Why RCM Doesn't Work?

GPAllied © 2009 • 1

Why RCMDoesn’t WorkHow To Avoid the 5 Biggest MistakesThat Lead To False Starts and Dead Ends

From the Reliability Professionals at GPAllied

A Special Report for Corporate Executives & Senior Managers

Copyright 2008 GPAllied LLC. All rights reserved. Any unauthorized use, sharing, reproduction

or distribution of these materials by any means, electronic, mechanical, or otherwise is strictly

prohibited. No portion of these materials may be reproduced in any manner whatsoever, without

the express written consent of the publisher.

To obtain permission, please contact:

GPAllied LLC.4200 Faber Place Drive Charleston, SC 29405

Phone 888.335.8276Fax [email protected]

5th Edition

September 2010

Copyright Notice


RCM Made Simple ................................................................................ 4

Does RCM Work for Manufacturers? .................................................... 7

RCM is too Resource Intensive - Mistake #1 ........................................ 8

RCM is Just too Complex - Mistake #2 ............................................... 10

Moving Forward Without A Plan - Mistake #3 ..................................... 13

RCM is All About Condition Monitoring - Mistake #4 .......................... 15

We Expect More From The RCM Process

Than We Do From Our Leaders - Mistake #5 .................................... 17

About GPAllied…………………………………………………... ............. 18

Table of Contents

4 • GPAllied © 2009 Why RCM Does Not Work

Nowlan and Howard Heap published

“Reliability Centered Maintenance”, the

ground-breaking study that changed

maintenance forever.

Yet myth, mystery and confusion about RCM

still abound. So let’s begin with the basic

truths.

To paraphrase RCM practitioner, Doug

Plucknette, of GPAllied, RCM is a structured

process developed to ensure the designed

safety and reliability capabilities of a process

or piece of equipment. The beauty of

understanding the RCM process is it can be

applied to virtually any physical asset in any

plant around the world.

RCM’s roots go back to the early 1960’s,

when the commercial airline companies were

considering buying the new jumbo jet, the

Boeing 747.

At the time, the airlines religiously practiced

time-based preventive maintenance. Why?

Because the conventional wisdom was that

equipment wears out over time. So that meant

taking planes out of service for maintenance

every 1,000, 5,000 or 10,000 hours.

But the problem with the 747’s was the amount

of maintenance specified by federal regulators

was three times more than the maintenance

required for Boeing 707’s. That meant more

time in maintenance, more time out of service,

and a huge disruption to operations.

Clearly, the airlines’ traditional approach to

maintenance would not be economically

feasible for the new jumbo jets.

So the airlines had two choices: Either buy

a larger fleet of planes or develop a more

economical approach to maintenance.

That’s why United Airlines led a task force

to re-evaluate the concept of preventive

maintenance and determine the most

economic strategy, without compromising

safety. The result was the process that we

now know as RCM, which was successfully

employed on the 747 and all subsequent jet

aircraft.

IntroductionReliability Centered Maintenance (RCM) is a

proven, logical, sensible approach that helps

companies improve reliability.

Yet most companies are not getting the return

they expected. They see RCM as too much

trouble for too little reward.

So that’s why we decided to publish this new

report. Find out why RCM doesn’t work, what

needs to change and how to put RCM to work

at your company so it doesn’t become another

Resource Consuming Monster.

It has been almost 30 years since Stanley

RCM Made Simple


Who Developed RCM?United, along with and Boeing Aircraft

Corporation, were the early pioneers of RCM.

Other airlines also considering buying the new

747’s joined the task force and contributed to

the process.

But it was Boeing and United who took the

lead in developing a logical, rational approach

to maintenance that would also be acceptable

to the federal regulators.

In 1976, the U.S. Department of Defense

contracted with United to publish how airlines

develop maintenance programs. The result

was “Reliability Centered Maintenance”, a

landmark 495-page report by Stanley Nowlan

and Howard Heap, which described the RCM

methodology developed for the Boeing 747,

Douglas DC-10 and Lockheed 1011.

(Nowlan was the Director of Maintenance

Analysis for United; Heap was United’s

Manager of Maintenance Program Planning.)

In 1978, the Defense Department placed the

report in the public domain for use by anyone

interested in it.

How RCM Revolutionized MaintenanceThe key to RCM was abandoning the

philosophy of “preserve-equipment” in favor

of “preserve-function”. Simply put,

equipment became the means to an

end, not the end in itself.

In addition, Nowlan and Heap

concluded that a maintenance

policy based on operating age

would have little, if any, impact on

failure rates. Thus, applying time-

based maintenance on equipment

which has no “wear-out” pattern was

futile. This forced a change in philosophy

from, “It wasn’t broke, but we fixed it anyway”

to “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”.

Nowlan and Heap also concluded that:

- Time-based maintenance works only for a

small percentage of components, and then

only when there is solid information on their

“wear-out” characteristics”.

- Condition Based Maintenance (CBM) is

the most-preferred option. That means

monitoring, observing and taking non-intrusive

actions, such as lubricating and cleaning, until

a condition signals that corrective action is

necessary.

- Run-to-failure is a viable tactic in situations


RCM PitfallsIn the last 40 years, no better method than

RCM has been found for determining what

maintenance should be performed. Four

statistically significant studies have confirmed

the validity of RCM.

Yet, in a survey conducted by Reliabilityweb.

com in 2005, several companies offered the

following excuses when it came to their failure

to begin or implement RCM as a reliability tool.

“Mining, like all industries, wants results

right away, not in 6 months or a year.

The classical RCM process is too time

and resource intense.”

“RCM is a great tool but very resource

intensive.”

“100% reliability is extremely expensive,

difficult to attain, and not necessarily

the right answer.”

“RCM is misunderstood to be software.”

“In the beginning, it was hard. And it

is still a challenge to steer the mind-

set toward more condition-based

maintenance than time-based.”

“We always ran into the problem with

implementation. In the few places

where we implemented it successfully,

it was at the maintenance level. And

recognition for it was non-existent.”

“The system is very strong but too high

level ...”

The truth is, there are many pitfalls in RCM.

But few get revealed when an RCM project

fails. You see, nobody wants to write an article

or present a paper at a conference which

reveals how money was wasted and great

visions were never realized.

when there is no safety and little economic

impact.

- In a significant number of situations, the very

act of maintenance itself causes subsequent

failure of the equipment.

- Non-intrusive maintenance tasks should

be used instead of intrusive maintenance

whenever possible. In other words, don’t

do any maintenance, except monitoring and

non-intrusive sustaining actions, until condition

directs intrusive corrective action.


Does RCM Work for Manufacturers?At the RCM 2005 conference in Clearwater,

Florida conference attendees were asked:

“If your company did the maintenance for

commercial airplanes, how often would you

fly?”

Scary thought? Fortunately, most industrial

maintenance managers will never have to

answer that question.

To be sure, when it comes to the

understanding of maintenance and the roll of

Reliability Centered Maintenance, the airlines

are far ahead of industrial manufacturers. After

all, RCM was invented by the airline industry.

But also, in the airline business, the

maintenance mission is quite clear, it begins

with an understanding of equipment functions

and the failure modes that result in functional

failures and ends with a very specific

maintenance strategy designed to mitigate

the consequences of each failure mode. As a

result, maintenance is viewed as a reliability

function instead of a repair function.

In viewing maintenance as a reliability

function, the airline industry simply charges

maintenance with the following mission:

To keep airplanes airborne, full of passengers,

and safe.

This mission leads to a very tight set of

maintenance guidelines, procedures and

controls. On the other hand, inside the typical

manufacturing plant where maintenance is

viewed as a repair, the maintenance mission is

not that clear.

For example, if a packaging line goes down for

a couple of hours, that may not be such a big

deal. But when you’re talking about a plane

with hundreds of people on board, that’s a

totally different story.

See, the fundamental difference between RCM

and all previous approaches to maintenance

is the emphasis on two things: safety and

reliability. So even when you take out the

safety factor, it’s obvious that RCM is still the

best way to go.

If RCM is so successful, why do some

companies have failed RCM efforts?

To answer this question, GPAllied created the

paper: Why RCM Doesn’t Work – How to Avoid

the 5 Biggest Mistakes that Lead to False

Starts and Dead Ends. In viewing the problem

with a traditional RCM approach, GPAllied

offers not only the top five causes for failed

RCM efforts, but pro-active tasks that can be

put in place to eliminate the failures.


Mistake Number 1 Leading to False Starts and Dead Ends in RCMRCM is often viewed as a very resource-

intensive process. To perform a single RCM

analysis requires a substantial amount of work

with literally hundreds of decisions that have to

be made.

So RCM should not be applied to every single

asset you have. The key is to apply it only

where it’s needed.

For instance, there might be only about 10%

of the assets in your plant where you need

RCM. If you apply RCM on that critical 10%,

you should be able to improve your overall

capacity, increase output and return a value

much greater than the money you spend

to do it.

How do you determine where you should apply RCM?

Focus on the systems that will give you the

best Return on Investment (ROI). Simply put,

RCM is a slam dunk when it comes to return

on investment for critical assets. Begin you

RCM effort by identifying the top 10% of your

most critical assets. Once this list has been

identified, you should now begin to measure

Overall Equipment Effectiveness (OEE) on

these assets and performing RCM analysis

on those critical assets that have equipment-

based operational, speed and quality losses.

If you have selected a critical asset, your

implemented RCM maintenance strategy will

show measurable improvements in OEE with

added improvements in Health, Safety and

Environmental performance as well.

As a general rule, the success of your first

implemented RCM analysis will build the

business case to complete RCM analysis on

the remainder of your critical assets.

Why is RCM viewed as being resource-intensive?

A good RCM analysis requires a number of

key people to take time away from their regular

jobs. Subject matter experts, like operators,

maintainers, supervisors and trades people,

will need to become a part of your RCM ef-

fort as it’s their expertise and experience that

makes the process successful.

While some plants believe they can’t afford

or even consider RCM – especially in a

reactive situation where the main job is to

keep the plant running. Companies who

have successful RCM efforts in place know

the reality when it comes to critical assets;

“We can’t afford to not do RCM when it

comes to our critical assets as the cost of lost

opportunities alone will doom our business.”

When we get down to the nuts and bolts of

why RCM works for some companies and not

RCM is Too Resource Intensive


others we find three things all the successful

efforts have in common;

1. Leadership

2. Structure

3. Discipline

Companies that don’t use RCM, look for and

share openly with others excuses as to why

a proven process didn’t work at their plant.

While some may view RCM as being labor

intensive, companies who have successful

RCM efforts understand that RCM analyses

performed by your experts on critical assets

will provide a return on investment in improved

equipment reliability with reduced Health,

Safety, and Environmental incidents and

accidents.

It takes experience and expertise to

understand your failure modes and mitigate

the consequences. Only your people bring

both experience and expertise to the table.

They are the critical resources able to deliver

exceptional results.

Only your people bring both experience and expertise to the table.


The 2nd Mistake Leading to False Starts and Dead Ends in RCMIf you’re looking for the book of excuses why

RCM didn’t work at your plant we have heard

them all. Recently we received a call from

an operations manager at a mid-sized U.S.

utility company. He’s part of a five-member

corporate team trying to improve the way they

do maintenance.

Basically, their challenge is to raise availability

across their fleet of plants from 85% to 91%.

At first, he wanted to talk about some

Condition Monitoring solutions. It seems they

have numerous plants, and “each one is doing

something different on PM and PdM.”

Then I asked a couple of questions about

RCM. Quickly, his tone changed from

enthusiastic to reluctant.

Finally, he said, “Hang on

a minute; I need to shut my

door.”

“Look”, he said, “RCM is a

dirty word around here. I’m

working with a group that

really doesn’t like RCM.

What they like is condition-

based. So I can’t go back

to them with anything that

sounds like RCM.”

Now what’s interesting is

there are four other members

on the team, and are all maintenance

managers. So in effect, the company’s senior

maintenance staff has already decided NOT to

use RCM as a way to improve availability.

Why? I didn’t ask, but I have a strong hunch

that the complexity of an RCM analysis and all

the documentation required can be extremely

demanding. That’s the main reason why

manufacturers have been so slow to adopt the

RCM approach.

Reliability Centered Maintenance is a

structured step by step, logical process. The

structure of this process, while quite simple,

requires a trained facilitator who has the

discipline to lead the team step by step through

the process.

At first glance, the RCM process can be

intimidating and we are often challenged with

RCM is Just too Complex


the question; Do we really need to discuss

failures to this level of detail?

If you want to be successful in improving

reliability, the answer is yes.

Remember the three traits of companies who

have successful RCM efforts?

Leadership – Structure – Discipline

The RCM process provides the structure

needed to be successful. Our GPAllied RCM

Blitz™ Practitioners provide the leadership and

direction through hands on mentoring that will

provide the leadership and discipline it takes to

make RCM part of your company culture.

Some recommendations when it comes to

starting a successful RCM effort:

1. Sell team members on the benefits of RCM

RCM takes time and effort away from people

who already have full-time jobs. So you’ve got

to be able to explain to them, in plain English,

the benefits of RCM.

Forget all the technical jargon. You must

be able to show how RCM will improve the

economics, safety or quality of life at the plant.

Post some examples of successful RCM

efforts and begin your effort by getting baseline

OEE measures on your critical assets.

Continue to measure OEE as you begin to

complete and implement the tasks from your

RCM analyses. The success or your effort and

the improved OEE will sell the process.

2. Use TBTUF

Total best thinking up-front, or TBTUF, is one

of the keys to successful RCM. In the simplest

terms, RCM is a decision-making process

which calls for answers to questions such as:

• What is this system supposed to do?

• How can it fail to do that?

• What causes it to fail?

• What happens when it does fail?

• Can we predict or prevent that from

happening?

Obviously, the answers must come from the

people who know the system: operators,

maintainers, supervisors, technicians,

designers and manufacturers.

The key is to identify these experts and get

their buy-in well in advance.

3. Involve the RCM team members in implementation

\Each RCM analysis should have an

Implementation Manager assigned to the

analysis. This person is responsible for

tracking and reporting the progress of your

implementation to company management

and the RCM team. To help push the

implementation forward, each task identified

in the RCM analysis should be assigned to a

specific individual and each task should have a

due date for completion.

One way to assist in moving forward with

implementation is to involve the RCM team

in the implementation of RCM tasks. The


people involved in the analysis will often

take ownership in making sure the tasks are

implemented, scheduled and completed.

4. Get leaders on board

It is not unusual to see the least experienced

and most junior personnel assigned to an RCM

analysis team. What does that tell everyone

about the project?

Your RCM teams should be made up of people

who are viewed as:

• Experts in the process or piece of

equipment being analyzed

• Respected by their peers in operations and

maintenance

• Outspoken, Honest, and Open to Change

5. The A-B-C formula for avoiding “analysis paralysis”

Information overload makes it difficult, if not

impossible, for people to make decisions. So

that’s a good reason to avoid non-stop RCM

analysis meetings which tie up people for

weeks on end.

Your RCM meetings should be prepped,

planned, scheduled and performed with the

efficiency of heart bypass surgery and tying up

critical resources (people) for weeks on end

will only doom your effort.

The RCM Blitz™ methodology came about

as a result of recognizing that RCM analyses

don’t have to last for weeks and months on

end. The average RCM Blitz analysis lasts

less than one week and by Monday afternoon

the following week you will have a complete

implementation plan in place.

Best of all, the team can start implementing

the simpler changes that come out of the RCM

process and start showing results!

Debunking myth number two, “RCM is too

complex”!

RCM is not complex, it’s structured, and as a

result, this structure requires a detailed plan

and the leadership to see it through.


Moving Forward Without a PlanThe 3rd Mistake Leading to False Starts and Dead Ends in RCMOne of Murphy’s Law states that everything

takes longer and costs more than originally

projected and we’re afraid that’s true about

many RCM projects.

The old maxim “time is money” most definitely

applies to maintenance.

One sad fact we all recognize about time; You

can’t speed it up or slow it down. When we

are young we can’t wait to get older so we

can drive or move out on our own. When we

get older we often wish we could go back and

change things or just slow time down to enjoy

life. So when it comes to time, what do we

have left?

We have to manage time to get the most out

of life and the same is true when it comes to

RCM. The best RCM efforts have a detailed

plan from start to finish and this plan is

reported to everyone who has a stake in the

RCM effort.

From a 30,000-foot view, there are basically

four steps to any RCM project:

1. Up front planning

2. The RCM Analysis

3. Implementation of RCM tasks

4. Achieve results, benefits and return on

investment

The secret is to consider step 3 first. Why?

Because if there’s no execution, there will

be no return on investment. So if you don’t

have or can’t get the resources needed for

implementation, there’s no point doing any

analysis.

Now this point seems obvious, but it’s often

overlooked.

For instance, in 2001 a steel plant did a

complete RCM analysis on a number of

critical systems in their rolling mills. But

afterwards, the company’s management

denied all requests for resources to implement

the results. The company later declared

bankruptcy and the plant was sold.

In another case, a big international chemical

company hired a consultant to facilitate

RCM analysis on a troublesome process

which was impacting multiple plants. The

analysis was completed, report written and

recommendations made within 3 weeks.

Yet two months later, the implementation still

hadn’t begun, and it probably never will.

The key to having a successful RCM effort

comes in understanding why the two above

RCM efforts failed. What did both efforts have

in common?

They failed to have a detailed plan in place

to set the project up for success. If you don’t

have a detailed plan for success, then you can

plan on failure.

Think Days Instead of Weeks

Without a doubt, one of the biggest success


factors in RCM is how fast you can go from the

analysis in step 2 to implementation in step 3.

The whole purpose of RCM is to determine the

most cost-effective type of maintenance for a

particular system. So it makes sense that the

sooner you can implement the results of an

RCM analysis, the sooner you should be able

to show the value.

In contrast, the longer it takes to implement the

results of an RCM analysis, the less likely the

project is to succeed.

That’s why one of the roles of an RCM

Implementation Manager is to push, push and

push some more to keep the elapsed time

between analysis and implementation down to

the shortest number of days possible.

You’ve probably heard of the concept in time

management which says work expands to

fill the time available. That principle will kill

you in RCM if you aren’t careful. It’s the

positive pressure of tight deadlines and high

expectations that get and keep RCM projects

in high gear.

He Who Hesitates….

Another costly mistake is when RCM leaders

wait until all the analysis are complete

before they begin implementing the new

maintenance plan. To be sure, in most cases

implementation can and should start soon after

analysis begins.

The fact is that RCM analysis teams have

many “Ah Ha” moments when they uncover

changes they know would have an immediate

impact ... IF immediate action was taken.

The secret is to treat the analysis,

implementation and results steps as

overlapping with each other rather than in strict

sequence. The ideal situation is when you

can begin showing real benefits of the RCM

process before the analysis stage has even

been completed.

Keep Approval Chains to a Minimum

Finally, it’s a good idea to keep the approval

process as short as possible in order to

prevent any delays in execution. You don’t

want anyone who is unfamiliar with the RCM

process blocking progress without good

reason.

All the mechanisms should be in place to start

implementing results well before the analysis

is complete on the first system. There can be

multiple activities to consider, including:

• Identifying and allocating resources

• Writing new procedures, walking-down

equipment and getting approvals

• Buying special parts and tools

• Training and orientation of crafts personnel

on new procedures

• Planning and scheduling

• Executing new tasks

The reality is that some companies can take

months to make small decisions. That’s why

it’s important to set aggressive timelines and

make everyone live by them once the changes

have been approved.


Shall we put to bed RCM excuse number

three? Rest assured, your RCM effort will

fail if you don’t have a plan. RCM takes time,

critical resources and money, so it should

only be applied where it will show a return on

investment.

Does that statement sound familiar? It should,

we have the same expectations for capital

spending, yet how many capital projects move

forward without a plan?

If you want your RCM effort to be successful

you will need a detailed plan in place. The

RCM Blitz™ method gives your RCM

facilitators detailed instruction on how to set

your effort up for success. Prior to starting

your first RCM you will prepare the RCM

contract that details each step of process, the

people involved in each step and the date it

will start and the date it will be completed. This

contract requires signatures from company

management, area managers, supervision and

the RCM team.

In ten years of leading companies to

successful RCM efforts, every company that

completed the RCM contract implemented

their analysis tasks, showed a return on their

investment and continued with a successful

RCM effort. The contract is your plan for

success when it comes to RCM, and now that

we have a plan, you can forget about making

mistake number three!

RCM is All About Condition Monitoring“We don’t have it, we don’t get it, and we can’t afford it”

The 4th Mistake Leading to False Starts and Dead Ends in RCMRCM is often viewed as a complex and

advanced reliability tool intended only for

companies with advanced maintenance

and reliability efforts. As a result, many

companies who could be successful in RCM

are scared away from the tool because they

don’t have a predictive maintenance group or

their tradespeople have not been trained in

precision alignment or balancing.

As a result, they shy away from a tool that will

help them build the business case for using

PdM and precision maintenance techniques.

A good RCM analysis delivers a balanced

set of maintenance tasks designed to ensure

the inherent designed safety and reliability

capabilities of your asset. The key word here

is balanced, each task is designed to mitigate

a specific failure mode with the recognition

that one task can not and will not cover all the

failure modes for any given component.

RCM is all about understanding failure and the

relationship between causes and effects. It’s a

process that shines a light on each component

detailing, not only the ways it can fail, but also

the ways we as humans cause it to fail.


As part of the RCM decision making process

we ask the question: Can the failure be

detected using On-Condition Maintenance?

When I ask this question regarding the failure

of a high speed bearing on a piece of rotating

equipment, I will often get the following

answer; “Well, no…..we don’t have a vibration

group, so we can’t detect that failure.”

Reliability Centered Maintenance is not about

the haves or have nots, it’s about making the

determination of what is the best thing to do.

So when it comes to answering the question;

Is there an On-Condition task that would detect

the failure? The correct answer is always yes,

and that task is vibration analysis.

If we follow the RCM process and start our

effort with a plan, the business case to perform

vibration analysis and other PdM techniques

on our critical assets will be a slam dunk. The

cost of bringing in the technology, detecting the

failure, and planning and scheduling the repair

prior to failure will be far less than cost of an

unscheduled emergency failure.

Reliability Centered Maintenance is all about

building the business case for reliability. It’s

about learning how to operate and maintain

our assets in the most efficient way possible.

With that being said, I think we can burry

excuse number four. Every one can afford to

learn and apply PdM techniques to their critical

assets.


We Expect More From the RCM Process Than We Do From Our Leaders

The 5th Mistake Leading to False Starts and Dead Ends in RCMIt’s been said in the past that one in every

three RCM efforts will end in failure. I think

that statement is actually being very kind to

RCM. I would put the number to two out of

every three.

These numbers are both sad and discouraging

considering the workforce in today’s

manufacturing companies are both more

experienced and educated than the workforce

Stan Nowlan and Howard Heap had to work

with.

I stated earlier that Reliability Centered

Maintenance is about understanding the

relationship between causes and effects, and

in doing so we use the experience of our RCM

team to identify the failure modes of our assets

and in turn use the RCM decision logic to

identify a maintenance task to mitigate each

failure.

Using that same logic, could we not perform a

RCM analysis on Why RCM Efforts Fail?

In simple terms Reliability Centered

Maintenance is Pro-Active Root Cause

Analysis and if we look at the causes of why

RCM efforts fail, one major piece of this cause

map would be leadership.

All by itself RCM is a fantastic process, put

six people through a RCM analysis and they

will come out of that analysis with a thorough

understanding of how the equipment is

supposed to work and the consequences

of each failure mode. That knowledge has

tremendous value, but on its own, it won’t

show a return on investment for the RCM

analysis. To get the value from your analyses,

they must be implemented.

While its been stated over and over that

implementation is the graveyard of RCM, I tend

to have different belief. While your RCM effort

might be dead and buried because it wasn’t

implemented. Your leadership holds the RCM

shovel and they have two choices:

1. They can use the shovel to dig a grave

by ignoring the process, expecting

implementation to happen all on its own.

2. They can use the shovel to dig the

foundation for a successful RCM effort

by becoming involved with the planning

and execution of each step of the RCM

process.

When it comes to successful RCM efforts,

we see leaders and leadership at all levels.

People who understand that while the RCM

process will deliver the structure, it takes

people to deliver the leadership and discipline

necessary to guarantee success in any RCM

initiative. With Leadership factored in….RCM

really DOES work!


About GPAlliedGPAllied helps companies build wealth and

competitive advantage through world-class

predictive maintenance and reliability across a

global manufacturing network.

Founded in 1997, GPAllied has quickly

become the largest engineering firm

specializing in predictive maintenance and

reliability engineering.

Today, GPAllied serves some of the biggest

names in manufacturing, including more than

200 plants and facilities in the U.S., Canada,

Europe and Latin America.

FREE Reliability ConsultationEvery year the gap between the companies

who are taking advantage of reliability and the

ones who aren’t gets wider.

That’s why you can’t afford not to make

significant reliability improvements in 2007.

Those who prepare now will reap big dividends

in the future…while others will struggle to

survive.

There are very few shortcuts. However, one is

to make sure you get the right help.

Now you can get answers to your most

important questions about RCM with a free,

55-minute reliability phone consultation.

There’s no hassle, no cost and no obligations.

Any information you provide is confidential and

will not be shared outside of our firm.

To take advantage of this special offer contact

GPAllied at:

Phone: 888-414-5760

Fax: 843-414-5779

Email: [email protected]


Legal NoticeWhile all attempts have been made to verify

information provided in this publication,

neither the author nor the publisher assumes

any responsibility for errors, omissions or

contradictory interpretation of the subject

matter herein.

The purchaser or reader of this publication

assumes responsibility for the use of these

materials and information. Adherence to all

applicable laws and regulations, including

federal, state and local governing business

practices and any other aspects of doing

business in the U.S. or any other jurisdiction

is the sole responsibility of the purchaser

or reader. GPAllied LLC. assumes no

responsibility or liability whatsoever on behalf

of any purchaser or reader of these materials.

GPAllied, LLC.4200 Faber Place Drive ▪ Charleston, SC 29405 USA

Phone 888.335.8276 ▪ Fax 843.414.5779www.GPAllied.com ▪ [email protected]

Education

Why RCM Doesn't Work?