Improvement Focus Areas |
Improvement activities are ad hoc and reactive, based on emotions rather than on focused priorities. As a result, improvements are not really noticeable. |
There is general consensus about broad improvement focus areas:
• The main focus is on safety, cost savings and breakdown reduction.
• There is no system to evaluate conflicting priorities.
• Asset-related losses are not quantified.
• Operational and Engineering objectives are still defined separately. |
The AM Policy, Strategy and Scorecard are used to define focus areas:
• Operations and Engineering have common AM objectives and KPIs.
• Asset-related losses are broadly quantified.
• Short and medium term improvement focus areas and initiatives are defined.
• Agreed focus areas are used to prioritise daily problem solving activities. |
Improvement focus areas have been refined and deployed:
• Improvement targets and initiatives are allocated to functional areas.
• Critical assets and specific losses have been identified for improvement.
• These losses are quantified to assist with prioritisation and ROI decisions.
• Specific triggers are used for follow-up problem solving for all review meetings. |
Focus areas are dynamically defined in line with the AM Strategy and current performance measures:
• The AM strategy is dynamic to guide focus areas.
• Performance measures define current performance gaps.
• The organisation is flexible enough to respond to changing priorities. |
Daily Management System |
There is no structured mechanism to review asset performance on a regular basis, leading to knee-jerk reactions and frustration. |
Operations and Maintenance Management have separate meetings:
• Problems are discussed at daily departmental management meetings.
• These meetings focus on explanation and blame allocation for problems.
• Managers report functional performance at monthly meetings.
• Front-line staff are not involved in these problem solving meetings. |
Cross-functional review meetings exist on strategic and tactical levels:
• Asset problems are discussed at daily planning/review meetings between Operations and Maintenance.
• Improvement actions are assigned to specific persons.
• AM Technical and Steering Committees discuss strategic problems. |
The full daily management system is in place, including front-line teams:
• Cross-functional frontline teams discuss and solve daily operational problems.
• Unsolved problems are escalated to daily first line management meetings.
• Thresholds are used to trigger further investigation and problem solving. |
The daily management system is efficient and pro-active:
• Frontline teams deal with most of the problems.
• They escalate solutions with cost or wider impact to management.
• Management support frontline teams with quick responses.
• The AM Steering Committee provides strategic direction and guidance. |
Improvement Projects |
Cross-functional teams are not used to solve complex problems. Actions are allocated to managers operating in isolation or disempowered individuals, resulting in general failure. |
Some examples of improvement projects with varying success:
• People are allocated randomly to these projects.
• Success depends on the power and influence of the project leader.
• Meetings are on ad hoc basis when people have time or when a crisis exists.
• There is no structured mechanism for project feedback. |
Formal project teams exist to drive AM improvement initiatives:
• Improvement projects are identified in the AM Strategy.
• Responsibility is given to an appropriate leader and cross-functional team.
• A specific scope, improvement targets and deadlines exist for each project.
• Project leaders report progress during regular AM Committee meetings. |
Improvement projects are triggered by the daily management system:
• Major or chronic problems are identified as potential projects.
• Project selection criteria are based on the AM Strategy and potential benefits.
• The project team is selected according to nature of the problem.
• The project team is held accountable for results. |
Innovation projects are allocated to cross-functional teams:
• A system exists to identify potential innovation projects (eg automation or use of new technology in asset care.)
• Projects selected in line with AM Policy and potential benefits
• Cross-functional, multi-level teams are allocated to investigate these options.
• They report back to top management. |
Use of Data |
Data is never used during problem solving. Solutions are based on gut-feel and emotions, with little or no factual validation. |
Some use of data during problem solving, mainly to quantify problems:
• KPIs are used to identify and quantify performance gaps.
• There is limited use of data during analysis.
• The main source of information is peoples experience and memory. |
Data from EAMS or CMMS is used to support root cause analysis:
• Pareto (80-20) analysis is used to identify main problem areas.
• Maintenance history is used during root cause analysis.
• The EAMS reports are used to identify trends and to verify solutions. |
Data mining is used extensively during root cause analysis:
• Teams use repeated Pareto analysis to isolate the problem areas.
• Data mining shows different perspectives of the problem, e.g. total downtime vs. stoppage frequency.
• Failure types and stoppage reasons are used to confirm root cause analysis. |
Statistical techniques are used to analyse data and find correlations:
• Correlation analysis is used to link input parameters to problems.
• Statistical process control and capability studies are used for process optimisation.
• Standard deviations are plotted to identify sources of variability. |
Root Cause Analysis |
There is no evidence of root cause analysis being done. Solutions are based on gut feel and are therefore not very effective. |
There are some isolated attempts at root cause analysis, but informal and ad hoc:
• Some people use 5 Why as a result of problem solving training in the past
• Some evidence of fishbone analysis or brainstorming.
• The techniques are not always well understood or correctly applied. |
Structured root cause analysis is used selectively:
• Technicians, foremen and project leaders have been trained in RCA.
• 5 Why is used effectively on the improvement projects.
• Good examples exist of fishbone analysis on improvement projects.
• Root causes are sometimes verified before implementing solutions. |
Structured RCA is used widely on projects and daily problem solving:
• Almost all artisans and operators are competent in root cause analysis.
• 5 Why and fishbone analysis are used effectively on all problem solving and investigations by frontline teams.
• Verification is used as part of RCA.
• Some examples exist of more advanced PM analysis. |
FMECA is used proactively to anticipate and prevent problems:
• FMECA forms the basis of asset care plan development (eg RCM or OMM).
• FMECA is used for risk assessment.
• PM Analysis is used on complex and chronic problems with multiple causes.
• Root cause analysis with verification is a way of life throughout the organisation. |
Improvement Actions |
Short term actions are implemented reactively, with little or no consideration of long term preventive actions. Improvement actions are not followed up to confirm their success. |
Possible long term solutions are discussed by management:
• Short term corrective actions are implemented effectively.
• Functional management teams discuss possible long term solutions.
• The selection of improvement actions are based on ad hoc and informal criteria.
• Follow-up is done via meeting minutes, but it is not very effective. |
Improvement actions are linked to root causes with formal follow-up:
• Improvement actions are only selected after root causes have been confirmed.
• Formal documented criteria are used to select the most appropriate solutions.
• Solutions are aligned with the AM Strategy.
• The Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) cycle is understood and used. |
Improvement actions are selected based on various criteria:
• Improvement actions are evaluated on costs, risks and strategy alignment.
• Improvement actions are formally monitored to completion.
• Successful solutions are standardised in SOPs, schedules and training.
• The PDCA cycle is used widely. |
A detailed cost- benefit analysis is used to justify improvement actions:
• Improvement actions are selected based on a full cost-benefit analysis.
• Improvement activities are monitored during daily meetings.
• Successful solutions are rolled out to similar areas (horizontal replication).
• The PDCA cycle is a way of life. |
Results and Benefits |
The success of solutions and improvement activities is not monitored. As a result the same problems often occur again. |
The success of improvement actions is monitored informally:
• Improvements are assumed to be successful unless proved otherwise.
• Management KPIs reflect the success or failure of improvement actions.
• Benefits vary - sometimes they are big, but other times small or negative. |
Benefits of improvement actions are tracked formally:
• Improvement project leaders report to management on results achieved.
• Performance against target is monitored to confirm sustainability.
• There are good performance improvements in the focus areas. |
Benefits are confirmed at appropriate levels based on a wide set of KPIs:
• Benefits are monitored by teams at operational, tactical or strategic levels.
• The impact of improvements on various KPIs is monitored.
• Very good performance improvements are achieved across various KPIs. |
The benefits of improvement actions are monitored for 3 to 6 months:
• A scorecard of improvement projects is used to measure cumulative benefits.
• Improvement actions are clearly linked to the AM Strategy and Scorecard.
• Benefits are fully sustainable and performance exceeds industry norms. |