The Connection Between Worker Capacity, Organizational Capacity and Output

by Dean Prigelmeier, President of Proactive Technologies, Inc.

The term “capacity” has many meanings. The business dictionary defines capacity for different applications, but generally defines it as “specific ability of an entity (person or organization) or resource, measured in quantity and level of quality, over an extended period.” What is often missed is that each application measured for capacity is made up of important contributors that, too, have capacity.

For example, the capacity of a company can be stated as the output measured quarterly or annually, but attempts to improve it without considering the make-up of the people, the equipment, the leadership, the strategy and resources would be difficult. The output would be affected by: 1) the availability of resources; 2) the level of staffing; 3) the quality of the staffing; 4) the output attainable by the equipment in use; 4) the allocation of all resources; and many more factors. The level of improvement for overall company capacity possible is reliant on the level of control of the inputs in use.

Thinking of a company as being made up of building blocks helps to visual this relationship. Fundamental to it all is the worker, and worker capacity. Worker capacity fits the definition above, but seldom do companies have a definition and control of a worker’s capacity. More often than not, companies view a workers contribution as placeholder for a position defined in terms of hours worked, dollars spent or an expected output based on the history of predecessors.

But worker capacity is much more than that. It relates to the range of tasks the worker is expected to masterfully perform, on equipment and using tools provided, meeting all standards and specifications, and in a safe and risk-adverse manner. It is affected by internal factors such as the company’s strategy, policies, management technique, working environment, company culture and perception of fair compensation. It can be affected, as well, by the worker’s external influences such as well-being, well-being of family members, health, finances and any number of unexpected disruptors.

Fundamental to all of these factors are two specific factors:

– What are all of the tasks for which the worker was hired;
– Is there a process in place to ensure each worker masters each task;

If the complete list of tasks the worker is expected to master is unknown, and probably no system to train the worker to master all of the tasks exists. From that pointlevel to the actual aggregate company capacity will be unknowable, unmeasurable and marginally subject to improvement.

If tasks are defined by “best practice” standards and a system is in place to quickly train each worker to “full job mastery,” the company can change its focus to overall capacity improvement and the other factors that maximize this potential.

To illustrate an example of worker capacity, let us imagine a job is made up of 100 tasks – all considered critical to mastery of a job classification and the worker reaching “expert status.” When a worker is hired in, the worker is said to have zero capacity; there is not documentation yet that any task of this new venue for the worker has been mastered. If the company was fortunate enough to find a worker with related work experience, the company can first focus on the transferability of previously mastered tasks to get them out of the way.

When the worker masters 20 tasks of the 100 tasks, it can be said that they have “20% capacity.” Yes, a discussion can erupt over how important these 20 tasks are compared to the other 80 tasks and how they add to collective company output, but we have to start somewhere and lacking any better measures these are more than sufficient. It is in the company’s interest to accelerate each worker’s job mastery development since for as long as it takes one expert is training the new worker; the expert’s output for that period is diminished and the new worker’s output is negligible even if training occurs on actual product or service – but both are on the payroll tying up company resources.

When the worker reaches around 50% capacity, the company will start to recognize a sustained level of contribution to the company’s output and yield. The expert trainer can spend less time with the new worker and the new worker has developed skills that are transferable to the learning of related tasks.

If this concept is applied to all workers in an organization or department and all workers are driven to full job mastery, this level is considered in measuring organizational capacity. The company not only has an accurate understanding of the department’s capacity, it can look at ways to improve the output of the department by bringing in better or faster equipment, and incentives and strategy changes. It can even decide, based on fact, if another worker is needed.

But this approach must be applied across all job classifications in the company to know its company capacity and whether the workforce is operating at full capacity in order to eliminate that concern and focus on other methods to increase company capacity. It will also allow the company to feel assured that they are maximizing each worker’s work output, work quality and safe performance while minimizing worker training costs.
Is this scenario possible? Absolutely. Proactive Technologies specializes in performing the job/task/safety analysis of each job classification to the task-best practice level, processing the data using its PROTECH™ system of managed human resource development software to developed all of the tools of the worker development process, keep development records on each worker’s progress toward full job mastery and provide monthly progress reports so the company can focus on its business. Visit the Proactive Technologies website to find out more.

By skipping the attention to detail at the worker level to rule out under-capacity leads to a weak foundation that the rest of the company rests upon. If more and more experts retire or turnover is high for the technically trained experts, or market changes drive product/service changes that foundation starts to crumble. No amount of investment in equipment, in LEAN exercises to improve process flow or management perks and incentives will have the impact expected. Training workers accurately and completely is an investment in the company’s current success and future stability and growth.

If you recognize these challenges and have shed your fear of even looking at other solutions, check out Proactive Technologies’ structured on-the-job training system approach to see how it might work at your firm, your family of facilities or your region. Contact a Proactive Technologies representative today to schedule a GoToMeeting videoconference briefing to your computer. This can be followed up with an onsite presentation for you and your colleagues. A 13-minute promo briefing is available at the Proactive Technologies website and provides an overview to get you started and to help you explain it to your staff. As always, onsite presentations are available as well.