By Ben Stevens, Optimal Maintenance Decisions (OMDEC) Inc.

 

So you’ve spent the money, you have the system, it’s in and (mostly) running. Are you getting your money’s worth? Most Maintenance Managers would reply “No!”.  (And most senior executives will say “Don’t know!” but that’s a story for another day…)

 

What underlies this all-too-frequently dismal outcome?:

 

Þ    Management not focusing enough on the process of improvement

Þ    CMMS users not having enough training to extract the benefits

Þ    No one specifically tasked with increasing value

Þ    Reports do not provide meaningful and timely data … usually because the data itself is not reliable

 

Too many companies use the CMMS purely as an administrative tool.  True, it does that job well, but properly used it will go far beyond that. 

 

 

Here are the improvements you should be getting:

q       higher equipment productivity, more uptime

q       higher equipment reliability, fewer breakdowns, higher production predictability

q       better quality maintenance work

q       lower material consumption plus lower stores inventory

q       lower labour dollars, less overtime and lower contractor dollars

q       better knowledge of what’s happening, (through performance measurement  trends from your CMMS)

q       fewer unexpected problems through better preventive maintenance and failure prediction

 

How much improvement, will depend on the individual business – the more maintenance intensive and capital intensive the enterprise, the bigger the benefits. How can you tell if you are getting your money’s worth? Try this test: Score yourself 5 points for each perfect yes and 0 for the opposite.

 

1.       All critical equipments are in the system
2.       All critical spares are in the system
3.       All the data is accurate and reliable
4.       All non-critical equipment and parts should be in the system
5.       70+% of your work is done against PM Work orders
6.       All PM’s are reviewed annually for relevance and accuracy
7.       All corrective work is done from work orders
8.       All breakdown work is recorded on template Work orders
9.       Work orders collect data – not only on material and hours used, but the equipment condition and failure causes
10.    All Work orders make sense (according to the maintenance technician on the job)
11.    95+% of your work is scheduled
12.    Parts pick-lists are prepared automatically from work orders
13.    Parts replenishment is driven by automatic ordering
14.    Overdue work orders are reviewed weekly
15.    All breakdowns are scrutinized to update the PM program
16.    The system prompts regular ABC counts
17.    Reports are useful, timely and accurate
18.    Your CMMS ties into your performance management system
19.    Your CMMS analyses equipment reliability and failure causes and ties directly into RCM
20.    Someone is specifically responsible for generating more value from the system
Total

 

Any score below about 65 means you get only marginal value from your CMMS; then you won’t be able to focus on maintenance improvement – too much of your life is spent scrambling from one crisis to the next. Here’s a simple 10 step remedial approach:

 

Step 1: Decide what you want to get out of the system – one piece at a time.

This is the point at which senior managers may need to get involved.  A key problem is the lack of common understanding (and even language!) between Senior Executives and Maintenance Management.  This chasm can be bridged only by Maintenance Managers learning Exec-speak.  A good starting point is to make sure that proposals for spending company money are formalized in company proposal format, complete with Summary, Objectives, Process, ROI Targets, Cash Flow projections etc (more of this in a later column.)  Let’s take a simple example. Assume you want to link your CMMS with your RCM program. Ultimately you want to increase equipment reliability.

 

Step 2: Confirm that the system can deliver what you want (it almost always can!)

The CMMS functionality will almost always out-perform the capability of the user.  If only you could figure out how….   If you are in any doubt as to whether it will perform what you require, then call the help-line.  In our current example, you have two separate databases – the RCM repository, and the record of work orders in the CMMS.  The two, likely, do not communicate with one another.  Consequently, when you collect event and failure data via the work order you rarely relate it to the functional failure, cause, effects, and consequences that were discovered during  RCM analysis. Hence, you lose the opportunity to update and validate the RCM database.  Most CMMSs lack such functionality.

 

Step 3: Understand what you are currently doing with the system.

Omitting this step often hides opportunities to perform a simple modification in lieu of a whole new procedure.  Let us pursue our example of a desirable link between the RCM analysis worksheet records and the CMMS equipment history. You have performed RCM process to create a set of tasks that address failure modes in ways that deal appropriately with their consequences.  However, in an entirely separate process, you will have created a set of fault codes (independently of the RCM analysis) in a drop down list to be used in the CMMS when closing a work order. As a result of the dichotomy between CMMS configuraton and RCM analysis, failure codes seldom produce satisfactory historical data. Pick lists of maintenance failure codes are often difficult to choose from and prone to error. The selection items are often too general or do not adequately fit a given situation. Or, alternatively, long lists of precise codes suffer from “choice overload” resulting in the overuse of the default “Other”. Obviously, we would wish to harmonize the RCM knowledge base with the CMMS lists of failure codes.

 

Step 4: Do a gap analysis between current and target.

We need to define exactly how our procedural change will benefit the organization. Current situation – 1) a static RCM knowledge base, 2) difficulty of applying failure codes to real cases, and 3) imprecise historical data. Desired outcome (of a linkage between RCM and work order system) - work order planning, execution, data collection and closure routines based on failure modes built into a continuously updated enriched RCM knowledge base.

Step 5: Itemize tasks to be done to close the gap.

First, decide on how the RCM-CMMS linkage can be made to happen – through an external utility, through an extension to the CMMS screens and forms or by requiring the CMMS vendor to buy into the upgrading of their capability.  Next, list the changes in the CMMS procedures for work order planning, release, execution and closing.  Identify the changes in the CMMS output reports and in the analysis of those reports.  Finally demonstrate the methodology and related work management routines for updating the RCM database.  Underpin the the new system with training, otherwise all will be for naught.

 

Step 6: Prioritize tasks based on both payback and cost and difficulty of implementing.

Do a financial evaluation to assure ourselves (and the Senior Execs) that we are spending company money wisely.  Measure the payback in terms of reduced failure frequency, increased availability, and higher quality. Hence we need to know current costs related to poor reliability, availability, productivity, and quality. And we need to postulate a realistic target for improvement.

Step 7: Plan the tasks in detail - what has to be done, by when and by whom.

This step should proceed only if we expect a positive return on investment.  In more complex projects, with specific deadlines, you will use a project management package (e.g. MS Project). Identify, in detail, the tasks, their sequence, who is to do them (whether internal or external), and what is the expected outcome.  Allow for approval and lead times for purchased items.

 

Step 8: Use the CMMS work order process to issue and execute the tasks.

Use the CMMS work order process for these types of mini-projects.  The work order can define the task, allocate resources, procure materials, set deadlines, and collect and report costs.  Any late tasks will appear on the overdue work order list at the next maintenance department meeting.  Using the CMMS lets other maintenance staff know what is happening.

Step 9: Install a simple progress tracking process - both for the tasks and the resulting improvements.

Tying the CMMS into performance management pays dividends – especially if the performance management process transcends commonly reported KPI’s.[1]  Set up the KPI’s to track the improvements you are forecasting, and post them so that all can see the progress.  Present the data with Pareto charts. Track the cost of failure (the repair cost plus the lost production value) rather than the frequency of failure.

 

Step 10:  Get on with it!

As the results start appearing, don’t be concerned if the turnaround is not immediate.  The benefits take time to work through the system.  Your analyses will prompt you to take specific actions in response to individual equipment or types of equipments’ performance.  Validate the data upon which you base your analysis. Target the root causes of failure. Make certain that the technicians actually execute the revised work plans, and, that they record the ensuing data accurately and consistently.

 

Procedural improvements could take up to a year depending on the resources you can put on the job. If you use an outside consultant to help you, then he should concentrate on:

 

• diagnosing the problem
• helping to plan the solution
• guiding the upgrade
• providing technical help

 

Make sure your own people do the work; that way the knowledge stays in house, AND the costs stay reasonable.

 

Please send comments to Ben Stevens