|
2001 Maintenance Task Selection Survey Results
Ó
Plant Maintenance Resource Center
Overview
This survey of use of techniques used by Maintenance professionals to select the appropriate routine tasks for Predictive and Preventive Maintenance tasks was conducted on the Plant Maintenance Resource Center web site in mid 2001.
Summary of Key Findings
Voluntary responses were sought to the survey, and 39 valid responses were received from a wide range of individuals working across a variety of industries.
The key findings are:
- 56% of respondents indicated that they had a formal approach to PM Task Selection. This is surprisingly low.
- 60% indicated that they were currently using, or had previously used, Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM) approaches to PM Task development. A similar number also indicated that they were using, or had previously had used, PM Optimization approaches. Given the relative recency of the PM Optimization approach, this latter figure may be overstated.
- Statistical Analysis/Weibull approaches were rarely used, and may not be as well understood.
- Most respondents were proactively analysing some, or all, of their equipment.
- Consultants are used in about one third of cases, and provide a wide range of services, including training, facilitation, collecting and analysing data, and making recommendations regarding PM tasks.
- Specialist PM Task Development software appears to be quite widely used, with 44% of respondents indicating that they used such software.
- Maintenance personnel, on the whole, tend to be more involved in PM Task development processes than Production personnel, and there is generally a high level of involvement of shop floor personnel.
- Overall, more than 50% of respondents considered their current approach to PM Task Development to be only satisfactory or poor. However, those that were using formal approaches were much more satisified with the results, with 50% considering the results from their approach to be Excellent or Very Good.
- RCM and PM Optimization approaches appeared to be considered to be similarly successful
- Respondents considered that the most important factors for success were Management Committment, and Training.
- 38% of respondents indicated that they had heard of the SAE standard for Reliability Centered Maintenance - JA1011, however only 15% of respondents have read the standard, and almost 50% of respondents did not know whether their current approach to PM Task Development complied with the SAE standard for RCM.
Respondent Data
Of the 39 valid responses, almost 44% of respondents were based in the USA, with the remainder spread throughout the world.
| Country |
Responses |
| United States | 17 |
| Canada | 2 |
| Australia | 8 |
| United Kingdom | 3 |
| Other | 9 |
Respondents came from a wide range of industries.
| Industry |
Responses |
| Manufacturing-Petroleum refining, chemicals and associated products | 7 |
| Manufacturing-Other | 6 |
| Manufacturing-Food, beverages, tobacco | 5 |
| Utilities-Electricity Generation | 3 |
| Mining-Metal ore | 3 |
| Manufacturing-Metal products | 3 |
| Manufacturing-Wood and paper products | 2 |
| Oil and Gas-Oil and gas extraction | 2 |
| Other | 8 |
Maintenance line management and Engineering positions were well represented in the survey.
| Position |
Responses |
| Maintenance Foreman/Supervisor |
10 |
| Plant/Maintenance Engineer |
7 |
| Maintenance Manager/Superintendent |
6 |
| Maintenance Planner |
6 |
| Maintenance Technician |
3 |
3% |
| Other |
3 |
| CMMS Support Professional |
2 |
| Process/Industrial Engineer |
1 |
| Consultant |
1 |
Respondents generally came from larger organisations.
| No of Trades/Craftspeople |
Responses |
| Large(more than 100 crafts/tradespeople) | 17 |
| Medium(10 to 100 crafts/tradespeople) | 17 |
| Small(less than 10 crafts/tradespeople) | 5 |
Detailed Results
Approaches to PM Task Development
56% of respondents indicated that they had a structured approach to PM task selection.
Which phrase best describes your workplace's approach to PM Task Development?
| Response |
Number |
| Formal/Structured |
22 |
| Informal/Unstructured |
16 |
| Don't Know |
1 |
Use of Reliability Centered Maintenance
Of those who indicated that they used a formal/structured process for PM task selection, almost 60% indicated that they were currently, or had previously, used Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM) for PM task selection. Interestingly, 2 out of the 16 who indicated that they were using informal processes also indicated that they were using RCM. Given that RCM is a highly structured process, there is some doubt about the accuracy of these responses.
Which of the following techniques are you using, or have you used, to develop or review your Routine Maintenance task program?
| |
Using RCM? |
| Currently Using |
Previously Used |
Never Used |
Don't Know |
| Approach to Task Development |
Formal/Structured |
12 |
1 |
7 |
2 |
| Informal/Unstructured |
2 |
1 |
8 |
5 |
| Don't Know |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Almost 60% of respondents using formal methods also indicated that they were using PM Optimization techniques for PM Task selection. It is possible that this figure is inflated somewhat, due to possible misunderstanding of what PM Optimization is, given that this is a relatively new term in the Maintenance lexicon.
| |
Using PM Optimization? |
| Currently Using |
Previously Used |
Never Used |
Don't Know |
| Approach to Task Development |
Formal/Structured |
11 |
2 |
4 |
5 |
| Informal/Unstructured |
3 |
2 |
6 |
5 |
| Don't Know |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Statistical techniques appear to be considerably less frequently used and/or understood.
| |
Using Statistical Analysis/Weibull Techniques? |
| Currently Using |
Previously Used |
Never Used |
Don't Know |
| Approach to Task Development |
Formal/Structured |
3 |
0 |
8 |
11 |
| Informal/Unstructured |
0 |
1 |
9 |
6 |
| Don't Know |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
A considerable proportion of those stating that they have a formal approach to PM Task development also state that they use informal techniques.
| |
Using Informal Techniques? |
| Currently Using |
Previously Used |
Never Used |
Don't Know |
| Approach to Task Development |
Formal/Structured |
7 |
7 |
2 |
6 |
| Informal/Unstructured |
10 |
2 |
1 |
3 |
| Don't Know |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
When is PM Task Development performed?
From the data provided, it would appear that most respondents are proactively assessing either all, or critical, equipment.
Approach to PM Task development at your workplace?
| Approach |
Responses |
| Proactively analysing all equipment |
11 |
| Proactively analysing critical equipment |
13 |
| Formally analysing after equipment failures |
3 |
| Adhoc, informal approach |
9 |
| Never reassess PM program |
2 |
| Don't have a PM program |
1 |
Role of Consultants
Consultants appear to be used about one third of the time
| Using Consultants? |
Responses |
| Yes |
14 |
| No |
25 |
Where consultants are involved, in about 70% of cases, they provide training.
| Consultants Conducted Training? |
Responses |
| Yes |
9 |
| No |
4 |
| Don't Know |
1 |
In nearly 80% of cases, where consultants are involved, they make recommendations or decisions regarding PM Tasks. I hope they have all the information that they need to make those decisions and that their Liability Insurance is up to date!
| Consultants made recommendations/decisions regarding PM tasks? |
Responses |
| Yes |
10 |
| No |
2 |
| Don't Know |
2 |
In around 75% of cases, where consultants are involved, they facilitated the PM task decision making process. Much lower risk, from the consultants viewpoint!
| Consultants facilitated PM task decision-making process? |
Responses |
| Yes |
9 |
| No |
3 |
| Don't Know |
2 |
In around 50% of cases, where consultants are involved, they were involved in project planning for the PM Task Development exercise.
| Consultants involved in Project Planning? |
Responses |
| Yes |
6 |
| No |
6 |
| Don't Know |
2 |
In around 60% of cases, where consultants are involved, they collected data for the decision making process.
| Consultants collected data? |
Responses |
| Yes |
8 |
| No |
5 |
| Don't Know |
1 |
In around 80% of cases, where consultants are involved, they analyzed data during the decision making process.
| Consultants analyzed data? |
Responses |
| Yes |
10 |
| No |
2 |
| Don't Know |
2 |
Use of Software
There is a relatively high prevalence of use of specialist PM Task Development software - particularly among those using formal processes.
| |
Approach to Task Development |
| Formal/Structured |
Informal/Unstructured |
Don't Know |
| Using Software? |
Specialist Software that makes decisions |
7 |
0 |
0 |
| Specialist Software that records decisions |
7 |
3 |
0 |
| Word Processor/Spreadsheet |
2 |
7 |
1 |
| No |
6 |
6 |
0 |
Who participates in the PM Task Development process?
Maintenance personnel, on the whole, tend to be more involved in PM Task development processes than Production personnel, and there is generally a high level of involvement of shop floor personnel.
| |
Yes |
No |
Don't Know |
| Maintenance Managers/Superintendents |
24 |
10 |
5 |
| Reliability/Plant/Maintenance Engineers |
16 |
15 |
8 |
| Maintenance Foremen/Supervisors/Coordinators |
29 |
7 |
3 |
| Maintenance Planners/Schedulers |
20 |
11 |
8 |
| Maintenance Trades/Craftspeople |
24 |
10 |
5 |
| Production Managers/Superintendents |
11 |
20 |
8 |
| Production Foremen/Supervisors/Coordinators |
9 |
22 |
8 |
| Production Operators |
11 |
19 |
9 |
| Equipment Vendors |
12 |
18 |
9 |
| Other Technical Specialists |
11 |
16 |
12 |
Success of current approaches to PM Task Development
Overall, more than 50% of respondents considered their current approach to PM Task Development to be only satisfactory or poor.
| Success of your current approach? |
Responses |
| Excellent |
3 |
| Very Good |
8 |
| Good |
5 |
| Satisfactory |
13 |
| Poor |
8 |
| Don't Know |
2 |
Those using formal approaches for PM Task Development were much more satisfied with the results being achieved.
| |
Approach to Task Development |
| Formal/Structured |
Informal/Unstructured |
Don't Know |
| Success of your current approach? |
Excellent |
3 |
0 |
0 |
| Very Good |
8 |
0 |
0 |
| Good |
3 |
2 |
0 |
| Satisfactory |
6 |
6 |
1 |
| Poor |
2 |
6 |
0 |
| Don't Know |
0 |
2 |
0 |
RCM and PM Optimization approaches appeared to be considered to be similarly successful.
| |
Approach to Task Development |
| Using RCM |
Using PMO |
Statistical/Weibull Analysis |
Informal Process |
| Success of your current approach? |
Excellent |
2 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
| Very Good |
5 |
3 |
0 |
2 |
| Good |
2 |
3 |
1 |
3 |
| Satisfactory |
4 |
5 |
1 |
6 |
| Poor |
1 |
1 |
0 |
5 |
| Don't Know |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Success Factors
Respondents considered that the most important factors for success were Management Committment, and Training.
| |
Aspects that led to your success? |
| Most Important |
2nd Most Important |
| A high level of committment from senior management |
6 |
4 |
| Effective training |
5 |
7 |
| Effective Project Management |
4 |
3 |
| Involvement by Shop Floor employees |
3 |
5 |
| Choosing the right Task Development approach |
2 |
2 |
| Choosing the right software package |
2 |
1 |
| Effective Change Management |
2 |
0 |
| Support from external consultants |
1 |
2 |
| Selecting the right equipment to analyse |
1 |
2 |
| Involvement by Operations employees |
1 |
1 |
| Having high quality data available for analysis |
1 |
0 |
| Strong support from equipment vendors |
0 |
2 |
| An adequate budget for the project |
0 |
1 |
Similar themes came out in the things that respondents considered that they should have done more of.
| Most important aspect of your implementation that you should have spent more time and effort on? |
Responses |
| A high level of committment from senior management |
9 |
| Effective training |
6 |
| Effective Change Management |
4 |
| Choosing the right Task Development approach |
4 |
| Having high quality data available for analysis |
3 |
Involvement by Shop Floor employees |
1 |
| Selecting the right equipment to analyse |
1 |
| An adequate budget for the project |
1 |
Use of the SAE Standard for Reliability Centered Maintenance (JA1011)
38% of respondents indicated that they had heard of the SAE standard for Reliability Centered Maintenance - JA1011, however only 15% of respondents have read the standard.
Heard of the SAE standard for Reliability Centered Maintenance (JA1011)?
| Response |
Number |
| Yes |
15 |
| No |
23 |
| N/A |
1 |
Read the SAE standard for Reliability Centered Maintenance (JA1011)?
| Response |
Number |
| Yes |
6 |
| No |
32 |
| N/A |
1 |
Almost 50% of respondents did not know whether their current approach to PM Task Development complied with the SAE standard for RCM.
Using a PM task development process that complies with the SAE standard for Reliability Centered Maintenance (JA1011)?
| Response |
Number |
| Yes |
5 |
| No |
15 |
| N/A |
19 |
Ó
Plant Maintenance Resource Center 2001
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 11:54:25 AEDT
Privacy Policy
| 
