|
CHRISTER IDHAMMAR is president and CEO of IDCON Inc., Raleigh, N.C., a company specializing in training and implementation of improved operations and maintenance organizations and practices. |
MAINTENANCE MANAGEMENT
Using experts to analyze benchmarking data
I dare to say that, with very few exceptions, most benchmarking exercises result in the realization that your maintenance organization must plan and schedule work in a more efficient way. In order to do that, you must also improve your preventive maintenance/essential care and condition monitoring (PM/ECCM).
Also, when the benchmarking team presents its findings to the rest of the maintenance organization, the organization will probably indicate that it has been suggesting these things for some time. It will then ask why such a long time was taken to come to such an obvious conclusion. Sometimes the organization will consult with an outside expert for analysis of these often confusing findings.
USING EXPERTS. When you perform a maintenance audit and develop an improvement plan, it is important to understand that you should view this undertaking as an educational effort. Your whole organization needs to realize and fully understand that what you are presently doing can be-and must be-improved.
The fact that some people within your organization have pointed out the same improvement opportunities before, but with poor reception from management, is very common. To be listened to, you must come from far away, have a foreign accent and a briefcase, and charge a fee for your advice. You are then an expert, or a consultant, as I am.
Even though I do feel very confident that I know my area of expertise very well, I think that it is also beneficial to be an outsider to the organization I am helping improve. As an outsider, you are not part of the politics that all organizations suffer from to a smaller or larger extent. It is important that an outside advisor tell you what you need to hear, which is not necessarily the same as what you want to hear.
Also, an outside advisor should be totally independent from services such as those offered by suppliers of computer systems, engineering services, contract maintenance, or predictive maintenance tools. Otherwise, there is a conflict of interest which might influence the outsider's advice.
In addition, I would give a word of warning about the experts who have a standard solution for your improvement opportunities. For example, if your organization is centralized, they will suggest that you decentralize it. If your organization is decentralized, they will recommend that you centralize it. Or, they might suggest that you have a specific number of planners per craftsperson, etc.
Instead, focus on the "right things" to do for your organization. Do not discuss how to implement the "right things." That is the next step and is done very differently in different organizations.
FOLLOW OTHERS OR LEAD. When discussing the "right things" to do, I often hear the question, "Who has done this before?" My answer is often, "I do not know of anyone who has done this before, but do you think it is the right thing to do?"
A follower, or a traditional manager, will often be very reluctant to try new ways unless someone else has done it before. A leader will go ahead with a new idea if he/she believes it is the right thing to do.
To make substantial improvements, you must have leaders to lead the improvement effort instead of traditional managers.
GRIDLOCK. I am often asked the question, "Since very few things you have suggested to do are new to us, why have we not implemented them already?"
Of course, I have thought the same thing many times. For example, very few organizations do a good job of executing the very essential elements of maintenance, including preventing, planning and scheduling, root cause failure analysis, and others.
In talking to a diagonal selection of employees in a mill, I often get the impression that they have given up because, in their opinion, top management is not supporting the program.
Top management, on the other hand, is surprised to hear this because they assume that they do not need to tell organizations to implement and do the essential elements of maintenance.
Often, the situation is that top management takes for granted that tasks are being done, while the mill organization is waiting for direction. Because of this, not many improvements are made.
PIM '97 is an excellent opportunity to improve your maintenance operations. You'll learn valuable tips and practical pointers on cost-effective failure analysis, the changing mill culture, team building, and more.
For more information and an updated program, call 415-278-5372 or fax 415-278-5373.
|
