This report produces a set of figures that help you assess, on a comparison basis between technicians, how well each is doing in terms of completing on the first visit, versus second, versus third, versus requiring four or more trips for completion.  It also allows a comparison of comparative averages, total quantity of jobs completed, etc.

Please note how the leftward graph allows you to visually compare (and at a glance) how your techs are comparing in regard to needing more than one trip, or not (you can easily see via comparative yellow/red/blue bands, for example, that BB is comparing poorly).  The two rightward graphs (cyan and violet) similarly allow at-a-glance comparison of how the techs compare on average trips-per-job and average days startto-completion.

In the case of all graphs, it’s also easy to compare with company-wide averages and numbers, as shown in the top/red section.  Indeed, you can think of the company-side values as providing a “par” figure, against which each tech can be compared.

Methodology for this report is as follows:

1. ‍The system reads within your archived JobRecords, beginning at the most recent, and working toward the oldest.
2. ‍It continues reading in such succession until having either: (a) reached record position 1; or (b) encountered at least 500 records that are older than your specified date range.
3. ‍The determination of whether a job fits within the specified date range is based on its OriginDate.
4. ‍For each job that’s found to fit within the date range, the system tallies quantity of visits by reading in the narrative history.
5. ‍For the main section as applicable to each tech, it determines which tech the job should be credited to by looking, in the narrative history, to see which tech was there first.  The theory is a different tech might be called upon to finish a job that a less competent one failed to (but should have) finished with fewer trips.  It’s not the tech who finished, but the one who should have finished earlier that should be charged with multiple trips.
6. ‍For the little final-line section as applicable to each tech (i.e., showing Total Completes and Avg Completes/Business Day ), it concentrates instead on the last tech who performed on the job.  It would not seem sensible, simply, to credit a mere initiating tech with job completions.
7. ‍For the last figure in that final-line section (i.e., showing Avg Days from Start To Finish ), the system tallies only those jobs where it’s one and the same tech who was there for both the first and final visit.  The thinking here is that, for such a figure, if different techs were involved, to tally this figure to either one of them.
8. ‍Please also note that, in regard to that final figure (showing Avg Days from Start To Finish ), we are counting days between first visit and final visit —not between the date the job was written and the final visit.  Since this is a measure of technician performance, there is no reason to include time between when the customer requested service and the date of the first visit.

In respect Average - Completes - Per - Business - Day , please note the first figure is derived on the basis a five-day work week.  In other words, the system looks at the date range involved, and figures how many standard week days (Monday through Friday) fit within that period.  It’s on the basis of that figure that it calculates the quantity of standard “business” days, using that figure as the denominator to calculate completes (for the technician who did the complete) per such standard business day.

In regard to Average - Completes - Per - Day - Worked , by contrast, the system’s method is to count, as a day worked by any particular, any day in which there’s an entry in an applicable JobRecord showing that he completed a work visit, on a job, on that day.  No others days are counted.  For the operation as a whole (i.e., “ALL” in the tally), any day on which any tech worked (according to the above-described criteria) is counted as a work day.

Base on the above, you may note some interesting comparisons.  Some of your techs may show higher completes per business day than per day worked.  For those, it’s evident they must have worked more days than are involved in the measure of standard business days.  Other techs may show higher completes per days worked than per business day.  For those, it should be evident that, for the period in question, they worked fewer days than are involved in the measure of standard business days .  Another interesting factor; you’ll likely find less variation, among the techs, in completes per days worked, as opposed to completes per business day.