Técnicas e instrumentos para el proceso metodológico

Ships (%) stayed at berth Ship (%) stayed at port

44% <2 Days 34% <2 Days

25% 3-4 Days 26% 3-4 Days

26% 5-13 Days 32% 5-13 Days

5% >13 Days 8% >13 Days

Source: Massawa Port Report of 1998

Service time is the time spent by the ship at berth , that is from time of berthing up to time of departure. In Massawa Port, according to Table 8, the service time has been decreased by 5% yearly, but waiting time has been increased by 35%. This shows

hand in hand with this development, the berth occupancy also increased. This was basically due to the consequence of firstly, there has not been done significant investment for the poor infrastructure and superstructure due to shortage of funding. Secondly, the inefficient administrative formalities, high non-working periods, and informal slack of shifting time. Thirdly, loose supervision and controlling system; and lastly, lack of co-ordination of different sections and workers, such as tally clerks, storekeepers, supervisors, trucks, and cargo handling equipment. The above reasons caused very low effective working hours; especially late starting and early finishing were common in each shift especially during the night. Consequently, the ship turn-around time is affected. In general, the average days of a ship service time were more than three days and the details can be summarised in the following Table 8.

In summary: the ship turn-around time is the summation of waiting time and service time. In Massawa Port, it was increased on average by 2% yearly. There were many factors that influenced the turn-around time, but the major factor was the unavailability of berth particularly at a peak season when the berth occupancy rate reached 75-80%. The idle time, non-operating time, and non-scheduling of service had also its own contribution to the increase in ship turn-around time.

Moreover, the analysis of ship turn round time is also supported by the grade of waiting time ratio and idle time ratio. The details can be seen in Table 8.

4.2.2. Grade of waiting time

The other indicator, which the ship owners used for evaluating the quality of the port, is grade of waiting. It is the ratio of cumulated waiting time to cumulated service time. However, the average grade of waiting was 23%. This indicates that non- working time was high, that is 23% of the service time.

4.2.3. Ship out-turns

Another quality of service measurement is ship out-turn. This measurement is done by comparing what is actually discharged from a ship with the condition or information expressed in the manifest about the cargo. This enables the port to know how much of the cargo is short landed, excess landed, damaged or deteriorated. In other words, it measures the efficiency and due care of the cargo handling operation of the port. In Massawa Port, this evaluation is done by ‘out-turn report stuff’. This stuff is considered as neutral body and its report is as evidence for any claim by any concerned body. Even the port cargo handling service charge is based up on the out- turn report. However, the report of this stuff might not be fully pure information and trusty especially for the general cargo. This is because the out-turn report personnel, as a witness, are not involved directly during the cargo handling operation, but they check and compare , that is what the actually handled cargo and the actual conditions mentioned at the manifest together with the captain comments during the cargo handling operation, after the ship work completion. Therefore, as the report comprises personal views of the third party, it might not be a perfect report because the concerned party might give the distorted comments to escape from accountability.

In summary, though the ship turn-around time is very important for analysing the working time, non-working time and waiting time, the result is given on average. Hence, the port needs careful examination of the result because the port is seriously affected by seasonal fluctuations. Besides, according to Prof. Francou lecture notes, the comparison of the grade of waiting time gives good information of what is acceptable by ship owners. Ship owners accept the port as a quality port if the grade of waiting time is equal or less than 10% rate; beyond this rate, they consider the port as a low quality one' (Francou. 1999, p.7). Depending on the above statement, the port has had a deficiency in quality of the services, because the grade of waiting was

competent and efficient in its management system because improving the management and supervision system plays a great role in increasing productivity and reducing idle time. This will give the opportunity of the reduction of the waiting time. Finally, the management has to give due consideration to sufficiency of storage area, efficiency of quay transfer operation, adequacy of labour, qualification of supervisors and competency of management, because they contribute greatly to the reduction of ship turn-around time.

4.3. Indicators of utilisation

Indicators of utilisation are very important for indicating how the facilities and resources are utilised. In Massawa Port, the most common indicators of utilisation are berth utilisation, equipment utilisation and storage utilisation. The details can be explained as follows:

4.3.1. Indicators of berth utilisation

Berth utilisation is the possibilities of maximum usage of berth by using different means and best techniques. The efficient berth utilisation depends on good planning and co-ordination of resources and facilities. The more efficient the utilisation of resources and facilities, the more perfect the berth utilisation will be. Berth utilisation embraces berth occupancy and berth working time.

a. Berth Occupancy

Berth occupancy is the ratio of berth occupied hours to the total berth hours during a specific period. The result of this indicator shows the degree of utilisation , that is either above or below the average. Berth occupancy varies from season to season. This can be seen from the following Table 10.and 11.

TABLE 10. SUMMARY OF BERTH OCCUPANCY RATIO OF 1998