Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
MASTER'S THESIS
CMMS Benchmarking Development inMining Industries
Yonas Lemma
Master of Science in Engineering TechnologyCivil Engineering
Luleå University of TechnologyDepartment of Civil, Environmental and Natural resources engineering
I
CMMS Benchmarking Development In
Mining Industries
Yonas Tesfaye Lemma
Master of Science Civil Engineering with Specialization In Mining and Geotechnical Engineering
Division of Operation and Maintenance Engineering
Luleå university of Technology
Department of Civil, Environmental and Natural Resources Engineering
II
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This thesis work would not have been possible without the guidance and the help of several individuals who in one way or another contributed and extended their valuable assistance in the preparation and completion of this study. First and foremost, my utmost gratitude to my supervisor professor Diego Galar and Co-supervisor professor Hakan Schunnesson. I will never forget. Prof. Diego has been my inspiration as I hurdle all the obstacles in the completion this thesis work. I gratefully acknowledge Dr. Phillip Tretten, Matthias Asplund, Stephen Famurewa, par Semberg and Samuel lamp for helping me translating the entire questioner to Swedish and giving me valuable encouragement. I would like to thanks Mr. Thomas Sundqvist maintenance manager, Mr. Jonas Fjellner deputy maintenance manager and Mr. Arne Vesterberg for providing support and help to accomplished this thesis work and answering my questioner.
Yonas Lemma Luleå, 2012-10-03
III
ABSTRACT
Effective resource management and reliable equipment are essential for optimize plant
performance .Both depend up on accurate timely management of massive amount of data and
on the effective use of maintenance resources. Computer management system (CMMS) also
called computerized managed maintenance system or computerized asset management system
(CAMS), are designed to fulfill these needs .These system can provide cost effective means of
managing a massive amount data that are generated by maintenance, inventory control and
purchasing .In addition, these systems can provide the means to manage effectively both
human and capital resources in plant or facility.
This master thesis describes the concept and challenges of CMMS implementation success
and also the CMMS benchmarking development case study Belong to Sweden two of the
underground mines site. The result found from those mines compared with 33 paper mill
factories in different Europe countries using the same Computer maintenance management
system Maximo software.
The CMMS benchmarking System is introduced as a means to evaluate the effective use of the current CMMS implementation to define functional gaps and to define how to enhance current use. Results from using measures its level of services, practices and develops its own unique benchmarking criteria with high standards for maintenance excellence. Effective benchmarking should start locally with a total evaluation of current maintenance practices and procedures and then lead to the development of plan of actions that lead to effective implementation. The CMMS benchmarking System is simply adaptable and should be specifically tailored to the existing CMMS and to its intended application.
The contribution of this master thesis work can be summarized are: Identified the gap CMMS
benchmarking effective implementation and maintenance performance, compare with other
company ,discussed and suggestion are made for some of to be improved.
Keywords: Benchmarking, Computer maintenance management system, Maintenance
performance measurement.
IV
LIST OF ABBREVIATION
CMMS Computer Maintenance Management System
CRM Customer Relationship Management
CSF Critical Success Factor
EFNM European Federation of National Maintenance Societies
O&M Operation and Maintenance
MPI Maintenance Performance Indicator
MPM Maintenance Performance Measurement
MPMS Maintenance Performance Measurement System
PI Performance Indicator
PII Process Integrity Index
PM Performance Measurement
PMS Performance Measurement System
SMRP Society for Maintenance and Reliability Professionals
V
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................................................. II
ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................. III
LIST OF ABBREVIATION ......................................................................................................... IV
SOME BASIC DEFINITION ..................................................................................................... VIII
LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................................... X
LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................ XI
1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 1
1.1 BACKGROUND ....................................................................................................................... 2
1.2 PURPOSE .................................................................................................................................. 2
1.3 RESEARCH QUESTIONS ........................................................................................................ 2
1.4 OBJECTIVES ............................................................................................................................ 3
1.5 SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS.................................................................................................... 3
1.6 THESIS STRUCTURE ............................................................................................................... 3
2. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................... 4
2.1 RESEARCH PROCESS .............................................................................................................. 4
2.2 LITTERATURE REVIEW ......................................................................................................... 4
2.3 EMPIRICAL INVESTIGATION ............................................................................................... 4
2.4 DATA COLLECTION METHOD ............................................................................................. 4
2.5 USE BENCHMARKING ........................................................................................................... 5
2.6 CASE STUDY ............................................................................................................................ 5
3. BENCHMARK ...................................................................................................................... 6
3.1 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................... 6
3.2 TYPE OF BENCHMARKING .................................................................................................. 7
3.3 THE BENCHMARKING PROCESS IN THE COMPANY PLAN ............................................. 7
VI
3.4 THE CMMS BENCHMARKING SYSTEM ............................................................................... 8
4. AN OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE ................................................................................... 12
4.1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................... 12
4.2 GOALS AND OBJECTIVE OF MAINTENACE ORGANIZATION ...................................... 12
4.3 MAINTENACE COST ............................................................................................................ 12
4.4 MAINTENANCE MANAGEMENT INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES NEEDS............... 13
4.5 DETERMINING THE NEEDS OF IT WITH IN MAINTENANCE MANAGEMENT.......... 15
4.6 COMPUTERIZED MAINTENANCE SYSTEM ...................................................................... 16
4.7 DETRMININING THE NEED............................................................................................... 17
4.8 HOW A CMMS MEETS THE NEED ...................................................................................... 19
4.9 RETURNS ON INVESTMENT ............................................................................................... 21
4.10 WHY CMMS FAIL ................................................................................................................... 26
4.11 MAXIMIZE USE OF COMPUTERIZED MAINTENANCE MANAGEMENT ...................... 31
5 MAXIMO ............................................................................................................................ 32
5.1 MAXIMO ENTERPRISE ASSET MANAGEMENT INTRODUCTION ................................. 32
5.2 WHAT DOES MAXIMO WORK MANAGEMENT OFFER ................................................... 33
5.3 PERFORMANC TESTING IBM MAXIMO ASSET MANAGEMNT ...................................... 34
5.4 DEFINING PERFORMANCE BENCHMARK TEST OBEJECTIVES ................................... 34
5.5 DEFININING TEST TYPES .................................................................................................. 35
6 CASE STUDY ..................................................................................................................... 36
6.1 DESCRIPTION OF CASE STUDY AREA .............................................................................. 36
6.2 OBJECTIVE AND STRATEGY ................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
6.3 USE OF CMMS BENCHMARKING AND IMPROVEMENT IN THIS CASE STUDY........... 36
6.4 MAINTENANCE ORGANIZATION CHART ....................................................................... 37
7 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS .......................................................................................... 38
7.1 DISCUSSION .......................................................................................................................... 41
VII
7.2 MAINTENANCE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT ......................................................... 42
7.3 CMMS EDUCATION AND TRAINING ................................................................................. 46
7.4 PREVENTIVE AND PREDICTIVE MAINTENANCE .......................................................... 47
7.5 BUDGET AND COST CONTROL ......................................................................................... 48
8 CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................. 49
9 FUTURE WORK................................................................................................................. 50
REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................... 51
APPENDIX RESEARCH QUESTIONERS ................................................................................ 53
THE ALL FACTORIES CMMS BENCHMARKING RATING SCALE ...................................... 56
VIII
SOME BASIC DEFINITION
Term Description Reference
Availability The ability of an item to be in a state to perform a require function under given conditions at a given instant of time Or over a given time interval, assuming that the required external resources are provided
IEV 191-02-05
Benchmarking
Is the practice of being humble enough to admit that some else is better at something and being wise enough to learn how to match and even surpass them at it.
(APQC, 1993)
Maintenance management
is the implementation of of different objectives and strategies in away such as maintenance control , planning taken into consideration the economical aspects.
SS-EN13306:2001
Maintenance Benchmarking
At strategic or global level is about “determining where you are now” and “where you want to go” to improve your maintenance business processes.
(Peters, 2006)
Spare Parts Is a part that is use to be replaced with a corresponding item in order to restore the original function.
SS-EN13306:2001
Maintenance Combination of all the technical and administrative actions, including supervision, intended to retain an item in, or restore it to, a state in which it can perform a required function.
IEV 191-07-01: 1990
Maintenance Concept
Interrelationship between the maintenance echelons, the indenture levels and the levels of maintenance to be applied for the maintenance of an item
3.1.10 of IEC 60300-3-14 Ed. 1.0 (2004)
Maintenance improvement
Improvement in maintenance and maintenance support activities is achieved by management support, effective processes, and communication
8.4 of IEC 60300-3-14 Ed. 1.0 (2004)
Maintenance Policy
General approach to the provision of maintenance and maintenance support based on the objectives and policies of owners, users and customers
3.1.12 of IEC 60300-3-14 Ed. 1.0 (2004)
Maintenance performance indicators (MPIs)
1. MPIs are a set of measures used for the measurement of maintenance impact on the process performance. MPIs are utilized to evaluate the effectiveness of maintenance carried out 2. MPIs compare the actual conditions with a specific set of reference conditions (requirements/targets)
Wireman, (1998).
EEA, (1999).
Maintenance related measurement
The purpose of maintenance-related measurement is to measure the effectiveness of maintenance and maintenance support
8.2.3 of IEC 60300-3-14 Ed. 1.0 (2004)
Measure Determine the size, amount, or degree of (something) by comparison with a standard unit
Oxford dictionary
IX
Measurement
1. The action of measuring, or a standard unit used in Measuring. 2. Measurement is a key management activity, that provides decision makers with information necessary for decision making, monitoring performance and effective allocation of resources 3. Measurements are the yardsticks that tell us how we have done and motivates us to perform
Oxford dictionary
Webster and Hung, (1994)
Najmi and Kehoe
,2001
Performance
1. The accomplishment or carrying out of something commanded or undertaken; the doing of an action or operation and measurement is the action or an act of measuring or calculating a length, quantity, value, etc. 2. The level to which a goal is attained. 3. Efficiency and effectiveness of purposeful action. 4. Effectiveness (i.e. measuring output to determine if they help accomplish objectives); Efficiency (i.e. measuring resources to determine whether the minimum amount are used in the production of these outputs) 5. A complex inter-relationship between seven performance criteria; effectiveness, efficiency, quality, productivity, quality of work life, innovation, profitability/budgetability
Oxford dictionary
Dwight, (1999)
Neely et al.(2000) Cordero (1989)
Rolstadas (1998)
Performanc management
1. The process by which a company manages its performance. It should be “in line with its corporate and functional strategies and objectives”. 2. Performance measurement as the process of quantifying the efficiency and effectiveness of action.
Bititci etal.(1997)
Neely et al.(1995)
Performance
measurement (PM)
1. The acquisition and analysis of information about the actual attainment of company objectives and plans and about factors that may influence that attainment. 2. The process of determining how successful organizations or individuals have been in attaining their objectives. 3. Performance measurement serves three basic functions, which are to co-ordinate, to monitor and to diagnose.
Van Drongelen & Cook (1997)
Sinclair & Zairi (1996) Atkinson et. Al (1997)
System
A combination of interacting elements organized to achieve one or more stated purposes. Note 1- A system may be considered as a product or as the services it provides. Note 2- In practice, the interpretation of its meaning are frequently clarified by the use of an associative noun, e.g. production system. Alternatively the word system may be substituted simply by a context dependent synonym, e.g. production, though this may then obscure a system principles perspective.
ISO/IEC 15288
X
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 3.1 Maintenance resources to improve maintenance in total not piecemeal…...............10
Figure 4.1: Maintenance of mobile mine equipment in the information age M Lewis,
L.Steinberg…………………………………………………………………………..............12
Figure 4.2: Information systems success model DeLone & MclLean……………………….14
Figure 4:3 Determining the need of IT system DeLone & MclLean………………..............14
Figure 4.4: The context of determining maintenance management IT needs………………..15
Figure 5.1: IBM maximo asset management (Euro Consulting EMEA)…………………….33
Figure 6.1: Underground mine1&2 organization chart……………………………………...37
Figure 7.1 CMMS Benchmarking Rating mining and paper mill companies………………...39
Figure 7.2 CMMS Benchmarking Rating comparison b/n mining and paper mill…………...40
Figure 7.3 CMMS Benchmarking Rating comparison b/n different countries ……………...41
Figure 7.4 CMMS Benchmarking Rating comparison b/n mining and paper mill companies.41
Figure 7.5 Underground mine1 & 2 mine reliable data for Schedule actual hours..………….43
Figure 7.6: preventive maintenance vs corrective maintenance Underground mine1 from
maximo data……………………………………………………………………………......44
Figure 7.7: preventive maintenance vs corrective maintenance Underground mine2 from
maximo data…………………………………………………………………………….…44
Figure 7.8: Schedule Compliance Underground mine1&2……..…………………………....45
Figure 7.9: Actual hours to plan estimate Underground mine1&2…….………………….46
XI
LIST OF TABLES
Table 4.1: Exemplification of IT demands within maintenance management……………….16
Table 7.1: Description of the criteria in the questionnaire and the number of questions in each
with respective points………………………………………………………………………38
Table 7.2: Underground Mine1 reliable data for Schedule and actual hour…………………43
Table 7.3: Underground Mine2 reliable data for Schedule and actual hour…………………43
Table 7.4: Total number of preventive maintenance vs. corrective maintenance Underground
Mine1 ……………………………………………………………………………………..43
Table 7.5: Total number of preventive maintenance vs corrective maintenance Underground
Mine2 …………………………………………………………………………………….44
Table 7.6: Schedule compliance Underground Mine1……………………………………...45
Table 7.7: Schedule compliance Underground mine2……………………………………...45
Table 7.8: Actual hours to plan estimate Underground Mine1 ……………………………...46
Table 7.9: Actual hours to plan estimate Underground Mine2 ……………………………...46
1
1. INTRODUCTION
Effective resource management and reliable equipment are essential for optimize plant
performance. Both depend on accurate timely management of massive amount of data and on
the effective use of maintenance resources. Computer management system (CMMS) also
called computerized managed maintenance system or computerized asset management system
(CAMS), are designed to fulfill these needs .These system can provide cost effective means of
managing a massive amount of data that are generated by maintenance, inventory control and
purchasing. In addition, these systems can provide the means to manage effectively both
human and capital resources in your plant or facility.
A successful CMMS implementation is not judged by the software but by the maintenance
improvement philosophies and strategies left by the project team. Ultimately, and certainly
historically, the true deliverable will be a tangible return on the company's investment.
A planned and well executed computer maintenance management system (CMMS) project can
earn a maximum return on investment realized through increasing efficiency, productivity and
profits. However a poorly planned and executed CMMS project can result in a lot of
revenues. These losses can be measured in terms of overall investment in the project as well
as from wasted time, money and lost projected revenue forecast up on the successful
installation and implementation of CMMS.
Benchmarking also is the process of identifying, understanding, and adapting today’s
outstanding maintenance practices to help your organization improve its performance.
The CMMS Benchmarking System is an important internal benchmarking tool to help gain maximum value from an existing CMMS or from the implementation of a new system for computerized maintenance management. Maintenance benchmarking at the strategic or global level is about “determining where you are now” and “where you want to go” to improve your maintenance business processes (Peters, 2006). The CMMS benchmarking system is helpful to improving your current CMMS to achieve and utilize of your IT investment. Benchmarking tool is the improvement process for getting maximum use from current information technology. The CMMS benchmarking system is introduced as a means to evaluate the effective use of your current CMMS, to define functional gaps and to define how to enhance current use. Results from using the CMMS benchmarking system will also help to develop and justify a replacement strategy if that is needed. The CMMS benchmarking system is easily adaptable and should be specifically tailored to your existing CMMS and to its intended application. This tool is an internal benchmarking guide that is a model process for benchmarking the effective utilization of CMMS for maximum value. The CMMS benchmarking system provides a methodology for developing a benchmark rating of your existing CMMS to determine how well this tool is supporting best practices and the total
2
maintenance process. It can also be used as a method to measure the future success and progress of a CMMS system implementation that is now being installed. Maintenance best practices are the key and the CMMS is the information technology tool that links it all together. Maintenance information is one of the key maintenance resources and must be a part of your approach to continuous reliability improvement Peters (2006).
1.1 BACKGROUND
During the past 20 years, the term “CMMS” (computerized maintenance management system) has become synonymous with productivity improvement and control of maintenance management processes. However, what do we really know regarding modern CMMSs? What are today and how have they evolved from the work-order systems that began to appear 20 to 30 years ago?. The tools and methodologies accessible today for managing maintenance and operations are truly come astounding. When compared to the mentalities and methods of the 1960s and 1970s, it can easily be seen that we have rapidly come a very long way. It can also be seen that maintenance management is of vital strategic importance and is no longer the necessary evil that it was once considered.
In the last three years literally billions of dollars will be spent, in many different countries, on
implementing CMMS and enterprise level systems. Some corporations, such as RIO TINTO
and BHP, have attempted to circumvent a lot of this cost by developing implementation
templates for use across their global operations Mather (2009).
CMMS implementations follow basically the same course every time. Yet most times there is
an attempt to re-invent much of the approach. However, in general, maintenance is
maintenance and apart from differing business rules the majority of the information required
to set up the system will remain similar.
1.2 PURPOSE
The purpose of this thesis work is to focus on the evaluation of the effectiveness and the successful execution of best practices such as CMMS implementation in mining industry. The CMMS benchmarking system was developed to support getting maximum value from an investment in CMMS by evaluating how well existing CMMS functionality is being used. The benchmarking system provides a methodology for developing an overall benchmark rating of your CMMS implementation as the baseline for determining how well CMMS is supporting best practices within the total maintenance operation. It can also be used as the baseline to measure the success of a future CMMS utilization.
1.3 RESEARCH QUESTIONS
In order to fulfill the above stated purpose, the following research questions need to be Answered: 1. What are the most common critical success factors that have a positive impact on implementing CMMS? 2. How well this tool is the supporting best practices and the total maintenance process?
3
1.4 OBJECTIVES
When the actual or expected performance is not satisfactory, it encourages the management to define the objective and strategies to improve on the economical, technical or organization point of view by using this benchmarking. At the system level and production line the maintenance objective can address some particular performance factors such as improvement of availability, improvement of cost effective maintenance, retaining the health safety, environment preservation, improvement in the cost effective management of the value of the maintenance inventory and control of contracted service etc.
1.5 SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS
Based on the research questions and objectives, the scope of the thesis work is limited to studying and identifying the issues and challenges associated with CMMS implementation success and benchmarking CMMS development. The study is limited to the issues related to the benchmarking CMMS development.
1.6 THESIS STRUCTURE
The structure of the thesis is divided into different chapters. Each chapter of the thesis illustrates different aspects of the computer maintenance management system. Chapter 1 deals with the introduction and purpose of the research, research questions, objectives of the research and scope and limitations. In chapter 2, the research methodology used to describe the research approach, research process and research strategy. In chapter 3, CMMS benchmarking system and the importance of benchmarking was reviewed. Chapter 4 discussed an overview of the CMMS based on literature survey. In chapter 5, various issues of Maximo software and define taste type was studied. In chapter 6, a case study of identifying CMMS implementation Success for different mining sites belonging to Sweden underground mines Company are discussed and compared with paper mill companies. Chapter 7 contains discussions of the results with reference to research questions and objectives and In Chapter 8, the addition to research contribution, scope for future research and conclusions are also included in this chapter.
4
2. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The research method used in this project is a comprehensive literature review and empirical study carried out CMMS implementation success.
2.1 RESEARCH PROCESS
The research for this study was carried out in two phases. In first phase, extensive literature review was undertaken CMMS implementation this was followed by empirical investigation CMMS implementation. The empirical investigation focuses on the qualitative aspect of the data collection only. In this phase of the study, theme based questionnaire was design by using CMMS benchmarking to check the CMMS implementation. Based on the collected information from the literature review, most of the common factors of CMMS implementation success was identify appropriately and then these factors was compare with the result achieved through the empirical study.
2.2 LITTERATURE REVIEW
A detail and comprehensive literature review was conducted that includes research articles and papers, books, case studies and web references to answer the Research Questions and to understand the topic in more depth. The literature review helps to further explore the area that provides extending aids and support in gathering information about the CMMS implementation problems and initiatives. Furthermore, it helps to identify the key CMMS success factors that have positive impact on implementation of CMMS.
2.3 EMPIRICAL INVESTIGATION
For the empirical investigation, qualitative approach was used to examine the respondent’s point of views concerning CMMS implementation. The method aids to support our findings that were closely examine from the outcome of the first phase. The aim of the empirical study is to create awareness in the research and respective research community in the practice of CMMS and its different activities. Its emphasis on effective use of scientific knowledge and the level of abstraction, that guide and help them for the development of new CMMS technologies.
For empirical study, a structural interview was carried out by the help of well-design
questionnaire. This would help to find the answers of the research questions and to
understand the topic in more depth. The empirical study helps to further explore the area that
provides extending helps and support in gathering information about the CMMS
implementation success problems and initiatives. Furthermore, it helps to identify the key
CMMS that have a positive impact on implementation.
2.4 DATA COLLECTION METHOD
There are many methods for collecting data. Some of methods are expensive and some are of a high quality. Some of the methods used to collect the data are described below. • Interview or Face-to-face: data was collected through visiting people. This method provides high response rate and the quality of collected data was better.
5
• Mail Survey: this method helps to distribute a large numbers of questionnaire data in a short time. In this case you could reach the people that are difficult to find them at any time. One of the advantages is that people can answer to the questionnaire in their own free time. • Observations: this method is commonly used in a case study where the researchers need to make their own observations to gather required data for the research problem.
2.5 USE BENCHMARKING
Why use benchmarking? It should be noted that what does not get measured, does not get managed. Therefore, benchmarking should be used to measure what is to be managed. Benchmarking is required for better management on your facility’s return of assets. In most cases, the higher the quality of maintenance being performed, the greater the return on assets will be. Therefore, to optimize your facility’s return on assets, it would be valuable to determine where your company’s numbers compare to the rest of the industry through the use of benchmarking. If any problem areas exist, benchmarking can detect them, and then those problem areas can be eliminated or minimized.
2.6 CASE STUDY
Yin (1994) defined the case study as “an empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary
phenomenon within its real-life context especially when the boundaries between phenomenon
and context are not clearly evident”. He has suggested six steps that should be used for case
study, as follows:
• Determining and defining the research questions: The researcher should form questions
about the situation or problem to be studied and determining a purpose for the study.
• Selecting the cases and determining data gathering and analysis techniques: The researcher
determines what approaches to use in selecting single or multiple real life case to examine in
depth and which data gathering approaches to use; data collection could be interview,
observation, survey, etc.
• Prepare to collect the data: The advanced preparation will help in handling large amount of
data in a documented and systematic way.
• Collecting data in the field: The researcher should collect the data in a systematic way.
• Evaluate and analyze the data: The researcher should examine the data using different
interpretations to find linkages between the research object and the outcomes.
• Prepare the report: After collecting and examining the data the researcher should transfer
the data from a complex form to an understandable data in order to make it easy to the reader
to understand independent of the researcher.
6
3. BENCHMARK
3.1 INTRODUCTION
A benchmark is a point of reference for a measurement. The term presumably originates from the practice of making dimensional height measurements of an object on a workbench using a graduated scale or similar tool, and using the surface of the workbench as the origin for the measurements. In surveying, benchmarks are landmarks of reliable, precisely-known altitude, and are often manmade objects, such as features of permanent structures that are unlikely to change, or special-purpose "monuments", which are typically small concrete obelisks, approximately 3 feet tall and 1 foot at the base, set permanently into the earth. Benchmarking is a very versatile tool that can be applied in a variety of ways to meet a range of requirements for improvement (Peters, 2006). The essence of benchmarking is the process of identifying the highest standards of excellence for products, services, or processes, and then making the improvements necessary to reach those standards ± commonly called ``best practices''. The rationalization lies partly in the question, Why re-invent the wheel? Benchmarking is not just competitive analysis or number crunching, nor is it spying, espionage or stealing. It is a process to establish the ground for creative breakthroughs. Many organizations publicize what they have achieved, but it is unusual for them to be open on the more mundane facts of how this transformation was made to work. More than 70 percent of the Fortune 500 companies use benchmarking on a regular basis, including AT&T, Ford, Eastman Kodak, IBM, Ford Motor Company and Weyerhaeuser Greengard( 1995). When xerox lunched benchmarking in the early 1970s its mainly used for two purpose • To wake up the organization and show the improvement were necessary • To motivate the organization for improvement and show that improvement could be made (by referring to other who had be made it) Many people see benchmarking only as a method for comparing key figures ,very ofen financial the purpos of ranking a company against compitors or an industry standard but is today benchmarking might have more powerful tool (Andersen & Pettersen, 1996):
The purpos of a benchmarking study is not only comparing for sake of evaluation ,but learing for achieving improvement .
One does not compare only key figures,although performance measure are an important element in the comparition processes ,i.e how tasks are performed are the center element in the comparision .
By looking at how those who are better perform their processes ,one can learn from the companies that have already achived a higher performance level than oneself.
The learning effects are not limited to information availabel from competitors.It is rather encorage to take an external view,seeking the best companies regardless of industry.
Benchmarking is not some left hand task that one hires a consultant to do. Benchmarking should be done accourding to a structured process, where one self harvests the learing effects.
7
3.2 TYPE OF BENCHMARKING
Four tapes of benchmarking according to (Andersen & Pettersen, 1996):
I. Internal benchmarking is comparision between department, units, subsidiaries or
countries with in the same company or organization . Mainly used with large coporation
where different units are evaluated and compared to each other . If one unit achieves
better than the other practices can be transferred internally for improvement . The
advantage of internal benchmarking are that it is often easy to define comparable
processes data and information easily accessible and frequently on a standar format.
II. Competitive benchmarking is direct comparition of own performance result against the
best real competitors, i.e. that manfacture the same product or deliver the same service.
An extension of competitor analysis where instead of focusing on the industry average
focus is on the best competitor. Due to problem regarding sharing of sensitive
information between competitors and the legal and ethical restriction connected to this
type of benchmarking competitive benchmarking is often seen superficial and too
focused on key figures.
III. Functional benchmarking is comparison of processes or functions against non
competitor companies with in the same industry or technological area. It is often easy to
get in touch with such companies and the problems facing these companies are often
similar.
IV. Generic benchmarking is comparison of own processes against the best processes
around regardless of industry. Finding companies in totally unrelated industries that
perform similar processes as oneself might sometimes require a solid portion of
creativity.The same goes for transferring knowledge from one industry to another.Still
the potential for identifying new technologies or practices that will lead to breakthroughs
is highest in generic benchmarking. one example is the spread of bar coding from
industry to industry .
3.3 THE BENCHMARKING PROCESS IN THE COMPANY PLAN
Accourding to Andersen and Pettersen (1996) :
1. Select the process to be benchmarked
The first stage of the planning phase is to select the process the benchnarking study will
center on improving. Three criteria can be used for selecting the process to benchmark:
The process impact on the company’s critical success factors.
8
The process importance for the main functions of the company.
Processes that represent or impact obvious problem areas in the company.
Identifay the companys critical succes factors that means it might be somewhat unclear, thus
making this step harder to complete.
What is the current performance for these factors ? This step will effect in some form of
ranking of the CSFs based on an evaluation of ourselves compared to others and to our own
objective . Identify processes that influence the most important CSFs. Again rational
reasoning combined with a good knowledge of the company will be of good help.
There are also complimentary tecniques one can take advantage of standard brainstorming or
an analysis technique for determining the inflonce of various process on the CSFs.
2. Form benchmarking team
The benchmarking team must fill the following roles:
Team leader
Link to manager/benchmarking sponsor
Process owner (s)
Process involvees
Supplier to the process, internal or external
Customer to the process, internal or external
Facilitors
3. Understanding and document the process to be benchmarked
4. Establish performance measures for the selected process.
3.4 THE CMMS BENCHMARKING SYSTEM
The CMMS Benchmarking System a universal benchmarking tool. Most important it provides
the framework for an improvement process for gaining better use of CMMS and your current
information technology for maintenance. This benchmarking tool was developed for a
number of reasons (pride in maintenace):
1. As a means to evaluate the effectiveness of the current CMMS.
9
2. To define functional gap.
3. To define how to enhance current use.
4. To help upgrade functional gaps.
5. To serve as a methodology to help develop and justify a replacement strategy.
The CMMS benchmarking System is introduced as a means to evaluate the effective use of the current CMMS implementation to define functional gaps and to define how to enhance current use. Results from using measures its level of services, practices and develops its own unique benchmarking criteria with high standards for maintenance excellence. Effective benchmarking should start locally with a total evaluation of current maintenance practices and procedures and then lead to the development of plan of actions that lead to effective implementation. The CMMS benchmarking System will also help to develop and justify a replacement strategy if that is needed. The CMMS benchmarking System is simply adaptable and should be specifically tailored to the existing CMMS and to its intended application. This tool is an internal benchmarking monitor that is a model process for benchmarking effective utilization of CMMS for maximum value. Benchmarking at its best is when maintenance successfully We must “Think Global but Start Local” with maintenance benchmarking internal benchmarking starts locally within the maintenance operation at the shop floor. It focuses on measuring the successful execution of best practices such as CMMS, preventive and predictive maintenance, maintenance planning and scheduling and effective maintenance storeroom operations. Internal benchmarking is about developing explicit internal metrics or performance indicators. It is about determining progress from an internal baseline or starting point and measuring the progress toward a performance goal specific to your type of maintenance operation. For example, an internal benchmark could be the current level of maintenance related downtime hours for a critical asset or the maintenance cost per unit of output such as cost per ton, cost per carton or cost per equivalent standard hour if a standard cost system is in place. The maintenance excellence index will provide an important means to measure the results of our maintenance improvement process. Industry standards can be useful, but your progress from your current baseline toward pre-established performance goals is the most important issue. Internal benchmarking is also about how well we are using our existing CMMS to enhance maintenance best practices. The CMMS benchmarking System is an important internal benchmarking tool to help achievement maximum value from an existing CMMS or from the implementation of a new system for computerized maintenance management Peters(2006). The successful maintenance leader will realize today’s best practices and identified top priority areas for effective improvement based upon on a total benchmark evaluation of their maintenance operation.
According to Peters (2006) Scoreboard for maintenance excellence provides a means to
evaluate how we are managing our six key maintenance resources such as people, technical
skills, physical assets, information, parts and materials and our hidden resources, the synergy
of team efforts. Figure illustrates how the Scoreboard for maintenance excellence includes
10
these six key maintenance resources and how hidden resources can evolve from the synergy
of team efforts.
Figure 3.1 Maintenance resources to improve maintenance in total not piecemeal, Peters(2006).
Development of CMMS benchmarking system as a standard for defining maximum CMMS
current utilization according to (Peters, 2006):
The benchmarking items in this category include:
1. The identification of specific CMMS functional requirements has been clearly defined and a
complete definition of system capabilities has been determined based on the size and type of
maintenance operation.
2. Equipment (asset) history data complete and accuracy 95% or better.
3. Spare parts inventory master record accuracy 95% or better.
11
4. Bill of materials for critical equipment includes listing of critical spare parts.
5. Preventive Maintenance tasks/frequencies data complete for 95% of applicable assets.
6. Direct responsibilities for maintaining parts inventory database is assigned.
7. Direct responsibilities for maintaining equipment/asset database is assigned.
8. Initial CMMS training for all maintenance employees with ongoing CMMS training
program for maintenance and storeroom employees.
9. Adequate support from supplier and consultants is budgeted to ensure a successful start-up.
10. Customization of the CMMS is planned to accommodate specific needs for part numbers,
equipment numbers, work order and management report formats, etc.
11. Training for CMMS is a top priority and will be established as an ongoing process for new
and existing users of the system.
12. System outputs have been developed into a maintenance information system that provides
management reports to monitor a wide range of factors related to labor, material, equipment
costs, etc.
13. A CMMS systems administrator (and backup) designated and trained
14. Inventory management module fully utilized and integrated with work order module.
15. Reorder notification for stock items is generated and used for reorder decisions.
16. CMMS provides MTBF, MTTR, failure trends and other reliability data.
17. Engineering changes related to equipment/asset data, drawings and specifications are
effectively
implemented.
18. Maintenance standard task database available and used for recurring planned jobs.
12
4. AN OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE
4.1 INTRODUCTION
Maintenance is defined (EN 13306:2001) as the combination of all technical, administrative
and managerial actions during the life cycle of an item intended to retain it in, or restore it to
a state in which it can perform the required function (or a combination of functions which are
considered necessary to provide a given service). In the same standard, maintenance
management is defined as all the activities of management that determine the maintenance
objectives or priorities, strategies and responsibilities and implement them by means such as
maintenance planning, maintenance control and supervision, and several improving methods
including economical aspects. Different authors have proposed models, frames or systems
seeking to manage maintenance in the best way. Using the most advanced techniques and
proposing innovative concepts, every model proposed has strengths and weaknesses Campos,
(2009).
4.2 GOALS AND OBJECTIVE OF MAINTENACE ORGANIZATION
Wireman (2005) states that the objectives of maintenance organization are maximum
production at the lowest cost ,the highest quality and with optimum safety standards, identify
and implement cost reductions, provide accurate equipment maintenance records, collecting
necessary maintenance cost information, optimize maintenance resources, optimize capital
equipment life, minimize energy usage and minimize inventory on hand.
4.3 MAINTENACE COST
Maintenance represents the single largest controllable cost in mining company
Figure 4.1: Maintenance of mobile mine equipment in the information age M Lewis, L.Steinberg
13
According to Mobley (2002) Maintenance cost is major part of the total operating cost of all
manufacture of production plant. Depending of the specific industries, maintenance costs can
represent between 15 and 60 percent of the goods produced. Recent survey of maintenance
management effectiveness indicate that one third 33 cents out of every dollar of all
maintenance costs is wasted as the result of unnecessary or improperly carried out
maintenance . When you consider U.S. industry spends more than $250 billion each year on
maintenance of plant equipment and facilitates, the impact on productivity and profit that is
represented by the maintenance operation becomes clear.
The result of ineffective maintenance management represents a loss of more than $60 billion
each year. Perhaps more important is the fact that ineffective maintenance management
significant affects the ability to manufacture quality product that are competitive in the world
market.
4.4 MAINTENANCE MANAGEMENT INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES
NEEDS
Maintenance management is becoming more important taking in too organization’s coming to
the point that in some of these are changed the Maintenance Manager. Its name is changing
to Asset Manager Physical or Reliability Manager, as the latter should not only worrying
aspects of maintenance (spare parts, staff, working methods, safety, tools, etc..), but also the
proper use and care of the assets of the company (un published). As defined by the UNE-EN
13306 is mean by management maintain "all management activities that determine the
objectives maintenance, strategies and responsibilities, and perform through maintenance
planning, control and monitoring maintenance, improvement of methods in the organization
including aspects economic ".
Productivity and efficiency are increasingly key features within an enterprise, which requires
maximizing resources utilization and minimizing costs, this requires different departments to
be constantly evaluated, so the availability and reliability play an important role within the
maintenance, which requires finding new methodologies for obtaining high performance in
teams, to avoid glitches and perform maintenance on optimal times with a reasonable costs
(un published).
Kans (2008) stated that Applying the newest of information technology will not make
wonders to a business here people do not know how to make use of the technology, or where
the goals of the business do not fit the IT policy. IT is only technology managed by a user.
The user of IT will not have any need for it if he/she lacks a purpose, which depends on the
goals of using IT. If the goal and purpose are clear, the actual use of the IT system could be
made effective. The IT system utilization can for instance give answers to which technical
functionality that is needed or the important characteristics of the IT system, such as security
14
thinking and user friendliness. The success or failure of an IT system is closely connected to
the demands of IT-support.
DeLone & MclLean(1992) summarized in the available published material of information systems success in a model comprising six dimensions of success system quality, information quality, system use, user satisfaction, individual impacts and organizational impacts, see Fig. 4.1The quality of the system and information singularly and jointly affect the use and the user satisfaction. The system use and user satisfaction are interrelated the use will affect the user satisfaction positively or negatively and vice versa. These in turn are qualifications of the impact on the individual performance which in turn will have organizational impacts.
Figure 4.2: Information systems success model DeLone & MclLean
Determining the needs of information technology within maintenance management
Figure 4:3 Determining the need of IT system DeLone & MclLean
15
In Fig. 4.2, we can see that the quality is affecting the use which in turn is affecting the impacts. When determining IT systems requirements, the contrary direction should be applied, defining the desired impacts in form of goals of the organization, which could be divided into individual performance goals, see Fig. 4.3. The impact could be measured by comparing the relative level of performance improvement and the level of goal fulfillment. The impacts are dependent on the purpose and the in mining company the IT system should be use. The utilization of a system could be measured by comparing the actual use with the intended purpose and use, which in turn are affected by the available features of the system, for instance in form of functionality, i.e. what logic is included in the IT system and
characteristics, i.e. the overall design of the IT system. High systems quality could be defined as a system meeting the requirements of the users and the organization.
4.5 DETERMINING THE NEEDS OF IT WITH IN MAINTENANCE
MANAGEMENT
Figure 4.4: The context of determining maintenance management IT needs.
Using input from previous sections, a conceptual model for the context of determining maintenance management IT needs is presented in Fig. 4.4 The main focus is given to the benefits the maintenance organization could reach by applying MMIT. Thus, the choice of technical features of MMIT is dependent upon the needs of the business. Different maintenance strategies and policies have different MMIT functionality needs.
16
Table 4.1:Exemplification of IT demands within maintenance management
Maintenance management activity level
Operational Tactical Strategic
Goal Resource efficiency
Resource
effectiveness Maintenance cost –Effectiveness
Purpose Reporting Resource allocation Decision support
Use
Mainly data input (ease of
use)
Mainly data
processing
(Planning facilities)
Mainly data output
(report generating facility, IT
integration)
User Maintenance technician
Maintenance
coordinator Maintenance manager
4.6 COMPUTERIZED MAINTENANCE SYSTEM
Bryan Weir (2007) states that computerized maintenance systems are utilized instead of the
manual (paper based) work maintenance systems that have been used for many years. The use
of computers in maintenance can provide ready access to precise data and ability to quick
search and find detailed, relevant information with ease. They offer the opportunity to
manage and provide a broad scope of Summarized information with better quality than a
manual system could ever provide.
As the types of maintenance have evolved over time, maintenance management has also been
this evolution, starting from a basic management reports based on manual and imprecise, to
manipulate large amount of information, so it has been necessary resort by using "Computer
Tools". This meant an evolution in how to manage the maintenance both in the general
concept and in each stage (Organization, planning, implementation and control). These tools
above are known as CMMS (Computer Maintenance Management System). Companies are
using these software programs under various maintenance prisms, and use as needed. 61% of
companies use completely devoted to systems management costs or expenses, 56% for
perform the management control of stock, 55% of the applications are designed the historical
record of equipment or machinery, 44% to make planning and work order releases (OT),
while a21% have dedicated systems to monitored variables(un published).
Specialized Maintenance Management at this stage, maintenance not only worry about
controlling bugs, but comprehensively manage all tasks associated with maintenance, pay
17
close attention to manage the asset life. It develops preventive maintenance to predictive
maintenance, which strives to detect incipient faults. All these improvements are achieved
with the integration of systems and methodologies work as different non-destructive analysis
techniques: Oil analysis, thermo graphic analysis and vibration analysis etc.
Using advanced management philosophies maintenance RCM TPM application of control
methods such as audits of maintenance. At this stage it is unquestionable the need to use tools
applied to the maintenance as in the case of CMMS, allowing greater control over information
and maintenance management, getting evaluate what the impact of maintenance on
performance of the company. Another important consideration with which this stage is the
relevance of management they begin to have the maintenance engineering department, which
are responsible for organizing and planning work for maintenance and to study the reliability
of equipment, develop failure prevention policies and analyze the causes and effects of faults
(unpublished).
4.7 DETRMININING THE NEED
A CMMS is a software tool for both management oriented activities maintenance, and related
to this. Basically, you are a database containing information about the company, workers,
warehouse, equipment and maintenance. It should be noted that everything runs a CMMS is
data, and as such, they should be introduces the system for use. If the details are incorrect the
results also will be. A maintenance management program, not a maintenance program that is
only a powerful management tool that facilitates the work of maintenance. Most of these
systems include basic modules for the identification and codification of assets, work orders,
preventive maintenance, history, material event of equipment purchasing managers and
warehouse management, as well as tools for analyzing information. These basic modules can
provide the foundation for an effective system of maintenance administration (unpublished).
William W.Cato and R.Keith Mobley (2001)
They have mentioned the important factor and salvage of CMMS so that it can achieve full
potential and show how to identified the problem that limit success and how resolve them.
Maintenance costs are growing faster than production costs. Some surveys have shown that at
many industries, typical management goals for maintenance such as 95% or better equipment
availability and reliability, 99% product quality, reduced maintenance overtime hours, reduced
backlogs and improved record keeping on repairs are not being met. Maintenance has tended
to be viewed as a "black hole" where too much money goes with little measurable return. But
as most companies find themselves looking for ways to reduce cost and increase productivity,
management is beginning to realize that maintenance offers real opportunities in both areas.
18
Maintenance can account for as much as 60% of controllable plant operating costs. Because
maintenance costs can be not only controlled, but often significantly reduced, efficient
management of maintenance can influence the bottom line much more than is usually
realized. All cost savings in maintenance are in actuality cost avoidance. For example, if the
profit margin in a manufacturing plant is 33% it would require $3.00 in increased sales to
equal a $1.00 savings in maintenance costs. Normally, it is much easier to reduce maintenance
costs than to increase sales. Controlling the maintenance activities in any facility requires an
effective organization and management. Also required is an accurate comprehensive easily
accessible database of relevant information. Some maintenance organizations still manage
their operations with a manual system or with no system at all. In all but the smallest of
maintenance operations manual systems break down under the burden of the vast amount of
information generated and required by maintenance. For this reason the computer is now
being recognized as a powerful tool for maintenance.
Only a computer has the ability to store, retrieve, calculate, organize, and present vast
amounts of data efficiently and accurately. It is highly unlikely that any organization with at
least ten maintenance craft personnel or an annual maintenance budget of $500,000 or more
will not benefit from a computer-managed maintenance system or CMMS.
Smaller organizations can benefit as well if they can justify the implementation cost. A
CMMS can be purchased for as little as a thousand dollars or as much as several hundred
thousand but the purchase price is only a portion of the total implementation cost. Other
costs include hardware, networking, training, data collection, data entry, and procedure
development. Many of these costs, such as data collection and data entry, may be internal
labor costs and can be very high. All costs must be considered in justifying the purchase.
There are many factors to consider in determining whether a CMMS can benefit your
operation. The most important factors relate to reduced cost, but also need to consider such
results as better organizational methods, reduced paperwork, and improved communications.
From a cost standpoint, if planned maintenance work is less than 90% of the total
maintenance work load, if craft productivity is less than 80% of capacity, or if craft overtime
is more than 10%, a CMMS can help you. If you’re finished product quality is consistently less
than 95% or your equipment availability is less than 95%, a CMMS can help you. If your
maintenance inventory cost, including holding cost, is more than 30% of your annual
maintenance budget, a CMMS can help you. If all of the above conditions apply to your
operation, a CMMS can probably work miracles for you.
This assumes that you implement the CMMS that is best suited to your needs, that you
implement it fully and properly, and that you use it to its fullest extent.
19
4.8 HOW A CMMS MEETS THE NEED
According to William W.Cato and R.Keith Mobley (2001)
It will help you to effective manage maintenance by organizing and tracking the myriad of
data required to run maintenance operations effectively. Examples of such data are work
schedules, backlogs, preventive maintenance plans and schedules, labor use and maintenance
cost distribution. A CMMS will also track materials used including quantities and cost. It can
control your inventories and maintain optimum cost-effective levels of spare parts. It can also
CMMS is provided historical, current and future information in both summary and detailed
format.
Most maintenance professionals who have used a good maintenance software system agree
that it produces tangible results in four key areas:
1. Increased labor productivity
2. Better inventory control
3. Improved availability of equipment and product quality.
Additional benefits may be increased equipment/asset life, reduced energy costs, improved
environmental controls, and improved record keeping to meet regulatory requirements or
ISO 9000 requirements. Many of the benefits and cost savings possible with a CMMS will
depend upon the features of the system you implement, how well you implement it, and how
well you use it.
Increased Labor Productivity
Maintenance productivity in U.S. and Canadian industries averages about 35%, or 2.8 hours
per 8-hour shift. The problem normally is not caused by craft personnel who do not work
conscientiously. Instead, it is the result of poor organization and planning, which cause to too
much travel time and wait time, parts and tools that are not available when needed and poor
or missing work instructions and procedures. These are the problems associated with a
"firefighting" environment one driven by the need to repair equipment as it breaks down,
rather than one centered around planned maintenance that prevents breakdowns.
Most maintenance organizations using a CMMS have been able to achieve labor productivity
rates of 70% to 80%, which is an improvement of at least 100%. The CMMS can improve
labor productivity in several ways:
20
1. Accurate information about equipment/assets is readily available. The time taken searching
files and manuals for historical information or for information about parts required for a
repair is practically eliminated.
2. Planning time is reduced dramatically through the immediate availability of information
required for planning. A CMMS also provides several planning aids. For example, the ability
to copy a previously completed work order into a new work order plan can eliminate one
planning process.
3. Work order plans are accurate and complete this can eliminate having the wrong people at the
wrong place at the wrong time. It also eliminates waiting for parts, getting the wrong parts, or
searching for procedures. Travel time between jobs can be greatly reduced.
4. In most cases, a CMMS will provide resource scheduling assistance to ensure all resources
labor and materials are available before the job is scheduled to begin.
5. An intangible benefit one more difficult to measure in dollars is improved employee morale as
a result of better planning, scheduling and organization.
Better Inventory Control
In most facilities where maintenance repair order (MRO) inventories are maintained with a
manual system, either too much or too little inventory is the norm. There tends to be an
excess of items that are frequently used. The opposite is true for infrequently used items.
This situation results because reordering is based on guess work, with no real means of
determining the best stocking quantity for each item. There are also the problems of obsolete
parts and duplicate items purchased from different vendors. Another critical problem is lack
of control over parts issued from the storeroom. With a CMMS, MRO inventory costs should
be reduced, on average, between 5% and 12%. Reductions as high as 20% are not unrealistic.
These reductions are the result of:-
1. The ability to quickly and accurately review inventory catalogs for duplicate parts.
2. The elimination of guess work on part reorders and stocking levels. The CMMS will
automatically create reorder requisitions based on reputable stock levels and work order
requirements for parts.
3. The identification of obsolete parts once bills of materials have been created. If a part in
inventory is not on a bill of materials, it is probably obsolete. Bills of materials can also help
control inventory stocking levels. If an equipment/asset item is permanently removed from
21
service, the CMMS can quickly show if any other equipment/assets use the same parts. If the
answer is yes, the stocking levels for those parts can probably be reduced if it is no, the parts
are probably obsolete.
4. The control of storeroom issues, that is parts can only (legally) be issued to a work order or an
account code.
5. The work order reservation or commitment function, which reserves parts for a work order
so that they are no longer available for other issues. This assures that parts will be available for
a work order when it is scheduled.
Improved Equipment/Asset Availability and Product Quality
Improvement of equipment/asset availability and product quality results from better planning,
less firefighting, and better analysis of repair histories. A good preventive maintenance system,
made available with most computerized maintenance systems, will also lead to these results.
4.9 RETURNS ON INVESTMENT
According to Bryan Weir (2009) the transition to CMMS will require a substantial investment.
The return on this investment will be dependent on the suitability of the selected software
package, an effectiveness of its implementation and the commitment of all personnel to the
new system. Most the packages by claiming
Increased plant availability by reducing down time
Lower operating costs by reducing overtime, spares inventory and
Prolonged asset life - by more effective maintenance
Reductions in spare part inventory by identifying parts through links to equipment
Much improved control over preventive maintenance schedule and documentation
Simplified access to maintenance data and statistics - through report generator
According to Daryl Mather (2002) why do you need it? What are the potential returns on your
investment and specifically what is it that your business requires?
It is recognized that in any large system the overall process requires a focus on much more
than the maintenance and operations content. However, it is within this area that the greatest
time and cost savings, including indirect costs, can be achieved.
As always, there are a range of things that must be considered in order to move to the
selection of your system.
22
First and foremost, why do you need this new system? And when you get it, what do you
expect to get in return? This can be a very difficult area to prove at times. Organizations that
are reliant on physical assets and operate without a CMMS are often convinced that they are
doing a good or average job and cannot see the value in adding new software and
responsibilities to their organizational structures. But what are these beliefs based on?
Generally nothing more than anecdotal information and the resistance to change, he has
found. There is rarely any comparison in terms of benchmarking to other companies within
the industry and there is rarely any evidence of continuous improvement. In fact, there can
often be a resistance to the fact that they are stuck in a reactive maintenance mode and are
not progressing at all.
It is essential to note that there is no system in the world that will deliver any return on
investment (ROI) without the involvement of management at the corporate level.
A strong and focused leadership effort is a key ingredient of any CMMS implementation
and success.
A general assumption can be made here CMMS will improve the maintenance efforts of
organizations in the reactive and even planned states of maintenance. If there is no system in
use today, there is a strong possibility that this operation is firmly in the reactive maintenance
stage, regardless of any card system in place. The ability to analyze, plan and schedule is
compromised without an electronic medium.
Another fact worth mentioning 50% less costly in terms of dollars and time is used planned
and scheduled maintenance task. So one of the benefits that can be recognized immediately is
the reduction of maintenance costs associated with unplanned and unscheduled work. This is
also an area where you need to be absolutely frank regarding your performance.
What was the percentage of work done in the last year that was both unplanned and
unscheduled? Do you know? Can you assume or infer certain levels?
One of the difficulties is in calculating an ROI when there is no information or maintenance
history. Some reading this will find this improbable however, Assure you that it is not only
probable but common.
Once you have defined the percentage of work that was done in the past year, you can assume
a 50% reduction in its cost, without any further problems. Again, the implementation of a
CMMS is not only a change in what you do but in the way you do it and the underlying
philosophy of how you do it.
So what else? What about the indirect costs associated with machine downtime and poor
reliability? A CMMS facilitates analyze this information in detail to determine the root causes
23
of machine failures. Although RCFA is an area requiring very specialized focus, there will be
failures that come to light with available data that would not have been noticed normally.
It is difficult to state exactly what the effects of a CMMS can be on availability however, from
his personal experience a conservative estimate is 2 to 3% within the first 6 months of
operation. What would an increased availability of 3% give your operations? If applied to a
fleet of haul trucks, it may mean the difference between 10 and 11 trucks. This means you can
rest some of your capital, perhaps even sell it, as well as the flow in savings to maintenance
requirements and inventory holdings. Obviously this figure must be analyzed on a per-
application basis, but it is always a significant savings.
What about reliability? By having the data available to evaluate, may be able to raise reliability
easily by designing out or developing better maintenance procedures for nuisance faults or
trips. The savings here can be 100% when the repeat effects of a small trip are calculated for
impact on operations and the resources carried to manage it currently.
The last, but by no means the least, area of savings is that of inventory levels and control.
Most modern CMMSs provide the ability to report on slow-moving items, to classify the
inventory holdings, and even provide optimization in some systems. When added to the flow
in inventory savings from increased maintenance efficiency and machine availability, this area
may well reflect the greatest dollar savings available within a short timeframe.
Also within the area of inventory management, introducing systems with the capabilities to
manage inventories in an advanced manner opens the possibility of the organization
implementing such methods. For example, an organization may suddenly have the tools at
hand to manage consignment stock and vendor-held stock, without mentioning the
possibilities of linking to internet marketplaces and even advance reducing stock holdings.
Savings of 5 to 7%, conservatively, in inventory holdings, mainly due to the application of
advanced reorder and quantity algorithms.
It is important to note that the figures mentioning here are very conservative and not
reflective of organizations where there is a significant effort dedicated to cultural change of
the workforce in order to fully implement the principles and practices of advanced
maintenance management. Returns on investment very much greater than these are not only
possible but frequently achieved.
Once the probable savings are calculated, then the budget limits for the purchase and
implementation can be set. At this point, can determine what business own annual ROI will
be. For example, if looking at a savings of $2 million a year on maintenance, inventory, and
indirect costs, a budget of $20 million will yield a 10% ROI. As can be seen, the figures and
size of investment here are not for the faint-hearted, nor is it a matter to be rushed or entered
24
into lightly. It will require a great amount of leadership effort and focus to achieve the goals
initially developed.
It is not recommended to allow the consultancy or software firm to calculate the possible
ROI. Even with performance-based contracts, there are a multitude of possible factors
affecting such calculations, and it is best that your people are definitely involved in, if not
leading, the final ROI calculations. So, a case can easily be built for the purchase and
implementation of a CMMS. Now comes the need to define exactly what it is that business
want. The definition of business requirements and rules, while vital for CMMS selection, is
also a core element toward the advancement of the organization to the planned state of
maintenance management and while the requirements of the business are addressed.
(Unpublished) The benefit of a CMMS is to allow centralized documentation of all
information maintenance departments, which means that changes occur in personnel
maintenance, information on the work, work to be undertaken, failures, records, etc.., it is
recorded in the system, thus ensuring continuity monitoring of maintenance programs on
each of the teams operated. This allows to standardize procedures and to obtain indicators
showing how well the maintenance is being performed and see the effectiveness of the
programs implemented with the order to make the right decisions for the future because
cannot control what is not is measured. This is how the computer systems used in
maintenance allow companies achieve these objectives, this does not mean that a manual
procedure is bad or not can achieve good results; the difference lies in the extra effort and
time cost achieve the desired objectives. Most professionals have used computer software
maintenance good results in four key areas,
I. Increased labor productivity.
II. Major spare parts inventory control.
III. Better availability of equipment.
IV. Additional benefits increase in the asset's life, reduced energy costs in major and
the maintenance records.
Some authors suggest that the benefits it provides can be divided into CMMS tangible and
intangible,
Tangible Benefit:-
Increase of 15 to 20% in the productivity of labor for maintenance.
25
Reduction of 10 to 15% in inventories of parts and material.
Increase of 10 to 20% in the life of the assets.
6% reduction in maintenance costs (labor, materials and spare parts)
Reduction of 10 to 15% at time inoperable equipment failures caused by lack
Preventive Maintenance•
Reduction of 5 to 10% in the rejection rate of finished products two
Reduction from 5 to 12% in average inventory costs.
Intangible Benefits:-
35% reduction in the time of purchase.
Increased efficiency of labor.
Better monitoring of worker performance.
Automatic generation of maintenance work orders.
Easier and faster review of inventory levels of parts.
26
4.10 WHY CMMS FAIL
There are many reasons why a CMMS may fail to meet the expectations of the user. But very
rarely is the CMMS itself, rather than human error, the culprit. Perhaps there was very little
preparation and research done before selecting a CMMS, or limited involvement by
management and the work force in the selection process the system may have been simply
installed rather than fully implemented , training may have been minimal, or incorrect or
insufficient data may have been entered. Any one of these mistakes can result in a less than
successful experience and a great deal of frustration on the part of those who are expected to
use the system.
According to William W.Cato and R.Keith Mobley (2001) most systems, as purchased and
installed are not management systems and often have limited management capability. Vendors
are very good at developing software programs that will store massive amounts of data,
manipulate the data, automate recurring tasks, and generate standard reports, but they do not
provide the real management tools needed to have an effective maintenance organization.
Human decision making based on the information provided by the systems is the key to good
maintenance management. A system is only as good as the people who use it. Another barrier
to the success of a CMMS may be self-imposed. The infrastructure and work culture in many
plants and facilities restrict effective management of the maintenance function no matter what
improvements are attempted. The addition of a CMMS will in these cases have a limited effect
on the ability of maintenance managers to improve conditions.
Finally, CMMS systems can fail as a management tool because of the way the system is
implemented. Poor planning up front results in misdirected resources, increased
implementation time, a loss of interest on the part of key personnel, and underfunding of the
project. Too little training or training at the wrong time results in misunderstanding and
confusion for the users. This leads to a lack of confidence in the CMMS and a resulting lack
of use. Improper or insufficient data initially loaded to the system results in inadequate
information available from the system. This too results in a loss of confidence and, again, a
lack of use. Proper planning and implementation are the keys to a successful CMMS.
The failure rate for CMMS installations is extremely high, A survey of failed implementations
disclosed the dominant factors that prevented success. The following classifications were
common to most of these failed attempts
1. PARTIAL IMPLEMENTATION
A large percentage of failures happen because the CMMS is not fully implemented. Most
companies lack the expertise required to fully implement a CMMS. Since their in-house
personnel do not have a working knowledge of these programs or fail to fully understand the
27
capabilities of the system, they fail to recognize all of the tasks that are required to directly or
indirectly support the installed system.
As a result, the project team cuts corners or takes only the minimum steps required to install
the basic CMMS hardware and software. The project team fails to recognize all of the factors,
including many non-maintenance issues that are absolute requirements for successful
implementation of a CMMS and effective maintenance management.
It is estimated that, on average, only 30% of the modules of a CMMS are used and that,
within these, only 30% of the functionality is used. The result is a 9% overall utilization of the
CMMS. Installation of a few computer terminals and a CMMS software package will not
generate any change in the effectiveness of your maintenance organization. You must identify
and resolve all factors that limit maintenance effectiveness.
2. LACK OF RESOURCES
Limited resources are a major cause of failure for any project. This failure is typically the result
of either poor planning or lack of management/ labor commitment. Generally, the failure
results from the former. Most CMMS justification packages and project plans, if developed at
all, fail to estimate the level of manpower and financial resources that will be required to fully
implement the CMMS and correct all of the limiting factors that preclude effective
maintenance management. As a result, the resources required to implement the project are
not available.
The second contributor to this problem is the lack of commitment from both corporate and
line management. In many cases, this results from the failure to sell the program to all levels
of plant personnel.
3. FRAGMENTATION OF EFFORT
Simply stated, many plants do not apply effective project management to the implementation
of their CMMS. Like all major projects, implementing a CMMS is a complex, long-term
project that must have strong management and leadership. It is imperative that an experienced
project manager be assigned to the project and be given the authority needed to complete the
project on time. Internal politics, labor relations, and a variety of other factors can contribute
to the fragmentation of the CMMS implementation effort. The project plan must anticipate
these problems and include effective means to limit their impact on the project schedule.
28
4. STAFF OVERLOAD OR NOT ENOUGH STAFF
Most implementations attempt to use in-house personnel for most, if not all, of the tasks
required to implement a CMMS. Implementing a CMMS often requires several man-years of
effort. In most cases, plants do not have the extra resources required to accomplish a
successful implementation. As a result, salaried and hourly personnel are asked to perform the
implementation in addition to their regular duties. The resulting conflict between meeting
production and maintenance goals and implementing a CMMS creates a total overload on all
personnel involved. They become frustrated with the slow progress being made and feel that
the system is not meeting expectations. A frequent result is that the CMMS implementation
becomes a secondary priority and the system is never fully implemented. The solution may be
to hire outside consultants who specialize in CMMS implementations. They can supplement
the in-house team and provide the leadership and knowledge needed.
5. INAPPROPRIATE EXPECTATIONS
Too many organizations expect that the implementation of CMMS hardware and software
will automatically result in an effective maintenance organization. This is absolutely not true.
A CMMS is a tool that will provide the information required to effectively manage the
maintenance function, but it cannot overcome the myriad of other factors that preclude
effectiveness. If not properly and timely implemented, the CMMS may actually increase the
ineffectiveness of a maintenance organization.
6. LACK OF BEHAVIORAL EXPECTATIONS
Another danger is the expectation that all employees will automatically embrace the new
CMMS system and the change in work culture required to properly use it. In fact, without a
radical change in the human factor, a CMMS system cannot provide the expected benefits.
The CMMS will definitely bring change to the organization and the way that business is
conducted. This is especially true if there was no formal system in place prior to the CMMS.
There will now be structure to the way work is assigned and scheduled. Reports on work
completed will be required. Equipment and parts will have to be identified.
7. TREATING COMPUTER AS DELIVERABLES
Many organizations have a myopic view of CMMS implementation and never realize that the
simple installation of computers, networks, and software is only a small part of a CMMS
implementation. Failure to fully implement all of the accompanying changes needed in work
methods, procedures, organization, employee attitude, skills, and other critical areas will
prevent success.
29
8. CONFRONTATION INSTEAD OF COLLABORATION
Almost every plant or facility has some level of internal politics that prevents effective
coordination and cooperation among and within its functions. In the case of a CMMS, the
major adversarial relationships will develop between maintenance, information systems,
procurement, finance, and production. Each of these organizations will be users of the
CMMS and each will have its own agenda regarding features, implementation schedule, and
desired results. During the planning phase, and throughout implementation, there should be a
team consisting of at least one representative from each affected organization. This team will
resolve differences and ensure the implementation stays on track. A senior management
person should act as arbitrator to resolve differences the team can not resolve. This person
must have final and absolute authority.
9. POOR COMMUNICATIONS
This is probably a subset of confrontation versus collaboration. Project management is the
fundamental requirement of successful implementation. Clear, concise communication is an
essential part of good project management. Too many projects lack a master project plan and
schedule that clearly identify all tasks and the sequence in which they must be performed to
meet the implementation schedule and budget. The lack of this master plan leads to poor
communication, adversarial relationships, and slippage of both timeline and budget. Have the
plan in place, get approval from all areas affected by the CMMS implementation, and keep
everyone in those areas advised of progress, changes and successes. Keep them a part of the
project on a daily basis. Establish a schedule for progress reports and meet the schedule. Be
honest on the progress reports about status, success and problems. Request help and advice
on problems. Keep everyone informed and involved.
10. LACK OF EXPERTISE
Many organizations do not have a staff with the experience and expertise to properly
implement an effective CMMS. Typical requirements include development of computer
networks, determination of computer terminal requirements, development of software
integrations, data collection, and database development. As stated earlier, implementation
requires a team that will bring all the required skills and knowledge together into a cohesive
unit. Often it is necessary to supplement the team with an outside consultant.
30
11. RELIANCE ON CONSULTANTS
Many plants address limited in-house knowledge by hiring a CMMS consultant to provide the
expertise and experience needed to properly implement an effective maintenance
management program and CMMS. While this approach is valid, extreme caution must be
exercised in the selection process. Poor leadership by an outside expert can also generate
CMMS failure. Verify the practical capabilities of the consultants you are considering. An
individual may have written books and magazine articles and may be on every CMMS
conference program without having the practical leadership abilities needed to implement a
system. Talk to previous clients and verify that the consultant has a proven record of
successful implementation. Do not use consultants from your CMMS vendor. This is
especially true with a time and material contract. No matter how ethical individual consultants
may be, the conflict between their position as employees of the CMMS vendor and their
responsibilities to you as a client will prohibit cost-effective, successful implementation. A
consultant must protect your interest and be absolutely committed to the implementation of
the most effective system for you. Any conflicts with these goals will seriously limit your
program.
12. MODIFICATION OF THE CMMS
Many organizations elect to modify the CMMS to match their existing business practices even
before they have had an opportunity to see if changing some of their practices to meet the
CMMS will be acceptable. In most cases, this is counterproductive. While some companies
have an effective maintenance organization without a CMMS, the majority do not. If you elect
to replicate your current business practices within the CMMS, there is a high probability that
few benefits will be achieved. In addition, modification of standard CMMS software can be
very expensive and time-consuming. Many CMMS vendors will gladly modify their software
to meet your specific demands. A major portion of their income is generated by
modifications. If you find the system that best meets your needs, there should be no reason
for changes other than minor ones, such as changes to report formats.
13. WORK CULTURE RESTRICTIONS
There are fundamental management, philosophical, or procedural issues, not CMMS system
issues, that can impede the smooth implementation of, or transition to a new CMMS. The
system may fit your specifications perfectly. However, if there is no internal agreement on
how the tool can best be used the system will fail to deliver the desired results. Radical
changes are sometimes required to break the habits of the past. If these issues are not dealt
with prior to implementing your new system, everyone will blame the CMMS for the
continuation of your chronic maintenance problems. In some cases, work culture issues can
affect the specification of the system. For example, one common issue is to the extent to
31
which machine operators will be involved in the maintenance of their equipment. This may
not affect system requirements, because the system doesn't really care whether it is
maintenance or production worker who does the maintenance, enters the data, or outputs the
reports. However, the success or failure of the CMMS can rest with this single issue. Unless
operators begin to take the care and maintenance of their equipment seriously, the
maintenance workers will feel that it is a waste of time to fill out work orders repeatedly for
the same problems. Operators will complain that the system is improving neither the response
rate of maintenance to their problems nor the quality of the repairs. Maintenance will insist
that nobody looks at the reports from the CMMS to see that repeated problems are caused by
operators who are poorly trained and do not care about the equipment. A "catch-22" situation
will develop that will eventually cause failure of the CMMS. In order to realize the potential
benefits of implementing a new CMMS, the deep-rooted philosophical, management, and
procedural issues must be identified and quickly resolved to the satisfaction of all
stakeholders.
4.11 MAXIMIZE USE OF COMPUTERIZED MAINTENANCE
MANAGEMENT
Systems that support the total maintenance operation will improve the quality of maintenance
and physical asset management and be integrated with the overall business system of the
organization. Computerized Maintenance Management Systems (CMMS) will provide greater
levels of manageability to maintenance operations. CMMS will cover the total scope of the
maintenance operation providing the means to improve the overall quality of maintenance
management. Enterprise Asset Management (EAM) will provide a broader scope of integrated
software to manage physical assets, human resources and parts inventory, in an integrated
system for maintenance management, maintenance, procurement, inventory management,
human resources, work management, asset performance, and process monitoring (Peters,
2006).
Vast amounts of data associated with maintenance tasks will come under computer control
and be available as key information for planning, scheduling, backlog control, equipment
history, parts availability, inventory control, performance measurement, downtime analysis,
etc.
32
5 MAXIMO
5.1 MAXIMO ENTERPRISE ASSET MANAGEMENT INTRODUCTION
IBM Maximo asset management is an integrated productivity tool and database that helps
organization manage entire asset types on a single software platform across multiple industry
sectors. Built on a service-oriented architecture (SOA), maximo asset management supplies a
comprehensive view of all asset types their conditions, locations and the work processes that
support business provide to make optimal planning, control, audit, and compliance capability.
By using the maximo asset management user interface, can establish key performance
indicators (KPIs) to monitor asset conditions and trigger automated action based on changes.
It can create, assign, monitor, notify, and report on key process components such as work
orders, service desk tickets, and purchase orders, including status, from start to finish. This
asset management software provides insight for enterprise assets, their conditions and work
processes, for better planning and control.
According to (EMEA) maximo asset management software provides the following service:
Manages asset deployment, specifications, monitoring, calibration, costing and tracking from a
single system. Provides enterprise asset management software for long and short-term
planning, preventive, reactive and condition-based maintenance, schedule management,
resource optimization and key performance indicators.
Plans inventory to meet maintenance demand, making the right parts available at the right
location when needed. Manages vendor contracts with comprehensive support for purchase,
lease, rental, warranty, rate, master, blanket and user defined contracts. Aligns service levels
with business objectives by defining service offerings and establishing service level agreements
(SLAs).Adapts to changing business requirements and connects with other enterprise systems
through a flexible business process configuration platform and scalable service oriented
architecture.
33
Figure 5.1: IBM maximo asset management (Euro Consulting EMEA)
5.2 WHAT DOES MAXIMO WORK MANAGEMENT OFFER
Accourding to MACS 2012:
Tracking tools enable detailed analysis of resource, materials, equipment usage, costs helping decrease labor and materials costs.
Graphical assignment manager optimizes maintenance schedules and labor utilization, ensuring that the right person with the right skills is assigned to the right job.
Preventive maintenance (PM) functionality allows PM schedules to be put into place, reducing unplanned downtime and reactive maintenance
Maximo offers the user a wide range features with maximo contract manager. With maximo contract manager organization has fully control of supplier contracts. All type of contracts can be submitted and managed such as purchase, rent, lease, warranties, or self-defined contracts.
Inventory transaction tracking capabilities streamline parts and materials management and decrease costs by eliminating excess or obsolete inventory.
Inventory optimization and planning functionality stock the right level of inventory to meet maintenance demand ensuring that the right parts are available at the right location, when needed reducing stock-outs, inventory shrinkage and carrying costs, as well as helping to achieve economies of scale through shared resources.
IBM maximo Procurement supports all phases of enterprise-wide procurement, including direct purchase requirements and inventory replenishment. These capabilities inform buyers about requisition, quotation, vendor, purchase order and contract data, allowing them to plan proactively. These capabilities also integrate easily with third party business systems from vendors such as PeopleSoft®, Oracle® and SAP®. In addition, Maximo OCS enables Maximo Enterprise to connect to online commerce systems and exchanges.
34
Approved vendor setup and vendor performance analysis tools - eliminate costly off-contract buying, ensuring the reliability of vendors, as well as the quality of materials.
Automated materials requisitioning capabilities - based on maintenance schedules ensure that the right parts are ordered at exactly the right time.
Automated interval-based, meter-based or event-driven purchasing capabilities - eliminate human intervention, streamline purchasing processes and eliminate manual data entry errors.
Global purchasing support - enables savings and efficiencies of group purchasing and
lower sourcing cost.
5.3 PERFORMANC TESTING IBM MAXIMO ASSET MANAGEMNT
The problem with that misconception is that internal tests performed by a development organization might not reflect conditions experienced in a production environment. Internal tests focus on discovering defects, determining whether the product is scalable to accommodate the largest organizations, and to determine overall performance of each of the applications. Customers who deploy Maximo Asset Management in a production environment should not exclusively rely on the results of internal testing. Instead, they should use the internal results as a guideline when determining the optimal configuration needed to support the mix of applications, number of JVMs, number of users and number of transactions that are typical of the actual production environment. This document provides guidelines for conducting performance tests of IBM maximo asset management in a customer environment. Four common reasons to conduct your own performance tests are IBM (2010):
To validate sizing estimates for a new Maximo implementation.
To ensure that Maximo meets the current requirements of the business processes and to
document the performance of the existing system.
To ensure that Maximo will meet the business demands for the future growth and to assist
the organization with predicting performance bottlenecks.
Analyze, tune and debug current performance issues in production environments
5.4 DEFINING PERFORMANCE BENCHMARK TEST OBEJECTIVES
A well-defined set of performance test objectives is critical to the success of any performance test project. Careful planning and consideration of all factors should be the first step of all projects. The most common reason for failed projects is that too little time is spent on planning IBM (2010): Define the test objective with a set of business questions that are expected to be answered by the results of the test. All further details of test design should map back to answering a specific business question. The following are examples of some business questions that you should address:
35
If this is a new deployment, will the architecture being deployed meet our business requirements?
If this is a new deployment will Maximo Asset Management provide a satisfactory response time, given the requirements for a certain number of concurrent users, performing a given number of transactions in a period of time, on the hardware that you currently have in place?
If this is a new deployment, given the combination of Maximo applications that intend to run, given the transaction volume and concurrent users that are expected, which component is likely to be a bottleneck to overall performance?
If this is an existing deployment, is the existing hardware sufficient to provide acceptable performance given the expected number of transactions and concurrent users, or is new hardware or reconfiguration of existing hardware necessary to provide acceptable performance? If there are planning a new installation, or if the company expect changes to your current maximo environment, such as an increase in the number of users, you should load test the entire application. Stress and stability tests are performed before you configure the product for a production environment. However, this type of testing is not always possible because of time, cost, or other constraints. Consequently, it is critical that to identify the business questions with the highest risks and rewards and test accordingly. Document the test objectives, including the business questions to address, in a project test plan. When testing is completed, you should be able to provide concise answers to each of the business questions in a test report IBM (2010).
5.5 DEFININING TEST TYPES
The type of test perform should be determined by the business questions. The following test types are commonly performed during Maximo performance test projects, but depend on the unique business questions might require additional testing IBM (2010).
I. Baseline Measurements
II. Performance Load Tests
III. Stress test
IV. Endurance Test
V. Sizing/Capacity Tests
VI. Performance Tuning/Debugging
VII. Batch Testing
36
6 CASE STUDY
6.1 DESCRIPTION OF CASE STUDY AREA
The case study is carried out in two underground mine operations in Sweden. Both mines use
maximo asset management software as maintenance management system. This research work
focusses on the evaluation of the effectiveness of current CMMS utilization by using generic
benchmarking tools. The study also extends to comparison of the result with different paper
mill companies, using the same type of CMMS for maintenance management. The first task
was to map the maintenance process and organizational structure of the case study.
Maintenance organization describes the interaction of inputs and outputs in a maintenance
process. This is characterized by assignment of tasks, communication channels, reporting
procedures and workflow that link together the activities of different individuals and groups
within the process Haroun A.E. & Duffuaa S.O. (2009). The organizational structure of
maintenance affects the implementation of CMMS to a large extent. The mapping of the
maintenance organization structure in the case study is shown in Figure 1. This gives a
preliminary understanding of the set up and functional linkages of maintenance activities with
the reporting procedure as well.
6.2 USE OF CMMS BENCHMARKING AND IMPROVEMENT IN THIS
CASE STUDY
The CMMS benchmarking system is a universal benchmarking tool. Most important it
provides the framework for an improvement process for gaining better use of CMMS and to
know the current information technology for maintenance. This benchmarking tool was
developed for a number of reasons (pride in maintenace):
1. As a means to evaluate the effectiveness of the current CMMS utilization.
2. To define functional gap.
3. To define how to enhance current use.
4. To help upgrade functional gaps.
5. To serve as a methodology to help develop and justify a replacement strategy.
The CMMS benchmarking system which has 9 benchmarking categories and 50 benchmark
items is easily adaptable and can be specifically tailored to all CMMS system and to their
intended application .The CMMS benchmarking system is an internal benchmarking tool that
is becoming a model process for benchmarking effective use of CMMS.
37
It is designed as a methodology for developing a benchmarking rating of CMMS ( Class A, B,
C or D) to determine how well this tool is supporting best practices and total maintenance
process.
6.3 MAINTENANCE ORGANIZATION CHART
The setting of tasks (dividing up the work), arranging resources (forming maintenance crews),
and coordinating activates to perform maintenance tasks is referred to as maintenance
organization. The maintenance organization’s structure is determined after planning the
maintenance capacity. The capacity of maintenance is mostly influenced by the level of
centralization or decentralization adopted. Essential issues often considered when forming
maintenance organization’s structure are: capacity planning, centralization or decentralization
and in-house or outsourcing, philosophies peculiar to the business in question or size, type
and owners of the business. The organization or mapping of maintenance function in the case
study area is given in the chart below (Figure 6.1)
Two underground mines Maintenance Organization chart
Figure 6.1: Maintenance organization of the mines
38
7 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
This chapter describes the results, analysis and findings from the benchmarking study of the underground1 and underground2 mining sites. The implementation and utilization of CMMS is understudied and compared with different paper mill factories in Europe. Following the benchmarking model of Andersen & Pettersen (1996) described earlier in this report, we have proceeded in the CMMS benchmarking of the aforementioned mines. Having selected the CMMS to be benchmarked and understanding the organization of the case studied, evaluation criteria designed by Peters (2006), is used to develop a questionnaire. Useful information is collected from questionnaire and presented in a logical form by considering benchmarking rating scale. The important analysis of the result follows the identified criteria which are below; Table 7.1: Description of the criteria in the questionnaire and the number of questions in each with
respective points
CMMS BENCHMARK EVALUATION CATEGORIES
EVALUATION ITEMS
OUT OF POINTS
SWEDEN (underground mine1 & underground mine2 )
1. CMMS Data Integrity 6 24 15
2. CMMS Education and Training 4 16 0
3. Work Control 5 20 10
4. Budget and Cost 5 20 6
5. Planning and Scheduling 7 28 19
6. MRO material Management 7 28 12
7. Preventive and Predictive maintenance 6 24 3
8. Maintenance Performance Measurement 4 16 4
9. Other Uses of CMMS 6 24 9
TOTAL CMMS EVALUATION ITEMS 50 200 78
39
A bar chart show in figure 7.1 was developed to compare the performance of each CMMS implementation in different companies and countries.
Figure 7.1 CMMS Benchmarking Rating mining and paper mill companies
40
To extract knowledge from the information presented in table 7.1, visual presentations are done in graphs and comparisons are made by generic benchmarking procedure. A column chart shown in figure 7.2 is developed to compare the average status of 33 paper mill factories and underground mine1 & 2 concerning results of same CMMS evaluating categories. This is an external benchmarking procedure and it identifies some weak aspects of CMMS implementation. The major weak areas in the CMMS implementation of the case study are; CMMS education and training, budget and control aspects, preventive and predictive maintenance aspects and maintenance performance aspects. However, the mines have laudable use of CMMS in material management and planning & scheduling.
CMMS BENCHMARKING EVALUATING CATEGORIES
15
15
9 11
10
11
6
16
19
9
12
11
3
7
4
14
9
Avera
ge Paper m
ill
2 Underg
round M
ines
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Grade
Other Uses of CMMS
Maintenance Performance Measurement
Preventive and Predictive maintenance
MRO material Management
Planning and Scheduling
Budget and Cost
Work Control
CMMS Education and Training
CMMS Data Integrity
Figure 7.2 CMMS Benchmarking Rating. comparison between mining and paper mill
companies.
Further analysis is done to compare the performance of same CMMS implementation in
different countries. This is shown in Figure 7.3, based on the information available in this
study, the two underground mines in Sweden falls in an average position ahead of two other
countries and behind the remaining two. Not so much could be inferred on cultural influence
on the effectiveness of CMMS implementation in mines.
41
78
119
67
69
115
Sweden
Spain
France
Italy
UK
0 20 40 60 80 100 198 199 200
Total CMMS Evaluation grade Figure 7.3 CMMS Benchmarking Rating comparison b/n different countries
Figure 7.4 compares the total grade of the benchmarking procedure for the two underground mines with the average, worst and best of some paper mills with similar CMMS. The two underground mines fall below the average grade of the 33 paper mills; this is reflecting weak utilisation of the CMMS in the mines.
31
161
102
78
Worst
Best
Average
2 Underground mines
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
Grade
Figure 7.4 CMMS Benchmarking Rating comparison b/n mining and paper mill companies
7.1 DISCUSSION
In this discussion part we have focused in weak utilization of CMMS implementation from the above
CMMS benchmarking evaluating categories result and giving some important remediation. Answer
the question how to improve the current CMMS utilization.
42
7.2 MAINTENANCE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT
In this section presented some of maintenance key performance indicator (KPI) from maximo data tow underground mining site. KPI development is one of importance to the final outcomes that you get from a CMMS, It is vital importance that you revise this to better define your CMMS requirements, as well as redefine your corporate focus in this process. The focus should be three fold: 1. on the definition of the KPIs that will be using to better measure equipment performance, 2. on the KPIs that will be using to define financial performance, 3. on the performance of maintenance processes generally. The overall business requirements first need to be defined. In the case of a mine site, you can state that the production plan for the year is based on a given availability or in the case of a process plant that through put for the year also will be based on predetermined availability statistics. As with everything in the model that you are developing, there is a need to determine the business requirements first (Mather, 2002).
I. Craft Performance two key areas affecting overall craft productivity are craft
utilization (Wrench time) and craft performance. Measurement of craft performance requires that realistic planning times be established for repair work and PM tasks. A standard job plan database can be developed for defining job scope, sequence of tasks, special tools listing and estimated times. The goal is measurement of the overall craft work force and not individual performance. Planning times are also an essential part of the planning process for developing a more accurate picture of work load and to support scheduling of overtime and staff additions.
II. Maintenance Customer Service: The results of improved maintenance planning must be improved customer service. The overall measurement process should include metrics such as compliance to meeting established schedules and jobs actually completed on schedule.
III. Maintenance Performance Measurement Process in this area it is important to have a performance measurement process that includes a number of key metric in each of the following major categories:-
Budget and Cost
Craft Productivity
Equipment Uptime
Planning and Scheduling
Customer Service
MRO Materials Management
Preventive and Predictive Maintenance The overall maintenance performance process should be established so that it clearly validates the benefits being received from the CMMS and maintenance best practice implementation Peters (2006). We have extracted some of KPI from the two underground mining site Maximo data, to check how the information quality and quantity are enough to evaluate some KPI and measure the performance of using some indicator. As we have investigated from maximo data more of the schedule data are not filled correctly.
43
For this reason difficult to evaluate maintenance performance. The reliability of result depends on the quality of information and correctly recorded on the work order. The table 7.2 and charts 7.3 show that out of total work order correctly filled schedule data. Table 7.2: underground mine1 reliable data for Schedule and actual hour
2010 2011 2012 (Jan.- Sep.)
Correctly filled 1177 1187 904
Total number Of WO 3890 3508 2259
correctly filled % 30,3% 33,8% 40,0%
Table 7.3: underground mine2 reliable data for Schedule and actual hour
2010 2011 2012 (Jan.- Sep.)
Correctly filled 34 1131 595
Total number Of WO 4083 4531 3304
correctly filled % 1% 25% 18%
1
25
18
3034
40
2010 2011 2012 (Jan-Sept)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Da
ta Q
ua
lity (
%)
Year
Mine 2
Mine 1
Figure 7.5 Mine1 and Mine 2 reliable data for Schedule and actual hours
Some aspects of maintenance performance related to CMMS implementation in the mines are studied. Figure 7.6 and 7.7 shows the level of preventive and corrective maintenance over three years in the underground mine1 and 2 respectively. The figures indicate a high level of corrective maintenance in the two mines. Further discussion on these is given later in the article. Table 7.4: Total number of preventive maintenance vs. corrective maintenance underground mine1
Jan.2010-Jun.2010 Jul. 2010-Dec.2010 Jan.2011-Jun.2011 Jul. 2011-Dec.2011 Jan.2012-Jun.2012
PM 581 482 613 519 595
CM 1313 1489 1338 1007 1280
44
(Jan.-Jun.)2010 (Jul.-Dec.)2010 (Jan.-Jun.)2011 (Jul. -Dec.)2011 (Jan.-Jun.)20120
20
40
60
80
% P
olic
y
PM
CMUnderground Mine 1
Figure 7.6: preventive maintenance vs corrective maintenance
underground mine1 from maximo data
Table 7.5: Total number of preventive maintenance vs corrective maintenance underground mine2
Jan.2010-Jun.2010 Jul.2010-Dec.2010 Jan.2011-Jun.2011 Jul.2011-Dec. 2011 Jan.2012-Jun.2012
PM 459 397 694 583 972
CM 1515 1712 1840 1394 1535
(Jan.-Jun.)2010 (Jul.-Dec.)2010 (Jan.-Jun.)2011 (Jul. -Dec.)2011 (Jan.-Jun.)20120
20
40
60
80
% P
olic
y
PM
CMUnderground Mine 2
Figure 7.7: preventive maintenance vs corrective maintenance
underground mine2 from maximo data
45
Schedule Compliance work orders is the ratio of the actual number of work orders
completed divided by the total number of work orders that was six month schedule.it is a
measure of adherence to the maintenance schedule
Table 7.6: Schedule compliance underground mine1 Jan.2010-Jun.2010 Jul. 2010-Dec.2010 Jan.2011-Jun.2011 Jul. 2011-Dec. 2011 Jan.2012-Jun.2012
No. of WO Performed as scheduled 416 405 405 410 523
Total number of Scheduled WO 624 505 504 530 636
Schedule compliance 66,67% 80,20% 80,36% 77,36% 82,23%
Table 7.7: Schedule compliance underground mine2
Jan.2011-Jun.2011 Jul. 2011-Dec. 2011 Jan.2012-Jun.2012
No. of WO Performed as scheduled 448 638 539
Total number of Scheduled WO 470 661 559
Schedule compliance 95,32% 96,52% 96,42%
67
80 80 7782
95 97 96
(Jan-Jun)2010 (Jul-Dec) 2010 (Jan-Jun)2011 (Jul -Dec)2011 (Jan-Jun)2012
0
20
40
60
80
100
Sche
du
le C
om
plia
nce
%
Mine 1
Mine 2
Figure 7.8: Schedule Compliance underground mine1& underground mine 2
I. Actual Hours to Planning Estimate is the ratio of the actual number of labor hours
reported on a work order to the estimated number of labor hours that was planned for
that work order.
46
Table 7.8: Actual hours to plan estimate underground mine1 Jan.2010-Jun.2010 Jul. 2010-Dec.2010 Jan.2011-Jun.2011 Jul. 2011-Dec. 2011 Jan.2012-Jun.2012
Actual WO Hours 5:42:33 161:08:52 6942:12:31 11428:41:51 4314:20:53
Planned WO Hours 606:12:00 2598:54:00 4804:24:00 7463:28:00 7421:04:00
Actual hours to plann Estimate
(Estimating Accuracy ) % 1% 6% 145% 153% 58%
Table 7.9: Actual hours to plan estimate underground mine2
Jul. 2010-Dec.2010 Jan.2011-Jun.2011 Jul. 2011-Dec. 2011 Jan.2012-Jun.2012
Actual WO Hours 480:05:45 0:44:29 0:49:54 1609:24:56
Planned WO Hours 1295:03:00 4052:53:00 4580:29:00 5860:00:00
Actual hours to plann Estimate
(Estimating Accuracy ) % 37% 0% 0% 27%
16
145
153
58
37
27
(Jan-Jun)2010 (Jul-Dec) 2010 (Jan-Jun)2011 (Jul -Dec)2011 (Jan-Jun)2012
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
140
145
150
155
Est
ma
ting
acc
ura
cy (
%)
Year
Mine 2
Mine 1
0 0
Figure 7.9: Actual hours to plan estimate, underground mine 1& underground mine 2
7.3 CMMS EDUCATION AND TRAINING
I. Initial CMMS Training: - one of biggest roadblocks to an effective CMMS installation is the lack of initial training on the system. Many organizations never take the time up front to properly train their people on the system. Shop level people must gain confidence in using the system for reporting work order information and knowing how to look up parts information. The CMMS implementation plan should include an adequate level of actual hands-on training on the system for all maintenance employees prior to the “go live” date. It is important to invest the time and expense to “train the trainers” who can in turn can assist with the training back in the shop. Many organizations set up “conference room pilots” where the CMMS software is set up and training occurs with actual data using CMMS vendor trainers or in house trainers. It is highly recommended that competency based training be conducted so that each person trained can demonstrate competency in each function they must perform on the system (Peters, 2006).
47
II. Ongoing CMMS Training:- The CMMS Implementation Plan must consider having an ongoing training program for maintenance and storeroom personnel. After the initial training there must be someone in the organization with the responsibility for ongoing training. If a good trainer has been developed within the organization prior to the “go live” date this person can be the key to future internal training on the new system. Ongoing training can include one on one support that helps to follow up on the initial training.
III. Initial CMMS Training for Operations Personnel:- The customers of maintenance must gain basic understanding of the system and know how to request work, check status of work requested and understand the priority system. During implementation operations personnel need to get an overview of how the total system will work and the specific things they will need to do to request work. If the organization has a formal planning and scheduling process, they will also need to know the internal procedures on how this will work (Peters, 2006).
IV. CMMS Systems Administrator/Backup Trained: - It is important that each site have
one person trained and dedicated as the systems administrator with a backup trained whenever possible. Typically, this person will be from information services and have a complete knowledge of system software, hardware, database structures, interfaces with other systems and report writing capabilities. The systems administrator will also have responsibility for direct contact with the CMMS vendor for debugging software problems and for coordinating software upgrades (Peters, 2006).
7.4 PREVENTIVE AND PREDICTIVE MAINTENANCE
I. Enhanced Preventive and Predictive Maintenance (PM/PdM):- Automatic scheduling of
repetitive PM activities with PM tasks and inspection frequencies documented on the
PM module and printed as part of the PM work order. CMMS enhances PM by
providing a method to monitor failure trends and to highlight major causes of equipment
breakdowns and unscheduled repairs.
II. PM/PdM Change Process:- This best practice area simply ensures that PM/PdM
procedures are subject to a continuous review process and that all changes to the program are made in a timely manner. The CMMS system should provide an easy method to update task descriptions and task frequencies and allow for mass updating when the procedure applies to more than one piece of equipment.
III. PM/PdM Compliance is measured: - One key measure of overall maintenance
performance should be how well the PM/PdM program is being executed based on the schedule. Measuring PM/PdM compliance ensures accountability from maintenance and from operations. Normally, a scheduling window of a week will be established to determine compliance. A goal of 98% or better for PM/PdM Compliance should be expected.
48
IV. Long Range PM/PdM Scheduling:- As a PM/PdM schedule is loaded to the system
peaks and valleys may occur for the actual scheduling due to frequencies of tasks coming at the same time period. The CMMS system should provide the capability to level load the actual PM/PdM schedule and to view upcoming PM/PdM workloads to assist in the overall planning process.
V. Lubrication Services:- Ideally lubrication services tasks frequencies and specifications
should be included as part of the PM/PdM module. A continuous change process for this area should also be put in place as well as an audit process established to ensure all lube and PM/PdM tasks are being performed as scheduled.
VI. CMMS Captures Reliability Data:- The elimination of root causes of problems is the goal rather than just more PM/PDM. One important feature of a Class A installation is being able to capture failure information that can in turn be used for reliability improvement. This requires that a good coding system for defining causes for failures be developed and that this information be accurately entered as the work order is closed.
VII. Complete PM/PDM Task Descriptions:- PM/PdM task descriptions often provide vague terminology to check, adjust, inspect, etc. and do not provide clear direction for specifically what is to be done. Task descriptions should be reviewed periodically and details added that to the level that a new crafts person would understand exactly what is to be done and be able to adequately perform the stated task.
7.5 BUDGET AND COST CONTROL
Without an effective work order system costs accrued to major budget accounts and not at
the level to support maintenance cost control. Deferred maintenance was extensive and
getting worse without an effective PM program being in place Peters (2006):
I. Craft Labor, Parts and Vendor Support Costs:- The equipment history file should provide the source of all costs charged to the asset. Here it is important to ensure that all labor is charged to the work orders for each asset and that parts are charged to the respective work orders.
II. Budget Status operating departments:- Operating departments should be held accountable for
their respective maintenance budgets. With an effective work order system in place for charging of all maintenance costs, the accounting process should allow for monitoring the status of departmental budgets. One recommended practice is for maintenance to be established as a zero based budget operation and that all labor and parts be charged back to the internal customer. This practice helps ensure accountability for all craft time, parts and materials to work orders.
III. Cost improvements due to CMMS:- The impact of a successful CMMS installation should be
reduced costs and achieving gained value in terms of greater output from existing resources. The CMMS team should be held accountable for documenting the savings that are achieved from the new CMMS and the maintenance best practices that evolve. The areas that were used to justify the CMMS capital investment such as reduced parts inventory, increased uptime and increased craft productivity should all be documented to show that improvements did occur.
49
IV. Deferred Maintenance Identified:-It is important that maintenance provides management with a
clear picture of maintenance requirements that require funding for the annual budget. Deferred maintenance on critical assets can lead to excessive total costs and unexpected failures. Benefits from CMMS will provide improved capability to document deferred maintenance that must be given priority during the budgeting process each year.
V. Life-cycle Costing Supported: -Complete equipment repair history provides the base for making
better replacement decisions. Many organizations often fail to have access to accurate equipment repair costs to support effective replacement decisions and continue to operate and maintain equipment beyond its economically useful life. As a result, the capital justification process then lacks the necessary life cycle costing information to support replacement decisions.
8 CONCLUSIONS
Benchmarking provides a good learning opportunity for those involved in the process, in addition to motivating their creativity and stretching their intellectual ability. The possibilities of bringing about useful changes in the organization and the benefits of such change also become evident. ‘Seeing is believing’ as the saying goes, seeing the viability of certain ideas, processes and activities and their successful implementation by other companies, tends to encourage one’s self-confidence and the belief that what other can do, one can do even better. It assists in improving internally and in getting even with others. The analysis of the questionnaire shows that the case study has weak utilized their CMMS to some extent, according to CMMS benchmarking rating (Peters, 2006) the total result in Class D that mean very low utilization but there is large room for improvement in some other aspects of CMMS implementation. The aspect to be improved include data quality, maintenance performance measurement, CMMS education and training, Preventive and predictive maintenance, budget and cost control to move towards maintenance excellence, this improvement potential should be investigated. Furthermore, assessment of maintenance decisions and actions is a key element in maintenance process, it is essential that CMMS facilitate this so as know the contribution and deficiency of maintenance. The status of KPI in the case study indicates that maintenance performance measurement using CMMS is not adequately deployed.
50
9 FUTURE WORK
Finally I am recommended underground mine1 and mine2 maintenance management by
considering this result from maximo data and the questioner encourage to decrease the gap
between generic benchmarking outcome of different companies there are using the same
software. Define objective and strategies to improve on the economical, technical or
organization point of view by consider benchmarking and European standard KPI are very
important in order to achieve a excellence in maintenance of technical assets.
51
REFERENCES
Campos,. (2009). review, classification and comparative analysis. Journal of Automation, Mobile
Robotics & Intelligent Systems vol.3, 1.
Andersen, B., & Pettersen, p. (1996). Benchmarking hand book : step-by step instruction.
Chapman;Hall,2-6 boundary row,London,SEK 8HN,UK.
APQC. (1993). Basics of benchmarking. Houston,Texas: APQC.
Campos, M. L. (2009). review, classification and comparative analysis. Journal of Automation, Mobile
Robotics & Intelligent Systems, 1.
Delone, W., & Mclean, E. (1992). Information systems success: the quest for the dependent variable,.
Information Systems Research, vol.3, 60-90.
EMEA, E. C. (u.d.). euro consulting emea. hämtat från euro consulting emea web site:
http://www.euroconsulting-emea.eu/ den 06 06 2012
Greengard. (1995). Discover best practices from benchmarking. personal Journal.
IBM. (February 2010). IBM maximo asset Managemnte. Hämtat från IBM web site:
https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/wikis/download/attachments/133498530/Performa
nceTestBestPracticesforLoadRunner.pdf?version=1 den 07 06 2012
Institute, T. m. (u.d.). Pride in maintenanace. Hämtat från pride-in-maintenance web site:
http://www.pride-in-maintenance.com/files/introduction-to-CMMS-benchmarking.pdf den
08 06 2012
Kans, M. (2008). An approach for determining the requirements of computerised maintenance
management system. Computer in industry.
MACS. (2012). Management consultancy and solutions. Hämtat från MACS Web site:
http://www.macseu.co.uk/ den 07 06 2012
MATHER, D. (2002). CMMS a timesaving implementation process. (R. J.atino, Red.) Florida: CRC
PRESS.
Mather, D. (den 03 08 2009). Plant Maintenance resource center. Hämtat från Plant maintenance Web
site: http://www.plant-maintenance.com/articles/CMMS_templates.shtml den 08 06 2012
Mobley, R. (2002). An Introduction to predictive Maintenance. wildwood avenue USA: Elsevier
science (USA).
52
Peters, R. (2006). Maintenance benchmarking and best practices:A profit and customer-centerd
approach. North Carolina: The maintenace excellence institute.
T, W. (1998). Developing performance indicators for managing maintenance. New York: Industrial
Press.
Weir, B. (den 03 Augast 2009). Plant Maintenace . Hämtat från http://www.plant-
maintenance.com/articles/CMMS_systems.shtml den 28 05 2012
Wireman, T. (2005). Developing performance indicaters for managing maintenace. New york: Library
of Congress Cataloging.
Yin, R. (1994). Case study research:Design and method. (2nd, Red.) London: Sage.
Haroun A.E. & Duffuaa S.O. (2009). "Maintenance organisation," in Handbook of Maintenance
Management and Engineering. London: Springer.
53
APPENDIX RESEARCH QUESTIONERS
CMMS BENCHMARKING CATEGORIES and ITEM
DESCRIPTIONS
YES
(4Points)
NO
(0Points)
WORKING ON IT (1,2 or3 Points)
A. CMMS DATA INTEGRITY 1. Equipment (asset) history data complete and accuracy 95% or better
2. Spare parts inventory master record accuracy 95% or better
3. Bill of materials for critical equipment includes listing of critical spare parts
4. Preventive Maintenance tasks/frequencies data complete for 95% of applicable assets
5. Direct responsibilities for maintaining parts inventory database is assigned
6. Direct responsibilities for maintaining equipment/asset database is assigned
B. CMMS EDUCATION AND TRAINING
7. Initial CMMS training for all maintenance employees
8. An ongoing CMMS training program for maintenance and storeroom employees
9. Initial CMMS orientation training for operations employees
10. A CMMS systems administrator (and backup)
designated and trained
C. WORK CONTROL 11. A work control function is established or a well-defined documented process is being used
12. On-line work request (or manual system) used to request work based on priorities
13. Work order system used to account for 100% of all craft hours available
14. Backlog reports are prepared by type of work to include estimated hours required
15. Well defined priority system is established based on criticality of equipment, safety factors, cost of downtime, etc.
54
CMMS BENCHMARKING
CATEGORIES AND ITEM
DESCRIPTIONS (Continued)
YES
(4Points)
NO
(0 Points)
WORKING ON IT (1, 2 or
3Points)
D. BUDGET AND COST CONTROL
16.Craft labor, parts and vendor support costs are charged to work order and accounted for in equipment/asset history file
17. Budget status on maintenance expenditures by
operating departments is available
18. Cost improvements due to CMMS and best practice
implementation have been documented
19. Deferred maintenance and repairs identified to
management during budgeting process
20. Life-cycle costing is supported by monitoring of
repair costs to replacement value
E. PLANNING AND SCHEDULING
21. A documented process for planning & scheduling has
been established
22. The level of proactive, planned work is monitored and
documented improvements have occurred
23. Craft utilization (true wrench time) is measured and documented improvements have occurred
24. Daily or weekly work schedules are available for planned work
25. Status of parts on order is available for support to maintenance planning process
26. Scheduling coordination between maintenance and operations has increased
27. Emergency repairs, hours and costs tracked and analyzed for reduction
F. MRO MATERIALS MANAGEMENT 28. Inventory management module fully utilized and
integrated with work order module
29. Inventory cycle counting based on defined criteria is used and inventory accuracy is 95% or better
30. Parts kiting is available and used for planned jobs
31. Electronic requisitioning capability available and used
32. Critical and/or capital spares are designated in parts inventory master record database
33. Reorder notification for stock items is generated and used for reorder decisions
34. Warranty information and status is available
55
CMMS BENCHMARKING
CATEGORIES AND ITEM
DESCRIPTIONS (Continued)
YES
(4Points)
NO (0 Points)
WORKING ON IT
1, 2 or 3
Point
s
G. PREVENTIVE and PREDICTIVE MAINTENANCE (PM/PdM) 35. PM/PdM change process is in place for
continuous review/update of tasks/frequencies
36. PM/PdM compliance is measured and overall
compliance is 98% or better
37. The long range PM/PdM schedule is available &
leveled loaded as needed with CMMS
38. Lube service specifications, tasks and frequencies
included in database
39. CMMS provides MTBF, MTTR , failure trends
and other reliability data
40. PM/PdM task descriptions contain enough
information for new crafts person to perform task
H. MAINTENANCE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT 41. Downtime (equipment/asset availability) due to
maintenance is measured and documented
improvements have occurred
42. Craft performance against estimated repair times is measured and documented improvements have occurred
43. Maintenance customer service levels are measured and documented improvements have occurred
44. The maintenance performance process is well established and based on multiple indicators compared to baseline performance values
I. OTHER USES OF CMMS 45. Maintenance leaders use CMMS to manage maintenance as internal business
46. Operations staff understands CMMS and uses it for better maintenance service
47. Engineering changes related to equipment/asset data, drawings and specifications are effectively implemented
48. Hierarchies of systems/ subsystems used for equipment/asset numbering in database
49. Failure and repair codes used to track trends for reliability improvement
50. Maintenance standard task database available and used for recurring planned jobs
TOTAL CMMS BENCHMARK RATING SCORE:
+
------------ +
56
THE ALL FACTORIES CMMS BENCHMARKING RATING SCALE
CMMS BENCHMARK EVALUATION
CATEGORIES
EV
AL
UA
TIO
N
ITE
MS
Ou
t o
f p
oin
ts
Sp
ain
(V
IA)
Sp
ain
(LIS
)
Sp
ain
(O
VR
)
Fra
nce (
BE
A)
Fra
nc (
BE
N)
Fra
nc
(L
AM
)
Fra
nc (
DO
U)
Fra
nc (
LA
V)
Fra
nc (
VN
Z)
Fra
nc (
SJU
)
Fra
nc (
TL
S)
Italy
(B
AD
)
1.CMMS Data Integrity 6 24 16 19 10 12 12 14 6 15 12 11 4 8
2. CMMS Education and Training 4 16 3 0 5 9 10 0 0 9 2 0 0 9
3. Work Control 5 20 3 1 10 11 11 2 1 9 0 0 0 10
4. Budget and Cost 5 20 11 10 12 11 11 10 10 11 10 10 9 10
5.Planning and Scheduling 7 28 13 17 18 15 15 12 8 19 7 11 2 13
6. MRO material Management 7 28 8 6 6 7 8 6 3 10 6 5 2 4
7.Preventive and Predictive maintenance 6 24 6 13 17 5 5 6 4 8 4 4 4 2
8. Maintenance Performance Measurement 4 16 6 6 8 6 5 6 5 5 4 6 4 4
9. Other Uses of CMMS 6 24 11 11 15 16 14 10 7 15 7 8 6 8
TOTAL CMMS EVALUATION ITEMS 50 200 77 83 101 92 91 66 44 101 52 55 31 68
CMMS BENCHMARK EVALUATION
CATEGORIES
EV
AL
UA
TIO
N
ITE
MS
Ou
t o
f p
oin
ts
Italy
(S
MH
)
UK
(E
LL
)
UK
(H
AR
)
UK
(W
IG)
UK
(N
EW
)
UK
(T
HA
)
UK
(T
HR
)
UK
(E
DI)
UK
(M
IL)
UK
(A
SH
)
UK
(W
RP
)
1.CMMS Data Integrity 6 24 8 15 16 14 15 16 14 20 15 16 23
2. CMMS Education and Training 4 16 9 13 11 10 12 10 11 12 10 11 15
3. Work Control 5 20 10 12 12 7 14 8 7 13 13 13 19
4. Budget and Cost 5 20 11 12 12 12 12 11 11 13 12 12 13
5.Planning and Scheduling 7 28 13 15 15 13 14 16 14 22 21 19 24
6. MRO material Management 7 28 5 9 9 7 8 6 9 14 13 13 17
7.Preventive and Predictive maintenance 6 24 2 12 11 10 9 9 8 16 15 15 19
8. Maintenance Performance Measurement 4 16 4 7 7 6 7 8 8 9 7 7 10
9. Other Uses of CMMS 6 24 8 13 13 13 15 15 15 18 15 15 21
TOTAL CMMS EVALUATION ITEMS 50 200 70 108 106 92 106 99 97 137 121 121 161
![Controlador de motor CMMS-AS/CMMS-ST/CMMD-AS · Descripción Funcionesy puesta apunto Versióndefirmware apartirde1.4.0.x.6 8040107 1404NH [8034521] Controlador de motor CMMS-AS/CMMS-ST/CMMD-AS](https://img.pdfslide.us/doc/110x75/60267df4bc18d8032670fb49/controlador-de-motor-cmms-ascmms-stcmmd-as-descripcin-funcionesy-puesta-apunto.jpg)
