“For the longest time GIS and SAP EAM were continents all onto themselves. Each contained many little countries but nobody from one continent would talk to anybody from the other, except for the occasional letter from an aunt. This is analogous to the way enterprise applications work in many organizations. While they are often viewed in a similar way, as large software applications, at best they perform different parts of similar tasks. More commonly they do different things, employ different practices, workflows and methods, communicate in different languages and utilize varying modes of governance. While the different continents analogy makes initial sense, when you dig into the capabilities and uses they look more like different planets.
Companies often use GIS and SAP for different purposes even if they are part of the same workflow. At its most basic level, GIS is used to add location to business processes. The majority of business data has a location component and GIS imbeds the “spatial factor” into operations. Companies employ GIS systems to map their assets, and it is the platform for querying infrastructure attributes. It is used as the foundation to build applications for regulatory compliance, integrity management or field activities like asset or environmental inspections. Having a geographic view of these processes makes the solutions significantly more effective. It is imbedded in complicated analyses like risk assessment or financial management because it is the “magic” ingredient that exposes critical, previously unseen, relationships. GIS is in emergency management and control rooms because geography turns complicated data into powerful, vital and quickly understood information. Implementations have proven that GIS improves an organization and makes it easier to operate effectively.
SAP on the other hand manages a separate yet linked series of vital functions. Companies implement SAP for enterprise resource management. It is a powerful solution and when an implementation is complete it can revolutionize almost every major process in an organization. It provides the consistency and captures the details critical to any organization’s business processes. SAP has the functionality to create and maintain an Asset Register which is used as the foundation for enterprise asset management. It defines the process and facilitates the purchasing of materials and then supports critical equipment traceability to eliminate potential disasters. It is the tool that integrates work management with finance and supply chain so that valuable financial decisions can be made and systems can be in continuous operation…”
“Work Execution Management – Time to Move Forward” by Terry Wireman
Work Execution Management – Time to Move Forward
Published on http://reliabilityweb.com December 9th, 2015.
Work execution management (WEM) is the domain where the work activities on assets identified in other domains, such as reliability engineering for maintenance (REM) or asset condition management (ACM), are actually performed. For example, when reliability engineering (RE) or root cause analysis (RCA) identifies activities that need to be performed on an asset to allow it to meet design performance specifications, those activities are planned and scheduled in the WEM domain. Similarly, if out of tolerance conditions are detected through the ACM domain, the work is properly identified and then planned and scheduled in the WEM domain. The interdependencies between the WEM domain and the other domains have a dramatic impact on the overall lifecycle costs of an asset, which ties into asset management.
What has been the progress over the years in WEM? Unfortunately, progress has not been as positive in the WEM domain as it has in the REM, ACM and leadership for reliability (LER) domains. Let’s take a look at each of the elements in the WEM domain and evaluate the extent of progress over the past 30 years.
The most effective preventive maintenance (PM) programs concentrate on the basics of maintaining the equipment, such as good visual inspections, good lubrication practices and good fastening procedures. While these seem basic, a survey in the book, “Maintenance Management for Quality Production,” published in 1984 by the Society of Manufacturing Engineers, states that only 22 percent of the 2,500 organizations surveyed were satisfied with their PM program. That survey was conducted over 30 years ago, but PM activities are still producing substandard results. Organizations still have equipment failures, sometimes just days after basic PM inspections were performed. When a root cause analysis is performed on the failure, it is determined that the cause is due to a problem that should have been found during the PM inspection that was just performed.
While the technology-driven inspections from the ACM domain can assist in proactively finding degrading equipment conditions, a good PM program focused on basic care is key to a cost-effective solution for premature equipment failures.
MRO SPARES MANAGEMENT
The maintenance, repair and operations spares management element (MRO) deals with the cost-effective procurement and utilization of spare parts. Since MRO can comprise 40 percent to 60 percent of an organization’s maintenance budget, this is an important area to consider.
How has the overall MRO function matured in the past few decades? Similar to the PM element, not much progress has been made. In organizations today, there are still an incorrect number of spare parts being stocked, whether too many, which results in excessive costs, or too few, which results in excessive equipment downtime. Organizations simply do not know how to correctly value their MRO.
PLANNING AND SCHEDULING
Planning and scheduling (PS) comprises activities that allow maintenance to be completed efficiently and economically. PS confirms that all logistics for the particular job are completely controlled before the job is executed. This ensures little or no waste as the work is performed. By eliminating waste, the work is now executed at the lowest possible cost.
Planning and scheduling has improved over the years, due to the increased utilization of planners. Companies have progressed from not even having planners to developing a good job/role description and allowing the planners to contribute to increase labor efficiencies and effectiveness. While there is still work needed in the area of the proper ratio of planners to maintenance technicians, as an organization continues to mature its planning and scheduling program, we should continue to see improvements in this area.
COMPUTERIZED MAINTENANCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
The computerized maintenance management system (CMMS) is a specially designed database for tracking all equipment maintenance information (see Figure 1). The CMMS has been used by maintenance organizations since the mid-1970s. So what has been the result of CMMS utilization? According to the “CMMS Best Practices Study” published by Reliabilityweb.com in 2011, “work order management was cited by 91 percent of respondents as the most important feature of a CMMS.” Yet, upon close scrutiny, the accuracy of the data in most CMMS databases is severely lacking. In informal surveys, the vast majority of maintenance reliability managers feel the data in their CMMS is too inaccurate to use for financial decision-making.
OPERATOR DRIVEN RELIABILITY
Operator driven reliability (ODR) is the element where operators are utilized to increase the capacity of the equipment they operate or to free up maintenance resources to be utilized on higher level maintenance reliability activities. The goal is to have the operators take ownership for 10 percent to 40 percent of the organization’s PM program. What has been the result of ODR initiatives? Overall, they have proven to be successful in a small number of organizations.
Defect elimination (DE) is a powerful element that builds on the five other WEM elements. The DE element uses cross functional teams to eliminate equipment-related defects, thereby increasing the capacity of the equipment. How successful has DE been for most organizations? Since DE focuses initially on the basics of maintenance and reliability, some organizations have had initial success. However, when the organization is ready to realize the true power of DE and it is applied by trained, cross functional teams, most fall well short of the goal. There are several reasons for this, including lines of jurisdiction between the various departments and proper training for all employees involved.
THE FUTURE OF THE WEM DOMAIN
What is the future of the WEM domain? After briefly reviewing the six elements of WEM, it is clear that if they are utilized correctly, they add great value to an organization’s maintenance reliability functions. But why do the WEM elements fail to achieve their true potential? There are two main reasons:
Lack of understanding the financial impact of the elements.
Lack of proper skills to implement and execute the elements.
When equipment/assets are out of service longer than required for repairs, it is a loss to the company. It impacts the capacity of the equipment/asset. If the organization is in a sold-out market, the lost capacity is a lost sale and, ultimately, lost revenue. Even if the organization has a capped market, the inefficiency in wasting maintenance and operational resources is still an unnecessary expense. It is necessary for all organizations to have a clear understanding of the losses in this area to ensure losses are minimized or avoided completely.
If organizations lack the skills necessary to implement and manage the elements of this domain, they will fail to execute the elements in the most efficient and economical manner. Not only does this lead to labor and material losses, but also prolonged downtime and repetitive delays. These unnecessary losses will impact the profitability of organizations, again from an expense and lost revenue perspective.
If organizations are going to make improvements in the WEM domain in the future, they will need to overcome the two reasons previously noted. If they can resolve these issues, their respective companies will see increased profitability and value delivery from their assets/equipment.
To see the Original Source of this article please click HERE
“Achieving Operational Excellence in a Data Driven World” How to Digest the Acronyms
Len Harms – It is my privilege to co-present with Rory Shaffer at the North America SAP for Utilities conference on the topic of “Achieving Operational Excellence in a Data Driven World”. When I was asked to write a blog post, I struggled to find an approach to this subject that was different from everything else that has already been produced on the topic of what I refer to as the “Acronyms” IT/OT, IoT, and Big Data. I think that the amount of discussion and number of articles written is a testament to the significance of these Acronyms.
An approach I use when trying to visualize a large concept is that I apply a use case, so when you consider the Acronyms I believe that the challenge is to find a use case that is applicable for your organization.
An example of a use case would be Condition Based Maintenance, CBM, this concept been around for some time, but for conditions we typically relied on inspection data collected from a technician, maybe a lab result, or readings from test equipment. With the advent of IoT and all the associated sensors, the amount of data has grown exponentially and this offers new opportunities to leverage condition data.
As a use case CBM offers a number of advantages:
CBM is proven. I encourage you to see the PSE+Gsuccess story that will be presented, they will show the value obtained through CBM and they have been achieving this for some time.
CBM is easy to explain to a leadership
It provides a foundation on which to grow. Prove the value of the technology and apply more use cases in the future
As always a large part of the value of a conference is the opportunity to discuss topics such as the acronyms. I look forward to meeting with customers, industry professionals and colleagues, discussing new ideas and use cases.
Our presentation on Achieving Operational Excellence in a Data Driven World will take place on Monday, September 14th at 10:50 a.m. We are part of the Leveraging Assets track chaired by our company, Vesta Partners.
Vesta’s Enterprise Wearable App idea is an Inspection Rounds Solution called Glass Rounds. This application allows technicians to record measurement readings from gauges and dials on equipment while leaving their hands free. The readings can be individual Measurement Points or a list of Measurement Points. The measurements entered will enforce upper and lower acceptable limits defined in SAP and allow the creation of maintenance notifications if a discrepancy is found. Glass Rounds enables technicians to collect valuable equipment performance information without distracting them from their operational tasks.
Check out the short demo of “Glass Rounds” below (presented by Tommy Dorsey), and stay tuned for the results of the Google Glass Challenge on May 1, 2015.