Archive for the ‘Strategy & Leadership’ Category

Things to think about (and do) in 2010

Tuesday, February 2nd, 2010

Maintenance and Reliability Professionals sharing wisdom that can make a difference for each of us. Hope this makes a powerful difference for those who read and re-read it throughout 2010…

http://reliabilityweb.com/index.php/articles/things_to_think_about_and_do_in_2010/

Maintenance and Operations Partnership: The Secret to Success in Reliability Improvement

Tuesday, February 2nd, 2010

While talking with a wide variety of companies, I believe that many still think that the whole reliability improvement effort belongs to the maintenance organization and it alone. In reality, that has been tried for many, many years with very limited success. It’s all about operations and maintenance working together to understand what has to be done and then working jointly to make it happen.

It’s no different than our automobiles. The mechanics can work their hearts out to have our cars in peak condition but then we have to do our part and work with them in learning how to care for our auto if we want that condition to sustain itself. This includes tasks we can help with such as checking the fluid levels, tire air pressure how we drive it,  etc. 

It’s all about us working together. We collectively need to have all our personnel understand how the equipment is supposed to function, all the many ways that it can fail, and their respective roles to keep the failures from occurring. There are incredibly straight forward processes that can be used to help this happen. Maintenance Task Analysis (MTA) and Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM) are two that come to mind. They are designed to help bring together all those that we want to care for and operate our assets and get at the root of how to optimize equipment performance. By now most folks have heard of these approaches to improving performance but how many have really gotten into ‘making it happen’. The value to both the shop floor and the company itself are unbelievable.

If you happen to be one of those that hasn’t taken this type opportunity to the next level, please give it some serious consideration. The success that you’ll enjoy just might be your own.

 Enjoy the journey and good luck.

Is your PM program good enough?

Monday, January 11th, 2010

Upon visiting a very successful company a couple of weeks ago, I got engaged in a serious conversation with their management on why their PM program wasn’t enough to allow them to reach optimum performance. I believe the following findings can be repeated in many plants across all industries so wanted to share it with you.

It seems that the plants leadership has worked over the past 2 years to put in place a complete PM program for all of its process control equipment. To their credit, they did a good job of identifying key assets and drafting an outline of what needed to be done and how frequently they should do it but that’s where the effort came to a stop.

Though they took a good first pass at the mentioned program, they failed to involve shop floor personnel in defining key equipment and leveraging their experience and knowledge to define what needed to be done and how often the PM should be scheduled. As you might guess, this caused a credibility gap when the program was rolled out, one which they never really recovered from.

The next shortcoming was the lack of using a formal process to get at the root of what needed to be looked at based on cost to do and consequences of failure. This allowed a number of PM’s to be put in place that really were a waste of time and dollars due to the very limited payback that could be expected vs the outlay of resources to accomplish the work. This is where a structured approach such as Maintenance Task Analysis (MTA), or for key critical assets, the use of Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM) would be a tremendous help in insuring the right work would be done at the right time.

Another shortfall to the approach that was taken was the lack of understanding for what Predictive Maintenance (PdM) concepts could do for them relative to seeing problems starting to develop prior to their becoming an issue. Time based maintenance is just to hit and miss for the majority of failures we try to catch when attempting to improve equipment reliability and performance. This is backed by documented findings that over 80% of all failure is random in nature.

Another shortfall that I would like to touch on is the importance of documenting the findings while performing a PM. Actually this needs to be done for all work, including the Reactive Maintenance carried out each day. This documented data allows you to understand exactly what and where your failures are occurring. This information really becomes the key to improving future performance. The data needs to be captured, documented and trended so as to be of the most value in sorting out what you want to focus on to drive improvement.

The company I’m relating to didn’t understand how critical these steps were and thus really evolved to what I call the ‘Poke and Hope’ approach to driving improvement.

As you think about the short comings listed here, I would encourage you to consider how your respective programs were developed and how well they are serving your needs. Does any of this sound like what might be taking place within your organization? I believe you’ll agree that this true story could be happening to you. Good Luck!

“What Gets Measured Gets Done” –is only partly correct.

Monday, December 7th, 2009

Tips for Establishing Effective Key Performance Indicators

by Joe Marin, Implementation Consultant, Ivara Corporation

The old saying that goes “What gets measured gets done” is only partly correct.

Many organizations find that despite a seaming wealth of Key Performance Indicators (KPI’s), little gain can be seen in the bottom-line of the corporation or at least tied defensibly with the initial project investment to achieve those gains. How then is a widely accepted process management tool failing to provide what it is meant to?

The answer is that performance management is not a simple process. Sure, over the long-term, well established processes and performance measures require minimal effort to maintain when compared with managing out-of-control processes, but to get from the out-of-control process to the “well-oiled” version takes a concerted and well reasoned effort. Key performance indicators can help in this regard but care must be taken in their application. This is meant as an introduction to many of the aspects to consider when establishing and using key performance indicators to measure improvement.

DETERMINE BUSINESS NEED
First determine what is important to the business, make sure that the indicator is linked to the business’ objectives (ie, Safety, Environmental compliance, Cost effectiveness, Quality, etc). There are dozens of potential business objectives, select only the most important to start with, those that are clearly defined as company policy are obvious choices. This is in keeping with the Six Sigma philosophy of focusing the measures on what is Critical to Satisfaction (CTS) of the customer.

DETERMINE THE AREA OF FOCUS AND LIMIT SCOPE
Walk the process and determine which areas show opportunity for improvement. List the processes and sub-processes in order of the size of opportunity and potential impact to the business objectives. Select one to three of the sub-processes for improvement. Note that, the more processes you try to affect change on at the same time, the harder it is to determine which changes you made to the process are responsible for the changes measured with the KPI’s.

Limit the amount of business objectives you intend to measure the impact on to one or two. Over time, the amount of measures will grow and cover all business objectives eventually, however, it is important to always watch your scope. It is a common failing to establish a large amount of performance measures all at the same time; this shot-gun approach overwhelms those who monitor and take action, and greatly reduces the chances that the implementation will be successful.

4-I’S – INDICATORS INEFFECTIVE IN ISOLATION
A single indicator will only tell part of the story. An indicator can only tell you what the output of the process it is measuring is. Only by comparing the indicator with other related measures can the problem be refined. For instance, Schedule Compliance = 40%, what does this tell us as a business? It tells us that we have an issue with schedule compliance, but it does not say why there is a problem or where the source is. Combine this with Estimate Accuracy = 90%, Maintenance Labour Utilization = 115% and %Reactive Work = 75%, and we can more closely theorize the root cause of the problem. Just looking at the Scheduling Compliance measure, the business can often be mistaken in its interpretation of the measure and assume that because the problem appears to be with scheduling, the solution also lies within scheduling. Whereas, when we look at the related data, Estimate accuracy, Maintenance Labour Utilization and % Reactive Work, it appears more likely that a large amount of reactive work likely forced the maintenance group to break the schedule.

KPIS SHOULD BE DESIGNED AND TESTED
Indicators generally return numeric values, which leads to the assumption that the results are irrefutable, scientific and that the conclusions based on the results are objective and not subjective. Most indicators can be interpreted subjectively. In order to aid the results to be as objective as possible, a KPI set should be formulated carefully by experienced personnel working together; this group should theorize likely reasons that a KPI can return a positive or negative value or trend and document this to aid those interpreting the data. Each theory should be tested with positive and negative inputs of the actual object/sub-process being measured prior to implementing the KPIs.
Do not just establish KPIs that measure areas thought to be performing poorly. Although we want to focus on making improvements, it is important to maintain what is already performing well.

It is often a good idea to include personnel that are well educated in Six Sigma methodology to aid in the development of KPIs, as they are knowledgeable in scientific measures and can link KPI sets to the Critical to Satisfaction measures of the business objectives.

LEADING VS LAGGING INDICATORS
Leading indicators are those that are used to predict early changes in performance and are direct measurements of a specific step in a process (hence the term leading, they lead you to the specific source of the measurement before the cycle is complete). Used effectively, leading indicators can be used to mitigate specific problems within a process before the business is impacted negatively.

Lagging indicators are those that show trends or the effects of changes to a set of steps within a process (hence the term lagging, they measure the results of a process after the cycle is complete). Lagging indicators are good gauges of cultural or systemic problems within a process. Used effectively, lagging indicators can be used to show the results of changes made to specific actions taken to improve the process.

If you’re trying to making improvements to a process, use leading indicators to determine those areas you will want to make specific improvements to then use lagging indicators to show the results of the changes made and how they affect the larger (parent) process. Leading and lagging indicators should be used in concert with each other, not in isolation.

IMPLEMENT IN STAGES
When implementing KPI’s, ensure that they are implemented in stages. There are two main reasons for this. The first reason, as mentioned previously, is to not overwhelm those monitoring and acting on the indicators. This can lead to sustainability issues with the measures and missed opportunities for improvement. The second reason is to allow time for the KPI’s to be tested and refined. When first starting to develop performance indicators it is common to have minor issues with the data inputs and calculations that lead to inaccurate measures. Having too many indicators often buries these flaws and often leads to wasted effort. This sows the seeds of doubt in the reliability of all key performance indicators and threatens the sustainability of the program.

In keeping with the 4-I’s, key performance indicators should be implemented in related sets (modules) in these implementation stages.

ESTABLISH THE BUSINESS TIERS IN THE REPORTING STRUCTURE
Indicators should role up the business tiers from the front-line managers to upper management. That way, upper management can determine if the performance issues are systemic or local.

SET APPROPRIATE SAMPLING FREQUENCY AND TREND WINDOW
Because most key performance indicators are used to aid in determining process effectiveness, the indicators must have time to build effective trends in order to determine if the process being measured is improving, maintaining or degrading. Ensure that you determine an effective sampling frequency and trend window for each individual indicator. Do not use the performance results to take action or report gains based on only one or two readings, always allow the indicator to develop a firm trend, highlight any outliers in the data and record the reasons for each outlier as this helps to defend the data’s integrity.

UNDERSTAND HUMAN FACTORS
Always be aware of the human factors involved when establishing KPI’s. Workers can often feel threatened that their own performance is what is being measured and can find ways of manipulating the process or measure to ensure a favourable measure results. Once a measure is compromised it can take a fair amount of effort to restore it of develop a new measure to take its place. So how do we deal with the human factors?

  1. Educate all personnel in the reporting chain of the purpose and philosophy of the KPI.
  2. Do not use a KPI as a personal performance measure or blame tool. KPI’s measure a process’s effectiveness and are not intended to measure the poor performance of a worker. There may be reasons that a worker’s performance will affect a process negatively, i.e. lack of training, oversight, etc. The moment that a KPI is used to directly reward or punish a worker, the KPI will likely be compromised to ensure that only a favourable output is returned in the future.
  3. When establishing a KPI set, do not focus on solely the negatives. Processes that are working need to be reinforced, therefore processes that show upward trends consistently need to well publicized, but also, processes that are maintaining themselves at or above targets need to be promoted because these processes are being effectively executed by personnel and providing good value to the business.
  4. KPIs should be automated and require as little direct effort to input values whenever possible. This not only helps the KPI to be sustainable, it has the added value of better protecting the integrity of the data and does not have the negative stigma of being an onerous chore for those inputting data.

IN THE END
Like all new tools, KPIs can be very useful in helping a business to achieve and maintain improved performance but, like all new tools, adequate time, development, learning and careful use is needed to ensure they produce what is intended of them.

Our challenge for tomorrow-Replacing today’s diminishing resources

Wednesday, November 11th, 2009

As most  of us are well aware, our skilled resources are quickly moving towards retirement and will do so  whether or not we’re ready for that to happen. Our equipment is becoming more complex each year as we install the newest technology to optimize our manufacturing processes. The challenge for all of us as I see it is to figure out how to sustain or better yet improve asset performance while we’re going through this tremendous change of technology and personnel, the very same people who best know how our assets should function.

This sounds like we’re moving into a real doomsday environment but I would suggest that we have two key considerations that can help us through this time of concern. First is to recognize that we have new technology available to us which can monitor all aspects of our assets health and help us understand the type of failure that’s evolving and guide us in understanding the best ‘fix’ to resolve the problem prior to a failure occurring. I believe that anyone not looking into this technology and truly learning how it can fit into their environment is truly missing a vital component needed to move towards improved reliability. We just don’t have the resources needed to do this via any other way!

The second consideration that can help resolve this problem is that of today’s economy. With times being what they are, there are many very capable, hard working  and talented folks available that normally we couldn’t begin to hope seeing as potential candidates to join our workforce. By using the latest technology and proven methodologies to better care for our respective assets, we can quickly help these new folks to climb the learning curve and faster than ever take over the task of keeping our respective plants running without missing a beat.

So in summary, yes we know caring for our assets has some unbelievable challenges ahead but given the availability of technology, proven methodology and some mighty fine folks available out there, we can and in fact MUST start looking real hard at what all of this can mean to help insure our success.  GOOD LUCK.

Reliabilty Engineers-Why not just grow them?

Tuesday, October 27th, 2009

Having just returned from this year’s SMRP conference, a conversation that I had with a large number of folks from many industries was that of having/ or not having enough reliability type engineers to meet our needs both now and in the future. Granted, the traditional route of developing these types of resources is limited today from advanced learning sources such as our universities but I would offer that doesn’t have to be a roadblock for us.

There are a large number of individuals we work with every day that can and should be considered, that is, our technicians and tradespeople. If we think about it, who else knows our equipment really well and all that’s NOT so right about it! From my experience, most all of our work forces have key individuals who not only could, but would love a chance to expand their scope of responsibility, grow their careers and make a world of difference in improving reliability in our respective plants. I also believe these folks would be easy to identify and would really appreciate a chance to explore their interest in becoming involved with this critical role in helping to insure our company’s future. Their skills include the ability to think through problems, to work well with others, and possessing a strong interest in learning about new ways to help improve asset performance. What a great way to help maximize how we use the resources we have all around us. Give it some thought, it really could be a significant part of the solution.

Your Asset Maintenance Program-Fact or Fiction?

Thursday, July 30th, 2009

Many of us have created maintenance programs for our assets over many years and with the help of many different people. Often the adjustments made to these are driven by a reaction to a given problem that “bit us” without fully understanding:

  1.  what created the problem in the first place
  2. the bottom line true financial impact of the failure and
  3. if  it’s worth doing something different, what is the best method to monitor that aspect of the assets health.

Too many times these changes/additions are driven by what “someone thinks” and not by truely looking at the facts. Over time these behaviors lead to an asset maintenance program that has reduced benefits and can create questionable feelings about the kind of job  maintenance is really doing.

What I would suggest you consider (if the above sounds all too familiar in your organization) is to step back and take a fresh look at what you feel really should be the appropriate program. I also believe it’s critical for both operations and maintenance to work on this together with the added assistance of engineering as appropriate.

There are several processes that take you through an excellent review of how an asset can fail and what can, and in fact should, be done to seeing the problem evolving to a point of concern. Maintenance Task Anaylsis and RCM are two that you should at least take a look at as they might relate to your environment. Using MTA for all but the most critical assets can promote a very effective and resource smart approach as you get started. The use of RCM can then be considered for the most critical balance of the assets that you are concerned about.

Taking advantage of your personnel’s experience coupled with these processes WILL result in a very credible and effective program created by the shop floor and driven by facts, not speculation. What a great way to both clean up a program and get your folks on board. You really can’t lose! Good luck.

KPIs and Communication, are they really linked?

Monday, July 20th, 2009

It seems that any time we talk about building a strong organization, a key component of success is effective communications.

I strongly agree and believe you can’t get there without it. For communications to be effective, it must be two way and done in a way that provides meaningful information to all parties involved. That is where KPIs play a key part in your success.

In order to have good communications, it’s important for the information being conveyed to be timely, pertinent to the needs of the people involved, easy to access and easy to relate to. Hence, the creation of a few vital KPIs will play a critical part of your being successful.

To generate lots of words usually loses the true value of what your trying to say. However, having the ability to be concise and showing vital measures to folks goes a long way towards keeping the organization interested in what’s being said and ‘tuned in’ to the message you want to pass along. These KPIs have the ability to show everyone how they are doing –and it only takes a few moments of their time. I think you would agree that’s a win/win for everyone, easy to generate and easy for everyone to relate to when your out on the shop floor. 

It’s also very important to create leading and lagging KPI’s as you give this approach your consideration. I’ll talk about these more in future blog postings.

You can’t communicate very well without good content and well selected KPIs to share what’s important with everyone. Please remember that the key to success is to communicate, communicate, communicate and have your critical KPIs tied into the message. Good luck!

Information Systems for our personnel-Key for success

Thursday, June 18th, 2009

As we sit back and look for what are critical components for our maintenance and reliability programs, the topic of information systems quickly comes to the forefront. In today’s world, information is usually a key part of keeping informed about the world we live in.

When at work, it isn’t any different as information is usually plentiful but hard to access in a friendly manner so that we may perform our responsibilities in an efficient manor. Our folks want to evaluate the health and condition of our assets on a regular basis but most often they struggle with an ‘easy’ way to summarize and determine if there are any problems starting to develop. We need to provide our organizations with friendly information systems that make themselves easy to access, then simplify finding our way to the particular piece of equipment we want to evaluate.

Many times we hear the phrase that ‘information is king’ and having the ability for all of our operations, maintenance and support folks to access it makes that same information that much more valuable and critical to our being successful. Having this type of friendly, easy to use system goes a long way in also helping to create a feeling of asset ownership. When we can come to work each day and have easy access to the information that shows us how good of a job we’re doing, how can we not get better?

The information system technology is there today, are we?

Sharing-It really can make a difference

Thursday, June 11th, 2009

Many of us have been working at improving asset performance via better maintenance and reliability for a long time. Some of our undertakings have worked really well and others have felt like they hit a wall. Independent of how good we think our ideas have been, we’ve run into obstacles that have made moving ahead really hard to do.

Some of these start with getting management buy in and expand all the way to the lacking of shop floor support for these ‘great’ ideas that we think can make a difference. As we learn how to work through these various obstacles, our skills at selling ideas and helping folks get on board steadily improve. We also get more skilled at learning what won’t work in our particular environment.

Now for the important part.

Think about how helpful these experiences can be if shared with others who are struggling with the same issues. That’s where it really helps to consider presenting your respective stories with other practitioners at events such as the SMRP conference help once per year, along with many other avenues which allow you to SHARE. This would also factor into the expanding of our networking with others which always proves to be of added value. I would close with the reminder that it’s not only the successes but the failures as well that are so very important to share. We can all learn from each other, the good and the not so good. Good Luck!