Check whether the two sites estimate work in the same way
- Reading time
- 3 minutes
- Last reviewed
On this page
Before adding two sites' job estimates together, ask what each estimate includes. One team may quote machine time; another may include setup, inspection and paperwork. Their numbers can share a unit without measuring the same work.
The immediate aim is a credible workload forecast. Pricing, profit margins and customer quotations need their own decisions. A planning comparison should not quietly become a new selling price or a judgment about which team works harder.
Compare the same job at both sites
Here is a fictional comparison in minutes. Assume both teams are describing the same quantity and agreed specification; that assumption needs checking in real work.
| Activity | Site A's recorded estimate | Site B's recorded estimate |
|---|---|---|
| Setup | Held in a separate allowance | 30 |
| Processing | 90 | 80 |
| Inspection | Booked elsewhere | 20 |
| Completion paperwork | Not recorded | 10 |
| Visible total | 90 | 140 |
It would be wrong to conclude from this table that Site B needs 50 minutes more for the same work. Site A's total is incomplete for the comparison. Its processing estimate is also 10 minutes higher, which is a separate difference to investigate.
Find the missing allowances and their basis. Check whether the time describes labour effort, machine occupancy or elapsed duration. An unattended operation and an operator's task may overlap; summing both can overstate elapsed time. A queue can lengthen delivery without adding the same amount of labour.
Agree the planning basis before changing standards
Use recent examples that reflect the mix the smaller business intends to accept. Separate routine work from jobs with unusual requirements, and explain where evidence is thin. A single easy job should not become the standard for every order.
Ask how each site handles first-off work, repeat batches, inspection, setup reuse and expected rework. Do not hide unresolved differences inside an average. If the teams use different definitions, preserve both figures until the comparison is understood.
The small-batch replacement example shows why setup and running time can pull a decision in different directions. The same issue can affect consolidation even when no equipment changes.
Check the estimate against the combined route
A locally sensible estimate may omit a handoff that becomes necessary after the sites combine. Travel to shared inspection, record approval and material availability can all change the route. Use the combined capacity review to test those dependencies before treating a spreadsheet total as achievable output.
Record who approved the revised planning basis and where it will be used. Keep the assumptions visible during the workload trial, so an apparent improvement can be traced to actual performance rather than a changed definition.
Only then decide whether equipment has lost its continuing role. UK Auction Group can discuss the surplus resulting from a consolidation. Give the enquiry the current release conditions; an optimistic estimate alone does not establish that a machine is no longer needed.
Sources
This guide is general information and education only. Legal, tax, employment and safety decisions may need a qualified adviser who knows your situation. Read the disclaimer.