5 LRTK Implementation Case Studies｜How Much Can a Single Person Improve Efficiency?

As labor shortages at sites become chronic, the demand to carry out tasks such as surveying, setting out, as-built confirmation, and inspection records with "as few people as possible" has been growing year by year. Especially at small sites, short-duration projects, and operations where personnel juggle multiple sites, whether work that used to be done by two people can be completed by one person directly translates into differences in productivity.

On the other hand, there are concerns about working alone. There are worries that confirming measurement points may take longer, that records may be more likely to be missed, and that re-measurements and rework may increase. In practice, simply reducing the number of personnel does not lead to greater efficiency; unless the entire workflow — including travel, verification, recording, and sharing — is changed, the field will instead become strained.

What has been attracting attention is a system that makes centimeter-level positional information easier to handle on-site and supports operations that can be easily completed by a single person. In particular, LRTK is drawing interest as a means to help reduce on-site staffing by making the entire workflow—from situational assessment and positioning to confirmation of as-built conditions and inspection records—easy to manage.

In this article, for practitioners searching for "LRTK case studies", we organize and explain five representative implementation examples so that it is easy to concretely imagine how much efficiency can be achieved by one-person operations. Rather than simply introducing features, we delve into which processes will be shortened, which verification tasks will be reduced, and what kinds of worksites are suitable.

Table of Contents

• Reasons Why Introducing LRTK Leads to Improved Efficiency in Solo Work

• Case Study 1 Small-scale civil engineering site where it became easier for one person to carry out site surveys

• Case Study 2: Site development and foundation work that reduced movement and checks for layout operations

• Case Study 3: Site operations that reduced back-and-forth between as-built verification and construction management

• Case Study 4: Streamlining location-based records for inspection and maintenance

• Case Study 5: Use in emergency response that requires rapid initial verification

• Key Implementation Points to Keep in Mind to Achieve Results When Working Alone

• Summary

Why Implementing LRTK Improves Efficiency for Solo Work

When considering efficiency improvements for one-person operations, many sites tend to focus only on "measuring time." However, in reality, much of the work time is not spent on the measurement itself but on moving around the site, checking against drawings, mutual verification, transcribing records, and organizing after returning to the office. On sites where two-person operations are the norm, it is common for one person to monitor the instrument while the other confirms the target, proceeding while calling out to each other. Although this workflow provides reliability, it requires fixed staffing and makes it difficult to reassign personnel to other tasks.

The reason LRTK is well suited to single-person work is that it makes it easy for judgment and recording to be completed by the same person without having to split the roles of someone who verifies positions and someone who records them. Because the operator can grasp their current location and the target position on site and handle coordinates and records on the spot, it reduces the need to switch equipment or have another person read values aloud. This makes it easier not merely to reduce the crew by one person, but to redesign the workflow itself to be shorter.

Also, when working alone, the ease of rechecking is extremely important. With two people, you can make up for each other’s oversights on the spot, but when you’re alone and only notice a missing record after leaving the site, the burden of revisiting is significant. Systems like LRTK that can link location information with on-site records are well suited to labor reduction in that they tend to lower the risk of having to revisit. When you review what was recorded on site later, being able to clearly see where the information was taken directly improves the efficiency of photo organization and report preparation.

Furthermore, the value of single-person work is not "complete unmanning" but "being able to reassign other personnel to different processes." Personnel who had been assisting with surveying can be redirected to safety management or task reorganization, and personnel who had been accompanying inspection work can be assigned to construction, thereby improving productivity across the entire site. The effect of introducing LRTK is less about enabling solo work itself than about creating flexibility in personnel deployment throughout the site.

Of course, you can't unconditionally reduce staffing to a single person at every site. Depending on visibility conditions, the openness of the sky, the surrounding environment, the required accuracy, and the importance of the process, there will be situations that require checks by multiple people. Even so, just being able to have one person handle parts of tasks that used to require two people every time can significantly change on-site operations. That's why, when considering LRTK implementation cases, the important perspective is not "should we replace everything" but "which processes are easiest to shift to one-person operation."

Case Study 1: A Small-Scale Civil Engineering Site Where Existing-Condition Surveying Became Easier to Carry Out by a Single Person

One of the clearest examples of implementation is surveying the existing conditions at small-scale civil engineering sites. For example, site checks before pavement repairs, inspections before starting exterior works, obtaining elevations before temporary construction planning, and determining the extent of partial earthworks emphasize quickly capturing the necessary locations rather than conducting broad-area precision surveys. On such sites, it has often been customary for two people to go to the field, with one person taking measurements and the other assisting.

However, in actual practice, even though the target area is not that large, the points that need to be checked are scattered, so every time you move there is back-and-forth communication, and it surprisingly takes time. Selection of survey points, verification against drawings, and decisions about additional data collection also arise each time, so there are many occasions when staff experienced in field work feel, "I want to make the decisions myself and capture everything in one go." Introducing LRTK changes the tempo of this kind of as-built survey.

For example, while walking the site you can collect the required points on the spot, making it easier to add inspection points for anomalies or areas near boundaries. Not only the measurement points planned in advance, but locations you decide upon after seeing the site—"I should capture this change in elevation" or "I should record this change in the slope shoulder"—can be collected continuously as you go, reducing the likelihood of needing to revisit. The fact that a task can be completed by one person also means greater flexibility in planning.

In this case, the efficiency gain comes not so much from the measurement itself as from integrating on-site decision-making and recordkeeping. Even at sites that used to proceed with consultation about measurement points under the assumption that an assistant would be present, the person in charge can work at their own pace, so the workflow is less likely to be interrupted. As a result, checks that used to take half a day can be completed in a short time, allowing the afternoon to be used for other on-site checks or administrative tasks. The value of being able to enter a site alone lies not only in shortening individual tasks but in allowing the entire day's schedule to be reorganized.

Also, smaller sites more often request to "get an overview within the day," so rapid initial response is emphasized. When there is no need to wait to secure assistants for scheduling, start-up decisions are made more quickly and overall project delays are reduced. On such sites, it is more practical for construction managers and site supervisors to obtain the necessary information themselves than to assemble a highly specialized surveying team. LRTK is well suited as a field tool for that kind of operation.

Moreover, site surveys also help prevent mistakes in subsequent processes. If elevations and the conditions near boundaries can be confirmed early before construction starts, the accuracy of material procurement and construction planning improves. When there is a system that allows one person to quickly grasp the site conditions, pre-construction anxiety is reduced and it becomes easier to prevent rework caused by insufficient checks. The term "labor reduction" alone tends to give the strong impression of cutting personnel, but in reality creating a system to "quickly and accurately grasp conditions" is the shortcut to reducing waste on site.

Case Study 2: Land development and foundation work that reduced movement and verification of layout tasks

The second situation where the benefits of introducing LRTK become readily apparent is earthworks and foundation work that involve positioning. Positioning is a key on-site task, and any deviation will affect all subsequent operations. Therefore careful verification is required, yet these processes are also prone to taking time for "moving to perform checks" and "cross-checking with drawings." Particularly for many-point positioning with small amounts at each point, it's the preparations to move to the next point—rather than the time spent on each individual point—that determine the overall duration.

On conventional sites, it's common for one person to read the drawings and give instructions while another aligns positions on the site, and as the number of target points increases, round trips and verbal calls increase. Even when the construction area is small, if there are many obstacles or poor footing, the accumulated verification actions take far more time than expected. Positioning is not a one-off task but is repeated for each phase—temporary works, excavation, foundations, burial/embedding, and restoration—so whether this can be made more efficient affects the entire site.

When working alone using LRTK, the person in charge can confirm their position as they proceed, making the work less dependent on communication with an assistant. This is especially advantageous in situations where you need to reliably capture a small number of critical points, or when the number of target points increases or decreases due to on-the-day changes to the plan, because you can verify them yourself and immediately proceed with staking out positions. If the points to be checked are clear and the surrounding conditions are relatively good, it becomes easier to maintain a steady pace when working alone.

The efficiency gains in this case are not simply a reduction in headcount. Because positions can be checked and the results immediately reflected on site, the kind of rework that happens when "we did it once, but when we reviewed it later we had to redo it" is less likely to occur. In site preparation and foundation work, even small deviations tend to propagate into subsequent processes—formwork, rebar placement, and installation—so the value of being able to proceed on site with confidence is significant. In other words, a state in which one person can carry out the work also means that the information needed for decision-making is consolidated at hand.

Also, if you leave positioning too much to subcontractors or dedicated personnel, even minor additional checks take time. On site, small requests such as “I just want to check one more point here” or “I want to verify the clearance just in case” occur frequently. With LRTK, site personnel can respond nimbly without having to arrange major redeployments each time. This nimbleness is especially valuable on projects with tight schedules.

Of course, there are cases where it is desirable for multiple people to verify important reference positions and carry out final checks. However, that does not mean two people are always necessary for auxiliary position checks or for setting out positions during intermediate stages. By introducing LRTK, you can separate the tasks that a single person can complete from those that should be verified by multiple people, enabling more efficient allocation of personnel. As a result, the intensity of work across the entire process increases and on-site waiting times are reduced.

Case Study 3: On-site Operations That Reduced the Back-and-Forth Between As-Built Verification and Construction Management

The third deployment example is construction management work that involves verification of as‑built conditions. On construction management sites there are many points that need to be checked during construction—whether work is progressing according to the drawings, whether the prescribed positional relationships are being maintained, and whether any areas require correction—and these must be monitored continuously. However, in reality it is often not possible to allocate personnel solely for verification tasks, so there is demand to complete them efficiently as part of daily site rounds.

The reason as-built verification tends to be inefficient is that inspection, recording, and sharing are fragmented. When what was observed on site is jotted down on paper or another device, then recompiled in the office and conveyed to relevant parties as needed, a time lag inevitably occurs. If the site progresses in the meantime, you can miss the timing for issuing correction instructions. For a person covering sites alone, being able to complete the process on site is more important than anything.

Using LRTK in operations makes it easier to hold the target location while confirming its position and to improve the accuracy of records on the spot. In particular, being able to create a state where it is easy to trace later what was checked at which position increases the reliability of as-built verification. This makes the records easier to handle as a verification history tied to positions rather than mere field notes, and reduces discrepancies in understanding among stakeholders. A major advantage is that the reproducibility of the information is easier to maintain even when a single person carries out the checks.

In this case, it is also important that the number of round trips between the site and the office is reduced. Even in situations where, in the past, one would return once to compare with the drawings and then, if necessary, head back to the site, if the information needed to make a decision is available on-site, it becomes easier to decide the next course of action on the spot. Not only does this reduce revisits caused by insufficient checks, but it also raises the quality of the time spent on-site, making it less likely that management accuracy will suffer even with limited personnel.

Also, in construction management, "records that anyone can understand" are necessary. Relying on verbal communication or ambiguous photos alone can mean that, when you review them later, you cannot discern the positional relationships and must reconfirm. An environment that makes it easy to keep verification histories with location information makes it easier to share information not only with the manager themself but also with supervisors and partner companies who check later. This also helps mitigate the over-reliance on a single person, a weakness of one-person operations.

As a result, not only does it become easier for a single person to carry out as-built verification, but it also brings the overall rhythm of construction management into order. If the necessary locations are covered during morning rounds and it becomes easier to make correction decisions within the same day, schedule delays can be more easily mitigated. Viewed as an example of LRTK implementation, this type of efficiency improvement is highly practical and is one of the areas where field personnel are most likely to feel the benefits.

Case Study 4: Streamlining Location-Tagged Inspection and Maintenance Recordkeeping

The fourth example is inspection and maintenance work for infrastructure and facilities. At inspection sites, detecting anomalies is important in itself, but even more so, it is required to accurately record where they were observed. The things to be recorded are diverse: cracks, settlement, deformation, changes in the surrounding terrain, the condition around equipment, and so on. When a single person has to cover these, balancing inspection and record-keeping becomes a challenge.

Traditionally, inspection staff would verify conditions on-site and then later have to re-mark positions on drawings and reconcile photos with notes. The more records there are, the more time it takes to organize them, and it is not uncommon for the administrative work after returning to take longer than the short on-site tasks. Moreover, when locations are recorded ambiguously, it becomes difficult to make comparisons at the next inspection, reducing the quality of ongoing management.

When inspections use LRTK, inspection points can be managed together with location information, making it easier for a single person to keep organized records. This not only shortens on-site time but also has great significance in improving the reproducibility of subsequent inspections. If it is clear what was inspected and where abnormalities occurred, tracking changes over time becomes smoother, and handing over the work is easier even if the person in charge changes.

Solo work tends to be feasible in inspection tasks because those tasks require covering a wide area at a steady pace. In many cases, it is more efficient for the person in charge to patrol using their own judgment and obtain the necessary information on the spot than to assign an assistant. Especially when picking up minor abnormalities or during routine patrols, high mobility directly contributes to inspection density. LRTK is effective as a means of reducing personnel without lowering the quality of such patrol-type operations.

Also, for inspections and maintenance, being able to explain things later is important. If you cannot explain why you determined that location needed repair and exactly where and what symptoms were observed, reaching agreement with the client and other stakeholders will take time. Records organized with location information help in preparing explanatory materials and, beyond merely improving on-site efficiency, contribute to speeding up overall management operations.

In this case, because a single person can move around the site and reliably capture the necessary information, it becomes less likely that inspection frequency will be reduced even amid labor shortages. The purpose of labor-saving measures is not to decrease the number of workers, but to maintain the required level of management with limited personnel. Introducing LRTK can be one of the realistic answers to that.

Case Study 5: Application in emergency response requiring rapid initial verification

The fifth example is initial post-disaster inspections and emergency responses to sudden on-site problems. For instance, checking for slope deformations, inspecting abnormalities around roads, and identifying defect locations during construction—situations where you must quickly visit the site and sort out the situation require speed as well as accuracy. In such cases, being able to rapidly assess the situation alone is more valuable than preparing a team of two or more people before heading to the site.

In emergency response, how much necessary information you can gather during the initial on-site check determines subsequent decisions. Reports with vague locations make it difficult for stakeholders to grasp the situation and lead to more follow-up checks. Conversely, if you can organize and communicate what you checked and where, it becomes easier to prioritize immediate response actions. Having a system that allows a single person to perform on-site checks using LRTK improves the quality of this initial response.

What matters in this case is not just the speed of getting to the site. Initial response includes confirming the site without hesitation, covering all necessary points without omission, and being able to share the findings immediately after returning. By strengthening the link between location awareness and on-site records, LRTK enables information organization that goes a step beyond mere visual reports. If the initial inspection is accurate, the number of subsequent additional dispatches or re-inspections can be reduced.

Also, in emergency response, personnel are often limited. In situations such as multiple sites overlapping during the daytime, sudden calls that prevent staff from being reassigned, or having to inspect a wide area sequentially, equipment and operations that can be handled by a single person are extremely effective. Of course, ensuring safety must be the top priority, but making it easier for even a single person to obtain the necessary situational awareness helps raise overall on-site response capability.

During emergencies, "information that can be used for immediate decision-making" is needed more than detailed deliverables. By introducing LRTK, when field personnel can confirm while marking positions themselves and quickly share key points, initial hesitation is reduced. As a result, decisions on emergency measures, explanations to stakeholders, and prioritization of additional investigations are accelerated, improving the overall ramp-up of the site. This is an example that efficiency from one-person operations leads not only to time savings but also to faster decision-making.

Key points to focus on to achieve results when working alone

Looking at LRTK implementation case studies, there is certainly potential for one-person operations, but to maximize effectiveness several prerequisites must be met. First, it is important to separate processes that can be done by one person from those that should be reviewed by multiple people. Forcing everything to be done by one person will create issues in accuracy verification and safety. Rather, it is more stable to introduce it by replacing tasks that are easily completed by one person—such as site condition checks, auxiliary positioning, routine as-built checks, and patrol inspections.

Next, it is important to clarify what should be recorded on-site and what should be handed over to subsequent processes. Even if one person works quickly, vague recording rules will make organizing the data back at the office time-consuming. By standardizing how measurement point names are assigned, how they correspond to photos, the classification of items to be checked, and the workflow for sharing, the efficiency gains from introducing LRTK become less dependent on the individual skills of each worker.

Also, for solo work, "preparations to reduce uncertainty" are important. Rather than looking for the target location after arriving on site, organizing in advance which points to focus on, which process steps it will be used in, and at which stages rechecking will be necessary can significantly change the time spent on site. LRTK is a tool that assists on-site decision-making, but it does not replace site planning itself. Only when combined with advance preparation do the strengths of solo work truly emerge.

Moreover, understanding accuracy requirements and on-site conditions is indispensable. Depending on the openness of the sky above and the surrounding environment, you cannot always operate under the same conditions. For processes that demand high accuracy or that involve critical handovers, complementary checks and verification by multiple people may be necessary. When introducing LRTK, you need the perspective to determine, for each process, "how far a single person can proceed."

And a point that is often overlooked is how to make use of the personnel freed up by one-person operations. The success of manpower reduction cannot be measured simply by whether staff numbers were cut. Only when the freed personnel are reassigned to other valuable tasks—such as safety management, changeovers/setups, quality checks, or coordinating surrounding work—will overall site productivity improve. The introduction of LRTK not only streamlines surveying and position verification but also serves as an opportunity to rethink on-site personnel deployment.

Summary

Looking at examples of LRTK adoption, you can see that the scope of tasks that a single worker can streamline is broader than imagined. For existing-condition surveys at small-scale civil engineering sites, on-site decision-making and recordkeeping can more easily be completed by one person, increasing the speed of pre-start checks. For staking out positions for land development and foundation work, it reduces the burden of movement and mutual checks, making it easier to arrange tasks with fewer rework steps. During verification of finished work, it reduces trips between the site and the office while helping to maintain the quality of construction management. In inspections and maintenance, organizing location-tagged records becomes easier, improving the repeatability of ongoing management. In emergency response, the speed of initial assessment and the ease of sharing information enhance on-site responsiveness.

The important point is not to assume that introducing LRTK will allow one person to do everything. The key to success is to identify which tasks are easiest to single-staff and to apply it according to site conditions and accuracy requirements. From that standpoint, LRTK becomes, in worksites during an era of labor shortages, not merely a convenient positioning device but a practical option for rethinking the workflow itself.

If you want to carry out site surveys, layout staking, as-built verification, and inspection records with fewer people, or are looking to reevaluate processes where two-person teams have become the norm, it is well worth seriously considering the use of LRTK. As a high-precision positioning device that can be attached to and used with a smartphone, LRTK links on-site decision-making, recording, and sharing, and supports creating workflows that make it easier for a single person to operate. If you want to realistically advance both manpower reduction and accuracy on site, start by identifying which of your company’s processes can be completed by one person, and review them beginning with the situations that can be replaced by LRTK.