Productivity in the construction industry 2017

Transcription

1 Study Report SR388 [2018] Productivity in the construction industry 2017 Matthew Curtis

2 1222 Moonshine Rd RD1, Porirua 5381 Private Bag Porirua 5240 New Zealand branz.nz The work reported here was funded by BRANZ from the Building Research Levy. BRANZ 2018 ISSN:

3 Preface This is the first of two reports on the BRANZ Levy-funded project ER0899 Monitoring industry performance. The project allows us to report on the performance of the industry, comment on what these changes mean for the industry and update the BRANZ Construction Dashboard. Acknowledgements We would like to thank the Building Research Levy for funding this piece of work. i

4 Productivity in the construction industry 2017 BRANZ Study Report SR388 Author Matthew Curtis Reference Curtis, M. (2018). Productivity in the construction industry BRANZ Study Report SR388. Judgeford, New Zealand: BRANZ Ltd. Abstract This report provides up-to-date productivity data for the construction industry. It presents the results of the BRANZ research project ER0899, building on previous work undertaken by researchers interested in productivity in the construction industry. The official productivity measures have shown improvement recently. This comes at a time when output is at a record high, aided by the Christchurch rebuild and earthquake strengthening work. Keywords Productivity, labour productivity, multi-factor productivity, construction productivity, innovation, costs, quality ii

5 Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION PRODUCTIVITY MEASURES... 3 Labour productivity... 3 Multi-factor productivity WHAT AFFECTS PRODUCTIVITY?... 6 Output... 6 Labour Costs Quality Research and development REFERENCES APPENDIX A: DATA SOURCES iii

6 Figures Figure 1. Construction productivity Figure 2. Labour productivity comparator industries Figure 3. Multi-factor productivity comparator industries Figure 4. Real GDP comparator industries Figure 5. What we are building Figure 6. Where we are building (residential) Figure 7. The effect of the Canterbury rebuild Figure 8. Labour productivity flat compared to production Figure 9. Labour inputs increase at a similar rate to production Figure 10. Hiring a new manager or professional has not been difficult Figure 11. Hiring tradespersons and related workers was much more difficult Figure 12. Costs of production have been rising in the construction industry Figure 13. Prices received for outputs Figure 14. Construction prices have increased Figure 15. Construction prices are rising faster than general inflation Figure 16. The quality of new residential buildings is increasing Figure 17. The majority of respondents had to call back their builder Figure 18. Most respondents would recommend their builder Figure 19. Builders have performed well to deliver quality new homes Figure 20. Most construction firms not undertaking research and development iv

7 Executive summary The latest official productivity statistics make good reading for the construction industry. Since March 2010, the productivity statistics are trending upwards. This comes at a time when the industry s output is booming. Since March 2010, the industry has increased its output by 3.4% per year. The Canterbury rebuild, catch-up in Auckland and earthquake strengthening work have contributed to the growth in output. At the same time, the prices that the industry is paying for inputs continue to climb. Historically, the industry has not been able to recover these increased costs through higher prices for their outputs, which has eaten into profit margins and productivity. 1

8 1. Introduction This report aims to update industry on the latest productivity trends in the official productivity measures. Productivity is seen by some parts of the industry as an area where the current body of knowledge is still inadequate (Kantar TNS, 2016). The focus is largely on how the official productivity measures have changed since our last report. However, given the growth in output in the industry, there is commentary on how the industry has responded to the additional output, how costs and quality are changing and innovation in the industry. 2

9 2. Productivity measures The first section of this report focuses on the latest trends in the official productivity measures. Labour productivity, capital productivity and multi-factor productivity are common means for measuring productivity, and Figure 1 illustrates the changes for each measure for the construction industry. Labour and multi-factor productivity seem to move largely in tandem, with growth in multi-factor productivity being slightly less than labour productivity. However, capital productivity is much lower than labour and multi-factor productivity. Capital productivity has decreased by 34% since 1978 (or about 1.1% each year). This is due to the increases in capital units over the period, 1 which was increasing at a faster rate than output. The use of more capital units should lead to an increase in labour productivity, as the same number of labour units should be able to produce a higher level of output. However, in the case of construction, this does not appear to have happened. Index (Mar-78 = 1000) Labour productivity Capital productivity Multi-factor productivity Figure 1. Construction productivity. Labour productivity Labour productivity is perhaps the most easily understood measure of productivity. Put simply, it measures GDP generated by any one industry (or the economy as a whole) divided by the number of paid hours of work (labour units) in the industry (or economy). Labour productivity is measured by the following: llllllllllll pppppppppppppppppppppppp = GGGGGG gggggggggggggggggg bbbb iiiiiiiiiiiiiiii pppppppp hoooooooo oooo wwwwwwww bbbb iiiiiiiissssssss 1 See Page and Norman (2014) for more information on capital units. 3

10 Figure 2 shows that labour productivity has risen slowly in the construction industry, particularly when compared to the selected comparator industries. Growth in labour productivity in the construction industry has averaged 0.6% per year since 2011, slightly lower than the 0.8% per year growth since The comparator industries have had a much higher rate of growth, particularly agriculture, forestry and fishing, and electricity, gas, water and waste services. Unlike the construction industry, the agriculture, forestry and fishing industry is a tradable export industry and is therefore subject to world demand. Manufacturing had a much more modest increase in labour productivity, growing at 1.3% per year since This industry typically employs heavy machinery in the production process, and therefore labour productivity gains have been made through technological advancements Index (Mar-78 = 1000) Construction Manufacturing Agriculture, forestry and fishing Electricity, gas, water and waste services Figure 2. Labour productivity comparator industries. Multi-factor productivity Multi-factor productivity measures changes in total productivity not caused by changes in the number of labour and capital units. These changes tend to be brought about through long-term technology changes, improved skills, management and training. Multi-factor productivity is measured by the following: mmmmmmmmmm ffffffffffff pppppppppppppppppppppppp = GGGGGG gggggggggggggggggg bbbb iiiiiiiiiiiiiiii cccccccccccccc uuuuuuuuuu + llaaaaaaaaaa uuuuuuuuuu bbbb iiiiiiiiiiiiiiii 2 Figure 3 shows the agriculture, forestry and fishing industry had the strongest growth in multi-factor productivity over the period, increasing by 134% since March The construction and manufacturing industries have had comparatively modest growth in multi-factor productivity over the same period, growing by 19% and 7% respectively. 2 Capital and labour units are measured by Stats NZ using indices (see Appendix A). 4

11 The low growth in multi-factor productivity in the construction industry suggests that there has been a lack of uptake of technological improvements and little improvement in the skills of workers. This could be due to the boom-bust nature of the industry, where it is difficult for firm owners to invest in skills. When demand is high, highly skilled workers are in high demand, and when demand is low, there is not enough work to keep highly skilled workers employed. In addition, changes in project management should yield improved productivity for the industry. In an industry where planning can be difficult due to the multitude of possible changes to any project, improving the management of projects can lead to efficiency and productivity gains. Index (Mar-78 = 1000) Construction Manufacturing Agriculture, forestry and fishing Electricity, gas, water and waste services Figure 3. Multi-factor productivity comparator industries. 5

12 3. What affects productivity? Productivity, in general, is a measure of how many outputs are produced by each unit of input. For the construction industry, this means how many buildings we can construct (or add to or alter) with the labour and equipment that we have available. Output can be measured in a number of ways. The most common measure is real gross domestic product (real GDP). Real GDP measures the value of economic output accounting for changes in prices (inflation). Given that there is not a standard unit of output, real GDP is the sum of profits plus wages/salaries, less depreciation, for the industry. We also include the value of consents in the following section on output. The value of consents gives an indication as to what work is on the immediate horizon and tracks roughly in line with real GDP. However, we use nominal values (unadjusted) for the consent data presented in the following section rather than the real data used for GDP. One way to increase productivity is to improve output with a fixed number of inputs. Alternatively, if fewer inputs can produce the same outputs, this would also result in increased productivity. Perhaps the easiest input to vary is labour. The construction industry tends to vary labour successfully as workloads change. However, the result of doing so is that labour productivity remains relatively stable, with short-term movements in productivity caused by a lag in labour responding to changes in workloads. Passing on cost increases is important for any business to maintain profit levels. It also has an influence on productivity, as GDP is a measure of value of economic output, and therefore, when costs are not sufficiently recovered, productivity suffers. In general, the industry has not sufficiently increased prices when the costs of production increase. However, in recent times, the industry has been improving in this. There is also a need to understand how quality has changed over time. Regulations have changed over time, mandating the use of double glazing in new residential buildings, for example. This influences the cost of the work but also results in changes in construction time. However, it is not enough to deliver a quality product. The client also expects their relationship with the builder to be beneficial, including good communication and service throughout the process. Output The amount that an industry is producing is given by the industry GDP. The GDP generated by the industry is an important component of productivity. If an industry can produce more using the same quantity of inputs, productivity will increase. The growth in GDP generated by the construction industry has far exceeded any of the comparator industries we have looked at as part of this report (Figure 4). Between April 1996 and March 2008, construction GDP grew by 86% or 5.3% per year. However, by the year ending March 2011, the construction industry was producing about 7.5% less than it produced for the year ending March This represents a fall in production of about 2.6% each year. 6

13 Both the agriculture, forestry and fishing and manufacturing industries suffered a decrease in GDP like the construction industry during the global financial crisis. However, neither industry experienced the scale of fall (or recovery) in GDP of the construction industry as the economy recovered. Since March 2011, construction GDP has grown strongly, up 23% or 5.2% per year, largely as a result of the Canterbury rebuild and strong demand for new housing in Auckland. In addition, the high cost of Auckland housing will be driving former Aucklanders elsewhere. The high cost of land in Auckland is likely to be forcing some wishing to build a new house to other regions Index (Mar 96 = 1000) Year ending Construction Manufacturing Agriculture, forestry and fishing Electricity, gas, water and waste services Figure 4. Real GDP comparator industries. Figure 5 looks at the nominal 3 value of all consents (including non-building construction) over the same period. The value of all consents, expectedly, follows a similar trend to the construction GDP index in Figure 4. Between April 2002 and March 2006, new residential buildings share of total consents was above 50%. During this period, the nominal value of all consents grew by 61% or 12.6% each year. Overall, as the construction industry is consenting more work, the new residential sector has an increasing share of the value of all consents. Over the last 4 years, new residential consents have increased strongly as a proportion of total consents. This has happened at the same time as the value of total consents increases. The value (in real terms) and number of new residential consents has increased by 57% and 76% respectively since March 2013, illustrating the challenge facing the new residential industry. Type of construction work has an impact on overall industry productivity. Various subindustries in construction have different input requirements and profit margins. Previous BRANZ work (Page, 2013) has shown subindustries such as road and bridge construction, other heavy and civil engineering construction, site preparation services and hire of construction machinery with operator have high value added per employee. These subindustries are more capital intensive than others and so will have higher labour productivities than more labour-intensive industries such as the finishing trades. 3 Unadjusted to account for inflation. 7

14 $25 60% Value $ bn (nominal) $20 $15 $10 $5 55% 50% 45% 40% Share $0 Mar-96 Mar-97 Mar-98 Mar-99 Mar-00 Mar-01 Mar-02 Mar-03 Mar-04 Mar-05 Mar-06 Mar-07 Mar-08 Mar-09 Mar-10 Mar-11 Mar-12 Mar-13 Mar-14 Mar-15 Mar-16 Mar-17 Year ending 35% All construction value (LHS) New residential share of total consents (RHS) Figure 5. What we are building. Figure 6 looks specifically at the residential sector. The Auckland region has typically had a strong share of residential consents. Residential consents in Auckland started slowing down after March 2005, 3 years before the total value of residential consents took a hit following the global financial crisis. The Auckland and Canterbury regions have led the recovery post-march However, the rest of New Zealand has had a strong share of residential consents, as consents are at a record level. Labour can take time to respond to changes in the locations of building activity as it is not perfectly mobile. Therefore, when there are swings in building activity between regions, productivity can suffer as labour takes time to adjust. $12 $10 Value $ bn (nominal) $8 $6 $4 $2 $0 Year ending Auckland Canterbury Rest of NZ Figure 6. Where we are building (residential). 8

15 Canterbury s share of total consents was typically steady between 10% and 15% preearthquake. However, the effect of the Canterbury rebuild is visible in Figure 7 as Canterbury s share of the total consents reached almost 30%, two to three times higher than it had been pre-earthquake. This posed big challenges for the local construction industry as workloads increased and labour was slow to respond. $25 30% Value $ bn (nominal) $20 $15 $10 $5 25% 20% 15% 10% Share $0 Mar-96 Mar-97 Mar-98 Mar-99 Mar-00 Mar-01 Mar-02 Mar-03 Mar-04 Mar-05 Mar-06 Mar-07 Mar-08 Mar-09 Mar-10 Mar-11 Mar-12 Mar-13 Mar-14 Mar-15 Mar-16 Mar-17 Year ending 5% All construction value (LHS) Canterbury share of total consents (RHS) Figure 7. The effect of the Canterbury rebuild. As seen previously, labour productivity for the construction industry has been relatively flat compared to comparator industries. However, production has increased at a much faster rate than those same industries. This has led to a wide gap between production and labour productivity as illustrated in Figure Index (Mar 96 = 1000) Year ending Production (real GDP) Labour productivity Figure 8. Labour productivity flat compared to production. 9

16 The ever-increasing gap between the two, as production continues to increase, suggests there is little change in effort expended by workers as their workloads increase. In addition, given that capital productivity is decreasing and multi-factor productivity is relatively flat, the industry does not become more productive in response to an increase in workloads. On the other hand, during the period of decreasing production during the global financial crisis, labour productivity initially decreases during the year ending March However, labour productivity actually increases during the year ending March 2010 as production continues to fall. Labour The construction industry responds to changing workloads by changing the number of FTEs employed in the industry (i.e. the labour input). Where FTEs and production diverge is where you would expect to get changes in labour productivity such as can be seen between March 2002 and March Figure 9 shows that changes in FTEs and production largely move in tandem. It is difficult for the industry to improve labour productivity if increasing workloads are met with increasing employment. If labour productivity is to improve, the challenge is for the industry to meet the increasing demand without a commensurate increase in FTEs. Since March 2012, FTEs have grown at a faster rate than production Index (Mar 96 = 1000) Year ending Full time equivalents Production (real GDP) Figure 9. Labour inputs increase at a similar rate to production. In firms with six or more employees, the Business Operations Survey (BOS) (Stats NZ, 2016) indicates that there is one manager or professional for every 7.3 employees. Proficient managers and professionals have the ability to put in place better processes and are able to better motivate their workers, minimising downtime and ensuring workers are more productive. The BOS asks to what extent the business experienced difficulty recruiting new staff by occupational group. It seems that the majority of medium to large construction firms do not have to regularly recruit a manager or professional. Not applicable was the 10

17 most common response to the survey. Of those firms that did have to recruit managers and professionals, the majority reported that they had no difficulty. The proportion of respondents stating that they have had some difficulty (moderate or severe) in recruiting managers and professionals had been increasing between 2013 and 2015 (Figure 10). In 2013, just over 12% of respondents stated that they had difficulty. This had grown to about 17% in 2015 as workloads increased and more workers were being sought to meet growing workloads. However, this percentage fell to 13% in % 90% Percentage of respondents 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% No difficulty Moderate difficulty Severe difficulty Not applicable Figure 10. Hiring a new manager or professional has not been difficult. Tradespersons and related workers (including apprentices) are the most commonly employed occupational group in the construction industry. In 2016, they made up 50% of workers in firms with six or more employees. In contrast to Figure 10, most respondents were required to recruit tradespersons and related workers. This resulted in a larger proportion of respondents stating that they had trouble recruiting tradespersons and related workers compared to managers and professionals. Figure 11 shows the proportion of respondents stating that they had difficulty recruiting tradespersons and related workers. In 2014, 2015 and 2016, a greater percentage reported having difficulty recruiting workers than the previous year. However, in both 2007 and 2012, over 20% of respondents stated having difficulty. The year ending March 2008 was a strong year for production in the construction industry (as can be seen in Figure 4), and 2012 was early in the upturn. As has been previously illustrated, the industry tends to respond to increasing workloads with increasing the workforce. Therefore, it is perhaps of little surprise that these difficulties in hiring tradespersons and related workers are prevalent in these years. 11

18 25% Percentage of respondents 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Moderate difficulty Severe difficulty Figure 11. Hiring tradespersons and related workers was much more difficult. Costs Changes in price/cost over time are generally measured through indices. The use of the consumer price index (CPI) is a familiar price index for most people and is the index used when discussing general inflation. Other indices exist that help us understand how other prices and costs are changing. The producer price index (PPI) for inputs indicates how the costs of production are changing (Stats NZ, n.d.). The measure includes the cost of subcontractors but excludes direct labour costs. The producer price index (PPI) for outputs indicates changes in prices received by the industry for its outputs. The capital goods price index (CGPI) measures the change in price by item of capital goods, such as residential buildings, non-residential buildings and civil construction. Figure 12 shows the changes in the PPI for inputs for the construction industry as well as the comparator industries. Both the manufacturing and electricity, gas, water and waste services industries indices fluctuate a lot more than the construction and agriculture, forestry and fishing industries. The construction industry has had a higher increase in costs of production than the comparator industries across the last 21 years. The increase in costs was rising at its fastest rate between April 2004 and March 2007, reaching a year-on-year increase of 10.4% in the year ending March Over the last 3 years, the increase in costs of production has been about 1% each year. 12

19 Index (Mar 96 = 1000) Construction Manufacturing Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing Electricity, gas, water and waste services Figure 12. Costs of production have been rising in the construction industry. The PPI outputs measure for the construction industry and the comparator industries is shown in Figure 13. The input measure shows that the costs of production in the construction industry had grown at a higher rate than the comparator industries. However, the growth in the prices received for inputs was stronger for the electricity, gas, water and waste services industry. In addition, both the manufacturing and agriculture, forestry and fishing industries had stronger growth in the PPI outputs measure until they decreased 3 years ago Index (Mar 96 = 1000) Construction Manufacturing Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing Electricity, gas, water and waste services Figure 13. Prices received for outputs. 13

20 This has meant that the ratio of changes in output prices to input prices in the construction industry remains below 1. This has implications on industry productivity (and profits). A ratio of 1 would mean that the industry is adequately passing on all of the price increases that it faces on its inputs. A ratio below 1 indicates that the industry has not been passing on price increases. The electricity, gas, water and waste services industry has been successful at passing on price increases. The industry s ratio of changes in output prices to input prices is about In comparison, the ratio is just 0.94 for the construction industry. This is lower than all of the comparator industries. The capital goods price index for the residential buildings, non-residential buildings and civil construction groups are shown in Figure 14 along with the consumer price index (CPI). The consumer price index is shown as it is a widely understood price index and therefore can provide a good means of comparison. The CGPI is a measure of the change in the cost of building. It aims to strip out any quality changes to compare a like-for-like building for changes in the cost of the final building. This provides an index for the residential building sector, the non-residential building sector and the civil construction sector. For both the residential buildings and civil construction sectors, the CGPI has increased at a faster rate than the CPI. The CGPI for non-residential buildings has experienced a similar total growth to the CPI over the last 21 years. However, the last 3 years has seen the CGPI for non-residential buildings increase at a faster rate than the CPI. Since March 1996, the price of residential buildings has more than doubled. This equates to an increase of 3.6% each year. Over the same period, the costs of production for the construction industry increased by about 3.2%. This suggests that most of the increase in the price of residential buildings has been due to an increase in the costs that the industry faces Index (Mar 96 = 1000) CGPI residential buildings CGPI civil construction CGPI non-residential buildings CPI Figure 14. Construction prices have increased. 14

21 Figure 15 shows the changes in the selected price indices over the last 5 years. It illustrates that the growth in prices received by the construction industry for its outputs (PPI outputs) has exceeded the growth in the costs of production (PPI inputs). The price of residential buildings has had the strongest growth over the last 5 years, increasing by 24%. In comparison, the price of non-residential buildings and civil construction has increased by about 16% and 8% respectively over the same period. The CPI has had a lower rate of growth than the construction indices. 30% Percentage change (over last 5 years) 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% PPI construction PPI construction (inputs) (outputs) CGPI (residential buildings) CGPI (nonresidential buildings) CGPI (civil construction) CPI Figure 15. Construction prices are rising faster than general inflation. Quality There is no measure of changes in quality using official statistics. Therefore, where the industry has improved the quality of the finished product, this is not being recognised. One way where we can illustrate changes in quality is to compare the dollar per square metre rate using consent information to the CGPI. The CGPI measures the changes in costs to build a standard building. It is structured in a way that aims to capture quality changes separately from nominal price changes so that quality changes can be excluded. Given that the dollar per square metre of consents for non-residential buildings can vary largely based on the mix of building types being built each year, we only compare the rates for new residential buildings. Assuming that changes in quality have been successfully stripped out from changes in prices, the prices for residential buildings has increased by 108% over the 22 years. This is illustrated in Figure 16 by the widening gap between the consents and CGPI indices. In comparison, the consented value of new residential buildings has increased by 159% over this same period. 15

22 Index (Mar 96 = 1000) Year ending Consents $/sqm CGPI residential buildings Figure 16. The quality of new residential buildings is increasing. Another measure of quality (also restricted to new residential buildings) is the BRANZ New House Owners Satisfaction Survey (Curtis, 2017). The survey asks questions on call-backs, likelihood of recommending the builder and client satisfaction. The majority of our respondents stated that they needed to call back their builder or a subtrade to repair defects after first occupancy. The most commonly called back subtrades were the painter, plumber and electrician. Percentage who had to call back their builder 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Survey year Figure 17. The majority of respondents had to call back their builder. Despite the high call-back rate, very few respondents stated that they would speak critically about their builder. In 2014, about 20% of respondents stated that they would speak critically about their builder. In the 2016 survey, 18% of respondents stated that they would speak critically about their builder. The two lines presented in 16

23 Figure 18 will not add to 100% as there is a neutral category that has not been shown below. However, this accounts for about 10% of respondents each year. It was also found that respondents in Auckland and Canterbury were less likely than those in the rest of New Zealand to recommend their builder. In Canterbury in particular, less than 60% of respondents stated that they would recommend their builder, and over 20% stated that they would speak critically about their builder. 90% 80% Percentage of respondents 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Survey year Rec ommend Critical Figure 18. Most respondents would recommend their builder. Respondents are asked to rank their builder across 12 measures on a 5-point scale, with 1 being very poor and 5 being very good. Figure 19 shows the average of the scores given. Average scores declined between 2012 and 2014, but 2015 and 2016 saw a slight improvement in average scores. It is worth noting that these scores have been strong throughout the survey period. 4.4 Average satisfaction score Survey year Figure 19. Builders have performed well to deliver quality new homes. 17

24 Research and development The BOS asks whether businesses had undertaken or funded any research and development (R&D) activities in the last financial year. Over the last 8 years, the overall percentage of all firms surveyed undertaking R&D has been between 7% and 9%. For construction firms, this has been lower in all years apart from 2010 and This was a period where production was low, and since the construction industry s production has picked up, the percentage of firms undertaking R&D has fallen off to between 3% and 5%. 10% 9% 8% % undertaking R&D 7% 6% 5% 4% 3% 2% 1% 0% Construction All industries Figure 20. Most construction firms not undertaking research and development. 18

25 References Curtis, M. (2017). New House Owners Satisfaction Survey BRANZ Study Report SR374. Judgeford, New Zealand: BRANZ Ltd. d5e5d5277b65f777c06 Kantar TNS. (2016). Industry needs survey. Retrieved from eca896c4925e9d Page, I. (2013). Building industry performance measures: Part two. BRANZ Study Report SR290. Judgeford, New Zealand: BRANZ Ltd. 45b3bd88b6e7003ff3 Page, I. & Norman, D. (2014). Measuring construction industry productivity and performance. BRANZ Study Report SR310. Judgeford, New Zealand: BRANZ Ltd bba2c888af5cd7 Stats NZ. (2016). Business Operations Survey information releases. Retrieved from ovation/business-operations-survey-info-releases.aspx Stats NZ. (n.d.). Producers price index: concepts, sources, and methods. Retrieved from ppi-concepts-sources-methods-2015/conceptual-basis.aspx 19

26 Appendix A: Data sources Stats NZ indices In this report, for simplicity, we have referred to the labour and capital inputs as part of the productivity measures as labour units and capital units. Stats NZ does not measure the inputs in this way, instead using indices to measure changes in either of these inputs. These indices form the denominator of the productivity measures in this report. IR10 data The IR10 form is an Inland Revenue tax form that collects data on the income, expenses, assets and liabilities of firms. The form underwent significant changes in 2013, which caused a break in the time series that we had previously used to track profits by subindustry, taxable profits over turnover and value added per person. Stats NZ is currently working with the data to sort out inconsistencies between the old and new data, and therefore, the charts were unable to be updated in this report. BRANZ Construction Dashboard The construction dashboard for key industry statistics has been live now for over a year. The dashboard shows changes in skills shortages, financial liquidity, customer service, injury rates, affordability, activity forecasts and build quality. The construction dashboard can be accessed at and there is a link to the technical report on the website. 20