|
Engineering firms with fewer than fifty staff have worked hard to become more efficient in 2011 to win work, though greater help from government would yield further returns.
There is significant scope for greater efficiency if government can streamline regulations on small companies. If measures were implemented that further reduced the amount of time required for administrative duties by 10%, this would save the typical small company approximately £13,000 – half the cost of an extra graduate engineer.
Nelson Ogunshakin OBE, ACE chief Executive, said: “Industry is keen to ensure past mistakes are not repeated. Unlike past downturns, many firms have dedicated money even in tough conditions to keep graduate training programmes open. However, as the country looks towards growth in the years ahead it will be important to ease the cost of doing business so that more people can be employed.
"Companies that took part in ACE’s Benchmarking Lite programme reported that they had made a series of savings in costs. These included low absenteeism and cutting back on administrative staff."
However, 5.2% of fee earner time was spent simply preparing bids for new work. This, along with other activities such as administration, saw engineering professionals spend a fifth of their time taken up by work that did not contribute to the projects from which they earn their income.
With companies reporting that they won nearly two thirds of the projects they tendered for, there would be scope for greater savings if clients in the public and private sector were able to simplify procurement practices.
- ENDS -
For media enquiries please contact Gavin Pearson (gpearson@acenet.co.uk) (020 7202 0255).
Notes to editors
Benchmarking Lite collected 150 items of data from 36 firms with fewer than 50 staff operating across the UK in the consultancy and engineering sector.
14.9% of non-fee earning staff left their company in 2011, compared to 12.7% joining – resulting in a net reduction in support staff of 2.1%.
Absenteeism was reported to make up just 1.1% of staff time, compared to 1.6% for large engineering firms.
The median success rate for competitive tendering was 65% by the total number of bids.
Following five years of successful benchmarking ACE in 2011 expanded this useful tool, offering it free to ACE members in the UK with a headcount of 50 or fewer.
ACE benchmarking is conducted in association with The Centre for Interfirm Comparison (CIFC) which has worked with ACE to design and operate the Benchmarking project for engineering and consultancy firms. Their significant experience and independence means that the ACE Benchmarking results are accurate and concise, providing an in depth analysis of companies performance.
For the full report please click here.
|