Addressing maintenance challenges: Exploring standardised workflows for enhanced efficiency

13 June, 2024

Using failure codes means that maintenance managers know exactly what the issue is, and can assign it a priority level, which makes scheduling easy. (A good CMMS can also handle scheduling and work orders instead of workers)

Standardising work processes

Managers can create step-by-step instructions for all the typical maintenance tasks in their plants. This set of instructions can include a checklist, along with built-in benchmarks, timelines, and quality checks. It should list the materials needed to do the job, along with any special tools.

A CMMS can include checklists that workers can access on their mobile devices, so that it’s easy to track progress.

Standardising reporting

A maintenance job isn’t over when the technician makes the repair. Reporting is a key part of the workflow. That’s what allows managers to analyse the process for cost, time efficiency, and effectiveness. Reporting allows for continuous improvement.

Obstacles to standardised workflows

Lack of data – or lack of data analytics – creates major obstacles to standardising workflows.

The bigger the operation, the more it stands to gain from standardising workflows. But standardising processes across a large operation is also tough.

Managers need data to create effective workflows. That means precise data for each asset’s maintenance needs, the more granular the better. It means insights into how often a part typically needs to be changed, or how long a machine can run before it develops a new fault.

These kinds of insights drive decisions about inventory, staffing, and scheduling. They also inform decisions about asset criticality.

Legacy systems get in the way

Many operations are still using a mixture of old manual data collection practices, and legacy systems like SAPs. This means that data collection is spotty and inconsistent. It also means that data tends to end up in silos, where teams can’t access it easily.

SAPs are often clunky and hard to implement. The systems are very cumbersome to configure, so inputting a change to workflows or to the reporting process is a big ordeal. Unlike a CMMS, which is intuitive and easy to learn, an SAP relies on transaction codes which take time and study to master.

The result is that end users can’t access data with the speed and ease they need to. It’s also hard to input data from different locations. In addition, SAPs can’t easily issue work orders and schedules, the way a CMMS can.

ERPs (Enterprise Resource Planning solutions) are also highly inefficient when it comes to standardising maintenance workflows. An ERP’s purpose is to handle data across departments; it’s very good at integrating business processes. But when it comes to the kind of analysis and interaction that is needed for standardising maintenance workflows, an ERP falls short.

To get the job done properly, the right tools are needed. A CMMS is purposemade for standardising workflows. It comes equipped with data analytics, the capacity to create and store work orders, and the ability to customise reporting. It’s also cloud-based, so that users can access it from anywhere, enabling technicians access to checklists in order to follow approved work processes. With every job performed, more data gets inputted and reported, so that managers can make continuous improvements to the processes.