Installation of a CMMS does NOT improve Asset Performance - Why is this?
A. What do the CMMS vendors say their product will deliver??Vendors state that their product will reduce downtime, extend asset life, capture asset total costs, reduce reactive maintenance, and improve work force efficiency. But software alone cannot deliver these results.
B. What does management hope to get from a CMMS? Management wants to see a reduction in backlog size, PM work performed on time, fewer breakdowns, and less maintenance costs. Unfortunately, there is no explanation on how to achieve these objectives – outside of implementing the CMMS.
C. What do many user communities end up doing with the CMMS? Many user communities end up making a fancy work order ticket system with meaningless KPIs. Electronic workflow is also set up to expedite work to the next person but oftentimes results in a bottleneck at the technician locker.
D. What should the CMMS be used for; how could it be configured to enhance asset performance, optimize work force productivity, and ensure job safety? In order to improve asset performance you need to focus on the bad actors and refinement of maintenance strategies. Work force productivity should be improved with weekly schedules, safety plans, and formal work order feedback.
E. Where have CMMS vendors fallen short in regards to product vision, i.e., what key features are missing from base product? A work order matrix should exist which automatically ranks the backlog each night. Maintenance scheduling should be an automated feature which produces a resource-leveled schedule using backlog ranking. Thirdly, RCM maintenance strategies, with failure modes, should be its own application inside the CMMS. This design permits an on-going refinement by establishing a 3-way match between the WO failure mode, RCM failure mode, and PM record. Lastly, WO feedback should be emphasized.
F. Why has the user community not recognized the potential a CMMS could provide in terms of stakeholder decision-making and process efficiency? Basically, you don’t know what you don’t know. The CMMS community usually attends tech conferences as opposed to asset-centric conferences. Therein, many lack understanding of the principles behind an asset management system based on reliability. They tend to believe that an EAM (enterprise asset management) by definition will support asset management.
The vendors business model is to sell software, which they do quite well. Unfortunately they are not all that interested in certifications for reliability and asset management systems. It seems that the CMMS vendors, user community and technology-based consultants focus solely on the software.
领英推荐
The endgame is to optimize return on asset (ROA) which means doing the right work at the right time by the right resource in a safe manner. System design should support reliability engineering and workforce efficiency.
Based on my experiences over 3 decades consulting, these are my suggestions for CMMS optimization in support of reliability in asset management. This usually requires product configuration. But maybe someday some of this could be base product.
Per the flow chart below, you can see that there are several roles that must be established to achieve the outcome that sales/marketing promised and management expected.
John Reeve, I didn’t read every reply. This somewhat inflammatory detail may have been mentioned: A lot of emphasis is put on the accounting aspect of the program. Trying to convince the powers that be that a properly setup CMMS not only provides the platform for improving reliability, it enhances the financial metrics and the ability to make data driven financial decisions. Unfortunately, the accounting department usually has a very high level of ?influence over the implementation. If the CMMS is meeting their needs, Katy bar the door at the mention of change.
Asset Strategy and System Superintendent at Kamoto Copper Company S.a
3 年This is very true. CMMS need to be always lead by clear expectations and visions
ERP & Supply Chain Consultant @ The Supply Chain Guy | CSCP
3 年Thank you John
Ingeniero/Asesor/Estratega
3 年I have seen is that CMMS can't improve performance just by itself, it is because garbage in so garbage goes out from any software. So, it is important to undersatand that asset performance will not change just for purchasing a brand new software.? Indeed, a CMMS deployment must define goals such as: detect and measuring backlog, identifying bad actors. Moreover, automation WO has to be considered as basic feature. Howewer, a CMMS must be a tool to obtain feedbaack that will address actions to change current status and source of solutions to problems, so maybe in that moment it will possible to estimated a new performance value. Finally, it is necessary to add well trained people plus financial resources to become in strong support to attempt succeed with a CMMS.
Reliability Consultant at Allied Reliability
3 年Most CMMS are not set up to deliver value It should be set up with the end game in mind - Being able to pull data OUT of the system to drive reliability and improvement decisions is the fundamental purpose of these sytems From the start, how the system is set up should prioritize ease of use, and training the end users to be able to utilize the system, or you are wasting an incredible amount of money. If your end users (the techs on the floor who do the work and report what they did) do not find it easy to report, they will not use it, and you will not get any actionable data. If you don't have useful data, you are wasting your time and money and will forever be reactive