|
|
CMMS Implementation Survey Results - 2004
Ó
Plant Maintenance Resource Center
Overview
This survey of CMMS Implementation was conducted on the Plant Maintenance Resource Center website between May and July 2004. Read the entire analysis, or click on one of the links below to go to the appropriate section.
Summary of Key Findings
Voluntary (and confidential) responses were sought to the survey, and 105 valid responses were received from a wide range of individuals working across a variety of industries.
The key findings are:
- The five most common CMMS in use were SAP, Maximo, MP2, MIMS/Ellipse and PMC.
- In comparison with our 2000 survey on this topic, there are significantly more SAP users and significantly fewer MP2 users in this survey.
- Most systems have been in place only for a few years, but a significant proportion have been in place for 5 years or more
- Statistical analysis of responses showed no clear correlation between the conduct of other usual change management activities associated with CMMS implementation, and the perception of implementation success
- The most commonly stated reasons for selection of the current CMMS were General functionality and features and Integration with other commercial software
- In comparison with our 2000 survey on this topic, Integration with other commercial software was a more significant factor in the selection of the CMMS
- CMMS are seen as being moderate-to hard to use, on average, with Maximo rating highest in terms of ease of use
- CMMS are, on average, seen as being only moderately well endowed with functionality and features, although SAP and Maximo rate highly in this area
- CMMS implementations are generally seen as moderately successful, with little variation between ratings for the top 5 most popular CMMS packages
- Most of those respondents who rated their implementation as poor had implemented packages other than these most popular packages
- In comparison with our 2000 survey on this topic, relatively fewer implementations, overall, are rated as being Poor
- The most important factors in implementation success were obtaining Senior Management committment, and effective training. The relative importance of slecting the correct CMMS appears to have declined over the last 4 years.
- Overall, most respondents reported that their CMMS implementation has led to some or significant benefits
Respondent Data
Of the 105 valid responses, just under one third half were based in the USA, with Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom also well represented.
In comparison with our 2000 survey on this topic, the overall proportion of respondents from the USA has reduced significantly, and those from other parts of the world increased.
| Country |
Responses |
% of Total |
| United States | 31 | 29.5% |
| Australia | 11 | 10.5% |
| United Kingdom | 7 | 6.7% |
| Canada | 6 | 5.7% |
| India | 4 | 3.8% |
| Egypt | 4 | 3.8% |
| Argentina | 2 | 1.9% |
| Venezuela | 2 | 1.9% |
| Iran | 2 | 1.9% |
| South Africa | 2 | 1.9% |
| Thailand | 2 | 1.9% |
| Ireland | 2 | 1.9% |
| Other/Not Specified | 30 | 28.6% |
Respondents came from a wide range of industries.
In comparison with our 2000 survey on this topic, there are significantly more respondents from Manufacturing-Petroleum refining, chemicals and associated products, and fewer from Manufacturing: Other.
| Industry |
Responses |
% of Total |
| Manufacturing-Petroleum refining, chemicals and associated products | 15 | 14.3% |
| Manufacturing-Food, beverages, tobacco | 9 | 8.6% |
| Oil and Gas-Oil and gas extraction | 8 | 7.6% |
| Mining-Metal ore | 7 | 6.7% |
| Manufacturing-Metal products | 7 | 6.7% |
| Manufacturing: Other | 6 | 5.7% |
| Utilities-Electricity Generation | 5 | 4.8% |
| Services-Transport | 4 | 3.8% |
| Manufacturing-Wood and paper products | 4 | 3.8% |
| Manufacturing-Non-metallic mineral processing | 4 | 3.8% |
| Services-Healthcare | 3 | 2.9% |
| Services-Other | 2 | 1.9% |
| Utilities-Water, sewerage, drainage | 2 | 1.9% |
| Services-Education/Academia | 2 | 1.9% |
| Services-Contract Maintenance/Repairs | 2 | 1.9% |
| Manufacturing-Machinery and equipment | 1 | 1.0% |
| Services-Property services/Building Maintenance | 1 | 1.0% |
| Mining-Services to Mining | 1 | 1.0% |
| Mining-Other | 1 | 1.0% |
| Agriculture-Forestry & Logging | 1 | 1.0% |
| Manufacturing-Printing, publishing, and recorded media | 1 | 1.0% |
| Other/Not Specified | 19 | 18.1% |
As in our 2000 survey on this topic, respondents generally came from larger and medium sized organisations.
| No of Trades/Craftspeople |
Responses |
% of Total |
| Large(more than 100 crafts/tradespeople) | 50 | 47.6% |
| Medium(10 to 100 crafts/tradespeople) | 39 | 37.1% |
| Small(less than 10 crafts/tradespeople) | 16 | 15.2% |
Detailed Results
This article focuses on some of the more interesting results, and also reviews the correlation between some of the survey results in order to determine what factors (if any) are more likely to lead to successful CMMS Implementation.
CMMS usage
Over 80% of respondents are currently using a CMMS. This is lower than for our 2000 survey on this topic, where almost 90% of respondents were currently using a CMMS.
| Does your workplace currently use a CMMS? |
| |
Responses |
% of Total |
| Yes |
86 |
81.9% |
| No |
19 |
18.1% |
The five most common CMMS in use include Maximo, SAP, MP2, PMC and MIMS. In comparison with our 2000 survey on this topic, there are significantly more SAP users and significantly fewer MP2 users in this survey. It would appear that the trend towards larger, integrated business systems may be impacting on those packages operating at the lower end of the CMMS market.
| Which CMMS does your workplace currently use? |
| CMMS |
Responses |
% of Total |
| SAP | 26 | 24.8% |
| Maximo | 14 | 13.3% |
| MP2 | 6 | 5.7% |
| MIMS | 5 | 4.8% |
| PMC | 4 | 3.8% |
| Mainsaver | 3 | 2.9% |
| MPAC | 3 | 2.9% |
| Elke/Maintracker | 2 | 1.9% |
| AMMS | 2 | 1.9% |
| Avantis | 1 | 1.0% |
| Asset controller xp | 1 | 1.0% |
| BPCS | 1 | 1.0% |
| Cedar | 1 | 1.0% |
| CENDEX | 1 | 1.0% |
| faciliworks | 1 | 1.0% |
| IMMPOWER | 1 | 1.0% |
| IFS | 1 | 1.0% |
| Isis | 1 | 1.0% |
| ITms Four Rivers | 1 | 1.0% |
| JD Edwards | 1 | 1.0% |
| Mainpac | 1 | 1.0% |
| Maintain it | 1 | 1.0% |
| Maintenance Manager | 1 | 1.0% |
| max | 1 | 1.0% |
| Mex | 1 | 1.0% |
| MPC Megamation | 1 | 1.0% |
| Passport | 1 | 1.0% |
| PC Maint | 1 | 1.0% |
| PM Soft | 1 | 1.0% |
| Rimses | 1 | 1.0% |
| Tabware | 1 | 1.0% |
| U.S. Postal Service E-Mars | 1 | 1.0% |
| Workmate | 1 | 1.0% |
| ZOLES | 1 | 1.0% |
| Other/Not Specified | 14 | 13.3% |
Most systems have been in place only for a few years, but a significant proportion have been in place for 5 years or more. In comparison with our 2000 survey on this topic, most systems have been implemented for longer, on average - could this be as a result of the pre-Y2K "bubble" in systems implementation activity?
| How long ago did you "go live"? |
| Years |
Responses |
% of Total |
| In progress | 5 | 4.8% |
| <1 year | 6 | 5.7% |
| 1-2 years | 17 | 16.2% |
| 2-3 years | 13 | 12.4% |
| 3-4 years | 13 | 12.4% |
| >4-5 years | 7 | 6.7% |
| >5 years | 27 | 25.7% |
| Not Applicable | 17 | 16.2% |
Reasons for selecting a CMMS
A large proportion of respondents were not aware of the reasons for selection of the current CMMS, but the most commonly stated reasons were General functionality and features and Integration with other commercial software. In comparison with our 2000 survey on this topic, Integration with other commercial software was a more significant factor in the selection of the CMMS. Ease of Use was seen as being less important in CMMS selection in this survey than in the previous survey.
| What was the most/second most important reason that your workplace chose your current CMMS? |
| |
Most Important |
Second Most Important |
| Reason |
Responses |
% of Total |
Responses |
% of Total |
| Availability in local language version | 0 | 0.0% | 1 | 1.0% |
| Availability of local support | 1 | 1.0% | 7 | 6.7% |
| Availability of training | 2 | 1.9% | 1 | 1.0% |
| Compatibility with previous CMMS software | 4 | 3.8% | 2 | 1.9% |
| Compatibility with our hardware/operating system | 3 | 2.9% | 3 | 2.9% |
| Don't know | 24 | 22.9% | 22 | 21.0% |
| Ease of implementation | 1 | 1.0% | 1 | 1.0% |
| Ease of Use | 9 | 8.6% | 4 | 3.8% |
| General functionality and features | 10 | 9.5% | 14 | 13.3% |
| General reputation of software and its vendor | 4 | 3.8% | 9 | 8.6% |
| Integration with other commercial software | 16 | 15.2% | 8 | 7.6% |
| Integration with other technical software | 0 | 0.0% | 2 | 1.9% |
| It uses the latest technology | 1 | 1.0% | 4 | 3.8% |
| Other/Not Applicable | 22 | 21.0% | 18 | 17.1% |
| Price | 7 | 6.7% | 7 | 6.7% |
| Speed of system response | 1 | 1.0% | 2 | 1.9% |
Amongst the "other" reasons given for selecting their CMMS, respondents included:
- Already being used in one of our other divisions.
- Best offer to improve my maintenance department
- Can handle enormous amounts of data.
- Coorporate decision
- Dealer is one of our company group
- Wide use across the industry
CMMS Comparison
CMMS are seen as being moderate-to hard to use, on average, with Maximo rating highest in terms of ease of use, SAP seen as being slightly harder to use than the average, and other packages outside the most popular five having a wide range of ease-of-use ratings. In comparison with our 2000 survey on this topic, the ratings for ease of use of SAP has improved markedly - Maximo continues to stand out in this area in terms of ease of use.
| How would you rate your current CMMS in terms of its ease of use? |
| |
No of Responses |
| CMMS |
Excellent |
Very Good |
Good |
Satisfactory |
Poor |
| Maximo |
3 |
3 |
6 |
2 |
|
| MP2 |
1 |
1 |
3 |
1 |
|
| SAP |
|
6 |
10 |
6 |
3 |
| MIMS |
1 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
|
| PMC |
|
|
2 |
2 |
|
| Other |
4 |
8 |
14 |
6 |
3 |
| Total |
8 |
17 |
28 |
21 |
13 |
CMMS are, on average, seen as being only moderately well endowed with functionality and features, although SAP and Maximo rate highly in this area. In comparison with our 2000 survey on this topic, Maximo's ratings in this area appear to have slipped slightly.
| How would you rate your current CMMS in terms of its general features and functionality? |
| |
No of Responses |
| CMMS |
Excellent |
Very Good |
Good |
Satisfactory |
Poor |
| Maximo |
1 |
7 |
4 |
2 |
|
| MP2 |
|
2 |
3 |
1 |
|
| SAP |
1 |
14 |
4 |
5 |
1 |
| MIMS |
1 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
|
| PMC |
|
|
2 |
1 |
1 |
| Other |
4 |
5 |
7 |
12 |
5 |
| Total |
7 |
30 |
20 |
23 |
7 |
On average, CMMS implementations are generally seen as moderately successful, with little variation between ratings for the top 5 most popular CMMS packages. Most of those respondents who rated their implementation as poor had implemented packages other than these most popular packages. In comparison with our 2000 survey on this topic, the ratings for SAP are more balanced in this survey - in the 2000 survey, most ratings were extreme - people seemed to either love or hate it. It appears that respondents now have a more considered view of the success of their SAP implementations. In addition, relatively fewer implementations, overall, are rated as being Poor.
| Overall, how would you rate the success of your CMMS implementation? |
| |
No of Responses |
| CMMS |
Excellent |
Very Good |
Good |
Satisfactory |
Poor |
| Maximo |
|
5 |
6 |
2 |
|
| MP2 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
|
1 |
| SAP |
|
5 |
11 |
8 |
1 |
| MIMS |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
| PMC |
|
1 |
2 |
|
1 |
| Other |
2 |
7 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
| Total |
4 |
20 |
29 |
19 |
13 |
Factors Influencing Implementation Success
According to the respondents, the most important factors in their success were obtaining Senior Management committment, and effective training. In comparison with our 2000 survey on this topic, Senior Management committment remains the most important factor in success, but Training is considered to be significantly more important than in the last survey. The relative importance of slecting the correct CMMS appears to have declined over the last 4 years.
| What do you consider are the two most important aspects of your implementation that led to your success? |
| |
Responses |
| Factor |
Most Important |
Second Most Important |
Total |
| Senior Management commitment | 15 | 17 | 32 |
| Effective training | 12 | 17 | 29 |
| Choosing the right CMMS | 10 | 7 | 17 |
| Effective Change Management | 10 | 5 | 15 |
| Focus on business benefits | 5 | 9 | 14 |
| Adequate budget | 6 | 8 | 14 |
| Effective BPR | 5 | 8 | 13 |
| Effective Project Management | 5 | 5 | 10 |
| CMMS Vendor Support | 7 | 2 | 9 |
| Consultant support | 4 | 2 | 6 |
Other reasons for success mentioned by respondents included:
- Cost, it was done inhouse.
- Strong and knowledgable end users.
Reinforcing the previous point, the most important area in which respondents wished they had done better was in the area of training. However, effective Business Process Reengineering (BPR) was also one area where respondents wished they had spent more time and effort. In comparison with our 2000 survey on this topic, better BPR and better Change Management were factors that are now considered to be more important - Selecting the right CMMS was seen as relatively less important in 2004 compared with 2000.
| In hindsight, what is the most important aspect of your implementation that you should have spent more time and effort on, in order to increase implementation success? |
| Factor |
Responses |
Percent |
| Effective training | 20 | 19.0% |
| Choosing the right CMMS | 9 | 8.6% |
| Senior Management commitment | 8 | 7.6% |
| Effective BPR | 16 | 15.2% |
| Effective Change Management | 12 | 11.4% |
| Effective Project Management | 5 | 4.8% |
| Adequate budget | 5 | 4.8% |
| Focus on business benefits | 2 | 1.9% |
| CMMS Vendor Support | 3 | 2.9% |
| Consultant Support | 1 | 1.0% |
| Other/Not Applicable | 24 | 22.9% |
Benefits obtained from CMMS Implementation
Overall, most respondents reported that their CMMS implementation has led to some or significant benefits. Note that, in the following table, the large number of "Don't Know/Not Applicable" responses includes those from people who do not currently use a CMMS.
In comparison with our 2000 survey on this topic, the overall level of benefits reported seems to have reduced slightly in some of the "hard" benefit areas, such as labour costs and equipment availability.
| |
Size of Benefits Obtained
% of Responses |
| Area of Benefit |
Significant |
Some |
None |
Don't Know/Not Applicable |
| Reductions in Labor Costs |
5.7% |
32.4% |
29.5% |
32.4% |
| Reductions in Materials Costs |
11.4% |
32.4% |
22.9% |
33.3% |
| Reductions in Other Costs |
8.6% |
36.2% |
23.8% |
31.4% |
| Improved Equipment Availability |
9.5% |
37.1% |
21.9% |
31.4% |
| Improved Equipment Reliability |
13.3% |
41.0% |
15.2% |
30.5% |
| Improved Cost Control |
35.2% |
23.8% |
16.2% |
24.8% |
| Improved Maintenance History |
30.5% |
37.1% |
9.5% |
22.9% |
| Improved Maintenance Planning |
30.5% |
36.2% |
8.6% |
24.3% |
| Improved Maintenance Scheduling |
28.6% |
39.0% |
6.7% |
25.7% |
| Improved Maintenance Schedules |
29.5% |
35.2% |
9.5% |
25.7% |
| Improved Spare Parts Control |
21.9% |
35.2% |
12.4% |
30.5% |
Additional benefits cited by respondents included:
- Upgrade in knowledge
- Equipment Perfomance
- Reduced fire fighting calls and breakdowns
- Standardisation between different maintenance departments
- Enhanced computer literacy, measurement
- Enhanced transparency and accountability
- Trending
- Time sheets of engineers
- Improved control of material tracking & delivery
- Be able to implement Asset maintenance program (RCM/RBI method) in the organisation
- Inventory control
- Changes in maintenance processes
- Vendor details recorded,
- Improved KPI's control
- Cost projection
Ó
Plant Maintenance Resource Center 2004
All rights reserved.
If you wish to copy or distribute this article, please email me to ask for permission first!
(Permission will generally be granted, so long as appropriate credit is given to its origin).
Copyright 1996-2009, The Plant Maintenance Resource Center . All Rights Reserved.
Revised: Thursday, 08-Oct-2015 11:51:54 AEDT
Privacy Policy
|
|
