PORT PlannIng, DesIgn anD ... - TBA - TBA home pagesection... · current efficiency gap. What can...
2
What I hear, I forget What I see, I remember What I do, I understand (Confucius) Confucius already knew that learning by doing is the only way of effective learning; and learning is needed in our industry. As the demand for productivity continues to rise, and the complexity of systems and operations increase – not least driven by automation and the introduction of even more systems – people need to be trained to be effective at what they do. This article discusses people controlling operations through the various systems present, ie planners, supervisors, dispatchers. How can they become better trained applying Confucian style learning? Room for improvement The need for training starts with the current efficiency gap. What can we gain if our operational control staff is better trained? (‘Operational control staff’ is a term we shall use to describe the staff planning the work (yard, vessel, rail), supervising the execution, solving incidents, and allocating and directing equipment in real-time). When we started our training programmes at TBA, we never envisaged that the efficiency gap could be as large as we now know it to be. Having put hundreds of operational control staff through our training programmes, we found that by improving their capabilities and applying best practices, average productivity levels could be increased by as much as 30%. We also found that the difference between the worst performer and the best performer is typically in the range of 50-60% in achieved productivity levels. Finally, we found that with the use of more automated tools – in many cases already licensed but poorly used – the consistency and performance of operations could also be substantially increased. The most common training methods today in the maritime industry are on-the-job training and classroom training, mainly through a standard and potentially tiresome series of PowerPoint slides. The effectiveness of this training method has proven to be less than 10% (regarding what people can remember from the material presented). Learning by doing Therefore, the time has come to start learning by doing. Depending on the trainees and the objectives of the training, we have developed training programmes in various forms; these range from three days to whole weeks, where trainees are confronted with plan preparation, planning, and work-execution-type jobs that are similar to the ones they have to perform in live operations. Tasks range from setting up the yard, planning discharge containers, decking export receivables coming in through the gate, determining how much equipment shall be deployed in the upcoming shift, allocating equipment in real-time to yard locations, planning the crane split, the quay crane-work queues, etc. In principle, this covers the entire range of duties of operational control staff. Feedback after every iteration in typical KPIs After each training cycle (typically we follow multiple cycles to enhance the learning experience), a feedback session follows. The feedback is based on the actual KPIs they achieved (eg vessel productivity, quay-crane productivity, yard-crane productivity, operational costs, truck turn-time), as well as on the Doing training Confucian style? Dr Yvo A Saanen, Managing Director TBA, Delft, the Netherlands Figure 1: Results of improved planning skills of trainees. The result is the average of approximately 100 trainees, all doing the same iterative training programme. In between the planning exercises, short classroom training sessions were held, with feedback given on trainees’ previous planning attempts. On average, the performance increased by 35% from the initial to the final results. 19.4 bx/h 24.1 bx/h 26.2 bx/h 100% 124% 135% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 0.0 bx/h 5.0 bx/h 10.0 bx/h 15.0 bx/h 20.0 bx/h 25.0 bx/h 30.0 bx/h First Plan Second Plan Third Plan Improvement compared to first plan Producvity Improvement PTO Deployments Average QC GMPH Improvement 1 Edition 63: September 2014 www.porttechnology.org PORT PLANNING, DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION IN PARTNERSHIP WITH
Transcript of PORT PlannIng, DesIgn anD ... - TBA - TBA home pagesection... · current efficiency gap. What can...
What I hear, I forgetWhat I see, I rememberWhat I do, I understand (Confucius)
Confucius already knew that learning by doing is the only way of effective learning; and learning is needed in our industry. As the demand for productivity continues to rise, and the complexity of systems and operations increase – not least driven by automation and the introduction of even more systems – people need to be trained to be effective at what they do.
This article discusses people controlling operations through the various systems present , i e p lanners , super v i sors , dispatchers. How can they become better trained applying Confucian style learning?
Room for improvementThe need for training starts with the current efficiency gap. What can we
gain if our operational control staff is better trained? (‘Operational control staff ’ is a term we shall use to describe the staff planning the work (yard, vessel, rail), supervising the execution, solving incidents, and allocating and directing equipment in real-time).
W hen we s t a r t ed our t r a in ing programmes at TBA, we never envisaged that the efficiency gap could be as large as we now know it to be. Having put hundreds of operational control staff through our training programmes, we found that by improving their capabilities and applying best practices, average productivity levels could be increased by as much as 30%.
We also found that the difference between the worst performer and the best performer is typically in the range of 50-60% in achieved productivity levels. Finally, we found that with the
use of more automated tools – in many cases already licensed but poorly used – the consistency and performance of operations could also be substantially increased.
The most common training methods today in the maritime industry are on-the-job training and c lassroom training, mainly through a standard and potentially tiresome series of PowerPoint slides. The effectiveness of this training method has proven to be less than 10% (regarding what people can remember from the material presented).
Learning by doingTherefore, the time has come to start learning by doing. Depending on the trainees and the objectives of the training, we have developed training programmes in various forms; these range from three days to whole weeks, where trainees are confronted with plan preparation, planning, and work-execution-type jobs that are similar to the ones they have to perform in live operations. Tasks range from setting up the yard, planning discharge containers, decking export receivables coming in through the gate, determining how much equipment shall be deployed in the upcoming shift, allocating equipment in real-time to yard locations, planning the crane split, the quay crane-work queues, etc. In principle, this covers the entire range of duties of operational control staff.
Feedback after every iteration in typical KPIsAfter each training cycle (typically we follow multiple cycles to enhance the learning experience), a feedback session follows. The feedback is based on the actual KPIs they achieved (eg vessel productivity, quay-crane productivity, yard-crane productivity, operational costs, truck turn-time), as well as on the
Doing training Confucian style?
Dr Yvo A Saanen, Managing Director TBA, Delft, the Netherlands
Figure 1: Results of improved planning skills of trainees. The result is the average of approximately 100 trainees, all doing the same iterative training programme. In between the planning exercises, short classroom training sessions were held, with feedback given on trainees’ previous planning attempts. On average, the performance increased by 35% from the initial to the final results.
19.4 bx/h 24.1 bx/h 26.2 bx/h
100%
124%
135%
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
125%
150%
0.0 bx/h
5.0 bx/h
10.0 bx/h
15.0 bx/h
20.0 bx/h
25.0 bx/h
30.0 bx/h
First Plan Second Plan Third Plan
Impr
ovem
ent c
ompa
red
to fi
rst p
lan
Prod
uctiv
ity
Improvement PTO DeploymentsAverage QC GMPH Improvement
1 Edit ion 63: September 2014 www.por ttechnolog y.org
PORT PlannIng, DesIgn anD COnsTRuCTIOn In PaRTneRshIP wITh
assessment of what they did (assessed by one of our trainers). In order to create the KPIs, our terminal emulation tool CONTROLS is run (overnight) to get the results for each trainee in a comparable way.
Competition element as motivator and fun factorThe last but essential element in the
training is competition. Plans are made either individually or in groups. After every submitted or executed plan, the KPIs are compared, and trainees or teams of trainees are extremely motivated to be the best in the class. As there is a level playing field, each trainee or team of trainees has equal chances to prepare the terminal in the most cost-efficient or productive way, without excuses. Every team works under exactly the same circumstances, with the same resources.
From ‘gamification’ to certificationToday, training in the form of games is a well-received and highly appreciated method. However, we expect that this can and will be brought to the next level. Operational control staff can be tested before being deployed in live operations. With well-developed and configured scenarios, they can be trained and then tested in their capabilities to deal with uncertainty, dynamic events, peak loads, and all kinds of other circumstances that make work in a terminal so challenging. This could lead to certified vessel planners, yard planners, and supervisors, and as such bring accreditation to the profession, as well as higher standards, and most l ikely better performing container terminals.
Figure 2: This graph illustrates an example of a training session with 30 vessel planners (P1 – P30), and their individual results, planning two vessels with 3 QCs each. The best planners achieved average berth (vessel) productivities of 60-70 containers per hour, while the worst planners only achieved 40-50 containers per hour – under exactly the same circumstances. same yard, same equipment, same drivers. Just their plan to make the difference. This is typical of the wide range of results we find with our ‘near-to-live’ training sessions.
Figure 3: The cycle followed in the training. In an iterative way, trainees find out how to apply best practices in their plans, and receive in each iteration feedback about their solutions
About the author
Dr Yvo Saanen is managing director and founder (1996) of TBA, a leading terminal design and simulation company in the Netherlands. He is in charge of all port and terminal-related projects globally in terms of their planning and optimisation by means of simulation and emulation. Dr Saanen holds an MSc in systems engineering and a PhD in the design and simulation of robotised container terminals, both obtained from Delft University of Technology. In addition, he is a lecturer at Delft University, Lloyd’s Maritime Academy and the Institute of Maritime Economics and Logistics (Erasmus University Rotterdam) teaching simulation and logistics and, at various institutions, lectures on terminal design by means of simulation.
About the company
Netherlands-based TBA is a leading international provider of consultancy and sof tware. Its product and service portfolio concentrates on marine terminals and intermodal container terminals. Key services are terminal planning using simulation, support of complex software (TOS) implementations and TOS fine tuning using TBA’s emulation tool controls, and training of terminal planners. TBA is also the leader in equipment control software (ECS) for automated terminals; it has supplied TEAMS, TBA’s Equipment Control Software to Euromax in Rotterdam, CTA in Hamburg and Antwerp Gateway. Forthcoming supply contracts will include APMT Rotterdam, Rotterdam World Gateway, and Long Beach Container Terminal. TBA’s clients include all major terminal operators worldwide and many local port operators. TBA’s subsidiary DBIS delivers total software solutions for bulk terminals.
Enquiries
Dr Yvo SaanenManaging Director / COOTel: +31 15 380 5775Mobile: +31 6 5373 4301Fax: +31 15 380 5763Email: [email protected]: http://www.linkedin.com/in/yasaanen
0.0bx/h
10.0bx/h
20.0bx/h
30.0bx/h
40.0bx/h
50.0bx/h
60.0bx/h
70.0bx/h
80.0bx/h
-40%
-30%
-20%
-10%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 P10 P11 P12 P13 P14 P15 P16 P17 P18 P19 P20 P21 P22 P23 P24 P25 P26 P27 P28 P29 P30
Vess
el P
rodu
ctivi
ty
Devi
ation
from
ave
rage
Vessel Productivity Deviation from average Vessel Productivity
Own Idea
Analysis and Feedback
Own (Fine Tuned)
Analysis and Feedback
Apply Best Practices
Final feedback
and discussion
Apply Best practices
(workplace)
Edit ion 63: September 2014 2
PORT PlannIng, DesIgn anD COnsTRuCTIOn In PaRTneRshIP wITh
