Something is still awry with the methods of many organizations
to integrate new information management technologies into their maintenance
departments. Notwithstanding many publicized anecdotes of successful applications
of computerized maintenance management systems (CMMS), there are myriad
untold tales of failed efforts, wasted resources, and unfulfilled expectations.
Many businesses and organizations that computerize their work order tracking,
preventive maintenance scheduling, and material management functions do
succeed in achieving dramatic improvements in operational efficiency. The
benefits of improved data management, increased service responsiveness,
cost savings, and other advantages are widely publicized. The trade periodicals
and industry forums continuously tell us about these accomplishments. Albeit,
they rarely report the stories and statistics about the less fortunate.
Those companies and organizations who falter in their attempts to achieve
meaningful results through computerization - and their reasons why.
This silent and frustrated majority have not been well represented, however,
they exist in numbers. Reliable sources indicate, that over the past few
years, more than 50% of computerized maintenance management system start
ups have failed to pay back a meaningful return on investment after two
years of operations. Although this ratio is believed to be improving, this
insider's experiences and interactions with facility professionals, around
the county verifies that the incidence of futility remains relatively high.
Simply stated, the reality is that heavy investments in computerized maintenance
management system information technologies have failed to live up to the
much publicized benefits of automation and have delivered some pretty disappointing
results.
WHAT SEEMS
TO BE THE PROBLEM?
Many maintenance management professionals seem to be walking into the
same technology traps that are endemic to the business community at large.
In the rush to automate every job function that affects organizational efficiency
and bottom line profits, many managers are overlooking some important caveats
inherent in all information technology implementations.
In the book, Computerizing the Corporation 1991 , McConnell describes
the syndrome that affects many information technology (IT) implementations.
Their list of root causes of the problems includes these common IT project
mistakes:
- Oversimplification
- Lack of resources
- Fragmentation of effort
- Staff overload or understaffed
- Inappropriate staff expectations
- Lack of behavioral expectations
- Treating computers as deliverables
- Confrontation instead of collaboration
- Poor communication leading to misplaced assignments
- No comprehensive planning to guide the implementation effort
These common mistakes, and other pitfalls specific to maintenance management,
are the primary causes for many distressed CMMS projects. Many problems
stem from misunderstandings about computerized maintenance. In particular,
the misconceptions center around the issues of what, why, and how.
Misconception #1 - What's a Computerized Maintenance Management System?
When asked this question maintenance professionals often respond by citing
the latest features of some favorite maintenance application, often equating
this piece of technology with the system, per se. Unfortunately, many CMMS
implementation projects are modeled around this limited concept of the system.
Little emphasis gets placed on other vital elements that make up of the
complete system.
Misconception #2 - Why computerize the maintenance function?
Recently, the issue of computerizing the maintenance function has accelerated
quickly beyond the question: why should we implement, to the imperative:
how do we implement. The decreasing cost of computer hardware, and the emerging
power of microcomputer and software technologies, have disguised the question
of feasibility. Many maintenance professionals, in their haste to keep up
with contemporary information management technologies, unwittingly, neglect
to evaluate these important questions before automating:
- Do we have an information management problem, or a business management
problem?
- Have we thoroughly evaluated the real benefits and costs of a CMMS
implementation?
- Do we have the internal knowledge and commitment to complete the
CMMS effort?
Before automating the maintenance function, an organization must determine
whether its effectiveness is diminished because of resource constraints,
dysfunctional work practices, information poverty, or other operational
deficiencies. Without prior analysis of the cause, organizations will often
implement solutions to problems that have been misdiagnosed. Very often
the causes of inefficiency are rooted in poor management habits, outdated
modes of operation, or lack of a defined maintenance management mission.
It is succinctly stated in Computerizing the Corporation: "that
technology implementation is a business problem, not a technical problem.
Its success or failure lies with management."
Misconception #3 - How should an organization implement a CMMS?
Business professionals, who make a living inside the software industry,
agree that there is no one-and-only correct way to successfully implement
a computerized maintenance management system. Organizations vary widely
in their management structure, business requirements, resource base, and
history of experience with automated systems. More importantly, their needs
for information differ along with the value that they place on obtaining
and managing it. These differences lead to a variety of approaches to implementing
computer assisted maintenance operations.
Part of the reason that well-intentioned implementation efforts fail
to achieve meaningful results is because they treat computers as deliverables.
These projects are flawed from the start because they are based on a narrow
concept of the system. They focus on installing computer hardware software
technology. In doing so, they fail to realize the importance of other elements
of a complete and beneficial system. Therefore, the emphasis of the implementation
effort is directed toward software installation and technology issues -
instead of a complete SYSTEM implementation.
THE NEED
FOR A COMPLETE CMMS
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
Feedback from experienced CMMS users indicates the need for a more comprehensive
approach. Industry Week Magazine's published study, Move the Wrench Over
and Pass Me the Computer, February 1990, provided some insights into
CMMS implementation efforts. When queried about what they'd do differently
to improve their implementation results, respondents listed: more and better
planning, more training, more end-user involvement in decision making, and
using a more formal project approach.
These accounts point toward the necessity for a practical and complete
system implementation approach. They suggest the need for a course of action
that is more systematic, is based on thorough planning, is results oriented,
and has a strong focus on education and training. An approach that recognizes
that the benefits to be achieved through automation will only be received
if all of the factors that comprise the complete CMMS are developed: people,
process and technology. An approach which can be universally applied to
plant and facility maintenance operations, small and large, simple and complex.
There is such an approach: PBR Associates'
