Skip to content
Pro Solutors

Improve and InnovateCase Study

Improving Production Flow and Output

How a precast concrete manufacturer lifted output by a third in nine months

Client
Example Precast Works Ltd (fictional precast concrete manufacturer)
Prepared by
Pro Solutors
Reference
PS-SAMPLE-002
Edition
Sample, October 2026
A production hall with a raised assembly platform where teams review process flow and planning boards
Sample - Fictional company

This is an illustrative sample. The company, project and all figures are fictional and are not real client data or real client results. It shows the structure and standard of our reports.

01

The result at a glance

+33%
daily output (18 to 24 elements)
9% to 3.5%
rework rate
71% to 92%
on-time delivery
About 5 months
payback on the one-off investment
Result at a glance
ItemDetail
ClientExample Precast Works Ltd (fictional precast concrete manufacturer)
Our solutionImprove and Innovate
Duration2 weeks of review, 9 months of phased implementation with the client team
OutcomeOutput up by a third, rework cut by more than half, on-time delivery from 71% to 92%.

All results are fictional and illustrative.

02

The challenge

Example Precast Works (about 60 staff, two shifts) had more orders than it could deliver. Demand was rising, but output had been stuck at about 18 elements a day for over a year. The team was working hard and adding overtime, yet deliveries kept slipping. Nobody could say clearly where the time was going.

  • Stuck output

    18 elements a day for 12 months, while orders grew.

  • Idle formwork

    Formwork sat idle for 31% of each shift, waiting for a free curing bed or for clean-down.

  • Rework

    9% of elements needed repair or remake, mostly from missed checks before pouring.

  • Late visibility

    Progress was tracked on paper and a whiteboard, so late deliveries were seen too late.

  • Overtime

    14% of labour hours were overtime, with rising cost and tired crews.

03

Our approach

  1. Review

    Walked the plant, interviewed supervisors and operators, and analysed two weeks of shift data.

  2. Find

    Listed 12 improvement opportunities across production, quality, planning and equipment.

  3. Prioritise

    Ranked each by impact and effort so the client started with what pays back fastest.

  4. Plan

    Built a phased roadmap with an owner, a target and a date for every action.

The main opportunities, ranked

Ranked opportunities
OpportunityImpactEffortPhase
Live digital production board showing the status of every elementHighLow1
Pre-pour checklist with photo sign-off at each stage gateMediumLow1
Standard formwork sets with quick-change fittingsHighMedium2
Curing scheduling using temperature sensors to release beds earlierHighMedium2
Reinforcement cage jigs and a pre-assembly cellMediumHigh3
Supplier delivery windows aligned to the pour planLowLow3

04

The roadmap

  1. Step 1 · Weeks 1 to 6

    1. Quick wins

    Production board; pre-pour checklist

    Goal: Make problems visible; cut rework

  2. Step 2 · Months 2 to 5

    2. Flow

    Standard formwork; sensor-based curing

    Goal: Remove idle time; free up curing beds

  3. Step 3 · Months 6 to 9

    3. Scale

    Cage jigs pilot; supplier windows; review

    Goal: Lock in gains and set next targets

05

The evidence and results

Results
MeasureBeforeAfterChange
Elements produced per day1824+33%
Rework rate9%3.5%-61%
On-time delivery71%92%+21 points
Curing bed utilisation58%79%+21 points
Overtime share of labour hours14%6%-8 points
Elements produced per day (illustrative)

Output rose steadily as each phase landed. The biggest steps came after the production board (month 2) and the new curing schedule (months 4 and 5).

Elements produced per day (illustrative)
PeriodValue
Start18
M118
M219
M320
M421
M522
M623
M723
M824
M924

06

Value delivered (illustrative)

Annual benefit and investment
Annual benefitUSD thousands
Lower rework cost95
Lower overtime70
Margin on extra output190
Fewer late-delivery penalties55
Total annual benefit410
One-off investment165

Payback

The one-off investment of 165k (sensors, formwork, software, training) is recovered in about five months of full benefit.

07

What made it work

  • Start with visibility.

    The cheapest change, a live production board, exposed the real delays within days.

  • Rank before you spend.

    Quick, low-effort wins paid for the bigger changes that followed.

  • Use the client team.

    Supervisors owned each action, so the changes stayed after we left.

  • Measure the same things throughout.

    Five measures were tracked every week against the starting figures.

08

What comes next

  • Extend sensor-based curing to the second production line.
  • Review the six opportunities held back, starting with the highest impact.
  • Set new targets: 26 elements a day and rework below 3%.
  • Consider the Align Your Technical Data solution to connect drawings, bar schedules and production records.

Assumptions and limits

  • Example Precast Works Ltd is fictional. All data, results and costs are illustrative.
  • A real case study would use the client data and be published only with their written permission.
  • Results depend on the client starting point, team and market, and are never guaranteed.

This is an illustrative sample. The company, project and all figures are fictional and are not real client data or real client results. It shows the structure and standard of our reports.

Innovation Roadmap Sprint

A short, fixed-scope sprint that turns improvement ideas into a prioritised roadmap you can act on.

What happens after you submit

  1. Problem received

    You describe it through the form.

  2. Read by an engineer

    Every submission is read by an engineer.

  3. A clear yes or no, and a next step

    You hear back within 2 working days.