October - Library - Central Queensland University

68
A key objective in being successful in the aspect of training lies in:
1. The targeted audience.
2. The process of training in itself.
Targeted Audience
As the two sayings go, jack of all trades, master of none and use it, or loose it. These two sayings pretty much sum up the objective
in terms of pitching the training to a targeted audience. Too often there is a mismatch between the targeted audience and the training
content. When this happens, the learning’s and skills development will be forgotten and/or never fully acquired given that they will
not be put into everyday use in the work environment.
The above point is why training of the maintenance personnel sits at the third level within the pyramid of key maintenance pro c e s s e s .
Put another way, until the organisation is out of the reactive mode, there will not be a clear understanding as to whom should be
trained and in which specific areas, coupled with re q u i rements to close the gap between actual skills, and skills re q u i red, to perf o rm
the different tasks more effectively and efficiently.
To further emphasise this point, organisations that are reactive need to train more people in more areas as opposed to refining the
training to a specific group/s - i.e. planners, supervisors, tradespeople, etc. The logic here is similar to the point made earlier with
re g a rd to reactive organisations needing to carry lots of spares. In both cases, the bottom line is that it is their only way of ensuring
a quick response, hence just another example of why (statistically) reactive maintenance costs more than planned maintenance.
The Training Process
When the words educating, training and/or learning are mentioned, most people would conjure up thoughts of sitting in a classro o m ,
attending lectures and/or “cramming” for an examination at the end of the course. The level of retention, once the exam is completed,
will vary from individual to individual, but in most cases the majority of what has been taught will be forgotten if there is no process
to firstly put into practice the new learnings and then secondly apply them in the work environment where they can be furt h e r
enhanced over time.
To further explore the frame work for an effective training program, Moore (1999, p. 339) suggests the following steps are a
recommended breakdown for a successful process of learning:
• The setting of clear objectives in terms of the outcomes of the training program. This should be a “win, win” situation for both
the person being trained and the organisation. Too often training programs are only a means for the trades (and others) to
progress through their levels and attract further financial benefits with the learning’s never fully realised.
• Receiving instruction in a classroom environment, with course notes, and then a test at the end of the course so as to verify
that the set objective has been achieved.
• A workshop practice session whereby the learning’s can be applied in a situation so as to ensure a level of proficiency prior
to it being used in the environment of the work place.
• The application of the learning’s on a regular basis so as to refine the skills.
• Refresher training (if applicable) - i.e. for example to meet statutory requirements, etc.
ENGINEERING / MAINTENANCE INTERFACE
The interface between engineering and maintenance sits at the top level of the pyramid of key maintenance management pro c e s s e s .
The logic behind this is quite simple in that maintenance cannot expect, or more strongly, specify that the engineering department
be in order if they (maintenance) are not. Put another way, maintenance needs to firstly be effective and efficient in maintaining
plant and equipment, which includes the ongoing collection of accurate data, so as to justify future decisions at the pre l i m i n a ry
design stage. Kelly (1999a, p. 2-8) specifies that this would include data such as:
• The true cost of maintaining a unit of equipment - i.e. all materials and labour (including contract labour).
• Plant reliability data - i.e. a measure of the time that equipment is available to operate at the rated capacity whilst repeatedly
yielding the same results. Measures would include: uptime / downtime, Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF), etc.
• Plant maintainability data - i.e. a function of the design of the plant and equipment so as to minimise the time it takes to carry
out maintenance, factoring issues such as time, effort and skill. Measures would include: Mean Time to Repair Failures
(MTTR), spares carried, etc.
If the maintenance department does not have the rigour and discipline to hence display accurate data such as the above, then how
can they expect engineering, or the organisation, to support the purchase of anything but the lowest cost option?
The relationship between engineering and maintenance there f o re needs to be viewed similarly to the relationship between the
stores and the maintenance department (discussed earlier) in that it needs to have a higher level focus rather than a departmental
focus. The relationship should be one in which the design, pro c u rement, installation and commissioning of new plant and equipment
is viewed, and hence measured, as a function of reliability and maintainability, with the overall objective being the most economical
plant and equipment to maintain (and hence produce) over its life - i.e. life cycle costing.
For this to happen however, the way in which most engineering departments operate, as the majority of maintenance personnel can
relate to, must change. In other words, most maintenance personnel can relate to becoming involved in projects when most of the
p re l i m i n a ry decisions have been made and then being told it is too late for changes to be made - too late in terms of not budgeted for.