Rex says
Money math without the spreadsheet headache. Plug in your numbers and I'll show you exactly where the dollars land.
Try a scenario
Click to load — tweak from there.Inputs
Result
Efficiency
115.8%
Proficiency
102.3%
Utilization
88.4%
Idle/non-billed paid hours
20.0
Psst — share this and help Rex grow
One click, a permanent link with your numbers baked in.
How to use this
- 1Enter flat-rate (flag) hours produced (hrs).
- 2Enter hours clocked in on jobs (hrs).
- 3Enter total paid hours available (hrs).
- 4Read your efficiency on the right — it updates as you type.
- 5Hit Share to keep the scenario or send it to someone.
About this calculator
Efficiency and proficiency get conflated constantly, and mixing them up leads to wrong conclusions about a technician's real performance. Efficiency is flat-rate hours produced divided by hours actually clocked in — it tells you how fast the tech works against the book. Proficiency is flat-rate hours produced divided by hours available (clocked-in hours plus paid time off, training, and other non-productive paid time) — it tells you how much of the tech's total paid time converts into billable output, which captures absenteeism and shop-caused downtime like parts delays or lack of work. A tech can be 130% efficient (fast worker) but only 85% proficient if they're sitting idle waiting on parts or work orders three hours a day. Shops that only track efficiency miss the productivity killed by poor workflow, thin car count, or bad scheduling, and end up blaming the tech for a shop-level problem.
Worked example
Using the values the calculator loads with:
Inputs
- Flat-rate (flag) hours produced: 176 hrs
- Hours clocked in on jobs: 152 hrs
- Total paid hours available: 172 hrs
Results
- Efficiency: 115.8%
- Proficiency: 102.3%
- Utilization: 88.4%
- Idle/non-billed paid hours: 20
What each field means
Inputs
- Flat-rate (flag) hours produced (hrs)
- The flat-rate (flag) hours produced used in the calculation, measured in hrs. Starts at 176 hrs so you have a working example on load.
- Hours clocked in on jobs (hrs)
- The hours clocked in on jobs used in the calculation, measured in hrs. Starts at 152 hrs so you have a working example on load.
- Total paid hours available (hrs)
- The total paid hours available used in the calculation, measured in hrs. Starts at 172 hrs so you have a working example on load.
Results
- Efficiency
- Returned as a percentage and shown as the headline result. It recalculates instantly whenever you change an input, so you can compare scenarios without reloading.
- Proficiency
- Returned as a percentage. It recalculates instantly whenever you change an input, so you can compare scenarios without reloading.
- Utilization
- Returned as a percentage. It recalculates instantly whenever you change an input, so you can compare scenarios without reloading.
- Idle/non-billed paid hours
- Returned as a decimal number. It recalculates instantly whenever you change an input, so you can compare scenarios without reloading.
FAQ
What's a good efficiency number?
Experienced techs on straightforward maintenance and diagnostic work commonly run 110-140% efficiency. New techs or those doing heavy diagnostic/electrical work may run 85-100% and still be fully competent — flat-rate times assume average conditions that don't always match the actual car in the bay.
Why can proficiency be low even with high efficiency?
Because proficiency captures time the tech is paid for but not working — waiting on parts, waiting on approvals, shop meetings, training. A 130%-efficient tech with only 80% proficiency is a fast worker being starved of consistent work, which is a scheduling and workflow problem, not a skill problem.
How do I raise proficiency without overworking techs?
Fix the utilization gap first: better appointment scheduling, faster parts sourcing, pre-pulling parts before the car arrives, and reducing the time a tech waits for advisor approval on additional work. Those changes convert idle paid hours into billed hours without asking anyone to work harder.
Should pay plans be based on efficiency or proficiency?
Efficiency, because it reflects what the individual tech controls. Basing pay on proficiency punishes techs for shop-level failures like parts delays, which breeds resentment and turnover even when the tech is performing well.
Accuracy and limitations
- Results are estimates before tax, fees, and inflation unless an input explicitly covers them.
- Rates are treated as fixed for the whole period — variable-rate products will drift from this projection.
- This is educational maths, not financial advice. Check anything contractual with the lender or your accountant.
Related tools
Cite this calculator
Writing about this topic? Grab a citation — every link helps keep these tools free.
RevenueLab. (2026). Technician Efficiency & Proficiency Calculator. Retrieved from https://www.revenuelab.fyi/toolbox/technician-efficiency-proficiency
<p>Source: <a href="https://www.revenuelab.fyi/toolbox/technician-efficiency-proficiency" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Technician Efficiency & Proficiency Calculator — RevenueLab</a> (2026).</p>
Source: [Technician Efficiency & Proficiency Calculator — RevenueLab](https://www.revenuelab.fyi/toolbox/technician-efficiency-proficiency) (2026).