Reliability and Maintenance Implementation Model
Christer Idhammar, IDCON INC
Step I
This column is the first in a series of articles about the implementation steps you need to take if you want to be successful in improving reliability and maintenance, sustain that improvement and after that continue to improve using a good reliability and maintenance implementation model.
“To tackle a problem from the wrong end can do nothing but harm” This was said by Confucius, a well known Chinese philosopher who lived around 551-479 BC. Another way of saying this is that it is important to start off an improvement initiative by Do the Right Things, then you must learn to do them right. Too often we turn this common sense statement upside down, we focus on doing things right but do not ask if this is the right thing to do. I have written about this in many previous articles.
Step II
This column is the second in a series of articles about the implementation steps you need to take if you want to be successful in improving reliability and maintenance, sustain that improvement and after that continue to improve.
After you have defined, agreed upon and documented your fundamental beliefs and principles (Step I – in the implementation pyramid as described in the July column) you should do an educational evaluation of how your present practices and performance compares to Current Best Practices – (CBP). We call these practices “Current” because we constantly discover better practices then the practices we know today. In defining these CBP, we structure them in nine key processes such as:
Step III
This column is the third in a series of articles about the implementation steps you need to take if you want to be successful in improving reliability and maintenance, sustain that improvement and after that continue to improve in the future.
After you have done the CBP (Current Best Practices) evaluation and discovered, understood and agreed upon your biggest improvement opportunities you shall not be surprised to find what you already knew, if you did not, it would be very bad. The difference is that key people in your organization have discovered this together. You have mutually agreed upon an action plan that includes roles and responsibilities for both operations, maintenance and engineering. This is different than traditional audits.