Painting
Painter Productivity Calculator
Measures an individual painter's output, where the comparison has to be like for like.
Result
Not all unbilled time is waste. Travel, restocking, training and warranty calls are necessary and will never be zero. The useful question is whether the share is drifting, not whether it reaches 100%.
Get a Free Business AuditHow the calculation works
Billable hours against paid hours per painter, with the value of the unbilled time shown. The caution with individual productivity in this trade is that the work is not uniform: a painter doing cutting-in and trim all week produces far fewer square feet than one rolling open wall, and comparing them on area makes the more skilled work look like underperformance.
What moves the number
- Task mix, since trim and cutting-in produce far less area than rolling.
- Job condition, which varies the preparation share.
- Experience, which affects both speed and the amount of rework.
- Whether the painter is also doing setup and cleanup.
Where this one goes wrong
Comparing painters on square feet per hour without accounting for task mix penalises the ones doing the difficult work, and in a trade where the careful cutting-in is what the customer actually notices that is a bad incentive to create. Compare within task type, or compare on jobs completed to standard rather than area. Rework is the other thing to measure, because a fast painter who generates callbacks costs more than a slower one who does not, and raw output misses that entirely.
Before you quote
- Compare within task type rather than on total area.
- Count rework and callbacks against raw output.
- Account for who is doing setup and cleanup.
Questions
About this calculator
Can painters be compared on square feet per hour?
Only within the same task. A painter doing trim and cutting-in all week produces far less area than one rolling open wall, and comparing them on area makes the more skilled work look like underperformance, which is a poor incentive to create.
What else should be measured besides speed?
Rework and callbacks, because a fast painter who generates return visits costs more than a slower one who does not. Raw output misses that completely, and in a trade judged on finish quality it is the measure that actually matters to the business.
Is a slower painter worth keeping?
Frequently, if the work is right first time and the finish is good. The cost of a callback includes the trip, the materials, the time and the damage to the relationship, and a painter who avoids them is often cheaper overall than one producing more square feet.
The formula
utilisation = billed hours / paid hours
Put this calculator on your site
Free to embed. Paste this where you want it to appear. It stays up to date automatically because it loads from BDEVY.
Please keep the attribution line. It is the only thing we ask in return.
How to use this calculator
- Paid hours per day. Enter your own figure; the page starts at 8.
- Hours that reach an invoice. Enter your own figure; the page starts at 5.2.
- Number of technicians. Enter your own figure; the page starts at 4.
- Rate charged per hour ($). Enter your own figure; the page starts at $68.
- Cost per paid hour ($). Wage plus burden.
- Working days per month. Enter your own figure; the page starts at 22.
The result updates as you type, so you can try a figure, see what it does to billable share of the day, and change it back. Nothing you enter is sent anywhere or saved.
A worked example
These are the figures the calculator opens with. Every number in the results column below is produced by the same calculation the page runs, so you can follow it through before putting your own figures in.
What goes in
| Input | Value |
|---|---|
| Paid hours per day | 8 |
| Hours that reach an invoice | 5.2 |
| Number of technicians | 4 |
| Rate charged per hour | $68 |
| Cost per paid hour | $34 |
| Working days per month | 22 |
What comes out
| Result | Value |
|---|---|
| Billable share of the day main result | 65.0% |
| Unbilled hours per month | 246 |
| Revenue those hours would have carried | $16,755 |
| What the unbilled hours cost in wages | $8,378 |
65.0% of the paid day reaches an invoice. The rest is 246 hours a month, costing $8,378 in wages and carrying $16,755 of revenue that never happened.
How sensitive the answer is
Holding everything else steady and changing only rate charged per hour, this is what happens to billable share of the day. It is worth knowing which of your inputs the answer actually hinges on, and which barely move it.
| Rate charged per hour ($) | Billable share of the day |
|---|---|
| $34 | 65.0% |
| $51 | 65.0% |
| $68 example above | 65.0% |
| $102 | 65.0% |
| $136 | 65.0% |
Every other input is held at the example value while this one changes, which is not how a real job behaves. Treat it as a guide to which number matters most, not as five separate quotes.
What each figure means
- Paid hours per day
- A number, between 0 and 24, starting at 8.
- Hours that reach an invoice
- A number, between 0 and 24, starting at 5.2.
- Number of technicians
- A number, between 0 and 500, starting at 4.
- Rate charged per hour ($)
- A money amount, starting at $68.
- Cost per paid hour ($)
- Wage plus burden.
- Working days per month
- A number, between 0 and 31, starting at 22.
What the results tell you
| Result | What it is |
|---|---|
| Billable share of the day | The headline result. A percentage. |
| Unbilled hours per month | A number. |
| Revenue those hours would have carried | A money figure. |
| What the unbilled hours cost in wages | A money figure. |
Estimating is the easy part
The jobs you never hear about cost more than the ones you mis-measure. BDEVY builds the marketing, systems and automation that bring them in.