Maintworld Magazine 4/2020

ASSET MANAGEMENT
etc.), often without adequate training,
and almost certainly without
any buy-in to the process. They
may or may not use the tools. They
almost certainly do not achieve precision
on an ongoing basis.
• People with condition-monitoring
systems achieve a level of competence
but their recommendations
are ignored. That may happen
because the maintenance department’s
ability to plan and schedule
is limited, or simply because they
do not believe in the technology or
believe in the philosophy of “condition-based
maintenance.”
• Condition-monitoring recommendations
may themselves be the issue.
For fear of being blamed if their
diagnosis is incorrect, their recommendations
are vague and often
come too late. And to top it off, in
many cases, only a fraction of the capability
of the condition-monitoring
system is used.
• Reliability specialists take root cause
failure analysis (RCFA) training, and
may even buy dedicated software,
but it is not used frequently, and
even when the root cause is discovered,
it is not eliminated.
• Vast sums of money and time are
spent developing a maintenance
strategy with a technique such as
Reliability Centered Maintenance
(RCM) yet its recommendations are
ignored or “cherry picked” - deciding
to follow just some of the recommendations
without eliminating the
existing PMs that deliver zero value.
• New lubrication dispensing containers
are purchased and desiccant
breathers are added to gearboxes.
But the containers are misused and
the desiccants are not renewed.
• Ultrasound assisted bearing lubrication
tools are purchased but they
still mix the greases, they grease the
bearings infrequently and pump dirt
from the nipples/Zerk fitting into
the bearing.
• People on the plant floor make suggestions
for improvement which are
ignored.
• Design and purchase decisions are
made which result in equipment
with maintainability or reliability
issues being added to the plant that
only add to the number of failures
that occur.
• Equipment is operated in such a way
that places additional strain
on the component thus reducing
the life of those components. That
includes the way they are started
and stopped.
There are many more examples where
programs either fail completely or simply
fail to achieve their full potential.
There is a common thread through
all of the points made above. They are all
people issues. And that is why it is recommended
to take the transformation path.
With an asset reliability transformation:
• Senior management are not only on
board with the program, but they
also drive it. They recognize the
importance of reliability in the same
way they value safety and quality
(and hopefully, the environment).
They appreciate the financial benefits
because the business case has
been developed. Plus, they recognize
the impact reliability has on safety,
quality, and the environment.
• With strong senior management
support, every manager will be
focused on the reliability improvement
process. Reliability will not
be simply viewed as a maintenance
issue. It will not be viewed as a temporary
project. It will be understood
that you cannot simply spend some
money and the problem will go away.
Unfortunately, “transformations”
do not enjoy a high probability of success.
In fact, it is widely reported that
only 70% of transformations succeed.
But there are ways of putting the odds in
your favour:
• It must start with senior management
and a commitment to remain
focused. This includes consistent
reinforcement of the key messages.
• Take it seriously and seek to achieve
targets within a limited timeframe.
There must not be a vague commitment
to improve reliability and thus
performance. You must understand
the current state, set achievable but
impressive goals, and establish a
timeframe for achieving the goals.
There needs to be a degree of
urgency. With the COVID-19
pandemic, most organizations have
a very well understood reason for
seeking to improve the performance
of the organization.
• Engage everyone. Everyone must
understand how they personally
benefit. Everyone must be encouraged
to contribute. You must demonstrate
that you respect their opinion.
The author would also recommend
that, where possible, you allow the
person who makes the suggestion to
take ownership of the improvement
process. You congratulate them publicly
for making the suggestion, and
you congratulate them for completing
the project.
• Manage all of the individual projects
correctly, with review meetings at
least every 10 weeks. There must be
a clear understanding of roles and
responsibilities, with targets, deadlines,
and a review process to identify
when a project is stalled.
The reliability transformation has
been made easier thanks to the safety
transformation. Everyone understands
how they benefit when working in a safe
plant. Everyone understands they must
contribute to the safety of the plant.
Everyone is constantly reminded about
the importance of safety. Plant safety
was not improved simply by buying some
software, training one or two people in
the safety department, and having one
or two people focused on identifying and
eliminating safety.
The same must now be true for reliability.
4/2020 maintworld 15