BUILDING THE FOUNDATION FOR A SUCCESSFUL MAINTENANCE PROGRAM

By Frederick T. Coenen Maintenance Management Consultant CSI Services, Inc., an Emerson Process Management Company Have you ever wondered why a large percentage of Maintenance programs either end up sitting on a shelf gathering dust or fail to produce the promised results? Until recently most of the customers that I have provided consulting services to have virtually none or very little in the way of Preventive (PM) (Time Based) or Predictive (PdM) (Conditioned Based) Maintenance programs. When I would ask them what percentage of their work was Reactive (Breakdown fighting fires) it would range from 50-90%. If they have a PM program, the answer of how much of the PM work that is done on schedule, ranged from 40%-60%. When the majority of the work is reactive, than the text book answer is implementing PM and PdM programs. But, before you can move ahead with the PM and PdM programs you have to have a solid foundation on which to build these programs. For the last year and a half I have been working with a large government agency. When the initial evaluation of their programs was done, it was obvious that they had an excellent preventive and predictive program in place. If youve ever had the opportunity to put this type of program in place this was the ideal situation. A separate department was formed with the sole purpose of developing the predictive programs to move from a strictly preventive to a combination of preventive and predictive. Starting with Vibration Analysis, Thermography, Oil Analysis and later adding Ultrasound this was a complete program. Excellent training was provided for all of the personnel which included certification. Full time technical and administrative support was provided as the programs were implemented and evolved. With all this in place over a period of 2-3 years you would think the results would be obvious. Yes, there were some successes but they were minimal! During the initial interviews with the Predictive Technicians, Maintenance Mechanics, maintenance management and support personnel a common theme came through. The predictive programs were doing exactly what they are supposed to do, identifying a problem before it failed, but the equipment was failing anywa y. As you would expect not

only was this very frustrating to the Predictive Technicians, but the equipment owners were really questioning the value of the program. The answer was obvious; the foundation for the program was not in place. But before we get into that, lets set the stage; approximately 6 -7 years ago the maintenance department was decentralized and each building became self-sufficient except for such trades as: carpentry, elevators, locksmith and machinists. With the decentralization came the loss of support personnel, common processes and systems. In short, everybody was doing his or her own thing. It was now clear why the identified work was not getting completed, there was not a common work flow process for the work to be completed. A computerized maintenance management system (CMMS) was in place but was used very little and was very slow. If a work order was developed it went in the system, usually got lost or was never completed. This is a perfect example of what looked like on the surface like a program that was working well and producing the expected results. But because the foundation was not in place the results of the program were less than expected. In order to address these issues the following four (4) step plan was put in place: 1. 2. 3. 4. Gain Top Management support for the program Develop and implement a simple work flow process Develop and implement an organization that supported the work flow process Select or develop a CMMS that supports the workflow and the organization.

RCM TPM RBM

Predictive Preventive Reactive

1. 2. 3. Consistent Top Management support for the program. Standardize Work Flow Process. Organized to support the Work Flow Process. CMMS System that supports the Work Flow and Organization.

4.

In order to gain the consistency and ownership required, teams of cross-functional maintenance personnel from the different buildings and crafts were formed to develop the work flow process and the organization to support the work flow. The workflow must be simple and easy to understand and provide the planning and scheduling steps to improve the manpower efficiencies.

MAINTENANCE WORK PROCESS

WORK ORDERS
PLAN
Packaging the work.

What went well and what needs improvement the next time we do this work. This is the continuous improvement step.

AUDIT
Who by name will do the work and the time and date it is scheduled to be completed.

SCHEDULE EXECUTE

When the work is actually completed. What actually got done

The team defined the detail work required for each step and what function in the workflow is responsible to complete the work. This plan was presented and accepted by all the maintenance management as the overall work flow process. Each Maintenance Building Manager and Craft Manager reorganized their departments and assigned people to fill the workflow functions. Depending on the workload and number of crafts the Planning and Scheduling could be under one person or in some cases multiple Planners and Schedulers were required. In every case the Audit responsibilities fell under the Planners.

A formal Planning and Scheduling class was presented to all the people filling these functions. The last step in the four - (4) step process was the CMMS program. As luck would have it a decision was made to replace the old system. Without going through all the details the final decision was made to develop the system in house using web pages. Having been through the in-house development before I was really doubtful that this was a good move. The maintenance team did not have any input in that decision and development of the program began in a vacuum using the old system, which did not work before, as a template. Since the group developing the CMMS had not been part of the Work Flow Process it became obvious very quickly that the new CMMS was not going to support the workflow. In order to correct this situation a meeting was held with the CMMS development group and the Maintenance Team. The purpose was to explain the Workflow and make sure the new CMMS system supported the work. Needless to say this caused a major redirection for the CMMS development team. Another cross-functional team was formed to provide the CMMS requirements in detail. The development of the system progressed fairly quickly and version (1) was put out for use in approximately 3 months. The advantage of using the web page concept became apparent very quickly, making changes to the system is quick and simple. Since we were really feeling our way along with the system and the people were new in the Planning and Scheduling functions, there were numerous requests for changes. The cross-functional team was required to review, prioritize, and approve all changes. The major test for each change: did it support the Maintenance workflow Process? The CMMS is a long way from being a complete system, but since the basic system is in place and supporting the workflow and the organization, the consisentcy and results are starting to be realized. As you examine your Maintenance Program make sure you have a strong foundation for your program: Is your Top Management support for the program strong and consistent? Do you have a simple workflow process that supports Planning and Scheduling? Does it include a continuous improvement step? Is the organization designed and manned to support the work? Does the CMMS support the work or do you have to change the way you do work to fit the CMMS?

Finally in order to sustain the management support that you must have for any program, report regularly on the agreed upon metrics.