Managing an asset is a high pressure role, and it can often be difficult to identify and act upon areas of underperformance amidst the day-to-day operations.
Many teams have a gut feeling that their asset is underperforming in certain areas, but are unsure where - and do not have the time to dedicate to exploring this any further.
In this blog post, our experienced team members share three areas where performance improvement opportunities can often be found…
Work order durations from the computerised maintenance management system (CMMS)
- Jim Jack, Senior Consultant
“The durations against work orders in the CMMS are typically all that the onshore scheduler has to go on when arranging to get personnel offshore.
“We often discover that these durations are not adequately understood, or are just an arbitrary number inherited typically as a placeholder form the baseline CMMS build. This can lead to issues when liquidating work, or lead to false or artificial exposure to backlog hours.
“By correcting your work hour durations to only capture tool time, i.e. the time taken to perform the tasks associated with the work order, this will allow more work to be planned and liquidated more efficiently offshore, which in turn, should lessen the burden on the workflow and people trying to manage these.”
Packaged maintenance plans
- Emeka Onuh, Project Manager
“Different disciplines are always involved in carrying out maintenance on an equipment or package. However, most often, the maintenance orders for these work come up at different times, leading to loss of production as a consequence for frequent shutdowns due to maintenance needs.
“If however, the different disciplines’ maintenance is planned and scheduled to come out at the same time, so the equipment/package is only shut down once for maintenance, this would not only reduce the number of visits to the equipment but also improve production and equipment uptime. In addition to this, the packaging of maintenance tasks will also improve safety, as the technicians’ exposure to the equipment is limited.
“When defining and creating equipment/package maintenance, all the required maintenance across the different disciplines should be identified, grouped/packaged together and scheduled for the maintenance order(s) to generate at the same time. This helps to optimise and provide efficiency in maintenance execution.
“The success of this revolves around articulating all the necessary maintenance and getting all the relevant disciplines involved in the review of the maintenance to be grouped/packaged together. As consultants, we have seen significant tangible cost savings and optimisation for operators who invested time into the analysis and discussion required to package maintenance successfully.”
Corrective maintenance : preventative maintenance: (CM:PM)
- Andrew Liddle, Project Manager
“Highlighting equipment with a high corrective maintenance (CM) to preventative maintenance (PM) ratio may allow the identification of preventive maintenance that is failing to mitigate against the failure modes of the equipment type.
“Based on the work order history for an item of equipment, an understanding of what the failures were, why they occurred and the frequency between these events (mean-time-between-failures - MTBF), may be concluded. Through investigation of these failures, issues may be identified and actions taken to modify the PM accordingly, if deemed cost efficient.
“Although a single benchmarking process will add value and insight into your business performance quickly, we recommend that maintenance teams should view this as an iterative process, with a cyclical review focused on bringing about long-term change.
“This iterative process, combined with a means of reporting, will aid stakeholders in the business, to understand that preventative maintenance should be treated as a value-adding process or investment, rather than a simple overhead.”
If you’d like to learn more about performance benchmarking and improvement service, click here.