Take
control of your work
by Arne Oas
In previous articles,
we discussed areas to address in your current maintenance management
system to ensure you have a solid base to move forward, improve or
restructure your CMMS program. To accomplish these changes, you need
to “draw a line in the sand,” make the changes, set aside prior
work practices and go forward. If you made the changes, what’s next?
The
next challenge associated with a CMMS implementation is work control.
Before worrying about optimizing preventive maintenance (PM) work,
expanding predictive maintenance (PdM) or identifying MRO inventory
(parts), you must be in control of your process. This and upcoming
articles will discuss work control issues.
What is work control?
This is the generic term that refers to the process an organization
uses to identify, manage and control how work is done and documented.
To assess your current work control process, start with these
questions:
1) How is work
identified? Who enters it into the system?
2) How is work
selected? Who approves jobs?
3) How is work
planned? How are required parts identified and ordered?
4) How is work
scheduled and assigned?
5) How is the
information recorded? Work orders? How does that info get back into
the system?
6) How is recorded
data analyzed?
These are some of the
things to consider if you want to fully understand the requirements
for good work control in your organization.
Let’s look at how
the system identifies work. Basically, you deal with three distinct
work types: scheduled (current PM/PdM), projects/capital (engineering
and outage) and repair (planned and unplanned).
PM/PdM
work should constitute 35 percent of your reported hours into
the system. If it’s not, you have some tasks to do later. This type
of work is the heart of any maintenance department since it drives
everything else in your site’s operation. This work is normally
preloaded in the CMMS from previous manual or computer systems. It has
a predefined calendar (or meter) frequency and associated schedule
triggers.
Pre-approved work
orders generate automatically when you reach the triggers. For
example, you can trigger work orders using a fixed frequency. Even if
previously generated work orders aren’t completed, the next PM will
generate (example: every 30 days). Or, you may use a float frequency
which resets based on the last completion date (example: 30 days after
the PM was last completed in the system).
For those of you with
production/maintenance coordination problems, your initial approach
should be to set PM triggers to a fixed frequency. When everyone is
used to doing the schedule, change them to a floating PM. The risk of
using float-driven PMs is that it’s easy for PMs to get lost in the
system, since new PMs aren’t generated if work orders aren’t
finished in a timely manner. You could get seriously behind and not
know it. This makes it difficult to be in control of your work.
Project
or capital work usually is major by nature and doesn’t deal
with day-to-day maintenance problems. Most CMMS programs control them
with parent/child work orders and accounting codes. The difficulty is
getting people to understand that a CMMS will track all the work and
it could have bi-directional interfaces into packages such as
Microsoft Project and your accounting system. Once they understand
those points, engineering can jump in and document their projects.
Repair
work has two categories: the foreseen (your backlog) and the
unforeseen (emergencies). It doesn’t matter which of these we talk
about; you identify them similarly through PM/PdM inspection
supporting system generation (control, DCS, BMS, etc.) or customer
identification of a problem/issue. If designed right, PM/PdM
inspections should generate half of your workload.
Repairs are the
problem children in the work control group. Why? The issue arises from
the associated physical response to their identification and initial
documentation as a work order. Do I fix it now or can it go into
backlog? And, who will enter the request into the system?
Answer the “fix it
now vs. backlog” question mostly by work priority (visit
www.mrotoday.com and read my Archived article “Did you control the
chaos?”). Also, answer the following questions:
1) Is it
life-threatening?
2) Is it a major
safety item?
3) Will continued
operation result in equipment or facility damage within 24 hours?
4) If identified on a
PM, do you need less than 15 minutes to repair it?
5) If identified on a
PM, are no parts required to fix the problem?
If you answer yes to
any of these, respond immediately and fix the problem, documenting it
after the fact. If you answer no to the questions, go into backlog.
Using pre-established jobs (standard repairs) in the CMMS can help
here. Establishing the responsible person or craft, estimated times,
work order codes and response times lets you standardize repair data
for further assignment and analysis.
How you enter work
into the system depends on how the CMMS application is deployed and
your organization structure and culture. If the CMMS is designed to
give anyone in the organization access, then anyone can enter a work
request (client, portal, Web, etc.). If it is not, a help desk is
required to assist them. Can the technicians document work and the
results? If not, the supervisors or person closing the work order must
enter the information.
Getting all of your
work (past, present and future) into the system and documented is
critical and is the first step in controlling it. After all, if you
don’t know what work you have to do, how can you control and perform
it effectively?
Arne
Oas is the senior maintenance consultant at Management Resources
Group. If you have a maintenance management software question, contact
Coach Oas at 215-918-2165, or e-mail oasa@mrginc.net.
This
article appeared in the October/November 2003 issue of MRO
Today magazine. Copyright 2003.
Back to top
Back to MRO Coach archives
|