08 NLB 86 Wall Tile 1 1 1 2 2 1 0.24000 0.329153 -27.09%
791 19-Aug-08 NLB 86 Wall Tile 1 1 1 2 2 1 0.28000 0.329153 -14.93%
792 25-Aug-08 NLB 92 Wall Tile 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.35000 0.329153 6.33%
258

Parameters
% Productivity
Measured
Pleasant=3
[100 (Yi-Ŷ)] / Ŷ
Group
(T) (S) (M) (P) (C)
(G)
793 26-Aug-08 NLB 93 Wall Tile 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.42000 0.329153 27.60%

794 27-Aug-08 NLB 93 Wall Tile 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.44000 0.329153 33.68%
795 27-Aug-08 NLB 94 Wall Tile 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.44000 0.329153 33.68%
796 28-Aug-08 NLB 95 Wall Tile 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.46000 0.329153 39.75%
797 30-Aug-08 NLB 96 Wall Tile 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.43000 0.329153 30.64%
798 31-Aug-08 NLB 97 Wall Tile 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.43000 0.329153 30.64%
799 3-Sep-08 NLB 100 Wall Tile 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.37000 0.329153 12.41%
800 6-Sep-08 NLB 100 Wall Tile 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.37000 0.329153 12.41%
801 6-Sep-08 NLB 101 Wall Tile 3 2 2 2 2 1 0.44000 0.329153 33.68%
802 7-Sep-08 NLB 102 Wall Tile 3 2 2 2 2 1 0.41000 0.329153 24.56%
803 8-Sep-08 NLB 103 Wall Tile 3 2 2 2 2 1 0.41000 0.329153 24.56%
804 9-Sep-08 NLB 104 Wall Tile 3 2 2 2 2 1 0.38000 0.329153 15.45%
805 10-Sep-08 NLB 105 Wall Tile 3 2 2 2 2 1 0.37000 0.329153 12.41%
806 14-Sep-08 NLB 108 Wall Tile 3 1 2 2 2 1 0.40000 0.329153 21.52%
807 15-Sep-08 NLB 109 Wall Tile 3 1 1 2 2 1 0.29000 0.329153 -11.90%
808 16-Oct-08 JIC 85 Wall Tile 1 1 1 2 1 1 0.18600 0.193800 -4.02%
809 21-Oct-08 JIC 86 Floor Tile 1 1 1 2 1 1 0.23600 0.193800 21.78%
810 6-Nov-08 JIC 89 Wall Tile 1 1 1 2 1 2 0.18600 0.193800 -4.02%
811 18-Nov-08 JIC 96 Wall Tile 1 1 1 2 1 2 0.16200 0.193800 -16.41%
812 1-Dec-08 JIC 102 Floor Tile 1 1 1 2 1 1 0.19900 0.193800 2.68%
Discarded
3 12-May-08 NLB 14 Block Work 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.529 0.329214 60.69%
5 13-May-08 NLB 15 Block Work 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.154 0.329214 -53.22%
6 14-May-08 NLB 16 Block Work 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.192 0.329214 -41.68%
2 23-Jun-08 NLB 50 Block Work 1 1 1 2 2 1 0.123 0.329214 -62.64%
10 15-Dec-08 ARS 6 Concreting 1 3 3 2 2 2 0.15 0.303200 -50.53%
12 24-Aug-08 JIC 71 Concreting 3 3 3 2 2 1 3.28 2.261000 45.07%
11 29-Oct-08 JIC 72 Concreting 3 3 3 2 2 1 1.583 2.261000 -29.99%
19 1-May-08 RIH 9 Concreting 1 3 3 2 2 2 0.28 0.192105 45.75%
18 5-Jun-08 RIH 14 Concreting 1 1 3 2 2 2 0.11 0.192105 -42.74%
13 16-Jul-08 RIH 18 Concreting 1 3 3 2 2 2 0.08 0.192105 -58.36%
15 26-Jul-08 RIH 19 Concreting 1 1 3 2 2 2 0.08 0.192105 -58.36%
20 2-Aug-08 RIH 20 Concreting 1 2 3 2 2 2 0.3 0.192105 56.16%
21 31-Aug-08 RIH 23 Concreting 1 3 3 2 2 2 0.3 0.192105 56.16%
22 8-Sep-08 RIH 24 Concreting 1 3 3 2 2 2 0.3 0.192105 56.16%
25 13-Jul-08 OAG 143 Concreting-1 3 3 3 2 2 2 0.76 1.648276 -53.89%
24 14-Sep-08 OAG 161 Concreting-1 1 3 2 2 2 2 0.82 1.648276 -50.25%
23 4-Jan-09 OAG 191 Concreting-1 2 3 2 2 2 2 1 1.648276 -39.33%
26 4-Jan-09 OAG 193 Concreting-1 2 3 2 2 2 2 0.75 1.648276 -54.50%
42 2-Mar-08 OAG 56 Concreting-2 3 2 2 2 2 2 0.28 0.179200 56.25%
38 5-Mar-08 OAG 62 Concreting-2 3 2 2 2 2 2 0.26 0.179200 45.09%
259

Parameters
% Productivity
Measured
Pleasant=3
[100 (Yi-Ŷ)] / Ŷ
Group
(T) (S) (M) (P) (C)
(G)

44 7-Sep-08 OAG 159 Concreting-2 1 3 2 2 2 2 0.28 0.179200 56.25%
52 20-Apr-08 OAG 118 Excavation 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.01 0.088217 -88.66%
78 12-Sep-08 NLB 112 Floor Tile 3 1 1 2 2 1 0.125 0.306857 -59.26%
82 30-Oct-08 BCC 2 Formwork 2 1 2 2 1 1 0.33 0.200250 -64.79%
84 27-Mar-08 JIC 8 Formwork 1 1 1 2 1 2 0.36 0.843560 -57.32%
83 12-Apr-08 JIC 47 Formwork 1 3 3 2 2 2 0.47 0.843560 -44.28%
95 24-Apr-08 NLB 2 Formwork 1 3 3 2 2 2 1.2 0.698566 71.78%
104 26-Apr-08 NLB 4 Formwork 1 3 3 2 2 2 1.05 0.698566 50.31%
109 28-Apr-08 NLB 6 Formwork 1 3 3 2 2 2 1.0938 0.698566 56.58%
107 4-May-08 NLB 9 Formwork 1 3 3 2 2 1 1.088 0.698566 55.75%
102 5-May-08 NLB 10 Formwork 1 3 3 2 2 1 1.02 0.698566 46.01%
108 11-May-08 NLB 13 Formwork 1 3 3 2 2 1 1.088 0.698566 55.75%
106 12-May-08 NLB 14 Formwork 1 3 3 2 2 1 1.066 0.698566 52.60%
94 13-May-08 NLB 15 Formwork 1 3 3 2 2 1 1.196 0.698566 71.21%
93 14-May-08 NLB 16 Formwork 1 3 3 2 2 1 1.15 0.698566 64.62%
103 18-May-08 NLB 18 Formwork 1 3 3 2 2 1 1.025 0.698566 46.73%
105 25-May-08 NLB 24 Formwork 1 3 3 2 2 1 1.063 0.698566 52.17%
101 28-May-08 NLB 27 Formwork 1 3 3 2 2 1 0.398 0.698566 -43.03%
87 29-May-08 NLB 28 Formwork 1 2 1 2 2 1 0.152 0.698566 -78.24%
86 31-May-08 NLB 29 Formwork 1 3 3 2 2 1 1.052 0.698566 50.59%
88 8-Jun-08 NLB 36 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 1 0.174 0.698566 -75.09%
99 10-Jun-08 NLB 38 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.334 0.698566 -52.19%
260

Parameters
% Productivity
Measured
Pleasant=3
[100 (Yi-Ŷ)] / Ŷ
Group
(T) (S) (M) (P) (C)
(G)
89 12-Jun-08 NLB 40 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 1 0.181 0.698566 -74.09%

85 13-Jun-08 NLB 41 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.287 0.698566 -58.92%
98 14-Jun-08 NLB 42 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.325 0.698566 -53.48%
100 15-Jun-08 NLB 43 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.346 0.698566 -50.47%
90 16-Jun-08 NLB 44 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 1 0.222 0.698566 -68.22%
92 17-Jun-08 NLB 45 Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.255 0.698566 -63.50%
96 18-Jun-08 NLB 46 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.319 0.698566 -54.34%
97 19-Jun-08 NLB 47 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 1 0.319 0.698566 -54.34%
91 21-Jun-08 NLB 48 Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.225 0.698566 -67.79%
116 4-Feb-08 OAG 2 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.22 0.383080 -42.57%
110 8-Feb-08 OAG 9 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.15 0.383080 -60.84%
117 11-Feb-08 OAG 16 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.22 0.383080 -42.57%
114 12-Feb-08 OAG 18 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.21 0.383080 -45.18%
115 13-Feb-08 OAG 20 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.21 0.383080 -45.18%
112 17-Feb-08 OAG 28 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.18 0.383080 -53.01%
111 18-Feb-08 OAG 30 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.16 0.383080 -58.23%
113 19-Feb-08 OAG 32 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.19 0.383080 -50.40%
118 20-Feb-08 OAG 34 Formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.22 0.383080 -42.57%
120 19-Mar-08 OAG 90 Formwork 1 2 1 2 2 2 0.55 0.383080 43.57%
119 6-Jul-08 OAG 141 Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.58 0.383080 51.40%
123 26-May-08 NLB 25 Plastering 1 1 2 2 1 1 0.666 0.395667 68.32%
136 28-May-08 NLB 27 Plastering 1 1 2 2 1 1 0.231 0.395667 -41.62%
122 29-May-08 NLB 28 Plastering 1 1 2 2 1 1 0.048 0.395667 -87.87%
148 14-Feb-08 JIC 2 Reinforcement 1 2 2 2 1 2 0.02 0.042125 -52.52%
144 18-May-08 JIC 55 Reinforcement 1 1 1 2 1 1 0.015 0.042125 -64.39%
151 29-Jun-08 JIC 59 Reinforcement 1 1 1 2 1 1 0.021 0.042125 -50.15%
154 12-Apr-08 NLB 1 Reinforcement 1 3 3 2 2 2 0.11 0.064636 70.18%
153 28-Apr-08 NLB 6 Reinforcement 1 3 3 2 2 2 0.109 0.064636 68.64%
155 6-May-08 NLB 11 Reinforcement 1 3 3 2 2 1 0.1 0.064636 54.71%
156 14-May-08 NLB 23 Reinforcement 1 3 3 2 2 1 0.093 0.064636 43.88%
261

Parameters
% Productivity
Measured
Pleasant=3
[100 (Yi-Ŷ)] / Ŷ
Group
(T) (S) (M) (P) (C)
(G)

191 13-Apr-08 OAG 117 Reinforcement 1 3 2 2 1 2 0.12 0.079066 51.77%
195 1-Jun-08 OAG 130 Reinforcement 1 3 2 2 1 2 0.12 0.079066 51.77%
202 6-Jul-08 OAG 140 Reinforcement 1 3 2 2 1 2 0.12 0.079066 51.77%
181 7-Sep-08 OAG 159 Reinforcement 1 3 2 2 2 2 0.13 0.079066 64.42%
220 5-Oct-08 OAG 166 Reinforcement 1 3 2 2 2 2 0.12 0.079066 51.77%
262

Parameters
% Productivity
Measured
Pleasant=3
[100 (Yi-Ŷ)] / Ŷ
Group
(T) (S) (M) (P) (C)
(G)

185 4-Jan-09 OAG 193 Reinforcement 1 3 2 2 2 2 0.13 0.079066 64.42%
233 4-Jan-09 OAG 192 Reinforcement 1 3 2 2 2 2 0.125 0.079066 58.10%
260 2-Jun-08 NLB 31 Wall Tile 1 2 1 2 2 1 0.174 0.329153 -47.14%
268 3-Jun-08 NLB 32 Wall Tile 1 1 1 2 2 1 0.194 0.329153 -41.06%
235 4-Jun-08 NLB 33 Wall Tile 1 1 1 2 1 1 0.096 0.329153 -70.83%
238 5-Jun-08 NLB 34 Wall Tile 1 1 1 2 2 1 0.112 0.329153 -65.97%
236 7-Jun-08 NLB 35 Wall Tile 1 2 1 2 2 1 0.104 0.329153 -68.40%
257 11-Jun-08 NLB 39 Wall Tile 1 1 1 2 2 1 0.162 0.329153 -50.78%
241 25-Jun-08 NLB 52 Wall Tile 1 1 1 2 2 1 0.117 0.329153 -64.45%
253 26-Jun-08 NLB 53 Wall Tile 1 1 1 2 2 1 0.136 0.329153 -58.68%
254 28-Jun-08 NLB 54 Wall Tile 1 1 1 2 2 1 0.142 0.329153 -56.86%
255 29-Jun-08 NLB 55 Wall Tile 1 1 1 2 2 1 0.142 0.329153 -56.86%
237 30-Jun-08 NLB 56 Wall Tile 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.111 0.329153 -66.28%
266 7-Jul-08 NLB 58 Wall Tile 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.188 0.329153 -42.88%
234 8-Jul-08 NLB 59 Wall Tile 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.138 0.329153 -58.07%
267 9-Jul-08 NLB 60 Wall Tile 1 1 1 2 2 1 0.19 0.329153 -42.28%
261 10-Jul-08 NLB 61 Wall Tile 1 1 1 2 2 1 0.175 0.329153 -46.83%
256 12-Jul-08 NLB 62 Wall Tile 1 1 1 2 2 1 0.155 0.329153 -52.91%
262 12-Jul-08 NLB 62 Wall Tile 1 1 1 2 2 1 0.175 0.329153 -46.83%
264 13-Jul-08 NLB 63 Wall Tile 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.186 0.329153 -43.49%
269 13-Jul-08 NLB 63 Wall Tile 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.196 0.329153 -40.45%
258 14-Jul-08 NLB 64 Wall Tile 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.162 0.329153 -50.78%
270 14-Jul-08 NLB 64 Wall Tile 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.196 0.329153 -40.45%
263 3-Aug-08 NLB 72 Wall Tile 1 1 1 2 2 1 0.182 0.329153 -44.71%
259 5-Aug-08 NLB 74 Wall Tile 1 1 1 2 2 1 0.167 0.329153 -49.26%
265 9-Aug-08 NLB 77 Wall Tile 1 1 1 2 2 1 0.186 0.329153 -43.49%
244 18-Aug-08 NLB 85 Wall Tile 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.55 0.329153 67.10%
252 20-Aug-08 NLB 87 Wall Tile 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.67 0.329153 103.55%
240 24-Aug-08 NLB 90 Wall Tile 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.114 0.329153 -65.37%
239 25-Aug-08 NLB 91 Wall Tile 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.113 0.329153 -65.67%
250 26-Aug-08 NLB 92 Wall Tile 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.59 0.329153 79.25%
251 28-Aug-08 NLB 94 Wall Tile 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.61 0.329153 85.32%
248 30-Aug-08 NLB 95 Wall Tile 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.57 0.329153 73.17%
276 31-Aug-08 NLB 96 Wall Tile 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.5 0.329153 51.91%
245 2-Sep-08 NLB 98 Wall Tile 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.56 0.329153 70.13%
274 2-Sep-08 NLB 98 Wall Tile 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.5 0.329153 51.91%
246 3-Sep-08 NLB 99 Wall Tile 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.56 0.329153 70.13%
275 3-Sep-08 NLB 99 Wall Tile 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.5 0.329153 51.91%
247 6-Sep-08 NLB 100 Wall Tile 3 2 2 2 2 1 0.56 0.329153 70.13%
278 6-Sep-08 NLB 100 Wall Tile 3 2 2 2 2 1 0.51 0.329153 54.94%
242 7-Sep-08 NLB 101 Wall Tile 3 2 2 2 2 1 0.53 0.329153 61.02%
272 7-Sep-08 NLB 101 Wall Tile 3 2 2 2 2 1 0.48 0.329153 45.83%
277 7-Sep-08 NLB 101 Wall Tile 3 2 2 2 2 1 0.5 0.329153 51.91%
243 9-Sep-08 NLB 103 Wall Tile 3 2 2 2 2 1 0.53 0.329153 61.02%
249 13-Sep-08 NLB 106 Wall Tile 3 2 2 2 2 1 0.59 0.329153 79.25%
271 14-Sep-08 NLB 107 Wall Tile 3 1 2 2 2 1 0.48 0.329153 45.83%
273 17-Sep-08 NLB 111 Wall Tile 3 2 1 2 2 1 0.5 0.329153 51.91%
263
Appendix 2
Master Field Data for Model Validation
Parameters
%
% Productivity Error
Measured Productivity
Ŷ =
Change - (PPCP -
Normally Procedure=1 Yi Predicted
No Date Site Activity 8+4=2 Good=2 Mixed=2 Normal = 2 [100 (Yi-Ŷ)] / Ŷ PPCM)
Contract=3 Excellent = 3 Skilled=3 Pleasant=3 using Model
Timings Supervision Group Material Procedure Climate

m3/hour m3/hour PPCM PPCP E
(T) (S) Dynamics (G) (M) (P) (C)
1 24-Jan-09 ARS Excavation 3 3 3 2 2 2 0.064 0.0652833 -1.97% -6.06% -4.09%

2 25-Jan-09 ARS Excavation 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.0654 0.0652833 0.18% -2.68% -2.86%
3 26-Jan-09 ARS Excavation 3 2 3 2 2 2 0.054 0.0652833 -17.28% -7.96% 9.32%
8 01-Feb-09 ARS Excavation 3 3 3 2 2 2 0.067 0.0652833 2.63% -6.06% -8.69%
11 04-Feb-09 ARS Excavation 3 2 3 2 2 2 0.0637 0.0652833 -2.43% -7.96% -5.53%
14 08-Feb-09 ARS Excavation 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.0592 0.0652833 -9.32% -2.68% 6.64%
25 21-Mar-09 ARS Excavation 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.05756 0.0652833 -11.83% -2.68% 9.15%
26 26-Mar-09 ARS Excavation 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.0874 0.0652833 33.88% -2.68% -36.56%
27 05-Apr-09 ARS Excavation 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.0526 0.0652833 -19.43% -2.68% 16.75%
28 3-Jan-09 ARS formwork 2 3 2 2 2 2 0.231 0.16494 40.05% 31.44% -8.61%
29 6-Jan-09 ARS formwork 2 3 2 2 2 2 0.230 0.16494 39.44% 31.44% -8.00%
30 7-Jan-09 ARS formwork 2 3 2 2 2 2 0.230 0.16494 39.44% 31.44% -8.00%
31 8-Jan-09 ARS formwork 2 2 3 2 2 2 0.210 0.16494 27.32% 15.48% -11.84%
32 10-Jan-09 ARS formwork 2 1 3 2 2 2 0.194 0.16494 17.62% 1.48% -16.14%
33 11-Jan-09 ARS formwork 2 2 1 2 2 2 0.207 0.16494 25.50% 19.40% -6.10%
34 12-Jan-09 ARS formwork 2 2 2 2 2 2 0.215 0.16494 30.35% 17.44% -12.91%
35 13-Jan-09 ARS formwork 2 2 1 2 2 2 0.210 0.16494 27.32% 19.40% -7.92%
36 14-Jan-09 ARS formwork 2 2 1 2 2 2 0.218 0.16494 32.17% 19.40% -12.77%
37 15-Jan-09 ARS formwork 2 2 2 2 2 2 0.210 0.16494 27.32% 17.44% -9.88%
38 17-Jan-09 ARS formwork 2 2 2 2 2 2 0.208 0.16494 26.11% 17.44% -8.67%
39 19-Jan-09 ARS formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.144 0.16494 -12.70% -16.06% -3.36%
40 20-Jan-09 ARS formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.151 0.16494 -8.45% -16.06% -7.61%
41 21-Jan-09 ARS formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.144 0.16494 -12.70% -16.06% -3.36%
42 22-Jan-09 ARS formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.149 0.16494 -9.66% -16.06% -6.40%
43 24-Jan-09 ARS formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.142 0.16494 -13.91% -16.06% -2.15%
44 25-Jan-09 ARS formwork 1 2 1 2 2 2 0.156 0.16494 -5.42% -0.10% 5.32%
45 26-Jan-09 ARS formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.148 0.16494 -10.39% -14.10% -3.71%
46 27-Jan-09 ARS formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.148 0.16494 -10.39% -14.10% -3.71%
47 28-Jan-09 ARS formwork 1 2 1 2 2 2 0.156 0.16494 -5.42% -0.10% 5.32%
48 29-Jan-09 ARS formwork 2 1 1 2 2 2 0.161 0.16494 -2.39% 5.40% 7.79%
49 31-Jan-09 ARS formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.151 0.16494 -8.45% -16.06% -7.61%
50 1-Feb-09 ARS formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.151 0.16494 -8.45% -16.06% -7.61%
51 2-Feb-09 ARS formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.147 0.16494 -10.88% -16.06% -5.18%
52 3-Feb-09 ARS formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.158 0.16494 -4.21% -2.06% 2.15%
53 4-Feb-09 ARS formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.149 0.16494 -9.66% -16.06% -6.40%
54 5-Feb-09 ARS formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.144 0.16494 -12.70% -16.06% -3.36%
55 7-Feb-09 ARS formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.140 0.16494 -15.12% -14.10% 1.02%
56 8-Feb-09 ARS formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.146 0.16494 -11.48% -16.06% -4.58%
57 9-Feb-09 ARS formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.153 0.16494 -7.24% -2.06% 5.18%
58 10-Feb-09 ARS formwork 2 1 2 2 2 2 0.168 0.16494 1.79% 3.44% 1.65%
59 10-Feb-09 ARS formwork 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.149 0.16494 -9.66% -14.10% -4.44%
60 12-Feb-09 ARS formwork 2 1 2 2 2 2 0.171 0.16494 3.67% 3.44% -0.23%
61 14-Feb-09 ARS formwork 2 1 2 2 2 2 0.175 0.16494 6.10% 3.44% -2.66%
62 15-Feb-09 ARS formwork 2 1 2 2 2 2 0.177 0.16494 7.31% 3.44% -3.87%
63 21-Feb-09 ARS formwork 2 1 2 2 2 2 0.176 0.16494 6.71% 3.44% -3.27%
64 22-Feb-09 ARS formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.150 0.16494 -9.06% -16.06% -7.00%
65 23-Feb-09 ARS formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.153 0.16494 -7.24% -16.06% -8.82%
66 24-Feb-09 ARS formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.142 0.16494 -13.91% -16.06% -2.15%
67 25-Feb-09 ARS formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.138 0.16494 -16.09% -16.06% 0.03%
68 26-Feb-09 ARS formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.153 0.16494 -7.24% -16.06% -8.82%
69 1-Mar-09 ARS formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.130 0.16494 -21.18% -16.06% 5.12%
70 2-Mar-09 ARS formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.133 0.16494 -19.36% -16.06% 3.30%
71 3-Mar-09 ARS formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.155 0.16494 -6.21% -16.06% -9.85%
264

Parameters
%
% Productivity
Measured Productivity Error
Ŷ =
Change - (PPCP -

72 4-Mar-09 ARS formwork 2 1 2 2 2 2 0.173 0.16494 4.64% 3.44% -1.20%

73 5-Mar-09 ARS formwork 2 1 2 2 2 2 0.190 0.16494 15.19% 3.44% -11.75%
74 14-Mar-09 ARS formwork 2 1 2 2 2 2 0.162 0.16494 -1.78% 3.44% 5.22%
75 15-Mar-09 ARS formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.150 0.16494 -9.06% -16.06% -7.00%
76 16-Mar-09 ARS formwork 2 1 2 2 2 2 0.175 0.16494 6.10% 3.44% -2.66%
77 17-Mar-09 ARS formwork 2 1 2 2 2 2 0.200 0.16494 21.26% 3.44% -17.82%
78 18-Mar-09 ARS formwork 2 3 2 2 2 2 0.225 0.16494 36.41% 31.44% -4.97%
79 11-Jan-09 OAG formwork 1 2 2 2 1 2 0.370 0.3830798 -3.41% -11.72% -8.31%
80 11-Jan-09 OAG formwork 1 2 2 2 1 2 0.380 0.3830798 -0.80% -11.72% -10.92%
81 18-Jan-09 OAG formwork 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.350 0.3830798 -8.64% -25.72% -17.08%
82 18-Jan-09 OAG formwork 1 1 2 2 1 2 0.360 0.3830798 -6.02% -25.72% -19.70%
83 25-Jan-09 OAG formwork 2 2 2 2 2 2 0.500 0.3830798 30.52% 17.44% -13.08%
84 25-Jan-09 OAG formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.390 0.3830798 1.81% -2.06% -3.87%
85 15-Feb-09 OAG formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.370 0.3830798 -3.41% -2.06% 1.35%
86 15-Feb-09 OAG formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.460 0.3830798 20.08% -2.06% -22.14%
87 22-Feb-09 OAG formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.330 0.3830798 -13.86% -16.06% -2.20%
88 22-Feb-09 OAG formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.480 0.3830798 25.30% -2.06% -27.36%
89 1-Mar-09 OAG formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.400 0.3830798 4.42% -2.06% -6.48%
90 1-Mar-09 OAG formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.380 0.3830798 -0.80% -2.06% -1.26%
91 8-Mar-09 OAG formwork 1 2 2 2 1 2 0.310 0.3830798 -19.08% -11.72% 7.36%
92 8-Mar-09 OAG formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.380 0.3830798 -0.80% -2.06% -1.26%
93 15-Mar-09 OAG formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.440 0.3830798 14.86% -2.06% -16.92%
94 15-Mar-09 OAG formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.460 0.3830798 20.08% -2.06% -22.14%
95 16-Mar-09 OAG formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.360 0.3830798 -6.02% -2.06% 3.96%
96 17-Mar-09 OAG formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.340 0.3830798 -11.25% -2.06% 9.19%
97 19-Mar-09 OAG formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.366 0.3830798 -4.46% -2.06% 2.40%
98 22-Mar-09 OAG formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.342 0.3830798 -10.72% -2.06% 8.66%
99 24-Mar-09 OAG formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.345 0.3830798 -9.94% -2.06% 7.88%
100 26-Mar-09 OAG formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.356 0.3830798 -7.07% -2.06% 5.01%
101 2-Apr-09 OAG formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.362 0.3830798 -5.50% -2.06% 3.44%
102 4-Apr-09 OAG formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.400 0.3830798 4.42% -2.06% -6.48%
103 6-Apr-09 OAG formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.360 0.3830798 -6.02% -2.06% 3.96%
104 7-Apr-09 OAG formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.365 0.3830798 -4.72% -2.06% 2.66%
105 8-Apr-09 OAG formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.366 0.3830798 -4.46% -2.06% 2.40%
106 10-Apr-09 OAG formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.360 0.3830798 -6.02% -2.06% 3.96%
107 12-Apr-09 OAG formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.350 0.3830798 -8.64% -2.06% 6.58%
108 15-Apr-09 OAG formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.350 0.3830798 -8.64% -2.06% 6.58%
109 17-Apr-09 OAG formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.340 0.3830798 -11.25% -2.06% 9.19%
110 19-Apr-09 OAG formwork 1 2 2 2 1 2 0.310 0.3830798 -19.08% -11.72% 7.36%
111 26-Apr-09 OAG formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.380 0.3830798 -0.80% -2.06% -1.26%
112 3-May-09 OAG formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.330 0.3830798 -13.86% -16.06% -2.20%
113 2-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.274 0.254306 7.74% -2.06% -9.80%
114 2-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.275 0.254306 8.14% -2.06% -10.20%
115 2-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.298 0.254306 17.18% -2.06% -19.24%
116 3-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.217 0.254306 -14.67% -16.06% -1.39%
117 3-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.247 0.254306 -2.87% -2.06% 0.81%
118 4-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.209 0.254306 -17.82% -16.06% 1.76%
119 4-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -16.06% -2.57%
120 4-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.283 0.254306 11.28% -2.06% -13.34%
121 5-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.210 0.254306 -17.42% -16.06% 1.36%
122 5-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -16.06% -2.57%
123 5-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.249 0.254306 -2.09% -2.06% 0.03%
124 5-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.270 0.254306 6.17% -2.06% -8.23%
125 6-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.201 0.254306 -20.96% -16.06% 4.90%
126 6-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.210 0.254306 -17.42% -16.06% 1.36%
127 6-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.210 0.254306 -17.42% -16.06% 1.36%
128 6-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -16.06% -2.57%
129 6-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.261 0.254306 2.63% -2.06% -4.69%
130 6-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.281 0.254306 10.50% -2.06% -12.56%
131 7-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.210 0.2543064 -17.42% -16.06% 1.36%
132 7-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -16.06% -2.57%
133 7-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.226 0.2543064 -11.13% -16.06% -4.93%
134 7-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.240 0.254306 -5.63% -2.06% 3.57%
135 7-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.260 0.254306 2.24% -2.06% -4.30%
136 7-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.280 0.254306 10.10% -2.06% -12.16%
137 7-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.280 0.254306 10.10% -2.06% -12.16%
138 8-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.201 0.254306 -20.96% -16.06% 4.90%
139 9-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.210 0.254306 -17.42% -16.06% 1.36%
140 9-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.210 0.254306 -17.42% -16.06% 1.36%
141 9-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.210 0.2543064 -17.42% -16.06% 1.36%
142 9-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.213 0.254306 -16.24% -16.06% 0.18%
143 9-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -2.06% 11.43%
265

Parameters
%
% Productivity
Ŷ =
Change - (PPCP -

144 9-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -2.06% 11.43%

145 9-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.227 0.254306 -10.74% -2.06% 8.68%
146 9-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.227 0.254306 -10.74% -2.06% 8.68%
147 9-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.253 0.254306 -0.51% -2.06% -1.55%
148 9-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.255 0.254306 0.27% -2.06% -2.33%
149 9-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.270 0.254306 6.17% -2.06% -8.23%
150 9-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.278 0.254306 9.32% -2.06% -11.38%
151 10-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.210 0.254306 -17.42% -2.06% 15.36%
152 10-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.210 0.254306 -17.42% -2.06% 15.36%
153 10-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.225 0.254306 -11.52% -2.06% 9.46%
154 10-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.250 0.254306 -1.69% -2.06% -0.37%
155 10-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.267 0.254306 4.99% -2.06% -7.05%
156 10-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.270 0.254306 6.17% -2.06% -8.23%
157 10-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.278 0.254306 9.32% -2.06% -11.38%
158 10-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.280 0.254306 10.10% -2.06% -12.16%
159 11-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.215 0.254306 -15.46% -16.06% -0.60%
160 11-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -16.06% -2.57%
161 11-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -16.06% -2.57%
162 11-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.235 0.254306 -7.59% -16.06% -8.47%
163 11-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.237 0.254306 -6.81% -16.06% -9.25%
164 11-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.250 0.254306 -1.69% -2.06% -0.37%
165 11-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.252 0.254306 -0.91% -2.06% -1.15%
166 11-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.252 0.254306 -0.91% -2.06% -1.15%
167 11-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.260 0.254306 2.24% -2.06% -4.30%
168 12-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.210 0.254306 -17.42% -16.06% 1.36%
169 12-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.210 0.254306 -17.42% -16.06% 1.36%
170 12-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.210 0.254306 -17.42% -16.06% 1.36%
171 12-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.213 0.254306 -16.24% -16.06% 0.18%
172 12-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -16.06% -2.57%
173 12-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.298 0.254306 17.18% -2.06% -19.24%
174 13-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.210 0.254306 -17.42% -2.06% 15.36%
175 13-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.215 0.254306 -15.46% -2.06% 13.40%
176 13-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -2.06% 11.43%
177 14-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.210 0.254306 -17.42% -2.06% 15.36%
178 14-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.210 0.254306 -17.42% -2.06% 15.36%
179 14-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.270 0.254306 6.17% -2.06% -8.23%
180 14-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.281 0.254306 10.50% -2.06% -12.56%
181 16-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.210 0.254306 -17.42% -2.06% 15.36%
182 16-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.210 0.254306 -17.42% -2.06% 15.36%
183 16-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -2.06% 11.43%
184 16-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.230 0.254306 -9.56% -2.06% 7.50%
185 16-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.240 0.254306 -5.63% -2.06% 3.57%
186 16-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.254 0.254306 -0.12% -2.06% -1.94%
187 16-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.270 0.254306 6.17% -2.06% -8.23%
188 17-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.260 0.254306 2.24% -2.06% -4.30%
189 17-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.280 0.254306 10.10% -2.06% -12.16%
190 17-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.298 0.254306 17.18% -2.06% -19.24%
191 18-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.230 0.254306 -9.56% -2.06% 7.50%
192 18-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.230 0.254306 -9.56% -2.06% 7.50%
193 18-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.240 0.254306 -5.63% -2.06% 3.57%
194 19-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.216 0.254306 -15.06% -2.06% 13.00%
195 19-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.216 0.254306 -15.06% -2.06% 13.00%
196 19-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.240 0.254306 -5.63% -2.06% 3.57%
197 19-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.250 0.254306 -1.69% -2.06% -0.37%
198 19-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.260 0.254306 2.24% -2.06% -4.30%
199 20-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.240 0.254306 -5.63% -2.06% 3.57%
200 20-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.260 0.254306 2.24% -2.06% -4.30%
201 20-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.280 0.254306 10.10% -2.06% -12.16%
202 20-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.298 0.254306 17.18% -2.06% -19.24%
203 21-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -2.06% 11.43%
204 21-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.226 0.254306 -11.13% -2.06% 9.07%
205 21-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.280 0.254306 10.10% -2.06% -12.16%
206 21-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.280 0.254306 10.10% -2.06% -12.16%
207 23-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -2.06% 11.43%
208 23-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.240 0.254306 -5.63% -2.06% 3.57%
209 23-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.260 0.254306 2.24% -2.06% -4.30%
210 23-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.282 0.254306 10.89% -2.06% -12.95%
211 23-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.292 0.254306 14.82% -2.06% -16.88%
212 24-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.210 0.254306 -17.42% -16.06% 1.36%
213 24-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.230 0.254306 -9.56% -16.06% -6.50%
214 24-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.230 0.254306 -9.56% -16.06% -6.50%
215 24-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.240 0.254306 -5.63% -2.06% 3.57%
266

Parameters
%
% Productivity
Ŷ =
Change - (PPCP -

216 24-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.251 0.254306 -1.30% -2.06% -0.76%

217 24-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.260 0.254306 2.24% -2.06% -4.30%
218 24-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.280 0.254306 10.10% -2.06% -12.16%
219 24-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.320 0.254306 25.83% -2.06% -27.89%
220 25-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -2.06% 11.43%
221 25-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -2.06% 11.43%
222 25-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.239 0.254306 -6.02% -2.06% 3.96%
223 25-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.267 0.254306 4.99% -2.06% -7.05%
224 25-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 3 2 0.326 0.254306 28.19% 7.60% -20.59%
225 26-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -2.06% 11.43%
226 26-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.256 0.254306 0.67% -2.06% -2.73%
227 26-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.260 0.254306 2.24% -2.06% -4.30%
228 26-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.260 0.254306 2.24% -2.06% -4.30%
229 26-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.270 0.254306 6.17% -2.06% -8.23%
230 26-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.275 0.254306 8.14% -2.06% -10.20%
231 26-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.280 0.254306 10.10% -2.06% -12.16%
232 26-May-09 BCC Formwork 2 2 2 2 2 2 0.326 0.254306 28.19% 17.44% -10.75%
233 27-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.210 0.254306 -17.42% -2.06% 15.36%
234 27-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.210 0.254306 -17.42% -2.06% 15.36%
235 27-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -2.06% 11.43%
236 27-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.230 0.254306 -9.56% -2.06% 7.50%
237 27-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.326 0.254306 28.19% -2.06% -30.25%
238 28-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.240 0.254306 -5.63% -2.06% 3.57%
239 28-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.250 0.254306 -1.69% -2.06% -0.37%
240 28-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.250 0.254306 -1.69% -2.06% -0.37%
241 28-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.280 0.254306 10.10% -2.06% -12.16%
242 28-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.326 0.254306 28.19% -2.06% -30.25%
243 30-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -2.63% 10.86%
244 30-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -2.63% 10.86%
245 30-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.230 0.254306 -9.56% -2.63% 6.93%
246 30-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.240 0.254306 -5.63% -2.63% 3.00%
247 30-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.250 0.254306 -1.69% -2.63% -0.94%
248 30-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.326 0.254306 28.19% -2.63% -30.82%
249 31-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.210 0.254306 -17.42% -2.63% 14.79%
250 31-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.225 0.254306 -11.52% -2.63% 8.89%
251 31-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.230 0.254306 -9.56% -2.63% 6.93%
252 31-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.252 0.254306 -0.91% -2.63% -1.72%
253 31-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.276 0.254306 8.53% -2.63% -11.16%
254 31-May-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.326 0.254306 28.19% -2.63% -30.82%
255 1-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.240 0.254306 -5.63% -2.63% 3.00%
256 1-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.240 0.254306 -5.63% -2.63% 3.00%
257 1-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.250 0.254306 -1.69% -2.63% -0.94%
258 1-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.260 0.254306 2.24% -2.63% -4.87%
259 1-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.275 0.254306 8.14% -2.63% -10.77%
260 1-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.275 0.254306 8.14% -2.63% -10.77%
261 1-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.326 0.254306 28.19% -2.63% -30.82%
262 2-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.215 0.254306 -15.46% -2.63% 12.83%
263 2-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.219 0.254306 -13.88% -2.63% 11.25%
264 2-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.240 0.254306 -5.63% -2.63% 3.00%
265 2-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.250 0.254306 -1.69% -2.63% -0.94%
266 2-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.260 0.254306 2.24% -2.63% -4.87%
267 2-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.260 0.254306 2.24% -2.63% -4.87%
268 2-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 2 2 2 2 2 1 0.326 0.254306 28.19% 16.87% -11.32%
269 3-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.210 0.254306 -17.42% -16.63% 0.79%
270 3-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.235 0.254306 -7.59% -2.63% 4.96%
271 3-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.270 0.254306 6.17% -2.63% -8.80%
272 3-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.275 0.254306 8.14% -2.63% -10.77%
273 3-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 2 2 2 2 2 1 0.326 0.254306 28.19% 16.87% -11.32%
274 4-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -2.63% 10.86%
275 4-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.235 0.254306 -7.59% -2.63% 4.96%
276 4-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.240 0.254306 -5.63% -2.63% 3.00%
277 4-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.245 0.254306 -3.66% -2.63% 1.03%
278 4-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.248 0.254306 -2.48% -2.63% -0.15%
279 4-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.260 0.254306 2.24% -2.63% -4.87%
280 4-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.270 0.254306 6.17% -2.63% -8.80%
281 4-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.275 0.254306 8.14% -2.63% -10.77%
282 4-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.326 0.254306 28.19% -2.63% -30.82%
283 6-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.230 0.254306 -9.56% -2.63% 6.93%
284 6-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.230 0.254306 -9.56% -2.63% 6.93%
285 6-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.230 0.254306 -9.56% -2.63% 6.93%
286 6-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.230 0.254306 -9.56% -2.63% 6.93%
287 6-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.260 0.254306 2.24% -2.63% -4.87%
267

Parameters
%
% Productivity
Ŷ =
Change - (PPCP -

288 6-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.326 0.254306 28.19% -2.63% -30.82%

289 7-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -2.63% 10.86%
290 7-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -2.63% 10.86%
291 7-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.225 0.254306 -11.52% -2.63% 8.89%
292 7-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.225 0.254306 -11.52% -2.63% 8.89%
293 7-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.225 0.254306 -11.52% -2.63% 8.89%
294 7-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.227 0.254306 -10.74% -2.63% 8.11%
295 7-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.278 0.254306 9.32% -2.63% -11.95%
296 7-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 2 2 2 2 2 1 0.326 0.254306 28.19% 16.87% -11.32%
297 8-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -2.63% 10.86%
298 8-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -2.63% 10.86%
299 8-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -2.63% 10.86%
300 8-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.227 0.254306 -10.74% -2.63% 8.11%
301 8-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.250 0.254306 -1.69% -2.63% -0.94%
302 8-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.250 0.254306 -1.69% -2.63% -0.94%
303 8-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.250 0.254306 -1.69% -2.63% -0.94%
304 8-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.260 0.254306 2.24% -2.63% -4.87%
305 8-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.261 0.254306 2.63% -2.63% -5.26%
306 8-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 2 2 2 2 2 1 0.326 0.254306 28.19% 16.87% -11.32%
307 9-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.257 0.254306 1.06% -2.63% -3.69%
308 9-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.260 0.254306 2.24% -2.63% -4.87%
309 9-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.270 0.254306 6.17% -2.63% -8.80%
310 9-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 2 2 2 2 2 1 0.326 0.254306 28.19% 16.87% -11.32%
311 10-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.210 0.254306 -17.42% -2.63% 14.79%
312 10-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.210 0.254306 -17.42% -2.63% 14.79%
313 10-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -2.63% 10.86%
314 10-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.230 0.254306 -9.56% -2.63% 6.93%
315 10-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.235 0.254306 -7.59% -2.63% 4.96%
316 10-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.235 0.254306 -7.59% -2.63% 4.96%
317 10-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.235 0.254306 -7.59% -2.63% 4.96%
318 10-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.250 0.254306 -1.69% -2.63% -0.94%
319 10-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.257 0.254306 1.06% -2.63% -3.69%
320 10-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.272 0.254306 6.96% -2.63% -9.59%
321 10-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 2 2 2 2 2 1 0.326 0.254306 28.19% 16.87% -11.32%
322 11-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.210 0.254306 -17.42% -16.63% 0.79%
323 11-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.210 0.254306 -17.42% -16.63% 0.79%
324 11-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.210 0.254306 -17.42% -16.63% 0.79%
325 11-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.260 0.254306 2.24% -2.63% -4.87%
326 11-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.270 0.254306 6.17% -2.63% -8.80%
327 11-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.270 0.254306 6.17% -2.63% -8.80%
328 11-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 2 2 2 2 2 1 0.326 0.254306 28.19% 16.87% -11.32%
329 13-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.215 0.254306 -15.46% -2.63% 12.83%
330 13-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.215 0.254306 -15.46% -2.63% 12.83%
331 13-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.247 0.254306 -2.87% -2.63% 0.24%
332 14-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.210 0.254306 -17.42% -2.63% 14.79%
333 14-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.246 0.254306 -3.27% -2.63% 0.64%
334 14-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.249 0.254306 -2.09% -2.63% -0.54%
335 15-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.210 0.254306 -17.42% -2.63% 14.79%
336 15-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.230 0.254306 -9.56% -2.63% 6.93%
337 15-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.230 0.254306 -9.56% -2.63% 6.93%
338 15-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.230 0.254306 -9.56% -2.63% 6.93%
339 15-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.238 0.254306 -6.41% -2.63% 3.78%
340 15-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 2 2 2 2 2 1 0.320 0.254306 25.83% 16.87% -8.96%
341 16-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.210 0.254306 -17.42% -2.63% 14.79%
342 16-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -2.63% 10.86%
343 16-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 3 2 2 2 1 0.232 0.254306 -8.77% 11.37% 20.14%
344 16-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 3 2 2 2 1 0.239 0.254306 -6.02% 11.37% 17.39%
345 16-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 3 2 2 2 1 0.250 0.254306 -1.69% 11.37% 13.06%
346 16-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 3 2 2 2 1 0.250 0.254306 -1.69% 11.37% 13.06%
347 16-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 3 2 2 2 1 0.250 0.254306 -1.69% 11.37% 13.06%
348 16-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 2 2 2 2 2 1 0.260 0.254306 2.24% 16.87% 14.63%
349 16-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 2 2 2 2 2 1 0.270 0.254306 6.17% 16.87% 10.70%
350 17-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.230 0.254306 -9.56% -2.63% 6.93%
351 17-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.230 0.254306 -9.56% -2.63% 6.93%
352 17-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.230 0.254306 -9.56% -2.63% 6.93%
353 17-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.239 0.254306 -6.02% -2.63% 3.39%
354 17-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.240 0.254306 -5.63% -2.63% 3.00%
355 17-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.250 0.254306 -1.69% -2.63% -0.94%
356 17-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.250 0.254306 -1.69% -2.63% -0.94%
357 18-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.210 0.254306 -17.42% -2.63% 14.79%
358 18-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.214 0.254306 -15.85% -2.63% 13.22%
359 18-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.217 0.254306 -14.67% -2.63% 12.04%
268

Parameters
%
% Productivity
Ŷ =
Change - (PPCP -

360 18-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -2.63% 10.86%

361 18-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.230 0.254306 -9.56% -2.63% 6.93%
362 18-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.240 0.254306 -5.63% -2.63% 3.00%
363 18-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.240 0.254306 -5.63% -2.63% 3.00%
364 18-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 2 2 2 2 2 1 0.247 0.254306 -2.87% 16.87% 19.74%
365 18-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.255 0.254306 0.27% -2.63% -2.90%
366 18-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 2 2 2 2 2 1 0.260 0.254306 2.24% 16.87% 14.63%
367 18-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.270 0.254306 6.17% -2.63% -8.80%
368 18-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.270 0.254306 6.17% -2.63% -8.80%
369 18-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.298 0.254306 17.18% -2.63% -19.81%
370 18-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.298 0.254306 17.18% -2.63% -19.81%
371 18-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.298 0.254306 17.18% -2.63% -19.81%
372 18-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.292 0.254306 14.82% -2.63% -17.45%
373 18-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.292 0.254306 14.82% -2.63% -17.45%
374 20-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.230 0.254306 -9.56% -2.63% 6.93%
375 20-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.240 0.254306 -5.63% -2.63% 3.00%
376 21-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.229 0.254306 -9.95% -2.63% 7.32%
377 23-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.250 0.254306 -1.69% -2.63% -0.94%
378 24-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 2 2 2 2 2 1 0.273 0.254306 7.35% 16.87% 9.52%
379 24-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 2 2 2 2 2 1 0.290 0.254306 14.04% 16.87% 2.83%
380 24-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 3 2 2 2 1 0.300 0.254306 17.97% 11.37% -6.60%
381 25-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.210 0.254306 -17.42% -16.63% 0.79%
382 25-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.210 0.254306 -17.42% -16.63% 0.79%
383 25-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.219 0.254306 -13.88% -16.63% -2.75%
384 25-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -16.63% -3.14%
385 25-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -16.63% -3.14%
386 25-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -16.63% -3.14%
387 25-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -16.63% -3.14%
388 25-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -16.63% -3.14%
389 25-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.227 0.254306 -10.74% -16.63% -5.89%
390 25-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.230 0.254306 -9.56% -16.63% -7.07%
391 25-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.230 0.254306 -9.56% -16.63% -7.07%
392 25-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.230 0.254306 -9.56% -16.63% -7.07%
393 25-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.233 0.254306 -8.38% -16.63% -8.25%
394 25-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.238 0.254306 -6.41% -16.63% -10.22%
395 25-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.260 0.254306 2.24% -2.63% -4.87%
396 25-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 3 2 2 2 1 0.300 0.254306 17.97% 11.37% -6.60%
397 25-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 3 2 2 2 1 0.300 0.254306 17.97% 11.37% -6.60%
398 27-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.250 0.254306 -1.69% -2.63% -0.94%
399 28-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -16.63% -3.14%
400 29-Jun-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -16.63% -3.14%
401 1-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.225 0.254306 -11.52% -2.63% 8.89%
402 1-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.290 0.254306 14.04% -2.63% -16.67%
403 1-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 2 2 2 2 2 1 0.300 0.254306 17.97% 16.87% -1.10%
404 2-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.210 0.254306 -17.42% -2.63% 14.79%
405 2-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.210 0.254306 -17.42% -16.63% 0.79%
406 2-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.210 0.254306 -17.42% -16.63% 0.79%
407 2-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.210 0.254306 -17.42% -2.63% 14.79%
408 2-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.210 0.254306 -17.42% -2.63% 14.79%
409 2-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.210 0.254306 -17.42% -2.63% 14.79%
410 2-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -2.63% 10.86%
411 2-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -16.63% -3.14%
412 2-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -2.63% 10.86%
413 2-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -2.63% 10.86%
414 2-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -2.63% 10.86%
415 2-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -2.63% 10.86%
416 2-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.227 0.254306 -10.74% -2.63% 8.11%
417 2-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.230 0.254306 -9.56% -16.63% -7.07%
418 2-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.230 0.254306 -9.56% -16.63% -7.07%
419 2-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.230 0.254306 -9.56% -16.63% -7.07%
420 2-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.233 0.254306 -8.38% -16.63% -8.25%
421 2-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.240 0.254306 -5.63% -2.63% 3.00%
422 2-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.240 0.254306 -5.63% -2.63% 3.00%
423 2-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.250 0.254306 -1.69% -2.63% -0.94%
424 2-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.250 0.254306 -1.69% -2.63% -0.94%
425 2-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.250 0.254306 -1.69% -2.63% -0.94%
426 2-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.250 0.254306 -1.69% -2.63% -0.94%
427 2-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.260 0.254306 2.24% -2.63% -4.87%
428 2-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.260 0.254306 2.24% -2.63% -4.87%
429 2-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.260 0.254306 2.24% -2.63% -4.87%
430 2-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.260 0.254306 2.24% -2.63% -4.87%
431 2-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.260 0.254306 2.24% -2.63% -4.87%
269

Parameters
%
% Productivity
Ŷ =
Change - (PPCP -

432 2-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.260 0.254306 2.24% -2.63% -4.87%

433 2-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.265 0.254306 4.21% -2.63% -6.84%
434 2-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.270 0.254306 6.17% -2.63% -8.80%
435 2-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.270 0.254306 6.17% -2.63% -8.80%
436 2-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.270 0.254306 6.17% -2.63% -8.80%
437 2-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.270 0.254306 6.17% -2.63% -8.80%
438 2-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 2 2 2 2 2 1 0.280 0.254306 10.10% 16.87% 6.77%
439 2-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 2 2 2 2 2 1 0.380 0.254306 49.43% 16.87% -32.56%
440 4-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -16.63% -3.14%
441 4-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.250 0.254306 -1.69% -2.63% -0.94%
442 4-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.260 0.254306 2.24% -2.63% -4.87%
443 4-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.275 0.254306 8.14% -2.63% -10.77%
444 4-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 2 2 2 2 2 1 0.310 0.254306 21.90% 16.87% -5.03%
445 4-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.292 0.254306 14.82% -2.63% -17.45%
446 4-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.385 0.254306 51.39% -2.63% -54.02%
447 5-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.210 0.254306 -17.42% -2.63% 14.79%
448 5-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.240 0.254306 -5.63% -2.63% 3.00%
449 5-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.250 0.254306 -1.69% -2.63% -0.94%
450 5-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.250 0.254306 -1.69% -2.63% -0.94%
451 5-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.260 0.254306 2.24% -2.63% -4.87%
452 5-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.300 0.254306 17.97% -2.63% -20.60%
453 5-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.298 0.254306 17.18% -2.63% -19.81%
454 5-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.292 0.254306 14.82% -2.63% -17.45%
455 5-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.292 0.254306 14.82% -2.63% -17.45%
456 6-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.225 0.254306 -11.52% -2.63% 8.89%
457 6-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.240 0.254306 -5.63% -2.63% 3.00%
458 6-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.241 0.254306 -5.23% -2.63% 2.60%
459 6-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.259 0.254306 1.85% -2.63% -4.48%
460 6-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.260 0.254306 2.24% -2.63% -4.87%
461 6-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.260 0.254306 2.24% -2.63% -4.87%
462 6-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.300 0.254306 17.97% -2.63% -20.60%
463 6-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.298 0.254306 17.18% -2.63% -19.81%
464 6-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.292 0.254306 14.82% -2.63% -17.45%
465 6-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.292 0.254306 14.82% -2.63% -17.45%
466 7-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -2.63% 10.86%
467 7-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.230 0.254306 -9.56% -2.63% 6.93%
468 7-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.235 0.254306 -7.59% -2.63% 4.96%
469 7-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.260 0.254306 2.24% -2.63% -4.87%
470 7-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.292 0.254306 14.82% -2.63% -17.45%
471 7-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.292 0.254306 14.82% -2.63% -17.45%
472 7-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 2 2 2 2 2 1 0.385 0.254306 51.39% 16.87% -34.52%
473 7-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 2 2 2 2 2 1 0.385 0.254306 51.39% 16.87% -34.52%
474 8-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.230 0.254306 -9.56% -2.63% 6.93%
475 8-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.245 0.254306 -3.66% -2.63% 1.03%
476 8-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.292 0.254306 14.82% -2.63% -17.45%
477 8-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 2 2 2 2 2 1 0.385 0.254306 51.39% 16.87% -34.52%
478 8-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 2 2 2 2 2 1 0.385 0.254306 51.39% 16.87% -34.52%
479 9-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -2.63% 10.86%
480 9-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -2.63% 10.86%
481 9-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.220 0.254306 -13.49% -2.63% 10.86%
482 9-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.230 0.254306 -9.56% -16.63% -7.07%
483 9-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.230 0.254306 -9.56% -2.63% 6.93%
484 9-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.240 0.254306 -5.63% -2.63% 3.00%
485 9-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.240 0.254306 -5.63% -2.63% 3.00%
486 9-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.240 0.254306 -5.63% -2.63% 3.00%
487 9-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.240 0.254306 -5.63% -2.63% 3.00%
488 9-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.240 0.254306 -5.63% -2.63% 3.00%
489 9-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.250 0.254306 -1.69% -2.63% -0.94%
490 9-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.250 0.254306 -1.69% -2.63% -0.94%
491 9-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.250 0.254306 -1.69% -2.63% -0.94%
492 9-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.260 0.254306 2.24% -2.63% -4.87%
493 9-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.260 0.254306 2.24% -2.63% -4.87%
494 9-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.270 0.254306 6.17% -2.63% -8.80%
495 9-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.298 0.254306 17.18% -2.63% -19.81%
496 9-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.298 0.254306 17.18% -2.63% -19.81%
497 9-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.298 0.254306 17.18% -2.63% -19.81%
498 9-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.298 0.254306 17.18% -2.63% -19.81%
499 9-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.298 0.254306 17.18% -2.63% -19.81%
500 9-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.298 0.254306 17.18% -2.63% -19.81%
501 9-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.292 0.254306 14.82% -2.63% -17.45%
502 9-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 2 2 2 2 2 1 0.385 0.254306 51.39% 16.87% -34.52%
503 9-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 2 2 2 2 2 1 0.385 0.254306 51.39% 16.87% -34.52%
270

Parameters
%
% Productivity
Ŷ =
Change - (PPCP -

504 11-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 2 2 2 2 2 1 0.360 0.254306 41.56% 16.87% -24.69%

505 11-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 2 2 3 2 2 1 0.360 0.254306 41.56% 14.91% -26.65%
506 11-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.292 0.254306 14.82% -2.63% -17.45%
507 11-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.326 0.254306 28.19% -2.63% -30.82%
508 11-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.385 0.254306 51.39% -2.63% -54.02%
509 12-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.296 0.254306 16.40% -2.63% -19.03%
510 13-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 3 2 2 1 0.253 0.254306 -0.51% -4.59% -4.08%
511 13-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.296 0.254306 16.40% -2.63% -19.03%
512 13-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.360 0.254306 41.56% -2.63% -44.19%
513 13-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 3 2 2 1 0.380 0.254306 49.43% -4.59% -54.02%
514 14-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 3 2 2 1 0.298 0.254306 17.18% -4.59% -21.77%
515 14-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.298 0.254306 17.18% -2.63% -19.81%
516 14-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.298 0.254306 17.18% -2.63% -19.81%
517 15-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.340 0.254306 33.70% -2.63% -36.33%
518 15-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 2 3 2 2 1 0.298 0.254306 17.18% -4.59% -21.77%
519 16-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 2 1 2 2 2 1 0.265 0.254306 4.21% 2.87% -1.34%
520 16-Jul-09 BCC Formwork 1 3 2 2 2 1 0.287 0.254306 12.86% 11.37% -1.49%
521 11-Jan-09 OAG Reinforcement 2 2 1 2 3 3 0.11 0.0640 71.88% -6.20% -78.08%
527 15-Feb-09 OAG Reinforcement 2 3 2 2 3 3 0.114 0.0640 78.13% 14.14% -63.99%
528 15-Feb-09 OAG Reinforcement 2 2 2 2 3 3 0.1 0.0640 56.25% -10.06% -66.31%
531 1-Mar-09 OAG Reinforcement 2 2 2 2 3 2 0.092 0.0640 43.75% -5.07% -48.82%
532 1-Mar-09 OAG Reinforcement 2 2 2 2 3 2 0.112 0.0640 75.00% -5.07% -80.07%
533 8-Mar-09 OAG Reinforcement 2 3 2 2 3 2 0.113 0.0640 76.56% 19.13% -57.43%
537 5-Apr-09 OAG Reinforcement 2 3 2 2 3 2 0.11 0.0640 71.88% 19.13% -52.75%
542 26-Apr-09 OAG Reinforcement 2 2 2 2 3 2 0.112 0.0640 75.00% -5.07% -80.07%
544 3-May-09 OAG Reinforcement 2 3 2 2 3 2 0.11 0.0640 71.88% 19.13% -52.75%
546 9-May-09 OAG Reinforcement 2 2 2 2 3 2 0.11 0.0640 71.88% -5.07% -76.95%
553 7-Jun-09 OAG Reinforcement 2 2 2 2 3 1 0.112 0.0640 75.00% -0.08% -75.08%
554 7-Jun-09 OAG Reinforcement 1 3 2 2 3 1 0.11 0.0640 71.88% 9.12% -62.76%
562 2-Jul-09 OAG Reinforcement 2 3 2 2 3 1 0.13 0.0640 103.13% 24.12% -79.01%
572 2-Aug-09 OAG Reinforcement 2 3 2 2 3 1 0.13 0.0640 103.13% 24.12% -79.01%
575 8-Jan-09 ARS Reinforcement 1 2 2 2 3 3 0.0194 0.0640 -69.69% -25.06% 44.63%
271

Parameters
%
% Productivity
Ŷ =
Change - (PPCP -


594 1-Feb-09 ARS Reinforcement 2 2 2 2 3 3 0.0240 0.0640 -62.50% -10.06% 52.44%
604 11-Feb-09 ARS Reinforcement 3 2 3 2 3 2 0.0250 0.0640 -60.94% 6.07% 67.01%
611 22-Mar-09 ARS Reinforcement 2 3 3 2 3 2 0.0320 0.0640 -50.00% 15.27% 65.27%
614 29-Mar-09 ARS Reinforcement 2 2 2 2 3 2 0.0270 0.0640 -57.81% -5.07% 52.74%
617 1-Apr-09 ARS Reinforcement 3 2 3 2 3 2 0.0310 0.0640 -51.56% 6.07% 57.63%
618 2-Apr-09 ARS Reinforcement 2 2 2 2 3 2 0.0284 0.0640 -55.63% -5.07% 50.56%
642 2-May-09 ARS Reinforcement 1 2 2 2 3 2 0.0210 0.0640 -67.19% -20.07% 47.12%
272

Parameters
%
% Productivity
Ŷ =
Change - (PPCP -


650 12-May-09 ARS Reinforcement 2 3 3 2 3 2 0.0300 0.0640 -53.13% 15.27% 68.40%
666 14-Jun-09 ARS Reinforcement 1 2 2 2 3 2 0.0200 0.0640 -68.75% -20.07% 48.68%
667 3-Jan-09 BCC Reinforcement 2 3 2 2 2 2 0.0390 0.03148 23.90% 16.12% -7.78%
671 3-Jan-09 BCC Reinforcement 2 3 2 2 2 2 0.0350 0.03148 11.19% 16.12% 4.93%
675 21-Mar-09 BCC Reinforcement 2 2 2 2 2 2 0.0310 0.03148 -1.52% -8.08% -6.56%
677 21-Mar-09 BCC Reinforcement 2 2 2 2 2 2 0.0240 0.03148 -23.76% -8.08% 15.68%
685 23-Mar-09 BCC Reinforcement 3 2 2 2 2 2 0.0340 0.03148 8.01% 6.92% -1.09%
703 28-Mar-09 BCC Reinforcement 3 3 2 2 2 2 0.0340 0.03148 8.01% 31.12% 23.11%
718 1-Apr-09 BCC Reinforcement 2 3 2 2 2 2 0.0340 0.03148 8.01% 16.12% 8.11%
719 1-Apr-09 BCC Reinforcement 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.0260 0.03148 -17.40% -23.08% -5.68%
273

Parameters
%
% Productivity
Ŷ =
Change - (PPCP -


728 4-Apr-09 BCC Reinforcement 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.0230 0.03148 -26.93% -23.08% 3.85%
729 5-Apr-09 BCC Reinforcement 3 2 2 2 2 2 0.0375 0.03148 19.13% 6.92% -12.21%
741 13-Apr-09 BCC Reinforcement 2 2 2 2 2 2 0.0320 0.03148 1.66% -8.08% -9.74%
274

Parameters
%
% Productivity
Ŷ =
Change - (PPCP -


794 3-May-09 BCC Reinforcement 3 2 2 2 2 2 0.0344 0.03148 9.28% 6.92% -2.36%
795 4-May-09 BCC Reinforcement 2 3 2 2 2 2 0.0340 0.03148 8.01% 16.12% 8.11%
800 9-May-09 BCC Reinforcement 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.0260 0.03148 -17.40% -23.08% -5.68%
811 18-May-09 BCC Reinforcement 2 2 2 2 2 2 0.0310 0.03148 -1.52% -8.08% -6.56%
821 23-May-09 BCC Reinforcement 2 2 2 2 2 2 0.0320 0.03148 1.66% -8.08% -9.74%
850 1-Jun-09 BCC Reinforcement 2 2 1 2 2 2 0.0340 0.03148 8.01% -4.22% -12.23%
851 1-Jun-09 BCC Reinforcement 2 2 1 2 2 2 0.0310 0.03148 -1.52% -4.22% -2.70%
275

Parameters
%
% Productivity
Ŷ =
Change - (PPCP -


890 13-Jun-09 BCC Reinforcement 2 3 2 2 2 2 0.0344 0.03148 9.28% 16.12% 6.84%
904 21-Jun-09 BCC Reinforcement 3 2 2 2 2 2 0.0344 0.03148 9.28% 6.92% -2.36%
921 1-Jul-09 BCC Reinforcement 2 3 2 2 2 2 0.0344 0.03148 9.28% 16.12% 6.84%
925 4-Jul-09 BCC Reinforcement 3 2 2 2 2 2 0.0344 0.03148 9.28% 6.92% -2.36%
926 4-Jul-09 BCC Reinforcement 3 2 2 2 2 2 0.0344 0.03148 9.28% 6.92% -2.36%
927 4-Jul-09 BCC Reinforcement 2 2 2 2 2 2 0.0310 0.03148 -1.52% -8.08% -6.56%
933 5-Jul-09 BCC Reinforcement 1 3 2 2 2 2 0.0260 0.03148 -17.40% 1.12% 18.52%
276

Parameters
%
% Productivity
Ŷ =
Change - (PPCP -


949 9-Jul-09 BCC Reinforcement 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.0240 0.03148 -23.76% -23.08% 0.68%
967 9-Jul-09 BCC Reinforcement 1 3 2 2 2 2 0.0260 0.03148 -17.40% 1.12% 18.52%
973 1-Apr-09 BCC Concreting 1 2 1 2 2 2 0.4419 0.441972671 -0.02% 10.02% 10.04%
974 1-Apr-09 BCC Concreting 1 2 1 2 2 2 0.5015 0.441972671 13.46% 10.02% -3.44%
977 4-Apr-09 BCC Concreting 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.3452 0.441972671 -21.89% -4.28% 17.61%
990 13-Apr-09 BCC Concreting 1 2 1 2 2 2 0.4515 0.441972671 2.16% 10.02% 7.86%
277

Parameters
%
% Productivity
Ŷ =
Change - (PPCP -


1049 2-May-09 BCC Concreting 1 1 1 2 2 2 0.3560 0.441972671 -19.45% -4.28% 15.17%
1050 2-May-09 BCC Concreting 1 2 1 2 2 2 0.4842 0.441972671 9.55% 10.02% 0.47%
1051 2-May-09 BCC Concreting 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.5572 0.441972671 26.07% 15.16% -10.91%
1058 4-May-09 BCC Concreting 1 2 1 2 2 2 0.4323 0.441972671 -2.19% 10.02% 12.21%
278

Parameters
%
% Productivity
Ŷ =
Change - (PPCP -


1119 1-Jun-09 BCC Concreting 3 2 1 2 2 1 0.5668 0.441972671 28.24% 20.79% -7.45%
1125 4-Jun-09 BCC Concreting 2 3 2 2 2 1 0.5745 0.441972671 29.98% 32.90% 2.92%
1126 6-Jun-09 BCC Concreting 1 1 1 2 2 1 0.3452 0.441972671 -21.89% -8.17% 13.72%
1146 29-Jun-09 BCC Concreting 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.3355 0.441972671 -24.09% -3.03% 21.06%
1149 1-Jul-09 BCC Concreting 2 3 3 2 2 1 0.5956 0.441972671 34.76% 38.04% 3.28%
1150 2-Jul-09 BCC Concreting 3 2 2 2 2 1 0.5860 0.441972671 32.59% 25.93% -6.66%
279

Parameters
%
% Productivity
Ŷ =
Change - (PPCP -

1152 5-Jul-09 BCC Concreting 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.4323 0.441972671 -2.19% 11.27% 13.46%

1164 3-Jan-09 BCC Blockwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.450 0.45464597 -1.02% 2.3% 3.30%
1165 21-Mar-09 BCC Blockwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.330 0.45464597 -27.42% 2.3% 29.70%
1169 24-Mar-09 BCC Blockwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.366 0.45464597 -19.50% -11.8% 7.68%
1185 1-Apr-09 BCC Blockwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.342 0.45464597 -24.78% -11.8% 12.96%
1187 1-Apr-09 BCC Blockwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.395 0.45464597 -13.13% 2.3% 15.41%
1188 1-Apr-09 BCC Blockwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.526 0.45464597 15.61% 2.3% -13.33%
1196 5-Apr-09 BCC Blockwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.460 0.45464597 1.16% 2.3% 1.12%
280

Parameters
%
% Productivity
Ŷ =
Change - (PPCP -


1246 2-May-09 BCC Blockwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.387 0.45464597 -14.90% 2.3% 17.18%
1248 2-May-09 BCC Blockwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.460 0.45464597 1.16% 2.3% 1.12%
1251 3-May-09 BCC Blockwork 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.497 0.45464597 9.34% 2.3% -7.06%
1256 5-May-09 BCC Blockwork 1 1 2 2 2 2 0.360 0.45464597 -20.82% -11.8% 9.00%
281

Parameters
%
% Productivity
Ŷ =
Change - (PPCP -


1332 28-May-09 BCC Blockwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.450 0.45464597 -0.93% -2.2% -1.23%
1337 30-May-09 BCC Blockwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.548 0.45464597 20.42% -2.2% -22.58%
1342 1-Jun-09 BCC Blockwork 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.360 0.45464597 -20.82% -16.3% 4.56%
1343 1-Jun-09 BCC Blockwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.517 0.45464597 13.68% -2.2% -15.84%
1355 4-Jun-09 BCC Blockwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.445 0.45464597 -2.06% -2.2% -0.10%
282

Parameters
%
% Productivity
Ŷ =
Change - (PPCP -


1385 14-Jun-09 BCC Blockwork 2 1 2 2 2 2 0.440 0.45464597 -3.22% 2.0% 5.20%
1387 14-Jun-09 BCC Blockwork 2 1 2 2 2 2 0.522 0.45464597 14.80% 2.0% -12.82%
1389 15-Jun-09 BCC Blockwork 2 2 2 2 2 2 0.494 0.45464597 8.66% 16.1% 7.42%
283

Parameters
%
% Productivity
Ŷ =
Change - (PPCP -


1463 1-Jul-09 BCC Blockwork 2 1 2 2 2 2 0.345 0.45464597 -24.12% 2.0% 26.10%
1464 1-Jul-09 BCC Blockwork 2 1 2 2 2 1 0.410 0.45464597 -9.92% -2.5% 7.46%
1472 2-Jul-09 BCC Blockwork 2 2 2 2 2 1 0.464 0.45464597 2.06% 11.6% 9.58%
1473 2-Jul-09 BCC Blockwork 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.480 0.45464597 5.58% -2.2% -7.74%
1475 2-Jul-09 BCC Blockwork 2 1 2 2 2 1 0.445 0.45464597 -2.06% -2.5% -0.40%
1492 7-Jul-09 BCC Blockwork 2 2 2 2 2 1 0.516 0.45464597 13.52% 11.6% -1.88%
1511 19-May-09 ARS Plastering 2 3 3 2 2 2 0.42100 0.35178 19.68% 11.91% -7.77%
284

Parameters
%
% Productivity
Ŷ =
Change - (PPCP -


1516 25-May-09 ARS Plastering 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.34648 0.35178 -1.51% -8.36% -6.85%
1517 7-Jun-09 ARS Plastering 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.36018 0.35178 2.39% -8.36% -10.75%
1518 8-Jun-09 ARS Plastering 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.34256 0.35178 -2.62% -11.64% -9.02%
1519 8-Jun-09 ARS Plastering 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.38367 0.35178 9.06% -8.36% -17.42%
1521 10-Jun-09 ARS Plastering 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.28580 0.35178 -18.76% -11.64% 7.12%
1531 22-Jun-09 ARS Plastering 2 2 2 2 2 2 0.38759 0.35178 10.18% 15.84% 5.66%
1539 1-Jul-09 ARS Plastering 2 2 2 2 2 1 0.38367 0.35178 9.06% 12.56% 3.50%
1540 4-Jul-09 ARS Plastering 2 2 2 2 2 1 0.39933 0.35178 13.52% 12.56% -0.96%
1542 6-Jul-09 ARS Plastering 2 3 3 2 2 1 0.32886 0.35178 -6.52% 8.63% 15.15%
1543 7-Jul-09 ARS Plastering 2 2 2 2 2 1 0.41015 0.35178 16.59% 12.56% -4.03%
1545 9-Jul-09 ARS Plastering 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.35086 0.35178 -0.26% -11.64% -11.38%
1547 12-Jul-09 ARS Plastering 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.35552 0.35178 1.06% -11.64% -12.70%
1549 14-Jul-09 ARS Plastering 1 2 2 2 2 1 0.29901 0.35178 -15.00% -11.64% 3.36%
1551 16-Jul-09 ARS Plastering 1 1 2 2 2 1 0.28932 0.35178 -17.76% -11.15% 6.61%
1552 17-Dec-08 JIC Tiling 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.198885 0.1938 2.62% 5.76% 3.14%
1553 3-Jan-09 JIC Tiling 2 2 3 2 2 2 0.223258 0.1938 15.20% 15.04% -0.16%
1554 5-Jan-09 JIC Tiling 2 2 3 2 2 2 0.253481 0.1938 30.80% 15.04% -15.76%
1555 7-Jan-09 JIC Tiling 2 2 3 2 2 2 0.245681 0.1938 26.77% 15.04% -11.73%
1556 8-Jan-09 JIC Tiling 2 2 3 2 2 2 0.239832 0.1938 23.75% 15.04% -8.71%
1557 8-Jan-09 JIC Tiling 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.190111 0.1938 -1.90% 5.76% 7.66%
1558 10-Jan-09 JIC Tiling 2 2 3 2 2 2 0.224233 0.1938 15.70% 15.04% -0.66%
1559 11-Jan-09 JIC Tiling 1 2 3 2 2 2 0.208634 0.1938 7.65% 14.54% 6.89%
1560 12-Jan-09 JIC Tiling 2 2 3 2 2 2 0.229108 0.1938 18.22% 15.04% -3.18%
1561 14-Jan-09 JIC Tiling 1 2 3 2 2 2 0.207659 0.1938 7.15% 14.54% 7.39%
1562 15-Jan-09 JIC Tiling 2 2 3 2 2 2 0.238857 0.1938 23.25% 15.04% -8.21%
1563 17-Jan-09 JIC Tiling 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.177437 0.1938 -8.44% 5.76% 14.20%
1564 18-Jan-09 JIC Tiling 1 2 3 2 2 2 0.212534 0.1938 9.67% 14.54% 4.87%
1565 19-Jan-09 JIC Tiling 2 2 3 2 2 2 0.228133 0.1938 17.72% 15.04% -2.68%
1566 20-Jan-09 JIC Tiling 2 2 3 2 2 2 0.230083 0.1938 18.72% 15.04% -3.68%
1567 14-Feb-09 JIC Tiling 2 2 3 2 2 2 0.234957 0.1938 21.24% 15.04% -6.20%
1568 21-Feb-09 JIC Tiling 2 2 3 2 2 2 0.220333 0.1938 13.69% 15.04% 1.35%
1569 25-Feb-09 JIC Tiling 1 2 2 2 2 2 0.20571 0.1938 6.15% 5.76% -0.39%
1570 28-Feb-09 JIC Tiling 2 2 3 2 2 2 0.229108 0.1938 18.22% 15.04% -3.18%
1571 4-Mar-09 JIC Tiling 2 2 3 2 2 2 0.226183 0.1938 16.71% 15.04% -1.67%
1572 8-Mar-09 JIC Tiling 1 2 3 2 2 2 0.20571 0.1938 6.15% 14.54% 8.39%
1573 11-Mar-09 JIC Tiling 2 2 3 2 2 2 0.236907 0.1938 22.24% 15.04% -7.20%
1574 16-Mar-09 JIC Tiling 1 2 3 2 2 2 0.209609 0.1938 8.16% 14.54% 6.38%
1575 19-Mar-09 JIC Tiling 2 2 3 2 2 2 0.226183 0.1938 16.71% 15.04% -1.67%
1576 23-Mar-09 JIC Tiling 1 2 3 2 2 2 0.209609 0.1938 8.16% 14.54% 6.38%
1577 26-Mar-09 JIC Tiling 2 2 3 2 2 2 0.226183 0.1938 16.71% 15.04% -1.67%
1578 30-Mar-09 JIC Tiling 2 2 3 2 2 2 0.233982 0.1938 20.73% 15.04% -5.69%
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Appendix 4-0
Summary of Productivity Models for all trades
Factors Affecting Productivity and their contribution

Total 2
R Timing Supervision Group Procedures Climate
Activity Iterations Data Final Regression Model having best R2 value
% s (S) Dynamics (P) (C)
Sets
(T) (G)
Excavation 4 104 93.4 -0.0024+0.0806T+0.0190S-0.233G-0.157P+0.328C 8.06% 1.90% -23.30% -15.70% 32.80%
Formwork 8 228 75 -0.661+0.195T+0.140S- 0.0196G+0.0966P+0.0057C 19.50% 14.00% -1.96% 9.66% 0.57%
Reinforce-
9 134 73.8 - 0.748+0.150T+0.242S-0.0386G+0.0301P-0.0499C 15.00% 24.20% -3.86% 3.01% -4.99%
ment
Concreting 5 119 78.5 -0.0283+0.0733T+0.143S+0.0514G-0.180P+0.0389C 7.33% 14.30% 5.14% -18.00% 3.89%
Block work 7 90 82.9 -0.480+0.138T+0.141S-0.128G+0.125P+0.0444C 13.80% 14.10% -12.80% 12.50% 4.44%
Plastering 4 80 92.6 -0.203+0.242T-0.0049S-0.0344G-0.0548P+0.0328C 24.20% -0.49% -3.44% -5.48% 3.28%
Tiling
7 57 83.1 +0.073+0.0050T+0.354S+0.0878G-0.282P-0.170C 0.50% 35.40% 8.78% -28.20% -17.00%
295
Appendix 4-1a
Summary Table : Excavation Productivity Model
Excavation Unit = m3/man hour

Number of Sites = 2
R2 value in last iteration to accept model = 93.4%

PPCP = - 0.0024 + 0.0806T + 0.0190S - 0.233G - 0.157P + 0.328C
Attachments :-
Appendix 4-1b : Iteration Summary : Excavation Productivity Model
Appendix 4-1c : Field Data Collection – Excavation
Appendix 4-1d : Residual Graphs & Minitab Session Printouts for
Iterations 1-4 : Excavation Productivity Models
296
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Appendix 4-1b
Iteration Summary : Excavation Productivity Model
Lack of Fit Test *

Durbin
Data R2 2
Set %
Statistic Curvature Interaction value
1 104 33.4 - 2.05619 G, C S p=0.012
2 95 60.5 - 1.50850 T, S, G, P, C G p=0.00

Excavation
No evidence
3 87 81.6 - 1.11372 - -
(p>=0.1)
4 77 93.4 -0.0024+0.0806T+0.0190S-0.233G-0.157P+0.328C 1.69130 - - p= 0.000
* Legend : Work Timings = T, Level of Supervision = S, Group Dynamics = G, Control by Procedure = P, Availability of Material = M, Climate = C
297
Appendix 4-1c
Residual Graphs and Minitab Session Printouts
Iteration 4 : Excavation
Residual Plots for % Productivity- Excavation : Iteration 4

99.9
99
2
90
Percent
50
0
10 -2
1
0.1 -4
-4 -2 0 2 4 -0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2

45
2
Frequency
30
0
15
-2
0 -4
-3.2 -1.6 0.0 1.6 3.2 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75
Session 4 - Printout from MINITAB 15

Aug 29 09
DATA SET- 77
* NOTE * All values in column are identical.



Constant -0.00244 0.02657 -0.09 0.927
Timings (T) 0.08057 0.01118 7.20 0.000 2.286
Supervision (S) 0.01895 0.01176 1.61 0.111 3.769
Group (G) -0.23278 0.02179 -10.68 0.000 10.234
Procedure (P) -0.15689 0.01463 -10.72 0.000 2.757
Climate (C) 0.32849 0.02322 14.14 0.000 4.577
298
S = 0.0333352 R-Sq = 93.4% R-Sq(adj) = 93.0%
PRESS = 0.0958733 R-Sq(pred) = 92.04%
Source DF SS MS F P
Regression 5 1.12547 0.22509 202.56 0.000
Residual Error 71 0.07890 0.00111
Lack of Fit 4 0.00402 0.00101 0.90 0.469
Pure Error 67 0.07487 0.00112
Total 76 1.20436
Source DF Seq SS
Timings (T) 1 0.04397
Group (G) 1 0.08164
Climate (C) 1 0.22230
Timings
8 1.00 0.02022 0.13161 0.00537 -0.11139 -3.39R
40 1.00 0.24693 0.15056 0.01114 0.09637 3.07R
49 2.00 0.13357 0.23113 0.00999 -0.09755 -3.07R
53 1.00 -0.03498 0.03590 0.01005 -0.07088 -2.23R
55 1.00 -0.06561 0.03590 0.01005 -0.10152 -3.19R
57 1.00 0.10289 0.03590 0.01005 0.06698 2.11R
Possible lack of fit at outer X-values (P-Value = 0.000)

299
Appendix 4-2a
Summary Table : Formwork Productivity Model
Formwork Unit = m2/man hour

Number of Sites = 5
2
R value in last iteration to accept model = 75 %

PPCP = - 0.661+0.195T+0.140S- 0.0196G+0.0966P+0.0057C
Attachments :-
Appendix 4-2b : Iteration Summary : Formwork Productivity Model
Appendix 4-2c : Field Data Collection – Formwork
Iterations 1-8 : Formwork Productivity Models
300
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Appendix 4-2b
Iteration Summary : Formwork Productivity Model
Lack of Fit Test
Durbin
Data R2 2
Activity Steps Regression Model having best R value Watson Possible Possible Significant
Set %
Statistic Curvature* Interaction at p-value
1 228 51.6 - 1.71835 T, S, G, C G p = 0.000
2 215 61.3 - 1.65925 T, S T, S, G p = 0.000
3 208 66.0 - 1.75402 T, S T, S, G p = 0.000
4 202 69.4 - 1.88032 T, S T, S, G p = 0.000
Formwork 5 198 71.5 - 1.87560 T, S, C T, S, G, C p = 0.000
6 195 72.8 - 1.87595 T, S T, S, G, C p = 0.000
7 188 73.6 - 1.87929 T, S, P, C T, S, G, C p = 0.000
p = 0.000
Iteration
stopped as
8 181 75 -0.661+0.195T+0.140S- 0.0196G+0.0966P+0.0057C 1.89354 T, S, C T, G,
Procedure
factor gets
deleted in 9
301
Appendix 4-2c
Iteration 8 : Formwork
Residual Plots for % Productivity - Formwork : Iteration 8

99.9
2
99
90
Percent
50 0
10
1
-2
0.1
-4 -2 0 2 4 -0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6

2
20
Frequency
0
10
0 -2
-1.8 -1.2 -0.6 0.0 0.6 1.2 1.8 1 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180

FORM WORK REGRESSION MODEL : 8
DATA SET : 181


- 0.0196 Group (G) + 0.0966 Procedure (P) + 0.0057 Climate (C)

Constant -0.66138 0.08569 -7.72 0.000
Timings (T) 0.19549 0.01511 12.94 0.000 1.167
Supervision (S) 0.13971 0.01575 8.87 0.000 2.541
Group (G) -0.01960 0.01952 -1.00 0.317 2.655
Procedure (P) 0.09661 0.05251 1.84 0.068 2.124
Climate (C) 0.00571 0.03925 0.15 0.884 2.468
S = 0.105386 R-Sq = 75.0% R-Sq(adj) = 74.3%
302
PRESS = 2.04645 R-Sq(pred) = 73.72%
Source DF SS MS F P
Regression 5 5.8438 1.1688 105.23 0.000
Residual Error 175 1.9436 0.0111
Lack of Fit 10 0.6749 0.0675 8.78 0.000
Pure Error 165 1.2687 0.0077
Total 180 7.7873
Source DF Seq SS
Timings (T) 1 3.8915
Group (G) 1 0.0615
Climate (C) 1 0.0002
Timings
114 2.00 0.25972 0.28888 0.03409 -0.02915 -0.29 X
117 2.00 0.31842 0.28888 0.03409 0.02954 0.30 X
129 2.00 0.38352 0.17447 0.01572 0.20905 2.01R
168 1.00 -0.27248 -0.26305 0.03513 -0.00943 -0.09 X
169 1.00 -0.33311 -0.26305 0.03513 -0.07006 -0.71 X
172 1.00 -0.27248 -0.26305 0.03513 -0.00943 -0.09 X
173 1.00 -0.21186 -0.26305 0.03513 0.05120 0.52 X
174 1.00 -0.27854 -0.26305 0.03513 -0.01549 -0.16 X
175 1.00 -0.28461 -0.26305 0.03513 -0.02156 -0.22 X
176 1.00 -0.26642 -0.26305 0.03513 -0.00337 -0.03 X
177 1.00 -0.22398 -0.26305 0.03513 0.03907 0.39 X
179 1.00 -0.22398 -0.26305 0.03513 0.03907 0.39 X

Lack of fit test

Possible curvature in variable Timings (P-Value = 0.002 )
Possible interaction in variable Timings (P-Value = 0.025 )
Possible curvature in variable Supervis (P-Value = 0.000 )
Possible interaction in variable Group (G (P-Value = 0.000 )
303
Appendix 4-3a
Summary Table : Reinforcement Productivity Model
Reinforcement Unit = metric tonnes / man hour

Number of Sites = 4
2

PPCP = - 0.748+0.150T+0.242S+0.0386G+0.0301P-0.0499C
Attachments :-
Appendix 4-3b : Iteration Summary : Reinforcement Productivity Model
Appendix 4-3c : Field Data Collection – Reinforcement
Iterations 1-9 : Reinforcement Models
304
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Appendix 4-3b
Iteration Summary : Reinforcement Productivity Model
Lack of Fit Test
Durbin
Data R2 2
Set %
Statistic Curvature* Interaction value
1 134 52.2 - 1.64226 S, G T, P, C p=0.000
2 128 61.8 - 1.71762 T, S, G T, P p=0.000
3 127 63.2 - 1.74117 T, S, G T, P, C p=0.000
4 124 66.6 - 1.91585 T, S, G T, P, C p=0.000
Reinforcement
5 120 69.7 - 1.78312 T, S, G, C P p=0.000
6 118 70.9 - 1.74390 T, S, G, C - p=0.001
7 116 72.0 - 1.75678 T, S, G - p=0.001
8 114 72.4 - 1.74693 S, G -

p=.005
9 113 73.8 - 0.748+0.150T+0.242S-0.0386G+0.0301P-0.0499C 1.68923 S, G - p= 0.014
305
Appendix 4-3c
Iteration 9 : Reinforcement
Residual Plots for % Productivity- Reinforcement 9

99.9 2
99
90 1
Percent
50
0
10
-1
1
0.1
-4 -2 0 2 4 -0.4 -0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4

Standardized Residual 2
30
1
Frequency
20
0
10
-1
0
-1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 1 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110

REINFORCEMENT REGRESSION 9
DATA SET : 113


- 0.0386 Group (G) + 0.0301 Procedure (P) - 0.0499 Climate (C)

Constant -0.74760 0.08981 -8.32 0.000
Timings (T) 0.15026 0.02080 7.23 0.000 1.377
Supervision (S) 0.24171 0.02417 10.00 0.000 2.558
Group (G) -0.03862 0.03454 -1.12 0.266 2.208
Procedure (P) 0.03008 0.03473 0.87 0.388 1.429
Climate (C) -0.04987 0.04133 -1.21 0.230 1.748
S = 0.0985216 R-Sq = 73.8% R-Sq(adj) = 72.6%
306
PRESS = 1.16150 R-Sq(pred) = 70.69%
Source DF SS MS F P
Regression 5 2.92375 0.58475 60.24 0.000
Residual Error 107 1.03860 0.00971
Lack of Fit 7 0.14997 0.02142 2.41 0.025
Pure Error 100 0.88863 0.00889
Total 112 3.96235
Source DF Seq SS
Timings (T) 1 0.81321
Group (G) 1 0.01634
Climate (C) 1 0.01413
Timings
35 3.00 0.18889 0.28142 0.04038 -0.09254 -1.03 X
88 3.00 0.25816 0.31150 0.04173 -0.05334 -0.60 X
91 3.00 0.26477 0.28142 0.04038 -0.01665 -0.19 X
93 1.00 -0.10267 0.02223 0.05578 -0.12491 -1.54 X
94 1.00 -0.02532 0.02223 0.05578 -0.04755 -0.59 X
96 3.00 0.22683 0.31150 0.04173 -0.08467 -0.95 X
100 3.00 0.26477 0.28142 0.04038 -0.01665 -0.19 X
113 3.00 0.39125 0.31150 0.04173 0.07975 0.89 X
Lack of fit test

307
Appendix 4-4a
Summary Table : Concreting Productivity Model
Concreting Unit = m3/man hour

Number of Sites = 4
2
PPCP = - 0.0283 + 0.0733T + 0.143S + 0.0514G - 0.180P + 0.0389C
Attachments :-
Appendix 4-4b : Iteration Summary : Concreting Productivity Model
Appendix 4-4c : Field Data Collection – Concreting
Iterations 1-5 : Concreting Models
308
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Appendix 4-4b
Iteration Summary : Concreting Productivity Model
Lack of Fit Test
Durbin
Data R2 2
Activity Steps Regression Model having best R value Watson Possible Possible Significant at
Set %
Statistic Curvature* Interaction p-value
1 119 64.6 - 1.86943 G, C S p=0.000
2 115 71.0 - 1.88801 S S, P p=0.000
Concreting 3 109 73.9 - 2.03504 P S, P, C p=0.016
4 106 85.8 - 1.88287 - P p=0.051
5 105 78.5 - 0.0283+0.0733T+0.143S+0.0514G-0.180P+0.0389C 1.90026 G S, P p=0.009
309
Appendix 4-4c
Iteration 5 : Concreting
Residual Plots for % Productivity - Concreting : Iteration 5

99.9
2
99
90
Percent
50 0
10
1
-2
0.1
-4 -2 0 2 4 -0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4

2
Frequency
8
0
4
-2
0
-1.50 -0.75 0.00 0.75 1.50 1 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Concreting Regression : 5
Aug 29 09
Date Set : 105


+ 0.0514 Group (G) - 0.180 Procedure (P) + 0.0389 Climate (C)

Constant -0.02831 0.05560 -0.51 0.612
Timings (T) 0.073299 0.009099 8.06 0.000 1.194
Supervision (S) 0.14335 0.01237 11.59 0.000 1.195
Group (G) 0.05135 0.01248 4.11 0.000 1.580
Procedure (P) -0.17988 0.01660 -10.83 0.000 1.286
Climate (C) 0.03888 0.01405 2.77 0.007 1.081
310
S = 0.0740131 R-Sq = 78.5% R-Sq(adj) = 77.4%
PRESS = 0.615560 R-Sq(pred) = 75.56%
Source DF SS MS F P
Regression 5 1.97605 0.39521 72.15 0.000
Residual Error 99 0.54232 0.00548
Lack of Fit 34 0.37074 0.01090 4.13 0.000
Pure Error 65 0.17158 0.00264
Total 104 2.51836
Source DF Seq SS
Timings (T) 1 0.36684
Group (G) 1 0.00156
Climate (C) 1 0.04195
Lack of fit test

Possible interaction in variable Supervis (P-Value = 0.033 )
Possible interaction in variable Procedure (P-Value = 0.041 )
311
Appendix 4-5a
Summary Table : Block work Productivity Model
Blockwork Unit = m2/man hour

Number of Sites = 3
2

PPCP = -0.480 + 0.138T + 0.141S - 0.128G + 0.125P + 0.0444C
Attachments :-
Appendix 4-5b : Iteration Summary : Blockwork Productivity Model
Appendix 4-5c : Field Data Collection – Blockwork
Iterations 1-7 : Blockwork Models
312
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Appendix 4-5b
Iteration Summary : Blockwork Productivity Model
Lack of Fit Test

Durbin
Data R2 2
Set %
1 90 57.2 - 1.53799 S, C p=0.001
2 86 68.2 - 1.58198 S G p=0.007
3 82 71.7 - 1.70880 T, S, P, C T, G p=0.001
Block Work 4 79 74.5 - 1.75913 - T, P p=0.033
5 76 78.5 - 2.10548 T, S - p=0.028

no evidence,
6 74 81.6 - 1.69566 - -
p ≥ 0.1
no evidence,
7 73 82.9 -0.480+0.138T+0.141S-0.128G+0.125P+0.0444C 1.77035 - -
p ≥ 0.1
313
Appendix 4-5c
Iteration 7 : Blockwork
Residual Plots for % Productivity - Blockwork : Iteration 7

99.9
2
99
90
Percent
50 0
10
1
0.1
-2
-4 -2 0 2 4 -0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4

2
Frequency
10
0
5
-2
0
-2 -1 0 1 2 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70

BLOCKWORK REGRESSION 7
Aug 29 09
DATA SET = 73


- 0.128 Group (G) + 0.125 Procedure (P) + 0.0444 Climate (C)

Constant -0.4800 0.1014 -4.73 0.000
Timings (T) 0.13789 0.02482 5.55 0.000 1.886
Supervision (S) 0.14095 0.02216 6.36 0.000 3.735
Group (G) -0.12791 0.03463 -3.69 0.000 2.590
Procedure (P) 0.12518 0.02153 5.81 0.000 1.380
Climate (C) 0.04441 0.02114 2.10 0.039 2.276
S = 0.0766402 R-Sq = 82.9% R-Sq(adj) = 81.6%
314
PRESS = 0.475372 R-Sq(pred) = 79.32%
Source DF SS MS F P
Regression 5 1.90508 0.38102 64.87 0.000
Residual Error 67 0.39354 0.00587
Lack of Fit 14 0.10709 0.00765 1.42 0.179
Pure Error 53 0.28645 0.00540
Total 72 2.29862
Source DF Seq SS
Timings (T) 1 1.36266
Group (G) 1 0.20046
Climate (C) 1 0.02593
315
Appendix 4-6a
Summary Table : Plastering Productivity Model
Plastering Unit = m2/man hour

Number of Sites = 2
R2 value in last iteration to accept model = 92.6%

PPCP = - 0.203 + 0.242T - 0.0049S - 0.0344G - 0.0548P + 0.0328C
Attachments :-
Appendix 4-6b : Iteration Summary : Plastering Productivity Model
Appendix 4-6c : Field Data Collection – Plastering
Iterations 1-4 : Plastering Productivity Models
316
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Appendix 4-6b
Summary Table : Plastering Productivity Model
Lack of Fit Test

Durbin
Data R2 2
Set %
1 80 81% - 2.04897 P T p=0.002
no evidence,
2 75 87.9% - 2.15155
p ≥ 0.1
Plastering
3 69 90.5% - 2.08803 P - p = 0.058
no evidence,
4 65 92.6% -0.203+0.242T-0.0049S-0.0344G-0.0548P+0.0328C 1.99670 P -
p ≥ 0.1
317
Appendix 4-6c
Iteration 4 : Plastering
Residual Plots for % Productivity - Plastering : Iteration 4

99.9
2
99
90
Percent
50 0
10
1
-2
0.1
-4 -2 0 2 4 -0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4

12 2
Frequency
8
0
-2
0
-2 -1 0 1 2 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65

PLASTER REGRESSION MODEL : 4
Aug 29 09
DATA SET : 65


% Productivity = - 0.203 + 0.242 Timings (T) - 0.0049 Supervision (S)

Constant -0.20299 0.04060 -5.00 0.000
Timings (T) 0.24166 0.01041 23.21 0.000 1.216
Supervision (S) -0.00486 0.01383 -0.35 0.726 2.136
Group (G) -0.034382 0.009858 -3.49 0.001 1.177
Procedure (P) -0.05477 0.01526 -3.59 0.001 2.029
Climate (C) 0.032785 0.007346 4.46 0.000 1.115
S = 0.0441369 R-Sq = 92.6% R-Sq(adj) = 92.0%
- 318 -
PRESS = 0.143926 R-Sq(pred) = 90.72%
Source DF SS MS F P
Regression 5 1.43607 0.28721 147.44 0.000
Residual Error 59 0.11494 0.00195
Lack of Fit 18 0.05307 0.00295 1.95 0.038
Pure Error 41 0.06186 0.00151
Total 64 1.55101
Source DF Seq SS
Timings (T) 1 1.30367
Group (G) 1 0.00547
Climate (C) 1 0.03880
Timings
10 1.00 -0.17860 -0.13210 0.02506 -0.04650 -1.28 X
16 1.00 -0.11542 -0.16648 0.02426 0.05106 1.38 X
19 2.00 0.12976 0.21751 0.01424 -0.08775 -2.10R
48 1.00 0.00282 -0.08538 0.01184 0.08821 2.07R
49 2.00 0.06946 0.15628 0.00903 -0.08681 -2.01R

- 319 -
Appendix 4-7a
Summary Table : Tiling Productivity Model
Tiling Unit = m2/man hour

Number of Sites = 2
2

PPCP = 0.073 + 0.0050T + 0.354S + 0.0878G - 0.282P - 0.170C
Attachments :-
Appendix 4-7b : Iteration Summary : Tiling Productivity Model
Appendix 4-7c : Field Data Collection – Tiling
Iterations 1-7 : Tiling Productivity Models
- 320 -
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Appendix 4-7b
Iteration : Tiling Productivity Model
Lack of Fit Test

Durbin
Data R2 2
Set %
no evidence,
1 57 44.2 - 2.04269 - -
p ≥ 0.1
no evidence,
2 54 57.3 - 1.51273 - -
p ≥ 0.1
no evidence,
3 52 65.7 - 1.51670 - -
p ≥ 0.1
no evidence,
Tiling 4 50 70.8 - 1.68154 - -
p ≥ 0.1
no evidence,
5 48 78.2 - 1.76711 - -
p ≥ 0.1
no evidence,
6 47 81.0 - 1.82933 - -
p ≥ 0.1
no evidence,
7 46 83.1 +0.073+0.0050T+0.354S+0.0878G-0.282P-0.170C 1.85932 - -
p ≥ 0.1
- 321 -
Appendix 4-7c
Iteration 7 : Tiling
Residual Plots for % Productivity -Tiling : Iteration 7

99
2
90
Percent
50 0
10
1 -2
-2 -1 0 1 2 -0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2

12 2
Frequency
8
0
4
0 -2
-2 -1 0 1 2 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

TILING REGRESSION : 7
DATA SET : 46


% Productivity = 0.073 + 0.0050 Timings (T) + 0.354 Supervision (S)
+ 0.0878 Group (G) - 0.282 Procedure (P) - 0.170 Climate (C)

Constant 0.0732 0.1738 0.42 0.676
Timings (T) 0.00500 0.02054 0.24 0.809 1.037
Supervision (S) 0.35442 0.04872 7.27 0.000 3.064
Group (G) 0.08776 0.05094 1.72 0.093 3.190
Procedure (P) -0.28199 0.06027 -4.68 0.000 1.907
Climate (C) -0.17028 0.08411 -2.02 0.050 1.594
S = 0.0921384 R-Sq = 83.1% R-Sq(adj) = 80.9%
- 322 -
PRESS = 0.483407 R-Sq(pred) = 75.88%
Source DF SS MS F P
Regression 5 1.66432 0.33286 39.21 0.000
Residual Error 40 0.33958 0.00849
Lack of Fit 2 0.03879 0.01940 2.45 0.100
Pure Error 38 0.30079 0.00792
Total 45 2.00390
Source DF Seq SS
Timings (T) 1 0.04523
Group (G) 1 0.00458
Climate (C) 1 0.03479
Timings
45 1.00 -0.0402 -0.1022 0.0652 0.0619 0.95 X
46 1.00 -0.1641 -0.1022 0.0652 -0.0619 -0.95 X
***
- 323 -
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Appendix 5-0
Grand Summary of Validation Data and Results
2 sigma limits ± 15 % Validation band
% Is Site
No. of Average Average as Outliers New
Variance Average Average as Mean 2 sigma limits
Data sets as Used in Computed used in Error ±2 Mean Outliers
Set Activity Site on Within (sigma = Std. ± 15 % band Accept Model
Used Model from Data Validation of indi- sigma Error of ± 15 %
Average ± 15% Deviation)
See Note 1 vidual limits remain- band
Yes/No
data ing data
D X (X1) (X1-X)/X LCL UCL LCL UCL
1 Excavation ARS 27 0.06528 0.06276 -3.9% Yes 0.06528 -1.28% -16.99% 14.43% 2 -0.59% -15.59% 14.41% 0 Yes
2 OAG 34 0.38308 0.37477 -2.2% Yes 0.38308 -2.67% -16.37% 11.03% 6 1.24% -13.76% 16.24% 0 Yes
3 Formwork ARS 51 0.16494 0.16951 2.8% Yes 0.16494 -1.74% -12.21% 8.73% 3 -4.25% -19.25% 10.75% 0 Yes
4 BCC 408 0.20025 0.25431 27.0% No 0.25431 -2.86% -16.25% 10.53% 98 -0.59% -15.59% 14.41% 0 Yes
5 OAG 54 0.07907 0.10910 38.0% No 0.10900 7.82% -5.64% 21.28% 12 11.81% -3.19% 26.81% 1/42 Yes
Rein-
6 ARS 92 0.01803 0.02530 40.3% No 0.02530 -4.89% -15.52% 5.74% 22 -5.26% -20.26% 9.74% 0 Yes
forcement
7 BCC 306 * 0.03148 - - 0.03148 0.39% -8.18% 8.96% 56 0.37% -14.63% 15.37% 0 Yes
Revalidated
8 Concreting BCC 191 0.44197 0.50211 13.6% Yes 0.44197 0.16% -18.45% 18.12% 9 -0.75% -15.75% 14.25% 27/182
±20% band
8-1 Concreting BCC 87 0.44197 0.46347 4.9% Yes 0.44197 3.77% -10.95% 18.49% 2 3.75% -11.25% 18.75% 0 Yes
Revalidated
9 Blockwork BCC 347 * 0.45465 - - 0.45465 0.19% -18.91% 19.29% 36 0.19% -14.81% 15.19% 27/311
±20% band
9-1 Blockwork BCC 298 * 0.454651 - - 0.454651 0.67% -15.14% 16.48% 29 1.03% -13.97% 16.03% 6/270 Yes
10 Plastering ARS 41 * 0.35178 - - 0.35178 -2.34% -17.38% 12.71% 3 -2.93% -17.93% 12.07% 0 Yes
11 Tiling JIC 27 0.19380 0.22120 14.1% Yes 0.19380 -0.58% -15.47% 14.30% 2 -0.57% -15.57% 14.43% 0 Yes
Note 1 -If Site Average is within the ± 15% of the average used in model formulation, then
Total 1963 * No data used during Model Formulation
previous average is used in validation; if not new computed is used
324
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Appendix 5-1a
Summary Table :
Excavation Productivity Model Validation (ARS Site)
Trade = Excavation
Unit = m3/man hour
Site = ARS

PPCP = -0.0024+0.0806T+0.0190S-0.233G-0.157P+0.328C

Attachments :-
Appendix 5-1b : Validation Graph : Excavation Productivity Model
325
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Appendix 5-1b
Validation Graph :
Excavation Productivity Model Validation
Excavation Productivity Model - Validation Graphs (ARS)

Error Chart for Excavation - 2 sigma limits ± 15 % Validation Band (Excavation)
ARS Site ARS Site
0.2 UCL=0.1441
+2SL=0.1443
0.1
_
Individual Value
Individual Value
0.0 X=-0.0128
_
0.0 X=-0.0059
-0.2 -2SL=-0.1699
-0.1
LCL=-0.1559
-0.4 -0.2
1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25
Excavation Productivity Model : Scatterplot of PPCM, PPCP and Error Histogram (with Normal Curve) of Error
0.1 Variable Mean -0.01279
Actual I /D StDev 0.09264
Predicted I /D N 27
8
Error
0.0
6
Frequency
Y-Data
-0.1 4
2
-0.2
0
0 6 12 18 24 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2
No Error
326
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Appendix 5-2a
Summary Table :
Formwork Productivity Model Validation (OAG site)
Trade = Formwork
Unit = m2/man hour
Site = OAG

PPCP = -0.661+0.195T+0.140S- 0.0196G+0.0966P+0.0057C

Attachments :-
Appendix 5-2b : Validation Graph : Formwork Productivity Model
(OAG site)
327
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Appendix 5-2b
Validation Graph :
Formwork Productivity Model Validation (OAG site)
Formwork Productivity Model - Validation Graphs (OAG)

Error Chart for Formwork - 2 sigma limits ± 15% Validation Band (Formwork)
OAG Site OAG Site
+2SL=0.1103 0.2
0.1 UCL=0.1624
_
0.0 0.1
Individual Value
Individual Value
X=-0.0267
_
X=0.0124
-0.1
0.0
-2SL=-0.1637
-0.2
-0.1
-0.3 LCL=-0.1376
1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 34 1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28
Scatterplot of PPCM, PPCP, Error vs No Error Distribution

Normal
Variable
PPCM Mean 0.01237
6.0
PPCP StDev 0.06191
Error N 28
0.2
4.5
Frequency
Y-Data
3.0
0.0
1.5
-0.2
0.0
0 10 20 30 -0.10 -0.05 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15
No Error
328
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Appendix 5-2c
Summary Validation Table :
Formwork Productivity Model (ARS site)
Trade = Formwork
Unit = m2/man hour
Site = ARS

PPCP = -0.661+0.195T+0.140S- 0.0196G+0.0966P+0.0057C

Attachments :-
Appendix 5-2d : Validation Graph : Formwork Productivity Model
(ARS site)
329
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Appendix 5-2d
Validation Graph :
Formwork Productivity Model Validation (ARS site)
Formwork Productivity Model - Validation Graphs (ARS)

Error Chart for Formwork - 2 sigma limits ± 15 Validation Band (Formwork)
ARS Site ARS Site
UCL=0.1075
+2SL=0.0598 0.1
0.05
Individual Value
Individual Value
0.00
_ 0.0 _
X=-0.0452 X=-0.0425
-0.05
-0.10 -0.1
-0.15
-2SL=-0.1501
-0.2 LCL=-0.1925
1 6 11 16 21 26 31 36 41 46 51 1 6 11 16 21 26 31 36 41 46

Normal
Variable
0.4
PPCM Mean -0.04253
12
PPCP StDev 0.05014
Error N 48
0.2 9
Frequency
Y-Data
6
0.0
-0.2
0
0 12 24 36 48 -0.16 -0.12 -0.08 -0.04 0.00 0.04
No Error
330
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Appendix 5-2e
Formwork Productivity Model (BCC Site)
Trade = Formwork
Unit = m2/man hour
Site = BCC

PPCP = -0.661+0.195T+0.140S- 0.0196G+0.0966P+0.0057C
Mean Error = -2.86%

Attachments :-
Appendix 5-2f : Validation Graph : Formwork Productivity Model
(BCC site)
331
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Appendix 5-2f
Validation Graph :
Formwork Productivity Model Validation (BCC site)
Formwork Productivity Model - Validation Graphs (BCC)

Error Chart for Formwork - 2 sigma limits ± 15% Validation Band (Formwork)
BCC Site BCC Site
Figure 6.8.b UCL=0.1441
0.2 +2SL=0.1053
0.1
_
X=-0.0286
Individual Value
0.0
Individual Value
_
0.0 X=-0.0059
-0.2
-2SL=-0.1625
-0.1
-0.4
LCL=-0.1559
-0.6 -0.2
1 42 83 124 165 206 247 288 329 370 1 32 63 94 125 156 187 218 249 280

Normal
Variable
PPCM Mean -0.005933
PPCP StDev 0.06941
30
0.2 Error N 310
Frequency
Y-Data
20
0.0
10
-0.2
0
0 100 200 300 400 -0.15 -0.10 -0.05 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15
No Error
332
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Appendix 5-3a
Reinforcement Productivity Model (OAG site)
Trade = Reinforcement
Unit = metric tonnes/man hour
Site = OAG

PPCP = - 0.748+0.150T+0.242S-0.0386G+0.0301P-0.0499C
Mean Error = 7.82%

Control Limits (2 sigma limits) = -5.64% to 21.28%
Outliers in ± 15% band = 1/42 (2.38%)
Attachments :-
Appendix 5-3b : Validation Graph : Reinforcement Productivity Model
(OAG site)
333
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Appendix 5-3b
Validation Graph :
Reinforcement Productivity Model Validation (OAG site)
Reinforcement Productivity Model - Validation Graphs (OAG)

Error Chart for Reinforcement - 2 sigma limits ± 15% Validation band (Reinforcement)
OAG Site OAG Site
0.3
+2SL=0.2128 UCL=0.2681
0.2
0.2
Individual Value
Individual Value
_ _
0.1 X=0.0782 X=0.1181
0.1
0.0
-2SL=-0.0564
-0.1 0.0
LCL=-0.0319
1 6 11 16 21 26 31 36 41 46 51 1 5 9 13 17 21 25 29 33 37 41

Normal
Variable
PPCM Mean 0.1181
0.2
PPCP StDev 0.06025
Error 10.0 N 42
0.0 7.5
Frequency
Y-Data
5.0
-0.2
2.5
-0.4 0.0
0 15 30 45 60 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25
No Error
334
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Appendix 5-3c
Reinforcement Productivity Model (ARS site)
Site = ARS

PPCP = - 0.748+0.150T+0.242S-0.0386G+0.0301P-0.0499C

Attachments :-
Appendix 5-3d : Validation Graph : Reinforcement Productivity Model
(ARS site)
335
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Appendix 5-3d
Validation Graph :
Reinforcement Productivity Model Validation (ARS site)
Reinforcement Productivity Model - Validation Graphs (ARS)

Error Chart for Reinforcement - 2 sigma limits ± 15% validation band (Reinforcement)
ARS Site ARS Site
UCL=0.0974
0.1
0.1
+2SL=0.0574
Individual Value
Individual Value
0.0
0.0 _ _
X=-0.0489 X=-0.0526
-0.1 -0.1
-2SL=-0.1552
-0.2
-0.2
LCL=-0.2026
1 10 19 28 37 46 55 64 73 82 91 1 8 15 22 29 36 43 50 57 64

Normal
0.4 Variable
PPCM Mean -0.05263
16
PPCP StDev 0.05531
Error N 70
0.2 12
Frequency
Y-Data
8
0.0
4
-0.2
0
0 20 40 60 80 -0.16 -0.12 -0.08 -0.04 0.00 0.04 0.08
No Error
336
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Appendix 5-3e
Summary Validation Table : Reinforcement Productivity
Model (BCC site)
Site = BCC

PPCP = - 0.748+0.150T+0.242S-0.0386G+0.0301P-0.0499C
Mean Error = 0.39%

Attachments :-
Appendix 5-3f : Validation Graph : Reinforcement Productivity Model
(BCC site)
337
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Appendix 5-3f
Validation Graph :
Reinforcement Productivity Model Validation (BCC site)
Reinforcement Productivity Model - Validation Graphs (BCC)

Error Chart for Reinforcement - 2 sigma limits ± 15 % Validation band (Reinforcement)
BCC Site BCC Site
UCL=0.1537
0.2
0.1
+2SL=0.0896
Individual Value
Individual Value
0.1
_
_ X=0.0037
X=0.0039 0.0
0.0
-0.1 -2SL=-0.0818
-0.1
-0.2 LCL=-0.1463
1 32 63 94 125 156 187 218 249 280 1 26 51 76 101 126 151 176 201 226

Normal
0.30 Variable
PPCM Mean 0.003734
PPCP StDev 0.06173
Error 60 N 250
0.15
45
Frequency
Y-Data
0.00
30
-0.15
15
-0.30 0
0 100 200 300 -0.12 -0.08 -0.04 0.00 0.04 0.08 0.12
No Error
338
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Appendix 5-4a
Summary Validation Table : Concreting Productivity
Model
Trade = Concreting
Unit = m3/man hour
Site = BCC

PPCP = -0.0283+0.0733T+0.143S+0.0514G-0.180P+0.0389C
Mean Error = 0.16%

Outliers in ± 15% band = 27/182
Accept Model ? = No, Revalidate using
narrower band of ± 20%
REVALIDATION
Truncated Data Set within ± 20% = 87
Mean Error = 3.77%
Accept Model = Yes
Attachments :-
Appendix 5-4b : Validation Graph : Concreting Productivity Model
(BCC site)
Appendix 5-4c : Re-validation Graph : Concreting Productivity Model
(BCC site)
339
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Appendix 5-4b
Validation Graph :
Concreting Productivity Model Validation (BCC site)
Concreting Productivity Model - Validation Graphs (BCC)

Error Chart for Concreting - 2 sigma limits ± 15% Validation Band (Concreting) - Taken for Revalidation
BCC Site BCC Site
Figure 6.12.b 0.2
UCL=0.1425
0.2 +2SL=0.1812
0.1
Individual Value
Individual Value
0.1
_
_ X=-0.0075
X=-0.0016 0.0
0.0
-0.1 -0.1
LCL=-0.1575
-0.2 -2SL=-0.1845 -0.2
1 20 39 58 77 96 115 134 153 172 191 1 19 37 55 73 91 109 127 145 163 181

Normal
Variable
0.4 PPCM Mean -0.007479
24
PPCP StDev 0.09845
Error N 182
0.2 18
Frequency
Y-Data
12
0.0
-0.2
0
0 50 100 150 200 -0.24 -0.18 -0.12 -0.06 0.00 0.06 0.12 0.18
No Error
340
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Appendix 5-4c
Re-Validation Graph :
Concreting Productivity Model Validation (BCC site)
Concreting Productivity Model-Revalidation graphs (BCC)

Error Chart for Concreting - 2 sigma limits (for truncated data) ± 15% validation band (Concreting)
BCC Site BCC Site; using truncated data ± 20% of model average
0.2 UCL=0.1875
0.2 +2SL=0.1849
0.1
Individual Value
Individual Value
0.1
_ _
X=0.0375
X=0.0377
0.0 0.0
-0.1 -0.1
-2SL=-0.1095 LCL=-0.1125
1 10 19 28 37 46 55 64 73 82 1 9 17 25 33 41 49 57 65 73 81

Normal
0.2 Variable
PPCM Mean 0.03746
16
PPCP StDev 0.08059
Error N 85
0.1
12
Frequency
Y-Data
0.0
8
-0.1
4
-0.2
0
0 20 40 60 80 -0.12 -0.06 0.00 0.06 0.12 0.18
No Error
341
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Appendix 5-5a
Blockwork Productivity Model (BCC Site)
Trade = Blockwork
Unit = m2/man hour
Site = BCC

PPCP = -0.480+0.138T+0.141S-0.128G+0.125P+0.0444C
Mean Error = 0.19%

Outliers (2 sigma limits) = 36/311
Outliers in ± 15% band = 27/347 (1.73%)
Accept Model ? = No, Revalidate using
narrower band of ± 20%
REVALIDATION
Truncated Data Set within ± 20% = 298
Mean Error = 0.67%
Outliers in ± 15% band = 6/270 (2.22%)
Accept Model = Yes for practical purposes
Attachments :-
Appendix 5-5b : Validation Graph : Blockwork Productivity Model
(BCC site)
Appendix 5-5c : Re-validation Graph : Blockwork Productivity Model
(BCC site)
342
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Appendix 5-5b
Validation Graph :
Blockwork Productivity Model Validation (BCC site)
Blockwork Productivity Model - Validation Graphs (BCC)

Error Chart for Blockwork - 2 sigma limits ± 15% Validation Band (Blockwork) - Taken for Revalidation
BCC Site BCC Site
0.4 0.4
+2SL=0.1929
0.2 _ 0.2
X=0.0019 UCL=0.1519
Individual Value
Individual Value
_
X=0.0019
0.0 0.0
-0.2 -0.2 LCL=-0.1481
-2SL=-0.1891
-0.4 -0.4
1 36 71 106 141 176 211 246 281 316 1 36 71 106 141 176 211 246 281 316

Normal
0.4 Variable
PPCM Mean 0.001901
PPCP 60 StDev 0.1179
Error N 347
0.2
45
Frequency
Y-Data
0.0
30
-0.2
15
-0.4 0
0 100 200 300 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
No Error
343
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Appendix 5-5c
Re-Validation Graph :
Blockwork Productivity Model Validation (BCC site)
Blockwork Productivity Model-Revalidation Graphs (BCC)

Error Chart for Blockwork - 2 sigma limits (truncated data) ± 15% Validation Band (Blockwork - truncated)
BCC Site BCC Site
0.2
0.2 UCL=0.1603
+2SL=0.1648
0.1 0.1
Individual Value
Individual Value
_
X=0.0067 _
0.0 X=0.0103
0.0
-0.1
-0.1
-2SL=-0.1514
-0.2
LCL=-0.1397
1 31 61 91 121 151 181 211 241 271 1 28 55 82 109 136 163 190 217 244

Normal
Variable
PPCM 30 Mean 0.01034
0.2 PPCP StDev 0.07774
Error N 269
0.1
20
Frequency
Y-Data
0.0
10
-0.1
-0.2
0
0 100 200 300 -0.12 -0.06 0.00 0.06 0.12 0.18
No Error
344
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Appendix 5-6a
Plastering Productivity Model (ARS Site)
Trade = Plastering
Unit = m2/man hour
Site = ARS

PPCP = -0.203+0.242T-0.0049S-0.0344G-0.0548P+0.0328C

Attachments :-
Appendix 5-6b : Validation Graph : Plastering Productivity Model
(ARS site)
345
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Appendix 5-6b
Validation Graph :
Plastering Productivity Model Validation (ARS site)
Plastering Productivity Model - Validation Graphs (ARS)

Error Chart for Plastering - 2 sigma limits ± 15% Validation Band (Plastering)
ARS Site ARS Site
0.2 UCL=0.1207
0.1
+2SL=0.1271
0.1
Individual Value
Individual Value
0.0 _
_ X=-0.0293
0.0 X=-0.0234
-0.1
-0.1
-0.2 -2SL=-0.1738 -0.2 LCL=-0.1793

1 5 9 13 17 21 25 29 33 37 41 1 5 9 13 17 21 25 29 33 37

Normal
Variable
PPCM Mean -0.02926
0.2 8
PPCP StDev 0.06725
Error N 38
0.1 6
Frequency
Y-Data
0.0
4
-0.1
2
-0.2
0
0 10 20 30 40 -0.15 -0.10 -0.05 0.00 0.05 0.10
No Error
346
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Appendix 5-7a
Tiling Productivity Model (JIC Site)
Trade = Tiling
Unit = m2/man hour
Site = JIC

PPCP = +0.073+0.0050T+0.354S+0.0878G-0.282P-0.170C

Attachments :-
Appendix 5-7b : Validation Graph : Tiling Productivity Model
(JIC site)
347
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Appendix 5-7b
Validation Graph :
Tiling Productivity Model Validation (JIC site)
Tiling Productivity Model - Validation Graphs (JIC)

Error Chart for Tiling - 2 sigma limits ± 15% Validation Band (Tiling)
JIC Site JIC Site
+2SL=0.1430 UCL=0.1443
0.1 0.1
Individual Value
Individual Value
_ _
0.0 X=-0.0058 0.0 X=-0.0057
-0.1 -0.1
-2SL=-0.1547 LCL=-0.1557
-0.2 -0.2
1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25

Normal
0.3 Variable
PPCM 8 Mean -0.005689
PPCP StDev 0.05750
Error N 25
0.2
6
Frequency
Y-Data
0.1
4
0.0
2
-0.1
0
0 10 20 30 -0.10 -0.05 0.00 0.05 0.10
No Error
348
Appendix 6-1 : Excavation Trade

Predicted Productivity for all Possible Combinations of factor levels
Climate Procedure Group Dynamics Supervision Timings

Runs Factors Factors Factors Factors Factors
PPCP Diff PPCP Diff PPCP Diff PPCP Diff PPCP Diff
T S G P C T S G P C T S G P C T S G P C T S G P C
1 1 1 1 1 1 3.52% 32.80% 1 1 1 1 1 3.52% ‐15.70% 1 1 1 1 1 3.52% ‐23.30% 1 1 1 1 1 3.52% 1.90% 1 1 1 1 1 3.52% 8.06%
2 1 1 1 1 2 36.32% 32.80% 1 1 1 2 1 -12.18% ‐15.70% 1 1 2 1 1 -19.78% ‐23.30% 1 2 1 1 1 5.42% 1.90% 2 1 1 1 1 11.58% 8.06%
3 1 1 1 1 3 69.12% 65.60% 1 1 1 3 1 -27.88% ‐31.40% 1 1 3 1 1 -43.08% ‐46.60% 1 3 1 1 1 7.32% 3.80% 3 1 1 1 1 19.64% 16.12%
4 1 1 1 2 1 -12.18% 32.80% 1 1 2 1 1 -19.78% ‐15.70% 1 2 1 1 1 5.42% ‐23.30% 2 1 1 1 1 11.58% 1.90% 1 1 1 1 2 36.32% 8.06%
5 1 1 1 2 2 20.62% 32.80% 1 1 2 2 1 -35.48% ‐15.70% 1 2 2 1 1 -17.88% ‐23.30% 2 2 1 1 1 13.48% 1.90% 2 1 1 1 2 44.38% 8.06%
6 1 1 1 2 3 53.42% 65.60% 1 1 2 3 1 -51.18% ‐31.40% 1 2 3 1 1 -41.18% ‐46.60% 2 3 1 1 1 15.38% 3.80% 3 1 1 1 2 52.44% 16.12%
7 1 1 1 3 1 -27.88% 32.80% 1 1 3 1 1 -43.08% ‐15.70% 1 3 1 1 1 7.32% ‐23.30% 3 1 1 1 1 19.64% 1.90% 1 1 1 1 3 69.12% 8.06%
8 1 1 1 3 2 4.92% 32.80% 1 1 3 2 1 -58.78% ‐15.70% 1 3 2 1 1 -15.98% ‐23.30% 3 2 1 1 1 21.54% 1.90% 2 1 1 1 3 77.18% 8.06%
9 1 1 1 3 3 37.72% 65.60% 1 1 3 3 1 -74.48% ‐31.40% 1 3 3 1 1 -39.28% ‐46.60% 3 3 1 1 1 23.44% 3.80% 3 1 1 1 3 85.24% 16.12%
10 1 1 2 1 1 -19.78% 32.80% 1 2 1 1 1 5.42% ‐15.70% 2 1 1 1 1 11.58% ‐23.30% 1 1 1 1 2 36.32% 1.90% 1 1 1 2 1 -12.18% 8.06%
11 1 1 2 1 2 13.02% 32.80% 1 2 1 2 1 -10.28% ‐15.70% 2 1 2 1 1 -11.72% ‐23.30% 1 2 1 1 2 38.22% 1.90% 2 1 1 2 1 -4.12% 8.06%
12 1 1 2 1 3 45.82% 65.60% 1 2 1 3 1 -25.98% ‐31.40% 2 1 3 1 1 -35.02% ‐46.60% 1 3 1 1 2 40.12% 3.80% 3 1 1 2 1 3.94% 16.12%
13 1 1 2 2 1 -35.48% 32.80% 1 2 2 1 1 -17.88% ‐15.70% 2 2 1 1 1 13.48% ‐23.30% 2 1 1 1 2 44.38% 1.90% 1 1 1 2 2 20.62% 8.06%
14 1 1 2 2 2 -2.68% 32.80% 1 2 2 2 1 -33.58% ‐15.70% 2 2 2 1 1 -9.82% ‐23.30% 2 2 1 1 2 46.28% 1.90% 2 1 1 2 2 28.68% 8.06%
15 1 1 2 2 3 30.12% 65.60% 1 2 2 3 1 -49.28% ‐31.40% 2 2 3 1 1 -33.12% ‐46.60% 2 3 1 1 2 48.18% 3.80% 3 1 1 2 2 36.74% 16.12%
16 1 1 2 3 1 -51.18% 32.80% 1 2 3 1 1 -41.18% ‐15.70% 2 3 1 1 1 15.38% ‐23.30% 3 1 1 1 2 52.44% 1.90% 1 1 1 2 3 53.42% 8.06%
17 1 1 2 3 2 -18.38% 32.80% 1 2 3 2 1 -56.88% ‐15.70% 2 3 2 1 1 -7.92% ‐23.30% 3 2 1 1 2 54.34% 1.90% 2 1 1 2 3 61.48% 8.06%
18 1 1 2 3 3 14.42% 65.60% 1 2 3 3 1 -72.58% ‐31.40% 2 3 3 1 1 -31.22% ‐46.60% 3 3 1 1 2 56.24% 3.80% 3 1 1 2 3 69.54% 16.12%
19 1 1 3 1 1 -43.08% 32.80% 1 3 1 1 1 7.32% ‐15.70% 3 1 1 1 1 19.64% ‐23.30% 1 1 1 1 3 69.12% 1.90% 1 1 1 3 1 -27.88% 8.06%
20 1 1 3 1 2 -10 28%
10.28% 32 80%
32.80% 1 3 1 2 1 -8 38%
8.38% ‐15 70%
15.70% 3 1 2 1 1 -3 66%
3.66% ‐23 30%
23.30% 1 2 1 1 3 71 02%
71.02% 1 90%
1.90% 2 1 1 3 1 -19 82%
19.82% 8 06%
8.06%
21 1 1 3 1 3 22.52% 65.60% 1 3 1 3 1 -24.08% ‐31.40% 3 1 3 1 1 -26.96% ‐46.60% 1 3 1 1 3 72.92% 3.80% 3 1 1 3 1 -11.76% 16.12%
22 1 1 3 2 1 -58.78% 32.80% 1 3 2 1 1 -15.98% ‐15.70% 3 2 1 1 1 21.54% ‐23.30% 2 1 1 1 3 77.18% 1.90% 1 1 1 3 2 4.92% 8.06%
23 1 1 3 2 2 -25.98% 32.80% 1 3 2 2 1 -31.68% ‐15.70% 3 2 2 1 1 -1.76% ‐23.30% 2 2 1 1 3 79.08% 1.90% 2 1 1 3 2 12.98% 8.06%
24 1 1 3 2 3 6.82% 65.60% 1 3 2 3 1 -47.38% ‐31.40% 3 2 3 1 1 -25.06% ‐46.60% 2 3 1 1 3 80.98% 3.80% 3 1 1 3 2 21.04% 16.12%
25 1 1 3 3 1 -74.48% 32.80% 1 3 3 1 1 -39.28% ‐15.70% 3 3 1 1 1 23.44% ‐23.30% 3 1 1 1 3 85.24% 1.90% 1 1 1 3 3 37.72% 8.06%
26 1 1 3 3 2 -41.68% 32.80% 1 3 3 2 1 -54.98% ‐15.70% 3 3 2 1 1 0.14% ‐23.30% 3 2 1 1 3 87.14% 1.90% 2 1 1 3 3 45.78% 8.06%
27 1 1 3 3 3 -8.88% 65.60% 1 3 3 3 1 -70.68% ‐31.40% 3 3 3 1 1 -23.16% ‐46.60% 3 3 1 1 3 89.04% 3.80% 3 1 1 3 3 53.84% 16.12%
28 1 2 1 1 1 5.42% 32.80% 2 1 1 1 1 11.58% ‐15.70% 1 1 1 1 2 36.32% ‐23.30% 1 1 1 2 1 -12.18% 1.90% 1 1 2 1 1 -19.78% 8.06%
29 1 2 1 1 2 38.22% 32.80% 2 1 1 2 1 -4.12% ‐15.70% 1 1 2 1 2 13.02% ‐23.30% 1 2 1 2 1 -10.28% 1.90% 2 1 2 1 1 -11.72% 8.06%
30 1 2 1 1 3 71.02% 65.60% 2 1 1 3 1 -19.82% ‐31.40% 1 1 3 1 2 -10.28% ‐46.60% 1 3 1 2 1 -8.38% 3.80% 3 1 2 1 1 -3.66% 16.12%
31 1 2 1 2 1 -10.28% 32.80% 2 1 2 1 1 -11.72% ‐15.70% 1 2 1 1 2 38.22% ‐23.30% 2 1 1 2 1 -4.12% 1.90% 1 1 2 1 2 13.02% 8.06%
32 1 2 1 2 2 22.52% 32.80% 2 1 2 2 1 -27.42% ‐15.70% 1 2 2 1 2 14.92% ‐23.30% 2 2 1 2 1 -2.22% 1.90% 2 1 2 1 2 21.08% 8.06%
33 1 2 1 2 3 55.32% 65.60% 2 1 2 3 1 -43.12% ‐31.40% 1 2 3 1 2 -8.38% ‐46.60% 2 3 1 2 1 -0.32% 3.80% 3 1 2 1 2 29.14% 16.12%
34 1 2 1 3 1 -25.98% 32.80% 2 1 3 1 1 -35.02% ‐15.70% 1 3 1 1 2 40.12% ‐23.30% 3 1 1 2 1 3.94% 1.90% 1 1 2 1 3 45.82% 8.06%
35 1 2 1 3 2 6.82% 32.80% 2 1 3 2 1 -50.72% ‐15.70% 1 3 2 1 2 16.82% ‐23.30% 3 2 1 2 1 5.84% 1.90% 2 1 2 1 3 53.88% 8.06%
36 1 2 1 3 3 39.62% 65.60% 2 1 3 3 1 -66.42% ‐31.40% 1 3 3 1 2 -6.48% ‐46.60% 3 3 1 2 1 7.74% 3.80% 3 1 2 1 3 61.94% 16.12%
37 1 2 2 1 1 -17.88% 32.80% 2 2 1 1 1 13.48% ‐15.70% 2 1 1 1 2 44.38% ‐23.30% 1 1 1 2 2 20.62% 1.90% 1 1 2 2 1 -35.48% 8.06%
38 1 2 2 1 2 14.92% 32.80% 2 2 1 2 1 -2.22% ‐15.70% 2 1 2 1 2 21.08% ‐23.30% 1 2 1 2 2 22.52% 1.90% 2 1 2 2 1 -27.42% 8.06%
39 1 2 2 1 3 47.72% 65.60% 2 2 1 3 1 -17.92% ‐31.40% 2 1 3 1 2 -2.22% ‐46.60% 1 3 1 2 2 24.42% 3.80% 3 1 2 2 1 -19.36% 16.12%
40 1 2 2 2 1 -33.58% 32.80% 2 2 2 1 1 -9.82% ‐15.70% 2 2 1 1 2 46.28% ‐23.30% 2 1 1 2 2 28.68% 1.90% 1 1 2 2 2 -2.68% 8.06%
41 1 2 2 2 2 -0.78% 32.80% 2 2 2 2 1 -25.52% ‐15.70% 2 2 2 1 2 22.98% ‐23.30% 2 2 1 2 2 30.58% 1.90% 2 1 2 2 2 5.38% 8.06%
42 1 2 2 2 3 32.02% 65.60% 2 2 2 3 1 -41.22% ‐31.40% 2 2 3 1 2 -0.32% ‐46.60% 2 3 1 2 2 32.48% 3.80% 3 1 2 2 2 13.44% 16.12%
43 1 2 2 3 1 -49.28% 32.80% 2 2 3 1 1 -33.12% ‐15.70% 2 3 1 1 2 48.18% ‐23.30% 3 1 1 2 2 36.74% 1.90% 1 1 2 2 3 30.12% 8.06%
44 1 2 2 3 2 -16.48% 32.80% 2 2 3 2 1 -48.82% ‐15.70% 2 3 2 1 2 24.88% ‐23.30% 3 2 1 2 2 38.64% 1.90% 2 1 2 2 3 38.18% 8.06%
45 1 2 2 3 3 16.32% 65.60% 2 2 3 3 1 -64.52% ‐31.40% 2 3 3 1 2 1.58% ‐46.60% 3 3 1 2 2 40.54% 3.80% 3 1 2 2 3 46.24% 16.12%
46 1 2 3 1 1 -41.18% 32.80% 2 3 1 1 1 15.38% ‐15.70% 3 1 1 1 2 52.44% ‐23.30% 1 1 1 2 3 53.42% 1.90% 1 1 2 3 1 -51.18% 8.06%
47 1 2 3 1 2 -8.38% 32.80% 2 3 1 2 1 -0.32% ‐15.70% 3 1 2 1 2 29.14% ‐23.30% 1 2 1 2 3 55.32% 1.90% 2 1 2 3 1 -43.12% 8.06%
48 1 2 3 1 3 24.42% 65.60% 2 3 1 3 1 -16.02% ‐31.40% 3 1 3 1 2 5.84% ‐46.60% 1 3 1 2 3 57.22% 3.80% 3 1 2 3 1 -35.06% 16.12%
49 1 2 3 2 1 -56.88% 32.80% 2 3 2 1 1 -7.92% ‐15.70% 3 2 1 1 2 54.34% ‐23.30% 2 1 1 2 3 61.48% 1.90% 1 1 2 3 2 -18.38% 8.06%
50 1 2 3 2 2 -24.08% 32.80% 2 3 2 2 1 -23.62% ‐15.70% 3 2 2 1 2 31.04% ‐23.30% 2 2 1 2 3 63.38% 1.90% 2 1 2 3 2 -10.32% 8.06%
51 1 2 3 2 3 8.72% 65.60% 2 3 2 3 1 -39.32% ‐31.40% 3 2 3 1 2 7.74% ‐46.60% 2 3 1 2 3 65.28% 3.80% 3 1 2 3 2 -2.26% 16.12%
52 1 2 3 3 1 -72.58% 32.80% 2 3 3 1 1 -31.22% ‐15.70% 3 3 1 1 2 56.24% ‐23.30% 3 1 1 2 3 69.54% 1.90% 1 1 2 3 3 14.42% 8.06%
53 1 2 3 3 2 -39.78% 32.80% 2 3 3 2 1 -46.92% ‐15.70% 3 3 2 1 2 32.94% ‐23.30% 3 2 1 2 3 71.44% 1.90% 2 1 2 3 3 22.48% 8.06%
54 1 2 3 3 3 -6.98% 65.60% 2 3 3 3 1 -62.62% ‐31.40% 3 3 3 1 2 9.64% ‐46.60% 3 3 1 2 3 73.34% 3.80% 3 1 2 3 3 30.54% 16.12%
55 1 3 1 1 1 7.32% 32.80% 3 1 1 1 1 19.64% ‐15.70% 1 1 1 1 3 69.12% ‐23.30% 1 1 1 3 1 -27.88% 1.90% 1 1 3 1 1 -43.08% 8.06%
56 1 3 1 1 2 40.12% 32.80% 3 1 1 2 1 3.94% ‐15.70% 1 1 2 1 3 45.82% ‐23.30% 1 2 1 3 1 -25.98% 1.90% 2 1 3 1 1 -35.02% 8.06%
349


57 1 3 1 1 3 72.92% 65.60% 3 1 1 3 1 -11.76% ‐31.40% 1 1 3 1 3 22.52% ‐46.60% 1 3 1 3 1 -24.08% 3.80% 3 1 3 1 1 -26.96% 16.12%
58 1 3 1 2 1 -8.38% 32.80% 3 1 2 1 1 -3.66% ‐15.70% 1 2 1 1 3 71.02% ‐23.30% 2 1 1 3 1 -19.82% 1.90% 1 1 3 1 2 -10.28% 8.06%
59 1 3 1 2 2 24.42% 32.80% 3 1 2 2 1 -19.36% ‐15.70% 1 2 2 1 3 47.72% ‐23.30% 2 2 1 3 1 -17.92% 1.90% 2 1 3 1 2 -2.22% 8.06%
60 1 3 1 2 3 57.22% 65.60% 3 1 2 3 1 -35.06% ‐31.40% 1 2 3 1 3 24.42% ‐46.60% 2 3 1 3 1 -16.02% 3.80% 3 1 3 1 2 5.84% 16.12%
61 1 3 1 3 1 -24.08% 32.80% 3 1 3 1 1 -26.96% ‐15.70% 1 3 1 1 3 72.92% ‐23.30% 3 1 1 3 1 -11.76% 1.90% 1 1 3 1 3 22.52% 8.06%
62 1 3 1 3 2 8.72% 32.80% 3 1 3 2 1 -42.66% ‐15.70% 1 3 2 1 3 49.62% ‐23.30% 3 2 1 3 1 -9.86% 1.90% 2 1 3 1 3 30.58% 8.06%
63 1 3 1 3 3 41.52% 65.60% 3 1 3 3 1 -58.36% ‐31.40% 1 3 3 1 3 26.32% ‐46.60% 3 3 1 3 1 -7.96% 3.80% 3 1 3 1 3 38.64% 16.12%
64 1 3 2 1 1 -15.98% 32.80% 3 2 1 1 1 21.54% ‐15.70% 2 1 1 1 3 77.18% ‐23.30% 1 1 1 3 2 4.92% 1.90% 1 1 3 2 1 -58.78% 8.06%
65 1 3 2 1 2 16.82% 32.80% 3 2 1 2 1 5.84% ‐15.70% 2 1 2 1 3 53.88% ‐23.30% 1 2 1 3 2 6.82% 1.90% 2 1 3 2 1 -50.72% 8.06%
66 1 3 2 1 3 49.62% 65.60% 3 2 1 3 1 -9.86% ‐31.40% 2 1 3 1 3 30.58% ‐46.60% 1 3 1 3 2 8.72% 3.80% 3 1 3 2 1 -42.66% 16.12%
67 1 3 2 2 1 -31.68% 32.80% 3 2 2 1 1 -1.76% ‐15.70% 2 2 1 1 3 79.08% ‐23.30% 2 1 1 3 2 12.98% 1.90% 1 1 3 2 2 -25.98% 8.06%
68 1 3 2 2 2 1.12% 32.80% 3 2 2 2 1 -17.46% ‐15.70% 2 2 2 1 3 55.78% ‐23.30% 2 2 1 3 2 14.88% 1.90% 2 1 3 2 2 -17.92% 8.06%
69 1 3 2 2 3 33.92% 65.60% 3 2 2 3 1 -33.16% ‐31.40% 2 2 3 1 3 32.48% ‐46.60% 2 3 1 3 2 16.78% 3.80% 3 1 3 2 2 -9.86% 16.12%
70 1 3 2 3 1 -47.38% 32.80% 3 2 3 1 1 -25.06% ‐15.70% 2 3 1 1 3 80.98% ‐23.30% 3 1 1 3 2 21.04% 1.90% 1 1 3 2 3 6.82% 8.06%
71 1 3 2 3 2 -14.58% 32.80% 3 2 3 2 1 -40.76% ‐15.70% 2 3 2 1 3 57.68% ‐23.30% 3 2 1 3 2 22.94% 1.90% 2 1 3 2 3 14.88% 8.06%
72 1 3 2 3 3 18.22% 65.60% 3 2 3 3 1 -56.46% ‐31.40% 2 3 3 1 3 34.38% ‐46.60% 3 3 1 3 2 24.84% 3.80% 3 1 3 2 3 22.94% 16.12%
73 1 3 3 1 1 -39.28% 32.80% 3 3 1 1 1 23.44% ‐15.70% 3 1 1 1 3 85.24% ‐23.30% 1 1 1 3 3 37.72% 1.90% 1 1 3 3 1 -74.48% 8.06%
74 1 3 3 1 2 -6.48% 32.80% 3 3 1 2 1 7.74% ‐15.70% 3 1 2 1 3 61.94% ‐23.30% 1 2 1 3 3 39.62% 1.90% 2 1 3 3 1 -66.42% 8.06%
75 1 3 3 1 3 26.32% 65.60% 3 3 1 3 1 -7.96% ‐31.40% 3 1 3 1 3 38.64% ‐46.60% 1 3 1 3 3 41.52% 3.80% 3 1 3 3 1 -58.36% 16.12%
76 1 3 3 2 1 -54 98%
54.98% 32 80%
32.80% 3 3 2 1 1 0 14%
0.14% ‐15 70%
15.70% 3 2 1 1 3 87 14%
87.14% ‐23 30%
23.30% 2 1 1 3 3 45 78%
45.78% 1 90%
1.90% 1 1 3 3 2 -41 68%
41.68% 8 06%
8.06%
77 1 3 3 2 2 -22.18% 32.80% 3 3 2 2 1 -15.56% ‐15.70% 3 2 2 1 3 63.84% ‐23.30% 2 2 1 3 3 47.68% 1.90% 2 1 3 3 2 -33.62% 8.06%
78 1 3 3 2 3 10.62% 65.60% 3 3 2 3 1 -31.26% ‐31.40% 3 2 3 1 3 40.54% ‐46.60% 2 3 1 3 3 49.58% 3.80% 3 1 3 3 2 -25.56% 16.12%
79 1 3 3 3 1 -70.68% 32.80% 3 3 3 1 1 -23.16% ‐15.70% 3 3 1 1 3 89.04% ‐23.30% 3 1 1 3 3 53.84% 1.90% 1 1 3 3 3 -8.88% 8.06%
80 1 3 3 3 2 -37.88% 32.80% 3 3 3 2 1 -38.86% ‐15.70% 3 3 2 1 3 65.74% ‐23.30% 3 2 1 3 3 55.74% 1.90% 2 1 3 3 3 -0.82% 8.06%
81 1 3 3 3 3 -5.08% 65.60% 3 3 3 3 1 -54.56% ‐31.40% 3 3 3 1 3 42.44% ‐46.60% 3 3 1 3 3 57.64% 3.80% 3 1 3 3 3 7.24% 16.12%
82 2 1 1 1 1 11.58% 32.80% 1 1 1 1 2 36.32% ‐15.70% 1 1 1 2 1 -12.18% ‐23.30% 1 1 2 1 1 -19.78% 1.90% 1 2 1 1 1 5.42% 8.06%
83 2 1 1 1 2 44.38% 32.80% 1 1 1 2 2 20.62% ‐15.70% 1 1 2 2 1 -35.48% ‐23.30% 1 2 2 1 1 -17.88% 1.90% 2 2 1 1 1 13.48% 8.06%
84 2 1 1 1 3 77.18% 65.60% 1 1 1 3 2 4.92% ‐31.40% 1 1 3 2 1 -58.78% ‐46.60% 1 3 2 1 1 -15.98% 3.80% 3 2 1 1 1 21.54% 16.12%
85 2 1 1 2 1 -4.12% 32.80% 1 1 2 1 2 13.02% ‐15.70% 1 2 1 2 1 -10.28% ‐23.30% 2 1 2 1 1 -11.72% 1.90% 1 2 1 1 2 38.22% 8.06%
86 2 1 1 2 2 28.68% 32.80% 1 1 2 2 2 -2.68% ‐15.70% 1 2 2 2 1 -33.58% ‐23.30% 2 2 2 1 1 -9.82% 1.90% 2 2 1 1 2 46.28% 8.06%
87 2 1 1 2 3 61.48% 65.60% 1 1 2 3 2 -18.38% ‐31.40% 1 2 3 2 1 -56.88% ‐46.60% 2 3 2 1 1 -7.92% 3.80% 3 2 1 1 2 54.34% 16.12%
88 2 1 1 3 1 -19.82% 32.80% 1 1 3 1 2 -10.28% ‐15.70% 1 3 1 2 1 -8.38% ‐23.30% 3 1 2 1 1 -3.66% 1.90% 1 2 1 1 3 71.02% 8.06%
89 2 1 1 3 2 12.98% 32.80% 1 1 3 2 2 -25.98% ‐15.70% 1 3 2 2 1 -31.68% ‐23.30% 3 2 2 1 1 -1.76% 1.90% 2 2 1 1 3 79.08% 8.06%
90 2 1 1 3 3 45.78% 65.60% 1 1 3 3 2 -41.68% ‐31.40% 1 3 3 2 1 -54.98% ‐46.60% 3 3 2 1 1 0.14% 3.80% 3 2 1 1 3 87.14% 16.12%
91 2 1 2 1 1 -11.72% 32.80% 1 2 1 1 2 38.22% ‐15.70% 2 1 1 2 1 -4.12% ‐23.30% 1 1 2 1 2 13.02% 1.90% 1 2 1 2 1 -10.28% 8.06%
92 2 1 2 1 2 21.08% 32.80% 1 2 1 2 2 22.52% ‐15.70% 2 1 2 2 1 -27.42% ‐23.30% 1 2 2 1 2 14.92% 1.90% 2 2 1 2 1 -2.22% 8.06%
93 2 1 2 1 3 53.88% 65.60% 1 2 1 3 2 6.82% ‐31.40% 2 1 3 2 1 -50.72% ‐46.60% 1 3 2 1 2 16.82% 3.80% 3 2 1 2 1 5.84% 16.12%
94 2 1 2 2 1 -27.42% 32.80% 1 2 2 1 2 14.92% ‐15.70% 2 2 1 2 1 -2.22% ‐23.30% 2 1 2 1 2 21.08% 1.90% 1 2 1 2 2 22.52% 8.06%
95 2 1 2 2 2 5.38% 32.80% 1 2 2 2 2 -0.78% ‐15.70% 2 2 2 2 1 -25.52% ‐23.30% 2 2 2 1 2 22.98% 1.90% 2 2 1 2 2 30.58% 8.06%
96 2 1 2 2 3 38.18% 65.60% 1 2 2 3 2 -16.48% ‐31.40% 2 2 3 2 1 -48.82% ‐46.60% 2 3 2 1 2 24.88% 3.80% 3 2 1 2 2 38.64% 16.12%
97 2 1 2 3 1 -43.12% 32.80% 1 2 3 1 2 -8.38% ‐15.70% 2 3 1 2 1 -0.32% ‐23.30% 3 1 2 1 2 29.14% 1.90% 1 2 1 2 3 55.32% 8.06%
98 2 1 2 3 2 -10.32% 32.80% 1 2 3 2 2 -24.08% ‐15.70% 2 3 2 2 1 -23.62% ‐23.30% 3 2 2 1 2 31.04% 1.90% 2 2 1 2 3 63.38% 8.06%
99 2 1 2 3 3 22.48% 65.60% 1 2 3 3 2 -39.78% ‐31.40% 2 3 3 2 1 -46.92% ‐46.60% 3 3 2 1 2 32.94% 3.80% 3 2 1 2 3 71.44% 16.12%
100 2 1 3 1 1 -35.02% 32.80% 1 3 1 1 2 40.12% ‐15.70% 3 1 1 2 1 3.94% ‐23.30% 1 1 2 1 3 45.82% 1.90% 1 2 1 3 1 -25.98% 8.06%
101 2 1 3 1 2 -2.22% 32.80% 1 3 1 2 2 24.42% ‐15.70% 3 1 2 2 1 -19.36% ‐23.30% 1 2 2 1 3 47.72% 1.90% 2 2 1 3 1 -17.92% 8.06%
102 2 1 3 1 3 30.58% 65.60% 1 3 1 3 2 8.72% ‐31.40% 3 1 3 2 1 -42.66% ‐46.60% 1 3 2 1 3 49.62% 3.80% 3 2 1 3 1 -9.86% 16.12%
103 2 1 3 2 1 -50.72% 32.80% 1 3 2 1 2 16.82% ‐15.70% 3 2 1 2 1 5.84% ‐23.30% 2 1 2 1 3 53.88% 1.90% 1 2 1 3 2 6.82% 8.06%
104 2 1 3 2 2 -17.92% 32.80% 1 3 2 2 2 1.12% ‐15.70% 3 2 2 2 1 -17.46% ‐23.30% 2 2 2 1 3 55.78% 1.90% 2 2 1 3 2 14.88% 8.06%
105 2 1 3 2 3 14.88% 65.60% 1 3 2 3 2 -14.58% ‐31.40% 3 2 3 2 1 -40.76% ‐46.60% 2 3 2 1 3 57.68% 3.80% 3 2 1 3 2 22.94% 16.12%
106 2 1 3 3 1 -66.42% 32.80% 1 3 3 1 2 -6.48% ‐15.70% 3 3 1 2 1 7.74% ‐23.30% 3 1 2 1 3 61.94% 1.90% 1 2 1 3 3 39.62% 8.06%
107 2 1 3 3 2 -33.62% 32.80% 1 3 3 2 2 -22.18% ‐15.70% 3 3 2 2 1 -15.56% ‐23.30% 3 2 2 1 3 63.84% 1.90% 2 2 1 3 3 47.68% 8.06%
108 2 1 3 3 3 -0.82% 65.60% 1 3 3 3 2 -37.88% ‐31.40% 3 3 3 2 1 -38.86% ‐46.60% 3 3 2 1 3 65.74% 3.80% 3 2 1 3 3 55.74% 16.12%
109 2 2 1 1 1 13.48% 32.80% 2 1 1 1 2 44.38% ‐15.70% 1 1 1 2 2 20.62% ‐23.30% 1 1 2 2 1 -35.48% 1.90% 1 2 2 1 1 -17.88% 8.06%
110 2 2 1 1 2 46.28% 32.80% 2 1 1 2 2 28.68% ‐15.70% 1 1 2 2 2 -2.68% ‐23.30% 1 2 2 2 1 -33.58% 1.90% 2 2 2 1 1 -9.82% 8.06%
111 2 2 1 1 3 79.08% 65.60% 2 1 1 3 2 12.98% ‐31.40% 1 1 3 2 2 -25.98% ‐46.60% 1 3 2 2 1 -31.68% 3.80% 3 2 2 1 1 -1.76% 16.12%
112 2 2 1 2 1 -2.22% 32.80% 2 1 2 1 2 21.08% ‐15.70% 1 2 1 2 2 22.52% ‐23.30% 2 1 2 2 1 -27.42% 1.90% 1 2 2 1 2 14.92% 8.06%
350


113 2 2 1 2 2 30.58% 32.80% 2 1 2 2 2 5.38% ‐15.70% 1 2 2 2 2 -0.78% ‐23.30% 2 2 2 2 1 -25.52% 1.90% 2 2 2 1 2 22.98% 8.06%
114 2 2 1 2 3 63.38% 65.60% 2 1 2 3 2 -10.32% ‐31.40% 1 2 3 2 2 -24.08% ‐46.60% 2 3 2 2 1 -23.62% 3.80% 3 2 2 1 2 31.04% 16.12%
115 2 2 1 3 1 -17.92% 32.80% 2 1 3 1 2 -2.22% ‐15.70% 1 3 1 2 2 24.42% ‐23.30% 3 1 2 2 1 -19.36% 1.90% 1 2 2 1 3 47.72% 8.06%
116 2 2 1 3 2 14.88% 32.80% 2 1 3 2 2 -17.92% ‐15.70% 1 3 2 2 2 1.12% ‐23.30% 3 2 2 2 1 -17.46% 1.90% 2 2 2 1 3 55.78% 8.06%
117 2 2 1 3 3 47.68% 65.60% 2 1 3 3 2 -33.62% ‐31.40% 1 3 3 2 2 -22.18% ‐46.60% 3 3 2 2 1 -15.56% 3.80% 3 2 2 1 3 63.84% 16.12%
118 2 2 2 1 1 -9.82% 32.80% 2 2 1 1 2 46.28% ‐15.70% 2 1 1 2 2 28.68% ‐23.30% 1 1 2 2 2 -2.68% 1.90% 1 2 2 2 1 -33.58% 8.06%
119 2 2 2 1 2 22.98% 32.80% 2 2 1 2 2 30.58% ‐15.70% 2 1 2 2 2 5.38% ‐23.30% 1 2 2 2 2 -0.78% 1.90% 2 2 2 2 1 -25.52% 8.06%
120 2 2 2 1 3 55.78% 65.60% 2 2 1 3 2 14.88% ‐31.40% 2 1 3 2 2 -17.92% ‐46.60% 1 3 2 2 2 1.12% 3.80% 3 2 2 2 1 -17.46% 16.12%
121 2 2 2 2 1 -25.52% 32.80% 2 2 2 1 2 22.98% ‐15.70% 2 2 1 2 2 30.58% ‐23.30% 2 1 2 2 2 5.38% 1.90% 1 2 2 2 2 -0.78% 8.06%
122 2 2 2 2 2 7.28% 32.80% 2 2 2 2 2 7.28% ‐15.70% 2 2 2 2 2 7.28% ‐23.30% 2 2 2 2 2 7.28% 1.90% 2 2 2 2 2 7.28% 8.06%
123 2 2 2 2 3 40.08% 65.60% 2 2 2 3 2 -8.42% ‐31.40% 2 2 3 2 2 -16.02% ‐46.60% 2 3 2 2 2 9.18% 3.80% 3 2 2 2 2 15.34% 16.12%
124 2 2 2 3 1 -41.22% 32.80% 2 2 3 1 2 -0.32% ‐15.70% 2 3 1 2 2 32.48% ‐23.30% 3 1 2 2 2 13.44% 1.90% 1 2 2 2 3 32.02% 8.06%
125 2 2 2 3 2 -8.42% 32.80% 2 2 3 2 2 -16.02% ‐15.70% 2 3 2 2 2 9.18% ‐23.30% 3 2 2 2 2 15.34% 1.90% 2 2 2 2 3 40.08% 8.06%
126 2 2 2 3 3 24.38% 65.60% 2 2 3 3 2 -31.72% ‐31.40% 2 3 3 2 2 -14.12% ‐46.60% 3 3 2 2 2 17.24% 3.80% 3 2 2 2 3 48.14% 16.12%
127 2 2 3 1 1 -33.12% 32.80% 2 3 1 1 2 48.18% ‐15.70% 3 1 1 2 2 36.74% ‐23.30% 1 1 2 2 3 30.12% 1.90% 1 2 2 3 1 -49.28% 8.06%
128 2 2 3 1 2 -0.32% 32.80% 2 3 1 2 2 32.48% ‐15.70% 3 1 2 2 2 13.44% ‐23.30% 1 2 2 2 3 32.02% 1.90% 2 2 2 3 1 -41.22% 8.06%
129 2 2 3 1 3 32.48% 65.60% 2 3 1 3 2 16.78% ‐31.40% 3 1 3 2 2 -9.86% ‐46.60% 1 3 2 2 3 33.92% 3.80% 3 2 2 3 1 -33.16% 16.12%
130 2 2 3 2 1 -48.82% 32.80% 2 3 2 1 2 24.88% ‐15.70% 3 2 1 2 2 38.64% ‐23.30% 2 1 2 2 3 38.18% 1.90% 1 2 2 3 2 -16.48% 8.06%
131 2 2 3 2 2 -16.02% 32.80% 2 3 2 2 2 9.18% ‐15.70% 3 2 2 2 2 15.34% ‐23.30% 2 2 2 2 3 40.08% 1.90% 2 2 2 3 2 -8.42% 8.06%
132 2 2 3 2 3 16 78%
16.78% 65 60%
65.60% 2 3 2 3 2 -6 52%
6.52% ‐31 40%
31.40% 3 2 3 2 2 -7 96%
7.96% ‐46 60%
46.60% 2 3 2 2 3 41 98%
41.98% 3 80%
3.80% 3 2 2 3 2 -0 36%
0.36% 16 12%
16.12%
133 2 2 3 3 1 -64.52% 32.80% 2 3 3 1 2 1.58% ‐15.70% 3 3 1 2 2 40.54% ‐23.30% 3 1 2 2 3 46.24% 1.90% 1 2 2 3 3 16.32% 8.06%
134 2 2 3 3 2 -31.72% 32.80% 2 3 3 2 2 -14.12% ‐15.70% 3 3 2 2 2 17.24% ‐23.30% 3 2 2 2 3 48.14% 1.90% 2 2 2 3 3 24.38% 8.06%
135 2 2 3 3 3 1.08% 65.60% 2 3 3 3 2 -29.82% ‐31.40% 3 3 3 2 2 -6.06% ‐46.60% 3 3 2 2 3 50.04% 3.80% 3 2 2 3 3 32.44% 16.12%
136 2 3 1 1 1 15.38% 32.80% 3 1 1 1 2 52.44% ‐15.70% 1 1 1 2 3 53.42% ‐23.30% 1 1 2 3 1 -51.18% 1.90% 1 2 3 1 1 -41.18% 8.06%
137 2 3 1 1 2 48.18% 32.80% 3 1 1 2 2 36.74% ‐15.70% 1 1 2 2 3 30.12% ‐23.30% 1 2 2 3 1 -49.28% 1.90% 2 2 3 1 1 -33.12% 8.06%
138 2 3 1 1 3 80.98% 65.60% 3 1 1 3 2 21.04% ‐31.40% 1 1 3 2 3 6.82% ‐46.60% 1 3 2 3 1 -47.38% 3.80% 3 2 3 1 1 -25.06% 16.12%
139 2 3 1 2 1 -0.32% 32.80% 3 1 2 1 2 29.14% ‐15.70% 1 2 1 2 3 55.32% ‐23.30% 2 1 2 3 1 -43.12% 1.90% 1 2 3 1 2 -8.38% 8.06%
140 2 3 1 2 2 32.48% 32.80% 3 1 2 2 2 13.44% ‐15.70% 1 2 2 2 3 32.02% ‐23.30% 2 2 2 3 1 -41.22% 1.90% 2 2 3 1 2 -0.32% 8.06%
141 2 3 1 2 3 65.28% 65.60% 3 1 2 3 2 -2.26% ‐31.40% 1 2 3 2 3 8.72% ‐46.60% 2 3 2 3 1 -39.32% 3.80% 3 2 3 1 2 7.74% 16.12%
142 2 3 1 3 1 -16.02% 32.80% 3 1 3 1 2 5.84% ‐15.70% 1 3 1 2 3 57.22% ‐23.30% 3 1 2 3 1 -35.06% 1.90% 1 2 3 1 3 24.42% 8.06%
143 2 3 1 3 2 16.78% 32.80% 3 1 3 2 2 -9.86% ‐15.70% 1 3 2 2 3 33.92% ‐23.30% 3 2 2 3 1 -33.16% 1.90% 2 2 3 1 3 32.48% 8.06%
144 2 3 1 3 3 49.58% 65.60% 3 1 3 3 2 -25.56% ‐31.40% 1 3 3 2 3 10.62% ‐46.60% 3 3 2 3 1 -31.26% 3.80% 3 2 3 1 3 40.54% 16.12%
145 2 3 2 1 1 -7.92% 32.80% 3 2 1 1 2 54.34% ‐15.70% 2 1 1 2 3 61.48% ‐23.30% 1 1 2 3 2 -18.38% 1.90% 1 2 3 2 1 -56.88% 8.06%
146 2 3 2 1 2 24.88% 32.80% 3 2 1 2 2 38.64% ‐15.70% 2 1 2 2 3 38.18% ‐23.30% 1 2 2 3 2 -16.48% 1.90% 2 2 3 2 1 -48.82% 8.06%
147 2 3 2 1 3 57.68% 65.60% 3 2 1 3 2 22.94% ‐31.40% 2 1 3 2 3 14.88% ‐46.60% 1 3 2 3 2 -14.58% 3.80% 3 2 3 2 1 -40.76% 16.12%
148 2 3 2 2 1 -23.62% 32.80% 3 2 2 1 2 31.04% ‐15.70% 2 2 1 2 3 63.38% ‐23.30% 2 1 2 3 2 -10.32% 1.90% 1 2 3 2 2 -24.08% 8.06%
149 2 3 2 2 2 9.18% 32.80% 3 2 2 2 2 15.34% ‐15.70% 2 2 2 2 3 40.08% ‐23.30% 2 2 2 3 2 -8.42% 1.90% 2 2 3 2 2 -16.02% 8.06%
150 2 3 2 2 3 41.98% 65.60% 3 2 2 3 2 -0.36% ‐31.40% 2 2 3 2 3 16.78% ‐46.60% 2 3 2 3 2 -6.52% 3.80% 3 2 3 2 2 -7.96% 16.12%
151 2 3 2 3 1 -39.32% 32.80% 3 2 3 1 2 7.74% ‐15.70% 2 3 1 2 3 65.28% ‐23.30% 3 1 2 3 2 -2.26% 1.90% 1 2 3 2 3 8.72% 8.06%
152 2 3 2 3 2 -6.52% 32.80% 3 2 3 2 2 -7.96% ‐15.70% 2 3 2 2 3 41.98% ‐23.30% 3 2 2 3 2 -0.36% 1.90% 2 2 3 2 3 16.78% 8.06%
153 2 3 2 3 3 26.28% 65.60% 3 2 3 3 2 -23.66% ‐31.40% 2 3 3 2 3 18.68% ‐46.60% 3 3 2 3 2 1.54% 3.80% 3 2 3 2 3 24.84% 16.12%
154 2 3 3 1 1 -31.22% 32.80% 3 3 1 1 2 56.24% ‐15.70% 3 1 1 2 3 69.54% ‐23.30% 1 1 2 3 3 14.42% 1.90% 1 2 3 3 1 -72.58% 8.06%
155 2 3 3 1 2 1.58% 32.80% 3 3 1 2 2 40.54% ‐15.70% 3 1 2 2 3 46.24% ‐23.30% 1 2 2 3 3 16.32% 1.90% 2 2 3 3 1 -64.52% 8.06%
156 2 3 3 1 3 34.38% 65.60% 3 3 1 3 2 24.84% ‐31.40% 3 1 3 2 3 22.94% ‐46.60% 1 3 2 3 3 18.22% 3.80% 3 2 3 3 1 -56.46% 16.12%
157 2 3 3 2 1 -46.92% 32.80% 3 3 2 1 2 32.94% ‐15.70% 3 2 1 2 3 71.44% ‐23.30% 2 1 2 3 3 22.48% 1.90% 1 2 3 3 2 -39.78% 8.06%
158 2 3 3 2 2 -14.12% 32.80% 3 3 2 2 2 17.24% ‐15.70% 3 2 2 2 3 48.14% ‐23.30% 2 2 2 3 3 24.38% 1.90% 2 2 3 3 2 -31.72% 8.06%
159 2 3 3 2 3 18.68% 65.60% 3 3 2 3 2 1.54% ‐31.40% 3 2 3 2 3 24.84% ‐46.60% 2 3 2 3 3 26.28% 3.80% 3 2 3 3 2 -23.66% 16.12%
160 2 3 3 3 1 -62.62% 32.80% 3 3 3 1 2 9.64% ‐15.70% 3 3 1 2 3 73.34% ‐23.30% 3 1 2 3 3 30.54% 1.90% 1 2 3 3 3 -6.98% 8.06%
161 2 3 3 3 2 -29.82% 32.80% 3 3 3 2 2 -6.06% ‐15.70% 3 3 2 2 3 50.04% ‐23.30% 3 2 2 3 3 32.44% 1.90% 2 2 3 3 3 1.08% 8.06%
162 2 3 3 3 3 2.98% 65.60% 3 3 3 3 2 -21.76% ‐31.40% 3 3 3 2 3 26.74% ‐46.60% 3 3 2 3 3 34.34% 3.80% 3 2 3 3 3 9.14% 16.12%
163 3 1 1 1 1 19.64% 32.80% 1 1 1 1 3 69.12% ‐15.70% 1 1 1 3 1 -27.88% ‐23.30% 1 1 3 1 1 -43.08% 1.90% 1 3 1 1 1 7.32% 8.06%
164 3 1 1 1 2 52.44% 32.80% 1 1 1 2 3 53.42% ‐15.70% 1 1 2 3 1 -51.18% ‐23.30% 1 2 3 1 1 -41.18% 1.90% 2 3 1 1 1 15.38% 8.06%
165 3 1 1 1 3 85.24% 65.60% 1 1 1 3 3 37.72% ‐31.40% 1 1 3 3 1 -74.48% ‐46.60% 1 3 3 1 1 -39.28% 3.80% 3 3 1 1 1 23.44% 16.12%
166 3 1 1 2 1 3.94% 32.80% 1 1 2 1 3 45.82% ‐15.70% 1 2 1 3 1 -25.98% ‐23.30% 2 1 3 1 1 -35.02% 1.90% 1 3 1 1 2 40.12% 8.06%
167 3 1 1 2 2 36.74% 32.80% 1 1 2 2 3 30.12% ‐15.70% 1 2 2 3 1 -49.28% ‐23.30% 2 2 3 1 1 -33.12% 1.90% 2 3 1 1 2 48.18% 8.06%
168 3 1 1 2 3 69.54% 65.60% 1 1 2 3 3 14.42% ‐31.40% 1 2 3 3 1 -72.58% ‐46.60% 2 3 3 1 1 -31.22% 3.80% 3 3 1 1 2 56.24% 16.12%
351


169 3 1 1 3 1 -11.76% 32.80% 1 1 3 1 3 22.52% ‐15.70% 1 3 1 3 1 -24.08% ‐23.30% 3 1 3 1 1 -26.96% 1.90% 1 3 1 1 3 72.92% 8.06%
170 3 1 1 3 2 21.04% 32.80% 1 1 3 2 3 6.82% ‐15.70% 1 3 2 3 1 -47.38% ‐23.30% 3 2 3 1 1 -25.06% 1.90% 2 3 1 1 3 80.98% 8.06%
171 3 1 1 3 3 53.84% 65.60% 1 1 3 3 3 -8.88% ‐31.40% 1 3 3 3 1 -70.68% ‐46.60% 3 3 3 1 1 -23.16% 3.80% 3 3 1 1 3 89.04% 16.12%
172 3 1 2 1 1 -3.66% 32.80% 1 2 1 1 3 71.02% ‐15.70% 2 1 1 3 1 -19.82% ‐23.30% 1 1 3 1 2 -10.28% 1.90% 1 3 1 2 1 -8.38% 8.06%
173 3 1 2 1 2 29.14% 32.80% 1 2 1 2 3 55.32% ‐15.70% 2 1 2 3 1 -43.12% ‐23.30% 1 2 3 1 2 -8.38% 1.90% 2 3 1 2 1 -0.32% 8.06%
174 3 1 2 1 3 61.94% 65.60% 1 2 1 3 3 39.62% ‐31.40% 2 1 3 3 1 -66.42% ‐46.60% 1 3 3 1 2 -6.48% 3.80% 3 3 1 2 1 7.74% 16.12%
175 3 1 2 2 1 -19.36% 32.80% 1 2 2 1 3 47.72% ‐15.70% 2 2 1 3 1 -17.92% ‐23.30% 2 1 3 1 2 -2.22% 1.90% 1 3 1 2 2 24.42% 8.06%
176 3 1 2 2 2 13.44% 32.80% 1 2 2 2 3 32.02% ‐15.70% 2 2 2 3 1 -41.22% ‐23.30% 2 2 3 1 2 -0.32% 1.90% 2 3 1 2 2 32.48% 8.06%
177 3 1 2 2 3 46.24% 65.60% 1 2 2 3 3 16.32% ‐31.40% 2 2 3 3 1 -64.52% ‐46.60% 2 3 3 1 2 1.58% 3.80% 3 3 1 2 2 40.54% 16.12%
178 3 1 2 3 1 -35.06% 32.80% 1 2 3 1 3 24.42% ‐15.70% 2 3 1 3 1 -16.02% ‐23.30% 3 1 3 1 2 5.84% 1.90% 1 3 1 2 3 57.22% 8.06%
179 3 1 2 3 2 -2.26% 32.80% 1 2 3 2 3 8.72% ‐15.70% 2 3 2 3 1 -39.32% ‐23.30% 3 2 3 1 2 7.74% 1.90% 2 3 1 2 3 65.28% 8.06%
180 3 1 2 3 3 30.54% 65.60% 1 2 3 3 3 -6.98% ‐31.40% 2 3 3 3 1 -62.62% ‐46.60% 3 3 3 1 2 9.64% 3.80% 3 3 1 2 3 73.34% 16.12%
181 3 1 3 1 1 -26.96% 32.80% 1 3 1 1 3 72.92% ‐15.70% 3 1 1 3 1 -11.76% ‐23.30% 1 1 3 1 3 22.52% 1.90% 1 3 1 3 1 -24.08% 8.06%
182 3 1 3 1 2 5.84% 32.80% 1 3 1 2 3 57.22% ‐15.70% 3 1 2 3 1 -35.06% ‐23.30% 1 2 3 1 3 24.42% 1.90% 2 3 1 3 1 -16.02% 8.06%
183 3 1 3 1 3 38.64% 65.60% 1 3 1 3 3 41.52% ‐31.40% 3 1 3 3 1 -58.36% ‐46.60% 1 3 3 1 3 26.32% 3.80% 3 3 1 3 1 -7.96% 16.12%
184 3 1 3 2 1 -42.66% 32.80% 1 3 2 1 3 49.62% ‐15.70% 3 2 1 3 1 -9.86% ‐23.30% 2 1 3 1 3 30.58% 1.90% 1 3 1 3 2 8.72% 8.06%
185 3 1 3 2 2 -9.86% 32.80% 1 3 2 2 3 33.92% ‐15.70% 3 2 2 3 1 -33.16% ‐23.30% 2 2 3 1 3 32.48% 1.90% 2 3 1 3 2 16.78% 8.06%
186 3 1 3 2 3 22.94% 65.60% 1 3 2 3 3 18.22% ‐31.40% 3 2 3 3 1 -56.46% ‐46.60% 2 3 3 1 3 34.38% 3.80% 3 3 1 3 2 24.84% 16.12%
187 3 1 3 3 1 -58.36% 32.80% 1 3 3 1 3 26.32% ‐15.70% 3 3 1 3 1 -7.96% ‐23.30% 3 1 3 1 3 38.64% 1.90% 1 3 1 3 3 41.52% 8.06%
188 3 1 3 3 2 -25 56%
25.56% 32 80%
32.80% 1 3 3 2 3 10 62%
10.62% ‐15 70%
15.70% 3 3 2 3 1 -31 26%
31.26% ‐23 30%
23.30% 3 2 3 1 3 40 54%
40.54% 1 90%
1.90% 2 3 1 3 3 49 58%
49.58% 8 06%
8.06%
189 3 1 3 3 3 7.24% 65.60% 1 3 3 3 3 -5.08% ‐31.40% 3 3 3 3 1 -54.56% ‐46.60% 3 3 3 1 3 42.44% 3.80% 3 3 1 3 3 57.64% 16.12%
190 3 2 1 1 1 21.54% 32.80% 2 1 1 1 3 77.18% ‐15.70% 1 1 1 3 2 4.92% ‐23.30% 1 1 3 2 1 -58.78% 1.90% 1 3 2 1 1 -15.98% 8.06%
191 3 2 1 1 2 54.34% 32.80% 2 1 1 2 3 61.48% ‐15.70% 1 1 2 3 2 -18.38% ‐23.30% 1 2 3 2 1 -56.88% 1.90% 2 3 2 1 1 -7.92% 8.06%
192 3 2 1 1 3 87.14% 65.60% 2 1 1 3 3 45.78% ‐31.40% 1 1 3 3 2 -41.68% ‐46.60% 1 3 3 2 1 -54.98% 3.80% 3 3 2 1 1 0.14% 16.12%
193 3 2 1 2 1 5.84% 32.80% 2 1 2 1 3 53.88% ‐15.70% 1 2 1 3 2 6.82% ‐23.30% 2 1 3 2 1 -50.72% 1.90% 1 3 2 1 2 16.82% 8.06%
194 3 2 1 2 2 38.64% 32.80% 2 1 2 2 3 38.18% ‐15.70% 1 2 2 3 2 -16.48% ‐23.30% 2 2 3 2 1 -48.82% 1.90% 2 3 2 1 2 24.88% 8.06%
195 3 2 1 2 3 71.44% 65.60% 2 1 2 3 3 22.48% ‐31.40% 1 2 3 3 2 -39.78% ‐46.60% 2 3 3 2 1 -46.92% 3.80% 3 3 2 1 2 32.94% 16.12%
196 3 2 1 3 1 -9.86% 32.80% 2 1 3 1 3 30.58% ‐15.70% 1 3 1 3 2 8.72% ‐23.30% 3 1 3 2 1 -42.66% 1.90% 1 3 2 1 3 49.62% 8.06%
197 3 2 1 3 2 22.94% 32.80% 2 1 3 2 3 14.88% ‐15.70% 1 3 2 3 2 -14.58% ‐23.30% 3 2 3 2 1 -40.76% 1.90% 2 3 2 1 3 57.68% 8.06%
198 3 2 1 3 3 55.74% 65.60% 2 1 3 3 3 -0.82% ‐31.40% 1 3 3 3 2 -37.88% ‐46.60% 3 3 3 2 1 -38.86% 3.80% 3 3 2 1 3 65.74% 16.12%
199 3 2 2 1 1 -1.76% 32.80% 2 2 1 1 3 79.08% ‐15.70% 2 1 1 3 2 12.98% ‐23.30% 1 1 3 2 2 -25.98% 1.90% 1 3 2 2 1 -31.68% 8.06%
200 3 2 2 1 2 31.04% 32.80% 2 2 1 2 3 63.38% ‐15.70% 2 1 2 3 2 -10.32% ‐23.30% 1 2 3 2 2 -24.08% 1.90% 2 3 2 2 1 -23.62% 8.06%
201 3 2 2 1 3 63.84% 65.60% 2 2 1 3 3 47.68% ‐31.40% 2 1 3 3 2 -33.62% ‐46.60% 1 3 3 2 2 -22.18% 3.80% 3 3 2 2 1 -15.56% 16.12%
202 3 2 2 2 1 -17.46% 32.80% 2 2 2 1 3 55.78% ‐15.70% 2 2 1 3 2 14.88% ‐23.30% 2 1 3 2 2 -17.92% 1.90% 1 3 2 2 2 1.12% 8.06%
203 3 2 2 2 2 15.34% 32.80% 2 2 2 2 3 40.08% ‐15.70% 2 2 2 3 2 -8.42% ‐23.30% 2 2 3 2 2 -16.02% 1.90% 2 3 2 2 2 9.18% 8.06%
204 3 2 2 2 3 48.14% 65.60% 2 2 2 3 3 24.38% ‐31.40% 2 2 3 3 2 -31.72% ‐46.60% 2 3 3 2 2 -14.12% 3.80% 3 3 2 2 2 17.24% 16.12%
205 3 2 2 3 1 -33.16% 32.80% 2 2 3 1 3 32.48% ‐15.70% 2 3 1 3 2 16.78% ‐23.30% 3 1 3 2 2 -9.86% 1.90% 1 3 2 2 3 33.92% 8.06%
206 3 2 2 3 2 -0.36% 32.80% 2 2 3 2 3 16.78% ‐15.70% 2 3 2 3 2 -6.52% ‐23.30% 3 2 3 2 2 -7.96% 1.90% 2 3 2 2 3 41.98% 8.06%
207 3 2 2 3 3 32.44% 65.60% 2 2 3 3 3 1.08% ‐31.40% 2 3 3 3 2 -29.82% ‐46.60% 3 3 3 2 2 -6.06% 3.80% 3 3 2 2 3 50.04% 16.12%
208 3 2 3 1 1 -25.06% 32.80% 2 3 1 1 3 80.98% ‐15.70% 3 1 1 3 2 21.04% ‐23.30% 1 1 3 2 3 6.82% 1.90% 1 3 2 3 1 -47.38% 8.06%
209 3 2 3 1 2 7.74% 32.80% 2 3 1 2 3 65.28% ‐15.70% 3 1 2 3 2 -2.26% ‐23.30% 1 2 3 2 3 8.72% 1.90% 2 3 2 3 1 -39.32% 8.06%
210 3 2 3 1 3 40.54% 65.60% 2 3 1 3 3 49.58% ‐31.40% 3 1 3 3 2 -25.56% ‐46.60% 1 3 3 2 3 10.62% 3.80% 3 3 2 3 1 -31.26% 16.12%
211 3 2 3 2 1 -40.76% 32.80% 2 3 2 1 3 57.68% ‐15.70% 3 2 1 3 2 22.94% ‐23.30% 2 1 3 2 3 14.88% 1.90% 1 3 2 3 2 -14.58% 8.06%
212 3 2 3 2 2 -7.96% 32.80% 2 3 2 2 3 41.98% ‐15.70% 3 2 2 3 2 -0.36% ‐23.30% 2 2 3 2 3 16.78% 1.90% 2 3 2 3 2 -6.52% 8.06%
213 3 2 3 2 3 24.84% 65.60% 2 3 2 3 3 26.28% ‐31.40% 3 2 3 3 2 -23.66% ‐46.60% 2 3 3 2 3 18.68% 3.80% 3 3 2 3 2 1.54% 16.12%
214 3 2 3 3 1 -56.46% 32.80% 2 3 3 1 3 34.38% ‐15.70% 3 3 1 3 2 24.84% ‐23.30% 3 1 3 2 3 22.94% 1.90% 1 3 2 3 3 18.22% 8.06%
215 3 2 3 3 2 -23.66% 32.80% 2 3 3 2 3 18.68% ‐15.70% 3 3 2 3 2 1.54% ‐23.30% 3 2 3 2 3 24.84% 1.90% 2 3 2 3 3 26.28% 8.06%
216 3 2 3 3 3 9.14% 65.60% 2 3 3 3 3 2.98% ‐31.40% 3 3 3 3 2 -21.76% ‐46.60% 3 3 3 2 3 26.74% 3.80% 3 3 2 3 3 34.34% 16.12%
217 3 3 1 1 1 23.44% 32.80% 3 1 1 1 3 85.24% ‐15.70% 1 1 1 3 3 37.72% ‐23.30% 1 1 3 3 1 -74.48% 1.90% 1 3 3 1 1 -39.28% 8.06%
218 3 3 1 1 2 56.24% 32.80% 3 1 1 2 3 69.54% ‐15.70% 1 1 2 3 3 14.42% ‐23.30% 1 2 3 3 1 -72.58% 1.90% 2 3 3 1 1 -31.22% 8.06%
219 3 3 1 1 3 89.04% 65.60% 3 1 1 3 3 53.84% ‐31.40% 1 1 3 3 3 -8.88% ‐46.60% 1 3 3 3 1 -70.68% 3.80% 3 3 3 1 1 -23.16% 16.12%
220 3 3 1 2 1 7.74% 32.80% 3 1 2 1 3 61.94% ‐15.70% 1 2 1 3 3 39.62% ‐23.30% 2 1 3 3 1 -66.42% 1.90% 1 3 3 1 2 -6.48% 8.06%
221 3 3 1 2 2 40.54% 32.80% 3 1 2 2 3 46.24% ‐15.70% 1 2 2 3 3 16.32% ‐23.30% 2 2 3 3 1 -64.52% 1.90% 2 3 3 1 2 1.58% 8.06%
222 3 3 1 2 3 73.34% 65.60% 3 1 2 3 3 30.54% ‐31.40% 1 2 3 3 3 -6.98% ‐46.60% 2 3 3 3 1 -62.62% 3.80% 3 3 3 1 2 9.64% 16.12%
223 3 3 1 3 1 -7.96% 32.80% 3 1 3 1 3 38.64% ‐15.70% 1 3 1 3 3 41.52% ‐23.30% 3 1 3 3 1 -58.36% 1.90% 1 3 3 1 3 26.32% 8.06%
224 3 3 1 3 2 24.84% 32.80% 3 1 3 2 3 22.94% ‐15.70% 1 3 2 3 3 18.22% ‐23.30% 3 2 3 3 1 -56.46% 1.90% 2 3 3 1 3 34.38% 8.06%
352


225 3 3 1 3 3 57.64% 65.60% 3 1 3 3 3 7.24% ‐31.40% 1 3 3 3 3 -5.08% ‐46.60% 3 3 3 3 1 -54.56% 3.80% 3 3 3 1 3 42.44% 16.12%
226 3 3 2 1 1 0.14% 32.80% 3 2 1 1 3 87.14% ‐15.70% 2 1 1 3 3 45.78% ‐23.30% 1 1 3 3 2 -41.68% 1.90% 1 3 3 2 1 -54.98% 8.06%
227 3 3 2 1 2 32.94% 32.80% 3 2 1 2 3 71.44% ‐15.70% 2 1 2 3 3 22.48% ‐23.30% 1 2 3 3 2 -39.78% 1.90% 2 3 3 2 1 -46.92% 8.06%
228 3 3 2 1 3 65.74% 65.60% 3 2 1 3 3 55.74% ‐31.40% 2 1 3 3 3 -0.82% ‐46.60% 1 3 3 3 2 -37.88% 3.80% 3 3 3 2 1 -38.86% 16.12%
229 3 3 2 2 1 -15.56% 32.80% 3 2 2 1 3 63.84% ‐15.70% 2 2 1 3 3 47.68% ‐23.30% 2 1 3 3 2 -33.62% 1.90% 1 3 3 2 2 -22.18% 8.06%
230 3 3 2 2 2 17.24% 32.80% 3 2 2 2 3 48.14% ‐15.70% 2 2 2 3 3 24.38% ‐23.30% 2 2 3 3 2 -31.72% 1.90% 2 3 3 2 2 -14.12% 8.06%
231 3 3 2 2 3 50.04% 65.60% 3 2 2 3 3 32.44% ‐31.40% 2 2 3 3 3 1.08% ‐46.60% 2 3 3 3 2 -29.82% 3.80% 3 3 3 2 2 -6.06% 16.12%
232 3 3 2 3 1 -31.26% 32.80% 3 2 3 1 3 40.54% ‐15.70% 2 3 1 3 3 49.58% ‐23.30% 3 1 3 3 2 -25.56% 1.90% 1 3 3 2 3 10.62% 8.06%
233 3 3 2 3 2 1.54% 32.80% 3 2 3 2 3 24.84% ‐15.70% 2 3 2 3 3 26.28% ‐23.30% 3 2 3 3 2 -23.66% 1.90% 2 3 3 2 3 18.68% 8.06%
234 3 3 2 3 3 34.34% 65.60% 3 2 3 3 3 9.14% ‐31.40% 2 3 3 3 3 2.98% ‐46.60% 3 3 3 3 2 -21.76% 3.80% 3 3 3 2 3 26.74% 16.12%
235 3 3 3 1 1 -23.16% 32.80% 3 3 1 1 3 89.04% ‐15.70% 3 1 1 3 3 53.84% ‐23.30% 1 1 3 3 3 -8.88% 1.90% 1 3 3 3 1 -70.68% 8.06%
236 3 3 3 1 2 9.64% 32.80% 3 3 1 2 3 73.34% ‐15.70% 3 1 2 3 3 30.54% ‐23.30% 1 2 3 3 3 -6.98% 1.90% 2 3 3 3 1 -62.62% 8.06%
237 3 3 3 1 3 42.44% 65.60% 3 3 1 3 3 57.64% ‐31.40% 3 1 3 3 3 7.24% ‐46.60% 1 3 3 3 3 -5.08% 3.80% 3 3 3 3 1 -54.56% 16.12%
238 3 3 3 2 1 -38.86% 32.80% 3 3 2 1 3 65.74% ‐15.70% 3 2 1 3 3 55.74% ‐23.30% 2 1 3 3 3 -0.82% 1.90% 1 3 3 3 2 -37.88% 8.06%
239 3 3 3 2 2 -6.06% 32.80% 3 3 2 2 3 50.04% ‐15.70% 3 2 2 3 3 32.44% ‐23.30% 2 2 3 3 3 1.08% 1.90% 2 3 3 3 2 -29.82% 8.06%
240 3 3 3 2 3 26.74% 65.60% 3 3 2 3 3 34.34% ‐31.40% 3 2 3 3 3 9.14% ‐46.60% 2 3 3 3 3 2.98% 3.80% 3 3 3 3 2 -21.76% 16.12%
241 3 3 3 3 1 -54.56% 32.80% 3 3 3 1 3 42.44% ‐15.70% 3 3 1 3 3 57.64% ‐23.30% 3 1 3 3 3 7.24% 1.90% 1 3 3 3 3 -5.08% 8.06%
242 3 3 3 3 2 -21.76% 32.80% 3 3 3 2 3 26.74% ‐15.70% 3 3 2 3 3 34.34% ‐23.30% 3 2 3 3 3 9.14% 1.90% 2 3 3 3 3 2.98% 8.06%
243 3 3 3 3 3 11.04% 65.60% 3 3 3 3 3 11.04% ‐31.40% 3 3 3 3 3 11.04% ‐46.60% 3 3 3 3 3 11.04% 3.80% 3 3 3 3 3 11.04% 16.12%
Legend :
PPCP - Percentage Productivity Change Predicted
T- Timings
S - Supervision
G - Group Dynamics
P - Procedure
353
Appendix 6-2 : Formwork Trade

Predicted Productivity for all Possible Combinations of Factor levels

1 1 1 1 1 1 -24.33% 0.57% 1 1 1 1 1 -24.33% 9.66% 1 1 1 1 1 -24.33% ‐1.96% 1 1 1 1 1 -24.33% 14.00% 1 1 1 1 1 -24.33% 19.50%
2 1 1 1 1 2 -23.76% 0.57% 1 1 1 2 1 -14.67% 9.66% 1 1 2 1 1 -26.29% ‐1.96% 1 2 1 1 1 -10.33% 14.00% 2 1 1 1 1 -4.83% 19.50%
3 1 1 1 1 3 -23.19% 1.14% 1 1 1 3 1 -5.01% 19.32% 1 1 3 1 1 -28.25% ‐3.92% 1 3 1 1 1 3.67% 28.00% 3 1 1 1 1 14.67% 39.00%
4 1 1 1 2 1 -14.67% 0.57% 1 1 2 1 1 -26.29% 9.66% 1 2 1 1 1 -10.33% ‐1.96% 2 1 1 1 1 -4.83% 14.00% 1 1 1 1 2 -23.76% 19.50%
5 1 1 1 2 2 -14.10% 0.57% 1 1 2 2 1 -16.63% 9.66% 1 2 2 1 1 -12.29% ‐1.96% 2 2 1 1 1 9.17% 14.00% 2 1 1 1 2 -4.26% 19.50%
6 1 1 1 2 3 -13.53% 1.14% 1 1 2 3 1 -6.97% 19.32% 1 2 3 1 1 -14.25% ‐3.92% 2 3 1 1 1 23.17% 28.00% 3 1 1 1 2 15.24% 39.00%
7 1 1 1 3 1 -5.01% 0.57% 1 1 3 1 1 -28.25% 9.66% 1 3 1 1 1 3.67% ‐1.96% 3 1 1 1 1 14.67% 14.00% 1 1 1 1 3 -23.19% 19.50%
8 1 1 1 3 2 -4.44% 0.57% 1 1 3 2 1 -18.59% 9.66% 1 3 2 1 1 1.71% ‐1.96% 3 2 1 1 1 28.67% 14.00% 2 1 1 1 3 -3.69% 19.50%
9 1 1 1 3 3 -3.87% 1.14% 1 1 3 3 1 -8.93% 19.32% 1 3 3 1 1 -0.25% ‐3.92% 3 3 1 1 1 42.67% 28.00% 3 1 1 1 3 15.81% 39.00%
10 1 1 2 1 1 -26.29% 0.57% 1 2 1 1 1 -10.33% 9.66% 2 1 1 1 1 -4.83% ‐1.96% 1 1 1 1 2 -23.76% 14.00% 1 1 1 2 1 -14.67% 19.50%
11 1 1 2 1 2 -25.72% 0.57% 1 2 1 2 1 -0.67% 9.66% 2 1 2 1 1 -6.79% ‐1.96% 1 2 1 1 2 -9.76% 14.00% 2 1 1 2 1 4.83% 19.50%
12 1 1 2 1 3 -25.15% 1.14% 1 2 1 3 1 8.99% 19.32% 2 1 3 1 1 -8.75% ‐3.92% 1 3 1 1 2 4.24% 28.00% 3 1 1 2 1 24.33% 39.00%
13 1 1 2 2 1 -16.63% 0.57% 1 2 2 1 1 -12.29% 9.66% 2 2 1 1 1 9.17% ‐1.96% 2 1 1 1 2 -4.26% 14.00% 1 1 1 2 2 -14.10% 19.50%
14 1 1 2 2 2 -16.06% 0.57% 1 2 2 2 1 -2.63% 9.66% 2 2 2 1 1 7.21% ‐1.96% 2 2 1 1 2 9.74% 14.00% 2 1 1 2 2 5.40% 19.50%
15 1 1 2 2 3 -15.49% 1.14% 1 2 2 3 1 7.03% 19.32% 2 2 3 1 1 5.25% ‐3.92% 2 3 1 1 2 23.74% 28.00% 3 1 1 2 2 24.90% 39.00%
16 1 1 2 3 1 -6.97% 0.57% 1 2 3 1 1 -14.25% 9.66% 2 3 1 1 1 23.17% ‐1.96% 3 1 1 1 2 15.24% 14.00% 1 1 1 2 3 -13.53% 19.50%
17 1 1 2 3 2 -6.40% 0.57% 1 2 3 2 1 -4.59% 9.66% 2 3 2 1 1 21.21% ‐1.96% 3 2 1 1 2 29.24% 14.00% 2 1 1 2 3 5.97% 19.50%
18 1 1 2 3 3 -5.83% 1.14% 1 2 3 3 1 5.07% 19.32% 2 3 3 1 1 19.25% ‐3.92% 3 3 1 1 2 43.24% 28.00% 3 1 1 2 3 25.47% 39.00%
19 1 1 3 1 1 -28.25% 0.57% 1 3 1 1 1 3.67% 9.66% 3 1 1 1 1 14.67% ‐1.96% 1 1 1 1 3 -23.19% 14.00% 1 1 1 3 1 -5.01% 19.50%
20 1 1 3 1 2 -27.68% 0.57% 1 3 1 2 1 13.33% 9.66% 3 1 2 1 1 12.71% ‐1.96% 1 2 1 1 3 -9.19% 14.00% 2 1 1 3 1 14.49% 19.50%
21 1 1 3 1 3 -27.11%
% 1.14% 1 3 1 3 1 22.99%
99% 19.32% 3 1 3 1 1 10.75%
0 5% ‐3.92%
3.92% 1 3 1 1 3 4.81%
8 % 28.00% 3 1 1 3 1 33.99%
33 99% 39.00%
22 1 1 3 2 1 -18.59% 0.57% 1 3 2 1 1 1.71% 9.66% 3 2 1 1 1 28.67% ‐1.96% 2 1 1 1 3 -3.69% 14.00% 1 1 1 3 2 -4.44% 19.50%
23 1 1 3 2 2 -18.02% 0.57% 1 3 2 2 1 11.37% 9.66% 3 2 2 1 1 26.71% ‐1.96% 2 2 1 1 3 10.31% 14.00% 2 1 1 3 2 15.06% 19.50%
24 1 1 3 2 3 -17.45% 1.14% 1 3 2 3 1 21.03% 19.32% 3 2 3 1 1 24.75% ‐3.92% 2 3 1 1 3 24.31% 28.00% 3 1 1 3 2 34.56% 39.00%
25 1 1 3 3 1 -8.93% 0.57% 1 3 3 1 1 -0.25% 9.66% 3 3 1 1 1 42.67% ‐1.96% 3 1 1 1 3 15.81% 14.00% 1 1 1 3 3 -3.87% 19.50%
26 1 1 3 3 2 -8.36% 0.57% 1 3 3 2 1 9.41% 9.66% 3 3 2 1 1 40.71% ‐1.96% 3 2 1 1 3 29.81% 14.00% 2 1 1 3 3 15.63% 19.50%
27 1 1 3 3 3 -7.79% 1.14% 1 3 3 3 1 19.07% 19.32% 3 3 3 1 1 38.75% ‐3.92% 3 3 1 1 3 43.81% 28.00% 3 1 1 3 3 35.13% 39.00%
28 1 2 1 1 1 -10.33% 0.57% 2 1 1 1 1 -4.83% 9.66% 1 1 1 1 2 -23.76% ‐1.96% 1 1 1 2 1 -14.67% 14.00% 1 1 2 1 1 -26.29% 19.50%
29 1 2 1 1 2 -9.76% 0.57% 2 1 1 2 1 4.83% 9.66% 1 1 2 1 2 -25.72% ‐1.96% 1 2 1 2 1 -0.67% 14.00% 2 1 2 1 1 -6.79% 19.50%
30 1 2 1 1 3 -9.19% 1.14% 2 1 1 3 1 14.49% 19.32% 1 1 3 1 2 -27.68% ‐3.92% 1 3 1 2 1 13.33% 28.00% 3 1 2 1 1 12.71% 39.00%
31 1 2 1 2 1 -0.67% 0.57% 2 1 2 1 1 -6.79% 9.66% 1 2 1 1 2 -9.76% ‐1.96% 2 1 1 2 1 4.83% 14.00% 1 1 2 1 2 -25.72% 19.50%
32 1 2 1 2 2 -0.10% 0.57% 2 1 2 2 1 2.87% 9.66% 1 2 2 1 2 -11.72% ‐1.96% 2 2 1 2 1 18.83% 14.00% 2 1 2 1 2 -6.22% 19.50%
33 1 2 1 2 3 0.47% 1.14% 2 1 2 3 1 12.53% 19.32% 1 2 3 1 2 -13.68% ‐3.92% 2 3 1 2 1 32.83% 28.00% 3 1 2 1 2 13.28% 39.00%
34 1 2 1 3 1 8.99% 0.57% 2 1 3 1 1 -8.75% 9.66% 1 3 1 1 2 4.24% ‐1.96% 3 1 1 2 1 24.33% 14.00% 1 1 2 1 3 -25.15% 19.50%
35 1 2 1 3 2 9.56% 0.57% 2 1 3 2 1 0.91% 9.66% 1 3 2 1 2 2.28% ‐1.96% 3 2 1 2 1 38.33% 14.00% 2 1 2 1 3 -5.65% 19.50%
36 1 2 1 3 3 10.13% 1.14% 2 1 3 3 1 10.57% 19.32% 1 3 3 1 2 0.32% ‐3.92% 3 3 1 2 1 52.33% 28.00% 3 1 2 1 3 13.85% 39.00%
37 1 2 2 1 1 -12.29% 0.57% 2 2 1 1 1 9.17% 9.66% 2 1 1 1 2 -4.26% ‐1.96% 1 1 1 2 2 -14.10% 14.00% 1 1 2 2 1 -16.63% 19.50%
38 1 2 2 1 2 -11.72% 0.57% 2 2 1 2 1 18.83% 9.66% 2 1 2 1 2 -6.22% ‐1.96% 1 2 1 2 2 -0.10% 14.00% 2 1 2 2 1 2.87% 19.50%
39 1 2 2 1 3 -11.15% 1.14% 2 2 1 3 1 28.49% 19.32% 2 1 3 1 2 -8.18% ‐3.92% 1 3 1 2 2 13.90% 28.00% 3 1 2 2 1 22.37% 39.00%
40 1 2 2 2 1 -2.63% 0.57% 2 2 2 1 1 7.21% 9.66% 2 2 1 1 2 9.74% ‐1.96% 2 1 1 2 2 5.40% 14.00% 1 1 2 2 2 -16.06% 19.50%
41 1 2 2 2 2 -2.06% 0.57% 2 2 2 2 1 16.87% 9.66% 2 2 2 1 2 7.78% ‐1.96% 2 2 1 2 2 19.40% 14.00% 2 1 2 2 2 3.44% 19.50%
42 1 2 2 2 3 -1.49% 1.14% 2 2 2 3 1 26.53% 19.32% 2 2 3 1 2 5.82% ‐3.92% 2 3 1 2 2 33.40% 28.00% 3 1 2 2 2 22.94% 39.00%
43 1 2 2 3 1 7.03% 0.57% 2 2 3 1 1 5.25% 9.66% 2 3 1 1 2 23.74% ‐1.96% 3 1 1 2 2 24.90% 14.00% 1 1 2 2 3 -15.49% 19.50%
44 1 2 2 3 2 7.60% 0.57% 2 2 3 2 1 14.91% 9.66% 2 3 2 1 2 21.78% ‐1.96% 3 2 1 2 2 38.90% 14.00% 2 1 2 2 3 4.01% 19.50%
45 1 2 2 3 3 8.17% 1.14% 2 2 3 3 1 24.57% 19.32% 2 3 3 1 2 19.82% ‐3.92% 3 3 1 2 2 52.90% 28.00% 3 1 2 2 3 23.51% 39.00%
46 1 2 3 1 1 -14.25% 0.57% 2 3 1 1 1 23.17% 9.66% 3 1 1 1 2 15.24% ‐1.96% 1 1 1 2 3 -13.53% 14.00% 1 1 2 3 1 -6.97% 19.50%
47 1 2 3 1 2 -13.68% 0.57% 2 3 1 2 1 32.83% 9.66% 3 1 2 1 2 13.28% ‐1.96% 1 2 1 2 3 0.47% 14.00% 2 1 2 3 1 12.53% 19.50%
48 1 2 3 1 3 -13.11% 1.14% 2 3 1 3 1 42.49% 19.32% 3 1 3 1 2 11.32% ‐3.92% 1 3 1 2 3 14.47% 28.00% 3 1 2 3 1 32.03% 39.00%
49 1 2 3 2 1 -4.59% 0.57% 2 3 2 1 1 21.21% 9.66% 3 2 1 1 2 29.24% ‐1.96% 2 1 1 2 3 5.97% 14.00% 1 1 2 3 2 -6.40% 19.50%
50 1 2 3 2 2 -4.02% 0.57% 2 3 2 2 1 30.87% 9.66% 3 2 2 1 2 27.28% ‐1.96% 2 2 1 2 3 19.97% 14.00% 2 1 2 3 2 13.10% 19.50%
51 1 2 3 2 3 -3.45% 1.14% 2 3 2 3 1 40.53% 19.32% 3 2 3 1 2 25.32% ‐3.92% 2 3 1 2 3 33.97% 28.00% 3 1 2 3 2 32.60% 39.00%
52 1 2 3 3 1 5.07% 0.57% 2 3 3 1 1 19.25% 9.66% 3 3 1 1 2 43.24% ‐1.96% 3 1 1 2 3 25.47% 14.00% 1 1 2 3 3 -5.83% 19.50%
53 1 2 3 3 2 5.64% 0.57% 2 3 3 2 1 28.91% 9.66% 3 3 2 1 2 41.28% ‐1.96% 3 2 1 2 3 39.47% 14.00% 2 1 2 3 3 13.67% 19.50%
54 1 2 3 3 3 6.21% 1.14% 2 3 3 3 1 38.57% 19.32% 3 3 3 1 2 39.32% ‐3.92% 3 3 1 2 3 53.47% 28.00% 3 1 2 3 3 33.17% 39.00%
354


55 1 3 1 1 1 3.67% 0.57% 3 1 1 1 1 14.67% 9.66% 1 1 1 1 3 -23.19% ‐1.96% 1 1 1 3 1 -5.01% 14.00% 1 1 3 1 1 -28.25% 19.50%
56 1 3 1 1 2 4.24% 0.57% 3 1 1 2 1 24.33% 9.66% 1 1 2 1 3 -25.15% ‐1.96% 1 2 1 3 1 8.99% 14.00% 2 1 3 1 1 -8.75% 19.50%
57 1 3 1 1 3 4.81% 1.14% 3 1 1 3 1 33.99% 19.32% 1 1 3 1 3 -27.11% ‐3.92% 1 3 1 3 1 22.99% 28.00% 3 1 3 1 1 10.75% 39.00%
58 1 3 1 2 1 13.33% 0.57% 3 1 2 1 1 12.71% 9.66% 1 2 1 1 3 -9.19% ‐1.96% 2 1 1 3 1 14.49% 14.00% 1 1 3 1 2 -27.68% 19.50%
59 1 3 1 2 2 13.90% 0.57% 3 1 2 2 1 22.37% 9.66% 1 2 2 1 3 -11.15% ‐1.96% 2 2 1 3 1 28.49% 14.00% 2 1 3 1 2 -8.18% 19.50%
60 1 3 1 2 3 14.47% 1.14% 3 1 2 3 1 32.03% 19.32% 1 2 3 1 3 -13.11% ‐3.92% 2 3 1 3 1 42.49% 28.00% 3 1 3 1 2 11.32% 39.00%
61 1 3 1 3 1 22.99% 0.57% 3 1 3 1 1 10.75% 9.66% 1 3 1 1 3 4.81% ‐1.96% 3 1 1 3 1 33.99% 14.00% 1 1 3 1 3 -27.11% 19.50%
62 1 3 1 3 2 23.56% 0.57% 3 1 3 2 1 20.41% 9.66% 1 3 2 1 3 2.85% ‐1.96% 3 2 1 3 1 47.99% 14.00% 2 1 3 1 3 -7.61% 19.50%
63 1 3 1 3 3 24.13% 1.14% 3 1 3 3 1 30.07% 19.32% 1 3 3 1 3 0.89% ‐3.92% 3 3 1 3 1 61.99% 28.00% 3 1 3 1 3 11.89% 39.00%
64 1 3 2 1 1 1.71% 0.57% 3 2 1 1 1 28.67% 9.66% 2 1 1 1 3 -3.69% ‐1.96% 1 1 1 3 2 -4.44% 14.00% 1 1 3 2 1 -18.59% 19.50%
65 1 3 2 1 2 2.28% 0.57% 3 2 1 2 1 38.33% 9.66% 2 1 2 1 3 -5.65% ‐1.96% 1 2 1 3 2 9.56% 14.00% 2 1 3 2 1 0.91% 19.50%
66 1 3 2 1 3 2.85% 1.14% 3 2 1 3 1 47.99% 19.32% 2 1 3 1 3 -7.61% ‐3.92% 1 3 1 3 2 23.56% 28.00% 3 1 3 2 1 20.41% 39.00%
67 1 3 2 2 1 11.37% 0.57% 3 2 2 1 1 26.71% 9.66% 2 2 1 1 3 10.31% ‐1.96% 2 1 1 3 2 15.06% 14.00% 1 1 3 2 2 -18.02% 19.50%
68 1 3 2 2 2 11.94% 0.57% 3 2 2 2 1 36.37% 9.66% 2 2 2 1 3 8.35% ‐1.96% 2 2 1 3 2 29.06% 14.00% 2 1 3 2 2 1.48% 19.50%
69 1 3 2 2 3 12.51% 1.14% 3 2 2 3 1 46.03% 19.32% 2 2 3 1 3 6.39% ‐3.92% 2 3 1 3 2 43.06% 28.00% 3 1 3 2 2 20.98% 39.00%
70 1 3 2 3 1 21.03% 0.57% 3 2 3 1 1 24.75% 9.66% 2 3 1 1 3 24.31% ‐1.96% 3 1 1 3 2 34.56% 14.00% 1 1 3 2 3 -17.45% 19.50%
71 1 3 2 3 2 21.60% 0.57% 3 2 3 2 1 34.41% 9.66% 2 3 2 1 3 22.35% ‐1.96% 3 2 1 3 2 48.56% 14.00% 2 1 3 2 3 2.05% 19.50%
72 1 3 2 3 3 22.17% 1.14% 3 2 3 3 1 44.07% 19.32% 2 3 3 1 3 20.39% ‐3.92% 3 3 1 3 2 62.56% 28.00% 3 1 3 2 3 21.55% 39.00%
73 1 3 3 1 1 -0.25% 0.57% 3 3 1 1 1 42.67% 9.66% 3 1 1 1 3 15.81% ‐1.96% 1 1 1 3 3 -3.87% 14.00% 1 1 3 3 1 -8.93% 19.50%
74 1 3 3 1 2 0.32% 0.57% 3 3 1 2 1 52.33% 9.66% 3 1 2 1 3 13.85% ‐1.96% 1 2 1 3 3 10.13% 14.00% 2 1 3 3 1 10.57% 19.50%
75 1 3 3 1 3 0.89% 1.14% 3 3 1 3 1 61.99% 19.32% 3 1 3 1 3 11.89% ‐3.92% 1 3 1 3 3 24.13% 28.00% 3 1 3 3 1 30.07% 39.00%
76 1 3 3 2 1 9.41% 0.57% 3 3 2 1 1 40.71% 9.66% 3 2 1 1 3 29.81% ‐1.96% 2 1 1 3 3 15.63% 14.00% 1 1 3 3 2 -8.36% 19.50%
77 1 3 3 2 2 9.98% 0.57% 3 3 2 2 1 50.37% 9.66% 3 2 2 1 3 27.85% ‐1.96% 2 2 1 3 3 29.63% 14.00% 2 1 3 3 2 11.14% 19.50%
78 1 3 3 2 3 10.55% 1.14% 3 3 2 3 1 60.03% 19.32% 3 2 3 1 3 25.89% ‐3.92% 2 3 1 3 3 43.63% 28.00% 3 1 3 3 2 30.64% 39.00%
79 1 3 3 3 1 19.07% 0.57% 3 3 3 1 1 38.75% 9.66% 3 3 1 1 3 43.81% ‐1.96% 3 1 1 3 3 35.13% 14.00% 1 1 3 3 3 -7.79% 19.50%
80 1 3 3 3 2 19.64% 0.57% 3 3 3 2 1 48.41% 9.66% 3 3 2 1 3 41.85% ‐1.96% 3 2 1 3 3 49.13% 14.00% 2 1 3 3 3 11.71% 19.50%
81 1 3 3 3 3 20.21% 1.14% 3 3 3 3 1 58.07% 19.32% 3 3 3 1 3 39.89% ‐3.92% 3 3 1 3 3 63.13% 28.00% 3 1 3 3 3 31.21% 39.00%
82 2 1 1 1 1 -4.83% 0.57% 1 1 1 1 2 -23.76% 9.66% 1 1 1 2 1 -14.67% ‐1.96% 1 1 2 1 1 -26.29% 14.00% 1 2 1 1 1 -10.33% 19.50%
83 2 1 1 1 2 -4.26% 0.57% 1 1 1 2 2 -14.10% 9.66% 1 1 2 2 1 -16.63% ‐1.96% 1 2 2 1 1 -12.29% 14.00% 2 2 1 1 1 9.17% 19.50%
84 2 1 1 1 3 -3.69% 1.14% 1 1 1 3 2 -4.44% 19.32% 1 1 3 2 1 -18.59% ‐3.92% 1 3 2 1 1 1.71% 28.00% 3 2 1 1 1 28.67% 39.00%
85 2 1 1 2 1 4.83% 0.57% 1 1 2 1 2 -25.72% 9.66% 1 2 1 2 1 -0.67% ‐1.96% 2 1 2 1 1 -6.79% 14.00% 1 2 1 1 2 -9.76% 19.50%
86 2 1 1 2 2 5.40% 0.57% 1 1 2 2 2 -16.06% 9.66% 1 2 2 2 1 -2.63% ‐1.96% 2 2 2 1 1 7.21% 14.00% 2 2 1 1 2 9.74% 19.50%
87 2 1 1 2 3 5.97% 1.14% 1 1 2 3 2 -6.40% 19.32% 1 2 3 2 1 -4.59% ‐3.92% 2 3 2 1 1 21.21% 28.00% 3 2 1 1 2 29.24% 39.00%
88 2 1 1 3 1 14.49% 0.57% 1 1 3 1 2 -27.68% 9.66% 1 3 1 2 1 13.33% ‐1.96% 3 1 2 1 1 12.71% 14.00% 1 2 1 1 3 -9.19% 19.50%
89 2 1 1 3 2 15.06% 0.57% 1 1 3 2 2 -18.02% 9.66% 1 3 2 2 1 11.37% ‐1.96% 3 2 2 1 1 26.71% 14.00% 2 2 1 1 3 10.31% 19.50%
90 2 1 1 3 3 15.63% 1.14% 1 1 3 3 2 -8.36% 19.32% 1 3 3 2 1 9.41% ‐3.92% 3 3 2 1 1 40.71% 28.00% 3 2 1 1 3 29.81% 39.00%
91 2 1 2 1 1 -6.79% 0.57% 1 2 1 1 2 -9.76% 9.66% 2 1 1 2 1 4.83% ‐1.96% 1 1 2 1 2 -25.72% 14.00% 1 2 1 2 1 -0.67% 19.50%
92 2 1 2 1 2 -6.22% 0.57% 1 2 1 2 2 -0.10% 9.66% 2 1 2 2 1 2.87% ‐1.96% 1 2 2 1 2 -11.72% 14.00% 2 2 1 2 1 18.83% 19.50%
93 2 1 2 1 3 -5.65% 1.14% 1 2 1 3 2 9.56% 19.32% 2 1 3 2 1 0.91% ‐3.92% 1 3 2 1 2 2.28% 28.00% 3 2 1 2 1 38.33% 39.00%
94 2 1 2 2 1 2.87% 0.57% 1 2 2 1 2 -11.72% 9.66% 2 2 1 2 1 18.83% ‐1.96% 2 1 2 1 2 -6.22% 14.00% 1 2 1 2 2 -0.10% 19.50%
95 2 1 2 2 2 3.44% 0.57% 1 2 2 2 2 -2.06% 9.66% 2 2 2 2 1 16.87% ‐1.96% 2 2 2 1 2 7.78% 14.00% 2 2 1 2 2 19.40% 19.50%
96 2 1 2 2 3 4.01% 1.14% 1 2 2 3 2 7.60% 19.32% 2 2 3 2 1 14.91% ‐3.92% 2 3 2 1 2 21.78% 28.00% 3 2 1 2 2 38.90% 39.00%
97 2 1 2 3 1 12.53% 0.57% 1 2 3 1 2 -13.68% 9.66% 2 3 1 2 1 32.83% ‐1.96% 3 1 2 1 2 13.28% 14.00% 1 2 1 2 3 0.47% 19.50%
98 2 1 2 3 2 13.10% 0.57% 1 2 3 2 2 -4.02% 9.66% 2 3 2 2 1 30.87% ‐1.96% 3 2 2 1 2 27.28% 14.00% 2 2 1 2 3 19.97% 19.50%
99 2 1 2 3 3 13.67% 1.14% 1 2 3 3 2 5.64% 19.32% 2 3 3 2 1 28.91% ‐3.92% 3 3 2 1 2 41.28% 28.00% 3 2 1 2 3 39.47% 39.00%
100 2 1 3 1 1 -8.75% 0.57% 1 3 1 1 2 4.24% 9.66% 3 1 1 2 1 24.33% ‐1.96% 1 1 2 1 3 -25.15% 14.00% 1 2 1 3 1 8.99% 19.50%
101 2 1 3 1 2 -8.18% 0.57% 1 3 1 2 2 13.90% 9.66% 3 1 2 2 1 22.37% ‐1.96% 1 2 2 1 3 -11.15% 14.00% 2 2 1 3 1 28.49% 19.50%
102 2 1 3 1 3 -7.61% 1.14% 1 3 1 3 2 23.56% 19.32% 3 1 3 2 1 20.41% ‐3.92% 1 3 2 1 3 2.85% 28.00% 3 2 1 3 1 47.99% 39.00%
103 2 1 3 2 1 0.91% 0.57% 1 3 2 1 2 2.28% 9.66% 3 2 1 2 1 38.33% ‐1.96% 2 1 2 1 3 -5.65% 14.00% 1 2 1 3 2 9.56% 19.50%
104 2 1 3 2 2 1.48% 0.57% 1 3 2 2 2 11.94% 9.66% 3 2 2 2 1 36.37% ‐1.96% 2 2 2 1 3 8.35% 14.00% 2 2 1 3 2 29.06% 19.50%
105 2 1 3 2 3 2.05% 1.14% 1 3 2 3 2 21.60% 19.32% 3 2 3 2 1 34.41% ‐3.92% 2 3 2 1 3 22.35% 28.00% 3 2 1 3 2 48.56% 39.00%
106 2 1 3 3 1 10.57% 0.57% 1 3 3 1 2 0.32% 9.66% 3 3 1 2 1 52.33% ‐1.96% 3 1 2 1 3 13.85% 14.00% 1 2 1 3 3 10.13% 19.50%
107 2 1 3 3 2 11.14% 0.57% 1 3 3 2 2 9.98% 9.66% 3 3 2 2 1 50.37% ‐1.96% 3 2 2 1 3 27.85% 14.00% 2 2 1 3 3 29.63% 19.50%
108 2 1 3 3 3 11.71% 1.14% 1 3 3 3 2 19.64% 19.32% 3 3 3 2 1 48.41% ‐3.92% 3 3 2 1 3 41.85% 28.00% 3 2 1 3 3 49.13% 39.00%
355


109 2 2 1 1 1 9.17% 0.57% 2 1 1 1 2 -4.26% 9.66% 1 1 1 2 2 -14.10% ‐1.96% 1 1 2 2 1 -16.63% 14.00% 1 2 2 1 1 -12.29% 19.50%
110 2 2 1 1 2 9.74% 0.57% 2 1 1 2 2 5.40% 9.66% 1 1 2 2 2 -16.06% ‐1.96% 1 2 2 2 1 -2.63% 14.00% 2 2 2 1 1 7.21% 19.50%
111 2 2 1 1 3 10.31% 1.14% 2 1 1 3 2 15.06% 19.32% 1 1 3 2 2 -18.02% ‐3.92% 1 3 2 2 1 11.37% 28.00% 3 2 2 1 1 26.71% 39.00%
112 2 2 1 2 1 18.83% 0.57% 2 1 2 1 2 -6.22% 9.66% 1 2 1 2 2 -0.10% ‐1.96% 2 1 2 2 1 2.87% 14.00% 1 2 2 1 2 -11.72% 19.50%
113 2 2 1 2 2 19.40% 0.57% 2 1 2 2 2 3.44% 9.66% 1 2 2 2 2 -2.06% ‐1.96% 2 2 2 2 1 16.87% 14.00% 2 2 2 1 2 7.78% 19.50%
114 2 2 1 2 3 19.97% 1.14% 2 1 2 3 2 13.10% 19.32% 1 2 3 2 2 -4.02% ‐3.92% 2 3 2 2 1 30.87% 28.00% 3 2 2 1 2 27.28% 39.00%
115 2 2 1 3 1 28.49% 0.57% 2 1 3 1 2 -8.18% 9.66% 1 3 1 2 2 13.90% ‐1.96% 3 1 2 2 1 22.37% 14.00% 1 2 2 1 3 -11.15% 19.50%
116 2 2 1 3 2 29.06% 0.57% 2 1 3 2 2 1.48% 9.66% 1 3 2 2 2 11.94% ‐1.96% 3 2 2 2 1 36.37% 14.00% 2 2 2 1 3 8.35% 19.50%
117 2 2 1 3 3 29.63% 1.14% 2 1 3 3 2 11.14% 19.32% 1 3 3 2 2 9.98% ‐3.92% 3 3 2 2 1 50.37% 28.00% 3 2 2 1 3 27.85% 39.00%
118 2 2 2 1 1 7.21% 0.57% 2 2 1 1 2 9.74% 9.66% 2 1 1 2 2 5.40% ‐1.96% 1 1 2 2 2 -16.06% 14.00% 1 2 2 2 1 -2.63% 19.50%
119 2 2 2 1 2 7.78% 0.57% 2 2 1 2 2 19.40% 9.66% 2 1 2 2 2 3.44% ‐1.96% 1 2 2 2 2 -2.06% 14.00% 2 2 2 2 1 16.87% 19.50%
120 2 2 2 1 3 8.35% 1.14% 2 2 1 3 2 29.06% 19.32% 2 1 3 2 2 1.48% ‐3.92% 1 3 2 2 2 11.94% 28.00% 3 2 2 2 1 36.37% 39.00%
121 2 2 2 2 1 16.87% 0.57% 2 2 2 1 2 7.78% 9.66% 2 2 1 2 2 19.40% ‐1.96% 2 1 2 2 2 3.44% 14.00% 1 2 2 2 2 -2.06% 19.50%
122 2 2 2 2 2 17.44% 0.57% 2 2 2 2 2 17.44% 9.66% 2 2 2 2 2 17.44% ‐1.96% 2 2 2 2 2 17.44% 14.00% 2 2 2 2 2 17.44% 19.50%
123 2 2 2 2 3 18.01% 1.14% 2 2 2 3 2 27.10% 19.32% 2 2 3 2 2 15.48% ‐3.92% 2 3 2 2 2 31.44% 28.00% 3 2 2 2 2 36.94% 39.00%
124 2 2 2 3 1 26.53% 0.57% 2 2 3 1 2 5.82% 9.66% 2 3 1 2 2 33.40% ‐1.96% 3 1 2 2 2 22.94% 14.00% 1 2 2 2 3 -1.49% 19.50%
125 2 2 2 3 2 27.10% 0.57% 2 2 3 2 2 15.48% 9.66% 2 3 2 2 2 31.44% ‐1.96% 3 2 2 2 2 36.94% 14.00% 2 2 2 2 3 18.01% 19.50%
126 2 2 2 3 3 27.67% 1.14% 2 2 3 3 2 25.14% 19.32% 2 3 3 2 2 29.48% ‐3.92% 3 3 2 2 2 50.94% 28.00% 3 2 2 2 3 37.51% 39.00%
127 2 2 3 1 1 5.25% 0.57% 2 3 1 1 2 23.74% 9.66% 3 1 1 2 2 24.90% ‐1.96% 1 1 2 2 3 -15.49% 14.00% 1 2 2 3 1 7.03% 19.50%
128 2 2 3 1 2 5.82% 0.57% 2 3 1 2 2 33.40% 9.66% 3 1 2 2 2 22.94% ‐1.96% 1 2 2 2 3 -1.49% 14.00% 2 2 2 3 1 26.53% 19.50%
129 2 2 3 1 3 6.39% 1.14% 2 3 1 3 2 43.06% 19.32% 3 1 3 2 2 20.98% ‐3.92% 1 3 2 2 3 12.51% 28.00% 3 2 2 3 1 46.03% 39.00%
130 2 2 3 2 1 14.91% 0.57% 2 3 2 1 2 21.78% 9.66% 3 2 1 2 2 38.90% ‐1.96% 2 1 2 2 3 4.01% 14.00% 1 2 2 3 2 7.60% 19.50%
131 2 2 3 2 2 15.48% 0.57% 2 3 2 2 2 31.44% 9.66% 3 2 2 2 2 36.94% ‐1.96% 2 2 2 2 3 18.01% 14.00% 2 2 2 3 2 27.10% 19.50%
132 2 2 3 2 3 16.05% 1.14% 2 3 2 3 2 41.10% 19.32% 3 2 3 2 2 34.98% ‐3.92% 2 3 2 2 3 32.01% 28.00% 3 2 2 3 2 46.60% 39.00%
133 2 2 3 3 1 24.57% 0.57% 2 3 3 1 2 19.82% 9.66% 3 3 1 2 2 52.90% ‐1.96% 3 1 2 2 3 23.51% 14.00% 1 2 2 3 3 8.17% 19.50%
134 2 2 3 3 2 25.14% 0.57% 2 3 3 2 2 29.48% 9.66% 3 3 2 2 2 50.94% ‐1.96% 3 2 2 2 3 37.51% 14.00% 2 2 2 3 3 27.67% 19.50%
135 2 2 3 3 3 25.71% 1.14% 2 3 3 3 2 39.14% 19.32% 3 3 3 2 2 48.98% ‐3.92% 3 3 2 2 3 51.51% 28.00% 3 2 2 3 3 47.17% 39.00%
136 2 3 1 1 1 23.17% 0.57% 3 1 1 1 2 15.24% 9.66% 1 1 1 2 3 -13.53% ‐1.96% 1 1 2 3 1 -6.97% 14.00% 1 2 3 1 1 -14.25% 19.50%
137 2 3 1 1 2 23.74% 0.57% 3 1 1 2 2 24.90% 9.66% 1 1 2 2 3 -15.49% ‐1.96% 1 2 2 3 1 7.03% 14.00% 2 2 3 1 1 5.25% 19.50%
138 2 3 1 1 3 24.31% 1.14% 3 1 1 3 2 34.56% 19.32% 1 1 3 2 3 -17.45% ‐3.92% 1 3 2 3 1 21.03% 28.00% 3 2 3 1 1 24.75% 39.00%
139 2 3 1 2 1 32.83% 0.57% 3 1 2 1 2 13.28% 9.66% 1 2 1 2 3 0.47% ‐1.96% 2 1 2 3 1 12.53% 14.00% 1 2 3 1 2 -13.68% 19.50%
140 2 3 1 2 2 33.40% 0.57% 3 1 2 2 2 22.94% 9.66% 1 2 2 2 3 -1.49% ‐1.96% 2 2 2 3 1 26.53% 14.00% 2 2 3 1 2 5.82% 19.50%
141 2 3 1 2 3 33.97% 1.14% 3 1 2 3 2 32.60% 19.32% 1 2 3 2 3 -3.45% ‐3.92% 2 3 2 3 1 40.53% 28.00% 3 2 3 1 2 25.32% 39.00%
142 2 3 1 3 1 42.49% 0.57% 3 1 3 1 2 11.32% 9.66% 1 3 1 2 3 14.47% ‐1.96% 3 1 2 3 1 32.03% 14.00% 1 2 3 1 3 -13.11% 19.50%
143 2 3 1 3 2 43.06% 0.57% 3 1 3 2 2 20.98% 9.66% 1 3 2 2 3 12.51% ‐1.96% 3 2 2 3 1 46.03% 14.00% 2 2 3 1 3 6.39% 19.50%
144 2 3 1 3 3 43.63% 1.14% 3 1 3 3 2 30.64% 19.32% 1 3 3 2 3 10.55% ‐3.92% 3 3 2 3 1 60.03% 28.00% 3 2 3 1 3 25.89% 39.00%
145 2 3 2 1 1 21.21% 0.57% 3 2 1 1 2 29.24% 9.66% 2 1 1 2 3 5.97% ‐1.96% 1 1 2 3 2 -6.40% 14.00% 1 2 3 2 1 -4.59% 19.50%
146 2 3 2 1 2 21.78% 0.57% 3 2 1 2 2 38.90% 9.66% 2 1 2 2 3 4.01% ‐1.96% 1 2 2 3 2 7.60% 14.00% 2 2 3 2 1 14.91% 19.50%
147 2 3 2 1 3 22.35% 1.14% 3 2 1 3 2 48.56% 19.32% 2 1 3 2 3 2.05% ‐3.92% 1 3 2 3 2 21.60% 28.00% 3 2 3 2 1 34.41% 39.00%
148 2 3 2 2 1 30.87% 0.57% 3 2 2 1 2 27.28% 9.66% 2 2 1 2 3 19.97% ‐1.96% 2 1 2 3 2 13.10% 14.00% 1 2 3 2 2 -4.02% 19.50%
149 2 3 2 2 2 31.44% 0.57% 3 2 2 2 2 36.94% 9.66% 2 2 2 2 3 18.01% ‐1.96% 2 2 2 3 2 27.10% 14.00% 2 2 3 2 2 15.48% 19.50%
150 2 3 2 2 3 32.01% 1.14% 3 2 2 3 2 46.60% 19.32% 2 2 3 2 3 16.05% ‐3.92% 2 3 2 3 2 41.10% 28.00% 3 2 3 2 2 34.98% 39.00%
151 2 3 2 3 1 40.53% 0.57% 3 2 3 1 2 25.32% 9.66% 2 3 1 2 3 33.97% ‐1.96% 3 1 2 3 2 32.60% 14.00% 1 2 3 2 3 -3.45% 19.50%
152 2 3 2 3 2 41.10% 0.57% 3 2 3 2 2 34.98% 9.66% 2 3 2 2 3 32.01% ‐1.96% 3 2 2 3 2 46.60% 14.00% 2 2 3 2 3 16.05% 19.50%
153 2 3 2 3 3 41.67% 1.14% 3 2 3 3 2 44.64% 19.32% 2 3 3 2 3 30.05% ‐3.92% 3 3 2 3 2 60.60% 28.00% 3 2 3 2 3 35.55% 39.00%
154 2 3 3 1 1 19.25% 0.57% 3 3 1 1 2 43.24% 9.66% 3 1 1 2 3 25.47% ‐1.96% 1 1 2 3 3 -5.83% 14.00% 1 2 3 3 1 5.07% 19.50%
155 2 3 3 1 2 19.82% 0.57% 3 3 1 2 2 52.90% 9.66% 3 1 2 2 3 23.51% ‐1.96% 1 2 2 3 3 8.17% 14.00% 2 2 3 3 1 24.57% 19.50%
156 2 3 3 1 3 20.39% 1.14% 3 3 1 3 2 62.56% 19.32% 3 1 3 2 3 21.55% ‐3.92% 1 3 2 3 3 22.17% 28.00% 3 2 3 3 1 44.07% 39.00%
157 2 3 3 2 1 28.91% 0.57% 3 3 2 1 2 41.28% 9.66% 3 2 1 2 3 39.47% ‐1.96% 2 1 2 3 3 13.67% 14.00% 1 2 3 3 2 5.64% 19.50%
158 2 3 3 2 2 29.48% 0.57% 3 3 2 2 2 50.94% 9.66% 3 2 2 2 3 37.51% ‐1.96% 2 2 2 3 3 27.67% 14.00% 2 2 3 3 2 25.14% 19.50%
159 2 3 3 2 3 30.05% 1.14% 3 3 2 3 2 60.60% 19.32% 3 2 3 2 3 35.55% ‐3.92% 2 3 2 3 3 41.67% 28.00% 3 2 3 3 2 44.64% 39.00%
160 2 3 3 3 1 38.57% 0.57% 3 3 3 1 2 39.32% 9.66% 3 3 1 2 3 53.47% ‐1.96% 3 1 2 3 3 33.17% 14.00% 1 2 3 3 3 6.21% 19.50%
161 2 3 3 3 2 39.14% 0.57% 3 3 3 2 2 48.98% 9.66% 3 3 2 2 3 51.51% ‐1.96% 3 2 2 3 3 47.17% 14.00% 2 2 3 3 3 25.71% 19.50%
162 2 3 3 3 3 39.71% 1.14% 3 3 3 3 2 58.64% 19.32% 3 3 3 2 3 49.55% ‐3.92% 3 3 2 3 3 61.17% 28.00% 3 2 3 3 3 45.21% 39.00%
356


163 3 1 1 1 1 14.67% 0.57% 1 1 1 1 3 -23.19% 9.66% 1 1 1 3 1 -5.01% ‐1.96% 1 1 3 1 1 -28.25% 14.00% 1 3 1 1 1 3.67% 19.50%
164 3 1 1 1 2 15.24% 0.57% 1 1 1 2 3 -13.53% 9.66% 1 1 2 3 1 -6.97% ‐1.96% 1 2 3 1 1 -14.25% 14.00% 2 3 1 1 1 23.17% 19.50%
165 3 1 1 1 3 15.81% 1.14% 1 1 1 3 3 -3.87% 19.32% 1 1 3 3 1 -8.93% ‐3.92% 1 3 3 1 1 -0.25% 28.00% 3 3 1 1 1 42.67% 39.00%
166 3 1 1 2 1 24.33% 0.57% 1 1 2 1 3 -25.15% 9.66% 1 2 1 3 1 8.99% ‐1.96% 2 1 3 1 1 -8.75% 14.00% 1 3 1 1 2 4.24% 19.50%
167 3 1 1 2 2 24.90% 0.57% 1 1 2 2 3 -15.49% 9.66% 1 2 2 3 1 7.03% ‐1.96% 2 2 3 1 1 5.25% 14.00% 2 3 1 1 2 23.74% 19.50%
168 3 1 1 2 3 25.47% 1.14% 1 1 2 3 3 -5.83% 19.32% 1 2 3 3 1 5.07% ‐3.92% 2 3 3 1 1 19.25% 28.00% 3 3 1 1 2 43.24% 39.00%
169 3 1 1 3 1 33.99% 0.57% 1 1 3 1 3 -27.11% 9.66% 1 3 1 3 1 22.99% ‐1.96% 3 1 3 1 1 10.75% 14.00% 1 3 1 1 3 4.81% 19.50%
170 3 1 1 3 2 34.56% 0.57% 1 1 3 2 3 -17.45% 9.66% 1 3 2 3 1 21.03% ‐1.96% 3 2 3 1 1 24.75% 14.00% 2 3 1 1 3 24.31% 19.50%
171 3 1 1 3 3 35.13% 1.14% 1 1 3 3 3 -7.79% 19.32% 1 3 3 3 1 19.07% ‐3.92% 3 3 3 1 1 38.75% 28.00% 3 3 1 1 3 43.81% 39.00%
172 3 1 2 1 1 12.71% 0.57% 1 2 1 1 3 -9.19% 9.66% 2 1 1 3 1 14.49% ‐1.96% 1 1 3 1 2 -27.68% 14.00% 1 3 1 2 1 13.33% 19.50%
173 3 1 2 1 2 13.28% 0.57% 1 2 1 2 3 0.47% 9.66% 2 1 2 3 1 12.53% ‐1.96% 1 2 3 1 2 -13.68% 14.00% 2 3 1 2 1 32.83% 19.50%
174 3 1 2 1 3 13.85% 1.14% 1 2 1 3 3 10.13% 19.32% 2 1 3 3 1 10.57% ‐3.92% 1 3 3 1 2 0.32% 28.00% 3 3 1 2 1 52.33% 39.00%
175 3 1 2 2 1 22.37% 0.57% 1 2 2 1 3 -11.15% 9.66% 2 2 1 3 1 28.49% ‐1.96% 2 1 3 1 2 -8.18% 14.00% 1 3 1 2 2 13.90% 19.50%
176 3 1 2 2 2 22.94% 0.57% 1 2 2 2 3 -1.49% 9.66% 2 2 2 3 1 26.53% ‐1.96% 2 2 3 1 2 5.82% 14.00% 2 3 1 2 2 33.40% 19.50%
177 3 1 2 2 3 23.51% 1.14% 1 2 2 3 3 8.17% 19.32% 2 2 3 3 1 24.57% ‐3.92% 2 3 3 1 2 19.82% 28.00% 3 3 1 2 2 52.90% 39.00%
178 3 1 2 3 1 32.03% 0.57% 1 2 3 1 3 -13.11% 9.66% 2 3 1 3 1 42.49% ‐1.96% 3 1 3 1 2 11.32% 14.00% 1 3 1 2 3 14.47% 19.50%
179 3 1 2 3 2 32.60% 0.57% 1 2 3 2 3 -3.45% 9.66% 2 3 2 3 1 40.53% ‐1.96% 3 2 3 1 2 25.32% 14.00% 2 3 1 2 3 33.97% 19.50%
180 3 1 2 3 3 33.17% 1.14% 1 2 3 3 3 6.21% 19.32% 2 3 3 3 1 38.57% ‐3.92% 3 3 3 1 2 39.32% 28.00% 3 3 1 2 3 53.47% 39.00%
181 3 1 3 1 1 10.75% 0.57% 1 3 1 1 3 4.81% 9.66% 3 1 1 3 1 33.99% ‐1.96% 1 1 3 1 3 -27.11% 14.00% 1 3 1 3 1 22.99% 19.50%
182 3 1 3 1 2 11.32% 0.57% 1 3 1 2 3 14.47% 9.66% 3 1 2 3 1 32.03% ‐1.96% 1 2 3 1 3 -13.11% 14.00% 2 3 1 3 1 42.49% 19.50%
183 3 1 3 1 3 11.89% 1.14% 1 3 1 3 3 24.13% 19.32% 3 1 3 3 1 30.07% ‐3.92% 1 3 3 1 3 0.89% 28.00% 3 3 1 3 1 61.99% 39.00%
184 3 1 3 2 1 20.41% 0.57% 1 3 2 1 3 2.85% 9.66% 3 2 1 3 1 47.99% ‐1.96% 2 1 3 1 3 -7.61% 14.00% 1 3 1 3 2 23.56% 19.50%
185 3 1 3 2 2 20.98% 0.57% 1 3 2 2 3 12.51% 9.66% 3 2 2 3 1 46.03% ‐1.96% 2 2 3 1 3 6.39% 14.00% 2 3 1 3 2 43.06% 19.50%
186 3 1 3 2 3 21.55% 1.14% 1 3 2 3 3 22.17% 19.32% 3 2 3 3 1 44.07% ‐3.92% 2 3 3 1 3 20.39% 28.00% 3 3 1 3 2 62.56% 39.00%
187 3 1 3 3 1 30.07% 0.57% 1 3 3 1 3 0.89% 9.66% 3 3 1 3 1 61.99% ‐1.96% 3 1 3 1 3 11.89% 14.00% 1 3 1 3 3 24.13% 19.50%
188 3 1 3 3 2 30.64% 0.57% 1 3 3 2 3 10.55% 9.66% 3 3 2 3 1 60.03% ‐1.96% 3 2 3 1 3 25.89% 14.00% 2 3 1 3 3 43.63% 19.50%
189 3 1 3 3 3 31.21% 1.14% 1 3 3 3 3 20.21% 19.32% 3 3 3 3 1 58.07% ‐3.92% 3 3 3 1 3 39.89% 28.00% 3 3 1 3 3 63.13% 39.00%
190 3 2 1 1 1 28.67% 0.57% 2 1 1 1 3 -3.69% 9.66% 1 1 1 3 2 -4.44% ‐1.96% 1 1 3 2 1 -18.59% 14.00% 1 3 2 1 1 1.71% 19.50%
191 3 2 1 1 2 29.24% 0.57% 2 1 1 2 3 5.97% 9.66% 1 1 2 3 2 -6.40% ‐1.96% 1 2 3 2 1 -4.59% 14.00% 2 3 2 1 1 21.21% 19.50%
192 3 2 1 1 3 29.81% 1.14% 2 1 1 3 3 15.63% 19.32% 1 1 3 3 2 -8.36% ‐3.92% 1 3 3 2 1 9.41% 28.00% 3 3 2 1 1 40.71% 39.00%
193 3 2 1 2 1 38.33% 0.57% 2 1 2 1 3 -5.65% 9.66% 1 2 1 3 2 9.56% ‐1.96% 2 1 3 2 1 0.91% 14.00% 1 3 2 1 2 2.28% 19.50%
194 3 2 1 2 2 38.90% 0.57% 2 1 2 2 3 4.01% 9.66% 1 2 2 3 2 7.60% ‐1.96% 2 2 3 2 1 14.91% 14.00% 2 3 2 1 2 21.78% 19.50%
195 3 2 1 2 3 39.47% 1.14% 2 1 2 3 3 13.67% 19.32% 1 2 3 3 2 5.64% ‐3.92% 2 3 3 2 1 28.91% 28.00% 3 3 2 1 2 41.28% 39.00%
196 3 2 1 3 1 47.99% 0.57% 2 1 3 1 3 -7.61% 9.66% 1 3 1 3 2 23.56% ‐1.96% 3 1 3 2 1 20.41% 14.00% 1 3 2 1 3 2.85% 19.50%
197 3 2 1 3 2 48.56% 0.57% 2 1 3 2 3 2.05% 9.66% 1 3 2 3 2 21.60% ‐1.96% 3 2 3 2 1 34.41% 14.00% 2 3 2 1 3 22.35% 19.50%
198 3 2 1 3 3 49.13% 1.14% 2 1 3 3 3 11.71% 19.32% 1 3 3 3 2 19.64% ‐3.92% 3 3 3 2 1 48.41% 28.00% 3 3 2 1 3 41.85% 39.00%
199 3 2 2 1 1 26.71% 0.57% 2 2 1 1 3 10.31% 9.66% 2 1 1 3 2 15.06% ‐1.96% 1 1 3 2 2 -18.02% 14.00% 1 3 2 2 1 11.37% 19.50%
200 3 2 2 1 2 27.28% 0.57% 2 2 1 2 3 19.97% 9.66% 2 1 2 3 2 13.10% ‐1.96% 1 2 3 2 2 -4.02% 14.00% 2 3 2 2 1 30.87% 19.50%
201 3 2 2 1 3 27.85% 1.14% 2 2 1 3 3 29.63% 19.32% 2 1 3 3 2 11.14% ‐3.92% 1 3 3 2 2 9.98% 28.00% 3 3 2 2 1 50.37% 39.00%
202 3 2 2 2 1 36.37% 0.57% 2 2 2 1 3 8.35% 9.66% 2 2 1 3 2 29.06% ‐1.96% 2 1 3 2 2 1.48% 14.00% 1 3 2 2 2 11.94% 19.50%
203 3 2 2 2 2 36.94% 0.57% 2 2 2 2 3 18.01% 9.66% 2 2 2 3 2 27.10% ‐1.96% 2 2 3 2 2 15.48% 14.00% 2 3 2 2 2 31.44% 19.50%
204 3 2 2 2 3 37.51% 1.14% 2 2 2 3 3 27.67% 19.32% 2 2 3 3 2 25.14% ‐3.92% 2 3 3 2 2 29.48% 28.00% 3 3 2 2 2 50.94% 39.00%
205 3 2 2 3 1 46.03% 0.57% 2 2 3 1 3 6.39% 9.66% 2 3 1 3 2 43.06% ‐1.96% 3 1 3 2 2 20.98% 14.00% 1 3 2 2 3 12.51% 19.50%
206 3 2 2 3 2 46.60% 0.57% 2 2 3 2 3 16.05% 9.66% 2 3 2 3 2 41.10% ‐1.96% 3 2 3 2 2 34.98% 14.00% 2 3 2 2 3 32.01% 19.50%
207 3 2 2 3 3 47.17% 1.14% 2 2 3 3 3 25.71% 19.32% 2 3 3 3 2 39.14% ‐3.92% 3 3 3 2 2 48.98% 28.00% 3 3 2 2 3 51.51% 39.00%
208 3 2 3 1 1 24.75% 0.57% 2 3 1 1 3 24.31% 9.66% 3 1 1 3 2 34.56% ‐1.96% 1 1 3 2 3 -17.45% 14.00% 1 3 2 3 1 21.03% 19.50%
209 3 2 3 1 2 25.32% 0.57% 2 3 1 2 3 33.97% 9.66% 3 1 2 3 2 32.60% ‐1.96% 1 2 3 2 3 -3.45% 14.00% 2 3 2 3 1 40.53% 19.50%
210 3 2 3 1 3 25.89% 1.14% 2 3 1 3 3 43.63% 19.32% 3 1 3 3 2 30.64% ‐3.92% 1 3 3 2 3 10.55% 28.00% 3 3 2 3 1 60.03% 39.00%
211 3 2 3 2 1 34.41% 0.57% 2 3 2 1 3 22.35% 9.66% 3 2 1 3 2 48.56% ‐1.96% 2 1 3 2 3 2.05% 14.00% 1 3 2 3 2 21.60% 19.50%
212 3 2 3 2 2 34.98% 0.57% 2 3 2 2 3 32.01% 9.66% 3 2 2 3 2 46.60% ‐1.96% 2 2 3 2 3 16.05% 14.00% 2 3 2 3 2 41.10% 19.50%
213 3 2 3 2 3 35.55% 1.14% 2 3 2 3 3 41.67% 19.32% 3 2 3 3 2 44.64% ‐3.92% 2 3 3 2 3 30.05% 28.00% 3 3 2 3 2 60.60% 39.00%
214 3 2 3 3 1 44.07% 0.57% 2 3 3 1 3 20.39% 9.66% 3 3 1 3 2 62.56% ‐1.96% 3 1 3 2 3 21.55% 14.00% 1 3 2 3 3 22.17% 19.50%
215 3 2 3 3 2 44.64% 0.57% 2 3 3 2 3 30.05% 9.66% 3 3 2 3 2 60.60% ‐1.96% 3 2 3 2 3 35.55% 14.00% 2 3 2 3 3 41.67% 19.50%
216 3 2 3 3 3 45.21% 1.14% 2 3 3 3 3 39.71% 19.32% 3 3 3 3 2 58.64% ‐3.92% 3 3 3 2 3 49.55% 28.00% 3 3 2 3 3 61.17% 39.00%
357


217 3 3 1 1 1 42.67% 0.57% 3 1 1 1 3 15.81% 9.66% 1 1 1 3 3 -3.87% ‐1.96% 1 1 3 3 1 -8.93% 14.00% 1 3 3 1 1 -0.25% 19.50%
218 3 3 1 1 2 43.24% 0.57% 3 1 1 2 3 25.47% 9.66% 1 1 2 3 3 -5.83% ‐1.96% 1 2 3 3 1 5.07% 14.00% 2 3 3 1 1 19.25% 19.50%
219 3 3 1 1 3 43.81% 1.14% 3 1 1 3 3 35.13% 19.32% 1 1 3 3 3 -7.79% ‐3.92% 1 3 3 3 1 19.07% 28.00% 3 3 3 1 1 38.75% 39.00%
220 3 3 1 2 1 52.33% 0.57% 3 1 2 1 3 13.85% 9.66% 1 2 1 3 3 10.13% ‐1.96% 2 1 3 3 1 10.57% 14.00% 1 3 3 1 2 0.32% 19.50%
221 3 3 1 2 2 52.90% 0.57% 3 1 2 2 3 23.51% 9.66% 1 2 2 3 3 8.17% ‐1.96% 2 2 3 3 1 24.57% 14.00% 2 3 3 1 2 19.82% 19.50%
222 3 3 1 2 3 53.47% 1.14% 3 1 2 3 3 33.17% 19.32% 1 2 3 3 3 6.21% ‐3.92% 2 3 3 3 1 38.57% 28.00% 3 3 3 1 2 39.32% 39.00%
223 3 3 1 3 1 61.99% 0.57% 3 1 3 1 3 11.89% 9.66% 1 3 1 3 3 24.13% ‐1.96% 3 1 3 3 1 30.07% 14.00% 1 3 3 1 3 0.89% 19.50%
224 3 3 1 3 2 62.56% 0.57% 3 1 3 2 3 21.55% 9.66% 1 3 2 3 3 22.17% ‐1.96% 3 2 3 3 1 44.07% 14.00% 2 3 3 1 3 20.39% 19.50%
225 3 3 1 3 3 63.13% 1.14% 3 1 3 3 3 31.21% 19.32% 1 3 3 3 3 20.21% ‐3.92% 3 3 3 3 1 58.07% 28.00% 3 3 3 1 3 39.89% 39.00%
226 3 3 2 1 1 40.71% 0.57% 3 2 1 1 3 29.81% 9.66% 2 1 1 3 3 15.63% ‐1.96% 1 1 3 3 2 -8.36% 14.00% 1 3 3 2 1 9.41% 19.50%
227 3 3 2 1 2 41.28% 0.57% 3 2 1 2 3 39.47% 9.66% 2 1 2 3 3 13.67% ‐1.96% 1 2 3 3 2 5.64% 14.00% 2 3 3 2 1 28.91% 19.50%
228 3 3 2 1 3 41.85% 1.14% 3 2 1 3 3 49.13% 19.32% 2 1 3 3 3 11.71% ‐3.92% 1 3 3 3 2 19.64% 28.00% 3 3 3 2 1 48.41% 39.00%
229 3 3 2 2 1 50.37% 0.57% 3 2 2 1 3 27.85% 9.66% 2 2 1 3 3 29.63% ‐1.96% 2 1 3 3 2 11.14% 14.00% 1 3 3 2 2 9.98% 19.50%
230 3 3 2 2 2 50.94% 0.57% 3 2 2 2 3 37.51% 9.66% 2 2 2 3 3 27.67% ‐1.96% 2 2 3 3 2 25.14% 14.00% 2 3 3 2 2 29.48% 19.50%
231 3 3 2 2 3 51.51% 1.14% 3 2 2 3 3 47.17% 19.32% 2 2 3 3 3 25.71% ‐3.92% 2 3 3 3 2 39.14% 28.00% 3 3 3 2 2 48.98% 39.00%
232 3 3 2 3 1 60.03% 0.57% 3 2 3 1 3 25.89% 9.66% 2 3 1 3 3 43.63% ‐1.96% 3 1 3 3 2 30.64% 14.00% 1 3 3 2 3 10.55% 19.50%
233 3 3 2 3 2 60.60% 0.57% 3 2 3 2 3 35.55% 9.66% 2 3 2 3 3 41.67% ‐1.96% 3 2 3 3 2 44.64% 14.00% 2 3 3 2 3 30.05% 19.50%
234 3 3 2 3 3 61.17% 1.14% 3 2 3 3 3 45.21% 19.32% 2 3 3 3 3 39.71% ‐3.92% 3 3 3 3 2 58.64% 28.00% 3 3 3 2 3 49.55% 39.00%
235 3 3 3 1 1 38.75% 0.57% 3 3 1 1 3 43.81% 9.66% 3 1 1 3 3 35.13% ‐1.96% 1 1 3 3 3 -7.79% 14.00% 1 3 3 3 1 19.07% 19.50%
236 3 3 3 1 2 39.32% 0.57% 3 3 1 2 3 53.47% 9.66% 3 1 2 3 3 33.17% ‐1.96% 1 2 3 3 3 6.21% 14.00% 2 3 3 3 1 38.57% 19.50%
237 3 3 3 1 3 39.89% 1.14% 3 3 1 3 3 63.13% 19.32% 3 1 3 3 3 31.21% ‐3.92% 1 3 3 3 3 20.21% 28.00% 3 3 3 3 1 58.07% 39.00%
238 3 3 3 2 1 48.41% 0.57% 3 3 2 1 3 41.85% 9.66% 3 2 1 3 3 49.13% ‐1.96% 2 1 3 3 3 11.71% 14.00% 1 3 3 3 2 19.64% 19.50%
239 3 3 3 2 2 48.98% 0.57% 3 3 2 2 3 51.51% 9.66% 3 2 2 3 3 47.17% ‐1.96% 2 2 3 3 3 25.71% 14.00% 2 3 3 3 2 39.14% 19.50%
240 3 3 3 2 3 49.55% 1.14% 3 3 2 3 3 61.17% 19.32% 3 2 3 3 3 45.21% ‐3.92% 2 3 3 3 3 39.71% 28.00% 3 3 3 3 2 58.64% 39.00%
241 3 3 3 3 1 58.07% 0.57% 3 3 3 1 3 39.89% 9.66% 3 3 1 3 3 63.13% ‐1.96% 3 1 3 3 3 31.21% 14.00% 1 3 3 3 3 20.21% 19.50%
242 3 3 3 3 2 58.64% 0.57% 3 3 3 2 3 49.55% 9.66% 3 3 2 3 3 61.17% ‐1.96% 3 2 3 3 3 45.21% 14.00% 2 3 3 3 3 39.71% 19.50%
243 3 3 3 3 3 59.21% 1.14% 3 3 3 3 3 59.21% 19.32% 3 3 3 3 3 59.21% ‐3.92% 3 3 3 3 3 59.21% 28.00% 3 3 3 3 3 59.21% 39.00%
Legend :
T- Timings
S - Supervision
G - Group Dynamics
P - Procedure
C - Climate
358
Appendix 6-3 : Reinforcement Trade


1 1 1 1 1 1 -41.44% ‐4.99% 1 1 1 1 1 -41.44% 3.01% 1 1 1 1 1 -41.44% ‐3.86% 1 1 1 1 1 -41.44% 24.20% 1 1 1 1 1 -41.44% 15.00%
2 1 1 1 1 2 -46.43% ‐4.99% 1 1 1 2 1 -38.43% 3.01% 1 1 2 1 1 -45.30% ‐3.86% 1 2 1 1 1 -17.24% 24.20% 2 1 1 1 1 -26.44% 15.00%
3 1 1 1 1 3 -51.42% ‐9.98% 1 1 1 3 1 -35.42% 6.02% 1 1 3 1 1 -49.16% ‐7.72% 1 3 1 1 1 6.96% 48.40% 3 1 1 1 1 -11.44% 30.00%
4 1 1 1 2 1 -38.43% ‐4.99% 1 1 2 1 1 -45.30% 3.01% 1 2 1 1 1 -17.24% ‐3.86% 2 1 1 1 1 -26.44% 24.20% 1 1 1 1 2 -46.43% 15.00%
5 1 1 1 2 2 -43.42% ‐4.99% 1 1 2 2 1 -42.29% 3.01% 1 2 2 1 1 -21.10% ‐3.86% 2 2 1 1 1 -2.24% 24.20% 2 1 1 1 2 -31.43% 15.00%
6 1 1 1 2 3 -48.41% ‐9.98% 1 1 2 3 1 -39.28% 6.02% 1 2 3 1 1 -24.96% ‐7.72% 2 3 1 1 1 21.96% 48.40% 3 1 1 1 2 -16.43% 30.00%
7 1 1 1 3 1 -35.42% ‐4.99% 1 1 3 1 1 -49.16% 3.01% 1 3 1 1 1 6.96% ‐3.86% 3 1 1 1 1 -11.44% 24.20% 1 1 1 1 3 -51.42% 15.00%
8 1 1 1 3 2 -40.41% ‐4.99% 1 1 3 2 1 -46.15% 3.01% 1 3 2 1 1 3.10% ‐3.86% 3 2 1 1 1 12.76% 24.20% 2 1 1 1 3 -36.42% 15.00%
9 1 1 1 3 3 -45.40% ‐9.98% 1 1 3 3 1 -43.14% 6.02% 1 3 3 1 1 -0.76% ‐7.72% 3 3 1 1 1 36.96% 48.40% 3 1 1 1 3 -21.42% 30.00%
10 1 1 2 1 1 -45.30% ‐4.99% 1 2 1 1 1 -17.24% 3.01% 2 1 1 1 1 -26.44% ‐3.86% 1 1 1 1 2 -46.43% 24.20% 1 1 1 2 1 -38.43% 15.00%
11 1 1 2 1 2 -50.29% ‐4.99% 1 2 1 2 1 -14.23% 3.01% 2 1 2 1 1 -30.30% ‐3.86% 1 2 1 1 2 -22.23% 24.20% 2 1 1 2 1 -23.43% 15.00%
12 1 1 2 1 3 -55.28% ‐9.98% 1 2 1 3 1 -11.22% 6.02% 2 1 3 1 1 -34.16% ‐7.72% 1 3 1 1 2 1.97% 48.40% 3 1 1 2 1 -8.43% 30.00%
13 1 1 2 2 1 -42.29% ‐4.99% 1 2 2 1 1 -21.10% 3.01% 2 2 1 1 1 -2.24% ‐3.86% 2 1 1 1 2 -31.43% 24.20% 1 1 1 2 2 -43.42% 15.00%
14 1 1 2 2 2 -47.28% ‐4.99% 1 2 2 2 1 -18.09% 3.01% 2 2 2 1 1 -6.10% ‐3.86% 2 2 1 1 2 -7.23% 24.20% 2 1 1 2 2 -28.42% 15.00%
15 1 1 2 2 3 -52.27% ‐9.98% 1 2 2 3 1 -15.08% 6.02% 2 2 3 1 1 -9.96% ‐7.72% 2 3 1 1 2 16.97% 48.40% 3 1 1 2 2 -13.42% 30.00%
16 1 1 2 3 1 -39.28% ‐4.99% 1 2 3 1 1 -24.96% 3.01% 2 3 1 1 1 21.96% ‐3.86% 3 1 1 1 2 -16.43% 24.20% 1 1 1 2 3 -48.41% 15.00%
17 1 1 2 3 2 -44.27% ‐4.99% 1 2 3 2 1 -21.95% 3.01% 2 3 2 1 1 18.10% ‐3.86% 3 2 1 1 2 7.77% 24.20% 2 1 1 2 3 -33.41% 15.00%
18 1 1 2 3 3 -49.26% ‐9.98% 1 2 3 3 1 -18.94% 6.02% 2 3 3 1 1 14.24% ‐7.72% 3 3 1 1 2 31.97% 48.40% 3 1 1 2 3 -18.41% 30.00%
19 1 1 3 1 1 -49.16% ‐4.99% 1 3 1 1 1 6.96% 3.01% 3 1 1 1 1 -11.44% ‐3.86% 1 1 1 1 3 -51.42% 24.20% 1 1 1 3 1 -35.42% 15.00%
20 1 1 3 1 2 -54.15% ‐4.99% 1 3 1 2 1 9.97% 3.01% 3 1 2 1 1 -15.30% ‐3.86% 1 2 1 1 3 -27.22% 24.20% 2 1 1 3 1 -20.42% 15.00%
21 1 1 3 1 3 -59.14%
59 % ‐9.98%
9.98% 1 3 1 3 1 12.98%
98% 6.02% 3 1 3 1 1 -19.16%
9 6% ‐7.72%
7.72% 1 3 1 1 3 -3.02%
30 % 48.40% 3 1 1 3 1 -5.42%
5 % 30.00%
22 1 1 3 2 1 -46.15% ‐4.99% 1 3 2 1 1 3.10% 3.01% 3 2 1 1 1 12.76% ‐3.86% 2 1 1 1 3 -36.42% 24.20% 1 1 1 3 2 -40.41% 15.00%
23 1 1 3 2 2 -51.14% ‐4.99% 1 3 2 2 1 6.11% 3.01% 3 2 2 1 1 8.90% ‐3.86% 2 2 1 1 3 -12.22% 24.20% 2 1 1 3 2 -25.41% 15.00%
24 1 1 3 2 3 -56.13% ‐9.98% 1 3 2 3 1 9.12% 6.02% 3 2 3 1 1 5.04% ‐7.72% 2 3 1 1 3 11.98% 48.40% 3 1 1 3 2 -10.41% 30.00%
25 1 1 3 3 1 -43.14% ‐4.99% 1 3 3 1 1 -0.76% 3.01% 3 3 1 1 1 36.96% ‐3.86% 3 1 1 1 3 -21.42% 24.20% 1 1 1 3 3 -45.40% 15.00%
26 1 1 3 3 2 -48.13% ‐4.99% 1 3 3 2 1 2.25% 3.01% 3 3 2 1 1 33.10% ‐3.86% 3 2 1 1 3 2.78% 24.20% 2 1 1 3 3 -30.40% 15.00%
27 1 1 3 3 3 -53.12% ‐9.98% 1 3 3 3 1 5.26% 6.02% 3 3 3 1 1 29.24% ‐7.72% 3 3 1 1 3 26.98% 48.40% 3 1 1 3 3 -15.40% 30.00%
28 1 2 1 1 1 -17.24% ‐4.99% 2 1 1 1 1 -26.44% 3.01% 1 1 1 1 2 -46.43% ‐3.86% 1 1 1 2 1 -38.43% 24.20% 1 1 2 1 1 -45.30% 15.00%
29 1 2 1 1 2 -22.23% ‐4.99% 2 1 1 2 1 -23.43% 3.01% 1 1 2 1 2 -50.29% ‐3.86% 1 2 1 2 1 -14.23% 24.20% 2 1 2 1 1 -30.30% 15.00%
30 1 2 1 1 3 -27.22% ‐9.98% 2 1 1 3 1 -20.42% 6.02% 1 1 3 1 2 -54.15% ‐7.72% 1 3 1 2 1 9.97% 48.40% 3 1 2 1 1 -15.30% 30.00%
31 1 2 1 2 1 -14.23% ‐4.99% 2 1 2 1 1 -30.30% 3.01% 1 2 1 1 2 -22.23% ‐3.86% 2 1 1 2 1 -23.43% 24.20% 1 1 2 1 2 -50.29% 15.00%
32 1 2 1 2 2 -19.22% ‐4.99% 2 1 2 2 1 -27.29% 3.01% 1 2 2 1 2 -26.09% ‐3.86% 2 2 1 2 1 0.77% 24.20% 2 1 2 1 2 -35.29% 15.00%
33 1 2 1 2 3 -24.21% ‐9.98% 2 1 2 3 1 -24.28% 6.02% 1 2 3 1 2 -29.95% ‐7.72% 2 3 1 2 1 24.97% 48.40% 3 1 2 1 2 -20.29% 30.00%
34 1 2 1 3 1 -11.22% ‐4.99% 2 1 3 1 1 -34.16% 3.01% 1 3 1 1 2 1.97% ‐3.86% 3 1 1 2 1 -8.43% 24.20% 1 1 2 1 3 -55.28% 15.00%
35 1 2 1 3 2 -16.21% ‐4.99% 2 1 3 2 1 -31.15% 3.01% 1 3 2 1 2 -1.89% ‐3.86% 3 2 1 2 1 15.77% 24.20% 2 1 2 1 3 -40.28% 15.00%
36 1 2 1 3 3 -21.20% ‐9.98% 2 1 3 3 1 -28.14% 6.02% 1 3 3 1 2 -5.75% ‐7.72% 3 3 1 2 1 39.97% 48.40% 3 1 2 1 3 -25.28% 30.00%
37 1 2 2 1 1 -21.10% ‐4.99% 2 2 1 1 1 -2.24% 3.01% 2 1 1 1 2 -31.43% ‐3.86% 1 1 1 2 2 -43.42% 24.20% 1 1 2 2 1 -42.29% 15.00%
38 1 2 2 1 2 -26.09% ‐4.99% 2 2 1 2 1 0.77% 3.01% 2 1 2 1 2 -35.29% ‐3.86% 1 2 1 2 2 -19.22% 24.20% 2 1 2 2 1 -27.29% 15.00%
39 1 2 2 1 3 -31.08% ‐9.98% 2 2 1 3 1 3.78% 6.02% 2 1 3 1 2 -39.15% ‐7.72% 1 3 1 2 2 4.98% 48.40% 3 1 2 2 1 -12.29% 30.00%
40 1 2 2 2 1 -18.09% ‐4.99% 2 2 2 1 1 -6.10% 3.01% 2 2 1 1 2 -7.23% ‐3.86% 2 1 1 2 2 -28.42% 24.20% 1 1 2 2 2 -47.28% 15.00%
41 1 2 2 2 2 -23.08% ‐4.99% 2 2 2 2 1 -3.09% 3.01% 2 2 2 1 2 -11.09% ‐3.86% 2 2 1 2 2 -4.22% 24.20% 2 1 2 2 2 -32.28% 15.00%
42 1 2 2 2 3 -28.07% ‐9.98% 2 2 2 3 1 -0.08% 6.02% 2 2 3 1 2 -14.95% ‐7.72% 2 3 1 2 2 19.98% 48.40% 3 1 2 2 2 -17.28% 30.00%
43 1 2 2 3 1 -15.08% ‐4.99% 2 2 3 1 1 -9.96% 3.01% 2 3 1 1 2 16.97% ‐3.86% 3 1 1 2 2 -13.42% 24.20% 1 1 2 2 3 -52.27% 15.00%
44 1 2 2 3 2 -20.07% ‐4.99% 2 2 3 2 1 -6.95% 3.01% 2 3 2 1 2 13.11% ‐3.86% 3 2 1 2 2 10.78% 24.20% 2 1 2 2 3 -37.27% 15.00%
45 1 2 2 3 3 -25.06% ‐9.98% 2 2 3 3 1 -3.94% 6.02% 2 3 3 1 2 9.25% ‐7.72% 3 3 1 2 2 34.98% 48.40% 3 1 2 2 3 -22.27% 30.00%
46 1 2 3 1 1 -24.96% ‐4.99% 2 3 1 1 1 21.96% 3.01% 3 1 1 1 2 -16.43% ‐3.86% 1 1 1 2 3 -48.41% 24.20% 1 1 2 3 1 -39.28% 15.00%
47 1 2 3 1 2 -29.95% ‐4.99% 2 3 1 2 1 24.97% 3.01% 3 1 2 1 2 -20.29% ‐3.86% 1 2 1 2 3 -24.21% 24.20% 2 1 2 3 1 -24.28% 15.00%
48 1 2 3 1 3 -34.94% ‐9.98% 2 3 1 3 1 27.98% 6.02% 3 1 3 1 2 -24.15% ‐7.72% 1 3 1 2 3 -0.01% 48.40% 3 1 2 3 1 -9.28% 30.00%
49 1 2 3 2 1 -21.95% ‐4.99% 2 3 2 1 1 18.10% 3.01% 3 2 1 1 2 7.77% ‐3.86% 2 1 1 2 3 -33.41% 24.20% 1 1 2 3 2 -44.27% 15.00%
50 1 2 3 2 2 -26.94% ‐4.99% 2 3 2 2 1 21.11% 3.01% 3 2 2 1 2 3.91% ‐3.86% 2 2 1 2 3 -9.21% 24.20% 2 1 2 3 2 -29.27% 15.00%
51 1 2 3 2 3 -31.93% ‐9.98% 2 3 2 3 1 24.12% 6.02% 3 2 3 1 2 0.05% ‐7.72% 2 3 1 2 3 14.99% 48.40% 3 1 2 3 2 -14.27% 30.00%
52 1 2 3 3 1 -18.94% ‐4.99% 2 3 3 1 1 14.24% 3.01% 3 3 1 1 2 31.97% ‐3.86% 3 1 1 2 3 -18.41% 24.20% 1 1 2 3 3 -49.26% 15.00%
53 1 2 3 3 2 -23.93% ‐4.99% 2 3 3 2 1 17.25% 3.01% 3 3 2 1 2 28.11% ‐3.86% 3 2 1 2 3 5.79% 24.20% 2 1 2 3 3 -34.26% 15.00%
54 1 2 3 3 3 -28.92% ‐9.98% 2 3 3 3 1 20.26% 6.02% 3 3 3 1 2 24.25% ‐7.72% 3 3 1 2 3 29.99% 48.40% 3 1 2 3 3 -19.26% 30.00%
359


55 1 3 1 1 1 6.96% ‐4.99% 3 1 1 1 1 -11.44% 3.01% 1 1 1 1 3 -51.42% ‐3.86% 1 1 1 3 1 -35.42% 24.20% 1 1 3 1 1 -49.16% 15.00%
56 1 3 1 1 2 1.97% ‐4.99% 3 1 1 2 1 -8.43% 3.01% 1 1 2 1 3 -55.28% ‐3.86% 1 2 1 3 1 -11.22% 24.20% 2 1 3 1 1 -34.16% 15.00%
57 1 3 1 1 3 -3.02% ‐9.98% 3 1 1 3 1 -5.42% 6.02% 1 1 3 1 3 -59.14% ‐7.72% 1 3 1 3 1 12.98% 48.40% 3 1 3 1 1 -19.16% 30.00%
58 1 3 1 2 1 9.97% ‐4.99% 3 1 2 1 1 -15.30% 3.01% 1 2 1 1 3 -27.22% ‐3.86% 2 1 1 3 1 -20.42% 24.20% 1 1 3 1 2 -54.15% 15.00%
59 1 3 1 2 2 4.98% ‐4.99% 3 1 2 2 1 -12.29% 3.01% 1 2 2 1 3 -31.08% ‐3.86% 2 2 1 3 1 3.78% 24.20% 2 1 3 1 2 -39.15% 15.00%
60 1 3 1 2 3 -0.01% ‐9.98% 3 1 2 3 1 -9.28% 6.02% 1 2 3 1 3 -34.94% ‐7.72% 2 3 1 3 1 27.98% 48.40% 3 1 3 1 2 -24.15% 30.00%
61 1 3 1 3 1 12.98% ‐4.99% 3 1 3 1 1 -19.16% 3.01% 1 3 1 1 3 -3.02% ‐3.86% 3 1 1 3 1 -5.42% 24.20% 1 1 3 1 3 -59.14% 15.00%
62 1 3 1 3 2 7.99% ‐4.99% 3 1 3 2 1 -16.15% 3.01% 1 3 2 1 3 -6.88% ‐3.86% 3 2 1 3 1 18.78% 24.20% 2 1 3 1 3 -44.14% 15.00%
63 1 3 1 3 3 3.00% ‐9.98% 3 1 3 3 1 -13.14% 6.02% 1 3 3 1 3 -10.74% ‐7.72% 3 3 1 3 1 42.98% 48.40% 3 1 3 1 3 -29.14% 30.00%
64 1 3 2 1 1 3.10% ‐4.99% 3 2 1 1 1 12.76% 3.01% 2 1 1 1 3 -36.42% ‐3.86% 1 1 1 3 2 -40.41% 24.20% 1 1 3 2 1 -46.15% 15.00%
65 1 3 2 1 2 -1.89% ‐4.99% 3 2 1 2 1 15.77% 3.01% 2 1 2 1 3 -40.28% ‐3.86% 1 2 1 3 2 -16.21% 24.20% 2 1 3 2 1 -31.15% 15.00%
66 1 3 2 1 3 -6.88% ‐9.98% 3 2 1 3 1 18.78% 6.02% 2 1 3 1 3 -44.14% ‐7.72% 1 3 1 3 2 7.99% 48.40% 3 1 3 2 1 -16.15% 30.00%
67 1 3 2 2 1 6.11% ‐4.99% 3 2 2 1 1 8.90% 3.01% 2 2 1 1 3 -12.22% ‐3.86% 2 1 1 3 2 -25.41% 24.20% 1 1 3 2 2 -51.14% 15.00%
68 1 3 2 2 2 1.12% ‐4.99% 3 2 2 2 1 11.91% 3.01% 2 2 2 1 3 -16.08% ‐3.86% 2 2 1 3 2 -1.21% 24.20% 2 1 3 2 2 -36.14% 15.00%
69 1 3 2 2 3 -3.87% ‐9.98% 3 2 2 3 1 14.92% 6.02% 2 2 3 1 3 -19.94% ‐7.72% 2 3 1 3 2 22.99% 48.40% 3 1 3 2 2 -21.14% 30.00%
70 1 3 2 3 1 9.12% ‐4.99% 3 2 3 1 1 5.04% 3.01% 2 3 1 1 3 11.98% ‐3.86% 3 1 1 3 2 -10.41% 24.20% 1 1 3 2 3 -56.13% 15.00%
71 1 3 2 3 2 4.13% ‐4.99% 3 2 3 2 1 8.05% 3.01% 2 3 2 1 3 8.12% ‐3.86% 3 2 1 3 2 13.79% 24.20% 2 1 3 2 3 -41.13% 15.00%
72 1 3 2 3 3 -0.86% ‐9.98% 3 2 3 3 1 11.06% 6.02% 2 3 3 1 3 4.26% ‐7.72% 3 3 1 3 2 37.99% 48.40% 3 1 3 2 3 -26.13% 30.00%
73 1 3 3 1 1 -0.76% ‐4.99% 3 3 1 1 1 36.96% 3.01% 3 1 1 1 3 -21.42% ‐3.86% 1 1 1 3 3 -45.40% 24.20% 1 1 3 3 1 -43.14% 15.00%
74 1 3 3 1 2 -5.75% ‐4.99% 3 3 1 2 1 39.97% 3.01% 3 1 2 1 3 -25.28% ‐3.86% 1 2 1 3 3 -21.20% 24.20% 2 1 3 3 1 -28.14% 15.00%
75 1 3 3 1 3 -10.74%
0 % ‐9.98%
9.98% 3 3 1 3 1 42.98%
98% 6.02% 3 1 3 1 3 -29.14%
9 % ‐7.72%
7.72% 1 3 1 3 3 3.00%
3 00% 48.40% 3 1 3 3 1 -13.14%
3 % 30.00%
76 1 3 3 2 1 2.25% ‐4.99% 3 3 2 1 1 33.10% 3.01% 3 2 1 1 3 2.78% ‐3.86% 2 1 1 3 3 -30.40% 24.20% 1 1 3 3 2 -48.13% 15.00%
77 1 3 3 2 2 -2.74% ‐4.99% 3 3 2 2 1 36.11% 3.01% 3 2 2 1 3 -1.08% ‐3.86% 2 2 1 3 3 -6.20% 24.20% 2 1 3 3 2 -33.13% 15.00%
78 1 3 3 2 3 -7.73% ‐9.98% 3 3 2 3 1 39.12% 6.02% 3 2 3 1 3 -4.94% ‐7.72% 2 3 1 3 3 18.00% 48.40% 3 1 3 3 2 -18.13% 30.00%
79 1 3 3 3 1 5.26% ‐4.99% 3 3 3 1 1 29.24% 3.01% 3 3 1 1 3 26.98% ‐3.86% 3 1 1 3 3 -15.40% 24.20% 1 1 3 3 3 -53.12% 15.00%
80 1 3 3 3 2 0.27% ‐4.99% 3 3 3 2 1 32.25% 3.01% 3 3 2 1 3 23.12% ‐3.86% 3 2 1 3 3 8.80% 24.20% 2 1 3 3 3 -38.12% 15.00%
81 1 3 3 3 3 -4.72% ‐9.98% 3 3 3 3 1 35.26% 6.02% 3 3 3 1 3 19.26% ‐7.72% 3 3 1 3 3 33.00% 48.40% 3 1 3 3 3 -23.12% 30.00%
82 2 1 1 1 1 -26.44% ‐4.99% 1 1 1 1 2 -46.43% 3.01% 1 1 1 2 1 -38.43% ‐3.86% 1 1 2 1 1 -45.30% 24.20% 1 2 1 1 1 -17.24% 15.00%
83 2 1 1 1 2 -31.43% ‐4.99% 1 1 1 2 2 -43.42% 3.01% 1 1 2 2 1 -42.29% ‐3.86% 1 2 2 1 1 -21.10% 24.20% 2 2 1 1 1 -2.24% 15.00%
84 2 1 1 1 3 -36.42% ‐9.98% 1 1 1 3 2 -40.41% 6.02% 1 1 3 2 1 -46.15% ‐7.72% 1 3 2 1 1 3.10% 48.40% 3 2 1 1 1 12.76% 30.00%
85 2 1 1 2 1 -23.43% ‐4.99% 1 1 2 1 2 -50.29% 3.01% 1 2 1 2 1 -14.23% ‐3.86% 2 1 2 1 1 -30.30% 24.20% 1 2 1 1 2 -22.23% 15.00%
86 2 1 1 2 2 -28.42% ‐4.99% 1 1 2 2 2 -47.28% 3.01% 1 2 2 2 1 -18.09% ‐3.86% 2 2 2 1 1 -6.10% 24.20% 2 2 1 1 2 -7.23% 15.00%
87 2 1 1 2 3 -33.41% ‐9.98% 1 1 2 3 2 -44.27% 6.02% 1 2 3 2 1 -21.95% ‐7.72% 2 3 2 1 1 18.10% 48.40% 3 2 1 1 2 7.77% 30.00%
88 2 1 1 3 1 -20.42% ‐4.99% 1 1 3 1 2 -54.15% 3.01% 1 3 1 2 1 9.97% ‐3.86% 3 1 2 1 1 -15.30% 24.20% 1 2 1 1 3 -27.22% 15.00%
89 2 1 1 3 2 -25.41% ‐4.99% 1 1 3 2 2 -51.14% 3.01% 1 3 2 2 1 6.11% ‐3.86% 3 2 2 1 1 8.90% 24.20% 2 2 1 1 3 -12.22% 15.00%
90 2 1 1 3 3 -30.40% ‐9.98% 1 1 3 3 2 -48.13% 6.02% 1 3 3 2 1 2.25% ‐7.72% 3 3 2 1 1 33.10% 48.40% 3 2 1 1 3 2.78% 30.00%
91 2 1 2 1 1 -30.30% ‐4.99% 1 2 1 1 2 -22.23% 3.01% 2 1 1 2 1 -23.43% ‐3.86% 1 1 2 1 2 -50.29% 24.20% 1 2 1 2 1 -14.23% 15.00%
92 2 1 2 1 2 -35.29% ‐4.99% 1 2 1 2 2 -19.22% 3.01% 2 1 2 2 1 -27.29% ‐3.86% 1 2 2 1 2 -26.09% 24.20% 2 2 1 2 1 0.77% 15.00%
93 2 1 2 1 3 -40.28% ‐9.98% 1 2 1 3 2 -16.21% 6.02% 2 1 3 2 1 -31.15% ‐7.72% 1 3 2 1 2 -1.89% 48.40% 3 2 1 2 1 15.77% 30.00%
94 2 1 2 2 1 -27.29% ‐4.99% 1 2 2 1 2 -26.09% 3.01% 2 2 1 2 1 0.77% ‐3.86% 2 1 2 1 2 -35.29% 24.20% 1 2 1 2 2 -19.22% 15.00%
95 2 1 2 2 2 -32.28% ‐4.99% 1 2 2 2 2 -23.08% 3.01% 2 2 2 2 1 -3.09% ‐3.86% 2 2 2 1 2 -11.09% 24.20% 2 2 1 2 2 -4.22% 15.00%
96 2 1 2 2 3 -37.27% ‐9.98% 1 2 2 3 2 -20.07% 6.02% 2 2 3 2 1 -6.95% ‐7.72% 2 3 2 1 2 13.11% 48.40% 3 2 1 2 2 10.78% 30.00%
97 2 1 2 3 1 -24.28% ‐4.99% 1 2 3 1 2 -29.95% 3.01% 2 3 1 2 1 24.97% ‐3.86% 3 1 2 1 2 -20.29% 24.20% 1 2 1 2 3 -24.21% 15.00%
98 2 1 2 3 2 -29.27% ‐4.99% 1 2 3 2 2 -26.94% 3.01% 2 3 2 2 1 21.11% ‐3.86% 3 2 2 1 2 3.91% 24.20% 2 2 1 2 3 -9.21% 15.00%
99 2 1 2 3 3 -34.26% ‐9.98% 1 2 3 3 2 -23.93% 6.02% 2 3 3 2 1 17.25% ‐7.72% 3 3 2 1 2 28.11% 48.40% 3 2 1 2 3 5.79% 30.00%
100 2 1 3 1 1 -34.16% ‐4.99% 1 3 1 1 2 1.97% 3.01% 3 1 1 2 1 -8.43% ‐3.86% 1 1 2 1 3 -55.28% 24.20% 1 2 1 3 1 -11.22% 15.00%
101 2 1 3 1 2 -39.15% ‐4.99% 1 3 1 2 2 4.98% 3.01% 3 1 2 2 1 -12.29% ‐3.86% 1 2 2 1 3 -31.08% 24.20% 2 2 1 3 1 3.78% 15.00%
102 2 1 3 1 3 -44.14% ‐9.98% 1 3 1 3 2 7.99% 6.02% 3 1 3 2 1 -16.15% ‐7.72% 1 3 2 1 3 -6.88% 48.40% 3 2 1 3 1 18.78% 30.00%
103 2 1 3 2 1 -31.15% ‐4.99% 1 3 2 1 2 -1.89% 3.01% 3 2 1 2 1 15.77% ‐3.86% 2 1 2 1 3 -40.28% 24.20% 1 2 1 3 2 -16.21% 15.00%
104 2 1 3 2 2 -36.14% ‐4.99% 1 3 2 2 2 1.12% 3.01% 3 2 2 2 1 11.91% ‐3.86% 2 2 2 1 3 -16.08% 24.20% 2 2 1 3 2 -1.21% 15.00%
105 2 1 3 2 3 -41.13% ‐9.98% 1 3 2 3 2 4.13% 6.02% 3 2 3 2 1 8.05% ‐7.72% 2 3 2 1 3 8.12% 48.40% 3 2 1 3 2 13.79% 30.00%
106 2 1 3 3 1 -28.14% ‐4.99% 1 3 3 1 2 -5.75% 3.01% 3 3 1 2 1 39.97% ‐3.86% 3 1 2 1 3 -25.28% 24.20% 1 2 1 3 3 -21.20% 15.00%
107 2 1 3 3 2 -33.13% ‐4.99% 1 3 3 2 2 -2.74% 3.01% 3 3 2 2 1 36.11% ‐3.86% 3 2 2 1 3 -1.08% 24.20% 2 2 1 3 3 -6.20% 15.00%
108 2 1 3 3 3 -38.12% ‐9.98% 1 3 3 3 2 0.27% 6.02% 3 3 3 2 1 32.25% ‐7.72% 3 3 2 1 3 23.12% 48.40% 3 2 1 3 3 8.80% 30.00%
360


109 2 2 1 1 1 -2.24% ‐4.99% 2 1 1 1 2 -31.43% 3.01% 1 1 1 2 2 -43.42% ‐3.86% 1 1 2 2 1 -42.29% 24.20% 1 2 2 1 1 -21.10% 15.00%
110 2 2 1 1 2 -7.23% ‐4.99% 2 1 1 2 2 -28.42% 3.01% 1 1 2 2 2 -47.28% ‐3.86% 1 2 2 2 1 -18.09% 24.20% 2 2 2 1 1 -6.10% 15.00%
111 2 2 1 1 3 -12.22% ‐9.98% 2 1 1 3 2 -25.41% 6.02% 1 1 3 2 2 -51.14% ‐7.72% 1 3 2 2 1 6.11% 48.40% 3 2 2 1 1 8.90% 30.00%
112 2 2 1 2 1 0.77% ‐4.99% 2 1 2 1 2 -35.29% 3.01% 1 2 1 2 2 -19.22% ‐3.86% 2 1 2 2 1 -27.29% 24.20% 1 2 2 1 2 -26.09% 15.00%
113 2 2 1 2 2 -4.22% ‐4.99% 2 1 2 2 2 -32.28% 3.01% 1 2 2 2 2 -23.08% ‐3.86% 2 2 2 2 1 -3.09% 24.20% 2 2 2 1 2 -11.09% 15.00%
114 2 2 1 2 3 -9.21% ‐9.98% 2 1 2 3 2 -29.27% 6.02% 1 2 3 2 2 -26.94% ‐7.72% 2 3 2 2 1 21.11% 48.40% 3 2 2 1 2 3.91% 30.00%
115 2 2 1 3 1 3.78% ‐4.99% 2 1 3 1 2 -39.15% 3.01% 1 3 1 2 2 4.98% ‐3.86% 3 1 2 2 1 -12.29% 24.20% 1 2 2 1 3 -31.08% 15.00%
116 2 2 1 3 2 -1.21% ‐4.99% 2 1 3 2 2 -36.14% 3.01% 1 3 2 2 2 1.12% ‐3.86% 3 2 2 2 1 11.91% 24.20% 2 2 2 1 3 -16.08% 15.00%
117 2 2 1 3 3 -6.20% ‐9.98% 2 1 3 3 2 -33.13% 6.02% 1 3 3 2 2 -2.74% ‐7.72% 3 3 2 2 1 36.11% 48.40% 3 2 2 1 3 -1.08% 30.00%
118 2 2 2 1 1 -6.10% ‐4.99% 2 2 1 1 2 -7.23% 3.01% 2 1 1 2 2 -28.42% ‐3.86% 1 1 2 2 2 -47.28% 24.20% 1 2 2 2 1 -18.09% 15.00%
119 2 2 2 1 2 -11.09% ‐4.99% 2 2 1 2 2 -4.22% 3.01% 2 1 2 2 2 -32.28% ‐3.86% 1 2 2 2 2 -23.08% 24.20% 2 2 2 2 1 -3.09% 15.00%
120 2 2 2 1 3 -16.08% ‐9.98% 2 2 1 3 2 -1.21% 6.02% 2 1 3 2 2 -36.14% ‐7.72% 1 3 2 2 2 1.12% 48.40% 3 2 2 2 1 11.91% 30.00%
121 2 2 2 2 1 -3.09% ‐4.99% 2 2 2 1 2 -11.09% 3.01% 2 2 1 2 2 -4.22% ‐3.86% 2 1 2 2 2 -32.28% 24.20% 1 2 2 2 2 -23.08% 15.00%
122 2 2 2 2 2 -8.08% ‐4.99% 2 2 2 2 2 -8.08% 3.01% 2 2 2 2 2 -8.08% ‐3.86% 2 2 2 2 2 -8.08% 24.20% 2 2 2 2 2 -8.08% 15.00%
123 2 2 2 2 3 -13.07% ‐9.98% 2 2 2 3 2 -5.07% 6.02% 2 2 3 2 2 -11.94% ‐7.72% 2 3 2 2 2 16.12% 48.40% 3 2 2 2 2 6.92% 30.00%
124 2 2 2 3 1 -0.08% ‐4.99% 2 2 3 1 2 -14.95% 3.01% 2 3 1 2 2 19.98% ‐3.86% 3 1 2 2 2 -17.28% 24.20% 1 2 2 2 3 -28.07% 15.00%
125 2 2 2 3 2 -5.07% ‐4.99% 2 2 3 2 2 -11.94% 3.01% 2 3 2 2 2 16.12% ‐3.86% 3 2 2 2 2 6.92% 24.20% 2 2 2 2 3 -13.07% 15.00%
126 2 2 2 3 3 -10.06% ‐9.98% 2 2 3 3 2 -8.93% 6.02% 2 3 3 2 2 12.26% ‐7.72% 3 3 2 2 2 31.12% 48.40% 3 2 2 2 3 1.93% 30.00%
127 2 2 3 1 1 -9.96% ‐4.99% 2 3 1 1 2 16.97% 3.01% 3 1 1 2 2 -13.42% ‐3.86% 1 1 2 2 3 -52.27% 24.20% 1 2 2 3 1 -15.08% 15.00%
128 2 2 3 1 2 -14.95% ‐4.99% 2 3 1 2 2 19.98% 3.01% 3 1 2 2 2 -17.28% ‐3.86% 1 2 2 2 3 -28.07% 24.20% 2 2 2 3 1 -0.08% 15.00%
129 2 2 3 1 3 -19.94%
99 % ‐9.98%
9.98% 2 3 1 3 2 22.99%
99% 6.02% 3 1 3 2 2 -21.14%
% ‐7.72%
7.72% 1 3 2 2 3 -3.87%
38 % 48.40% 3 2 2 3 1 14.92%
9 % 30.00%
130 2 2 3 2 1 -6.95% ‐4.99% 2 3 2 1 2 13.11% 3.01% 3 2 1 2 2 10.78% ‐3.86% 2 1 2 2 3 -37.27% 24.20% 1 2 2 3 2 -20.07% 15.00%
131 2 2 3 2 2 -11.94% ‐4.99% 2 3 2 2 2 16.12% 3.01% 3 2 2 2 2 6.92% ‐3.86% 2 2 2 2 3 -13.07% 24.20% 2 2 2 3 2 -5.07% 15.00%
132 2 2 3 2 3 -16.93% ‐9.98% 2 3 2 3 2 19.13% 6.02% 3 2 3 2 2 3.06% ‐7.72% 2 3 2 2 3 11.13% 48.40% 3 2 2 3 2 9.93% 30.00%
133 2 2 3 3 1 -3.94% ‐4.99% 2 3 3 1 2 9.25% 3.01% 3 3 1 2 2 34.98% ‐3.86% 3 1 2 2 3 -22.27% 24.20% 1 2 2 3 3 -25.06% 15.00%
134 2 2 3 3 2 -8.93% ‐4.99% 2 3 3 2 2 12.26% 3.01% 3 3 2 2 2 31.12% ‐3.86% 3 2 2 2 3 1.93% 24.20% 2 2 2 3 3 -10.06% 15.00%
135 2 2 3 3 3 -13.92% ‐9.98% 2 3 3 3 2 15.27% 6.02% 3 3 3 2 2 27.26% ‐7.72% 3 3 2 2 3 26.13% 48.40% 3 2 2 3 3 4.94% 30.00%
136 2 3 1 1 1 21.96% ‐4.99% 3 1 1 1 2 -16.43% 3.01% 1 1 1 2 3 -48.41% ‐3.86% 1 1 2 3 1 -39.28% 24.20% 1 2 3 1 1 -24.96% 15.00%
137 2 3 1 1 2 16.97% ‐4.99% 3 1 1 2 2 -13.42% 3.01% 1 1 2 2 3 -52.27% ‐3.86% 1 2 2 3 1 -15.08% 24.20% 2 2 3 1 1 -9.96% 15.00%
138 2 3 1 1 3 11.98% ‐9.98% 3 1 1 3 2 -10.41% 6.02% 1 1 3 2 3 -56.13% ‐7.72% 1 3 2 3 1 9.12% 48.40% 3 2 3 1 1 5.04% 30.00%
139 2 3 1 2 1 24.97% ‐4.99% 3 1 2 1 2 -20.29% 3.01% 1 2 1 2 3 -24.21% ‐3.86% 2 1 2 3 1 -24.28% 24.20% 1 2 3 1 2 -29.95% 15.00%
140 2 3 1 2 2 19.98% ‐4.99% 3 1 2 2 2 -17.28% 3.01% 1 2 2 2 3 -28.07% ‐3.86% 2 2 2 3 1 -0.08% 24.20% 2 2 3 1 2 -14.95% 15.00%
141 2 3 1 2 3 14.99% ‐9.98% 3 1 2 3 2 -14.27% 6.02% 1 2 3 2 3 -31.93% ‐7.72% 2 3 2 3 1 24.12% 48.40% 3 2 3 1 2 0.05% 30.00%
142 2 3 1 3 1 27.98% ‐4.99% 3 1 3 1 2 -24.15% 3.01% 1 3 1 2 3 -0.01% ‐3.86% 3 1 2 3 1 -9.28% 24.20% 1 2 3 1 3 -34.94% 15.00%
143 2 3 1 3 2 22.99% ‐4.99% 3 1 3 2 2 -21.14% 3.01% 1 3 2 2 3 -3.87% ‐3.86% 3 2 2 3 1 14.92% 24.20% 2 2 3 1 3 -19.94% 15.00%
144 2 3 1 3 3 18.00% ‐9.98% 3 1 3 3 2 -18.13% 6.02% 1 3 3 2 3 -7.73% ‐7.72% 3 3 2 3 1 39.12% 48.40% 3 2 3 1 3 -4.94% 30.00%
145 2 3 2 1 1 18.10% ‐4.99% 3 2 1 1 2 7.77% 3.01% 2 1 1 2 3 -33.41% ‐3.86% 1 1 2 3 2 -44.27% 24.20% 1 2 3 2 1 -21.95% 15.00%
146 2 3 2 1 2 13.11% ‐4.99% 3 2 1 2 2 10.78% 3.01% 2 1 2 2 3 -37.27% ‐3.86% 1 2 2 3 2 -20.07% 24.20% 2 2 3 2 1 -6.95% 15.00%
147 2 3 2 1 3 8.12% ‐9.98% 3 2 1 3 2 13.79% 6.02% 2 1 3 2 3 -41.13% ‐7.72% 1 3 2 3 2 4.13% 48.40% 3 2 3 2 1 8.05% 30.00%
148 2 3 2 2 1 21.11% ‐4.99% 3 2 2 1 2 3.91% 3.01% 2 2 1 2 3 -9.21% ‐3.86% 2 1 2 3 2 -29.27% 24.20% 1 2 3 2 2 -26.94% 15.00%
149 2 3 2 2 2 16.12% ‐4.99% 3 2 2 2 2 6.92% 3.01% 2 2 2 2 3 -13.07% ‐3.86% 2 2 2 3 2 -5.07% 24.20% 2 2 3 2 2 -11.94% 15.00%
150 2 3 2 2 3 11.13% ‐9.98% 3 2 2 3 2 9.93% 6.02% 2 2 3 2 3 -16.93% ‐7.72% 2 3 2 3 2 19.13% 48.40% 3 2 3 2 2 3.06% 30.00%
151 2 3 2 3 1 24.12% ‐4.99% 3 2 3 1 2 0.05% 3.01% 2 3 1 2 3 14.99% ‐3.86% 3 1 2 3 2 -14.27% 24.20% 1 2 3 2 3 -31.93% 15.00%
152 2 3 2 3 2 19.13% ‐4.99% 3 2 3 2 2 3.06% 3.01% 2 3 2 2 3 11.13% ‐3.86% 3 2 2 3 2 9.93% 24.20% 2 2 3 2 3 -16.93% 15.00%
153 2 3 2 3 3 14.14% ‐9.98% 3 2 3 3 2 6.07% 6.02% 2 3 3 2 3 7.27% ‐7.72% 3 3 2 3 2 34.13% 48.40% 3 2 3 2 3 -1.93% 30.00%
154 2 3 3 1 1 14.24% ‐4.99% 3 3 1 1 2 31.97% 3.01% 3 1 1 2 3 -18.41% ‐3.86% 1 1 2 3 3 -49.26% 24.20% 1 2 3 3 1 -18.94% 15.00%
155 2 3 3 1 2 9.25% ‐4.99% 3 3 1 2 2 34.98% 3.01% 3 1 2 2 3 -22.27% ‐3.86% 1 2 2 3 3 -25.06% 24.20% 2 2 3 3 1 -3.94% 15.00%
156 2 3 3 1 3 4.26% ‐9.98% 3 3 1 3 2 37.99% 6.02% 3 1 3 2 3 -26.13% ‐7.72% 1 3 2 3 3 -0.86% 48.40% 3 2 3 3 1 11.06% 30.00%
157 2 3 3 2 1 17.25% ‐4.99% 3 3 2 1 2 28.11% 3.01% 3 2 1 2 3 5.79% ‐3.86% 2 1 2 3 3 -34.26% 24.20% 1 2 3 3 2 -23.93% 15.00%
158 2 3 3 2 2 12.26% ‐4.99% 3 3 2 2 2 31.12% 3.01% 3 2 2 2 3 1.93% ‐3.86% 2 2 2 3 3 -10.06% 24.20% 2 2 3 3 2 -8.93% 15.00%
159 2 3 3 2 3 7.27% ‐9.98% 3 3 2 3 2 34.13% 6.02% 3 2 3 2 3 -1.93% ‐7.72% 2 3 2 3 3 14.14% 48.40% 3 2 3 3 2 6.07% 30.00%
160 2 3 3 3 1 20.26% ‐4.99% 3 3 3 1 2 24.25% 3.01% 3 3 1 2 3 29.99% ‐3.86% 3 1 2 3 3 -19.26% 24.20% 1 2 3 3 3 -28.92% 15.00%
161 2 3 3 3 2 15.27% ‐4.99% 3 3 3 2 2 27.26% 3.01% 3 3 2 2 3 26.13% ‐3.86% 3 2 2 3 3 4.94% 24.20% 2 2 3 3 3 -13.92% 15.00%
162 2 3 3 3 3 10.28% ‐9.98% 3 3 3 3 2 30.27% 6.02% 3 3 3 2 3 22.27% ‐7.72% 3 3 2 3 3 29.14% 48.40% 3 2 3 3 3 1.08% 30.00%
361


163 3 1 1 1 1 -11.44% ‐4.99% 1 1 1 1 3 -51.42% 3.01% 1 1 1 3 1 -35.42% ‐3.86% 1 1 3 1 1 -49.16% 24.20% 1 3 1 1 1 6.96% 15.00%
164 3 1 1 1 2 -16.43% ‐4.99% 1 1 1 2 3 -48.41% 3.01% 1 1 2 3 1 -39.28% ‐3.86% 1 2 3 1 1 -24.96% 24.20% 2 3 1 1 1 21.96% 15.00%
165 3 1 1 1 3 -21.42% ‐9.98% 1 1 1 3 3 -45.40% 6.02% 1 1 3 3 1 -43.14% ‐7.72% 1 3 3 1 1 -0.76% 48.40% 3 3 1 1 1 36.96% 30.00%
166 3 1 1 2 1 -8.43% ‐4.99% 1 1 2 1 3 -55.28% 3.01% 1 2 1 3 1 -11.22% ‐3.86% 2 1 3 1 1 -34.16% 24.20% 1 3 1 1 2 1.97% 15.00%
167 3 1 1 2 2 -13.42% ‐4.99% 1 1 2 2 3 -52.27% 3.01% 1 2 2 3 1 -15.08% ‐3.86% 2 2 3 1 1 -9.96% 24.20% 2 3 1 1 2 16.97% 15.00%
168 3 1 1 2 3 -18.41% ‐9.98% 1 1 2 3 3 -49.26% 6.02% 1 2 3 3 1 -18.94% ‐7.72% 2 3 3 1 1 14.24% 48.40% 3 3 1 1 2 31.97% 30.00%
169 3 1 1 3 1 -5.42% ‐4.99% 1 1 3 1 3 -59.14% 3.01% 1 3 1 3 1 12.98% ‐3.86% 3 1 3 1 1 -19.16% 24.20% 1 3 1 1 3 -3.02% 15.00%
170 3 1 1 3 2 -10.41% ‐4.99% 1 1 3 2 3 -56.13% 3.01% 1 3 2 3 1 9.12% ‐3.86% 3 2 3 1 1 5.04% 24.20% 2 3 1 1 3 11.98% 15.00%
171 3 1 1 3 3 -15.40% ‐9.98% 1 1 3 3 3 -53.12% 6.02% 1 3 3 3 1 5.26% ‐7.72% 3 3 3 1 1 29.24% 48.40% 3 3 1 1 3 26.98% 30.00%
172 3 1 2 1 1 -15.30% ‐4.99% 1 2 1 1 3 -27.22% 3.01% 2 1 1 3 1 -20.42% ‐3.86% 1 1 3 1 2 -54.15% 24.20% 1 3 1 2 1 9.97% 15.00%
173 3 1 2 1 2 -20.29% ‐4.99% 1 2 1 2 3 -24.21% 3.01% 2 1 2 3 1 -24.28% ‐3.86% 1 2 3 1 2 -29.95% 24.20% 2 3 1 2 1 24.97% 15.00%
174 3 1 2 1 3 -25.28% ‐9.98% 1 2 1 3 3 -21.20% 6.02% 2 1 3 3 1 -28.14% ‐7.72% 1 3 3 1 2 -5.75% 48.40% 3 3 1 2 1 39.97% 30.00%
175 3 1 2 2 1 -12.29% ‐4.99% 1 2 2 1 3 -31.08% 3.01% 2 2 1 3 1 3.78% ‐3.86% 2 1 3 1 2 -39.15% 24.20% 1 3 1 2 2 4.98% 15.00%
176 3 1 2 2 2 -17.28% ‐4.99% 1 2 2 2 3 -28.07% 3.01% 2 2 2 3 1 -0.08% ‐3.86% 2 2 3 1 2 -14.95% 24.20% 2 3 1 2 2 19.98% 15.00%
177 3 1 2 2 3 -22.27% ‐9.98% 1 2 2 3 3 -25.06% 6.02% 2 2 3 3 1 -3.94% ‐7.72% 2 3 3 1 2 9.25% 48.40% 3 3 1 2 2 34.98% 30.00%
178 3 1 2 3 1 -9.28% ‐4.99% 1 2 3 1 3 -34.94% 3.01% 2 3 1 3 1 27.98% ‐3.86% 3 1 3 1 2 -24.15% 24.20% 1 3 1 2 3 -0.01% 15.00%
179 3 1 2 3 2 -14.27% ‐4.99% 1 2 3 2 3 -31.93% 3.01% 2 3 2 3 1 24.12% ‐3.86% 3 2 3 1 2 0.05% 24.20% 2 3 1 2 3 14.99% 15.00%
180 3 1 2 3 3 -19.26% ‐9.98% 1 2 3 3 3 -28.92% 6.02% 2 3 3 3 1 20.26% ‐7.72% 3 3 3 1 2 24.25% 48.40% 3 3 1 2 3 29.99% 30.00%
181 3 1 3 1 1 -19.16% ‐4.99% 1 3 1 1 3 -3.02% 3.01% 3 1 1 3 1 -5.42% ‐3.86% 1 1 3 1 3 -59.14% 24.20% 1 3 1 3 1 12.98% 15.00%
182 3 1 3 1 2 -24.15% ‐4.99% 1 3 1 2 3 -0.01% 3.01% 3 1 2 3 1 -9.28% ‐3.86% 1 2 3 1 3 -34.94% 24.20% 2 3 1 3 1 27.98% 15.00%
183 3 1 3 1 3 -29.14%
9 % ‐9.98%
9.98% 1 3 1 3 3 3.00%
3 00% 6.02% 3 1 3 3 1 -13.14%
3 % ‐7.72%
7.72% 1 3 3 1 3 -10.74%
0 % 48.40% 3 3 1 3 1 42.98%
98% 30.00%
184 3 1 3 2 1 -16.15% ‐4.99% 1 3 2 1 3 -6.88% 3.01% 3 2 1 3 1 18.78% ‐3.86% 2 1 3 1 3 -44.14% 24.20% 1 3 1 3 2 7.99% 15.00%
185 3 1 3 2 2 -21.14% ‐4.99% 1 3 2 2 3 -3.87% 3.01% 3 2 2 3 1 14.92% ‐3.86% 2 2 3 1 3 -19.94% 24.20% 2 3 1 3 2 22.99% 15.00%
186 3 1 3 2 3 -26.13% ‐9.98% 1 3 2 3 3 -0.86% 6.02% 3 2 3 3 1 11.06% ‐7.72% 2 3 3 1 3 4.26% 48.40% 3 3 1 3 2 37.99% 30.00%
187 3 1 3 3 1 -13.14% ‐4.99% 1 3 3 1 3 -10.74% 3.01% 3 3 1 3 1 42.98% ‐3.86% 3 1 3 1 3 -29.14% 24.20% 1 3 1 3 3 3.00% 15.00%
188 3 1 3 3 2 -18.13% ‐4.99% 1 3 3 2 3 -7.73% 3.01% 3 3 2 3 1 39.12% ‐3.86% 3 2 3 1 3 -4.94% 24.20% 2 3 1 3 3 18.00% 15.00%
189 3 1 3 3 3 -23.12% ‐9.98% 1 3 3 3 3 -4.72% 6.02% 3 3 3 3 1 35.26% ‐7.72% 3 3 3 1 3 19.26% 48.40% 3 3 1 3 3 33.00% 30.00%
190 3 2 1 1 1 12.76% ‐4.99% 2 1 1 1 3 -36.42% 3.01% 1 1 1 3 2 -40.41% ‐3.86% 1 1 3 2 1 -46.15% 24.20% 1 3 2 1 1 3.10% 15.00%
191 3 2 1 1 2 7.77% ‐4.99% 2 1 1 2 3 -33.41% 3.01% 1 1 2 3 2 -44.27% ‐3.86% 1 2 3 2 1 -21.95% 24.20% 2 3 2 1 1 18.10% 15.00%
192 3 2 1 1 3 2.78% ‐9.98% 2 1 1 3 3 -30.40% 6.02% 1 1 3 3 2 -48.13% ‐7.72% 1 3 3 2 1 2.25% 48.40% 3 3 2 1 1 33.10% 30.00%
193 3 2 1 2 1 15.77% ‐4.99% 2 1 2 1 3 -40.28% 3.01% 1 2 1 3 2 -16.21% ‐3.86% 2 1 3 2 1 -31.15% 24.20% 1 3 2 1 2 -1.89% 15.00%
194 3 2 1 2 2 10.78% ‐4.99% 2 1 2 2 3 -37.27% 3.01% 1 2 2 3 2 -20.07% ‐3.86% 2 2 3 2 1 -6.95% 24.20% 2 3 2 1 2 13.11% 15.00%
195 3 2 1 2 3 5.79% ‐9.98% 2 1 2 3 3 -34.26% 6.02% 1 2 3 3 2 -23.93% ‐7.72% 2 3 3 2 1 17.25% 48.40% 3 3 2 1 2 28.11% 30.00%
196 3 2 1 3 1 18.78% ‐4.99% 2 1 3 1 3 -44.14% 3.01% 1 3 1 3 2 7.99% ‐3.86% 3 1 3 2 1 -16.15% 24.20% 1 3 2 1 3 -6.88% 15.00%
197 3 2 1 3 2 13.79% ‐4.99% 2 1 3 2 3 -41.13% 3.01% 1 3 2 3 2 4.13% ‐3.86% 3 2 3 2 1 8.05% 24.20% 2 3 2 1 3 8.12% 15.00%
198 3 2 1 3 3 8.80% ‐9.98% 2 1 3 3 3 -38.12% 6.02% 1 3 3 3 2 0.27% ‐7.72% 3 3 3 2 1 32.25% 48.40% 3 3 2 1 3 23.12% 30.00%
199 3 2 2 1 1 8.90% ‐4.99% 2 2 1 1 3 -12.22% 3.01% 2 1 1 3 2 -25.41% ‐3.86% 1 1 3 2 2 -51.14% 24.20% 1 3 2 2 1 6.11% 15.00%
200 3 2 2 1 2 3.91% ‐4.99% 2 2 1 2 3 -9.21% 3.01% 2 1 2 3 2 -29.27% ‐3.86% 1 2 3 2 2 -26.94% 24.20% 2 3 2 2 1 21.11% 15.00%
201 3 2 2 1 3 -1.08% ‐9.98% 2 2 1 3 3 -6.20% 6.02% 2 1 3 3 2 -33.13% ‐7.72% 1 3 3 2 2 -2.74% 48.40% 3 3 2 2 1 36.11% 30.00%
202 3 2 2 2 1 11.91% ‐4.99% 2 2 2 1 3 -16.08% 3.01% 2 2 1 3 2 -1.21% ‐3.86% 2 1 3 2 2 -36.14% 24.20% 1 3 2 2 2 1.12% 15.00%
203 3 2 2 2 2 6.92% ‐4.99% 2 2 2 2 3 -13.07% 3.01% 2 2 2 3 2 -5.07% ‐3.86% 2 2 3 2 2 -11.94% 24.20% 2 3 2 2 2 16.12% 15.00%
204 3 2 2 2 3 1.93% ‐9.98% 2 2 2 3 3 -10.06% 6.02% 2 2 3 3 2 -8.93% ‐7.72% 2 3 3 2 2 12.26% 48.40% 3 3 2 2 2 31.12% 30.00%
205 3 2 2 3 1 14.92% ‐4.99% 2 2 3 1 3 -19.94% 3.01% 2 3 1 3 2 22.99% ‐3.86% 3 1 3 2 2 -21.14% 24.20% 1 3 2 2 3 -3.87% 15.00%
206 3 2 2 3 2 9.93% ‐4.99% 2 2 3 2 3 -16.93% 3.01% 2 3 2 3 2 19.13% ‐3.86% 3 2 3 2 2 3.06% 24.20% 2 3 2 2 3 11.13% 15.00%
207 3 2 2 3 3 4.94% ‐9.98% 2 2 3 3 3 -13.92% 6.02% 2 3 3 3 2 15.27% ‐7.72% 3 3 3 2 2 27.26% 48.40% 3 3 2 2 3 26.13% 30.00%
208 3 2 3 1 1 5.04% ‐4.99% 2 3 1 1 3 11.98% 3.01% 3 1 1 3 2 -10.41% ‐3.86% 1 1 3 2 3 -56.13% 24.20% 1 3 2 3 1 9.12% 15.00%
209 3 2 3 1 2 0.05% ‐4.99% 2 3 1 2 3 14.99% 3.01% 3 1 2 3 2 -14.27% ‐3.86% 1 2 3 2 3 -31.93% 24.20% 2 3 2 3 1 24.12% 15.00%
210 3 2 3 1 3 -4.94% ‐9.98% 2 3 1 3 3 18.00% 6.02% 3 1 3 3 2 -18.13% ‐7.72% 1 3 3 2 3 -7.73% 48.40% 3 3 2 3 1 39.12% 30.00%
211 3 2 3 2 1 8.05% ‐4.99% 2 3 2 1 3 8.12% 3.01% 3 2 1 3 2 13.79% ‐3.86% 2 1 3 2 3 -41.13% 24.20% 1 3 2 3 2 4.13% 15.00%
212 3 2 3 2 2 3.06% ‐4.99% 2 3 2 2 3 11.13% 3.01% 3 2 2 3 2 9.93% ‐3.86% 2 2 3 2 3 -16.93% 24.20% 2 3 2 3 2 19.13% 15.00%
213 3 2 3 2 3 -1.93% ‐9.98% 2 3 2 3 3 14.14% 6.02% 3 2 3 3 2 6.07% ‐7.72% 2 3 3 2 3 7.27% 48.40% 3 3 2 3 2 34.13% 30.00%
214 3 2 3 3 1 11.06% ‐4.99% 2 3 3 1 3 4.26% 3.01% 3 3 1 3 2 37.99% ‐3.86% 3 1 3 2 3 -26.13% 24.20% 1 3 2 3 3 -0.86% 15.00%
215 3 2 3 3 2 6.07% ‐4.99% 2 3 3 2 3 7.27% 3.01% 3 3 2 3 2 34.13% ‐3.86% 3 2 3 2 3 -1.93% 24.20% 2 3 2 3 3 14.14% 15.00%
216 3 2 3 3 3 1.08% ‐9.98% 2 3 3 3 3 10.28% 6.02% 3 3 3 3 2 30.27% ‐7.72% 3 3 3 2 3 22.27% 48.40% 3 3 2 3 3 29.14% 30.00%
362


217 3 3 1 1 1 36.96% ‐4.99% 3 1 1 1 3 -21.42% 3.01% 1 1 1 3 3 -45.40% ‐3.86% 1 1 3 3 1 -43.14% 24.20% 1 3 3 1 1 -0.76% 15.00%
218 3 3 1 1 2 31.97% ‐4.99% 3 1 1 2 3 -18.41% 3.01% 1 1 2 3 3 -49.26% ‐3.86% 1 2 3 3 1 -18.94% 24.20% 2 3 3 1 1 14.24% 15.00%
219 3 3 1 1 3 26.98% ‐9.98% 3 1 1 3 3 -15.40% 6.02% 1 1 3 3 3 -53.12% ‐7.72% 1 3 3 3 1 5.26% 48.40% 3 3 3 1 1 29.24% 30.00%
220 3 3 1 2 1 39.97% ‐4.99% 3 1 2 1 3 -25.28% 3.01% 1 2 1 3 3 -21.20% ‐3.86% 2 1 3 3 1 -28.14% 24.20% 1 3 3 1 2 -5.75% 15.00%
221 3 3 1 2 2 34.98% ‐4.99% 3 1 2 2 3 -22.27% 3.01% 1 2 2 3 3 -25.06% ‐3.86% 2 2 3 3 1 -3.94% 24.20% 2 3 3 1 2 9.25% 15.00%
222 3 3 1 2 3 29.99% ‐9.98% 3 1 2 3 3 -19.26% 6.02% 1 2 3 3 3 -28.92% ‐7.72% 2 3 3 3 1 20.26% 48.40% 3 3 3 1 2 24.25% 30.00%
223 3 3 1 3 1 42.98% ‐4.99% 3 1 3 1 3 -29.14% 3.01% 1 3 1 3 3 3.00% ‐3.86% 3 1 3 3 1 -13.14% 24.20% 1 3 3 1 3 -10.74% 15.00%
224 3 3 1 3 2 37.99% ‐4.99% 3 1 3 2 3 -26.13% 3.01% 1 3 2 3 3 -0.86% ‐3.86% 3 2 3 3 1 11.06% 24.20% 2 3 3 1 3 4.26% 15.00%
225 3 3 1 3 3 33.00% ‐9.98% 3 1 3 3 3 -23.12% 6.02% 1 3 3 3 3 -4.72% ‐7.72% 3 3 3 3 1 35.26% 48.40% 3 3 3 1 3 19.26% 30.00%
226 3 3 2 1 1 33.10% ‐4.99% 3 2 1 1 3 2.78% 3.01% 2 1 1 3 3 -30.40% ‐3.86% 1 1 3 3 2 -48.13% 24.20% 1 3 3 2 1 2.25% 15.00%
227 3 3 2 1 2 28.11% ‐4.99% 3 2 1 2 3 5.79% 3.01% 2 1 2 3 3 -34.26% ‐3.86% 1 2 3 3 2 -23.93% 24.20% 2 3 3 2 1 17.25% 15.00%
228 3 3 2 1 3 23.12% ‐9.98% 3 2 1 3 3 8.80% 6.02% 2 1 3 3 3 -38.12% ‐7.72% 1 3 3 3 2 0.27% 48.40% 3 3 3 2 1 32.25% 30.00%
229 3 3 2 2 1 36.11% ‐4.99% 3 2 2 1 3 -1.08% 3.01% 2 2 1 3 3 -6.20% ‐3.86% 2 1 3 3 2 -33.13% 24.20% 1 3 3 2 2 -2.74% 15.00%
230 3 3 2 2 2 31.12% ‐4.99% 3 2 2 2 3 1.93% 3.01% 2 2 2 3 3 -10.06% ‐3.86% 2 2 3 3 2 -8.93% 24.20% 2 3 3 2 2 12.26% 15.00%
231 3 3 2 2 3 26.13% ‐9.98% 3 2 2 3 3 4.94% 6.02% 2 2 3 3 3 -13.92% ‐7.72% 2 3 3 3 2 15.27% 48.40% 3 3 3 2 2 27.26% 30.00%
232 3 3 2 3 1 39.12% ‐4.99% 3 2 3 1 3 -4.94% 3.01% 2 3 1 3 3 18.00% ‐3.86% 3 1 3 3 2 -18.13% 24.20% 1 3 3 2 3 -7.73% 15.00%
233 3 3 2 3 2 34.13% ‐4.99% 3 2 3 2 3 -1.93% 3.01% 2 3 2 3 3 14.14% ‐3.86% 3 2 3 3 2 6.07% 24.20% 2 3 3 2 3 7.27% 15.00%
234 3 3 2 3 3 29.14% ‐9.98% 3 2 3 3 3 1.08% 6.02% 2 3 3 3 3 10.28% ‐7.72% 3 3 3 3 2 30.27% 48.40% 3 3 3 2 3 22.27% 30.00%
235 3 3 3 1 1 29.24% ‐4.99% 3 3 1 1 3 26.98% 3.01% 3 1 1 3 3 -15.40% ‐3.86% 1 1 3 3 3 -53.12% 24.20% 1 3 3 3 1 5.26% 15.00%
236 3 3 3 1 2 24.25% ‐4.99% 3 3 1 2 3 29.99% 3.01% 3 1 2 3 3 -19.26% ‐3.86% 1 2 3 3 3 -28.92% 24.20% 2 3 3 3 1 20.26% 15.00%
237 3 3 3 1 3 19.26%
9 6% ‐9.98%
9.98% 3 3 1 3 3 33.00%
33 00% 6.02% 3 1 3 3 3 -23.12%
3 % ‐7.72%
7.72% 1 3 3 3 3 -4.72%
% 48.40% 3 3 3 3 1 35.26%
35 6% 30.00%
238 3 3 3 2 1 32.25% ‐4.99% 3 3 2 1 3 23.12% 3.01% 3 2 1 3 3 8.80% ‐3.86% 2 1 3 3 3 -38.12% 24.20% 1 3 3 3 2 0.27% 15.00%
239 3 3 3 2 2 27.26% ‐4.99% 3 3 2 2 3 26.13% 3.01% 3 2 2 3 3 4.94% ‐3.86% 2 2 3 3 3 -13.92% 24.20% 2 3 3 3 2 15.27% 15.00%
240 3 3 3 2 3 22.27% ‐9.98% 3 3 2 3 3 29.14% 6.02% 3 2 3 3 3 1.08% ‐7.72% 2 3 3 3 3 10.28% 48.40% 3 3 3 3 2 30.27% 30.00%
241 3 3 3 3 1 35.26% ‐4.99% 3 3 3 1 3 19.26% 3.01% 3 3 1 3 3 33.00% ‐3.86% 3 1 3 3 3 -23.12% 24.20% 1 3 3 3 3 -4.72% 15.00%
242 3 3 3 3 2 30.27% ‐4.99% 3 3 3 2 3 22.27% 3.01% 3 3 2 3 3 29.14% ‐3.86% 3 2 3 3 3 1.08% 24.20% 2 3 3 3 3 10.28% 15.00%
243 3 3 3 3 3 25.28% ‐9.98% 3 3 3 3 3 25.28% 6.02% 3 3 3 3 3 25.28% ‐7.72% 3 3 3 3 3 25.28% 48.40% 3 3 3 3 3 25.28% 30.00%
Legend :
T- Timings
S - Supervision
G - Group Dynamics
P - Procedure
363
Appendix 6-4 : Concreting Trade


1 1 1 1 1 1 9.83% 3.89% 1 1 1 1 1 9.83% ‐18.00% 1 1 1 1 1 9.83% 5.14% 1 1 1 1 1 9.83% 14.30% 1 1 1 1 1 9.83% 7.33%
2 1 1 1 1 2 13.72% 3.89% 1 1 1 2 1 -8.17% ‐18.00% 1 1 2 1 1 14.97% 5.14% 1 2 1 1 1 24.13% 14.30% 2 1 1 1 1 17.16% 7.33%
3 1 1 1 1 3 17.61% 7.78% 1 1 1 3 1 -26.17% ‐36.00% 1 1 3 1 1 20.11% 10.28% 1 3 1 1 1 38.43% 28.60% 3 1 1 1 1 24.49% 14.66%
4 1 1 1 2 1 -8.17% 3.89% 1 1 2 1 1 14.97% ‐18.00% 1 2 1 1 1 24.13% 5.14% 2 1 1 1 1 17.16% 14.30% 1 1 1 1 2 13.72% 7.33%
5 1 1 1 2 2 -4.28% 3.89% 1 1 2 2 1 -3.03% ‐18.00% 1 2 2 1 1 29.27% 5.14% 2 2 1 1 1 31.46% 14.30% 2 1 1 1 2 21.05% 7.33%
6 1 1 1 2 3 -0.39% 7.78% 1 1 2 3 1 -21.03% ‐36.00% 1 2 3 1 1 34.41% 10.28% 2 3 1 1 1 45.76% 28.60% 3 1 1 1 2 28.38% 14.66%
7 1 1 1 3 1 -26.17% 3.89% 1 1 3 1 1 20.11% ‐18.00% 1 3 1 1 1 38.43% 5.14% 3 1 1 1 1 24.49% 14.30% 1 1 1 1 3 17.61% 7.33%
8 1 1 1 3 2 -22.28% 3.89% 1 1 3 2 1 2.11% ‐18.00% 1 3 2 1 1 43.57% 5.14% 3 2 1 1 1 38.79% 14.30% 2 1 1 1 3 24.94% 7.33%
9 1 1 1 3 3 -18.39% 7.78% 1 1 3 3 1 -15.89% ‐36.00% 1 3 3 1 1 48.71% 10.28% 3 3 1 1 1 53.09% 28.60% 3 1 1 1 3 32.27% 14.66%
10 1 1 2 1 1 14.97% 3.89% 1 2 1 1 1 24.13% ‐18.00% 2 1 1 1 1 17.16% 5.14% 1 1 1 1 2 13.72% 14.30% 1 1 1 2 1 -8.17% 7.33%
11 1 1 2 1 2 18.86% 3.89% 1 2 1 2 1 6.13% ‐18.00% 2 1 2 1 1 22.30% 5.14% 1 2 1 1 2 28.02% 14.30% 2 1 1 2 1 -0.84% 7.33%
12 1 1 2 1 3 22.75% 7.78% 1 2 1 3 1 -11.87% ‐36.00% 2 1 3 1 1 27.44% 10.28% 1 3 1 1 2 42.32% 28.60% 3 1 1 2 1 6.49% 14.66%
13 1 1 2 2 1 -3.03% 3.89% 1 2 2 1 1 29.27% ‐18.00% 2 2 1 1 1 31.46% 5.14% 2 1 1 1 2 21.05% 14.30% 1 1 1 2 2 -4.28% 7.33%
14 1 1 2 2 2 0.86% 3.89% 1 2 2 2 1 11.27% ‐18.00% 2 2 2 1 1 36.60% 5.14% 2 2 1 1 2 35.35% 14.30% 2 1 1 2 2 3.05% 7.33%
15 1 1 2 2 3 4.75% 7.78% 1 2 2 3 1 -6.73% ‐36.00% 2 2 3 1 1 41.74% 10.28% 2 3 1 1 2 49.65% 28.60% 3 1 1 2 2 10.38% 14.66%
16 1 1 2 3 1 -21.03% 3.89% 1 2 3 1 1 34.41% ‐18.00% 2 3 1 1 1 45.76% 5.14% 3 1 1 1 2 28.38% 14.30% 1 1 1 2 3 -0.39% 7.33%
17 1 1 2 3 2 -17.14% 3.89% 1 2 3 2 1 16.41% ‐18.00% 2 3 2 1 1 50.90% 5.14% 3 2 1 1 2 42.68% 14.30% 2 1 1 2 3 6.94% 7.33%
18 1 1 2 3 3 -13.25% 7.78% 1 2 3 3 1 -1.59% ‐36.00% 2 3 3 1 1 56.04% 10.28% 3 3 1 1 2 56.98% 28.60% 3 1 1 2 3 14.27% 14.66%
19 1 1 3 1 1 20.11% 3.89% 1 3 1 1 1 38.43% ‐18.00% 3 1 1 1 1 24.49% 5.14% 1 1 1 1 3 17.61% 14.30% 1 1 1 3 1 -26.17% 7.33%
20 1 1 3 1 2 24.00% 3.89% 1 3 1 2 1 20.43% ‐18.00% 3 1 2 1 1 29.63% 5.14% 1 2 1 1 3 31.91% 14.30% 2 1 1 3 1 -18.84% 7.33%
21 1 1 3 1 3 27.89%
89% 7.78% 1 3 1 3 1 2.43%
3% ‐36.00%
36.00% 3 1 3 1 1 34.77%
3 % 10.28% 1 3 1 1 3 46.21%
6 % 28.60% 3 1 1 3 1 -11.51%
5 % 14.66%
22 1 1 3 2 1 2.11% 3.89% 1 3 2 1 1 43.57% ‐18.00% 3 2 1 1 1 38.79% 5.14% 2 1 1 1 3 24.94% 14.30% 1 1 1 3 2 -22.28% 7.33%
23 1 1 3 2 2 6.00% 3.89% 1 3 2 2 1 25.57% ‐18.00% 3 2 2 1 1 43.93% 5.14% 2 2 1 1 3 39.24% 14.30% 2 1 1 3 2 -14.95% 7.33%
24 1 1 3 2 3 9.89% 7.78% 1 3 2 3 1 7.57% ‐36.00% 3 2 3 1 1 49.07% 10.28% 2 3 1 1 3 53.54% 28.60% 3 1 1 3 2 -7.62% 14.66%
25 1 1 3 3 1 -15.89% 3.89% 1 3 3 1 1 48.71% ‐18.00% 3 3 1 1 1 53.09% 5.14% 3 1 1 1 3 32.27% 14.30% 1 1 1 3 3 -18.39% 7.33%
26 1 1 3 3 2 -12.00% 3.89% 1 3 3 2 1 30.71% ‐18.00% 3 3 2 1 1 58.23% 5.14% 3 2 1 1 3 46.57% 14.30% 2 1 1 3 3 -11.06% 7.33%
27 1 1 3 3 3 -8.11% 7.78% 1 3 3 3 1 12.71% ‐36.00% 3 3 3 1 1 63.37% 10.28% 3 3 1 1 3 60.87% 28.60% 3 1 1 3 3 -3.73% 14.66%
28 1 2 1 1 1 24.13% 3.89% 2 1 1 1 1 17.16% ‐18.00% 1 1 1 1 2 13.72% 5.14% 1 1 1 2 1 -8.17% 14.30% 1 1 2 1 1 14.97% 7.33%
29 1 2 1 1 2 28.02% 3.89% 2 1 1 2 1 -0.84% ‐18.00% 1 1 2 1 2 18.86% 5.14% 1 2 1 2 1 6.13% 14.30% 2 1 2 1 1 22.30% 7.33%
30 1 2 1 1 3 31.91% 7.78% 2 1 1 3 1 -18.84% ‐36.00% 1 1 3 1 2 24.00% 10.28% 1 3 1 2 1 20.43% 28.60% 3 1 2 1 1 29.63% 14.66%
31 1 2 1 2 1 6.13% 3.89% 2 1 2 1 1 22.30% ‐18.00% 1 2 1 1 2 28.02% 5.14% 2 1 1 2 1 -0.84% 14.30% 1 1 2 1 2 18.86% 7.33%
32 1 2 1 2 2 10.02% 3.89% 2 1 2 2 1 4.30% ‐18.00% 1 2 2 1 2 33.16% 5.14% 2 2 1 2 1 13.46% 14.30% 2 1 2 1 2 26.19% 7.33%
33 1 2 1 2 3 13.91% 7.78% 2 1 2 3 1 -13.70% ‐36.00% 1 2 3 1 2 38.30% 10.28% 2 3 1 2 1 27.76% 28.60% 3 1 2 1 2 33.52% 14.66%
34 1 2 1 3 1 -11.87% 3.89% 2 1 3 1 1 27.44% ‐18.00% 1 3 1 1 2 42.32% 5.14% 3 1 1 2 1 6.49% 14.30% 1 1 2 1 3 22.75% 7.33%
35 1 2 1 3 2 -7.98% 3.89% 2 1 3 2 1 9.44% ‐18.00% 1 3 2 1 2 47.46% 5.14% 3 2 1 2 1 20.79% 14.30% 2 1 2 1 3 30.08% 7.33%
36 1 2 1 3 3 -4.09% 7.78% 2 1 3 3 1 -8.56% ‐36.00% 1 3 3 1 2 52.60% 10.28% 3 3 1 2 1 35.09% 28.60% 3 1 2 1 3 37.41% 14.66%
37 1 2 2 1 1 29.27% 3.89% 2 2 1 1 1 31.46% ‐18.00% 2 1 1 1 2 21.05% 5.14% 1 1 1 2 2 -4.28% 14.30% 1 1 2 2 1 -3.03% 7.33%
38 1 2 2 1 2 33.16% 3.89% 2 2 1 2 1 13.46% ‐18.00% 2 1 2 1 2 26.19% 5.14% 1 2 1 2 2 10.02% 14.30% 2 1 2 2 1 4.30% 7.33%
39 1 2 2 1 3 37.05% 7.78% 2 2 1 3 1 -4.54% ‐36.00% 2 1 3 1 2 31.33% 10.28% 1 3 1 2 2 24.32% 28.60% 3 1 2 2 1 11.63% 14.66%
40 1 2 2 2 1 11.27% 3.89% 2 2 2 1 1 36.60% ‐18.00% 2 2 1 1 2 35.35% 5.14% 2 1 1 2 2 3.05% 14.30% 1 1 2 2 2 0.86% 7.33%
41 1 2 2 2 2 15.16% 3.89% 2 2 2 2 1 18.60% ‐18.00% 2 2 2 1 2 40.49% 5.14% 2 2 1 2 2 17.35% 14.30% 2 1 2 2 2 8.19% 7.33%
42 1 2 2 2 3 19.05% 7.78% 2 2 2 3 1 0.60% ‐36.00% 2 2 3 1 2 45.63% 10.28% 2 3 1 2 2 31.65% 28.60% 3 1 2 2 2 15.52% 14.66%
43 1 2 2 3 1 -6.73% 3.89% 2 2 3 1 1 41.74% ‐18.00% 2 3 1 1 2 49.65% 5.14% 3 1 1 2 2 10.38% 14.30% 1 1 2 2 3 4.75% 7.33%
44 1 2 2 3 2 -2.84% 3.89% 2 2 3 2 1 23.74% ‐18.00% 2 3 2 1 2 54.79% 5.14% 3 2 1 2 2 24.68% 14.30% 2 1 2 2 3 12.08% 7.33%
45 1 2 2 3 3 1.05% 7.78% 2 2 3 3 1 5.74% ‐36.00% 2 3 3 1 2 59.93% 10.28% 3 3 1 2 2 38.98% 28.60% 3 1 2 2 3 19.41% 14.66%
46 1 2 3 1 1 34.41% 3.89% 2 3 1 1 1 45.76% ‐18.00% 3 1 1 1 2 28.38% 5.14% 1 1 1 2 3 -0.39% 14.30% 1 1 2 3 1 -21.03% 7.33%
47 1 2 3 1 2 38.30% 3.89% 2 3 1 2 1 27.76% ‐18.00% 3 1 2 1 2 33.52% 5.14% 1 2 1 2 3 13.91% 14.30% 2 1 2 3 1 -13.70% 7.33%
48 1 2 3 1 3 42.19% 7.78% 2 3 1 3 1 9.76% ‐36.00% 3 1 3 1 2 38.66% 10.28% 1 3 1 2 3 28.21% 28.60% 3 1 2 3 1 -6.37% 14.66%
49 1 2 3 2 1 16.41% 3.89% 2 3 2 1 1 50.90% ‐18.00% 3 2 1 1 2 42.68% 5.14% 2 1 1 2 3 6.94% 14.30% 1 1 2 3 2 -17.14% 7.33%
50 1 2 3 2 2 20.30% 3.89% 2 3 2 2 1 32.90% ‐18.00% 3 2 2 1 2 47.82% 5.14% 2 2 1 2 3 21.24% 14.30% 2 1 2 3 2 -9.81% 7.33%
51 1 2 3 2 3 24.19% 7.78% 2 3 2 3 1 14.90% ‐36.00% 3 2 3 1 2 52.96% 10.28% 2 3 1 2 3 35.54% 28.60% 3 1 2 3 2 -2.48% 14.66%
52 1 2 3 3 1 -1.59% 3.89% 2 3 3 1 1 56.04% ‐18.00% 3 3 1 1 2 56.98% 5.14% 3 1 1 2 3 14.27% 14.30% 1 1 2 3 3 -13.25% 7.33%
53 1 2 3 3 2 2.30% 3.89% 2 3 3 2 1 38.04% ‐18.00% 3 3 2 1 2 62.12% 5.14% 3 2 1 2 3 28.57% 14.30% 2 1 2 3 3 -5.92% 7.33%
54 1 2 3 3 3 6.19% 7.78% 2 3 3 3 1 20.04% ‐36.00% 3 3 3 1 2 67.26% 10.28% 3 3 1 2 3 42.87% 28.60% 3 1 2 3 3 1.41% 14.66%
364


55 1 3 1 1 1 38.43% 3.89% 3 1 1 1 1 24.49% ‐18.00% 1 1 1 1 3 17.61% 5.14% 1 1 1 3 1 -26.17% 14.30% 1 1 3 1 1 20.11% 7.33%
56 1 3 1 1 2 42.32% 3.89% 3 1 1 2 1 6.49% ‐18.00% 1 1 2 1 3 22.75% 5.14% 1 2 1 3 1 -11.87% 14.30% 2 1 3 1 1 27.44% 7.33%
57 1 3 1 1 3 46.21% 7.78% 3 1 1 3 1 -11.51% ‐36.00% 1 1 3 1 3 27.89% 10.28% 1 3 1 3 1 2.43% 28.60% 3 1 3 1 1 34.77% 14.66%
58 1 3 1 2 1 20.43% 3.89% 3 1 2 1 1 29.63% ‐18.00% 1 2 1 1 3 31.91% 5.14% 2 1 1 3 1 -18.84% 14.30% 1 1 3 1 2 24.00% 7.33%
59 1 3 1 2 2 24.32% 3.89% 3 1 2 2 1 11.63% ‐18.00% 1 2 2 1 3 37.05% 5.14% 2 2 1 3 1 -4.54% 14.30% 2 1 3 1 2 31.33% 7.33%
60 1 3 1 2 3 28.21% 7.78% 3 1 2 3 1 -6.37% ‐36.00% 1 2 3 1 3 42.19% 10.28% 2 3 1 3 1 9.76% 28.60% 3 1 3 1 2 38.66% 14.66%
61 1 3 1 3 1 2.43% 3.89% 3 1 3 1 1 34.77% ‐18.00% 1 3 1 1 3 46.21% 5.14% 3 1 1 3 1 -11.51% 14.30% 1 1 3 1 3 27.89% 7.33%
62 1 3 1 3 2 6.32% 3.89% 3 1 3 2 1 16.77% ‐18.00% 1 3 2 1 3 51.35% 5.14% 3 2 1 3 1 2.79% 14.30% 2 1 3 1 3 35.22% 7.33%
63 1 3 1 3 3 10.21% 7.78% 3 1 3 3 1 -1.23% ‐36.00% 1 3 3 1 3 56.49% 10.28% 3 3 1 3 1 17.09% 28.60% 3 1 3 1 3 42.55% 14.66%
64 1 3 2 1 1 43.57% 3.89% 3 2 1 1 1 38.79% ‐18.00% 2 1 1 1 3 24.94% 5.14% 1 1 1 3 2 -22.28% 14.30% 1 1 3 2 1 2.11% 7.33%
65 1 3 2 1 2 47.46% 3.89% 3 2 1 2 1 20.79% ‐18.00% 2 1 2 1 3 30.08% 5.14% 1 2 1 3 2 -7.98% 14.30% 2 1 3 2 1 9.44% 7.33%
66 1 3 2 1 3 51.35% 7.78% 3 2 1 3 1 2.79% ‐36.00% 2 1 3 1 3 35.22% 10.28% 1 3 1 3 2 6.32% 28.60% 3 1 3 2 1 16.77% 14.66%
67 1 3 2 2 1 25.57% 3.89% 3 2 2 1 1 43.93% ‐18.00% 2 2 1 1 3 39.24% 5.14% 2 1 1 3 2 -14.95% 14.30% 1 1 3 2 2 6.00% 7.33%
68 1 3 2 2 2 29.46% 3.89% 3 2 2 2 1 25.93% ‐18.00% 2 2 2 1 3 44.38% 5.14% 2 2 1 3 2 -0.65% 14.30% 2 1 3 2 2 13.33% 7.33%
69 1 3 2 2 3 33.35% 7.78% 3 2 2 3 1 7.93% ‐36.00% 2 2 3 1 3 49.52% 10.28% 2 3 1 3 2 13.65% 28.60% 3 1 3 2 2 20.66% 14.66%
70 1 3 2 3 1 7.57% 3.89% 3 2 3 1 1 49.07% ‐18.00% 2 3 1 1 3 53.54% 5.14% 3 1 1 3 2 -7.62% 14.30% 1 1 3 2 3 9.89% 7.33%
71 1 3 2 3 2 11.46% 3.89% 3 2 3 2 1 31.07% ‐18.00% 2 3 2 1 3 58.68% 5.14% 3 2 1 3 2 6.68% 14.30% 2 1 3 2 3 17.22% 7.33%
72 1 3 2 3 3 15.35% 7.78% 3 2 3 3 1 13.07% ‐36.00% 2 3 3 1 3 63.82% 10.28% 3 3 1 3 2 20.98% 28.60% 3 1 3 2 3 24.55% 14.66%
73 1 3 3 1 1 48.71% 3.89% 3 3 1 1 1 53.09% ‐18.00% 3 1 1 1 3 32.27% 5.14% 1 1 1 3 3 -18.39% 14.30% 1 1 3 3 1 -15.89% 7.33%
74 1 3 3 1 2 52.60% 3.89% 3 3 1 2 1 35.09% ‐18.00% 3 1 2 1 3 37.41% 5.14% 1 2 1 3 3 -4.09% 14.30% 2 1 3 3 1 -8.56% 7.33%
75 1 3 3 1 3 56.49%
56 9% 7.78% 3 3 1 3 1 17.09%
09% ‐36.00%
36.00% 3 1 3 1 3 42.55%
55% 10.28% 1 3 1 3 3 10.21%
0 % 28.60% 3 1 3 3 1 -1.23%
3% 14.66%
76 1 3 3 2 1 30.71% 3.89% 3 3 2 1 1 58.23% ‐18.00% 3 2 1 1 3 46.57% 5.14% 2 1 1 3 3 -11.06% 14.30% 1 1 3 3 2 -12.00% 7.33%
77 1 3 3 2 2 34.60% 3.89% 3 3 2 2 1 40.23% ‐18.00% 3 2 2 1 3 51.71% 5.14% 2 2 1 3 3 3.24% 14.30% 2 1 3 3 2 -4.67% 7.33%
78 1 3 3 2 3 38.49% 7.78% 3 3 2 3 1 22.23% ‐36.00% 3 2 3 1 3 56.85% 10.28% 2 3 1 3 3 17.54% 28.60% 3 1 3 3 2 2.66% 14.66%
79 1 3 3 3 1 12.71% 3.89% 3 3 3 1 1 63.37% ‐18.00% 3 3 1 1 3 60.87% 5.14% 3 1 1 3 3 -3.73% 14.30% 1 1 3 3 3 -8.11% 7.33%
80 1 3 3 3 2 16.60% 3.89% 3 3 3 2 1 45.37% ‐18.00% 3 3 2 1 3 66.01% 5.14% 3 2 1 3 3 10.57% 14.30% 2 1 3 3 3 -0.78% 7.33%
81 1 3 3 3 3 20.49% 7.78% 3 3 3 3 1 27.37% ‐36.00% 3 3 3 1 3 71.15% 10.28% 3 3 1 3 3 24.87% 28.60% 3 1 3 3 3 6.55% 14.66%
82 2 1 1 1 1 17.16% 3.89% 1 1 1 1 2 13.72% ‐18.00% 1 1 1 2 1 -8.17% 5.14% 1 1 2 1 1 14.97% 14.30% 1 2 1 1 1 24.13% 7.33%
83 2 1 1 1 2 21.05% 3.89% 1 1 1 2 2 -4.28% ‐18.00% 1 1 2 2 1 -3.03% 5.14% 1 2 2 1 1 29.27% 14.30% 2 2 1 1 1 31.46% 7.33%
84 2 1 1 1 3 24.94% 7.78% 1 1 1 3 2 -22.28% ‐36.00% 1 1 3 2 1 2.11% 10.28% 1 3 2 1 1 43.57% 28.60% 3 2 1 1 1 38.79% 14.66%
85 2 1 1 2 1 -0.84% 3.89% 1 1 2 1 2 18.86% ‐18.00% 1 2 1 2 1 6.13% 5.14% 2 1 2 1 1 22.30% 14.30% 1 2 1 1 2 28.02% 7.33%
86 2 1 1 2 2 3.05% 3.89% 1 1 2 2 2 0.86% ‐18.00% 1 2 2 2 1 11.27% 5.14% 2 2 2 1 1 36.60% 14.30% 2 2 1 1 2 35.35% 7.33%
87 2 1 1 2 3 6.94% 7.78% 1 1 2 3 2 -17.14% ‐36.00% 1 2 3 2 1 16.41% 10.28% 2 3 2 1 1 50.90% 28.60% 3 2 1 1 2 42.68% 14.66%
88 2 1 1 3 1 -18.84% 3.89% 1 1 3 1 2 24.00% ‐18.00% 1 3 1 2 1 20.43% 5.14% 3 1 2 1 1 29.63% 14.30% 1 2 1 1 3 31.91% 7.33%
89 2 1 1 3 2 -14.95% 3.89% 1 1 3 2 2 6.00% ‐18.00% 1 3 2 2 1 25.57% 5.14% 3 2 2 1 1 43.93% 14.30% 2 2 1 1 3 39.24% 7.33%
90 2 1 1 3 3 -11.06% 7.78% 1 1 3 3 2 -12.00% ‐36.00% 1 3 3 2 1 30.71% 10.28% 3 3 2 1 1 58.23% 28.60% 3 2 1 1 3 46.57% 14.66%
91 2 1 2 1 1 22.30% 3.89% 1 2 1 1 2 28.02% ‐18.00% 2 1 1 2 1 -0.84% 5.14% 1 1 2 1 2 18.86% 14.30% 1 2 1 2 1 6.13% 7.33%
92 2 1 2 1 2 26.19% 3.89% 1 2 1 2 2 10.02% ‐18.00% 2 1 2 2 1 4.30% 5.14% 1 2 2 1 2 33.16% 14.30% 2 2 1 2 1 13.46% 7.33%
93 2 1 2 1 3 30.08% 7.78% 1 2 1 3 2 -7.98% ‐36.00% 2 1 3 2 1 9.44% 10.28% 1 3 2 1 2 47.46% 28.60% 3 2 1 2 1 20.79% 14.66%
94 2 1 2 2 1 4.30% 3.89% 1 2 2 1 2 33.16% ‐18.00% 2 2 1 2 1 13.46% 5.14% 2 1 2 1 2 26.19% 14.30% 1 2 1 2 2 10.02% 7.33%
95 2 1 2 2 2 8.19% 3.89% 1 2 2 2 2 15.16% ‐18.00% 2 2 2 2 1 18.60% 5.14% 2 2 2 1 2 40.49% 14.30% 2 2 1 2 2 17.35% 7.33%
96 2 1 2 2 3 12.08% 7.78% 1 2 2 3 2 -2.84% ‐36.00% 2 2 3 2 1 23.74% 10.28% 2 3 2 1 2 54.79% 28.60% 3 2 1 2 2 24.68% 14.66%
97 2 1 2 3 1 -13.70% 3.89% 1 2 3 1 2 38.30% ‐18.00% 2 3 1 2 1 27.76% 5.14% 3 1 2 1 2 33.52% 14.30% 1 2 1 2 3 13.91% 7.33%
98 2 1 2 3 2 -9.81% 3.89% 1 2 3 2 2 20.30% ‐18.00% 2 3 2 2 1 32.90% 5.14% 3 2 2 1 2 47.82% 14.30% 2 2 1 2 3 21.24% 7.33%
99 2 1 2 3 3 -5.92% 7.78% 1 2 3 3 2 2.30% ‐36.00% 2 3 3 2 1 38.04% 10.28% 3 3 2 1 2 62.12% 28.60% 3 2 1 2 3 28.57% 14.66%
100 2 1 3 1 1 27.44% 3.89% 1 3 1 1 2 42.32% ‐18.00% 3 1 1 2 1 6.49% 5.14% 1 1 2 1 3 22.75% 14.30% 1 2 1 3 1 -11.87% 7.33%
101 2 1 3 1 2 31.33% 3.89% 1 3 1 2 2 24.32% ‐18.00% 3 1 2 2 1 11.63% 5.14% 1 2 2 1 3 37.05% 14.30% 2 2 1 3 1 -4.54% 7.33%
102 2 1 3 1 3 35.22% 7.78% 1 3 1 3 2 6.32% ‐36.00% 3 1 3 2 1 16.77% 10.28% 1 3 2 1 3 51.35% 28.60% 3 2 1 3 1 2.79% 14.66%
103 2 1 3 2 1 9.44% 3.89% 1 3 2 1 2 47.46% ‐18.00% 3 2 1 2 1 20.79% 5.14% 2 1 2 1 3 30.08% 14.30% 1 2 1 3 2 -7.98% 7.33%
104 2 1 3 2 2 13.33% 3.89% 1 3 2 2 2 29.46% ‐18.00% 3 2 2 2 1 25.93% 5.14% 2 2 2 1 3 44.38% 14.30% 2 2 1 3 2 -0.65% 7.33%
105 2 1 3 2 3 17.22% 7.78% 1 3 2 3 2 11.46% ‐36.00% 3 2 3 2 1 31.07% 10.28% 2 3 2 1 3 58.68% 28.60% 3 2 1 3 2 6.68% 14.66%
106 2 1 3 3 1 -8.56% 3.89% 1 3 3 1 2 52.60% ‐18.00% 3 3 1 2 1 35.09% 5.14% 3 1 2 1 3 37.41% 14.30% 1 2 1 3 3 -4.09% 7.33%
107 2 1 3 3 2 -4.67% 3.89% 1 3 3 2 2 34.60% ‐18.00% 3 3 2 2 1 40.23% 5.14% 3 2 2 1 3 51.71% 14.30% 2 2 1 3 3 3.24% 7.33%
108 2 1 3 3 3 -0.78% 7.78% 1 3 3 3 2 16.60% ‐36.00% 3 3 3 2 1 45.37% 10.28% 3 3 2 1 3 66.01% 28.60% 3 2 1 3 3 10.57% 14.66%
365


109 2 2 1 1 1 31.46% 3.89% 2 1 1 1 2 21.05% ‐18.00% 1 1 1 2 2 -4.28% 5.14% 1 1 2 2 1 -3.03% 14.30% 1 2 2 1 1 29.27% 7.33%
110 2 2 1 1 2 35.35% 3.89% 2 1 1 2 2 3.05% ‐18.00% 1 1 2 2 2 0.86% 5.14% 1 2 2 2 1 11.27% 14.30% 2 2 2 1 1 36.60% 7.33%
111 2 2 1 1 3 39.24% 7.78% 2 1 1 3 2 -14.95% ‐36.00% 1 1 3 2 2 6.00% 10.28% 1 3 2 2 1 25.57% 28.60% 3 2 2 1 1 43.93% 14.66%
112 2 2 1 2 1 13.46% 3.89% 2 1 2 1 2 26.19% ‐18.00% 1 2 1 2 2 10.02% 5.14% 2 1 2 2 1 4.30% 14.30% 1 2 2 1 2 33.16% 7.33%
113 2 2 1 2 2 17.35% 3.89% 2 1 2 2 2 8.19% ‐18.00% 1 2 2 2 2 15.16% 5.14% 2 2 2 2 1 18.60% 14.30% 2 2 2 1 2 40.49% 7.33%
114 2 2 1 2 3 21.24% 7.78% 2 1 2 3 2 -9.81% ‐36.00% 1 2 3 2 2 20.30% 10.28% 2 3 2 2 1 32.90% 28.60% 3 2 2 1 2 47.82% 14.66%
115 2 2 1 3 1 -4.54% 3.89% 2 1 3 1 2 31.33% ‐18.00% 1 3 1 2 2 24.32% 5.14% 3 1 2 2 1 11.63% 14.30% 1 2 2 1 3 37.05% 7.33%
116 2 2 1 3 2 -0.65% 3.89% 2 1 3 2 2 13.33% ‐18.00% 1 3 2 2 2 29.46% 5.14% 3 2 2 2 1 25.93% 14.30% 2 2 2 1 3 44.38% 7.33%
117 2 2 1 3 3 3.24% 7.78% 2 1 3 3 2 -4.67% ‐36.00% 1 3 3 2 2 34.60% 10.28% 3 3 2 2 1 40.23% 28.60% 3 2 2 1 3 51.71% 14.66%
118 2 2 2 1 1 36.60% 3.89% 2 2 1 1 2 35.35% ‐18.00% 2 1 1 2 2 3.05% 5.14% 1 1 2 2 2 0.86% 14.30% 1 2 2 2 1 11.27% 7.33%
119 2 2 2 1 2 40.49% 3.89% 2 2 1 2 2 17.35% ‐18.00% 2 1 2 2 2 8.19% 5.14% 1 2 2 2 2 15.16% 14.30% 2 2 2 2 1 18.60% 7.33%
120 2 2 2 1 3 44.38% 7.78% 2 2 1 3 2 -0.65% ‐36.00% 2 1 3 2 2 13.33% 10.28% 1 3 2 2 2 29.46% 28.60% 3 2 2 2 1 25.93% 14.66%
121 2 2 2 2 1 18.60% 3.89% 2 2 2 1 2 40.49% ‐18.00% 2 2 1 2 2 17.35% 5.14% 2 1 2 2 2 8.19% 14.30% 1 2 2 2 2 15.16% 7.33%
122 2 2 2 2 2 22.49% 3.89% 2 2 2 2 2 22.49% ‐18.00% 2 2 2 2 2 22.49% 5.14% 2 2 2 2 2 22.49% 14.30% 2 2 2 2 2 22.49% 7.33%
123 2 2 2 2 3 26.38% 7.78% 2 2 2 3 2 4.49% ‐36.00% 2 2 3 2 2 27.63% 10.28% 2 3 2 2 2 36.79% 28.60% 3 2 2 2 2 29.82% 14.66%
124 2 2 2 3 1 0.60% 3.89% 2 2 3 1 2 45.63% ‐18.00% 2 3 1 2 2 31.65% 5.14% 3 1 2 2 2 15.52% 14.30% 1 2 2 2 3 19.05% 7.33%
125 2 2 2 3 2 4.49% 3.89% 2 2 3 2 2 27.63% ‐18.00% 2 3 2 2 2 36.79% 5.14% 3 2 2 2 2 29.82% 14.30% 2 2 2 2 3 26.38% 7.33%
126 2 2 2 3 3 8.38% 7.78% 2 2 3 3 2 9.63% ‐36.00% 2 3 3 2 2 41.93% 10.28% 3 3 2 2 2 44.12% 28.60% 3 2 2 2 3 33.71% 14.66%
127 2 2 3 1 1 41.74% 3.89% 2 3 1 1 2 49.65% ‐18.00% 3 1 1 2 2 10.38% 5.14% 1 1 2 2 3 4.75% 14.30% 1 2 2 3 1 -6.73% 7.33%
128 2 2 3 1 2 45.63% 3.89% 2 3 1 2 2 31.65% ‐18.00% 3 1 2 2 2 15.52% 5.14% 1 2 2 2 3 19.05% 14.30% 2 2 2 3 1 0.60% 7.33%
129 2 2 3 1 3 49.52%
95 % 7.78% 2 3 1 3 2 13.65%
3 65% ‐36.00%
36.00% 3 1 3 2 2 20.66%
0 66% 10.28% 1 3 2 2 3 33.35%
33 35% 28.60% 3 2 2 3 1 7.93%
93% 14.66%
130 2 2 3 2 1 23.74% 3.89% 2 3 2 1 2 54.79% ‐18.00% 3 2 1 2 2 24.68% 5.14% 2 1 2 2 3 12.08% 14.30% 1 2 2 3 2 -2.84% 7.33%
131 2 2 3 2 2 27.63% 3.89% 2 3 2 2 2 36.79% ‐18.00% 3 2 2 2 2 29.82% 5.14% 2 2 2 2 3 26.38% 14.30% 2 2 2 3 2 4.49% 7.33%
132 2 2 3 2 3 31.52% 7.78% 2 3 2 3 2 18.79% ‐36.00% 3 2 3 2 2 34.96% 10.28% 2 3 2 2 3 40.68% 28.60% 3 2 2 3 2 11.82% 14.66%
133 2 2 3 3 1 5.74% 3.89% 2 3 3 1 2 59.93% ‐18.00% 3 3 1 2 2 38.98% 5.14% 3 1 2 2 3 19.41% 14.30% 1 2 2 3 3 1.05% 7.33%
134 2 2 3 3 2 9.63% 3.89% 2 3 3 2 2 41.93% ‐18.00% 3 3 2 2 2 44.12% 5.14% 3 2 2 2 3 33.71% 14.30% 2 2 2 3 3 8.38% 7.33%
135 2 2 3 3 3 13.52% 7.78% 2 3 3 3 2 23.93% ‐36.00% 3 3 3 2 2 49.26% 10.28% 3 3 2 2 3 48.01% 28.60% 3 2 2 3 3 15.71% 14.66%
136 2 3 1 1 1 45.76% 3.89% 3 1 1 1 2 28.38% ‐18.00% 1 1 1 2 3 -0.39% 5.14% 1 1 2 3 1 -21.03% 14.30% 1 2 3 1 1 34.41% 7.33%
137 2 3 1 1 2 49.65% 3.89% 3 1 1 2 2 10.38% ‐18.00% 1 1 2 2 3 4.75% 5.14% 1 2 2 3 1 -6.73% 14.30% 2 2 3 1 1 41.74% 7.33%
138 2 3 1 1 3 53.54% 7.78% 3 1 1 3 2 -7.62% ‐36.00% 1 1 3 2 3 9.89% 10.28% 1 3 2 3 1 7.57% 28.60% 3 2 3 1 1 49.07% 14.66%
139 2 3 1 2 1 27.76% 3.89% 3 1 2 1 2 33.52% ‐18.00% 1 2 1 2 3 13.91% 5.14% 2 1 2 3 1 -13.70% 14.30% 1 2 3 1 2 38.30% 7.33%
140 2 3 1 2 2 31.65% 3.89% 3 1 2 2 2 15.52% ‐18.00% 1 2 2 2 3 19.05% 5.14% 2 2 2 3 1 0.60% 14.30% 2 2 3 1 2 45.63% 7.33%
141 2 3 1 2 3 35.54% 7.78% 3 1 2 3 2 -2.48% ‐36.00% 1 2 3 2 3 24.19% 10.28% 2 3 2 3 1 14.90% 28.60% 3 2 3 1 2 52.96% 14.66%
142 2 3 1 3 1 9.76% 3.89% 3 1 3 1 2 38.66% ‐18.00% 1 3 1 2 3 28.21% 5.14% 3 1 2 3 1 -6.37% 14.30% 1 2 3 1 3 42.19% 7.33%
143 2 3 1 3 2 13.65% 3.89% 3 1 3 2 2 20.66% ‐18.00% 1 3 2 2 3 33.35% 5.14% 3 2 2 3 1 7.93% 14.30% 2 2 3 1 3 49.52% 7.33%
144 2 3 1 3 3 17.54% 7.78% 3 1 3 3 2 2.66% ‐36.00% 1 3 3 2 3 38.49% 10.28% 3 3 2 3 1 22.23% 28.60% 3 2 3 1 3 56.85% 14.66%
145 2 3 2 1 1 50.90% 3.89% 3 2 1 1 2 42.68% ‐18.00% 2 1 1 2 3 6.94% 5.14% 1 1 2 3 2 -17.14% 14.30% 1 2 3 2 1 16.41% 7.33%
146 2 3 2 1 2 54.79% 3.89% 3 2 1 2 2 24.68% ‐18.00% 2 1 2 2 3 12.08% 5.14% 1 2 2 3 2 -2.84% 14.30% 2 2 3 2 1 23.74% 7.33%
147 2 3 2 1 3 58.68% 7.78% 3 2 1 3 2 6.68% ‐36.00% 2 1 3 2 3 17.22% 10.28% 1 3 2 3 2 11.46% 28.60% 3 2 3 2 1 31.07% 14.66%
148 2 3 2 2 1 32.90% 3.89% 3 2 2 1 2 47.82% ‐18.00% 2 2 1 2 3 21.24% 5.14% 2 1 2 3 2 -9.81% 14.30% 1 2 3 2 2 20.30% 7.33%
149 2 3 2 2 2 36.79% 3.89% 3 2 2 2 2 29.82% ‐18.00% 2 2 2 2 3 26.38% 5.14% 2 2 2 3 2 4.49% 14.30% 2 2 3 2 2 27.63% 7.33%
150 2 3 2 2 3 40.68% 7.78% 3 2 2 3 2 11.82% ‐36.00% 2 2 3 2 3 31.52% 10.28% 2 3 2 3 2 18.79% 28.60% 3 2 3 2 2 34.96% 14.66%
151 2 3 2 3 1 14.90% 3.89% 3 2 3 1 2 52.96% ‐18.00% 2 3 1 2 3 35.54% 5.14% 3 1 2 3 2 -2.48% 14.30% 1 2 3 2 3 24.19% 7.33%
152 2 3 2 3 2 18.79% 3.89% 3 2 3 2 2 34.96% ‐18.00% 2 3 2 2 3 40.68% 5.14% 3 2 2 3 2 11.82% 14.30% 2 2 3 2 3 31.52% 7.33%
153 2 3 2 3 3 22.68% 7.78% 3 2 3 3 2 16.96% ‐36.00% 2 3 3 2 3 45.82% 10.28% 3 3 2 3 2 26.12% 28.60% 3 2 3 2 3 38.85% 14.66%
154 2 3 3 1 1 56.04% 3.89% 3 3 1 1 2 56.98% ‐18.00% 3 1 1 2 3 14.27% 5.14% 1 1 2 3 3 -13.25% 14.30% 1 2 3 3 1 -1.59% 7.33%
155 2 3 3 1 2 59.93% 3.89% 3 3 1 2 2 38.98% ‐18.00% 3 1 2 2 3 19.41% 5.14% 1 2 2 3 3 1.05% 14.30% 2 2 3 3 1 5.74% 7.33%
156 2 3 3 1 3 63.82% 7.78% 3 3 1 3 2 20.98% ‐36.00% 3 1 3 2 3 24.55% 10.28% 1 3 2 3 3 15.35% 28.60% 3 2 3 3 1 13.07% 14.66%
157 2 3 3 2 1 38.04% 3.89% 3 3 2 1 2 62.12% ‐18.00% 3 2 1 2 3 28.57% 5.14% 2 1 2 3 3 -5.92% 14.30% 1 2 3 3 2 2.30% 7.33%
158 2 3 3 2 2 41.93% 3.89% 3 3 2 2 2 44.12% ‐18.00% 3 2 2 2 3 33.71% 5.14% 2 2 2 3 3 8.38% 14.30% 2 2 3 3 2 9.63% 7.33%
159 2 3 3 2 3 45.82% 7.78% 3 3 2 3 2 26.12% ‐36.00% 3 2 3 2 3 38.85% 10.28% 2 3 2 3 3 22.68% 28.60% 3 2 3 3 2 16.96% 14.66%
160 2 3 3 3 1 20.04% 3.89% 3 3 3 1 2 67.26% ‐18.00% 3 3 1 2 3 42.87% 5.14% 3 1 2 3 3 1.41% 14.30% 1 2 3 3 3 6.19% 7.33%
161 2 3 3 3 2 23.93% 3.89% 3 3 3 2 2 49.26% ‐18.00% 3 3 2 2 3 48.01% 5.14% 3 2 2 3 3 15.71% 14.30% 2 2 3 3 3 13.52% 7.33%
162 2 3 3 3 3 27.82% 7.78% 3 3 3 3 2 31.26% ‐36.00% 3 3 3 2 3 53.15% 10.28% 3 3 2 3 3 30.01% 28.60% 3 2 3 3 3 20.85% 14.66%
366


163 3 1 1 1 1 24.49% 3.89% 1 1 1 1 3 17.61% ‐18.00% 1 1 1 3 1 -26.17% 5.14% 1 1 3 1 1 20.11% 14.30% 1 3 1 1 1 38.43% 7.33%
164 3 1 1 1 2 28.38% 3.89% 1 1 1 2 3 -0.39% ‐18.00% 1 1 2 3 1 -21.03% 5.14% 1 2 3 1 1 34.41% 14.30% 2 3 1 1 1 45.76% 7.33%
165 3 1 1 1 3 32.27% 7.78% 1 1 1 3 3 -18.39% ‐36.00% 1 1 3 3 1 -15.89% 10.28% 1 3 3 1 1 48.71% 28.60% 3 3 1 1 1 53.09% 14.66%
166 3 1 1 2 1 6.49% 3.89% 1 1 2 1 3 22.75% ‐18.00% 1 2 1 3 1 -11.87% 5.14% 2 1 3 1 1 27.44% 14.30% 1 3 1 1 2 42.32% 7.33%
167 3 1 1 2 2 10.38% 3.89% 1 1 2 2 3 4.75% ‐18.00% 1 2 2 3 1 -6.73% 5.14% 2 2 3 1 1 41.74% 14.30% 2 3 1 1 2 49.65% 7.33%
168 3 1 1 2 3 14.27% 7.78% 1 1 2 3 3 -13.25% ‐36.00% 1 2 3 3 1 -1.59% 10.28% 2 3 3 1 1 56.04% 28.60% 3 3 1 1 2 56.98% 14.66%
169 3 1 1 3 1 -11.51% 3.89% 1 1 3 1 3 27.89% ‐18.00% 1 3 1 3 1 2.43% 5.14% 3 1 3 1 1 34.77% 14.30% 1 3 1 1 3 46.21% 7.33%
170 3 1 1 3 2 -7.62% 3.89% 1 1 3 2 3 9.89% ‐18.00% 1 3 2 3 1 7.57% 5.14% 3 2 3 1 1 49.07% 14.30% 2 3 1 1 3 53.54% 7.33%
171 3 1 1 3 3 -3.73% 7.78% 1 1 3 3 3 -8.11% ‐36.00% 1 3 3 3 1 12.71% 10.28% 3 3 3 1 1 63.37% 28.60% 3 3 1 1 3 60.87% 14.66%
172 3 1 2 1 1 29.63% 3.89% 1 2 1 1 3 31.91% ‐18.00% 2 1 1 3 1 -18.84% 5.14% 1 1 3 1 2 24.00% 14.30% 1 3 1 2 1 20.43% 7.33%
173 3 1 2 1 2 33.52% 3.89% 1 2 1 2 3 13.91% ‐18.00% 2 1 2 3 1 -13.70% 5.14% 1 2 3 1 2 38.30% 14.30% 2 3 1 2 1 27.76% 7.33%
174 3 1 2 1 3 37.41% 7.78% 1 2 1 3 3 -4.09% ‐36.00% 2 1 3 3 1 -8.56% 10.28% 1 3 3 1 2 52.60% 28.60% 3 3 1 2 1 35.09% 14.66%
175 3 1 2 2 1 11.63% 3.89% 1 2 2 1 3 37.05% ‐18.00% 2 2 1 3 1 -4.54% 5.14% 2 1 3 1 2 31.33% 14.30% 1 3 1 2 2 24.32% 7.33%
176 3 1 2 2 2 15.52% 3.89% 1 2 2 2 3 19.05% ‐18.00% 2 2 2 3 1 0.60% 5.14% 2 2 3 1 2 45.63% 14.30% 2 3 1 2 2 31.65% 7.33%
177 3 1 2 2 3 19.41% 7.78% 1 2 2 3 3 1.05% ‐36.00% 2 2 3 3 1 5.74% 10.28% 2 3 3 1 2 59.93% 28.60% 3 3 1 2 2 38.98% 14.66%
178 3 1 2 3 1 -6.37% 3.89% 1 2 3 1 3 42.19% ‐18.00% 2 3 1 3 1 9.76% 5.14% 3 1 3 1 2 38.66% 14.30% 1 3 1 2 3 28.21% 7.33%
179 3 1 2 3 2 -2.48% 3.89% 1 2 3 2 3 24.19% ‐18.00% 2 3 2 3 1 14.90% 5.14% 3 2 3 1 2 52.96% 14.30% 2 3 1 2 3 35.54% 7.33%
180 3 1 2 3 3 1.41% 7.78% 1 2 3 3 3 6.19% ‐36.00% 2 3 3 3 1 20.04% 10.28% 3 3 3 1 2 67.26% 28.60% 3 3 1 2 3 42.87% 14.66%
181 3 1 3 1 1 34.77% 3.89% 1 3 1 1 3 46.21% ‐18.00% 3 1 1 3 1 -11.51% 5.14% 1 1 3 1 3 27.89% 14.30% 1 3 1 3 1 2.43% 7.33%
182 3 1 3 1 2 38.66% 3.89% 1 3 1 2 3 28.21% ‐18.00% 3 1 2 3 1 -6.37% 5.14% 1 2 3 1 3 42.19% 14.30% 2 3 1 3 1 9.76% 7.33%
183 3 1 3 1 3 42.55%
55% 7.78% 1 3 1 3 3 10.21%
0 % ‐36.00%
36.00% 3 1 3 3 1 -1.23%
3% 10.28% 1 3 3 1 3 56.49%
56 9% 28.60% 3 3 1 3 1 17.09%
09% 14.66%
184 3 1 3 2 1 16.77% 3.89% 1 3 2 1 3 51.35% ‐18.00% 3 2 1 3 1 2.79% 5.14% 2 1 3 1 3 35.22% 14.30% 1 3 1 3 2 6.32% 7.33%
185 3 1 3 2 2 20.66% 3.89% 1 3 2 2 3 33.35% ‐18.00% 3 2 2 3 1 7.93% 5.14% 2 2 3 1 3 49.52% 14.30% 2 3 1 3 2 13.65% 7.33%
186 3 1 3 2 3 24.55% 7.78% 1 3 2 3 3 15.35% ‐36.00% 3 2 3 3 1 13.07% 10.28% 2 3 3 1 3 63.82% 28.60% 3 3 1 3 2 20.98% 14.66%
187 3 1 3 3 1 -1.23% 3.89% 1 3 3 1 3 56.49% ‐18.00% 3 3 1 3 1 17.09% 5.14% 3 1 3 1 3 42.55% 14.30% 1 3 1 3 3 10.21% 7.33%
188 3 1 3 3 2 2.66% 3.89% 1 3 3 2 3 38.49% ‐18.00% 3 3 2 3 1 22.23% 5.14% 3 2 3 1 3 56.85% 14.30% 2 3 1 3 3 17.54% 7.33%
189 3 1 3 3 3 6.55% 7.78% 1 3 3 3 3 20.49% ‐36.00% 3 3 3 3 1 27.37% 10.28% 3 3 3 1 3 71.15% 28.60% 3 3 1 3 3 24.87% 14.66%
190 3 2 1 1 1 38.79% 3.89% 2 1 1 1 3 24.94% ‐18.00% 1 1 1 3 2 -22.28% 5.14% 1 1 3 2 1 2.11% 14.30% 1 3 2 1 1 43.57% 7.33%
191 3 2 1 1 2 42.68% 3.89% 2 1 1 2 3 6.94% ‐18.00% 1 1 2 3 2 -17.14% 5.14% 1 2 3 2 1 16.41% 14.30% 2 3 2 1 1 50.90% 7.33%
192 3 2 1 1 3 46.57% 7.78% 2 1 1 3 3 -11.06% ‐36.00% 1 1 3 3 2 -12.00% 10.28% 1 3 3 2 1 30.71% 28.60% 3 3 2 1 1 58.23% 14.66%
193 3 2 1 2 1 20.79% 3.89% 2 1 2 1 3 30.08% ‐18.00% 1 2 1 3 2 -7.98% 5.14% 2 1 3 2 1 9.44% 14.30% 1 3 2 1 2 47.46% 7.33%
194 3 2 1 2 2 24.68% 3.89% 2 1 2 2 3 12.08% ‐18.00% 1 2 2 3 2 -2.84% 5.14% 2 2 3 2 1 23.74% 14.30% 2 3 2 1 2 54.79% 7.33%
195 3 2 1 2 3 28.57% 7.78% 2 1 2 3 3 -5.92% ‐36.00% 1 2 3 3 2 2.30% 10.28% 2 3 3 2 1 38.04% 28.60% 3 3 2 1 2 62.12% 14.66%
196 3 2 1 3 1 2.79% 3.89% 2 1 3 1 3 35.22% ‐18.00% 1 3 1 3 2 6.32% 5.14% 3 1 3 2 1 16.77% 14.30% 1 3 2 1 3 51.35% 7.33%
197 3 2 1 3 2 6.68% 3.89% 2 1 3 2 3 17.22% ‐18.00% 1 3 2 3 2 11.46% 5.14% 3 2 3 2 1 31.07% 14.30% 2 3 2 1 3 58.68% 7.33%
198 3 2 1 3 3 10.57% 7.78% 2 1 3 3 3 -0.78% ‐36.00% 1 3 3 3 2 16.60% 10.28% 3 3 3 2 1 45.37% 28.60% 3 3 2 1 3 66.01% 14.66%
199 3 2 2 1 1 43.93% 3.89% 2 2 1 1 3 39.24% ‐18.00% 2 1 1 3 2 -14.95% 5.14% 1 1 3 2 2 6.00% 14.30% 1 3 2 2 1 25.57% 7.33%
200 3 2 2 1 2 47.82% 3.89% 2 2 1 2 3 21.24% ‐18.00% 2 1 2 3 2 -9.81% 5.14% 1 2 3 2 2 20.30% 14.30% 2 3 2 2 1 32.90% 7.33%
201 3 2 2 1 3 51.71% 7.78% 2 2 1 3 3 3.24% ‐36.00% 2 1 3 3 2 -4.67% 10.28% 1 3 3 2 2 34.60% 28.60% 3 3 2 2 1 40.23% 14.66%
202 3 2 2 2 1 25.93% 3.89% 2 2 2 1 3 44.38% ‐18.00% 2 2 1 3 2 -0.65% 5.14% 2 1 3 2 2 13.33% 14.30% 1 3 2 2 2 29.46% 7.33%
203 3 2 2 2 2 29.82% 3.89% 2 2 2 2 3 26.38% ‐18.00% 2 2 2 3 2 4.49% 5.14% 2 2 3 2 2 27.63% 14.30% 2 3 2 2 2 36.79% 7.33%
204 3 2 2 2 3 33.71% 7.78% 2 2 2 3 3 8.38% ‐36.00% 2 2 3 3 2 9.63% 10.28% 2 3 3 2 2 41.93% 28.60% 3 3 2 2 2 44.12% 14.66%
205 3 2 2 3 1 7.93% 3.89% 2 2 3 1 3 49.52% ‐18.00% 2 3 1 3 2 13.65% 5.14% 3 1 3 2 2 20.66% 14.30% 1 3 2 2 3 33.35% 7.33%
206 3 2 2 3 2 11.82% 3.89% 2 2 3 2 3 31.52% ‐18.00% 2 3 2 3 2 18.79% 5.14% 3 2 3 2 2 34.96% 14.30% 2 3 2 2 3 40.68% 7.33%
207 3 2 2 3 3 15.71% 7.78% 2 2 3 3 3 13.52% ‐36.00% 2 3 3 3 2 23.93% 10.28% 3 3 3 2 2 49.26% 28.60% 3 3 2 2 3 48.01% 14.66%
208 3 2 3 1 1 49.07% 3.89% 2 3 1 1 3 53.54% ‐18.00% 3 1 1 3 2 -7.62% 5.14% 1 1 3 2 3 9.89% 14.30% 1 3 2 3 1 7.57% 7.33%
209 3 2 3 1 2 52.96% 3.89% 2 3 1 2 3 35.54% ‐18.00% 3 1 2 3 2 -2.48% 5.14% 1 2 3 2 3 24.19% 14.30% 2 3 2 3 1 14.90% 7.33%
210 3 2 3 1 3 56.85% 7.78% 2 3 1 3 3 17.54% ‐36.00% 3 1 3 3 2 2.66% 10.28% 1 3 3 2 3 38.49% 28.60% 3 3 2 3 1 22.23% 14.66%
211 3 2 3 2 1 31.07% 3.89% 2 3 2 1 3 58.68% ‐18.00% 3 2 1 3 2 6.68% 5.14% 2 1 3 2 3 17.22% 14.30% 1 3 2 3 2 11.46% 7.33%
212 3 2 3 2 2 34.96% 3.89% 2 3 2 2 3 40.68% ‐18.00% 3 2 2 3 2 11.82% 5.14% 2 2 3 2 3 31.52% 14.30% 2 3 2 3 2 18.79% 7.33%
213 3 2 3 2 3 38.85% 7.78% 2 3 2 3 3 22.68% ‐36.00% 3 2 3 3 2 16.96% 10.28% 2 3 3 2 3 45.82% 28.60% 3 3 2 3 2 26.12% 14.66%
214 3 2 3 3 1 13.07% 3.89% 2 3 3 1 3 63.82% ‐18.00% 3 3 1 3 2 20.98% 5.14% 3 1 3 2 3 24.55% 14.30% 1 3 2 3 3 15.35% 7.33%
215 3 2 3 3 2 16.96% 3.89% 2 3 3 2 3 45.82% ‐18.00% 3 3 2 3 2 26.12% 5.14% 3 2 3 2 3 38.85% 14.30% 2 3 2 3 3 22.68% 7.33%
216 3 2 3 3 3 20.85% 7.78% 2 3 3 3 3 27.82% ‐36.00% 3 3 3 3 2 31.26% 10.28% 3 3 3 2 3 53.15% 28.60% 3 3 2 3 3 30.01% 14.66%
367


217 3 3 1 1 1 53.09% 3.89% 3 1 1 1 3 32.27% ‐18.00% 1 1 1 3 3 -18.39% 5.14% 1 1 3 3 1 -15.89% 14.30% 1 3 3 1 1 48.71% 7.33%
218 3 3 1 1 2 56.98% 3.89% 3 1 1 2 3 14.27% ‐18.00% 1 1 2 3 3 -13.25% 5.14% 1 2 3 3 1 -1.59% 14.30% 2 3 3 1 1 56.04% 7.33%
219 3 3 1 1 3 60.87% 7.78% 3 1 1 3 3 -3.73% ‐36.00% 1 1 3 3 3 -8.11% 10.28% 1 3 3 3 1 12.71% 28.60% 3 3 3 1 1 63.37% 14.66%
220 3 3 1 2 1 35.09% 3.89% 3 1 2 1 3 37.41% ‐18.00% 1 2 1 3 3 -4.09% 5.14% 2 1 3 3 1 -8.56% 14.30% 1 3 3 1 2 52.60% 7.33%
221 3 3 1 2 2 38.98% 3.89% 3 1 2 2 3 19.41% ‐18.00% 1 2 2 3 3 1.05% 5.14% 2 2 3 3 1 5.74% 14.30% 2 3 3 1 2 59.93% 7.33%
222 3 3 1 2 3 42.87% 7.78% 3 1 2 3 3 1.41% ‐36.00% 1 2 3 3 3 6.19% 10.28% 2 3 3 3 1 20.04% 28.60% 3 3 3 1 2 67.26% 14.66%
223 3 3 1 3 1 17.09% 3.89% 3 1 3 1 3 42.55% ‐18.00% 1 3 1 3 3 10.21% 5.14% 3 1 3 3 1 -1.23% 14.30% 1 3 3 1 3 56.49% 7.33%
224 3 3 1 3 2 20.98% 3.89% 3 1 3 2 3 24.55% ‐18.00% 1 3 2 3 3 15.35% 5.14% 3 2 3 3 1 13.07% 14.30% 2 3 3 1 3 63.82% 7.33%
225 3 3 1 3 3 24.87% 7.78% 3 1 3 3 3 6.55% ‐36.00% 1 3 3 3 3 20.49% 10.28% 3 3 3 3 1 27.37% 28.60% 3 3 3 1 3 71.15% 14.66%
226 3 3 2 1 1 58.23% 3.89% 3 2 1 1 3 46.57% ‐18.00% 2 1 1 3 3 -11.06% 5.14% 1 1 3 3 2 -12.00% 14.30% 1 3 3 2 1 30.71% 7.33%
227 3 3 2 1 2 62.12% 3.89% 3 2 1 2 3 28.57% ‐18.00% 2 1 2 3 3 -5.92% 5.14% 1 2 3 3 2 2.30% 14.30% 2 3 3 2 1 38.04% 7.33%
228 3 3 2 1 3 66.01% 7.78% 3 2 1 3 3 10.57% ‐36.00% 2 1 3 3 3 -0.78% 10.28% 1 3 3 3 2 16.60% 28.60% 3 3 3 2 1 45.37% 14.66%
229 3 3 2 2 1 40.23% 3.89% 3 2 2 1 3 51.71% ‐18.00% 2 2 1 3 3 3.24% 5.14% 2 1 3 3 2 -4.67% 14.30% 1 3 3 2 2 34.60% 7.33%
230 3 3 2 2 2 44.12% 3.89% 3 2 2 2 3 33.71% ‐18.00% 2 2 2 3 3 8.38% 5.14% 2 2 3 3 2 9.63% 14.30% 2 3 3 2 2 41.93% 7.33%
231 3 3 2 2 3 48.01% 7.78% 3 2 2 3 3 15.71% ‐36.00% 2 2 3 3 3 13.52% 10.28% 2 3 3 3 2 23.93% 28.60% 3 3 3 2 2 49.26% 14.66%
232 3 3 2 3 1 22.23% 3.89% 3 2 3 1 3 56.85% ‐18.00% 2 3 1 3 3 17.54% 5.14% 3 1 3 3 2 2.66% 14.30% 1 3 3 2 3 38.49% 7.33%
233 3 3 2 3 2 26.12% 3.89% 3 2 3 2 3 38.85% ‐18.00% 2 3 2 3 3 22.68% 5.14% 3 2 3 3 2 16.96% 14.30% 2 3 3 2 3 45.82% 7.33%
234 3 3 2 3 3 30.01% 7.78% 3 2 3 3 3 20.85% ‐36.00% 2 3 3 3 3 27.82% 10.28% 3 3 3 3 2 31.26% 28.60% 3 3 3 2 3 53.15% 14.66%
235 3 3 3 1 1 63.37% 3.89% 3 3 1 1 3 60.87% ‐18.00% 3 1 1 3 3 -3.73% 5.14% 1 1 3 3 3 -8.11% 14.30% 1 3 3 3 1 12.71% 7.33%
236 3 3 3 1 2 67.26% 3.89% 3 3 1 2 3 42.87% ‐18.00% 3 1 2 3 3 1.41% 5.14% 1 2 3 3 3 6.19% 14.30% 2 3 3 3 1 20.04% 7.33%
237 3 3 3 1 3 71.15%
5% 7.78% 3 3 1 3 3 24.87%
8 % ‐36.00%
36.00% 3 1 3 3 3 6.55%
6 55% 10.28% 1 3 3 3 3 20.49%
0 9% 28.60% 3 3 3 3 1 27.37%
3 % 14.66%
238 3 3 3 2 1 45.37% 3.89% 3 3 2 1 3 66.01% ‐18.00% 3 2 1 3 3 10.57% 5.14% 2 1 3 3 3 -0.78% 14.30% 1 3 3 3 2 16.60% 7.33%
239 3 3 3 2 2 49.26% 3.89% 3 3 2 2 3 48.01% ‐18.00% 3 2 2 3 3 15.71% 5.14% 2 2 3 3 3 13.52% 14.30% 2 3 3 3 2 23.93% 7.33%
240 3 3 3 2 3 53.15% 7.78% 3 3 2 3 3 30.01% ‐36.00% 3 2 3 3 3 20.85% 10.28% 2 3 3 3 3 27.82% 28.60% 3 3 3 3 2 31.26% 14.66%
241 3 3 3 3 1 27.37% 3.89% 3 3 3 1 3 71.15% ‐18.00% 3 3 1 3 3 24.87% 5.14% 3 1 3 3 3 6.55% 14.30% 1 3 3 3 3 20.49% 7.33%
242 3 3 3 3 2 31.26% 3.89% 3 3 3 2 3 53.15% ‐18.00% 3 3 2 3 3 30.01% 5.14% 3 2 3 3 3 20.85% 14.30% 2 3 3 3 3 27.82% 7.33%
243 3 3 3 3 3 35.15% 7.78% 3 3 3 3 3 35.15% ‐36.00% 3 3 3 3 3 35.15% 10.28% 3 3 3 3 3 35.15% 28.60% 3 3 3 3 3 35.15% 14.66%
Legend :
T- Timings
S - Supervision
G - Group Dynamics
P - Procedure
C - Climate
368
Appendix 6-5 : Blockwork Trade


1 1 1 1 1 1 -16.0% 4.44% 1 1 1 1 1 -16.0% 12.50% 1 1 1 1 1 -16.0% ‐12.80% 1 1 1 1 1 -16.0% 14.10% 1 1 1 1 1 -16.0% 13.80%
2 1 1 1 1 2 -11.5% 4.44% 1 1 1 2 1 -3.5% 12.50% 1 1 2 1 1 -28.8% ‐12.80% 1 2 1 1 1 -1.9% 14.10% 2 1 1 1 1 -2.2% 13.80%
3 1 1 1 1 3 -7.1% 8.88% 1 1 1 3 1 9.0% 25.00% 1 1 3 1 1 -41.6% ‐25.60% 1 3 1 1 1 12.2% 28.20% 3 1 1 1 1 11.6% 27.60%
4 1 1 1 2 1 -3.5% 4.44% 1 1 2 1 1 -28.8% 12.50% 1 2 1 1 1 -1.9% ‐12.80% 2 1 1 1 1 -2.2% 14.10% 1 1 1 1 2 -11.5% 13.80%
5 1 1 1 2 2 1.0% 4.44% 1 1 2 2 1 -16.3% 12.50% 1 2 2 1 1 -14.7% ‐12.80% 2 2 1 1 1 11.9% 14.10% 2 1 1 1 2 2.3% 13.80%
6 1 1 1 2 3 5.4% 8.88% 1 1 2 3 1 -3.8% 25.00% 1 2 3 1 1 -27.5% ‐25.60% 2 3 1 1 1 26.0% 28.20% 3 1 1 1 2 16.1% 27.60%
7 1 1 1 3 1 9.0% 4.44% 1 1 3 1 1 -41.6% 12.50% 1 3 1 1 1 12.2% ‐12.80% 3 1 1 1 1 11.6% 14.10% 1 1 1 1 3 -7.1% 13.80%
8 1 1 1 3 2 13.5% 4.44% 1 1 3 2 1 -29.1% 12.50% 1 3 2 1 1 -0.6% ‐12.80% 3 2 1 1 1 25.7% 14.10% 2 1 1 1 3 6.7% 13.80%
9 1 1 1 3 3 17.9% 8.88% 1 1 3 3 1 -16.6% 25.00% 1 3 3 1 1 -13.4% ‐25.60% 3 3 1 1 1 39.8% 28.20% 3 1 1 1 3 20.5% 27.60%
10 1 1 2 1 1 -28.8% 4.44% 1 2 1 1 1 -1.9% 12.50% 2 1 1 1 1 -2.2% ‐12.80% 1 1 1 1 2 -11.5% 14.10% 1 1 1 2 1 -3.5% 13.80%
11 1 1 2 1 2 -24.3% 4.44% 1 2 1 2 1 10.6% 12.50% 2 1 2 1 1 -15.0% ‐12.80% 1 2 1 1 2 2.6% 14.10% 2 1 1 2 1 10.3% 13.80%
12 1 1 2 1 3 -19.9% 8.88% 1 2 1 3 1 23.1% 25.00% 2 1 3 1 1 -27.8% ‐25.60% 1 3 1 1 2 16.7% 28.20% 3 1 1 2 1 24.1% 27.60%
13 1 1 2 2 1 -16.3% 4.44% 1 2 2 1 1 -14.7% 12.50% 2 2 1 1 1 11.9% ‐12.80% 2 1 1 1 2 2.3% 14.10% 1 1 1 2 2 1.0% 13.80%
14 1 1 2 2 2 -11.8% 4.44% 1 2 2 2 1 -2.2% 12.50% 2 2 2 1 1 -0.9% ‐12.80% 2 2 1 1 2 16.4% 14.10% 2 1 1 2 2 14.8% 13.80%
15 1 1 2 2 3 -7.4% 8.88% 1 2 2 3 1 10.3% 25.00% 2 2 3 1 1 -13.7% ‐25.60% 2 3 1 1 2 30.5% 28.20% 3 1 1 2 2 28.6% 27.60%
16 1 1 2 3 1 -3.8% 4.44% 1 2 3 1 1 -27.5% 12.50% 2 3 1 1 1 26.0% ‐12.80% 3 1 1 1 2 16.1% 14.10% 1 1 1 2 3 5.4% 13.80%
17 1 1 2 3 2 0.7% 4.44% 1 2 3 2 1 -15.0% 12.50% 2 3 2 1 1 13.2% ‐12.80% 3 2 1 1 2 30.2% 14.10% 2 1 1 2 3 19.2% 13.80%
18 1 1 2 3 3 5.1% 8.88% 1 2 3 3 1 -2.5% 25.00% 2 3 3 1 1 0.4% ‐25.60% 3 3 1 1 2 44.3% 28.20% 3 1 1 2 3 33.0% 27.60%
19 1 1 3 1 1 -41.6% 4.44% 1 3 1 1 1 12.2% 12.50% 3 1 1 1 1 11.6% ‐12.80% 1 1 1 1 3 -7.1% 14.10% 1 1 1 3 1 9.0% 13.80%
20 1 1 3 1 2 -37.1% 4.44% 1 3 1 2 1 24.7% 12.50% 3 1 2 1 1 -1.2% ‐12.80% 1 2 1 1 3 7.0% 14.10% 2 1 1 3 1 22.8% 13.80%
21 1 1 3 1 3 -32.7% 8.88% 1 3 1 3 1 37.2% 25.00% 3 1 3 1 1 -14.0% ‐25.60% 1 3 1 1 3 21.1% 28.20% 3 1 1 3 1 36.6% 27.60%
22 1 1 3 2 1 -29.1%
29.1% 4.44% 1 3 2 1 1 -0.6%
0.6% 12.50% 3 2 1 1 1 25.7% ‐12.80%
12.80% 2 1 1 1 3 6.7% 14.10% 1 1 1 3 2 13.5% 13.80%
23 1 1 3 2 2 -24.6% 4.44% 1 3 2 2 1 11.9% 12.50% 3 2 2 1 1 12.9% ‐12.80% 2 2 1 1 3 20.8% 14.10% 2 1 1 3 2 27.3% 13.80%
24 1 1 3 2 3 -20.2% 8.88% 1 3 2 3 1 24.4% 25.00% 3 2 3 1 1 0.1% ‐25.60% 2 3 1 1 3 34.9% 28.20% 3 1 1 3 2 41.1% 27.60%
25 1 1 3 3 1 -16.6% 4.44% 1 3 3 1 1 -13.4% 12.50% 3 3 1 1 1 39.8% ‐12.80% 3 1 1 1 3 20.5% 14.10% 1 1 1 3 3 17.9% 13.80%
26 1 1 3 3 2 -12.1% 4.44% 1 3 3 2 1 -0.9% 12.50% 3 3 2 1 1 27.0% ‐12.80% 3 2 1 1 3 34.6% 14.10% 2 1 1 3 3 31.7% 13.80%
27 1 1 3 3 3 -7.7% 8.88% 1 3 3 3 1 11.6% 25.00% 3 3 3 1 1 14.2% ‐25.60% 3 3 1 1 3 48.7% 28.20% 3 1 1 3 3 45.5% 27.60%
28 1 2 1 1 1 -1.9% 4.44% 2 1 1 1 1 -2.2% 12.50% 1 1 1 1 2 -11.5% ‐12.80% 1 1 1 2 1 -3.5% 14.10% 1 1 2 1 1 -28.8% 13.80%
29 1 2 1 1 2 2.6% 4.44% 2 1 1 2 1 10.3% 12.50% 1 1 2 1 2 -24.3% ‐12.80% 1 2 1 2 1 10.6% 14.10% 2 1 2 1 1 -15.0% 13.80%
30 1 2 1 1 3 7.0% 8.88% 2 1 1 3 1 22.8% 25.00% 1 1 3 1 2 -37.1% ‐25.60% 1 3 1 2 1 24.7% 28.20% 3 1 2 1 1 -1.2% 27.60%
31 1 2 1 2 1 10.6% 4.44% 2 1 2 1 1 -15.0% 12.50% 1 2 1 1 2 2.6% ‐12.80% 2 1 1 2 1 10.3% 14.10% 1 1 2 1 2 -24.3% 13.80%
32 1 2 1 2 2 15.1% 4.44% 2 1 2 2 1 -2.5% 12.50% 1 2 2 1 2 -10.2% ‐12.80% 2 2 1 2 1 24.4% 14.10% 2 1 2 1 2 -10.5% 13.80%
33 1 2 1 2 3 19.5% 8.88% 2 1 2 3 1 10.0% 25.00% 1 2 3 1 2 -23.0% ‐25.60% 2 3 1 2 1 38.5% 28.20% 3 1 2 1 2 3.3% 27.60%
34 1 2 1 3 1 23.1% 4.44% 2 1 3 1 1 -27.8% 12.50% 1 3 1 1 2 16.7% ‐12.80% 3 1 1 2 1 24.1% 14.10% 1 1 2 1 3 -19.9% 13.80%
35 1 2 1 3 2 27.6% 4.44% 2 1 3 2 1 -15.3% 12.50% 1 3 2 1 2 3.9% ‐12.80% 3 2 1 2 1 38.2% 14.10% 2 1 2 1 3 -6.1% 13.80%
36 1 2 1 3 3 32.0% 8.88% 2 1 3 3 1 -2.8% 25.00% 1 3 3 1 2 -8.9% ‐25.60% 3 3 1 2 1 52.3% 28.20% 3 1 2 1 3 7.7% 27.60%
37 1 2 2 1 1 -14.7% 4.44% 2 2 1 1 1 11.9% 12.50% 2 1 1 1 2 2.3% ‐12.80% 1 1 1 2 2 1.0% 14.10% 1 1 2 2 1 -16.3% 13.80%
38 1 2 2 1 2 -10.2% 4.44% 2 2 1 2 1 24.4% 12.50% 2 1 2 1 2 -10.5% ‐12.80% 1 2 1 2 2 15.1% 14.10% 2 1 2 2 1 -2.5% 13.80%
39 1 2 2 1 3 -5.8% 8.88% 2 2 1 3 1 36.9% 25.00% 2 1 3 1 2 -23.3% ‐25.60% 1 3 1 2 2 29.2% 28.20% 3 1 2 2 1 11.3% 27.60%
40 1 2 2 2 1 -2.2% 4.44% 2 2 2 1 1 -0.9% 12.50% 2 2 1 1 2 16.4% ‐12.80% 2 1 1 2 2 14.8% 14.10% 1 1 2 2 2 -11.8% 13.80%
41 1 2 2 2 2 2.3% 4.44% 2 2 2 2 1 11.6% 12.50% 2 2 2 1 2 3.6% ‐12.80% 2 2 1 2 2 28.9% 14.10% 2 1 2 2 2 2.0% 13.80%
42 1 2 2 2 3 6.7% 8.88% 2 2 2 3 1 24.1% 25.00% 2 2 3 1 2 -9.2% ‐25.60% 2 3 1 2 2 43.0% 28.20% 3 1 2 2 2 15.8% 27.60%
43 1 2 2 3 1 10.3% 4.44% 2 2 3 1 1 -13.7% 12.50% 2 3 1 1 2 30.5% ‐12.80% 3 1 1 2 2 28.6% 14.10% 1 1 2 2 3 -7.4% 13.80%
44 1 2 2 3 2 14.8% 4.44% 2 2 3 2 1 -1.2% 12.50% 2 3 2 1 2 17.7% ‐12.80% 3 2 1 2 2 42.7% 14.10% 2 1 2 2 3 6.4% 13.80%
45 1 2 2 3 3 19.2% 8.88% 2 2 3 3 1 11.3% 25.00% 2 3 3 1 2 4.9% ‐25.60% 3 3 1 2 2 56.8% 28.20% 3 1 2 2 3 20.2% 27.60%
46 1 2 3 1 1 -27.5% 4.44% 2 3 1 1 1 26.0% 12.50% 3 1 1 1 2 16.1% ‐12.80% 1 1 1 2 3 5.4% 14.10% 1 1 2 3 1 -3.8% 13.80%
47 1 2 3 1 2 -23.0% 4.44% 2 3 1 2 1 38.5% 12.50% 3 1 2 1 2 3.3% ‐12.80% 1 2 1 2 3 19.5% 14.10% 2 1 2 3 1 10.0% 13.80%
48 1 2 3 1 3 -18.6% 8.88% 2 3 1 3 1 51.0% 25.00% 3 1 3 1 2 -9.5% ‐25.60% 1 3 1 2 3 33.6% 28.20% 3 1 2 3 1 23.8% 27.60%
49 1 2 3 2 1 -15.0% 4.44% 2 3 2 1 1 13.2% 12.50% 3 2 1 1 2 30.2% ‐12.80% 2 1 1 2 3 19.2% 14.10% 1 1 2 3 2 0.7% 13.80%
50 1 2 3 2 2 -10.5% 4.44% 2 3 2 2 1 25.7% 12.50% 3 2 2 1 2 17.4% ‐12.80% 2 2 1 2 3 33.3% 14.10% 2 1 2 3 2 14.5% 13.80%
51 1 2 3 2 3 -6.1% 8.88% 2 3 2 3 1 38.2% 25.00% 3 2 3 1 2 4.6% ‐25.60% 2 3 1 2 3 47.4% 28.20% 3 1 2 3 2 28.3% 27.60%
52 1 2 3 3 1 -2.5% 4.44% 2 3 3 1 1 0.4% 12.50% 3 3 1 1 2 44.3% ‐12.80% 3 1 1 2 3 33.0% 14.10% 1 1 2 3 3 5.1% 13.80%
53 1 2 3 3 2 2.0% 4.44% 2 3 3 2 1 12.9% 12.50% 3 3 2 1 2 31.5% ‐12.80% 3 2 1 2 3 47.1% 14.10% 2 1 2 3 3 18.9% 13.80%
54 1 2 3 3 3 6.4% 8.88% 2 3 3 3 1 25.4% 25.00% 3 3 3 1 2 18.7% ‐25.60% 3 3 1 2 3 61.2% 28.20% 3 1 2 3 3 32.7% 27.60%
55 1 3 1 1 1 12.2% 4.44% 3 1 1 1 1 11.6% 12.50% 1 1 1 1 3 -7.1% ‐12.80% 1 1 1 3 1 9.0% 14.10% 1 1 3 1 1 -41.6% 13.80%
369


56 1 3 1 1 2 16.7% 4.44% 3 1 1 2 1 24.1% 12.50% 1 1 2 1 3 -19.9% ‐12.80% 1 2 1 3 1 23.1% 14.10% 2 1 3 1 1 -27.8% 13.80%
57 1 3 1 1 3 21.1% 8.88% 3 1 1 3 1 36.6% 25.00% 1 1 3 1 3 -32.7% ‐25.60% 1 3 1 3 1 37.2% 28.20% 3 1 3 1 1 -14.0% 27.60%
58 1 3 1 2 1 24.7% 4.44% 3 1 2 1 1 -1.2% 12.50% 1 2 1 1 3 7.0% ‐12.80% 2 1 1 3 1 22.8% 14.10% 1 1 3 1 2 -37.1% 13.80%
59 1 3 1 2 2 29.2% 4.44% 3 1 2 2 1 11.3% 12.50% 1 2 2 1 3 -5.8% ‐12.80% 2 2 1 3 1 36.9% 14.10% 2 1 3 1 2 -23.3% 13.80%
60 1 3 1 2 3 33.6% 8.88% 3 1 2 3 1 23.8% 25.00% 1 2 3 1 3 -18.6% ‐25.60% 2 3 1 3 1 51.0% 28.20% 3 1 3 1 2 -9.5% 27.60%
61 1 3 1 3 1 37.2% 4.44% 3 1 3 1 1 -14.0% 12.50% 1 3 1 1 3 21.1% ‐12.80% 3 1 1 3 1 36.6% 14.10% 1 1 3 1 3 -32.7% 13.80%
62 1 3 1 3 2 41.7% 4.44% 3 1 3 2 1 -1.5% 12.50% 1 3 2 1 3 8.3% ‐12.80% 3 2 1 3 1 50.7% 14.10% 2 1 3 1 3 -18.9% 13.80%
63 1 3 1 3 3 46.1% 8.88% 3 1 3 3 1 11.0% 25.00% 1 3 3 1 3 -4.5% ‐25.60% 3 3 1 3 1 64.8% 28.20% 3 1 3 1 3 -5.1% 27.60%
64 1 3 2 1 1 -0.6% 4.44% 3 2 1 1 1 25.7% 12.50% 2 1 1 1 3 6.7% ‐12.80% 1 1 1 3 2 13.5% 14.10% 1 1 3 2 1 -29.1% 13.80%
65 1 3 2 1 2 3.9% 4.44% 3 2 1 2 1 38.2% 12.50% 2 1 2 1 3 -6.1% ‐12.80% 1 2 1 3 2 27.6% 14.10% 2 1 3 2 1 -15.3% 13.80%
66 1 3 2 1 3 8.3% 8.88% 3 2 1 3 1 50.7% 25.00% 2 1 3 1 3 -18.9% ‐25.60% 1 3 1 3 2 41.7% 28.20% 3 1 3 2 1 -1.5% 27.60%
67 1 3 2 2 1 11.9% 4.44% 3 2 2 1 1 12.9% 12.50% 2 2 1 1 3 20.8% ‐12.80% 2 1 1 3 2 27.3% 14.10% 1 1 3 2 2 -24.6% 13.80%
68 1 3 2 2 2 16.4% 4.44% 3 2 2 2 1 25.4% 12.50% 2 2 2 1 3 8.0% ‐12.80% 2 2 1 3 2 41.4% 14.10% 2 1 3 2 2 -10.8% 13.80%
69 1 3 2 2 3 20.8% 8.88% 3 2 2 3 1 37.9% 25.00% 2 2 3 1 3 -4.8% ‐25.60% 2 3 1 3 2 55.5% 28.20% 3 1 3 2 2 3.0% 27.60%
70 1 3 2 3 1 24.4% 4.44% 3 2 3 1 1 0.1% 12.50% 2 3 1 1 3 34.9% ‐12.80% 3 1 1 3 2 41.1% 14.10% 1 1 3 2 3 -20.2% 13.80%
71 1 3 2 3 2 28.9% 4.44% 3 2 3 2 1 12.6% 12.50% 2 3 2 1 3 22.1% ‐12.80% 3 2 1 3 2 55.2% 14.10% 2 1 3 2 3 -6.4% 13.80%
72 1 3 2 3 3 33.3% 8.88% 3 2 3 3 1 25.1% 25.00% 2 3 3 1 3 9.3% ‐25.60% 3 3 1 3 2 69.3% 28.20% 3 1 3 2 3 7.4% 27.60%
73 1 3 3 1 1 -13.4% 4.44% 3 3 1 1 1 39.8% 12.50% 3 1 1 1 3 20.5% ‐12.80% 1 1 1 3 3 17.9% 14.10% 1 1 3 3 1 -16.6% 13.80%
74 1 3 3 1 2 -8.9% 4.44% 3 3 1 2 1 52.3% 12.50% 3 1 2 1 3 7.7% ‐12.80% 1 2 1 3 3 32.0% 14.10% 2 1 3 3 1 -2.8% 13.80%
75 1 3 3 1 3 -4.5% 8.88% 3 3 1 3 1 64.8% 25.00% 3 1 3 1 3 -5.1% ‐25.60% 1 3 1 3 3 46.1% 28.20% 3 1 3 3 1 11.0% 27.60%
76 1 3 3 2 1 -0.9% 4.44% 3 3 2 1 1 27.0% 12.50% 3 2 1 1 3 34.6% ‐12.80% 2 1 1 3 3 31.7% 14.10% 1 1 3 3 2 -12.1% 13.80%
77 1 3 3 2 2 3.6% 4.44% 3 3 2 2 1 39.5% 12.50% 3 2 2 1 3 21.8% ‐12.80%
12.80% 2 2 1 3 3 45.8% 14.10% 2 1 3 3 2 1.7% 13.80%
78 1 3 3 2 3 8.0% 8.88% 3 3 2 3 1 52.0% 25.00% 3 2 3 1 3 9.0% ‐25.60% 2 3 1 3 3 59.9% 28.20% 3 1 3 3 2 15.5% 27.60%
79 1 3 3 3 1 11.6% 4.44% 3 3 3 1 1 14.2% 12.50% 3 3 1 1 3 48.7% ‐12.80% 3 1 1 3 3 45.5% 14.10% 1 1 3 3 3 -7.7% 13.80%
80 1 3 3 3 2 16.1% 4.44% 3 3 3 2 1 26.7% 12.50% 3 3 2 1 3 35.9% ‐12.80% 3 2 1 3 3 59.6% 14.10% 2 1 3 3 3 6.1% 13.80%
81 1 3 3 3 3 20.5% 8.88% 3 3 3 3 1 39.2% 25.00% 3 3 3 1 3 23.1% ‐25.60% 3 3 1 3 3 73.7% 28.20% 3 1 3 3 3 19.9% 27.60%
82 2 1 1 1 1 -2.2% 4.44% 1 1 1 1 2 -11.5% 12.50% 1 1 1 2 1 -3.5% ‐12.80% 1 1 2 1 1 -28.8% 14.10% 1 2 1 1 1 -1.9% 13.80%
83 2 1 1 1 2 2.3% 4.44% 1 1 1 2 2 1.0% 12.50% 1 1 2 2 1 -16.3% ‐12.80% 1 2 2 1 1 -14.7% 14.10% 2 2 1 1 1 11.9% 13.80%
84 2 1 1 1 3 6.7% 8.88% 1 1 1 3 2 13.5% 25.00% 1 1 3 2 1 -29.1% ‐25.60% 1 3 2 1 1 -0.6% 28.20% 3 2 1 1 1 25.7% 27.60%
85 2 1 1 2 1 10.3% 4.44% 1 1 2 1 2 -24.3% 12.50% 1 2 1 2 1 10.6% ‐12.80% 2 1 2 1 1 -15.0% 14.10% 1 2 1 1 2 2.6% 13.80%
86 2 1 1 2 2 14.8% 4.44% 1 1 2 2 2 -11.8% 12.50% 1 2 2 2 1 -2.2% ‐12.80% 2 2 2 1 1 -0.9% 14.10% 2 2 1 1 2 16.4% 13.80%
87 2 1 1 2 3 19.2% 8.88% 1 1 2 3 2 0.7% 25.00% 1 2 3 2 1 -15.0% ‐25.60% 2 3 2 1 1 13.2% 28.20% 3 2 1 1 2 30.2% 27.60%
88 2 1 1 3 1 22.8% 4.44% 1 1 3 1 2 -37.1% 12.50% 1 3 1 2 1 24.7% ‐12.80% 3 1 2 1 1 -1.2% 14.10% 1 2 1 1 3 7.0% 13.80%
89 2 1 1 3 2 27.3% 4.44% 1 1 3 2 2 -24.6% 12.50% 1 3 2 2 1 11.9% ‐12.80% 3 2 2 1 1 12.9% 14.10% 2 2 1 1 3 20.8% 13.80%
90 2 1 1 3 3 31.7% 8.88% 1 1 3 3 2 -12.1% 25.00% 1 3 3 2 1 -0.9% ‐25.60% 3 3 2 1 1 27.0% 28.20% 3 2 1 1 3 34.6% 27.60%
91 2 1 2 1 1 -15.0% 4.44% 1 2 1 1 2 2.6% 12.50% 2 1 1 2 1 10.3% ‐12.80% 1 1 2 1 2 -24.3% 14.10% 1 2 1 2 1 10.6% 13.80%
92 2 1 2 1 2 -10.5% 4.44% 1 2 1 2 2 15.1% 12.50% 2 1 2 2 1 -2.5% ‐12.80% 1 2 2 1 2 -10.2% 14.10% 2 2 1 2 1 24.4% 13.80%
93 2 1 2 1 3 -6.1% 8.88% 1 2 1 3 2 27.6% 25.00% 2 1 3 2 1 -15.3% ‐25.60% 1 3 2 1 2 3.9% 28.20% 3 2 1 2 1 38.2% 27.60%
94 2 1 2 2 1 -2.5% 4.44% 1 2 2 1 2 -10.2% 12.50% 2 2 1 2 1 24.4% ‐12.80% 2 1 2 1 2 -10.5% 14.10% 1 2 1 2 2 15.1% 13.80%
95 2 1 2 2 2 2.0% 4.44% 1 2 2 2 2 2.3% 12.50% 2 2 2 2 1 11.6% ‐12.80% 2 2 2 1 2 3.6% 14.10% 2 2 1 2 2 28.9% 13.80%
96 2 1 2 2 3 6.4% 8.88% 1 2 2 3 2 14.8% 25.00% 2 2 3 2 1 -1.2% ‐25.60% 2 3 2 1 2 17.7% 28.20% 3 2 1 2 2 42.7% 27.60%
97 2 1 2 3 1 10.0% 4.44% 1 2 3 1 2 -23.0% 12.50% 2 3 1 2 1 38.5% ‐12.80% 3 1 2 1 2 3.3% 14.10% 1 2 1 2 3 19.5% 13.80%
98 2 1 2 3 2 14.5% 4.44% 1 2 3 2 2 -10.5% 12.50% 2 3 2 2 1 25.7% ‐12.80% 3 2 2 1 2 17.4% 14.10% 2 2 1 2 3 33.3% 13.80%
99 2 1 2 3 3 18.9% 8.88% 1 2 3 3 2 2.0% 25.00% 2 3 3 2 1 12.9% ‐25.60% 3 3 2 1 2 31.5% 28.20% 3 2 1 2 3 47.1% 27.60%
100 2 1 3 1 1 -27.8% 4.44% 1 3 1 1 2 16.7% 12.50% 3 1 1 2 1 24.1% ‐12.80% 1 1 2 1 3 -19.9% 14.10% 1 2 1 3 1 23.1% 13.80%
101 2 1 3 1 2 -23.3% 4.44% 1 3 1 2 2 29.2% 12.50% 3 1 2 2 1 11.3% ‐12.80% 1 2 2 1 3 -5.8% 14.10% 2 2 1 3 1 36.9% 13.80%
102 2 1 3 1 3 -18.9% 8.88% 1 3 1 3 2 41.7% 25.00% 3 1 3 2 1 -1.5% ‐25.60% 1 3 2 1 3 8.3% 28.20% 3 2 1 3 1 50.7% 27.60%
103 2 1 3 2 1 -15.3% 4.44% 1 3 2 1 2 3.9% 12.50% 3 2 1 2 1 38.2% ‐12.80% 2 1 2 1 3 -6.1% 14.10% 1 2 1 3 2 27.6% 13.80%
104 2 1 3 2 2 -10.8% 4.44% 1 3 2 2 2 16.4% 12.50% 3 2 2 2 1 25.4% ‐12.80% 2 2 2 1 3 8.0% 14.10% 2 2 1 3 2 41.4% 13.80%
105 2 1 3 2 3 -6.4% 8.88% 1 3 2 3 2 28.9% 25.00% 3 2 3 2 1 12.6% ‐25.60% 2 3 2 1 3 22.1% 28.20% 3 2 1 3 2 55.2% 27.60%
106 2 1 3 3 1 -2.8% 4.44% 1 3 3 1 2 -8.9% 12.50% 3 3 1 2 1 52.3% ‐12.80% 3 1 2 1 3 7.7% 14.10% 1 2 1 3 3 32.0% 13.80%
107 2 1 3 3 2 1.7% 4.44% 1 3 3 2 2 3.6% 12.50% 3 3 2 2 1 39.5% ‐12.80% 3 2 2 1 3 21.8% 14.10% 2 2 1 3 3 45.8% 13.80%
108 2 1 3 3 3 6.1% 8.88% 1 3 3 3 2 16.1% 25.00% 3 3 3 2 1 26.7% ‐25.60% 3 3 2 1 3 35.9% 28.20% 3 2 1 3 3 59.6% 27.60%
109 2 2 1 1 1 11.9% 4.44% 2 1 1 1 2 2.3% 12.50% 1 1 1 2 2 1.0% ‐12.80% 1 1 2 2 1 -16.3% 14.10% 1 2 2 1 1 -14.7% 13.80%
110 2 2 1 1 2 16.4% 4.44% 2 1 1 2 2 14.8% 12.50% 1 1 2 2 2 -11.8% ‐12.80% 1 2 2 2 1 -2.2% 14.10% 2 2 2 1 1 -0.9% 13.80%
370


111 2 2 1 1 3 20.8% 8.88% 2 1 1 3 2 27.3% 25.00% 1 1 3 2 2 -24.6% ‐25.60% 1 3 2 2 1 11.9% 28.20% 3 2 2 1 1 12.9% 27.60%
112 2 2 1 2 1 24.4% 4.44% 2 1 2 1 2 -10.5% 12.50% 1 2 1 2 2 15.1% ‐12.80% 2 1 2 2 1 -2.5% 14.10% 1 2 2 1 2 -10.2% 13.80%
113 2 2 1 2 2 28.9% 4.44% 2 1 2 2 2 2.0% 12.50% 1 2 2 2 2 2.3% ‐12.80% 2 2 2 2 1 11.6% 14.10% 2 2 2 1 2 3.6% 13.80%
114 2 2 1 2 3 33.3% 8.88% 2 1 2 3 2 14.5% 25.00% 1 2 3 2 2 -10.5% ‐25.60% 2 3 2 2 1 25.7% 28.20% 3 2 2 1 2 17.4% 27.60%
115 2 2 1 3 1 36.9% 4.44% 2 1 3 1 2 -23.3% 12.50% 1 3 1 2 2 29.2% ‐12.80% 3 1 2 2 1 11.3% 14.10% 1 2 2 1 3 -5.8% 13.80%
116 2 2 1 3 2 41.4% 4.44% 2 1 3 2 2 -10.8% 12.50% 1 3 2 2 2 16.4% ‐12.80% 3 2 2 2 1 25.4% 14.10% 2 2 2 1 3 8.0% 13.80%
117 2 2 1 3 3 45.8% 8.88% 2 1 3 3 2 1.7% 25.00% 1 3 3 2 2 3.6% ‐25.60% 3 3 2 2 1 39.5% 28.20% 3 2 2 1 3 21.8% 27.60%
118 2 2 2 1 1 -0.9% 4.44% 2 2 1 1 2 16.4% 12.50% 2 1 1 2 2 14.8% ‐12.80% 1 1 2 2 2 -11.8% 14.10% 1 2 2 2 1 -2.2% 13.80%
119 2 2 2 1 2 3.6% 4.44% 2 2 1 2 2 28.9% 12.50% 2 1 2 2 2 2.0% ‐12.80% 1 2 2 2 2 2.3% 14.10% 2 2 2 2 1 11.6% 13.80%
120 2 2 2 1 3 8.0% 8.88% 2 2 1 3 2 41.4% 25.00% 2 1 3 2 2 -10.8% ‐25.60% 1 3 2 2 2 16.4% 28.20% 3 2 2 2 1 25.4% 27.60%
121 2 2 2 2 1 11.6% 4.44% 2 2 2 1 2 3.6% 12.50% 2 2 1 2 2 28.9% ‐12.80% 2 1 2 2 2 2.0% 14.10% 1 2 2 2 2 2.3% 13.80%
122 2 2 2 2 2 16.1% 4.44% 2 2 2 2 2 16.1% 12.50% 2 2 2 2 2 16.1% ‐12.80% 2 2 2 2 2 16.1% 14.10% 2 2 2 2 2 16.1% 13.80%
123 2 2 2 2 3 20.5% 8.88% 2 2 2 3 2 28.6% 25.00% 2 2 3 2 2 3.3% ‐25.60% 2 3 2 2 2 30.2% 28.20% 3 2 2 2 2 29.9% 27.60%
124 2 2 2 3 1 24.1% 4.44% 2 2 3 1 2 -9.2% 12.50% 2 3 1 2 2 43.0% ‐12.80% 3 1 2 2 2 15.8% 14.10% 1 2 2 2 3 6.7% 13.80%
125 2 2 2 3 2 28.6% 4.44% 2 2 3 2 2 3.3% 12.50% 2 3 2 2 2 30.2% ‐12.80% 3 2 2 2 2 29.9% 14.10% 2 2 2 2 3 20.5% 13.80%
126 2 2 2 3 3 33.0% 8.88% 2 2 3 3 2 15.8% 25.00% 2 3 3 2 2 17.4% ‐25.60% 3 3 2 2 2 44.0% 28.20% 3 2 2 2 3 34.3% 27.60%
127 2 2 3 1 1 -13.7% 4.44% 2 3 1 1 2 30.5% 12.50% 3 1 1 2 2 28.6% ‐12.80% 1 1 2 2 3 -7.4% 14.10% 1 2 2 3 1 10.3% 13.80%
128 2 2 3 1 2 -9.2% 4.44% 2 3 1 2 2 43.0% 12.50% 3 1 2 2 2 15.8% ‐12.80% 1 2 2 2 3 6.7% 14.10% 2 2 2 3 1 24.1% 13.80%
129 2 2 3 1 3 -4.8% 8.88% 2 3 1 3 2 55.5% 25.00% 3 1 3 2 2 3.0% ‐25.60% 1 3 2 2 3 20.8% 28.20% 3 2 2 3 1 37.9% 27.60%
130 2 2 3 2 1 -1.2% 4.44% 2 3 2 1 2 17.7% 12.50% 3 2 1 2 2 42.7% ‐12.80% 2 1 2 2 3 6.4% 14.10% 1 2 2 3 2 14.8% 13.80%
131 2 2 3 2 2 3.3% 4.44% 2 3 2 2 2 30.2% 12.50% 3 2 2 2 2 29.9% ‐12.80% 2 2 2 2 3 20.5% 14.10% 2 2 2 3 2 28.6% 13.80%
132 2 2 3 2 3 7.7% 8.88% 2 3 2 3 2 42.7% 25.00% 3 2 3 2 2 17.1% ‐25.60%
25.60% 2 3 2 2 3 34.6% 28.20% 3 2 2 3 2 42.4% 27.60%
133 2 2 3 3 1 11.3% 4.44% 2 3 3 1 2 4.9% 12.50% 3 3 1 2 2 56.8% ‐12.80% 3 1 2 2 3 20.2% 14.10% 1 2 2 3 3 19.2% 13.80%
134 2 2 3 3 2 15.8% 4.44% 2 3 3 2 2 17.4% 12.50% 3 3 2 2 2 44.0% ‐12.80% 3 2 2 2 3 34.3% 14.10% 2 2 2 3 3 33.0% 13.80%
135 2 2 3 3 3 20.2% 8.88% 2 3 3 3 2 29.9% 25.00% 3 3 3 2 2 31.2% ‐25.60% 3 3 2 2 3 48.4% 28.20% 3 2 2 3 3 46.8% 27.60%
136 2 3 1 1 1 26.0% 4.44% 3 1 1 1 2 16.1% 12.50% 1 1 1 2 3 5.4% ‐12.80% 1 1 2 3 1 -3.8% 14.10% 1 2 3 1 1 -27.5% 13.80%
137 2 3 1 1 2 30.5% 4.44% 3 1 1 2 2 28.6% 12.50% 1 1 2 2 3 -7.4% ‐12.80% 1 2 2 3 1 10.3% 14.10% 2 2 3 1 1 -13.7% 13.80%
138 2 3 1 1 3 34.9% 8.88% 3 1 1 3 2 41.1% 25.00% 1 1 3 2 3 -20.2% ‐25.60% 1 3 2 3 1 24.4% 28.20% 3 2 3 1 1 0.1% 27.60%
139 2 3 1 2 1 38.5% 4.44% 3 1 2 1 2 3.3% 12.50% 1 2 1 2 3 19.5% ‐12.80% 2 1 2 3 1 10.0% 14.10% 1 2 3 1 2 -23.0% 13.80%
140 2 3 1 2 2 43.0% 4.44% 3 1 2 2 2 15.8% 12.50% 1 2 2 2 3 6.7% ‐12.80% 2 2 2 3 1 24.1% 14.10% 2 2 3 1 2 -9.2% 13.80%
141 2 3 1 2 3 47.4% 8.88% 3 1 2 3 2 28.3% 25.00% 1 2 3 2 3 -6.1% ‐25.60% 2 3 2 3 1 38.2% 28.20% 3 2 3 1 2 4.6% 27.60%
142 2 3 1 3 1 51.0% 4.44% 3 1 3 1 2 -9.5% 12.50% 1 3 1 2 3 33.6% ‐12.80% 3 1 2 3 1 23.8% 14.10% 1 2 3 1 3 -18.6% 13.80%
143 2 3 1 3 2 55.5% 4.44% 3 1 3 2 2 3.0% 12.50% 1 3 2 2 3 20.8% ‐12.80% 3 2 2 3 1 37.9% 14.10% 2 2 3 1 3 -4.8% 13.80%
144 2 3 1 3 3 59.9% 8.88% 3 1 3 3 2 15.5% 25.00% 1 3 3 2 3 8.0% ‐25.60% 3 3 2 3 1 52.0% 28.20% 3 2 3 1 3 9.0% 27.60%
145 2 3 2 1 1 13.2% 4.44% 3 2 1 1 2 30.2% 12.50% 2 1 1 2 3 19.2% ‐12.80% 1 1 2 3 2 0.7% 14.10% 1 2 3 2 1 -15.0% 13.80%
146 2 3 2 1 2 17.7% 4.44% 3 2 1 2 2 42.7% 12.50% 2 1 2 2 3 6.4% ‐12.80% 1 2 2 3 2 14.8% 14.10% 2 2 3 2 1 -1.2% 13.80%
147 2 3 2 1 3 22.1% 8.88% 3 2 1 3 2 55.2% 25.00% 2 1 3 2 3 -6.4% ‐25.60% 1 3 2 3 2 28.9% 28.20% 3 2 3 2 1 12.6% 27.60%
148 2 3 2 2 1 25.7% 4.44% 3 2 2 1 2 17.4% 12.50% 2 2 1 2 3 33.3% ‐12.80% 2 1 2 3 2 14.5% 14.10% 1 2 3 2 2 -10.5% 13.80%
149 2 3 2 2 2 30.2% 4.44% 3 2 2 2 2 29.9% 12.50% 2 2 2 2 3 20.5% ‐12.80% 2 2 2 3 2 28.6% 14.10% 2 2 3 2 2 3.3% 13.80%
150 2 3 2 2 3 34.6% 8.88% 3 2 2 3 2 42.4% 25.00% 2 2 3 2 3 7.7% ‐25.60% 2 3 2 3 2 42.7% 28.20% 3 2 3 2 2 17.1% 27.60%
151 2 3 2 3 1 38.2% 4.44% 3 2 3 1 2 4.6% 12.50% 2 3 1 2 3 47.4% ‐12.80% 3 1 2 3 2 28.3% 14.10% 1 2 3 2 3 -6.1% 13.80%
152 2 3 2 3 2 42.7% 4.44% 3 2 3 2 2 17.1% 12.50% 2 3 2 2 3 34.6% ‐12.80% 3 2 2 3 2 42.4% 14.10% 2 2 3 2 3 7.7% 13.80%
153 2 3 2 3 3 47.1% 8.88% 3 2 3 3 2 29.6% 25.00% 2 3 3 2 3 21.8% ‐25.60% 3 3 2 3 2 56.5% 28.20% 3 2 3 2 3 21.5% 27.60%
154 2 3 3 1 1 0.4% 4.44% 3 3 1 1 2 44.3% 12.50% 3 1 1 2 3 33.0% ‐12.80% 1 1 2 3 3 5.1% 14.10% 1 2 3 3 1 -2.5% 13.80%
155 2 3 3 1 2 4.9% 4.44% 3 3 1 2 2 56.8% 12.50% 3 1 2 2 3 20.2% ‐12.80% 1 2 2 3 3 19.2% 14.10% 2 2 3 3 1 11.3% 13.80%
156 2 3 3 1 3 9.3% 8.88% 3 3 1 3 2 69.3% 25.00% 3 1 3 2 3 7.4% ‐25.60% 1 3 2 3 3 33.3% 28.20% 3 2 3 3 1 25.1% 27.60%
157 2 3 3 2 1 12.9% 4.44% 3 3 2 1 2 31.5% 12.50% 3 2 1 2 3 47.1% ‐12.80% 2 1 2 3 3 18.9% 14.10% 1 2 3 3 2 2.0% 13.80%
158 2 3 3 2 2 17.4% 4.44% 3 3 2 2 2 44.0% 12.50% 3 2 2 2 3 34.3% ‐12.80% 2 2 2 3 3 33.0% 14.10% 2 2 3 3 2 15.8% 13.80%
159 2 3 3 2 3 21.8% 8.88% 3 3 2 3 2 56.5% 25.00% 3 2 3 2 3 21.5% ‐25.60% 2 3 2 3 3 47.1% 28.20% 3 2 3 3 2 29.6% 27.60%
160 2 3 3 3 1 25.4% 4.44% 3 3 3 1 2 18.7% 12.50% 3 3 1 2 3 61.2% ‐12.80% 3 1 2 3 3 32.7% 14.10% 1 2 3 3 3 6.4% 13.80%
161 2 3 3 3 2 29.9% 4.44% 3 3 3 2 2 31.2% 12.50% 3 3 2 2 3 48.4% ‐12.80% 3 2 2 3 3 46.8% 14.10% 2 2 3 3 3 20.2% 13.80%
162 2 3 3 3 3 34.3% 8.88% 3 3 3 3 2 43.7% 25.00% 3 3 3 2 3 35.6% ‐25.60% 3 3 2 3 3 60.9% 28.20% 3 2 3 3 3 34.0% 27.60%
163 3 1 1 1 1 11.6% 4.44% 1 1 1 1 3 -7.1% 12.50% 1 1 1 3 1 9.0% ‐12.80% 1 1 3 1 1 -41.6% 14.10% 1 3 1 1 1 12.2% 13.80%
164 3 1 1 1 2 16.1% 4.44% 1 1 1 2 3 5.4% 12.50% 1 1 2 3 1 -3.8% ‐12.80% 1 2 3 1 1 -27.5% 14.10% 2 3 1 1 1 26.0% 13.80%
165 3 1 1 1 3 20.5% 8.88% 1 1 1 3 3 17.9% 25.00% 1 1 3 3 1 -16.6% ‐25.60% 1 3 3 1 1 -13.4% 28.20% 3 3 1 1 1 39.8% 27.60%
371


166 3 1 1 2 1 24.1% 4.44% 1 1 2 1 3 -19.9% 12.50% 1 2 1 3 1 23.1% ‐12.80% 2 1 3 1 1 -27.8% 14.10% 1 3 1 1 2 16.7% 13.80%
167 3 1 1 2 2 28.6% 4.44% 1 1 2 2 3 -7.4% 12.50% 1 2 2 3 1 10.3% ‐12.80% 2 2 3 1 1 -13.7% 14.10% 2 3 1 1 2 30.5% 13.80%
168 3 1 1 2 3 33.0% 8.88% 1 1 2 3 3 5.1% 25.00% 1 2 3 3 1 -2.5% ‐25.60% 2 3 3 1 1 0.4% 28.20% 3 3 1 1 2 44.3% 27.60%
169 3 1 1 3 1 36.6% 4.44% 1 1 3 1 3 -32.7% 12.50% 1 3 1 3 1 37.2% ‐12.80% 3 1 3 1 1 -14.0% 14.10% 1 3 1 1 3 21.1% 13.80%
170 3 1 1 3 2 41.1% 4.44% 1 1 3 2 3 -20.2% 12.50% 1 3 2 3 1 24.4% ‐12.80% 3 2 3 1 1 0.1% 14.10% 2 3 1 1 3 34.9% 13.80%
171 3 1 1 3 3 45.5% 8.88% 1 1 3 3 3 -7.7% 25.00% 1 3 3 3 1 11.6% ‐25.60% 3 3 3 1 1 14.2% 28.20% 3 3 1 1 3 48.7% 27.60%
172 3 1 2 1 1 -1.2% 4.44% 1 2 1 1 3 7.0% 12.50% 2 1 1 3 1 22.8% ‐12.80% 1 1 3 1 2 -37.1% 14.10% 1 3 1 2 1 24.7% 13.80%
173 3 1 2 1 2 3.3% 4.44% 1 2 1 2 3 19.5% 12.50% 2 1 2 3 1 10.0% ‐12.80% 1 2 3 1 2 -23.0% 14.10% 2 3 1 2 1 38.5% 13.80%
174 3 1 2 1 3 7.7% 8.88% 1 2 1 3 3 32.0% 25.00% 2 1 3 3 1 -2.8% ‐25.60% 1 3 3 1 2 -8.9% 28.20% 3 3 1 2 1 52.3% 27.60%
175 3 1 2 2 1 11.3% 4.44% 1 2 2 1 3 -5.8% 12.50% 2 2 1 3 1 36.9% ‐12.80% 2 1 3 1 2 -23.3% 14.10% 1 3 1 2 2 29.2% 13.80%
176 3 1 2 2 2 15.8% 4.44% 1 2 2 2 3 6.7% 12.50% 2 2 2 3 1 24.1% ‐12.80% 2 2 3 1 2 -9.2% 14.10% 2 3 1 2 2 43.0% 13.80%
177 3 1 2 2 3 20.2% 8.88% 1 2 2 3 3 19.2% 25.00% 2 2 3 3 1 11.3% ‐25.60% 2 3 3 1 2 4.9% 28.20% 3 3 1 2 2 56.8% 27.60%
178 3 1 2 3 1 23.8% 4.44% 1 2 3 1 3 -18.6% 12.50% 2 3 1 3 1 51.0% ‐12.80% 3 1 3 1 2 -9.5% 14.10% 1 3 1 2 3 33.6% 13.80%
179 3 1 2 3 2 28.3% 4.44% 1 2 3 2 3 -6.1% 12.50% 2 3 2 3 1 38.2% ‐12.80% 3 2 3 1 2 4.6% 14.10% 2 3 1 2 3 47.4% 13.80%
180 3 1 2 3 3 32.7% 8.88% 1 2 3 3 3 6.4% 25.00% 2 3 3 3 1 25.4% ‐25.60% 3 3 3 1 2 18.7% 28.20% 3 3 1 2 3 61.2% 27.60%
181 3 1 3 1 1 -14.0% 4.44% 1 3 1 1 3 21.1% 12.50% 3 1 1 3 1 36.6% ‐12.80% 1 1 3 1 3 -32.7% 14.10% 1 3 1 3 1 37.2% 13.80%
182 3 1 3 1 2 -9.5% 4.44% 1 3 1 2 3 33.6% 12.50% 3 1 2 3 1 23.8% ‐12.80% 1 2 3 1 3 -18.6% 14.10% 2 3 1 3 1 51.0% 13.80%
183 3 1 3 1 3 -5.1% 8.88% 1 3 1 3 3 46.1% 25.00% 3 1 3 3 1 11.0% ‐25.60% 1 3 3 1 3 -4.5% 28.20% 3 3 1 3 1 64.8% 27.60%
184 3 1 3 2 1 -1.5% 4.44% 1 3 2 1 3 8.3% 12.50% 3 2 1 3 1 50.7% ‐12.80% 2 1 3 1 3 -18.9% 14.10% 1 3 1 3 2 41.7% 13.80%
185 3 1 3 2 2 3.0% 4.44% 1 3 2 2 3 20.8% 12.50% 3 2 2 3 1 37.9% ‐12.80% 2 2 3 1 3 -4.8% 14.10% 2 3 1 3 2 55.5% 13.80%
186 3 1 3 2 3 7.4% 8.88% 1 3 2 3 3 33.3% 25.00% 3 2 3 3 1 25.1% ‐25.60% 2 3 3 1 3 9.3% 28.20% 3 3 1 3 2 69.3% 27.60%
187 3 1 3 3 1 11.0% 4.44% 1 3 3 1 3 -4.5%
4.5% 12.50% 3 3 1 3 1 64.8% ‐12.80%
12.80% 3 1 3 1 3 -5.1%
5.1% 14.10% 1 3 1 3 3 46.1% 13.80%
188 3 1 3 3 2 15.5% 4.44% 1 3 3 2 3 8.0% 12.50% 3 3 2 3 1 52.0% ‐12.80% 3 2 3 1 3 9.0% 14.10% 2 3 1 3 3 59.9% 13.80%
189 3 1 3 3 3 19.9% 8.88% 1 3 3 3 3 20.5% 25.00% 3 3 3 3 1 39.2% ‐25.60% 3 3 3 1 3 23.1% 28.20% 3 3 1 3 3 73.7% 27.60%
190 3 2 1 1 1 25.7% 4.44% 2 1 1 1 3 6.7% 12.50% 1 1 1 3 2 13.5% ‐12.80% 1 1 3 2 1 -29.1% 14.10% 1 3 2 1 1 -0.6% 13.80%
191 3 2 1 1 2 30.2% 4.44% 2 1 1 2 3 19.2% 12.50% 1 1 2 3 2 0.7% ‐12.80% 1 2 3 2 1 -15.0% 14.10% 2 3 2 1 1 13.2% 13.80%
192 3 2 1 1 3 34.6% 8.88% 2 1 1 3 3 31.7% 25.00% 1 1 3 3 2 -12.1% ‐25.60% 1 3 3 2 1 -0.9% 28.20% 3 3 2 1 1 27.0% 27.60%
193 3 2 1 2 1 38.2% 4.44% 2 1 2 1 3 -6.1% 12.50% 1 2 1 3 2 27.6% ‐12.80% 2 1 3 2 1 -15.3% 14.10% 1 3 2 1 2 3.9% 13.80%
194 3 2 1 2 2 42.7% 4.44% 2 1 2 2 3 6.4% 12.50% 1 2 2 3 2 14.8% ‐12.80% 2 2 3 2 1 -1.2% 14.10% 2 3 2 1 2 17.7% 13.80%
195 3 2 1 2 3 47.1% 8.88% 2 1 2 3 3 18.9% 25.00% 1 2 3 3 2 2.0% ‐25.60% 2 3 3 2 1 12.9% 28.20% 3 3 2 1 2 31.5% 27.60%
196 3 2 1 3 1 50.7% 4.44% 2 1 3 1 3 -18.9% 12.50% 1 3 1 3 2 41.7% ‐12.80% 3 1 3 2 1 -1.5% 14.10% 1 3 2 1 3 8.3% 13.80%
197 3 2 1 3 2 55.2% 4.44% 2 1 3 2 3 -6.4% 12.50% 1 3 2 3 2 28.9% ‐12.80% 3 2 3 2 1 12.6% 14.10% 2 3 2 1 3 22.1% 13.80%
198 3 2 1 3 3 59.6% 8.88% 2 1 3 3 3 6.1% 25.00% 1 3 3 3 2 16.1% ‐25.60% 3 3 3 2 1 26.7% 28.20% 3 3 2 1 3 35.9% 27.60%
199 3 2 2 1 1 12.9% 4.44% 2 2 1 1 3 20.8% 12.50% 2 1 1 3 2 27.3% ‐12.80% 1 1 3 2 2 -24.6% 14.10% 1 3 2 2 1 11.9% 13.80%
200 3 2 2 1 2 17.4% 4.44% 2 2 1 2 3 33.3% 12.50% 2 1 2 3 2 14.5% ‐12.80% 1 2 3 2 2 -10.5% 14.10% 2 3 2 2 1 25.7% 13.80%
201 3 2 2 1 3 21.8% 8.88% 2 2 1 3 3 45.8% 25.00% 2 1 3 3 2 1.7% ‐25.60% 1 3 3 2 2 3.6% 28.20% 3 3 2 2 1 39.5% 27.60%
202 3 2 2 2 1 25.4% 4.44% 2 2 2 1 3 8.0% 12.50% 2 2 1 3 2 41.4% ‐12.80% 2 1 3 2 2 -10.8% 14.10% 1 3 2 2 2 16.4% 13.80%
203 3 2 2 2 2 29.9% 4.44% 2 2 2 2 3 20.5% 12.50% 2 2 2 3 2 28.6% ‐12.80% 2 2 3 2 2 3.3% 14.10% 2 3 2 2 2 30.2% 13.80%
204 3 2 2 2 3 34.3% 8.88% 2 2 2 3 3 33.0% 25.00% 2 2 3 3 2 15.8% ‐25.60% 2 3 3 2 2 17.4% 28.20% 3 3 2 2 2 44.0% 27.60%
205 3 2 2 3 1 37.9% 4.44% 2 2 3 1 3 -4.8% 12.50% 2 3 1 3 2 55.5% ‐12.80% 3 1 3 2 2 3.0% 14.10% 1 3 2 2 3 20.8% 13.80%
206 3 2 2 3 2 42.4% 4.44% 2 2 3 2 3 7.7% 12.50% 2 3 2 3 2 42.7% ‐12.80% 3 2 3 2 2 17.1% 14.10% 2 3 2 2 3 34.6% 13.80%
207 3 2 2 3 3 46.8% 8.88% 2 2 3 3 3 20.2% 25.00% 2 3 3 3 2 29.9% ‐25.60% 3 3 3 2 2 31.2% 28.20% 3 3 2 2 3 48.4% 27.60%
208 3 2 3 1 1 0.1% 4.44% 2 3 1 1 3 34.9% 12.50% 3 1 1 3 2 41.1% ‐12.80% 1 1 3 2 3 -20.2% 14.10% 1 3 2 3 1 24.4% 13.80%
209 3 2 3 1 2 4.6% 4.44% 2 3 1 2 3 47.4% 12.50% 3 1 2 3 2 28.3% ‐12.80% 1 2 3 2 3 -6.1% 14.10% 2 3 2 3 1 38.2% 13.80%
210 3 2 3 1 3 9.0% 8.88% 2 3 1 3 3 59.9% 25.00% 3 1 3 3 2 15.5% ‐25.60% 1 3 3 2 3 8.0% 28.20% 3 3 2 3 1 52.0% 27.60%
211 3 2 3 2 1 12.6% 4.44% 2 3 2 1 3 22.1% 12.50% 3 2 1 3 2 55.2% ‐12.80% 2 1 3 2 3 -6.4% 14.10% 1 3 2 3 2 28.9% 13.80%
212 3 2 3 2 2 17.1% 4.44% 2 3 2 2 3 34.6% 12.50% 3 2 2 3 2 42.4% ‐12.80% 2 2 3 2 3 7.7% 14.10% 2 3 2 3 2 42.7% 13.80%
213 3 2 3 2 3 21.5% 8.88% 2 3 2 3 3 47.1% 25.00% 3 2 3 3 2 29.6% ‐25.60% 2 3 3 2 3 21.8% 28.20% 3 3 2 3 2 56.5% 27.60%
214 3 2 3 3 1 25.1% 4.44% 2 3 3 1 3 9.3% 12.50% 3 3 1 3 2 69.3% ‐12.80% 3 1 3 2 3 7.4% 14.10% 1 3 2 3 3 33.3% 13.80%
215 3 2 3 3 2 29.6% 4.44% 2 3 3 2 3 21.8% 12.50% 3 3 2 3 2 56.5% ‐12.80% 3 2 3 2 3 21.5% 14.10% 2 3 2 3 3 47.1% 13.80%
216 3 2 3 3 3 34.0% 8.88% 2 3 3 3 3 34.3% 25.00% 3 3 3 3 2 43.7% ‐25.60% 3 3 3 2 3 35.6% 28.20% 3 3 2 3 3 60.9% 27.60%
217 3 3 1 1 1 39.8% 4.44% 3 1 1 1 3 20.5% 12.50% 1 1 1 3 3 17.9% ‐12.80% 1 1 3 3 1 -16.6% 14.10% 1 3 3 1 1 -13.4% 13.80%
218 3 3 1 1 2 44.3% 4.44% 3 1 1 2 3 33.0% 12.50% 1 1 2 3 3 5.1% ‐12.80% 1 2 3 3 1 -2.5% 14.10% 2 3 3 1 1 0.4% 13.80%
219 3 3 1 1 3 48.7% 8.88% 3 1 1 3 3 45.5% 25.00% 1 1 3 3 3 -7.7% ‐25.60% 1 3 3 3 1 11.6% 28.20% 3 3 3 1 1 14.2% 27.60%
220 3 3 1 2 1 52.3% 4.44% 3 1 2 1 3 7.7% 12.50% 1 2 1 3 3 32.0% ‐12.80% 2 1 3 3 1 -2.8% 14.10% 1 3 3 1 2 -8.9% 13.80%
372


221 3 3 1 2 2 56.8% 4.44% 3 1 2 2 3 20.2% 12.50% 1 2 2 3 3 19.2% ‐12.80% 2 2 3 3 1 11.3% 14.10% 2 3 3 1 2 4.9% 13.80%
222 3 3 1 2 3 61.2% 8.88% 3 1 2 3 3 32.7% 25.00% 1 2 3 3 3 6.4% ‐25.60% 2 3 3 3 1 25.4% 28.20% 3 3 3 1 2 18.7% 27.60%
223 3 3 1 3 1 64.8% 4.44% 3 1 3 1 3 -5.1% 12.50% 1 3 1 3 3 46.1% ‐12.80% 3 1 3 3 1 11.0% 14.10% 1 3 3 1 3 -4.5% 13.80%
224 3 3 1 3 2 69.3% 4.44% 3 1 3 2 3 7.4% 12.50% 1 3 2 3 3 33.3% ‐12.80% 3 2 3 3 1 25.1% 14.10% 2 3 3 1 3 9.3% 13.80%
225 3 3 1 3 3 73.7% 8.88% 3 1 3 3 3 19.9% 25.00% 1 3 3 3 3 20.5% ‐25.60% 3 3 3 3 1 39.2% 28.20% 3 3 3 1 3 23.1% 27.60%
226 3 3 2 1 1 27.0% 4.44% 3 2 1 1 3 34.6% 12.50% 2 1 1 3 3 31.7% ‐12.80% 1 1 3 3 2 -12.1% 14.10% 1 3 3 2 1 -0.9% 13.80%
227 3 3 2 1 2 31.5% 4.44% 3 2 1 2 3 47.1% 12.50% 2 1 2 3 3 18.9% ‐12.80% 1 2 3 3 2 2.0% 14.10% 2 3 3 2 1 12.9% 13.80%
228 3 3 2 1 3 35.9% 8.88% 3 2 1 3 3 59.6% 25.00% 2 1 3 3 3 6.1% ‐25.60% 1 3 3 3 2 16.1% 28.20% 3 3 3 2 1 26.7% 27.60%
229 3 3 2 2 1 39.5% 4.44% 3 2 2 1 3 21.8% 12.50% 2 2 1 3 3 45.8% ‐12.80% 2 1 3 3 2 1.7% 14.10% 1 3 3 2 2 3.6% 13.80%
230 3 3 2 2 2 44.0% 4.44% 3 2 2 2 3 34.3% 12.50% 2 2 2 3 3 33.0% ‐12.80% 2 2 3 3 2 15.8% 14.10% 2 3 3 2 2 17.4% 13.80%
231 3 3 2 2 3 48.4% 8.88% 3 2 2 3 3 46.8% 25.00% 2 2 3 3 3 20.2% ‐25.60% 2 3 3 3 2 29.9% 28.20% 3 3 3 2 2 31.2% 27.60%
232 3 3 2 3 1 52.0% 4.44% 3 2 3 1 3 9.0% 12.50% 2 3 1 3 3 59.9% ‐12.80% 3 1 3 3 2 15.5% 14.10% 1 3 3 2 3 8.0% 13.80%
233 3 3 2 3 2 56.5% 4.44% 3 2 3 2 3 21.5% 12.50% 2 3 2 3 3 47.1% ‐12.80% 3 2 3 3 2 29.6% 14.10% 2 3 3 2 3 21.8% 13.80%
234 3 3 2 3 3 60.9% 8.88% 3 2 3 3 3 34.0% 25.00% 2 3 3 3 3 34.3% ‐25.60% 3 3 3 3 2 43.7% 28.20% 3 3 3 2 3 35.6% 27.60%
235 3 3 3 1 1 14.2% 4.44% 3 3 1 1 3 48.7% 12.50% 3 1 1 3 3 45.5% ‐12.80% 1 1 3 3 3 -7.7% 14.10% 1 3 3 3 1 11.6% 13.80%
236 3 3 3 1 2 18.7% 4.44% 3 3 1 2 3 61.2% 12.50% 3 1 2 3 3 32.7% ‐12.80% 1 2 3 3 3 6.4% 14.10% 2 3 3 3 1 25.4% 13.80%
237 3 3 3 1 3 23.1% 8.88% 3 3 1 3 3 73.7% 25.00% 3 1 3 3 3 19.9% ‐25.60% 1 3 3 3 3 20.5% 28.20% 3 3 3 3 1 39.2% 27.60%
238 3 3 3 2 1 26.7% 4.44% 3 3 2 1 3 35.9% 12.50% 3 2 1 3 3 59.6% ‐12.80% 2 1 3 3 3 6.1% 14.10% 1 3 3 3 2 16.1% 13.80%
239 3 3 3 2 2 31.2% 4.44% 3 3 2 2 3 48.4% 12.50% 3 2 2 3 3 46.8% ‐12.80% 2 2 3 3 3 20.2% 14.10% 2 3 3 3 2 29.9% 13.80%
240 3 3 3 2 3 35.6% 8.88% 3 3 2 3 3 60.9% 25.00% 3 2 3 3 3 34.0% ‐25.60% 2 3 3 3 3 34.3% 28.20% 3 3 3 3 2 43.7% 27.60%
241 3 3 3 3 1 39.2% 4.44% 3 3 3 1 3 23.1% 12.50% 3 3 1 3 3 73.7% ‐12.80% 3 1 3 3 3 19.9% 14.10% 1 3 3 3 3 20.5% 13.80%
242 3 3 3 3 2 43.7% 4.44% 3 3 3 2 3 35.6% 12.50% 3 3 2 3 3 60.9% ‐12.80%
12.80% 3 2 3 3 3 34.0% 14.10% 2 3 3 3 3 34.3% 13.80%
243 3 3 3 3 3 48.1% 8.88% 3 3 3 3 3 48.1% 25.00% 3 3 3 3 3 48.1% ‐25.60% 3 3 3 3 3 48.1% 28.20% 3 3 3 3 3 48.1% 27.60%
Legend :
T- Timings
S - Supervision
G - Group Dynamics
P - Procedure
C - Climate
373
Appendix 6-6 : Plastering Trade


1 1 1 1 1 1 -2.23% 3.28% 1 1 1 1 1 -2.23% ‐5.48% 1 1 1 1 1 -2.23% ‐3.44% 1 1 1 1 1 -2.23% ‐0.49% 1 1 1 1 1 -2.23% 24.20%
2 1 1 1 1 2 1.05% 3.28% 1 1 1 2 1 -7.71% ‐5.48% 1 1 2 1 1 -5.67% ‐3.44% 1 2 1 1 1 -2.72% ‐0.49% 2 1 1 1 1 21.97% 24.20%
3 1 1 1 1 3 4.33% 6.56% 1 1 1 3 1 -13.19% ‐10.96% 1 1 3 1 1 -9.11% ‐6.88% 1 3 1 1 1 -3.21% ‐0.98% 3 1 1 1 1 46.17% 48.40%
4 1 1 1 2 1 -7.71% 3.28% 1 1 2 1 1 -5.67% ‐5.48% 1 2 1 1 1 -2.72% ‐3.44% 2 1 1 1 1 21.97% ‐0.49% 1 1 1 1 2 1.05% 24.20%
5 1 1 1 2 2 -4.43% 3.28% 1 1 2 2 1 -11.15% ‐5.48% 1 2 2 1 1 -6.16% ‐3.44% 2 2 1 1 1 21.48% ‐0.49% 2 1 1 1 2 25.25% 24.20%
6 1 1 1 2 3 -1.15% 6.56% 1 1 2 3 1 -16.63% ‐10.96% 1 2 3 1 1 -9.60% ‐6.88% 2 3 1 1 1 20.99% ‐0.98% 3 1 1 1 2 49.45% 48.40%
7 1 1 1 3 1 -13.19% 3.28% 1 1 3 1 1 -9.11% ‐5.48% 1 3 1 1 1 -3.21% ‐3.44% 3 1 1 1 1 46.17% ‐0.49% 1 1 1 1 3 4.33% 24.20%
8 1 1 1 3 2 -9.91% 3.28% 1 1 3 2 1 -14.59% ‐5.48% 1 3 2 1 1 -6.65% ‐3.44% 3 2 1 1 1 45.68% ‐0.49% 2 1 1 1 3 28.53% 24.20%
9 1 1 1 3 3 -6.63% 6.56% 1 1 3 3 1 -20.07% ‐10.96% 1 3 3 1 1 -10.09% ‐6.88% 3 3 1 1 1 45.19% ‐0.98% 3 1 1 1 3 52.73% 48.40%
10 1 1 2 1 1 -5.67% 3.28% 1 2 1 1 1 -2.72% ‐5.48% 2 1 1 1 1 21.97% ‐3.44% 1 1 1 1 2 1.05% ‐0.49% 1 1 1 2 1 -7.71% 24.20%
11 1 1 2 1 2 -2.39% 3.28% 1 2 1 2 1 -8.20% ‐5.48% 2 1 2 1 1 18.53% ‐3.44% 1 2 1 1 2 0.56% ‐0.49% 2 1 1 2 1 16.49% 24.20%
12 1 1 2 1 3 0.89% 6.56% 1 2 1 3 1 -13.68% ‐10.96% 2 1 3 1 1 15.09% ‐6.88% 1 3 1 1 2 0.07% ‐0.98% 3 1 1 2 1 40.69% 48.40%
13 1 1 2 2 1 -11.15% 3.28% 1 2 2 1 1 -6.16% ‐5.48% 2 2 1 1 1 21.48% ‐3.44% 2 1 1 1 2 25.25% ‐0.49% 1 1 1 2 2 -4.43% 24.20%
14 1 1 2 2 2 -7.87% 3.28% 1 2 2 2 1 -11.64% ‐5.48% 2 2 2 1 1 18.04% ‐3.44% 2 2 1 1 2 24.76% ‐0.49% 2 1 1 2 2 19.77% 24.20%
15 1 1 2 2 3 -4.59% 6.56% 1 2 2 3 1 -17.12% ‐10.96% 2 2 3 1 1 14.60% ‐6.88% 2 3 1 1 2 24.27% ‐0.98% 3 1 1 2 2 43.97% 48.40%
16 1 1 2 3 1 -16.63% 3.28% 1 2 3 1 1 -9.60% ‐5.48% 2 3 1 1 1 20.99% ‐3.44% 3 1 1 1 2 49.45% ‐0.49% 1 1 1 2 3 -1.15% 24.20%
17 1 1 2 3 2 -13.35% 3.28% 1 2 3 2 1 -15.08% ‐5.48% 2 3 2 1 1 17.55% ‐3.44% 3 2 1 1 2 48.96% ‐0.49% 2 1 1 2 3 23.05% 24.20%
18 1 1 2 3 3 -10.07% 6.56% 1 2 3 3 1 -20.56% ‐10.96% 2 3 3 1 1 14.11% ‐6.88% 3 3 1 1 2 48.47% ‐0.98% 3 1 1 2 3 47.25% 48.40%
19 1 1 3 1 1 -9.11% 3.28% 1 3 1 1 1 -3.21% ‐5.48% 3 1 1 1 1 46.17% ‐3.44% 1 1 1 1 3 4.33% ‐0.49% 1 1 1 3 1 -13.19% 24.20%
20 1 1 3 1 2 -5.83% 3.28% 1 3 1 2 1 -8.69% ‐5.48% 3 1 2 1 1 42.73% ‐3.44% 1 2 1 1 3 3.84% ‐0.49% 2 1 1 3 1 11.01% 24.20%
21 1 1 3 1 3 -2 55%
-2.55% 6 56%
6.56% 1 3 1 3 1 -14 17%
-14.17% ‐10 96%
‐10.96% 3 1 3 1 1 39 29%
39.29% ‐6 88%
‐6.88% 1 3 1 1 3 3 35%
3.35% ‐0 98%
‐0.98% 3 1 1 3 1 35 21%
35.21% 48 40%
48.40%
22 1 1 3 2 1 -14.59% 3.28% 1 3 2 1 1 -6.65% ‐5.48% 3 2 1 1 1 45.68% ‐3.44% 2 1 1 1 3 28.53% ‐0.49% 1 1 1 3 2 -9.91% 24.20%
23 1 1 3 2 2 -11.31% 3.28% 1 3 2 2 1 -12.13% ‐5.48% 3 2 2 1 1 42.24% ‐3.44% 2 2 1 1 3 28.04% ‐0.49% 2 1 1 3 2 14.29% 24.20%
24 1 1 3 2 3 -8.03% 6.56% 1 3 2 3 1 -17.61% ‐10.96% 3 2 3 1 1 38.80% ‐6.88% 2 3 1 1 3 27.55% ‐0.98% 3 1 1 3 2 38.49% 48.40%
25 1 1 3 3 1 -20.07% 3.28% 1 3 3 1 1 -10.09% ‐5.48% 3 3 1 1 1 45.19% ‐3.44% 3 1 1 1 3 52.73% ‐0.49% 1 1 1 3 3 -6.63% 24.20%
26 1 1 3 3 2 -16.79% 3.28% 1 3 3 2 1 -15.57% ‐5.48% 3 3 2 1 1 41.75% ‐3.44% 3 2 1 1 3 52.24% ‐0.49% 2 1 1 3 3 17.57% 24.20%
27 1 1 3 3 3 -13.51% 6.56% 1 3 3 3 1 -21.05% ‐10.96% 3 3 3 1 1 38.31% ‐6.88% 3 3 1 1 3 51.75% ‐0.98% 3 1 1 3 3 41.77% 48.40%
28 1 2 1 1 1 -2.72% 3.28% 2 1 1 1 1 21.97% ‐5.48% 1 1 1 1 2 1.05% ‐3.44% 1 1 1 2 1 -7.71% ‐0.49% 1 1 2 1 1 -5.67% 24.20%
29 1 2 1 1 2 0.56% 3.28% 2 1 1 2 1 16.49% ‐5.48% 1 1 2 1 2 -2.39% ‐3.44% 1 2 1 2 1 -8.20% ‐0.49% 2 1 2 1 1 18.53% 24.20%
30 1 2 1 1 3 3.84% 6.56% 2 1 1 3 1 11.01% ‐10.96% 1 1 3 1 2 -5.83% ‐6.88% 1 3 1 2 1 -8.69% ‐0.98% 3 1 2 1 1 42.73% 48.40%
31 1 2 1 2 1 -8.20% 3.28% 2 1 2 1 1 18.53% ‐5.48% 1 2 1 1 2 0.56% ‐3.44% 2 1 1 2 1 16.49% ‐0.49% 1 1 2 1 2 -2.39% 24.20%
32 1 2 1 2 2 -4.92% 3.28% 2 1 2 2 1 13.05% ‐5.48% 1 2 2 1 2 -2.88% ‐3.44% 2 2 1 2 1 16.00% ‐0.49% 2 1 2 1 2 21.81% 24.20%
33 1 2 1 2 3 -1.64% 6.56% 2 1 2 3 1 7.57% ‐10.96% 1 2 3 1 2 -6.32% ‐6.88% 2 3 1 2 1 15.51% ‐0.98% 3 1 2 1 2 46.01% 48.40%
34 1 2 1 3 1 -13.68% 3.28% 2 1 3 1 1 15.09% ‐5.48% 1 3 1 1 2 0.07% ‐3.44% 3 1 1 2 1 40.69% ‐0.49% 1 1 2 1 3 0.89% 24.20%
35 1 2 1 3 2 -10.40% 3.28% 2 1 3 2 1 9.61% ‐5.48% 1 3 2 1 2 -3.37% ‐3.44% 3 2 1 2 1 40.20% ‐0.49% 2 1 2 1 3 25.09% 24.20%
36 1 2 1 3 3 -7.12% 6.56% 2 1 3 3 1 4.13% ‐10.96% 1 3 3 1 2 -6.81% ‐6.88% 3 3 1 2 1 39.71% ‐0.98% 3 1 2 1 3 49.29% 48.40%
37 1 2 2 1 1 -6.16% 3.28% 2 2 1 1 1 21.48% ‐5.48% 2 1 1 1 2 25.25% ‐3.44% 1 1 1 2 2 -4.43% ‐0.49% 1 1 2 2 1 -11.15% 24.20%
38 1 2 2 1 2 -2.88% 3.28% 2 2 1 2 1 16.00% ‐5.48% 2 1 2 1 2 21.81% ‐3.44% 1 2 1 2 2 -4.92% ‐0.49% 2 1 2 2 1 13.05% 24.20%
39 1 2 2 1 3 0.40% 6.56% 2 2 1 3 1 10.52% ‐10.96% 2 1 3 1 2 18.37% ‐6.88% 1 3 1 2 2 -5.41% ‐0.98% 3 1 2 2 1 37.25% 48.40%
40 1 2 2 2 1 -11.64% 3.28% 2 2 2 1 1 18.04% ‐5.48% 2 2 1 1 2 24.76% ‐3.44% 2 1 1 2 2 19.77% ‐0.49% 1 1 2 2 2 -7.87% 24.20%
41 1 2 2 2 2 -8.36% 3.28% 2 2 2 2 1 12.56% ‐5.48% 2 2 2 1 2 21.32% ‐3.44% 2 2 1 2 2 19.28% ‐0.49% 2 1 2 2 2 16.33% 24.20%
42 1 2 2 2 3 -5.08% 6.56% 2 2 2 3 1 7.08% ‐10.96% 2 2 3 1 2 17.88% ‐6.88% 2 3 1 2 2 18.79% ‐0.98% 3 1 2 2 2 40.53% 48.40%
43 1 2 2 3 1 -17.12% 3.28% 2 2 3 1 1 14.60% ‐5.48% 2 3 1 1 2 24.27% ‐3.44% 3 1 1 2 2 43.97% ‐0.49% 1 1 2 2 3 -4.59% 24.20%
44 1 2 2 3 2 -13.84% 3.28% 2 2 3 2 1 9.12% ‐5.48% 2 3 2 1 2 20.83% ‐3.44% 3 2 1 2 2 43.48% ‐0.49% 2 1 2 2 3 19.61% 24.20%
45 1 2 2 3 3 -10.56% 6.56% 2 2 3 3 1 3.64% ‐10.96% 2 3 3 1 2 17.39% ‐6.88% 3 3 1 2 2 42.99% ‐0.98% 3 1 2 2 3 43.81% 48.40%
46 1 2 3 1 1 -9.60% 3.28% 2 3 1 1 1 20.99% ‐5.48% 3 1 1 1 2 49.45% ‐3.44% 1 1 1 2 3 -1.15% ‐0.49% 1 1 2 3 1 -16.63% 24.20%
47 1 2 3 1 2 -6.32% 3.28% 2 3 1 2 1 15.51% ‐5.48% 3 1 2 1 2 46.01% ‐3.44% 1 2 1 2 3 -1.64% ‐0.49% 2 1 2 3 1 7.57% 24.20%
48 1 2 3 1 3 -3.04% 6.56% 2 3 1 3 1 10.03% ‐10.96% 3 1 3 1 2 42.57% ‐6.88% 1 3 1 2 3 -2.13% ‐0.98% 3 1 2 3 1 31.77% 48.40%
49 1 2 3 2 1 -15.08% 3.28% 2 3 2 1 1 17.55% ‐5.48% 3 2 1 1 2 48.96% ‐3.44% 2 1 1 2 3 23.05% ‐0.49% 1 1 2 3 2 -13.35% 24.20%
50 1 2 3 2 2 -11.80% 3.28% 2 3 2 2 1 12.07% ‐5.48% 3 2 2 1 2 45.52% ‐3.44% 2 2 1 2 3 22.56% ‐0.49% 2 1 2 3 2 10.85% 24.20%
51 1 2 3 2 3 -8.52% 6.56% 2 3 2 3 1 6.59% ‐10.96% 3 2 3 1 2 42.08% ‐6.88% 2 3 1 2 3 22.07% ‐0.98% 3 1 2 3 2 35.05% 48.40%
52 1 2 3 3 1 -20.56% 3.28% 2 3 3 1 1 14.11% ‐5.48% 3 3 1 1 2 48.47% ‐3.44% 3 1 1 2 3 47.25% ‐0.49% 1 1 2 3 3 -10.07% 24.20%
53 1 2 3 3 2 -17.28% 3.28% 2 3 3 2 1 8.63% ‐5.48% 3 3 2 1 2 45.03% ‐3.44% 3 2 1 2 3 46.76% ‐0.49% 2 1 2 3 3 14.13% 24.20%
54 1 2 3 3 3 -14.00% 6.56% 2 3 3 3 1 3.15% ‐10.96% 3 3 3 1 2 41.59% ‐6.88% 3 3 1 2 3 46.27% ‐0.98% 3 1 2 3 3 38.33% 48.40%
55 1 3 1 1 1 -3.21% 3.28% 3 1 1 1 1 46.17% ‐5.48% 1 1 1 1 3 4.33% ‐3.44% 1 1 1 3 1 -13.19% ‐0.49% 1 1 3 1 1 -9.11% 24.20%
56 1 3 1 1 2 0.07% 3.28% 3 1 1 2 1 40.69% ‐5.48% 1 1 2 1 3 0.89% ‐3.44% 1 2 1 3 1 -13.68% ‐0.49% 2 1 3 1 1 15.09% 24.20%
374


57 1 3 1 1 3 3.35% 6.56% 3 1 1 3 1 35.21% ‐10.96% 1 1 3 1 3 -2.55% ‐6.88% 1 3 1 3 1 -14.17% ‐0.98% 3 1 3 1 1 39.29% 48.40%
58 1 3 1 2 1 -8.69% 3.28% 3 1 2 1 1 42.73% ‐5.48% 1 2 1 1 3 3.84% ‐3.44% 2 1 1 3 1 11.01% ‐0.49% 1 1 3 1 2 -5.83% 24.20%
59 1 3 1 2 2 -5.41% 3.28% 3 1 2 2 1 37.25% ‐5.48% 1 2 2 1 3 0.40% ‐3.44% 2 2 1 3 1 10.52% ‐0.49% 2 1 3 1 2 18.37% 24.20%
60 1 3 1 2 3 -2.13% 6.56% 3 1 2 3 1 31.77% ‐10.96% 1 2 3 1 3 -3.04% ‐6.88% 2 3 1 3 1 10.03% ‐0.98% 3 1 3 1 2 42.57% 48.40%
61 1 3 1 3 1 -14.17% 3.28% 3 1 3 1 1 39.29% ‐5.48% 1 3 1 1 3 3.35% ‐3.44% 3 1 1 3 1 35.21% ‐0.49% 1 1 3 1 3 -2.55% 24.20%
62 1 3 1 3 2 -10.89% 3.28% 3 1 3 2 1 33.81% ‐5.48% 1 3 2 1 3 -0.09% ‐3.44% 3 2 1 3 1 34.72% ‐0.49% 2 1 3 1 3 21.65% 24.20%
63 1 3 1 3 3 -7.61% 6.56% 3 1 3 3 1 28.33% ‐10.96% 1 3 3 1 3 -3.53% ‐6.88% 3 3 1 3 1 34.23% ‐0.98% 3 1 3 1 3 45.85% 48.40%
64 1 3 2 1 1 -6.65% 3.28% 3 2 1 1 1 45.68% ‐5.48% 2 1 1 1 3 28.53% ‐3.44% 1 1 1 3 2 -9.91% ‐0.49% 1 1 3 2 1 -14.59% 24.20%
65 1 3 2 1 2 -3.37% 3.28% 3 2 1 2 1 40.20% ‐5.48% 2 1 2 1 3 25.09% ‐3.44% 1 2 1 3 2 -10.40% ‐0.49% 2 1 3 2 1 9.61% 24.20%
66 1 3 2 1 3 -0.09% 6.56% 3 2 1 3 1 34.72% ‐10.96% 2 1 3 1 3 21.65% ‐6.88% 1 3 1 3 2 -10.89% ‐0.98% 3 1 3 2 1 33.81% 48.40%
67 1 3 2 2 1 -12.13% 3.28% 3 2 2 1 1 42.24% ‐5.48% 2 2 1 1 3 28.04% ‐3.44% 2 1 1 3 2 14.29% ‐0.49% 1 1 3 2 2 -11.31% 24.20%
68 1 3 2 2 2 -8.85% 3.28% 3 2 2 2 1 36.76% ‐5.48% 2 2 2 1 3 24.60% ‐3.44% 2 2 1 3 2 13.80% ‐0.49% 2 1 3 2 2 12.89% 24.20%
69 1 3 2 2 3 -5.57% 6.56% 3 2 2 3 1 31.28% ‐10.96% 2 2 3 1 3 21.16% ‐6.88% 2 3 1 3 2 13.31% ‐0.98% 3 1 3 2 2 37.09% 48.40%
70 1 3 2 3 1 -17.61% 3.28% 3 2 3 1 1 38.80% ‐5.48% 2 3 1 1 3 27.55% ‐3.44% 3 1 1 3 2 38.49% ‐0.49% 1 1 3 2 3 -8.03% 24.20%
71 1 3 2 3 2 -14.33% 3.28% 3 2 3 2 1 33.32% ‐5.48% 2 3 2 1 3 24.11% ‐3.44% 3 2 1 3 2 38.00% ‐0.49% 2 1 3 2 3 16.17% 24.20%
72 1 3 2 3 3 -11.05% 6.56% 3 2 3 3 1 27.84% ‐10.96% 2 3 3 1 3 20.67% ‐6.88% 3 3 1 3 2 37.51% ‐0.98% 3 1 3 2 3 40.37% 48.40%
73 1 3 3 1 1 -10.09% 3.28% 3 3 1 1 1 45.19% ‐5.48% 3 1 1 1 3 52.73% ‐3.44% 1 1 1 3 3 -6.63% ‐0.49% 1 1 3 3 1 -20.07% 24.20%
74 1 3 3 1 2 -6.81% 3.28% 3 3 1 2 1 39.71% ‐5.48% 3 1 2 1 3 49.29% ‐3.44% 1 2 1 3 3 -7.12% ‐0.49% 2 1 3 3 1 4.13% 24.20%
75 1 3 3 1 3 -3.53% 6.56% 3 3 1 3 1 34.23% ‐10.96% 3 1 3 1 3 45.85% ‐6.88% 1 3 1 3 3 -7.61% ‐0.98% 3 1 3 3 1 28.33% 48.40%
76 1 3 3 2 1 -15.57% 3.28% 3 3 2 1 1 41.75% ‐5.48% 3 2 1 1 3 52.24% ‐3.44% 2 1 1 3 3 17.57% ‐0.49% 1 1 3 3 2 -16.79% 24.20%
77 1 3 3 2 2 -12
12.29%
29% 3 28%
3.28% 3 3 2 2 1 36 27%
36.27% ‐5
5.48%
48% 3 2 2 1 3 48 80%
48.80% ‐3
3.44%
44% 2 2 1 3 3 17 08%
17.08% ‐0
0.49%
49% 2 1 3 3 2 7 41%
7.41% 24 20%
24.20%
78 1 3 3 2 3 -9.01% 6.56% 3 3 2 3 1 30.79% ‐10.96% 3 2 3 1 3 45.36% ‐6.88% 2 3 1 3 3 16.59% ‐0.98% 3 1 3 3 2 31.61% 48.40%
79 1 3 3 3 1 -21.05% 3.28% 3 3 3 1 1 38.31% ‐5.48% 3 3 1 1 3 51.75% ‐3.44% 3 1 1 3 3 41.77% ‐0.49% 1 1 3 3 3 -13.51% 24.20%
80 1 3 3 3 2 -17.77% 3.28% 3 3 3 2 1 32.83% ‐5.48% 3 3 2 1 3 48.31% ‐3.44% 3 2 1 3 3 41.28% ‐0.49% 2 1 3 3 3 10.69% 24.20%
81 1 3 3 3 3 -14.49% 6.56% 3 3 3 3 1 27.35% ‐10.96% 3 3 3 1 3 44.87% ‐6.88% 3 3 1 3 3 40.79% ‐0.98% 3 1 3 3 3 34.89% 48.40%
82 2 1 1 1 1 21.97% 3.28% 1 1 1 1 2 1.05% ‐5.48% 1 1 1 2 1 -7.71% ‐3.44% 1 1 2 1 1 -5.67% ‐0.49% 1 2 1 1 1 -2.72% 24.20%
83 2 1 1 1 2 25.25% 3.28% 1 1 1 2 2 -4.43% ‐5.48% 1 1 2 2 1 -11.15% ‐3.44% 1 2 2 1 1 -6.16% ‐0.49% 2 2 1 1 1 21.48% 24.20%
84 2 1 1 1 3 28.53% 6.56% 1 1 1 3 2 -9.91% ‐10.96% 1 1 3 2 1 -14.59% ‐6.88% 1 3 2 1 1 -6.65% ‐0.98% 3 2 1 1 1 45.68% 48.40%
85 2 1 1 2 1 16.49% 3.28% 1 1 2 1 2 -2.39% ‐5.48% 1 2 1 2 1 -8.20% ‐3.44% 2 1 2 1 1 18.53% ‐0.49% 1 2 1 1 2 0.56% 24.20%
86 2 1 1 2 2 19.77% 3.28% 1 1 2 2 2 -7.87% ‐5.48% 1 2 2 2 1 -11.64% ‐3.44% 2 2 2 1 1 18.04% ‐0.49% 2 2 1 1 2 24.76% 24.20%
87 2 1 1 2 3 23.05% 6.56% 1 1 2 3 2 -13.35% ‐10.96% 1 2 3 2 1 -15.08% ‐6.88% 2 3 2 1 1 17.55% ‐0.98% 3 2 1 1 2 48.96% 48.40%
88 2 1 1 3 1 11.01% 3.28% 1 1 3 1 2 -5.83% ‐5.48% 1 3 1 2 1 -8.69% ‐3.44% 3 1 2 1 1 42.73% ‐0.49% 1 2 1 1 3 3.84% 24.20%
89 2 1 1 3 2 14.29% 3.28% 1 1 3 2 2 -11.31% ‐5.48% 1 3 2 2 1 -12.13% ‐3.44% 3 2 2 1 1 42.24% ‐0.49% 2 2 1 1 3 28.04% 24.20%
90 2 1 1 3 3 17.57% 6.56% 1 1 3 3 2 -16.79% ‐10.96% 1 3 3 2 1 -15.57% ‐6.88% 3 3 2 1 1 41.75% ‐0.98% 3 2 1 1 3 52.24% 48.40%
91 2 1 2 1 1 18.53% 3.28% 1 2 1 1 2 0.56% ‐5.48% 2 1 1 2 1 16.49% ‐3.44% 1 1 2 1 2 -2.39% ‐0.49% 1 2 1 2 1 -8.20% 24.20%
92 2 1 2 1 2 21.81% 3.28% 1 2 1 2 2 -4.92% ‐5.48% 2 1 2 2 1 13.05% ‐3.44% 1 2 2 1 2 -2.88% ‐0.49% 2 2 1 2 1 16.00% 24.20%
93 2 1 2 1 3 25.09% 6.56% 1 2 1 3 2 -10.40% ‐10.96% 2 1 3 2 1 9.61% ‐6.88% 1 3 2 1 2 -3.37% ‐0.98% 3 2 1 2 1 40.20% 48.40%
94 2 1 2 2 1 13.05% 3.28% 1 2 2 1 2 -2.88% ‐5.48% 2 2 1 2 1 16.00% ‐3.44% 2 1 2 1 2 21.81% ‐0.49% 1 2 1 2 2 -4.92% 24.20%
95 2 1 2 2 2 16.33% 3.28% 1 2 2 2 2 -8.36% ‐5.48% 2 2 2 2 1 12.56% ‐3.44% 2 2 2 1 2 21.32% ‐0.49% 2 2 1 2 2 19.28% 24.20%
96 2 1 2 2 3 19.61% 6.56% 1 2 2 3 2 -13.84% ‐10.96% 2 2 3 2 1 9.12% ‐6.88% 2 3 2 1 2 20.83% ‐0.98% 3 2 1 2 2 43.48% 48.40%
97 2 1 2 3 1 7.57% 3.28% 1 2 3 1 2 -6.32% ‐5.48% 2 3 1 2 1 15.51% ‐3.44% 3 1 2 1 2 46.01% ‐0.49% 1 2 1 2 3 -1.64% 24.20%
98 2 1 2 3 2 10.85% 3.28% 1 2 3 2 2 -11.80% ‐5.48% 2 3 2 2 1 12.07% ‐3.44% 3 2 2 1 2 45.52% ‐0.49% 2 2 1 2 3 22.56% 24.20%
99 2 1 2 3 3 14.13% 6.56% 1 2 3 3 2 -17.28% ‐10.96% 2 3 3 2 1 8.63% ‐6.88% 3 3 2 1 2 45.03% ‐0.98% 3 2 1 2 3 46.76% 48.40%
100 2 1 3 1 1 15.09% 3.28% 1 3 1 1 2 0.07% ‐5.48% 3 1 1 2 1 40.69% ‐3.44% 1 1 2 1 3 0.89% ‐0.49% 1 2 1 3 1 -13.68% 24.20%
101 2 1 3 1 2 18.37% 3.28% 1 3 1 2 2 -5.41% ‐5.48% 3 1 2 2 1 37.25% ‐3.44% 1 2 2 1 3 0.40% ‐0.49% 2 2 1 3 1 10.52% 24.20%
102 2 1 3 1 3 21.65% 6.56% 1 3 1 3 2 -10.89% ‐10.96% 3 1 3 2 1 33.81% ‐6.88% 1 3 2 1 3 -0.09% ‐0.98% 3 2 1 3 1 34.72% 48.40%
103 2 1 3 2 1 9.61% 3.28% 1 3 2 1 2 -3.37% ‐5.48% 3 2 1 2 1 40.20% ‐3.44% 2 1 2 1 3 25.09% ‐0.49% 1 2 1 3 2 -10.40% 24.20%
104 2 1 3 2 2 12.89% 3.28% 1 3 2 2 2 -8.85% ‐5.48% 3 2 2 2 1 36.76% ‐3.44% 2 2 2 1 3 24.60% ‐0.49% 2 2 1 3 2 13.80% 24.20%
105 2 1 3 2 3 16.17% 6.56% 1 3 2 3 2 -14.33% ‐10.96% 3 2 3 2 1 33.32% ‐6.88% 2 3 2 1 3 24.11% ‐0.98% 3 2 1 3 2 38.00% 48.40%
106 2 1 3 3 1 4.13% 3.28% 1 3 3 1 2 -6.81% ‐5.48% 3 3 1 2 1 39.71% ‐3.44% 3 1 2 1 3 49.29% ‐0.49% 1 2 1 3 3 -7.12% 24.20%
107 2 1 3 3 2 7.41% 3.28% 1 3 3 2 2 -12.29% ‐5.48% 3 3 2 2 1 36.27% ‐3.44% 3 2 2 1 3 48.80% ‐0.49% 2 2 1 3 3 17.08% 24.20%
108 2 1 3 3 3 10.69% 6.56% 1 3 3 3 2 -17.77% ‐10.96% 3 3 3 2 1 32.83% ‐6.88% 3 3 2 1 3 48.31% ‐0.98% 3 2 1 3 3 41.28% 48.40%
109 2 2 1 1 1 21.48% 3.28% 2 1 1 1 2 25.25% ‐5.48% 1 1 1 2 2 -4.43% ‐3.44% 1 1 2 2 1 -11.15% ‐0.49% 1 2 2 1 1 -6.16% 24.20%
110 2 2 1 1 2 24.76% 3.28% 2 1 1 2 2 19.77% ‐5.48% 1 1 2 2 2 -7.87% ‐3.44% 1 2 2 2 1 -11.64% ‐0.49% 2 2 2 1 1 18.04% 24.20%
111 2 2 1 1 3 28.04% 6.56% 2 1 1 3 2 14.29% ‐10.96% 1 1 3 2 2 -11.31% ‐6.88% 1 3 2 2 1 -12.13% ‐0.98% 3 2 2 1 1 42.24% 48.40%
112 2 2 1 2 1 16.00% 3.28% 2 1 2 1 2 21.81% ‐5.48% 1 2 1 2 2 -4.92% ‐3.44% 2 1 2 2 1 13.05% ‐0.49% 1 2 2 1 2 -2.88% 24.20%
375


113 2 2 1 2 2 19.28% 3.28% 2 1 2 2 2 16.33% ‐5.48% 1 2 2 2 2 -8.36% ‐3.44% 2 2 2 2 1 12.56% ‐0.49% 2 2 2 1 2 21.32% 24.20%
114 2 2 1 2 3 22.56% 6.56% 2 1 2 3 2 10.85% ‐10.96% 1 2 3 2 2 -11.80% ‐6.88% 2 3 2 2 1 12.07% ‐0.98% 3 2 2 1 2 45.52% 48.40%
115 2 2 1 3 1 10.52% 3.28% 2 1 3 1 2 18.37% ‐5.48% 1 3 1 2 2 -5.41% ‐3.44% 3 1 2 2 1 37.25% ‐0.49% 1 2 2 1 3 0.40% 24.20%
116 2 2 1 3 2 13.80% 3.28% 2 1 3 2 2 12.89% ‐5.48% 1 3 2 2 2 -8.85% ‐3.44% 3 2 2 2 1 36.76% ‐0.49% 2 2 2 1 3 24.60% 24.20%
117 2 2 1 3 3 17.08% 6.56% 2 1 3 3 2 7.41% ‐10.96% 1 3 3 2 2 -12.29% ‐6.88% 3 3 2 2 1 36.27% ‐0.98% 3 2 2 1 3 48.80% 48.40%
118 2 2 2 1 1 18.04% 3.28% 2 2 1 1 2 24.76% ‐5.48% 2 1 1 2 2 19.77% ‐3.44% 1 1 2 2 2 -7.87% ‐0.49% 1 2 2 2 1 -11.64% 24.20%
119 2 2 2 1 2 21.32% 3.28% 2 2 1 2 2 19.28% ‐5.48% 2 1 2 2 2 16.33% ‐3.44% 1 2 2 2 2 -8.36% ‐0.49% 2 2 2 2 1 12.56% 24.20%
120 2 2 2 1 3 24.60% 6.56% 2 2 1 3 2 13.80% ‐10.96% 2 1 3 2 2 12.89% ‐6.88% 1 3 2 2 2 -8.85% ‐0.98% 3 2 2 2 1 36.76% 48.40%
121 2 2 2 2 1 12.56% 3.28% 2 2 2 1 2 21.32% ‐5.48% 2 2 1 2 2 19.28% ‐3.44% 2 1 2 2 2 16.33% ‐0.49% 1 2 2 2 2 -8.36% 24.20%
122 2 2 2 2 2 15.84% 3.28% 2 2 2 2 2 15.84% ‐5.48% 2 2 2 2 2 15.84% ‐3.44% 2 2 2 2 2 15.84% ‐0.49% 2 2 2 2 2 15.84% 24.20%
123 2 2 2 2 3 19.12% 6.56% 2 2 2 3 2 10.36% ‐10.96% 2 2 3 2 2 12.40% ‐6.88% 2 3 2 2 2 15.35% ‐0.98% 3 2 2 2 2 40.04% 48.40%
124 2 2 2 3 1 7.08% 3.28% 2 2 3 1 2 17.88% ‐5.48% 2 3 1 2 2 18.79% ‐3.44% 3 1 2 2 2 40.53% ‐0.49% 1 2 2 2 3 -5.08% 24.20%
125 2 2 2 3 2 10.36% 3.28% 2 2 3 2 2 12.40% ‐5.48% 2 3 2 2 2 15.35% ‐3.44% 3 2 2 2 2 40.04% ‐0.49% 2 2 2 2 3 19.12% 24.20%
126 2 2 2 3 3 13.64% 6.56% 2 2 3 3 2 6.92% ‐10.96% 2 3 3 2 2 11.91% ‐6.88% 3 3 2 2 2 39.55% ‐0.98% 3 2 2 2 3 43.32% 48.40%
127 2 2 3 1 1 14.60% 3.28% 2 3 1 1 2 24.27% ‐5.48% 3 1 1 2 2 43.97% ‐3.44% 1 1 2 2 3 -4.59% ‐0.49% 1 2 2 3 1 -17.12% 24.20%
128 2 2 3 1 2 17.88% 3.28% 2 3 1 2 2 18.79% ‐5.48% 3 1 2 2 2 40.53% ‐3.44% 1 2 2 2 3 -5.08% ‐0.49% 2 2 2 3 1 7.08% 24.20%
129 2 2 3 1 3 21.16% 6.56% 2 3 1 3 2 13.31% ‐10.96% 3 1 3 2 2 37.09% ‐6.88% 1 3 2 2 3 -5.57% ‐0.98% 3 2 2 3 1 31.28% 48.40%
130 2 2 3 2 1 9.12% 3.28% 2 3 2 1 2 20.83% ‐5.48% 3 2 1 2 2 43.48% ‐3.44% 2 1 2 2 3 19.61% ‐0.49% 1 2 2 3 2 -13.84% 24.20%
131 2 2 3 2 2 12.40% 3.28% 2 3 2 2 2 15.35% ‐5.48% 3 2 2 2 2 40.04% ‐3.44% 2 2 2 2 3 19.12% ‐0.49% 2 2 2 3 2 10.36% 24.20%
132 2 2 3 2 3 15.68% 6.56% 2 3 2 3 2 9.87% ‐10.96% 3 2 3 2 2 36.60% ‐6.88% 2 3 2 2 3 18.63% ‐0.98% 3 2 2 3 2 34.56% 48.40%
133 2 2 3 3 1 3 64%
3.64% 3 28%
3.28% 2 3 3 1 2 17 39%
17.39% ‐5
5.48%
48% 3 3 1 2 2 42 99%
42.99% ‐3
3.44%
44% 3 1 2 2 3 43 81%
43.81% ‐0
0.49%
49% 1 2 2 3 3 -10
10.56%
56% 24 20%
24.20%
134 2 2 3 3 2 6.92% 3.28% 2 3 3 2 2 11.91% ‐5.48% 3 3 2 2 2 39.55% ‐3.44% 3 2 2 2 3 43.32% ‐0.49% 2 2 2 3 3 13.64% 24.20%
135 2 2 3 3 3 10.20% 6.56% 2 3 3 3 2 6.43% ‐10.96% 3 3 3 2 2 36.11% ‐6.88% 3 3 2 2 3 42.83% ‐0.98% 3 2 2 3 3 37.84% 48.40%
136 2 3 1 1 1 20.99% 3.28% 3 1 1 1 2 49.45% ‐5.48% 1 1 1 2 3 -1.15% ‐3.44% 1 1 2 3 1 -16.63% ‐0.49% 1 2 3 1 1 -9.60% 24.20%
137 2 3 1 1 2 24.27% 3.28% 3 1 1 2 2 43.97% ‐5.48% 1 1 2 2 3 -4.59% ‐3.44% 1 2 2 3 1 -17.12% ‐0.49% 2 2 3 1 1 14.60% 24.20%
138 2 3 1 1 3 27.55% 6.56% 3 1 1 3 2 38.49% ‐10.96% 1 1 3 2 3 -8.03% ‐6.88% 1 3 2 3 1 -17.61% ‐0.98% 3 2 3 1 1 38.80% 48.40%
139 2 3 1 2 1 15.51% 3.28% 3 1 2 1 2 46.01% ‐5.48% 1 2 1 2 3 -1.64% ‐3.44% 2 1 2 3 1 7.57% ‐0.49% 1 2 3 1 2 -6.32% 24.20%
140 2 3 1 2 2 18.79% 3.28% 3 1 2 2 2 40.53% ‐5.48% 1 2 2 2 3 -5.08% ‐3.44% 2 2 2 3 1 7.08% ‐0.49% 2 2 3 1 2 17.88% 24.20%
141 2 3 1 2 3 22.07% 6.56% 3 1 2 3 2 35.05% ‐10.96% 1 2 3 2 3 -8.52% ‐6.88% 2 3 2 3 1 6.59% ‐0.98% 3 2 3 1 2 42.08% 48.40%
142 2 3 1 3 1 10.03% 3.28% 3 1 3 1 2 42.57% ‐5.48% 1 3 1 2 3 -2.13% ‐3.44% 3 1 2 3 1 31.77% ‐0.49% 1 2 3 1 3 -3.04% 24.20%
143 2 3 1 3 2 13.31% 3.28% 3 1 3 2 2 37.09% ‐5.48% 1 3 2 2 3 -5.57% ‐3.44% 3 2 2 3 1 31.28% ‐0.49% 2 2 3 1 3 21.16% 24.20%
144 2 3 1 3 3 16.59% 6.56% 3 1 3 3 2 31.61% ‐10.96% 1 3 3 2 3 -9.01% ‐6.88% 3 3 2 3 1 30.79% ‐0.98% 3 2 3 1 3 45.36% 48.40%
145 2 3 2 1 1 17.55% 3.28% 3 2 1 1 2 48.96% ‐5.48% 2 1 1 2 3 23.05% ‐3.44% 1 1 2 3 2 -13.35% ‐0.49% 1 2 3 2 1 -15.08% 24.20%
146 2 3 2 1 2 20.83% 3.28% 3 2 1 2 2 43.48% ‐5.48% 2 1 2 2 3 19.61% ‐3.44% 1 2 2 3 2 -13.84% ‐0.49% 2 2 3 2 1 9.12% 24.20%
147 2 3 2 1 3 24.11% 6.56% 3 2 1 3 2 38.00% ‐10.96% 2 1 3 2 3 16.17% ‐6.88% 1 3 2 3 2 -14.33% ‐0.98% 3 2 3 2 1 33.32% 48.40%
148 2 3 2 2 1 12.07% 3.28% 3 2 2 1 2 45.52% ‐5.48% 2 2 1 2 3 22.56% ‐3.44% 2 1 2 3 2 10.85% ‐0.49% 1 2 3 2 2 -11.80% 24.20%
149 2 3 2 2 2 15.35% 3.28% 3 2 2 2 2 40.04% ‐5.48% 2 2 2 2 3 19.12% ‐3.44% 2 2 2 3 2 10.36% ‐0.49% 2 2 3 2 2 12.40% 24.20%
150 2 3 2 2 3 18.63% 6.56% 3 2 2 3 2 34.56% ‐10.96% 2 2 3 2 3 15.68% ‐6.88% 2 3 2 3 2 9.87% ‐0.98% 3 2 3 2 2 36.60% 48.40%
151 2 3 2 3 1 6.59% 3.28% 3 2 3 1 2 42.08% ‐5.48% 2 3 1 2 3 22.07% ‐3.44% 3 1 2 3 2 35.05% ‐0.49% 1 2 3 2 3 -8.52% 24.20%
152 2 3 2 3 2 9.87% 3.28% 3 2 3 2 2 36.60% ‐5.48% 2 3 2 2 3 18.63% ‐3.44% 3 2 2 3 2 34.56% ‐0.49% 2 2 3 2 3 15.68% 24.20%
153 2 3 2 3 3 13.15% 6.56% 3 2 3 3 2 31.12% ‐10.96% 2 3 3 2 3 15.19% ‐6.88% 3 3 2 3 2 34.07% ‐0.98% 3 2 3 2 3 39.88% 48.40%
154 2 3 3 1 1 14.11% 3.28% 3 3 1 1 2 48.47% ‐5.48% 3 1 1 2 3 47.25% ‐3.44% 1 1 2 3 3 -10.07% ‐0.49% 1 2 3 3 1 -20.56% 24.20%
155 2 3 3 1 2 17.39% 3.28% 3 3 1 2 2 42.99% ‐5.48% 3 1 2 2 3 43.81% ‐3.44% 1 2 2 3 3 -10.56% ‐0.49% 2 2 3 3 1 3.64% 24.20%
156 2 3 3 1 3 20.67% 6.56% 3 3 1 3 2 37.51% ‐10.96% 3 1 3 2 3 40.37% ‐6.88% 1 3 2 3 3 -11.05% ‐0.98% 3 2 3 3 1 27.84% 48.40%
157 2 3 3 2 1 8.63% 3.28% 3 3 2 1 2 45.03% ‐5.48% 3 2 1 2 3 46.76% ‐3.44% 2 1 2 3 3 14.13% ‐0.49% 1 2 3 3 2 -17.28% 24.20%
158 2 3 3 2 2 11.91% 3.28% 3 3 2 2 2 39.55% ‐5.48% 3 2 2 2 3 43.32% ‐3.44% 2 2 2 3 3 13.64% ‐0.49% 2 2 3 3 2 6.92% 24.20%
159 2 3 3 2 3 15.19% 6.56% 3 3 2 3 2 34.07% ‐10.96% 3 2 3 2 3 39.88% ‐6.88% 2 3 2 3 3 13.15% ‐0.98% 3 2 3 3 2 31.12% 48.40%
160 2 3 3 3 1 3.15% 3.28% 3 3 3 1 2 41.59% ‐5.48% 3 3 1 2 3 46.27% ‐3.44% 3 1 2 3 3 38.33% ‐0.49% 1 2 3 3 3 -14.00% 24.20%
161 2 3 3 3 2 6.43% 3.28% 3 3 3 2 2 36.11% ‐5.48% 3 3 2 2 3 42.83% ‐3.44% 3 2 2 3 3 37.84% ‐0.49% 2 2 3 3 3 10.20% 24.20%
162 2 3 3 3 3 9.71% 6.56% 3 3 3 3 2 30.63% ‐10.96% 3 3 3 2 3 39.39% ‐6.88% 3 3 2 3 3 37.35% ‐0.98% 3 2 3 3 3 34.40% 48.40%
163 3 1 1 1 1 46.17% 3.28% 1 1 1 1 3 4.33% ‐5.48% 1 1 1 3 1 -13.19% ‐3.44% 1 1 3 1 1 -9.11% ‐0.49% 1 3 1 1 1 -3.21% 24.20%
164 3 1 1 1 2 49.45% 3.28% 1 1 1 2 3 -1.15% ‐5.48% 1 1 2 3 1 -16.63% ‐3.44% 1 2 3 1 1 -9.60% ‐0.49% 2 3 1 1 1 20.99% 24.20%
165 3 1 1 1 3 52.73% 6.56% 1 1 1 3 3 -6.63% ‐10.96% 1 1 3 3 1 -20.07% ‐6.88% 1 3 3 1 1 -10.09% ‐0.98% 3 3 1 1 1 45.19% 48.40%
166 3 1 1 2 1 40.69% 3.28% 1 1 2 1 3 0.89% ‐5.48% 1 2 1 3 1 -13.68% ‐3.44% 2 1 3 1 1 15.09% ‐0.49% 1 3 1 1 2 0.07% 24.20%
167 3 1 1 2 2 43.97% 3.28% 1 1 2 2 3 -4.59% ‐5.48% 1 2 2 3 1 -17.12% ‐3.44% 2 2 3 1 1 14.60% ‐0.49% 2 3 1 1 2 24.27% 24.20%
168 3 1 1 2 3 47.25% 6.56% 1 1 2 3 3 -10.07% ‐10.96% 1 2 3 3 1 -20.56% ‐6.88% 2 3 3 1 1 14.11% ‐0.98% 3 3 1 1 2 48.47% 48.40%
376


169 3 1 1 3 1 35.21% 3.28% 1 1 3 1 3 -2.55% ‐5.48% 1 3 1 3 1 -14.17% ‐3.44% 3 1 3 1 1 39.29% ‐0.49% 1 3 1 1 3 3.35% 24.20%
170 3 1 1 3 2 38.49% 3.28% 1 1 3 2 3 -8.03% ‐5.48% 1 3 2 3 1 -17.61% ‐3.44% 3 2 3 1 1 38.80% ‐0.49% 2 3 1 1 3 27.55% 24.20%
171 3 1 1 3 3 41.77% 6.56% 1 1 3 3 3 -13.51% ‐10.96% 1 3 3 3 1 -21.05% ‐6.88% 3 3 3 1 1 38.31% ‐0.98% 3 3 1 1 3 51.75% 48.40%
172 3 1 2 1 1 42.73% 3.28% 1 2 1 1 3 3.84% ‐5.48% 2 1 1 3 1 11.01% ‐3.44% 1 1 3 1 2 -5.83% ‐0.49% 1 3 1 2 1 -8.69% 24.20%
173 3 1 2 1 2 46.01% 3.28% 1 2 1 2 3 -1.64% ‐5.48% 2 1 2 3 1 7.57% ‐3.44% 1 2 3 1 2 -6.32% ‐0.49% 2 3 1 2 1 15.51% 24.20%
174 3 1 2 1 3 49.29% 6.56% 1 2 1 3 3 -7.12% ‐10.96% 2 1 3 3 1 4.13% ‐6.88% 1 3 3 1 2 -6.81% ‐0.98% 3 3 1 2 1 39.71% 48.40%
175 3 1 2 2 1 37.25% 3.28% 1 2 2 1 3 0.40% ‐5.48% 2 2 1 3 1 10.52% ‐3.44% 2 1 3 1 2 18.37% ‐0.49% 1 3 1 2 2 -5.41% 24.20%
176 3 1 2 2 2 40.53% 3.28% 1 2 2 2 3 -5.08% ‐5.48% 2 2 2 3 1 7.08% ‐3.44% 2 2 3 1 2 17.88% ‐0.49% 2 3 1 2 2 18.79% 24.20%
177 3 1 2 2 3 43.81% 6.56% 1 2 2 3 3 -10.56% ‐10.96% 2 2 3 3 1 3.64% ‐6.88% 2 3 3 1 2 17.39% ‐0.98% 3 3 1 2 2 42.99% 48.40%
178 3 1 2 3 1 31.77% 3.28% 1 2 3 1 3 -3.04% ‐5.48% 2 3 1 3 1 10.03% ‐3.44% 3 1 3 1 2 42.57% ‐0.49% 1 3 1 2 3 -2.13% 24.20%
179 3 1 2 3 2 35.05% 3.28% 1 2 3 2 3 -8.52% ‐5.48% 2 3 2 3 1 6.59% ‐3.44% 3 2 3 1 2 42.08% ‐0.49% 2 3 1 2 3 22.07% 24.20%
180 3 1 2 3 3 38.33% 6.56% 1 2 3 3 3 -14.00% ‐10.96% 2 3 3 3 1 3.15% ‐6.88% 3 3 3 1 2 41.59% ‐0.98% 3 3 1 2 3 46.27% 48.40%
181 3 1 3 1 1 39.29% 3.28% 1 3 1 1 3 3.35% ‐5.48% 3 1 1 3 1 35.21% ‐3.44% 1 1 3 1 3 -2.55% ‐0.49% 1 3 1 3 1 -14.17% 24.20%
182 3 1 3 1 2 42.57% 3.28% 1 3 1 2 3 -2.13% ‐5.48% 3 1 2 3 1 31.77% ‐3.44% 1 2 3 1 3 -3.04% ‐0.49% 2 3 1 3 1 10.03% 24.20%
183 3 1 3 1 3 45.85% 6.56% 1 3 1 3 3 -7.61% ‐10.96% 3 1 3 3 1 28.33% ‐6.88% 1 3 3 1 3 -3.53% ‐0.98% 3 3 1 3 1 34.23% 48.40%
184 3 1 3 2 1 33.81% 3.28% 1 3 2 1 3 -0.09% ‐5.48% 3 2 1 3 1 34.72% ‐3.44% 2 1 3 1 3 21.65% ‐0.49% 1 3 1 3 2 -10.89% 24.20%
185 3 1 3 2 2 37.09% 3.28% 1 3 2 2 3 -5.57% ‐5.48% 3 2 2 3 1 31.28% ‐3.44% 2 2 3 1 3 21.16% ‐0.49% 2 3 1 3 2 13.31% 24.20%
186 3 1 3 2 3 40.37% 6.56% 1 3 2 3 3 -11.05% ‐10.96% 3 2 3 3 1 27.84% ‐6.88% 2 3 3 1 3 20.67% ‐0.98% 3 3 1 3 2 37.51% 48.40%
187 3 1 3 3 1 28.33% 3.28% 1 3 3 1 3 -3.53% ‐5.48% 3 3 1 3 1 34.23% ‐3.44% 3 1 3 1 3 45.85% ‐0.49% 1 3 1 3 3 -7.61% 24.20%
188 3 1 3 3 2 31.61% 3.28% 1 3 3 2 3 -9.01% ‐5.48% 3 3 2 3 1 30.79% ‐3.44% 3 2 3 1 3 45.36% ‐0.49% 2 3 1 3 3 16.59% 24.20%
189 3 1 3 3 3 34 89%
34.89% 6 56%
6.56% 1 3 3 3 3 -14
14.49%
49% ‐10
10.96%
96% 3 3 3 3 1 27 35%
27.35% ‐6
6.88%
88% 3 3 3 1 3 44 87%
44.87% ‐0
0.98%
98% 3 3 1 3 3 40 79%
40.79% 48 40%
48.40%
190 3 2 1 1 1 45.68% 3.28% 2 1 1 1 3 28.53% ‐5.48% 1 1 1 3 2 -9.91% ‐3.44% 1 1 3 2 1 -14.59% ‐0.49% 1 3 2 1 1 -6.65% 24.20%
191 3 2 1 1 2 48.96% 3.28% 2 1 1 2 3 23.05% ‐5.48% 1 1 2 3 2 -13.35% ‐3.44% 1 2 3 2 1 -15.08% ‐0.49% 2 3 2 1 1 17.55% 24.20%
192 3 2 1 1 3 52.24% 6.56% 2 1 1 3 3 17.57% ‐10.96% 1 1 3 3 2 -16.79% ‐6.88% 1 3 3 2 1 -15.57% ‐0.98% 3 3 2 1 1 41.75% 48.40%
193 3 2 1 2 1 40.20% 3.28% 2 1 2 1 3 25.09% ‐5.48% 1 2 1 3 2 -10.40% ‐3.44% 2 1 3 2 1 9.61% ‐0.49% 1 3 2 1 2 -3.37% 24.20%
194 3 2 1 2 2 43.48% 3.28% 2 1 2 2 3 19.61% ‐5.48% 1 2 2 3 2 -13.84% ‐3.44% 2 2 3 2 1 9.12% ‐0.49% 2 3 2 1 2 20.83% 24.20%
195 3 2 1 2 3 46.76% 6.56% 2 1 2 3 3 14.13% ‐10.96% 1 2 3 3 2 -17.28% ‐6.88% 2 3 3 2 1 8.63% ‐0.98% 3 3 2 1 2 45.03% 48.40%
196 3 2 1 3 1 34.72% 3.28% 2 1 3 1 3 21.65% ‐5.48% 1 3 1 3 2 -10.89% ‐3.44% 3 1 3 2 1 33.81% ‐0.49% 1 3 2 1 3 -0.09% 24.20%
197 3 2 1 3 2 38.00% 3.28% 2 1 3 2 3 16.17% ‐5.48% 1 3 2 3 2 -14.33% ‐3.44% 3 2 3 2 1 33.32% ‐0.49% 2 3 2 1 3 24.11% 24.20%
198 3 2 1 3 3 41.28% 6.56% 2 1 3 3 3 10.69% ‐10.96% 1 3 3 3 2 -17.77% ‐6.88% 3 3 3 2 1 32.83% ‐0.98% 3 3 2 1 3 48.31% 48.40%
199 3 2 2 1 1 42.24% 3.28% 2 2 1 1 3 28.04% ‐5.48% 2 1 1 3 2 14.29% ‐3.44% 1 1 3 2 2 -11.31% ‐0.49% 1 3 2 2 1 -12.13% 24.20%
200 3 2 2 1 2 45.52% 3.28% 2 2 1 2 3 22.56% ‐5.48% 2 1 2 3 2 10.85% ‐3.44% 1 2 3 2 2 -11.80% ‐0.49% 2 3 2 2 1 12.07% 24.20%
201 3 2 2 1 3 48.80% 6.56% 2 2 1 3 3 17.08% ‐10.96% 2 1 3 3 2 7.41% ‐6.88% 1 3 3 2 2 -12.29% ‐0.98% 3 3 2 2 1 36.27% 48.40%
202 3 2 2 2 1 36.76% 3.28% 2 2 2 1 3 24.60% ‐5.48% 2 2 1 3 2 13.80% ‐3.44% 2 1 3 2 2 12.89% ‐0.49% 1 3 2 2 2 -8.85% 24.20%
203 3 2 2 2 2 40.04% 3.28% 2 2 2 2 3 19.12% ‐5.48% 2 2 2 3 2 10.36% ‐3.44% 2 2 3 2 2 12.40% ‐0.49% 2 3 2 2 2 15.35% 24.20%
204 3 2 2 2 3 43.32% 6.56% 2 2 2 3 3 13.64% ‐10.96% 2 2 3 3 2 6.92% ‐6.88% 2 3 3 2 2 11.91% ‐0.98% 3 3 2 2 2 39.55% 48.40%
205 3 2 2 3 1 31.28% 3.28% 2 2 3 1 3 21.16% ‐5.48% 2 3 1 3 2 13.31% ‐3.44% 3 1 3 2 2 37.09% ‐0.49% 1 3 2 2 3 -5.57% 24.20%
206 3 2 2 3 2 34.56% 3.28% 2 2 3 2 3 15.68% ‐5.48% 2 3 2 3 2 9.87% ‐3.44% 3 2 3 2 2 36.60% ‐0.49% 2 3 2 2 3 18.63% 24.20%
207 3 2 2 3 3 37.84% 6.56% 2 2 3 3 3 10.20% ‐10.96% 2 3 3 3 2 6.43% ‐6.88% 3 3 3 2 2 36.11% ‐0.98% 3 3 2 2 3 42.83% 48.40%
208 3 2 3 1 1 38.80% 3.28% 2 3 1 1 3 27.55% ‐5.48% 3 1 1 3 2 38.49% ‐3.44% 1 1 3 2 3 -8.03% ‐0.49% 1 3 2 3 1 -17.61% 24.20%
209 3 2 3 1 2 42.08% 3.28% 2 3 1 2 3 22.07% ‐5.48% 3 1 2 3 2 35.05% ‐3.44% 1 2 3 2 3 -8.52% ‐0.49% 2 3 2 3 1 6.59% 24.20%
210 3 2 3 1 3 45.36% 6.56% 2 3 1 3 3 16.59% ‐10.96% 3 1 3 3 2 31.61% ‐6.88% 1 3 3 2 3 -9.01% ‐0.98% 3 3 2 3 1 30.79% 48.40%
211 3 2 3 2 1 33.32% 3.28% 2 3 2 1 3 24.11% ‐5.48% 3 2 1 3 2 38.00% ‐3.44% 2 1 3 2 3 16.17% ‐0.49% 1 3 2 3 2 -14.33% 24.20%
212 3 2 3 2 2 36.60% 3.28% 2 3 2 2 3 18.63% ‐5.48% 3 2 2 3 2 34.56% ‐3.44% 2 2 3 2 3 15.68% ‐0.49% 2 3 2 3 2 9.87% 24.20%
213 3 2 3 2 3 39.88% 6.56% 2 3 2 3 3 13.15% ‐10.96% 3 2 3 3 2 31.12% ‐6.88% 2 3 3 2 3 15.19% ‐0.98% 3 3 2 3 2 34.07% 48.40%
214 3 2 3 3 1 27.84% 3.28% 2 3 3 1 3 20.67% ‐5.48% 3 3 1 3 2 37.51% ‐3.44% 3 1 3 2 3 40.37% ‐0.49% 1 3 2 3 3 -11.05% 24.20%
215 3 2 3 3 2 31.12% 3.28% 2 3 3 2 3 15.19% ‐5.48% 3 3 2 3 2 34.07% ‐3.44% 3 2 3 2 3 39.88% ‐0.49% 2 3 2 3 3 13.15% 24.20%
216 3 2 3 3 3 34.40% 6.56% 2 3 3 3 3 9.71% ‐10.96% 3 3 3 3 2 30.63% ‐6.88% 3 3 3 2 3 39.39% ‐0.98% 3 3 2 3 3 37.35% 48.40%
217 3 3 1 1 1 45.19% 3.28% 3 1 1 1 3 52.73% ‐5.48% 1 1 1 3 3 -6.63% ‐3.44% 1 1 3 3 1 -20.07% ‐0.49% 1 3 3 1 1 -10.09% 24.20%
218 3 3 1 1 2 48.47% 3.28% 3 1 1 2 3 47.25% ‐5.48% 1 1 2 3 3 -10.07% ‐3.44% 1 2 3 3 1 -20.56% ‐0.49% 2 3 3 1 1 14.11% 24.20%
219 3 3 1 1 3 51.75% 6.56% 3 1 1 3 3 41.77% ‐10.96% 1 1 3 3 3 -13.51% ‐6.88% 1 3 3 3 1 -21.05% ‐0.98% 3 3 3 1 1 38.31% 48.40%
220 3 3 1 2 1 39.71% 3.28% 3 1 2 1 3 49.29% ‐5.48% 1 2 1 3 3 -7.12% ‐3.44% 2 1 3 3 1 4.13% ‐0.49% 1 3 3 1 2 -6.81% 24.20%
221 3 3 1 2 2 42.99% 3.28% 3 1 2 2 3 43.81% ‐5.48% 1 2 2 3 3 -10.56% ‐3.44% 2 2 3 3 1 3.64% ‐0.49% 2 3 3 1 2 17.39% 24.20%
222 3 3 1 2 3 46.27% 6.56% 3 1 2 3 3 38.33% ‐10.96% 1 2 3 3 3 -14.00% ‐6.88% 2 3 3 3 1 3.15% ‐0.98% 3 3 3 1 2 41.59% 48.40%
223 3 3 1 3 1 34.23% 3.28% 3 1 3 1 3 45.85% ‐5.48% 1 3 1 3 3 -7.61% ‐3.44% 3 1 3 3 1 28.33% ‐0.49% 1 3 3 1 3 -3.53% 24.20%
224 3 3 1 3 2 37.51% 3.28% 3 1 3 2 3 40.37% ‐5.48% 1 3 2 3 3 -11.05% ‐3.44% 3 2 3 3 1 27.84% ‐0.49% 2 3 3 1 3 20.67% 24.20%
377


225 3 3 1 3 3 40.79% 6.56% 3 1 3 3 3 34.89% ‐10.96% 1 3 3 3 3 -14.49% ‐6.88% 3 3 3 3 1 27.35% ‐0.98% 3 3 3 1 3 44.87% 48.40%
226 3 3 2 1 1 41.75% 3.28% 3 2 1 1 3 52.24% ‐5.48% 2 1 1 3 3 17.57% ‐3.44% 1 1 3 3 2 -16.79% ‐0.49% 1 3 3 2 1 -15.57% 24.20%
227 3 3 2 1 2 45.03% 3.28% 3 2 1 2 3 46.76% ‐5.48% 2 1 2 3 3 14.13% ‐3.44% 1 2 3 3 2 -17.28% ‐0.49% 2 3 3 2 1 8.63% 24.20%
228 3 3 2 1 3 48.31% 6.56% 3 2 1 3 3 41.28% ‐10.96% 2 1 3 3 3 10.69% ‐6.88% 1 3 3 3 2 -17.77% ‐0.98% 3 3 3 2 1 32.83% 48.40%
229 3 3 2 2 1 36.27% 3.28% 3 2 2 1 3 48.80% ‐5.48% 2 2 1 3 3 17.08% ‐3.44% 2 1 3 3 2 7.41% ‐0.49% 1 3 3 2 2 -12.29% 24.20%
230 3 3 2 2 2 39.55% 3.28% 3 2 2 2 3 43.32% ‐5.48% 2 2 2 3 3 13.64% ‐3.44% 2 2 3 3 2 6.92% ‐0.49% 2 3 3 2 2 11.91% 24.20%
231 3 3 2 2 3 42.83% 6.56% 3 2 2 3 3 37.84% ‐10.96% 2 2 3 3 3 10.20% ‐6.88% 2 3 3 3 2 6.43% ‐0.98% 3 3 3 2 2 36.11% 48.40%
232 3 3 2 3 1 30.79% 3.28% 3 2 3 1 3 45.36% ‐5.48% 2 3 1 3 3 16.59% ‐3.44% 3 1 3 3 2 31.61% ‐0.49% 1 3 3 2 3 -9.01% 24.20%
233 3 3 2 3 2 34.07% 3.28% 3 2 3 2 3 39.88% ‐5.48% 2 3 2 3 3 13.15% ‐3.44% 3 2 3 3 2 31.12% ‐0.49% 2 3 3 2 3 15.19% 24.20%
234 3 3 2 3 3 37.35% 6.56% 3 2 3 3 3 34.40% ‐10.96% 2 3 3 3 3 9.71% ‐6.88% 3 3 3 3 2 30.63% ‐0.98% 3 3 3 2 3 39.39% 48.40%
235 3 3 3 1 1 38.31% 3.28% 3 3 1 1 3 51.75% ‐5.48% 3 1 1 3 3 41.77% ‐3.44% 1 1 3 3 3 -13.51% ‐0.49% 1 3 3 3 1 -21.05% 24.20%
236 3 3 3 1 2 41.59% 3.28% 3 3 1 2 3 46.27% ‐5.48% 3 1 2 3 3 38.33% ‐3.44% 1 2 3 3 3 -14.00% ‐0.49% 2 3 3 3 1 3.15% 24.20%
237 3 3 3 1 3 44.87% 6.56% 3 3 1 3 3 40.79% ‐10.96% 3 1 3 3 3 34.89% ‐6.88% 1 3 3 3 3 -14.49% ‐0.98% 3 3 3 3 1 27.35% 48.40%
238 3 3 3 2 1 32.83% 3.28% 3 3 2 1 3 48.31% ‐5.48% 3 2 1 3 3 41.28% ‐3.44% 2 1 3 3 3 10.69% ‐0.49% 1 3 3 3 2 -17.77% 24.20%
239 3 3 3 2 2 36.11% 3.28% 3 3 2 2 3 42.83% ‐5.48% 3 2 2 3 3 37.84% ‐3.44% 2 2 3 3 3 10.20% ‐0.49% 2 3 3 3 2 6.43% 24.20%
240 3 3 3 2 3 39.39% 6.56% 3 3 2 3 3 37.35% ‐10.96% 3 2 3 3 3 34.40% ‐6.88% 2 3 3 3 3 9.71% ‐0.98% 3 3 3 3 2 30.63% 48.40%
241 3 3 3 3 1 27.35% 3.28% 3 3 3 1 3 44.87% ‐5.48% 3 3 1 3 3 40.79% ‐3.44% 3 1 3 3 3 34.89% ‐0.49% 1 3 3 3 3 -14.49% 24.20%
242 3 3 3 3 2 30.63% 3.28% 3 3 3 2 3 39.39% ‐5.48% 3 3 2 3 3 37.35% ‐3.44% 3 2 3 3 3 34.40% ‐0.49% 2 3 3 3 3 9.71% 24.20%
243 3 3 3 3 3 33.91% 6.56% 3 3 3 3 3 33.91% ‐10.96% 3 3 3 3 3 33.91% ‐6.88% 3 3 3 3 3 33.91% ‐0.98% 3 3 3 3 3 33.91% 48.40%
Legend :
T- Timings
S - Supervision
G - Group Dynamics
P - Procedure
C - Climate
378
Appendix 6-7 : Tiling Trade


1 1 1 1 1 1 6.78% ‐17.00% 1 1 1 1 1 6.78% ‐28.20% 1 1 1 1 1 6.78% 8.78% 1 1 1 1 1 6.78% 35.40% 1 1 1 1 1 6.78% 0.50%
2 1 1 1 1 2 -10.22% ‐17.00% 1 1 1 2 1 -21.42% ‐28.20% 1 1 2 1 1 15.56% 8.78% 1 2 1 1 1 42.18% 35.40% 2 1 1 1 1 7.28% 0.50%
3 1 1 1 1 3 -27.22% ‐34.00% 1 1 1 3 1 -49.62% ‐56.40% 1 1 3 1 1 24.34% 17.56% 1 3 1 1 1 77.58% 70.80% 3 1 1 1 1 7.78% 1.00%
4 1 1 1 2 1 -21.42% ‐17.00% 1 1 2 1 1 15.56% ‐28.20% 1 2 1 1 1 42.18% 8.78% 2 1 1 1 1 7.28% 35.40% 1 1 1 1 2 -10.22% 0.50%
5 1 1 1 2 2 -38.42% ‐17.00% 1 1 2 2 1 -12.64% ‐28.20% 1 2 2 1 1 50.96% 8.78% 2 2 1 1 1 42.68% 35.40% 2 1 1 1 2 -9.72% 0.50%
6 1 1 1 2 3 -55.42% ‐34.00% 1 1 2 3 1 -40.84% ‐56.40% 1 2 3 1 1 59.74% 17.56% 2 3 1 1 1 78.08% 70.80% 3 1 1 1 2 -9.22% 1.00%
7 1 1 1 3 1 -49.62% ‐17.00% 1 1 3 1 1 24.34% ‐28.20% 1 3 1 1 1 77.58% 8.78% 3 1 1 1 1 7.78% 35.40% 1 1 1 1 3 -27.22% 0.50%
8 1 1 1 3 2 -66.62% ‐17.00% 1 1 3 2 1 -3.86% ‐28.20% 1 3 2 1 1 86.36% 8.78% 3 2 1 1 1 43.18% 35.40% 2 1 1 1 3 -26.72% 0.50%
9 1 1 1 3 3 -83.62% ‐34.00% 1 1 3 3 1 -32.06% ‐56.40% 1 3 3 1 1 95.14% 17.56% 3 3 1 1 1 78.58% 70.80% 3 1 1 1 3 -26.22% 1.00%
10 1 1 2 1 1 15.56% ‐17.00% 1 2 1 1 1 42.18% ‐28.20% 2 1 1 1 1 7.28% 8.78% 1 1 1 1 2 -10.22% 35.40% 1 1 1 2 1 -21.42% 0.50%
11 1 1 2 1 2 -1.44% ‐17.00% 1 2 1 2 1 13.98% ‐28.20% 2 1 2 1 1 16.06% 8.78% 1 2 1 1 2 25.18% 35.40% 2 1 1 2 1 -20.92% 0.50%
12 1 1 2 1 3 -18.44% ‐34.00% 1 2 1 3 1 -14.22% ‐56.40% 2 1 3 1 1 24.84% 17.56% 1 3 1 1 2 60.58% 70.80% 3 1 1 2 1 -20.42% 1.00%
13 1 1 2 2 1 -12.64% ‐17.00% 1 2 2 1 1 50.96% ‐28.20% 2 2 1 1 1 42.68% 8.78% 2 1 1 1 2 -9.72% 35.40% 1 1 1 2 2 -38.42% 0.50%
14 1 1 2 2 2 -29.64% ‐17.00% 1 2 2 2 1 22.76% ‐28.20% 2 2 2 1 1 51.46% 8.78% 2 2 1 1 2 25.68% 35.40% 2 1 1 2 2 -37.92% 0.50%
15 1 1 2 2 3 -46.64% ‐34.00% 1 2 2 3 1 -5.44% ‐56.40% 2 2 3 1 1 60.24% 17.56% 2 3 1 1 2 61.08% 70.80% 3 1 1 2 2 -37.42% 1.00%
16 1 1 2 3 1 -40.84% ‐17.00% 1 2 3 1 1 59.74% ‐28.20% 2 3 1 1 1 78.08% 8.78% 3 1 1 1 2 -9.22% 35.40% 1 1 1 2 3 -55.42% 0.50%
17 1 1 2 3 2 -57.84% ‐17.00% 1 2 3 2 1 31.54% ‐28.20% 2 3 2 1 1 86.86% 8.78% 3 2 1 1 2 26.18% 35.40% 2 1 1 2 3 -54.92% 0.50%
18 1 1 2 3 3 -74.84% ‐34.00% 1 2 3 3 1 3.34% ‐56.40% 2 3 3 1 1 95.64% 17.56% 3 3 1 1 2 61.58% 70.80% 3 1 1 2 3 -54.42% 1.00%
19 1 1 3 1 1 24.34% ‐17.00% 1 3 1 1 1 77.58% ‐28.20% 3 1 1 1 1 7.78% 8.78% 1 1 1 1 3 -27.22% 35.40% 1 1 1 3 1 -49.62% 0.50%
20 1 1 3 1 2 7.34% ‐17.00% 1 3 1 2 1 49.38% ‐28.20% 3 1 2 1 1 16.56% 8.78% 1 2 1 1 3 8.18% 35.40% 2 1 1 3 1 -49.12% 0.50%
21 1 1 3 1 3 -9 66%
-9.66% ‐34 00%
‐34.00% 1 3 1 3 1 21 18%
21.18% ‐56 40%
‐56.40% 3 1 3 1 1 25 34%
25.34% 17 56%
17.56% 1 3 1 1 3 43 58%
43.58% 70 80%
70.80% 3 1 1 3 1 -48 62%
-48.62% 1 00%
1.00%
22 1 1 3 2 1 -3.86% ‐17.00% 1 3 2 1 1 86.36% ‐28.20% 3 2 1 1 1 43.18% 8.78% 2 1 1 1 3 -26.72% 35.40% 1 1 1 3 2 -66.62% 0.50%
23 1 1 3 2 2 -20.86% ‐17.00% 1 3 2 2 1 58.16% ‐28.20% 3 2 2 1 1 51.96% 8.78% 2 2 1 1 3 8.68% 35.40% 2 1 1 3 2 -66.12% 0.50%
24 1 1 3 2 3 -37.86% ‐34.00% 1 3 2 3 1 29.96% ‐56.40% 3 2 3 1 1 60.74% 17.56% 2 3 1 1 3 44.08% 70.80% 3 1 1 3 2 -65.62% 1.00%
25 1 1 3 3 1 -32.06% ‐17.00% 1 3 3 1 1 95.14% ‐28.20% 3 3 1 1 1 78.58% 8.78% 3 1 1 1 3 -26.22% 35.40% 1 1 1 3 3 -83.62% 0.50%
26 1 1 3 3 2 -49.06% ‐17.00% 1 3 3 2 1 66.94% ‐28.20% 3 3 2 1 1 87.36% 8.78% 3 2 1 1 3 9.18% 35.40% 2 1 1 3 3 -83.12% 0.50%
27 1 1 3 3 3 -66.06% ‐34.00% 1 3 3 3 1 38.74% ‐56.40% 3 3 3 1 1 96.14% 17.56% 3 3 1 1 3 44.58% 70.80% 3 1 1 3 3 -82.62% 1.00%
28 1 2 1 1 1 42.18% ‐17.00% 2 1 1 1 1 7.28% ‐28.20% 1 1 1 1 2 -10.22% 8.78% 1 1 1 2 1 -21.42% 35.40% 1 1 2 1 1 15.56% 0.50%
29 1 2 1 1 2 25.18% ‐17.00% 2 1 1 2 1 -20.92% ‐28.20% 1 1 2 1 2 -1.44% 8.78% 1 2 1 2 1 13.98% 35.40% 2 1 2 1 1 16.06% 0.50%
30 1 2 1 1 3 8.18% ‐34.00% 2 1 1 3 1 -49.12% ‐56.40% 1 1 3 1 2 7.34% 17.56% 1 3 1 2 1 49.38% 70.80% 3 1 2 1 1 16.56% 1.00%
31 1 2 1 2 1 13.98% ‐17.00% 2 1 2 1 1 16.06% ‐28.20% 1 2 1 1 2 25.18% 8.78% 2 1 1 2 1 -20.92% 35.40% 1 1 2 1 2 -1.44% 0.50%
32 1 2 1 2 2 -3.02% ‐17.00% 2 1 2 2 1 -12.14% ‐28.20% 1 2 2 1 2 33.96% 8.78% 2 2 1 2 1 14.48% 35.40% 2 1 2 1 2 -0.94% 0.50%
33 1 2 1 2 3 -20.02% ‐34.00% 2 1 2 3 1 -40.34% ‐56.40% 1 2 3 1 2 42.74% 17.56% 2 3 1 2 1 49.88% 70.80% 3 1 2 1 2 -0.44% 1.00%
34 1 2 1 3 1 -14.22% ‐17.00% 2 1 3 1 1 24.84% ‐28.20% 1 3 1 1 2 60.58% 8.78% 3 1 1 2 1 -20.42% 35.40% 1 1 2 1 3 -18.44% 0.50%
35 1 2 1 3 2 -31.22% ‐17.00% 2 1 3 2 1 -3.36% ‐28.20% 1 3 2 1 2 69.36% 8.78% 3 2 1 2 1 14.98% 35.40% 2 1 2 1 3 -17.94% 0.50%
36 1 2 1 3 3 -48.22% ‐34.00% 2 1 3 3 1 -31.56% ‐56.40% 1 3 3 1 2 78.14% 17.56% 3 3 1 2 1 50.38% 70.80% 3 1 2 1 3 -17.44% 1.00%
37 1 2 2 1 1 50.96% ‐17.00% 2 2 1 1 1 42.68% ‐28.20% 2 1 1 1 2 -9.72% 8.78% 1 1 1 2 2 -38.42% 35.40% 1 1 2 2 1 -12.64% 0.50%
38 1 2 2 1 2 33.96% ‐17.00% 2 2 1 2 1 14.48% ‐28.20% 2 1 2 1 2 -0.94% 8.78% 1 2 1 2 2 -3.02% 35.40% 2 1 2 2 1 -12.14% 0.50%
39 1 2 2 1 3 16.96% ‐34.00% 2 2 1 3 1 -13.72% ‐56.40% 2 1 3 1 2 7.84% 17.56% 1 3 1 2 2 32.38% 70.80% 3 1 2 2 1 -11.64% 1.00%
40 1 2 2 2 1 22.76% ‐17.00% 2 2 2 1 1 51.46% ‐28.20% 2 2 1 1 2 25.68% 8.78% 2 1 1 2 2 -37.92% 35.40% 1 1 2 2 2 -29.64% 0.50%
41 1 2 2 2 2 5.76% ‐17.00% 2 2 2 2 1 23.26% ‐28.20% 2 2 2 1 2 34.46% 8.78% 2 2 1 2 2 -2.52% 35.40% 2 1 2 2 2 -29.14% 0.50%
42 1 2 2 2 3 -11.24% ‐34.00% 2 2 2 3 1 -4.94% ‐56.40% 2 2 3 1 2 43.24% 17.56% 2 3 1 2 2 32.88% 70.80% 3 1 2 2 2 -28.64% 1.00%
43 1 2 2 3 1 -5.44% ‐17.00% 2 2 3 1 1 60.24% ‐28.20% 2 3 1 1 2 61.08% 8.78% 3 1 1 2 2 -37.42% 35.40% 1 1 2 2 3 -46.64% 0.50%
44 1 2 2 3 2 -22.44% ‐17.00% 2 2 3 2 1 32.04% ‐28.20% 2 3 2 1 2 69.86% 8.78% 3 2 1 2 2 -2.02% 35.40% 2 1 2 2 3 -46.14% 0.50%
45 1 2 2 3 3 -39.44% ‐34.00% 2 2 3 3 1 3.84% ‐56.40% 2 3 3 1 2 78.64% 17.56% 3 3 1 2 2 33.38% 70.80% 3 1 2 2 3 -45.64% 1.00%
46 1 2 3 1 1 59.74% ‐17.00% 2 3 1 1 1 78.08% ‐28.20% 3 1 1 1 2 -9.22% 8.78% 1 1 1 2 3 -55.42% 35.40% 1 1 2 3 1 -40.84% 0.50%
47 1 2 3 1 2 42.74% ‐17.00% 2 3 1 2 1 49.88% ‐28.20% 3 1 2 1 2 -0.44% 8.78% 1 2 1 2 3 -20.02% 35.40% 2 1 2 3 1 -40.34% 0.50%
48 1 2 3 1 3 25.74% ‐34.00% 2 3 1 3 1 21.68% ‐56.40% 3 1 3 1 2 8.34% 17.56% 1 3 1 2 3 15.38% 70.80% 3 1 2 3 1 -39.84% 1.00%
49 1 2 3 2 1 31.54% ‐17.00% 2 3 2 1 1 86.86% ‐28.20% 3 2 1 1 2 26.18% 8.78% 2 1 1 2 3 -54.92% 35.40% 1 1 2 3 2 -57.84% 0.50%
50 1 2 3 2 2 14.54% ‐17.00% 2 3 2 2 1 58.66% ‐28.20% 3 2 2 1 2 34.96% 8.78% 2 2 1 2 3 -19.52% 35.40% 2 1 2 3 2 -57.34% 0.50%
51 1 2 3 2 3 -2.46% ‐34.00% 2 3 2 3 1 30.46% ‐56.40% 3 2 3 1 2 43.74% 17.56% 2 3 1 2 3 15.88% 70.80% 3 1 2 3 2 -56.84% 1.00%
52 1 2 3 3 1 3.34% ‐17.00% 2 3 3 1 1 95.64% ‐28.20% 3 3 1 1 2 61.58% 8.78% 3 1 1 2 3 -54.42% 35.40% 1 1 2 3 3 -74.84% 0.50%
53 1 2 3 3 2 -13.66% ‐17.00% 2 3 3 2 1 67.44% ‐28.20% 3 3 2 1 2 70.36% 8.78% 3 2 1 2 3 -19.02% 35.40% 2 1 2 3 3 -74.34% 0.50%
54 1 2 3 3 3 -30.66% ‐34.00% 2 3 3 3 1 39.24% ‐56.40% 3 3 3 1 2 79.14% 17.56% 3 3 1 2 3 16.38% 70.80% 3 1 2 3 3 -73.84% 1.00%
55 1 3 1 1 1 77.58% ‐17.00% 3 1 1 1 1 7.78% ‐28.20% 1 1 1 1 3 -27.22% 8.78% 1 1 1 3 1 -49.62% 35.40% 1 1 3 1 1 24.34% 0.50%
56 1 3 1 1 2 60.58% ‐17.00% 3 1 1 2 1 -20.42% ‐28.20% 1 1 2 1 3 -18.44% 8.78% 1 2 1 3 1 -14.22% 35.40% 2 1 3 1 1 24.84% 0.50%
57 1 3 1 1 3 43.58% ‐34.00% 3 1 1 3 1 -48.62% ‐56.40% 1 1 3 1 3 -9.66% 17.56% 1 3 1 3 1 21.18% 70.80% 3 1 3 1 1 25.34% 1.00%
379


58 1 3 1 2 1 49.38% ‐17.00% 3 1 2 1 1 16.56% ‐28.20% 1 2 1 1 3 8.18% 8.78% 2 1 1 3 1 -49.12% 35.40% 1 1 3 1 2 7.34% 0.50%
59 1 3 1 2 2 32.38% ‐17.00% 3 1 2 2 1 -11.64% ‐28.20% 1 2 2 1 3 16.96% 8.78% 2 2 1 3 1 -13.72% 35.40% 2 1 3 1 2 7.84% 0.50%
60 1 3 1 2 3 15.38% ‐34.00% 3 1 2 3 1 -39.84% ‐56.40% 1 2 3 1 3 25.74% 17.56% 2 3 1 3 1 21.68% 70.80% 3 1 3 1 2 8.34% 1.00%
61 1 3 1 3 1 21.18% ‐17.00% 3 1 3 1 1 25.34% ‐28.20% 1 3 1 1 3 43.58% 8.78% 3 1 1 3 1 -48.62% 35.40% 1 1 3 1 3 -9.66% 0.50%
62 1 3 1 3 2 4.18% ‐17.00% 3 1 3 2 1 -2.86% ‐28.20% 1 3 2 1 3 52.36% 8.78% 3 2 1 3 1 -13.22% 35.40% 2 1 3 1 3 -9.16% 0.50%
63 1 3 1 3 3 -12.82% ‐34.00% 3 1 3 3 1 -31.06% ‐56.40% 1 3 3 1 3 61.14% 17.56% 3 3 1 3 1 22.18% 70.80% 3 1 3 1 3 -8.66% 1.00%
64 1 3 2 1 1 86.36% ‐17.00% 3 2 1 1 1 43.18% ‐28.20% 2 1 1 1 3 -26.72% 8.78% 1 1 1 3 2 -66.62% 35.40% 1 1 3 2 1 -3.86% 0.50%
65 1 3 2 1 2 69.36% ‐17.00% 3 2 1 2 1 14.98% ‐28.20% 2 1 2 1 3 -17.94% 8.78% 1 2 1 3 2 -31.22% 35.40% 2 1 3 2 1 -3.36% 0.50%
66 1 3 2 1 3 52.36% ‐34.00% 3 2 1 3 1 -13.22% ‐56.40% 2 1 3 1 3 -9.16% 17.56% 1 3 1 3 2 4.18% 70.80% 3 1 3 2 1 -2.86% 1.00%
67 1 3 2 2 1 58.16% ‐17.00% 3 2 2 1 1 51.96% ‐28.20% 2 2 1 1 3 8.68% 8.78% 2 1 1 3 2 -66.12% 35.40% 1 1 3 2 2 -20.86% 0.50%
68 1 3 2 2 2 41.16% ‐17.00% 3 2 2 2 1 23.76% ‐28.20% 2 2 2 1 3 17.46% 8.78% 2 2 1 3 2 -30.72% 35.40% 2 1 3 2 2 -20.36% 0.50%
69 1 3 2 2 3 24.16% ‐34.00% 3 2 2 3 1 -4.44% ‐56.40% 2 2 3 1 3 26.24% 17.56% 2 3 1 3 2 4.68% 70.80% 3 1 3 2 2 -19.86% 1.00%
70 1 3 2 3 1 29.96% ‐17.00% 3 2 3 1 1 60.74% ‐28.20% 2 3 1 1 3 44.08% 8.78% 3 1 1 3 2 -65.62% 35.40% 1 1 3 2 3 -37.86% 0.50%
71 1 3 2 3 2 12.96% ‐17.00% 3 2 3 2 1 32.54% ‐28.20% 2 3 2 1 3 52.86% 8.78% 3 2 1 3 2 -30.22% 35.40% 2 1 3 2 3 -37.36% 0.50%
72 1 3 2 3 3 -4.04% ‐34.00% 3 2 3 3 1 4.34% ‐56.40% 2 3 3 1 3 61.64% 17.56% 3 3 1 3 2 5.18% 70.80% 3 1 3 2 3 -36.86% 1.00%
73 1 3 3 1 1 95.14% ‐17.00% 3 3 1 1 1 78.58% ‐28.20% 3 1 1 1 3 -26.22% 8.78% 1 1 1 3 3 -83.62% 35.40% 1 1 3 3 1 -32.06% 0.50%
74 1 3 3 1 2 78.14% ‐17.00% 3 3 1 2 1 50.38% ‐28.20% 3 1 2 1 3 -17.44% 8.78% 1 2 1 3 3 -48.22% 35.40% 2 1 3 3 1 -31.56% 0.50%
75 1 3 3 1 3 61.14% ‐34.00% 3 3 1 3 1 22.18% ‐56.40% 3 1 3 1 3 -8.66% 17.56% 1 3 1 3 3 -12.82% 70.80% 3 1 3 3 1 -31.06% 1.00%
76 1 3 3 2 1 66.94% ‐17.00% 3 3 2 1 1 87.36% ‐28.20% 3 2 1 1 3 9.18% 8.78% 2 1 1 3 3 -83.12% 35.40% 1 1 3 3 2 -49.06% 0.50%
77 1 3 3 2 2 49.94% ‐17.00% 3 3 2 2 1 59.16% ‐28.20% 3 2 2 1 3 17.96% 8.78% 2 2 1 3 3 -47.72% 35.40% 2 1 3 3 2 -48.56% 0.50%
78 1 3 3 2 3 32 94%
32.94% ‐34 00%
‐34.00% 3 3 2 3 1 30 96%
30.96% ‐56 40%
‐56.40% 3 2 3 1 3 26 74%
26.74% 17 56%
17.56% 2 3 1 3 3 -12 32%
-12.32% 70 80%
70.80% 3 1 3 3 2 -48 06%
-48.06% 1 00%
1.00%
79 1 3 3 3 1 38.74% ‐17.00% 3 3 3 1 1 96.14% ‐28.20% 3 3 1 1 3 44.58% 8.78% 3 1 1 3 3 -82.62% 35.40% 1 1 3 3 3 -66.06% 0.50%
80 1 3 3 3 2 21.74% ‐17.00% 3 3 3 2 1 67.94% ‐28.20% 3 3 2 1 3 53.36% 8.78% 3 2 1 3 3 -47.22% 35.40% 2 1 3 3 3 -65.56% 0.50%
81 1 3 3 3 3 4.74% ‐34.00% 3 3 3 3 1 39.74% ‐56.40% 3 3 3 1 3 62.14% 17.56% 3 3 1 3 3 -11.82% 70.80% 3 1 3 3 3 -65.06% 1.00%
82 2 1 1 1 1 7.28% ‐17.00% 1 1 1 1 2 -10.22% ‐28.20% 1 1 1 2 1 -21.42% 8.78% 1 1 2 1 1 15.56% 35.40% 1 2 1 1 1 42.18% 0.50%
83 2 1 1 1 2 -9.72% ‐17.00% 1 1 1 2 2 -38.42% ‐28.20% 1 1 2 2 1 -12.64% 8.78% 1 2 2 1 1 50.96% 35.40% 2 2 1 1 1 42.68% 0.50%
84 2 1 1 1 3 -26.72% ‐34.00% 1 1 1 3 2 -66.62% ‐56.40% 1 1 3 2 1 -3.86% 17.56% 1 3 2 1 1 86.36% 70.80% 3 2 1 1 1 43.18% 1.00%
85 2 1 1 2 1 -20.92% ‐17.00% 1 1 2 1 2 -1.44% ‐28.20% 1 2 1 2 1 13.98% 8.78% 2 1 2 1 1 16.06% 35.40% 1 2 1 1 2 25.18% 0.50%
86 2 1 1 2 2 -37.92% ‐17.00% 1 1 2 2 2 -29.64% ‐28.20% 1 2 2 2 1 22.76% 8.78% 2 2 2 1 1 51.46% 35.40% 2 2 1 1 2 25.68% 0.50%
87 2 1 1 2 3 -54.92% ‐34.00% 1 1 2 3 2 -57.84% ‐56.40% 1 2 3 2 1 31.54% 17.56% 2 3 2 1 1 86.86% 70.80% 3 2 1 1 2 26.18% 1.00%
88 2 1 1 3 1 -49.12% ‐17.00% 1 1 3 1 2 7.34% ‐28.20% 1 3 1 2 1 49.38% 8.78% 3 1 2 1 1 16.56% 35.40% 1 2 1 1 3 8.18% 0.50%
89 2 1 1 3 2 -66.12% ‐17.00% 1 1 3 2 2 -20.86% ‐28.20% 1 3 2 2 1 58.16% 8.78% 3 2 2 1 1 51.96% 35.40% 2 2 1 1 3 8.68% 0.50%
90 2 1 1 3 3 -83.12% ‐34.00% 1 1 3 3 2 -49.06% ‐56.40% 1 3 3 2 1 66.94% 17.56% 3 3 2 1 1 87.36% 70.80% 3 2 1 1 3 9.18% 1.00%
91 2 1 2 1 1 16.06% ‐17.00% 1 2 1 1 2 25.18% ‐28.20% 2 1 1 2 1 -20.92% 8.78% 1 1 2 1 2 -1.44% 35.40% 1 2 1 2 1 13.98% 0.50%
92 2 1 2 1 2 -0.94% ‐17.00% 1 2 1 2 2 -3.02% ‐28.20% 2 1 2 2 1 -12.14% 8.78% 1 2 2 1 2 33.96% 35.40% 2 2 1 2 1 14.48% 0.50%
93 2 1 2 1 3 -17.94% ‐34.00% 1 2 1 3 2 -31.22% ‐56.40% 2 1 3 2 1 -3.36% 17.56% 1 3 2 1 2 69.36% 70.80% 3 2 1 2 1 14.98% 1.00%
94 2 1 2 2 1 -12.14% ‐17.00% 1 2 2 1 2 33.96% ‐28.20% 2 2 1 2 1 14.48% 8.78% 2 1 2 1 2 -0.94% 35.40% 1 2 1 2 2 -3.02% 0.50%
95 2 1 2 2 2 -29.14% ‐17.00% 1 2 2 2 2 5.76% ‐28.20% 2 2 2 2 1 23.26% 8.78% 2 2 2 1 2 34.46% 35.40% 2 2 1 2 2 -2.52% 0.50%
96 2 1 2 2 3 -46.14% ‐34.00% 1 2 2 3 2 -22.44% ‐56.40% 2 2 3 2 1 32.04% 17.56% 2 3 2 1 2 69.86% 70.80% 3 2 1 2 2 -2.02% 1.00%
97 2 1 2 3 1 -40.34% ‐17.00% 1 2 3 1 2 42.74% ‐28.20% 2 3 1 2 1 49.88% 8.78% 3 1 2 1 2 -0.44% 35.40% 1 2 1 2 3 -20.02% 0.50%
98 2 1 2 3 2 -57.34% ‐17.00% 1 2 3 2 2 14.54% ‐28.20% 2 3 2 2 1 58.66% 8.78% 3 2 2 1 2 34.96% 35.40% 2 2 1 2 3 -19.52% 0.50%
99 2 1 2 3 3 -74.34% ‐34.00% 1 2 3 3 2 -13.66% ‐56.40% 2 3 3 2 1 67.44% 17.56% 3 3 2 1 2 70.36% 70.80% 3 2 1 2 3 -19.02% 1.00%
100 2 1 3 1 1 24.84% ‐17.00% 1 3 1 1 2 60.58% ‐28.20% 3 1 1 2 1 -20.42% 8.78% 1 1 2 1 3 -18.44% 35.40% 1 2 1 3 1 -14.22% 0.50%
101 2 1 3 1 2 7.84% ‐17.00% 1 3 1 2 2 32.38% ‐28.20% 3 1 2 2 1 -11.64% 8.78% 1 2 2 1 3 16.96% 35.40% 2 2 1 3 1 -13.72% 0.50%
102 2 1 3 1 3 -9.16% ‐34.00% 1 3 1 3 2 4.18% ‐56.40% 3 1 3 2 1 -2.86% 17.56% 1 3 2 1 3 52.36% 70.80% 3 2 1 3 1 -13.22% 1.00%
103 2 1 3 2 1 -3.36% ‐17.00% 1 3 2 1 2 69.36% ‐28.20% 3 2 1 2 1 14.98% 8.78% 2 1 2 1 3 -17.94% 35.40% 1 2 1 3 2 -31.22% 0.50%
104 2 1 3 2 2 -20.36% ‐17.00% 1 3 2 2 2 41.16% ‐28.20% 3 2 2 2 1 23.76% 8.78% 2 2 2 1 3 17.46% 35.40% 2 2 1 3 2 -30.72% 0.50%
105 2 1 3 2 3 -37.36% ‐34.00% 1 3 2 3 2 12.96% ‐56.40% 3 2 3 2 1 32.54% 17.56% 2 3 2 1 3 52.86% 70.80% 3 2 1 3 2 -30.22% 1.00%
106 2 1 3 3 1 -31.56% ‐17.00% 1 3 3 1 2 78.14% ‐28.20% 3 3 1 2 1 50.38% 8.78% 3 1 2 1 3 -17.44% 35.40% 1 2 1 3 3 -48.22% 0.50%
107 2 1 3 3 2 -48.56% ‐17.00% 1 3 3 2 2 49.94% ‐28.20% 3 3 2 2 1 59.16% 8.78% 3 2 2 1 3 17.96% 35.40% 2 2 1 3 3 -47.72% 0.50%
108 2 1 3 3 3 -65.56% ‐34.00% 1 3 3 3 2 21.74% ‐56.40% 3 3 3 2 1 67.94% 17.56% 3 3 2 1 3 53.36% 70.80% 3 2 1 3 3 -47.22% 1.00%
109 2 2 1 1 1 42.68% ‐17.00% 2 1 1 1 2 -9.72% ‐28.20% 1 1 1 2 2 -38.42% 8.78% 1 1 2 2 1 -12.64% 35.40% 1 2 2 1 1 50.96% 0.50%
110 2 2 1 1 2 25.68% ‐17.00% 2 1 1 2 2 -37.92% ‐28.20% 1 1 2 2 2 -29.64% 8.78% 1 2 2 2 1 22.76% 35.40% 2 2 2 1 1 51.46% 0.50%
111 2 2 1 1 3 8.68% ‐34.00% 2 1 1 3 2 -66.12% ‐56.40% 1 1 3 2 2 -20.86% 17.56% 1 3 2 2 1 58.16% 70.80% 3 2 2 1 1 51.96% 1.00%
112 2 2 1 2 1 14.48% ‐17.00% 2 1 2 1 2 -0.94% ‐28.20% 1 2 1 2 2 -3.02% 8.78% 2 1 2 2 1 -12.14% 35.40% 1 2 2 1 2 33.96% 0.50%
113 2 2 1 2 2 -2.52% ‐17.00% 2 1 2 2 2 -29.14% ‐28.20% 1 2 2 2 2 5.76% 8.78% 2 2 2 2 1 23.26% 35.40% 2 2 2 1 2 34.46% 0.50%
114 2 2 1 2 3 -19.52% ‐34.00% 2 1 2 3 2 -57.34% ‐56.40% 1 2 3 2 2 14.54% 17.56% 2 3 2 2 1 58.66% 70.80% 3 2 2 1 2 34.96% 1.00%
380


115 2 2 1 3 1 -13.72% ‐17.00% 2 1 3 1 2 7.84% ‐28.20% 1 3 1 2 2 32.38% 8.78% 3 1 2 2 1 -11.64% 35.40% 1 2 2 1 3 16.96% 0.50%
116 2 2 1 3 2 -30.72% ‐17.00% 2 1 3 2 2 -20.36% ‐28.20% 1 3 2 2 2 41.16% 8.78% 3 2 2 2 1 23.76% 35.40% 2 2 2 1 3 17.46% 0.50%
117 2 2 1 3 3 -47.72% ‐34.00% 2 1 3 3 2 -48.56% ‐56.40% 1 3 3 2 2 49.94% 17.56% 3 3 2 2 1 59.16% 70.80% 3 2 2 1 3 17.96% 1.00%
118 2 2 2 1 1 51.46% ‐17.00% 2 2 1 1 2 25.68% ‐28.20% 2 1 1 2 2 -37.92% 8.78% 1 1 2 2 2 -29.64% 35.40% 1 2 2 2 1 22.76% 0.50%
119 2 2 2 1 2 34.46% ‐17.00% 2 2 1 2 2 -2.52% ‐28.20% 2 1 2 2 2 -29.14% 8.78% 1 2 2 2 2 5.76% 35.40% 2 2 2 2 1 23.26% 0.50%
120 2 2 2 1 3 17.46% ‐34.00% 2 2 1 3 2 -30.72% ‐56.40% 2 1 3 2 2 -20.36% 17.56% 1 3 2 2 2 41.16% 70.80% 3 2 2 2 1 23.76% 1.00%
121 2 2 2 2 1 23.26% ‐17.00% 2 2 2 1 2 34.46% ‐28.20% 2 2 1 2 2 -2.52% 8.78% 2 1 2 2 2 -29.14% 35.40% 1 2 2 2 2 5.76% 0.50%
122 2 2 2 2 2 6.26% ‐17.00% 2 2 2 2 2 6.26% ‐28.20% 2 2 2 2 2 6.26% 8.78% 2 2 2 2 2 6.26% 35.40% 2 2 2 2 2 6.26% 0.50%
123 2 2 2 2 3 -10.74% ‐34.00% 2 2 2 3 2 -21.94% ‐56.40% 2 2 3 2 2 15.04% 17.56% 2 3 2 2 2 41.66% 70.80% 3 2 2 2 2 6.76% 1.00%
124 2 2 2 3 1 -4.94% ‐17.00% 2 2 3 1 2 43.24% ‐28.20% 2 3 1 2 2 32.88% 8.78% 3 1 2 2 2 -28.64% 35.40% 1 2 2 2 3 -11.24% 0.50%
125 2 2 2 3 2 -21.94% ‐17.00% 2 2 3 2 2 15.04% ‐28.20% 2 3 2 2 2 41.66% 8.78% 3 2 2 2 2 6.76% 35.40% 2 2 2 2 3 -10.74% 0.50%
126 2 2 2 3 3 -38.94% ‐34.00% 2 2 3 3 2 -13.16% ‐56.40% 2 3 3 2 2 50.44% 17.56% 3 3 2 2 2 42.16% 70.80% 3 2 2 2 3 -10.24% 1.00%
127 2 2 3 1 1 60.24% ‐17.00% 2 3 1 1 2 61.08% ‐28.20% 3 1 1 2 2 -37.42% 8.78% 1 1 2 2 3 -46.64% 35.40% 1 2 2 3 1 -5.44% 0.50%
128 2 2 3 1 2 43.24% ‐17.00% 2 3 1 2 2 32.88% ‐28.20% 3 1 2 2 2 -28.64% 8.78% 1 2 2 2 3 -11.24% 35.40% 2 2 2 3 1 -4.94% 0.50%
129 2 2 3 1 3 26.24% ‐34.00% 2 3 1 3 2 4.68% ‐56.40% 3 1 3 2 2 -19.86% 17.56% 1 3 2 2 3 24.16% 70.80% 3 2 2 3 1 -4.44% 1.00%
130 2 2 3 2 1 32.04% ‐17.00% 2 3 2 1 2 69.86% ‐28.20% 3 2 1 2 2 -2.02% 8.78% 2 1 2 2 3 -46.14% 35.40% 1 2 2 3 2 -22.44% 0.50%
131 2 2 3 2 2 15.04% ‐17.00% 2 3 2 2 2 41.66% ‐28.20% 3 2 2 2 2 6.76% 8.78% 2 2 2 2 3 -10.74% 35.40% 2 2 2 3 2 -21.94% 0.50%
132 2 2 3 2 3 -1.96% ‐34.00% 2 3 2 3 2 13.46% ‐56.40% 3 2 3 2 2 15.54% 17.56% 2 3 2 2 3 24.66% 70.80% 3 2 2 3 2 -21.44% 1.00%
133 2 2 3 3 1 3.84% ‐17.00% 2 3 3 1 2 78.64% ‐28.20% 3 3 1 2 2 33.38% 8.78% 3 1 2 2 3 -45.64% 35.40% 1 2 2 3 3 -39.44% 0.50%
134 2 2 3 3 2 -13.16% ‐17.00% 2 3 3 2 2 50.44% ‐28.20% 3 3 2 2 2 42.16% 8.78% 3 2 2 2 3 -10.24% 35.40% 2 2 2 3 3 -38.94% 0.50%
135 2 2 3 3 3 -30 16%
-30.16% ‐34 00%
‐34.00% 2 3 3 3 2 22 24%
22.24% ‐56 40%
‐56.40% 3 3 3 2 2 50 94%
50.94% 17 56%
17.56% 3 3 2 2 3 25 16%
25.16% 70 80%
70.80% 3 2 2 3 3 -38 44%
-38.44% 1 00%
1.00%
136 2 3 1 1 1 78.08% ‐17.00% 3 1 1 1 2 -9.22% ‐28.20% 1 1 1 2 3 -55.42% 8.78% 1 1 2 3 1 -40.84% 35.40% 1 2 3 1 1 59.74% 0.50%
137 2 3 1 1 2 61.08% ‐17.00% 3 1 1 2 2 -37.42% ‐28.20% 1 1 2 2 3 -46.64% 8.78% 1 2 2 3 1 -5.44% 35.40% 2 2 3 1 1 60.24% 0.50%
138 2 3 1 1 3 44.08% ‐34.00% 3 1 1 3 2 -65.62% ‐56.40% 1 1 3 2 3 -37.86% 17.56% 1 3 2 3 1 29.96% 70.80% 3 2 3 1 1 60.74% 1.00%
139 2 3 1 2 1 49.88% ‐17.00% 3 1 2 1 2 -0.44% ‐28.20% 1 2 1 2 3 -20.02% 8.78% 2 1 2 3 1 -40.34% 35.40% 1 2 3 1 2 42.74% 0.50%
140 2 3 1 2 2 32.88% ‐17.00% 3 1 2 2 2 -28.64% ‐28.20% 1 2 2 2 3 -11.24% 8.78% 2 2 2 3 1 -4.94% 35.40% 2 2 3 1 2 43.24% 0.50%
141 2 3 1 2 3 15.88% ‐34.00% 3 1 2 3 2 -56.84% ‐56.40% 1 2 3 2 3 -2.46% 17.56% 2 3 2 3 1 30.46% 70.80% 3 2 3 1 2 43.74% 1.00%
142 2 3 1 3 1 21.68% ‐17.00% 3 1 3 1 2 8.34% ‐28.20% 1 3 1 2 3 15.38% 8.78% 3 1 2 3 1 -39.84% 35.40% 1 2 3 1 3 25.74% 0.50%
143 2 3 1 3 2 4.68% ‐17.00% 3 1 3 2 2 -19.86% ‐28.20% 1 3 2 2 3 24.16% 8.78% 3 2 2 3 1 -4.44% 35.40% 2 2 3 1 3 26.24% 0.50%
144 2 3 1 3 3 -12.32% ‐34.00% 3 1 3 3 2 -48.06% ‐56.40% 1 3 3 2 3 32.94% 17.56% 3 3 2 3 1 30.96% 70.80% 3 2 3 1 3 26.74% 1.00%
145 2 3 2 1 1 86.86% ‐17.00% 3 2 1 1 2 26.18% ‐28.20% 2 1 1 2 3 -54.92% 8.78% 1 1 2 3 2 -57.84% 35.40% 1 2 3 2 1 31.54% 0.50%
146 2 3 2 1 2 69.86% ‐17.00% 3 2 1 2 2 -2.02% ‐28.20% 2 1 2 2 3 -46.14% 8.78% 1 2 2 3 2 -22.44% 35.40% 2 2 3 2 1 32.04% 0.50%
147 2 3 2 1 3 52.86% ‐34.00% 3 2 1 3 2 -30.22% ‐56.40% 2 1 3 2 3 -37.36% 17.56% 1 3 2 3 2 12.96% 70.80% 3 2 3 2 1 32.54% 1.00%
148 2 3 2 2 1 58.66% ‐17.00% 3 2 2 1 2 34.96% ‐28.20% 2 2 1 2 3 -19.52% 8.78% 2 1 2 3 2 -57.34% 35.40% 1 2 3 2 2 14.54% 0.50%
149 2 3 2 2 2 41.66% ‐17.00% 3 2 2 2 2 6.76% ‐28.20% 2 2 2 2 3 -10.74% 8.78% 2 2 2 3 2 -21.94% 35.40% 2 2 3 2 2 15.04% 0.50%
150 2 3 2 2 3 24.66% ‐34.00% 3 2 2 3 2 -21.44% ‐56.40% 2 2 3 2 3 -1.96% 17.56% 2 3 2 3 2 13.46% 70.80% 3 2 3 2 2 15.54% 1.00%
151 2 3 2 3 1 30.46% ‐17.00% 3 2 3 1 2 43.74% ‐28.20% 2 3 1 2 3 15.88% 8.78% 3 1 2 3 2 -56.84% 35.40% 1 2 3 2 3 -2.46% 0.50%
152 2 3 2 3 2 13.46% ‐17.00% 3 2 3 2 2 15.54% ‐28.20% 2 3 2 2 3 24.66% 8.78% 3 2 2 3 2 -21.44% 35.40% 2 2 3 2 3 -1.96% 0.50%
153 2 3 2 3 3 -3.54% ‐34.00% 3 2 3 3 2 -12.66% ‐56.40% 2 3 3 2 3 33.44% 17.56% 3 3 2 3 2 13.96% 70.80% 3 2 3 2 3 -1.46% 1.00%
154 2 3 3 1 1 95.64% ‐17.00% 3 3 1 1 2 61.58% ‐28.20% 3 1 1 2 3 -54.42% 8.78% 1 1 2 3 3 -74.84% 35.40% 1 2 3 3 1 3.34% 0.50%
155 2 3 3 1 2 78.64% ‐17.00% 3 3 1 2 2 33.38% ‐28.20% 3 1 2 2 3 -45.64% 8.78% 1 2 2 3 3 -39.44% 35.40% 2 2 3 3 1 3.84% 0.50%
156 2 3 3 1 3 61.64% ‐34.00% 3 3 1 3 2 5.18% ‐56.40% 3 1 3 2 3 -36.86% 17.56% 1 3 2 3 3 -4.04% 70.80% 3 2 3 3 1 4.34% 1.00%
157 2 3 3 2 1 67.44% ‐17.00% 3 3 2 1 2 70.36% ‐28.20% 3 2 1 2 3 -19.02% 8.78% 2 1 2 3 3 -74.34% 35.40% 1 2 3 3 2 -13.66% 0.50%
158 2 3 3 2 2 50.44% ‐17.00% 3 3 2 2 2 42.16% ‐28.20% 3 2 2 2 3 -10.24% 8.78% 2 2 2 3 3 -38.94% 35.40% 2 2 3 3 2 -13.16% 0.50%
159 2 3 3 2 3 33.44% ‐34.00% 3 3 2 3 2 13.96% ‐56.40% 3 2 3 2 3 -1.46% 17.56% 2 3 2 3 3 -3.54% 70.80% 3 2 3 3 2 -12.66% 1.00%
160 2 3 3 3 1 39.24% ‐17.00% 3 3 3 1 2 79.14% ‐28.20% 3 3 1 2 3 16.38% 8.78% 3 1 2 3 3 -73.84% 35.40% 1 2 3 3 3 -30.66% 0.50%
161 2 3 3 3 2 22.24% ‐17.00% 3 3 3 2 2 50.94% ‐28.20% 3 3 2 2 3 25.16% 8.78% 3 2 2 3 3 -38.44% 35.40% 2 2 3 3 3 -30.16% 0.50%
162 2 3 3 3 3 5.24% ‐34.00% 3 3 3 3 2 22.74% ‐56.40% 3 3 3 2 3 33.94% 17.56% 3 3 2 3 3 -3.04% 70.80% 3 2 3 3 3 -29.66% 1.00%
163 3 1 1 1 1 7.78% ‐17.00% 1 1 1 1 3 -27.22% ‐28.20% 1 1 1 3 1 -49.62% 8.78% 1 1 3 1 1 24.34% 35.40% 1 3 1 1 1 77.58% 0.50%
164 3 1 1 1 2 -9.22% ‐17.00% 1 1 1 2 3 -55.42% ‐28.20% 1 1 2 3 1 -40.84% 8.78% 1 2 3 1 1 59.74% 35.40% 2 3 1 1 1 78.08% 0.50%
165 3 1 1 1 3 -26.22% ‐34.00% 1 1 1 3 3 -83.62% ‐56.40% 1 1 3 3 1 -32.06% 17.56% 1 3 3 1 1 95.14% 70.80% 3 3 1 1 1 78.58% 1.00%
166 3 1 1 2 1 -20.42% ‐17.00% 1 1 2 1 3 -18.44% ‐28.20% 1 2 1 3 1 -14.22% 8.78% 2 1 3 1 1 24.84% 35.40% 1 3 1 1 2 60.58% 0.50%
167 3 1 1 2 2 -37.42% ‐17.00% 1 1 2 2 3 -46.64% ‐28.20% 1 2 2 3 1 -5.44% 8.78% 2 2 3 1 1 60.24% 35.40% 2 3 1 1 2 61.08% 0.50%
168 3 1 1 2 3 -54.42% ‐34.00% 1 1 2 3 3 -74.84% ‐56.40% 1 2 3 3 1 3.34% 17.56% 2 3 3 1 1 95.64% 70.80% 3 3 1 1 2 61.58% 1.00%
169 3 1 1 3 1 -48.62% ‐17.00% 1 1 3 1 3 -9.66% ‐28.20% 1 3 1 3 1 21.18% 8.78% 3 1 3 1 1 25.34% 35.40% 1 3 1 1 3 43.58% 0.50%
170 3 1 1 3 2 -65.62% ‐17.00% 1 1 3 2 3 -37.86% ‐28.20% 1 3 2 3 1 29.96% 8.78% 3 2 3 1 1 60.74% 35.40% 2 3 1 1 3 44.08% 0.50%
171 3 1 1 3 3 -82.62% ‐34.00% 1 1 3 3 3 -66.06% ‐56.40% 1 3 3 3 1 38.74% 17.56% 3 3 3 1 1 96.14% 70.80% 3 3 1 1 3 44.58% 1.00%
381


172 3 1 2 1 1 16.56% ‐17.00% 1 2 1 1 3 8.18% ‐28.20% 2 1 1 3 1 -49.12% 8.78% 1 1 3 1 2 7.34% 35.40% 1 3 1 2 1 49.38% 0.50%
173 3 1 2 1 2 -0.44% ‐17.00% 1 2 1 2 3 -20.02% ‐28.20% 2 1 2 3 1 -40.34% 8.78% 1 2 3 1 2 42.74% 35.40% 2 3 1 2 1 49.88% 0.50%
174 3 1 2 1 3 -17.44% ‐34.00% 1 2 1 3 3 -48.22% ‐56.40% 2 1 3 3 1 -31.56% 17.56% 1 3 3 1 2 78.14% 70.80% 3 3 1 2 1 50.38% 1.00%
175 3 1 2 2 1 -11.64% ‐17.00% 1 2 2 1 3 16.96% ‐28.20% 2 2 1 3 1 -13.72% 8.78% 2 1 3 1 2 7.84% 35.40% 1 3 1 2 2 32.38% 0.50%
176 3 1 2 2 2 -28.64% ‐17.00% 1 2 2 2 3 -11.24% ‐28.20% 2 2 2 3 1 -4.94% 8.78% 2 2 3 1 2 43.24% 35.40% 2 3 1 2 2 32.88% 0.50%
177 3 1 2 2 3 -45.64% ‐34.00% 1 2 2 3 3 -39.44% ‐56.40% 2 2 3 3 1 3.84% 17.56% 2 3 3 1 2 78.64% 70.80% 3 3 1 2 2 33.38% 1.00%
178 3 1 2 3 1 -39.84% ‐17.00% 1 2 3 1 3 25.74% ‐28.20% 2 3 1 3 1 21.68% 8.78% 3 1 3 1 2 8.34% 35.40% 1 3 1 2 3 15.38% 0.50%
179 3 1 2 3 2 -56.84% ‐17.00% 1 2 3 2 3 -2.46% ‐28.20% 2 3 2 3 1 30.46% 8.78% 3 2 3 1 2 43.74% 35.40% 2 3 1 2 3 15.88% 0.50%
180 3 1 2 3 3 -73.84% ‐34.00% 1 2 3 3 3 -30.66% ‐56.40% 2 3 3 3 1 39.24% 17.56% 3 3 3 1 2 79.14% 70.80% 3 3 1 2 3 16.38% 1.00%
181 3 1 3 1 1 25.34% ‐17.00% 1 3 1 1 3 43.58% ‐28.20% 3 1 1 3 1 -48.62% 8.78% 1 1 3 1 3 -9.66% 35.40% 1 3 1 3 1 21.18% 0.50%
182 3 1 3 1 2 8.34% ‐17.00% 1 3 1 2 3 15.38% ‐28.20% 3 1 2 3 1 -39.84% 8.78% 1 2 3 1 3 25.74% 35.40% 2 3 1 3 1 21.68% 0.50%
183 3 1 3 1 3 -8.66% ‐34.00% 1 3 1 3 3 -12.82% ‐56.40% 3 1 3 3 1 -31.06% 17.56% 1 3 3 1 3 61.14% 70.80% 3 3 1 3 1 22.18% 1.00%
184 3 1 3 2 1 -2.86% ‐17.00% 1 3 2 1 3 52.36% ‐28.20% 3 2 1 3 1 -13.22% 8.78% 2 1 3 1 3 -9.16% 35.40% 1 3 1 3 2 4.18% 0.50%
185 3 1 3 2 2 -19.86% ‐17.00% 1 3 2 2 3 24.16% ‐28.20% 3 2 2 3 1 -4.44% 8.78% 2 2 3 1 3 26.24% 35.40% 2 3 1 3 2 4.68% 0.50%
186 3 1 3 2 3 -36.86% ‐34.00% 1 3 2 3 3 -4.04% ‐56.40% 3 2 3 3 1 4.34% 17.56% 2 3 3 1 3 61.64% 70.80% 3 3 1 3 2 5.18% 1.00%
187 3 1 3 3 1 -31.06% ‐17.00% 1 3 3 1 3 61.14% ‐28.20% 3 3 1 3 1 22.18% 8.78% 3 1 3 1 3 -8.66% 35.40% 1 3 1 3 3 -12.82% 0.50%
188 3 1 3 3 2 -48.06% ‐17.00% 1 3 3 2 3 32.94% ‐28.20% 3 3 2 3 1 30.96% 8.78% 3 2 3 1 3 26.74% 35.40% 2 3 1 3 3 -12.32% 0.50%
189 3 1 3 3 3 -65.06% ‐34.00% 1 3 3 3 3 4.74% ‐56.40% 3 3 3 3 1 39.74% 17.56% 3 3 3 1 3 62.14% 70.80% 3 3 1 3 3 -11.82% 1.00%
190 3 2 1 1 1 43.18% ‐17.00% 2 1 1 1 3 -26.72% ‐28.20% 1 1 1 3 2 -66.62% 8.78% 1 1 3 2 1 -3.86% 35.40% 1 3 2 1 1 86.36% 0.50%
191 3 2 1 1 2 26.18% ‐17.00% 2 1 1 2 3 -54.92% ‐28.20% 1 1 2 3 2 -57.84% 8.78% 1 2 3 2 1 31.54% 35.40% 2 3 2 1 1 86.86% 0.50%
192 3 2 1 1 3 9 18%
9.18% ‐34 00%
‐34.00% 2 1 1 3 3 -83 12%
-83.12% ‐56 40%
‐56.40% 1 1 3 3 2 -49 06%
-49.06% 17 56%
17.56% 1 3 3 2 1 66 94%
66.94% 70 80%
70.80% 3 3 2 1 1 87 36%
87.36% 1 00%
1.00%
193 3 2 1 2 1 14.98% ‐17.00% 2 1 2 1 3 -17.94% ‐28.20% 1 2 1 3 2 -31.22% 8.78% 2 1 3 2 1 -3.36% 35.40% 1 3 2 1 2 69.36% 0.50%
194 3 2 1 2 2 -2.02% ‐17.00% 2 1 2 2 3 -46.14% ‐28.20% 1 2 2 3 2 -22.44% 8.78% 2 2 3 2 1 32.04% 35.40% 2 3 2 1 2 69.86% 0.50%
195 3 2 1 2 3 -19.02% ‐34.00% 2 1 2 3 3 -74.34% ‐56.40% 1 2 3 3 2 -13.66% 17.56% 2 3 3 2 1 67.44% 70.80% 3 3 2 1 2 70.36% 1.00%
196 3 2 1 3 1 -13.22% ‐17.00% 2 1 3 1 3 -9.16% ‐28.20% 1 3 1 3 2 4.18% 8.78% 3 1 3 2 1 -2.86% 35.40% 1 3 2 1 3 52.36% 0.50%
197 3 2 1 3 2 -30.22% ‐17.00% 2 1 3 2 3 -37.36% ‐28.20% 1 3 2 3 2 12.96% 8.78% 3 2 3 2 1 32.54% 35.40% 2 3 2 1 3 52.86% 0.50%
198 3 2 1 3 3 -47.22% ‐34.00% 2 1 3 3 3 -65.56% ‐56.40% 1 3 3 3 2 21.74% 17.56% 3 3 3 2 1 67.94% 70.80% 3 3 2 1 3 53.36% 1.00%
199 3 2 2 1 1 51.96% ‐17.00% 2 2 1 1 3 8.68% ‐28.20% 2 1 1 3 2 -66.12% 8.78% 1 1 3 2 2 -20.86% 35.40% 1 3 2 2 1 58.16% 0.50%
200 3 2 2 1 2 34.96% ‐17.00% 2 2 1 2 3 -19.52% ‐28.20% 2 1 2 3 2 -57.34% 8.78% 1 2 3 2 2 14.54% 35.40% 2 3 2 2 1 58.66% 0.50%
201 3 2 2 1 3 17.96% ‐34.00% 2 2 1 3 3 -47.72% ‐56.40% 2 1 3 3 2 -48.56% 17.56% 1 3 3 2 2 49.94% 70.80% 3 3 2 2 1 59.16% 1.00%
202 3 2 2 2 1 23.76% ‐17.00% 2 2 2 1 3 17.46% ‐28.20% 2 2 1 3 2 -30.72% 8.78% 2 1 3 2 2 -20.36% 35.40% 1 3 2 2 2 41.16% 0.50%
203 3 2 2 2 2 6.76% ‐17.00% 2 2 2 2 3 -10.74% ‐28.20% 2 2 2 3 2 -21.94% 8.78% 2 2 3 2 2 15.04% 35.40% 2 3 2 2 2 41.66% 0.50%
204 3 2 2 2 3 -10.24% ‐34.00% 2 2 2 3 3 -38.94% ‐56.40% 2 2 3 3 2 -13.16% 17.56% 2 3 3 2 2 50.44% 70.80% 3 3 2 2 2 42.16% 1.00%
205 3 2 2 3 1 -4.44% ‐17.00% 2 2 3 1 3 26.24% ‐28.20% 2 3 1 3 2 4.68% 8.78% 3 1 3 2 2 -19.86% 35.40% 1 3 2 2 3 24.16% 0.50%
206 3 2 2 3 2 -21.44% ‐17.00% 2 2 3 2 3 -1.96% ‐28.20% 2 3 2 3 2 13.46% 8.78% 3 2 3 2 2 15.54% 35.40% 2 3 2 2 3 24.66% 0.50%
207 3 2 2 3 3 -38.44% ‐34.00% 2 2 3 3 3 -30.16% ‐56.40% 2 3 3 3 2 22.24% 17.56% 3 3 3 2 2 50.94% 70.80% 3 3 2 2 3 25.16% 1.00%
208 3 2 3 1 1 60.74% ‐17.00% 2 3 1 1 3 44.08% ‐28.20% 3 1 1 3 2 -65.62% 8.78% 1 1 3 2 3 -37.86% 35.40% 1 3 2 3 1 29.96% 0.50%
209 3 2 3 1 2 43.74% ‐17.00% 2 3 1 2 3 15.88% ‐28.20% 3 1 2 3 2 -56.84% 8.78% 1 2 3 2 3 -2.46% 35.40% 2 3 2 3 1 30.46% 0.50%
210 3 2 3 1 3 26.74% ‐34.00% 2 3 1 3 3 -12.32% ‐56.40% 3 1 3 3 2 -48.06% 17.56% 1 3 3 2 3 32.94% 70.80% 3 3 2 3 1 30.96% 1.00%
211 3 2 3 2 1 32.54% ‐17.00% 2 3 2 1 3 52.86% ‐28.20% 3 2 1 3 2 -30.22% 8.78% 2 1 3 2 3 -37.36% 35.40% 1 3 2 3 2 12.96% 0.50%
212 3 2 3 2 2 15.54% ‐17.00% 2 3 2 2 3 24.66% ‐28.20% 3 2 2 3 2 -21.44% 8.78% 2 2 3 2 3 -1.96% 35.40% 2 3 2 3 2 13.46% 0.50%
213 3 2 3 2 3 -1.46% ‐34.00% 2 3 2 3 3 -3.54% ‐56.40% 3 2 3 3 2 -12.66% 17.56% 2 3 3 2 3 33.44% 70.80% 3 3 2 3 2 13.96% 1.00%
214 3 2 3 3 1 4.34% ‐17.00% 2 3 3 1 3 61.64% ‐28.20% 3 3 1 3 2 5.18% 8.78% 3 1 3 2 3 -36.86% 35.40% 1 3 2 3 3 -4.04% 0.50%
215 3 2 3 3 2 -12.66% ‐17.00% 2 3 3 2 3 33.44% ‐28.20% 3 3 2 3 2 13.96% 8.78% 3 2 3 2 3 -1.46% 35.40% 2 3 2 3 3 -3.54% 0.50%
216 3 2 3 3 3 -29.66% ‐34.00% 2 3 3 3 3 5.24% ‐56.40% 3 3 3 3 2 22.74% 17.56% 3 3 3 2 3 33.94% 70.80% 3 3 2 3 3 -3.04% 1.00%
217 3 3 1 1 1 78.58% ‐17.00% 3 1 1 1 3 -26.22% ‐28.20% 1 1 1 3 3 -83.62% 8.78% 1 1 3 3 1 -32.06% 35.40% 1 3 3 1 1 95.14% 0.50%
218 3 3 1 1 2 61.58% ‐17.00% 3 1 1 2 3 -54.42% ‐28.20% 1 1 2 3 3 -74.84% 8.78% 1 2 3 3 1 3.34% 35.40% 2 3 3 1 1 95.64% 0.50%
219 3 3 1 1 3 44.58% ‐34.00% 3 1 1 3 3 -82.62% ‐56.40% 1 1 3 3 3 -66.06% 17.56% 1 3 3 3 1 38.74% 70.80% 3 3 3 1 1 96.14% 1.00%
220 3 3 1 2 1 50.38% ‐17.00% 3 1 2 1 3 -17.44% ‐28.20% 1 2 1 3 3 -48.22% 8.78% 2 1 3 3 1 -31.56% 35.40% 1 3 3 1 2 78.14% 0.50%
221 3 3 1 2 2 33.38% ‐17.00% 3 1 2 2 3 -45.64% ‐28.20% 1 2 2 3 3 -39.44% 8.78% 2 2 3 3 1 3.84% 35.40% 2 3 3 1 2 78.64% 0.50%
222 3 3 1 2 3 16.38% ‐34.00% 3 1 2 3 3 -73.84% ‐56.40% 1 2 3 3 3 -30.66% 17.56% 2 3 3 3 1 39.24% 70.80% 3 3 3 1 2 79.14% 1.00%
223 3 3 1 3 1 22.18% ‐17.00% 3 1 3 1 3 -8.66% ‐28.20% 1 3 1 3 3 -12.82% 8.78% 3 1 3 3 1 -31.06% 35.40% 1 3 3 1 3 61.14% 0.50%
224 3 3 1 3 2 5.18% ‐17.00% 3 1 3 2 3 -36.86% ‐28.20% 1 3 2 3 3 -4.04% 8.78% 3 2 3 3 1 4.34% 35.40% 2 3 3 1 3 61.64% 0.50%
225 3 3 1 3 3 -11.82% ‐34.00% 3 1 3 3 3 -65.06% ‐56.40% 1 3 3 3 3 4.74% 17.56% 3 3 3 3 1 39.74% 70.80% 3 3 3 1 3 62.14% 1.00%
226 3 3 2 1 1 87.36% ‐17.00% 3 2 1 1 3 9.18% ‐28.20% 2 1 1 3 3 -83.12% 8.78% 1 1 3 3 2 -49.06% 35.40% 1 3 3 2 1 66.94% 0.50%
227 3 3 2 1 2 70.36% ‐17.00% 3 2 1 2 3 -19.02% ‐28.20% 2 1 2 3 3 -74.34% 8.78% 1 2 3 3 2 -13.66% 35.40% 2 3 3 2 1 67.44% 0.50%
228 3 3 2 1 3 53.36% ‐34.00% 3 2 1 3 3 -47.22% ‐56.40% 2 1 3 3 3 -65.56% 17.56% 1 3 3 3 2 21.74% 70.80% 3 3 3 2 1 67.94% 1.00%
382


229 3 3 2 2 1 59.16% ‐17.00% 3 2 2 1 3 17.96% ‐28.20% 2 2 1 3 3 -47.72% 8.78% 2 1 3 3 2 -48.56% 35.40% 1 3 3 2 2 49.94% 0.50%
230 3 3 2 2 2 42.16% ‐17.00% 3 2 2 2 3 -10.24% ‐28.20% 2 2 2 3 3 -38.94% 8.78% 2 2 3 3 2 -13.16% 35.40% 2 3 3 2 2 50.44% 0.50%
231 3 3 2 2 3 25.16% ‐34.00% 3 2 2 3 3 -38.44% ‐56.40% 2 2 3 3 3 -30.16% 17.56% 2 3 3 3 2 22.24% 70.80% 3 3 3 2 2 50.94% 1.00%
232 3 3 2 3 1 30.96% ‐17.00% 3 2 3 1 3 26.74% ‐28.20% 2 3 1 3 3 -12.32% 8.78% 3 1 3 3 2 -48.06% 35.40% 1 3 3 2 3 32.94% 0.50%
233 3 3 2 3 2 13.96% ‐17.00% 3 2 3 2 3 -1.46% ‐28.20% 2 3 2 3 3 -3.54% 8.78% 3 2 3 3 2 -12.66% 35.40% 2 3 3 2 3 33.44% 0.50%
234 3 3 2 3 3 -3.04% ‐34.00% 3 2 3 3 3 -29.66% ‐56.40% 2 3 3 3 3 5.24% 17.56% 3 3 3 3 2 22.74% 70.80% 3 3 3 2 3 33.94% 1.00%
235 3 3 3 1 1 96.14% ‐17.00% 3 3 1 1 3 44.58% ‐28.20% 3 1 1 3 3 -82.62% 8.78% 1 1 3 3 3 -66.06% 35.40% 1 3 3 3 1 38.74% 0.50%
236 3 3 3 1 2 79.14% ‐17.00% 3 3 1 2 3 16.38% ‐28.20% 3 1 2 3 3 -73.84% 8.78% 1 2 3 3 3 -30.66% 35.40% 2 3 3 3 1 39.24% 0.50%
237 3 3 3 1 3 62.14% ‐34.00% 3 3 1 3 3 -11.82% ‐56.40% 3 1 3 3 3 -65.06% 17.56% 1 3 3 3 3 4.74% 70.80% 3 3 3 3 1 39.74% 1.00%
238 3 3 3 2 1 67.94% ‐17.00% 3 3 2 1 3 53.36% ‐28.20% 3 2 1 3 3 -47.22% 8.78% 2 1 3 3 3 -65.56% 35.40% 1 3 3 3 2 21.74% 0.50%
239 3 3 3 2 2 50.94% ‐17.00% 3 3 2 2 3 25.16% ‐28.20% 3 2 2 3 3 -38.44% 8.78% 2 2 3 3 3 -30.16% 35.40% 2 3 3 3 2 22.24% 0.50%
240 3 3 3 2 3 33.94% ‐34.00% 3 3 2 3 3 -3.04% ‐56.40% 3 2 3 3 3 -29.66% 17.56% 2 3 3 3 3 5.24% 70.80% 3 3 3 3 2 22.74% 1.00%
241 3 3 3 3 1 39.74% ‐17.00% 3 3 3 1 3 62.14% ‐28.20% 3 3 1 3 3 -11.82% 8.78% 3 1 3 3 3 -65.06% 35.40% 1 3 3 3 3 4.74% 0.50%
242 3 3 3 3 2 22.74% ‐17.00% 3 3 3 2 3 33.94% ‐28.20% 3 3 2 3 3 -3.04% 8.78% 3 2 3 3 3 -29.66% 35.40% 2 3 3 3 3 5.24% 0.50%
243 3 3 3 3 3 5.74% ‐34.00% 3 3 3 3 3 5.74% ‐56.40% 3 3 3 3 3 5.74% 17.56% 3 3 3 3 3 5.74% 70.80% 3 3 3 3 3 5.74% 1.00%
Legend :
T- Timings
S - Supervision
G - Group Dynamics
P - Procedure
C - Climate
383
Appendix 7 -1
Random Number Table
384
Appendix 7 -1
Random Number Table
385
Appendix 7-2
Chi Square Values
386
Appendix 7 -2
Chi SquareValues
387
Appendix 7-3
Statistical Definitions
(as used in MINITAB 15)
The definitions appearing are an extract from the above MINITAB 15 – Methods and
Formulas screen.
388
Regression equation
For a model with multiple predictors, the equation is:
…..
The fitted equation is:
ŷ= …..
In simple linear regression, which includes only one predictor, the model is:
Using regression estimates  by b0, and 1 by b1, the model is:

ŷ=
You can fit your data with following models:
Model Order Statistical model
type
Linear First
Quadratic Second
Cubic Third
Notation
Y = Response
= k predictor
th
= k population regression coefficient

th
e = error term ~ N(0, 1)

= estimate of k population regression coefficient
th
ŷ = fitted response
Regression coefficients
Each predictor in a regression equation has an estimated coefficient associated with the
population regression coefficients, β . Use the estimated coefficients (b ) with the
k k
predictors to calculate the fitted value of the response.

The formula for the coefficient or slope in simple linear regression is:
∑
∑
The formula for the intercept (b ) is: 0
bo =
389
In matrix terms, the vector of coefficients in multiple regression is calculated by the

formula:
b = (x'x) x'y -1
Notation
yi = ith observed response value
= mean response
xi = ith predictor value
= mean predictor
x = response matrix
y = predictor matrix
t-value (T)
Compare the t-value to the t-distribution to determine if a predictor is significant. The
bigger the absolute value of the t-value, the more likely the predictor is significant. The
formula is:
Estimated coefficient
Standard error of the coefficient
p‐value (p)
Used in hypothesis tests to help you decide whether to reject or fail to reject a null
hypothesis. The p-value is the probability of obtaining a test statistic that is at least as
extreme as the actual calculated value, if the null hypothesis is true. A commonly used
cut-off value for the p-value is 0.05. For example, if the calculated p-value of a test
statistic is less than 0.05, you reject the null hypothesis.
S
An estimate of σ, the estimated standard deviation of the error in the model. Note that s2
= MS Error.
R2 (R-sq)
Coefficient of determination; indicates how much variation in the response is explained
by the model. The higher the R2 , the better the model fits your data. The formula is:
∑
R2 = 1- = 1-
∑
390
Notation
= mean response
ŷi = i fitted response
th
Adjusted R2
Accounts for the number of predictors in our model and is useful for comparing models
with different numbers of predictors. The formula is:
∑
Radj2 = 1- =1-
∑
Notation
= ith fitted response
= mean response
N = number of observations
P = number of terms in the model
Sum of squares (SS)

The sum of squared distances. SS Total is the total variation in the data. SS Regression
is the portion of the variation explained by the model, while SS Error is the portion not
explained by the model and is attributed to error. The calculations are:
Sources of variation Sum of squares (SS)
SS Regression ∑ (ŷi - y )2
SS Error ∑ (yi – ŷ) 2
SS Total ∑ (yi – y )2
Notation
ŷi = ith fitted response

y = mean response
391
Degrees of freedom (DF)

Indicates the number of independent pieces of information involving the response data
needed to calculate the sum of squares. The degrees of freedom for each component of
the model are:
Sources of variation DF
Regression P
Error n-p-1
Total n-1
Notation
p = number of terms in the model
MS Regression
The formula for mean square regression is:
SS Regression
MS Regression =
DF Regression
∑ (ŷi - y )2
Notation
P
y= mean
response
ŷi = ith fitted
response
p= number
of terms
in the
model
MS Error
Mean square error, which is the variance around the fitted regression line. MS Error =
s2. The formula is:
MSE = SS Error = ∑ (yi – ŷi)2
DF Error n–p-1
392
Notation
ŷi = ith fitted response
MS Total
The formula for mean square total is:
∑
MS Total = =
Notation
= mean response
F - If the calculated F-value is greater than the F-value from the F-distribution, then at
least one of the coefficients is not equal to zero. The F-value is used to determine the p-
value. The formula for the calculated F-value is:
MS Regression
MS Error
Sequential sum of squares

Minitab calculates the sequential sums of squares for each predictor. The output
depends on the order the predictors are entered into the model. The sequential sum of
squares is the unique portion of SS Regression explained by a predictor, given any
previously entered predictors. If you have a model with three predictors, X1, X2, and
X3, the sequential sum of squares for X3 shows how much of the remaining variation
X3 explains given that X1 and X2 are already in the model. To obtain a different
sequence of predictors, repeat the regression procedure entering the predictors in a
different order.
Fitted value
The predicted y or ŷ; the mean response value for the given predictor values using the
estimated regression equation.
393
Standard error of fitted value (SE Fit)

The standard error of the fitted value in a regression model with one predictor is:
SE Fit = s2 1 + (x0 - x )2
n ∑ (xi - x )2
The standard error of the fitted value in a regression model with more than one
predictor is:
Sqrt(s2 [x'o(X'X)-1xo])
x’o = [ 1, x1,0,….,xk,0 ]
Notation
xi = ith predictor value
x = mean predictor
x = response matrix
2
s = mean square error
Residuals
The difference between the observed values and predicted or fitted values. This part of
the observation is not explained by the fitted model. The residual of an observation is:
ei = yi-ŷi
Notation
ŷi = i fitted response
th
Standardized residuals
The standardized residual is helpful in identifying outliers. Also called the internally
Studentized residual and is calculated as:
ri = ei
2
s (1 – hi)
Notation
ei = i residual
th
394
hi = i diagonal element of
th
x(x’x)-1x’
s2 = mean square error
Confidence interval
The range in which the estimated mean response for a given set of predictor values is
expected to fall. The formula is:
⁄ ,
s = =
Notation
= fitted response value for a given set of predictor value
= level of significance
N = number of observations
P = number of terms in the model
= variance-covariance matrix of coefficient
= mean square error
X = response matrix
xo = matrix of given predictor values
Prediction interval
The range in which the predicted response for a new observation is expected to fall. The
formula is:
⁄ ,
s = 1
Notation
= fitted response value for a given set of predictor value
= level of significance
s2 = mean square error
x = response matrix
395
xo = matrix of given predictor values
Pure error lack-of-fit test

To calculate the pure error lack-of-fit test, Minitab calculates:
1 The sum of squares for each set of replicates and adds them together to create the
pure error sum of squares (SS PE).
2 The pure error mean square
MS PE =
DFPE = n-m
3 The lack-of-fit sum of squares
SS L OF = SSE - SSPE
4 The lack-of-fit mean square
MS L OF –
5 The test statistics
F- Statistics =
Large F-values and small p-values suggest that the model is inadequate.
***
396
Factors Affecting Productivity in the UAE Construction Appendix 8
Industry, Nabil Ailabouni, 2010
ADGAS – Offshore Associated Gases,,

EPC Package No. 01 (Das Island)
The Project Scope of works include major civil and mechanical works, with related electrical works for the
Offshore Associated Gases (OAG) project, Das Island. New facilities on Das Island are designed to compress
and dehydrate the additional quantities of offshore associated LP gases. Design capabilities for the new
facilities at Das Island is 211 MMscfd and includes provision for future expansion to 470 MMscfd.
Mechanical works include related piping and equipment installations whilst civil works include site preparation,
piling, trenching, building works, drainage, foundations, structures, including detailed design and supply /
installation of HVAC systems.
Client ADGAS/ TECHNIP
Main (EPC) Contractor TECHNIP
Period of Construction 28 Months – Start: February 2007 Expected Finish: July 2009
Peak Manpower 600
Contract Value Lump sum AED 400,000,000.
397

398

399
EMAL Aluminium Smelter Complex Anode Rodding Shop

Building - EPC Works
Th project
The j t scope off works
k include
i l d th
the d
design,
i engineering
i i studies,
t di procurementt and
d tturnkey
k
construction of the Anode Rodding Shop EMAL Smelter Complex, Al Taweelah, Abu Dhabi.
Works include the 108x48x11 m building area, 5500 sq. m. area, equipment foundations,
construction of the control room, Amenities Building, Pump House Building, Steel Structure,
Metal claddings, MEP services include Power and Lighting, Water Supply and Drainage
Works, HVAC, and associated Civil Works.
Client ECL, (100, Rue Chalantm 59790 Ronchin, France

Consultant/Main Contractor SNC Lavalin / Worley Parsons
Period of Construction April 08 - Aug 09 (17 months)

Peak Manpower
Contract Value Lump sum AED 97,70,000/-

97 70 000/
400
Ju e a Islands
Jumeirah s a ds – Heights,
e g ts, Dubai;
uba ;
Cluster C Apartments Courtesy www.jumeirahheights.com/en/living/the-clusters
The works
Th k consist
i t off the
th
construction of the 2 clusters - 3
buildings each in the East and
West Cluster; and having a
common basement. Total Built up
area is approximately 81,000 sq.
m. Project includes a substation.
Client / Employer NAKHEEL, Contract No. N004-060-02

Engineer ARENCO (Architectural and Engineering Consultants)
Period of Construction 16 months Start : Dec 2007 Expected Finish : March 2009
Peak Manpower 1600
Contract Value Lump Sum AED 380,000,000
401
Engineering,
g ee g, Procurement
ocu e e t and
a d Construction
Co st uct o
(EPC) For Borouge Quality Control Laboratory
Engineering, Procurement and Construction (EPC) of the Quality Control Laboratory which is part of the
overall Borouge 2 Project and comprises the following main areas:
PP & PE Lab, Chemistry Lab, Mechanical Testing, Instrument Workshop, Gases Cylinders Room,
Chemicals Store, Electrical Rooms, Office Area.
Client/Owner Abu Dhabi Polymers Company Limited

Manager Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (ADNOC)
Period of Construction Start : Aug-07 – Completion : June-09
Peak Manpower 675
Contract Value Lump sum: Dhs. 96,080,678
402
Ruwais Industrial Services Harbour

(EPC Project)
The Ruwais Industrial Services Harbour is an

EPC (Engineering Procurement,
Construction) type project involving detailed
engineering design, fabrication, supply and
install of all materials & equipment,
construction, testing and commissioning for
MARINE STRUCTURES and BUILDING,
SERVICES and
d INFRASTRUCTURE.
INFRASTRUCTURE The
Th
client is Abu Dhabi Petroleum Ports Authority
(PPA) operating jetty; WORKS being located
within the Ruwais Industrial Area Security
Zone.
Client Abu Dhabi National Oil Company

p y ((ADNOC))
Consultant Hyder Consulting Engineers
Engineering Subcontractor TEBODIN Middle East Ltd.
Period of Construction 30 months Start : April 2006 Finish : Sept. 2008
Peak Manpower 400
Contract Value Lump Sum AED 167,368,748/-

167,368,748/
Agreement No.: 115950C1, Project No. 5950
403

(EPC Project)
The marine construction works include the construction of 1000 m length quay walls to 3 berths, rock scour
protection sea walls to seaward side of 2 berths, including , roll on – roll off (RO-RO) berth, launching ramp,
fendering, mooring systems, 2 No’s 500 KN Heavy Lift Area, rock armour revetment, back up apron paving,
services drainage and lighting, installation marine bollards – 200 tons & 4 no’s 100 tons in deep sea, tidal
gauge, including detailed engineering design of all the above elements. Design Service Life for all marine
works is 50 years. Dredging is required at the harbour basin area upto a depth of -8 m level w.r.t. Jabel
Dhanna Chart Datum. Steel Sheet Piling amounting to approximately 3000 tons will be utilized.
The civil engineering works include the construction of the Administration Building, Crisis Management
centre, extensions, control tower, sports facilities – recreational centre and basket ball court, sand blasting
facilities, Utilities building, Decompression Chamber, and a Helipad, including a gatch service road.
Mechanical installations include a water pumping station, fire water pumping station with pumps, hydrants,
pressure vessels, jockey pumps and piping, Diesel fuel storage tank and associated pumps and piping,
HVAC and building services. Electrical Installations include a new 11 KV electrical supply with associated
switchgears and transformers, a new 415 V distribution system, low current control and power systems for
equipment, earthing and lighting protection systems, telecommunications, fire detection and intruder alarm
system, CCTV systems, security access control systems, integrated ELV systems and SCADA systems.
404

(EPC Project)
405

(EPC Project)
406
Baniyas
y Commercial and Residential
Complex, Abu Dhabi
The works comprises the construction, completion, maintenance and handing over of the following
building/structure as per project specifications/drawings
1. Villas: 1.1 Detached Types (Ground Floor, 1st Floor & Roof) V1-9 Nos.
V2-2 Nos. V3-1 No.
1.2 Attached Types (Ground Floor, 1st Floor & Roof) VA1 (8 Attached
Villas)1 No., VA2 (4 Attached Villas)- 3 Nos VA3 (4 Attached Villas) – 3 Nos. VA4
(6 Attached Villas) -2 Nos.
2. Apartment Buildings – Building Block 1 (Ground Floor + 5 Typical Floor

+ Penthouse
P th + Roof)
R f) – 2 N
Nos. B
Building
ildi Bl
Block
k 2 (G
(Ground
d Fl
Floor + 4 T
Typical
i l Fl
Floor + P
Penthouse
th +
Roof) – 1 No.
3. Shopping Mall – Basement + Ground Floor + First Floor + Roof
4. All other connected Electro-mechanical, A/C works & life works
Client Baniyas Investment and Development Company

Consultant WP-World Planners Consultant Engineers LLC
Period of Construction 27 months
Peak Manpower 2500
Contract Value Dhs. 940,000,000/-
407

Final Sept Redacted

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

Final Sept Redacted

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

FACTORS AFFECTING EMPLOYEE

PRODUCTIVITY IN THE UAE

A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the

School of Environment and Technology

No Description Page No.

2.1.4 The Contingency Approach……………………………………………... 39

3.5 Perception Surveys for the effect on productivity

4 DATA COLLECTION, DATA ANALYSIS AND THE

5 MODEL VALIDATION AND EVALUATION OF VARIABILITY

LIST OF APPENDICES…………….................…………………………………. 245

Appendix 4 Collection of Productivity Modelling Data & Graphs….. 295 - 323

I would like to express my gratitude and appreciation to my supervisors - Dr.

Then I would thank my partners and employees in Target Engineering

Dated September, 2010

ARCOM - Association of Researchers in Construction Management

CHAPTER 1 – RESEARCH INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER 1 – RESEARCH INTRODUCTION

1.0 CHAPTER INTRODUCTION

‘Productivity rate’ of construction trades is one of the elements required to

In fulfilment of the research objectives, a literature review was conducted to

1.1 NEED FOR RESEARCH

Knowing productivity rates of various trades in the construction industry is

The construction industry in the UAE is a multibillion dollar industry,

1.1.1 Gap in Knowledge

Review of contemporary works on the subject of productivity revealed that the

The works of contemporary writers is briefly mentioned in this section leading to

coefficient of determination - was reviewed for model adequacy. The SAS

Ogunlana and Chang (1998) studied worker motivation on selected construction

Proverbs et al (1998) did a comparative evaluation of reinforcement fixing

Mohamed and Srinavin (2002) in their study of thermal environment effects on

Kazaz and Ulubeyli (2006) studied the organizational factors influencing

Aiyetan and Olotouah (2006) studied the impact of motivation on workers’

increased motivation and therefore the productivity. There was no model

Alinaitwe et al (2007) studied the factors affecting the productivity of building

After identifying the broad categories of factors affecting productivity as

Similar works involving statistical models giving predicted construction

1.2 RESEARCH AIM

1.2.1 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

The objectives to fulfill the research aim are:

1.3 SCOPE OF RESEARCH

The construction industry is characterized by multiple site conditions having

1.3.1 Definition of Productivity

As per the OECD, the objectives of productivity measurement include:

b) Efficiency – to check if maximum output that is physically achievable with

There are many different ways of measuring productivity. For example, in a

Every management initiative strives to ensure optimal utilization of resources;

Government, politicians, academics and economists all stress the importance of

1.4 BRIEF OUTLINE OF RESEARCH

realizing its objectives. They highlighted Survey, Experiment, Archival Analysis,

Research studies in the construction industry are generally conducted through

In section 1.1.1, pg. 3, contemporary works on productivity were outlined briefly

Fig. 1.1: Overview of the Research

1.4.1 Review of Existing Literature & Publications

In order to identify the factors affecting productivity in the UAE construction

Key words such as productivity, construction industry, productivity rates, UAE,

1.4.2 Data Collection: Survey for Significant Factors

A number of research methods were considered ranging from interviews, survey

Accordingly three research surveys were undertaken. This was followed up by a

1.4.3 Data Collection: Surveys for Effect of Significant Factors

1.4.4 Data Collection: Statistical Tests of Significance Using Chi –Square

1.4.5. Field Data Collection

Work Timings (T) was varied at : Level 1 - Normal 8 hours work

Activities under Factors varied during data