A situational

A situational maintenance maintenance

model model

Jens O. Riis
Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark, 349
James T. Luxhøj
Received August 1996
Rutgers University, Piscataway, USA and Revised November 1996
Uffe Thorsteinsson
Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark

Introduction
Wireman[1] refers to maintenance planning as “the last frontier” for
manufacturing facilities. In the move to world-class manufacturing (WCM),
many firms are realizing a critical need for effective maintenance of production
facilities and systems. With the trend to just-in-time (JIT) production and to
flexible, agile manufacturing, it is vital that maintenance management becomes
integrated with corporate strategy to ensure equipment availability, quality
products, on-time deliveries and competitive pricing. The changing needs of
modern manufacturing necessitate a re-examination of the role that improved
maintenance management plays in achieving key cost and service advantages.
The common trends from Scandinavian[2] and US[1] benchmarking studies
for maintenance suggest that there exists a need to develop clear maintenance
objectives and goals, to define key variables for measuring and controlling
maintenance activities, to ensure better linkages between maintenance and
production, to move towards computer-based maintenance systems, to
decentralize some maintenance activities, to instil better training and to
investigate modern maintenance methods.
Two major trends in the development of maintenance management research
identified by the benchmarking studies may be succintly stated as:
(1) emerging developments and advances in maintenance technology,
information and decision technology, and maintenance methods; and
(2) the linking of maintenance to quality improvement strategies and the use
of maintenance as a competitive strategy (e.g. the development of total
productive maintenance (TPM)).
We view the major challenge of maintenance management research as
developing new models and methods that include both major trends.
The purpose of this paper is to develop a framework or a systems viewpoint
for analysing and designing maintenance programmes for industrial
enterprises. The main concern of this paper addresses the question “Which International Journal of Quality
elements constitute a maintenance system?” The paper also seeks to provide & Reliability Management,
Vol. 14 No. 4, 1997, p. 349-366,
answers to questions such as “What are the important factors to consider when © MCB University Press, 0265-671X
IJQRM analysing the present status of maintenance in a company?” and “What
14,4 constitutes the design variables (decision elements) when we desire to improve
a maintenance system?”
The elements that comprise a maintenance system are individually
discussed, which leads to the development of an integrated modelling approach
based on the concepts of situational management theory. This synergistic
350 model is proposed as both an analysis and design tool for industrial firms
seeking to gain a competitive advantage with their maintenance programmes.

Maintenance improvement connected to organizational learning

In their quest towards world class manufacturing, many industries are
appreciating the need for efficient maintenance systems that have been effectively
integrated with their corporate strategy. New production management
techniques, such as just-in-time, flexible and agile manufacturing demand quick
response times and equipment availability. Riis and Neergaard[3] argue that there
is a need to link manufacturing planning to the perspectives of individual
behaviour, decision support, management systems and organizational structure,
and corporate culture. These authors develop a multi-factor organizational
learning model as a new manufacturing paradigm. This model, illustrated in
Figure 1, includes both formal and informal dimensions in a company.
As new methods and technologies evolve for maintenance planning, such as
expert systems, constraint-based reasoning, belief networks and artificial
neural networks, there is an important need to develop a broader framework to
ensure that these methods become integrated into the modus operandi of an
organization. Otherwise there exists the real possibility that the new methods
and technologies for maintenance management may become islands of
automation that will not provide any meaningful feedback to improve
organizational performance.
If a maintenance system is to have a successful implementation, the
additional learning perspectives of the Riis-Neergaard[3] model (Figure 1) need
to considered during the system design process. A Danish-Norwegian survey[4]
reports that most enterprises tended to introduce technological means first and
afterwards adjust the imbalance by applying organizational means.
To better ensure that technology, organizational development and corporate
strategy are coupled, the Riis-Neergaard model can be used to ask key
questions during the maintenance system development process, such as:
• What will be the consequences for the four types of learning of
introducing the new maintenance system for a company?
• Which changes are required in a company’s management systems,
information technology, organizational structure and culture, as well as
individual behaviour in order to utilize the new maintenance system fully?
Such an approach will prevent the situation where a new maintenance system is
developed in isolation and views the system development as an interactive,
collaborative process with due regard to the mutual interrelationships to the other
three learning perspectives. This integrative approach encourages the
 A situational
maintenance
model

351

Figure 1.
Riss Neergaard model of
organizational learning

development of individual qualifications for maintenance technicians rather than

relying extensively on the procedures embedded in a computerized maintenance
management system. The approach also places awareness on collective learning
processes as implemented by formal organizational structure and management
systems for production planning and control and recognizes the role that informal
systems play in operationalizing maintenance concepts. Such an understanding
is essential for a successful implementation of new maintenance models and
methods that are more quantitative and technology based.
IJQRM Situational model of a maintenance system
14,4 A conceptual model is proposed in Figure 2 to identify and to integrate the
elements of a maintenance system with the purpose of disclosing design
variables. This model builds on “situational production management”[5]. The
components of this situational maintenance model are discussed in the following
section. Market dynamics and the advancement of technology require that
352 companies re-examine the role of their maintenance systems. Situational factors
strongly influence the maintenance methods that are used in an industrial
enterprise. Influence arrows portray the various connections between the
components of the model. The essential concepts from total productive
maintenance (TPM) for relating corporate objectives to maintenance goals can be
incorporated into this model as a means for articulating declared goals. The idea
of using TPM to identify major production losses due to equipment, personnel,
management, and material inefficiencies can highlight the cost drivers associated
with lack of appropriate maintenance to the production system. Note the dynamic
interactions of the elements of a maintenance system with the declared goals, the
object system (focal area) and maintenance task profile. Moreover, changes in the
situation of the enterprise and evaluation of actual performance may necessitate
modifications to the declared corporate goals, which in turn affects the selected
object system and maintenance task profile.
In Denmark, the theory and practice of situational production management
has been developed over more than a decade in close co-operation with
researchers, consultants and practitioners. It has been successfully applied in
analysing and designing a number of Danish production management
systems[6]. Situational theory has its roots in normative decision making,
systems theory, engineering design and organizational theory (contingency
perspective). Essentially, when viewed from the perspective of an industrial
enterprise, situational theory states that the specific situation of the firm and its

Figure 2.
Situational model of a
maintenance system
environment determine which maintenance solution is most appropriate to the A situational
firm. The situational model has intuitive, practical appeal. maintenance
Elements of a maintenance system
model
A system could be defined as “a number of elements functioning as a whole”.
Maintenance is a support function within the industrial enterprise. The
maintenance system is very much dependent on the structure and purpose of 353
the enterprise, the external conditions, internal constraints and specified
corporate objectives. This analysis of the situation leads into the identification
of the object system or focal areas for maintenance, the maintenance task
profile, and the inherent elements comprising the maintenance system. A
discussion of these system elements follows.
Situation of the enterprise. Following a contingency theory approach, the
characteristics of the industrial enterprise will, to a large extent, determine
which declared goals and which objects of maintenance are appropriate and,
furthermore, how the maintenance system should be designed. Having argued
for the inclusion of situational parameters, it is, on the other hand, not easy to
identify which parameters are most relevant. Different parameters to be
considered are:
• environmental demands;
• delivery times;
• product mix and product structure;
• supply chains (horizontal and vertical integration);
• quality demands;
• production processes required;
• equipment required;
• safety needs;
• skills of the workforce.
Declared goals. Declared goals reflect top management’s priorities within an
enterprise and establish the need for maintenance. Factors that influence
declared goals include market share, economic results (e.g. return on
investment), productivity, quality, flow (e.g. delivery times, on-time deliveries),
environmental issues and safety. The actual weight to the factors will vary, but
it should reflect the strategic importance of maintenance for the industrial
enterprise. Either multi-attribute decision-making techniques or simple rank-
ordering rules could be utilized here to establish the weights.
High-level goals for a maintenance system include establishing strategies and
policies that are consistent with the manufacturing strategy, communicating
effectively with other corporate sub-systems, defining maintenance tasks and
methods, planning and controlling maintenance activities, and accumulating
maintenance knowledge. These goals can be placed into a hierarchy of strategic,
tactical and operational maintenance objectives.
IJQRM As reported in the maintenance benchmarking studies, there exists a gap in
14,4 linking maintenance objectives to overall corporate strategy. Perhaps what is
needed is a two-phased framework that first links maintenance planning to
manufacturing strategy, and then relates manufacturing strategy to corporate
strategy. Riis[7] presents a number of models and methods for dealing with
integration when developing a manufacturing strategy. Total productive
354 maintenance (TPM) is a relatively new approach to the development of
maintenance systems[8,9]. TPM is a life-cycle and employee involvement
approach to maintenance management that:
• tries to maximize overall equipment effectiveness and overall efficiency;
• develops a preventive maintenance programme for the life-cycle of the
equipment;
• uses team-based concepts;
• involves operators in maintaining the equipment;
• uses motivational management (autonomous small groups) to promote
preventive maintenance.
In the TPM framework, the goals are to develop a maintenance-free design and to
involve the participation of all employees to improve maintenance productivity. A
metric, termed the overall equipment effectiveness (OEE), is defined as a function
of equipment availability, quality rate and equipment performance efficiency.
If a company has an OEE of 85 per cent or more, then it is considered to be a
world-class company. TPM also provides a systematic procedure for linking
corporate goals to maintenance goals. This procedure considers the external
and internal corporate environments, the development of a basic maintenance
policy, the identification of key points for maintenance improvement and,
finally, the definition of target values for maintenance performance. The TPM
metrics offer a starting-point for developing quantitative variables for relating
maintenance measurement and control to corporate strategy.
TPM focuses on eliminating major losses encountered in production
activities. These losses are decomposed into major losses obstructing equipment
efficiency, manpower (personnel) efficiency and efficiency of material and energy.
Based on their links to achieving corporate goals, targets to eliminate or reduce
these losses are developed directly for the maintenance task in a production
system. Just as in activity-based costing where cost drivers are identified, the
objective here is to identify variables that can demonstrate causal relationships
that maintenance activities have on production system performance. Each of the
major equipment losses is functionally related to availability, performance
efficiency, and/or quality rate. Thus, the improvement from a maintenance
system can be measured by its impact on the OEE. The concept of total
productive maintenance is gaining wider acceptance in industrial firms[9].
The object system of maintenance. In order to have a meaningful discussion of
the maintenance activity within an enterprise, the object system of maintenance
needs to be defined. This could be an individual component of a machine; or it
could be a single machining tool (e.g. a drilling machine, a lathe or a milling A situational
machine); or it could be a production cell with single machining tools, maintenance
transportation and materials handling equipment, etc.; or it could be an entire model
factory (i.e. a production system). Figure 3 illustrates how the production system
hierarchy is composed of factory, process unit, aggregate and component levels.
These production hierarchy levels correspond to the traditional organizational
levels of top management, functional, supervision and operator levels. The figure 355
also attempts to illustrate how the hierarchy may be decomposed into both
horizontal and vertical integration levels, and highlights the importance of cross-
level maintenance integration to avoid creating maintenance management
islands. Such an approach is instructive for defining the objects of maintenance.
Thorsteinsson[10] proposes a broader view of the objects of maintenance.
Figure 4 illustrates that the building, technology, transportation methods,
production plant, supply, stock system and information system can each be
considered objects of maintenance. It is not possible to discuss a maintenance
system meaningfully without first having clearly defined the object system.
How to do this depends on the actual situation, i.e. the actual performance of the
enterprise with respect to maintenance, and on the declared objectives and
goals of the enterprise.
Maintenance task profile. Typical maintenance tasks include fault isolation,
fault detection, fault diagnosis, repair, replacement, overhaul, calibration and
testing, lubrication of components, inventory control of spare parts, statistical
analysis of failure and maintenance data, determination of inspection schedules
and methods[11].

Production system

Factory Aggregate
Process unit
Component Maintenance system

Horizontal Vertical Cross levels

integration in integration in and functional
maintenance maintenance integration of
management management maintenance
management

Operator level

Supervision level

Functional level
Figure 3.
Top management level
Things, The objects of
Focus on: Money Customer service Availability failures maintenance
Organization
 (water, oil, gas, electricity, etc.)
IJQRM
14,4

communication systems
Offshore installations
Technical installation

Production systems
Means of transport

Supply systems

Information and
Traffic facilities
356
Buildings

Area Area Area Area Area Area Area Area

specific specific specific specific specific specific specific specific
methods methods methods methods methods methods methods methods

Common base of technical measuring, controlling, calculating and working methods

Reliability and risk, cracks/chinks, corrosion, accelerated testing, automatic watching,
data logging, storing and analysis

Management of maintenance activities

Organization, planning, working methods, economy, quality of maintenance, education,
resource usage, spare part inventory control, administrative system, use of EDP
technology
Maintenance includes a number of specific methods for each technological maintenance
Figure 4. area and a common base of technical methods and knowledge of industrial engineering,
A broader view of the management, planning and carrying out maintenance
objects of maintenance
Source: [10]

Thorsteinsson and Hage[12] develop a broader and richer definition of the

maintenance task based on viewing the maintenance system as a production
system where the “products” are maintenance services. These authors identify
12 main maintenance tasks, or “fields”, that are grouped into three primary
categories – technical, human, and economic. The technical category of the
maintenance task comprises maintenance products (maintenance services), the
quality of these products, and the methods, resources, materials and control
strategies for maintenance. The human category of the maintenance task
comprises internal relations between the maintenance organization and other
departments (e.g. production) including corporate staff, external relations to
local regulatory authorities, labour organizations, vendors, etc., and the design
of the maintenance organization itself (i.e. centralized versus decentralized,
responsibilities, skill levels, personnel selection, etc.). The economic category of
the maintenance task comprises the structure of maintenance (work
breakdown, relation to accounting system, etc.), the economic control of
maintenance (budgets, cash flow, etc.), and production economy (economic
relationship between maintenance and production). Definitions of these 12 main A situational
maintenance fields are as follows[12]: maintenance
(1) The technical part: model
• The maintenance products. Specification of the different types of
services and products from the maintenance function. Specification
in relation to each plant system. 357
• Quality of the maintenance products. Specification of quality of the
maintenance jobs. Quality reports, certification documents, decision
about maintenance standards, etc.
• Maintenance working methods. Specification of working methods,
time standards, relationship between maintenance jobs, etc.
• Maintenance resources. Equipment for maintenance, buying
maintenance services, information about new equipment, capacity of
equipment, usage control, etc.
• Maintenance materials. Inventory planning (spare parts, etc.),
warehousing, relationship with vendors, etc.
• Controlling maintenance activities. Scheduling of maintenance jobs,
progress in work, manpower planning, etc.
(2) The human part:
• Internal relations in maintenance function. Relation to other
department, corporation and co-ordination, especially to production.
• External relation for the maintenance function. Relation to external
parties, especially related to environment and safety. Contact to local
authorities, press, labour organization, customer, vendors,
neighbours, etc.
• Organization of the maintenance function. Design of the organization,
selection of people, relationship between groups of skills,
responsibility and authority.
(3) The economic part:
• Structure of maintenance. Work breakdown of maintenance,
responsibility for work packages, area structure, relation to
accounting system, specification base (drawings, documentation), etc.
• Maintenance economy. Economic control of maintenance: cost
estimates, budgets, cash flow, accounting for the maintenance
function. Plant investment and financing.
• Production economy. Production economy versus maintenance
economy, cost benefit of maintenance.
Thorsteinsson and Hage[12] then link the five managerial functions of
formulating goals and strategies, analysis, recording and controlling,
specifying and planning, and conducting the work to the 12 maintenance fields
IJQRM by developing a “radar” diagram. This radar diagram, based on the graphical
14,4 concept of a radar screen for tracking ships or airplanes, may then be used as a
diagnostic tool to evaluate the level of managerial effort currently being
expended by an industrial company towards its maintenance activities. As
depicted in Figure 5, such an analysis leads to the development of maintenance
profiles that clearly illustrate to management where their efforts have been
358 allocated with respect to the maintenance task within their organizations.
Moreover, the radar diagram may also be used to suggest changes to
management efforts and to evaluate the possible organizational effects of new,
improved maintenance management programmes. The radar tool has been
computerized and the authors report positive test case results from analysing

Management of plant
and maintenance
function

Maintenance products
Quality of
maintenance Production
products economy

Maintaining
working Maintenance
methods economy

Maintenance Maintenance
resources structure
Conducting the work

Specifying, planning

Recording, control
Maintenance Maintenance
materials organization
Analysis

Goals, strategies External

Figure 5. Controlling
maintenance relations for
Thorsteinsson-Hage activities Internal relations maintenance
radar diagram for in maintenance function
analysis of maintenance function
tasks
Source: [10]
maintenance tasks at a steelworks, a manufacturer of electrical lamps, and a A situational
vendor selling maintenance services for industrial control systems. maintenance
The maintenance system. The maintenance system comprises both formal model
and informal elements. The formal elements include management systems and
methods, organizational structures, information systems, and technology
necessary to implement the generic maintenance tasks within an industrial
enterprise. The management system essentially specifies when to deal with one 359
or more of the maintenance tasks, what to do when a task is dealt with, and who
should do it. The management system also includes the formal collective
knowledge and know-how. Regarding the organization, in some industrial
firms, there is a distinct division of responsibility for maintenance tasks
between operators of individual machining tools, set-up fitters and skilled
workers from the maintenance department. Information systems can range
from manual data collection and reporting to sophisticated EDP systems.
Maintenance technology can include a range of off-line and on-line diagnostic
devices for mechanical wear, vibration analysis, electrical measurements,
sound intensities, hydraulic and pneumatic testing, temperature monitoring,
tribology (i.e. lubricating oil and wear particle analyses), motion pattern
monitoring and shock-pulse measurement.
Informal elements of a maintenance system include the actors of
maintenance. These actors include the individuals performing maintenance
functions (i.e. technicians, operators, managers) as well as the influence of the
corporate culture. Individuals of a maintenance organization act and decide
using their knowledge, skills and know-how, their motivation and attitudes. In
addition to being part of the formal management system, individuals act
informally. Attention is given to how individuals from the maintenance
department interact with other members of the enterprise. One of the design
variables for improving maintenance with respect to individuals is to educate
them by providing appropriate decision support in terms of information
systems and decision rules. Although there are only a few possibilities to alter
directly the culture in an industrial enterprise, it is suggested that corporate
culture be included as an element in a maintenance system. It captures the
collective, informal learning which has occurred in the past.
Actual performance. The declared goals of the enterprise influence the
structure and function of the different elements of the maintenance system.
Once these elements have been designed, the actual performance of the
maintenance system can be compared to its anticipated performance. This
comparison may lead to the identification of a gap between actual and
anticipated performance, and thus provides a basis for improvements and
perhaps modifications of the declared goals.

Analysis of existing maintenance systems

The real benefit of the situational model or framework introduced above lies in
its application. Two applications are considered in this paper: analysis and
design. As Riis[5] illustrates, the situational approach may be applied at three
IJQRM levels of analysis: general, industry, and individual corporate levels. From an
14,4 analysis perspective, the situational maintenance model may be used to assess
the current level of maintenance support in a company and the integration of
maintenance with basic management functions. Use of the situational model
compels management to examine both the internal and external corporate
environment with respect to market dynamics, production system capacity,
360 vendor relationships, available technology, etc. In addition, management can
then articulate what the perceived corporate goals are and then question the
compatibility of stated maintenance goals. This may lead to a gap and identify
some opportunities for maintenance improvement.
Use of the situational maintenance model as an analysis tool clearly requires
that management identify the object system or focal area of maintenance. Once
this has been completed, the Thorsteinsson-Hage[12] “radar” diagram can then
be used to develop a maintenance profile that will graphically portray to
management where their efforts have been concentrated with respect to the
maintenance task. For example, the radar diagram for company B presented in
Figure 6 suggests that this company allocates minimal effort to the technological

Company B
Present managerial effort, maintenance
management
Maintenance
products
Maintenance Production
quality economy

Maintenance Maintenance
work methods economy

Maintenance Maintenance
resources structure

Carry out

Specifying
Maintenance Maintenance
materials organization
Recording

Analysis External
Figure 6. Maintenance relations
Radar diagram for activities Goal, strategy
company B
Internal relations
area (i.e. the left side) compared with the organizational and economical issues A situational
(i.e. the right side). This leads to the identification of a gap between perception maintenance
and reality that offers the company an opportunity to initiate new, improved model
maintenance programmes. The radar diagram for company C is illustrated in
Figure 7. The main efforts are in the following control areas: maintenance
organization, maintenance products, internal relations and maintenance
structure. The remaining areas appear unbalanced (maintenance quality, 361
maintenance resources and maintenance materials) with no connection between
the levels of goals/strategies and recording. Opportunities exist to link
maintenance performance metrics with corporate goals.
On completion of the maintenance audit with the radar diagram, the
situational model can then be used to analyse the existing maintenance system
with respect to management system and methods, organizational structure,
information systems and maintenance technology. Such an analysis may
indicate that an imbalance exists, for example, between the informal and formal
dimensions of the decision support systems for maintenance. Management’s
recognition of this imbalance may lead to more training programmes for

Company C
Present managerial effort,
maintenance management
Maintenance
products
Maintenance Production
quality economy

Maintenance Maintenance
work methods economy

Maintenance Maintenance
resources structure

Carry out

Specifying
Maintenance Maintenance
materials organization
Recording

Analysis External
Maintenance relations
activities Figure 7.
Goal, strategy Radar diagram for
company C
Internal relations
IJQRM individual technicians and to the development of improved decision support
14,4 systems. The use of the situational maintenance model as an analysis tool also
requires that management examine its procedures for recording and tracking
actual maintenance performance to see if these indicators are truly connected to
overall corporate goals. This analysis may reveal the absence of maintenance
performance indicators or indicators that do not establish causal relationships
362 with manufacturing strategy. Such a gap may lead to the refinement of some
performance indicators or the definition of new, improved indicators.
To elaborate further on the use of the situational maintenance model as an
analysis tool at three different levels – general, industry and individual
corporate levels – the following example is created:
(1) General level. At the general level, the maintenance manager may ask to
what extent does the concept of predictive maintenance, with its reliance
on on-line condition monitoring of critical equipment parameters,
represent a universal shift in the definition of the maintenance task.
(2) Industry level. The maintenance manager may realize that the nature of
the enterprise’s continuous manufacturing processes leads to the use of a
predictive maintenance strategy with the embedding of sensors
throughout the processes owing to the reported success of this
maintenance strategy by other related firms in this industry.
(3) Individual corporate level. At this level, the maintenance manager, with
the assistance of the production manager, would need to identify the
precise parameters to be controlled in the plant, the type of sensors to use
(e.g. vibration, noise, temperature, viscosity, etc.), and the frequency of
data collection required to implement a predictive maintenance strategy.
In the next section, the use of the situational maintenance model as a design tool
is elaborated.

Design of new maintenance systems

This section outlines several steps for improving an existing maintenance
system or for designing a new system. In addition, this section attempts to map
the definitions of alternative maintenance categories to the situational
characteristics of an industrial enterprise in an attempt to create design profiles
for maintenance systems. The mapping is based on a general survey of three
Danish companies representing diverse industries, such as audio/video
manufacturing, heavy industrial equipment and medical products. Building on
these company experiences with their maintenance systems, an attempt is
made to characterize maintenance design variables that are appropriate for a
representative industrial situation. Using the idea of analytical
generalization[13], a normative classification scheme is created that is based on
literature studies and the three cases from Danish industry.
Table I illustrates this mapping where the individual components of the
situational maintenance model are specified and connected with the five
Maintenance
category Situational characteristics
Corrective Simple technology
Redundancies
Large inventories of spares
Low product complexity
Standardized products
Moderate to large product
mix
Preventive Semi-automatic technology
Some redundancies
Moderate inventory levels
Specialized products
Predictive Automatic technology
(off-line) High maintainability
High redundancy
Large inventory of
components
Condition based Advanced technology
(on-line) Very high redundancies
Very high maintainability
Continuous processing
Complex systems
Large capital investment
Intelligent (None at present time)
maintenance
Examples of
design profiles
Table I.
Declared goals
Steady capacity utilization
Reduce maintenance work
Increase line availability
Improve equipement uptime
High availability
High service level
High capacity utilization
Increase production output
High equipment uptime
Low probability of
unscheduled maintenance
High safety, quality
Very high service level
Very high equipment
availibility
Very high process reliability
High maintenance costs
Reduce number of failures
Very high reliability
Very high availability
Very high quality and safety
Very high maintenance costs
Reduce dependency on
equipment vendors
Management systems
and process knowledge Maintenance tasks Organization
Generalists Visual inspection Informal,
Manual data and MIS Fault isolation decentralized
Low level of process Emergency repair
knowledge Replacement
Adjustment
Cleaning
Generalists/specialists Periodic inspection Centralized
Manual and computer- Overhaul
based data and MIS Replacement
Moderate to high level Calibration
of process knowledge Lubrication
Specialists Vibration monitoring Hierarchical
Computer-based data Process parameter
and MIS monitoring
High level of process Thermography
knowledge Tribology
Specialists Use of programmable Hybrid
Computer-based MIS logic controllers
Sensor-based data on (PLCs) to monitor
critical parameters process parameters
High level of process (near real-time)
knowledge Fault forecasting
Specialists Use of expert system Matrix
100% sensor-based and neural networks
data and computerized with PLCs (real time)
MIS detection and correction
Very high level of Built-in test equipment
process knowledge Accuracy improvement
363
model
maintenance
A situational
IJQRM primary maintenance categories of corrective, preventive, predictive (off-line),
14,4 condition-based (on-line), and intelligent maintenance. The design variables are
considered as management systems and process knowledge, maintenance
tasks, and organizational structure. Based on the general survey of the Danish
companies, declared maintenance goals have been extracted and matched with
the corresponding maintenance category. The basic type of management
364 systems (manual or computerized MIS), skill level (generalists/specialists), and
level of process knowledge (low/high/very high) required to implement such a
maintenance system are also identified. Associated maintenance tasks are
specified, and a suggested organizational structure (centralized/decentralized/
hierarchical/hybrid/matrix) is recommended. The items in the “intelligent
maintenance” category represent ideal design characteristics based on the
literature, since the survey of Danish industries did not identify any firms with
extensive use of expert systems or neural network technology.
For the purposes of creating profiles, process knowledge may be low,
moderate, high or very high and refers to a pre-condition necessary to
implement the respective maintenance category. Data acquisition techniques
will be considered under this dimension and are classified as manual,
computerized or sensor based. People refer to the maintenance workers who are
classified as either specialists or generalists. Tasks provide some brief
descriptions of the typical maintenance functions of each category. Finally, the
maintenance organization is classified as informal, centralized, area, hybrid,
hierarchical or matrix.
An informal maintenance organization lacks structure and maintenance
tasks are performed by production-maintenance workers at the direction of the
production manager. The centralized maintenance organization involves a
relatively large maintenance department or group that supports the main
production function. Such an organization typically has high utilization of
resources, a slow response time, and a large, varied labour pool. In the
decentralized or area maintenance organization, maintenance groups are
strategically located in the production facility. While such an organizational
approach may result in low utilization of resources, the response time to
production problems is quicker owing to the proximity of the maintenance
technicians to the production equipment. This proximity also tends to result in
the concept of equipment “ownership” for the maintenance group. The hybrid
maintenance organization has been successfully applied in very large
production facilities where it is possible to have a combination of a centralized
maintenance area for repair of large equipment problems and inventory
management of critical spare parts, and smaller, decentralized maintenance
groups located in strategic areas of the factory for rapid response to production
problems. Hierarchical maintenance organizations have a top-down structure
with strategic, tactical and operational levels of decision making and repair
facilities. The matrix organization provides cross-functional maintenance
support and expertise and could be organized around products, processes,
markets and/or customers.
Design elements of a maintenance system A situational
Holistic in its approach, the situational maintenance model leads to the maintenance
identification of formal and informal design variables for maintenance systems model
and to the fundamental development of a coherent maintenance management
concept. The formal design variables include management systems,
organizational structure, information systems, and technology. The informal
design variables include individuals, behaviour and corporate culture. As 365
discussed earlier, the specifications of these design variables lead to the creation
of normative maintenance profiles that map maintenance policies, such as
corrective, preventive, predictive, condition based or intelligent maintenance
into a maintenance system.
Characterizing the formal and informal design variables results in a holistic
solution to the problem of maintenance management. This holistic solution
emanates from a maintenance concept, or “vision statement” that is a formal
recognition by corporate management of the vital role that maintenance fulfils
in realizing manufacturing strategy. Discussion and development of the
maintenance management concept will eventually lead to well-defined
maintenance objectives and goals that are consistent with declared corporate
goals, identification of the object systems (focal areas) for maintenance in the
enterprise, technical details for the design and implementation of the
maintenance management system, and definitions of maintenance metrics for
evaluating actual system performance.
For example, with respect to the organizational element, there are a number
of different actors who are involved in maintenance systems development.
These actors include machine operators, set-up fitters, maintenance
technicians, external services and specialists. The organizational structure for
maintenance could focus on specialized maintenance functions or crafts, such
as mechanics, electricians, pipe fitters, millwrights, etc. Alternatively, the
maintenance function could be distributed throughout the organization with
workers possessing generalized skills owing to a certain level of cross-training.
For example, at company B there were three distinct levels of maintenance,
whereas at company A there was more operator involvement in daily
maintenance activities. The trends that we see in maintenance systems
development for the design element of the organization are the increased
importance that maintenance plays in the design area, increased usage of built-
in diagnostic or automatic test equipment, more operator involvement with
maintenance and more outsourcing of maintenance services.
For the design element of management systems and methods, we see the
importance of a differentiated management system for the various maintenance
tasks. At company B there was a high degree of formalization in their
management systems. At company C, the maintenance knowledge base was
more informal and unstructured. Also, depending on the situation, there were
varying levels of integration of the production function with the maintenance
task. This took the form of including maintenance planning in engineering
product design to incorporating the maintenance task into facilities planning.
IJQRM Concluding remarks
14,4 This paper presents a situational approach for designing maintenance systems
that very much depends on the specifics of an individual industrial enterprise.
A model describing the various elements of a maintenance system is proposed.
The situational model embraces concepts from total productive maintenance
(TPM) for linking corporate goals with specific targets for maintenance
366 activities in order to eliminate losses that occur during production. The use of a
radar diagram for identifying managerial efforts towards accomplishing
maintenance tasks is viewed as a pragmatic tool for motivating changes to a
maintenance system. The situational model facilitates a holistic approach to the
design of a unique maintenance management system for an enterprise by
considering both formal and informal organizational and individual
dimensions. Building on successes with situational production management
concepts, the situational maintenance model offers a pragmatic approach for an
industrial enterprise to develop maintenance systems that have the potential to
enhance significantly the firm’s competitive advantage in manufacturing.
References
1. Wireman, T., World Class Maintenance Management, Industrial Press, New York, NY,
1990.
2. EUREKA: European Benchmark Study on Maintenance, European Benchmark Study on
Maintenance, EU 724, Denmark, 1993.
3. Riis, J.O. and Neergaard, C., “The learning company: a new manufacturing paradigm”,
Proceedings of the Annual CIM Europe Conference, Copenhagen, 1994.
4. Frick, J., Gersten, F., Hansen, P.H.K., Riis, J.O. and Sun, H., “Evolutionary CIM
implementation – an empirical study of technological-organizational development and
market dynamics”, Proceedings of the 8th CIM Europe-Annual Conference, Birmingham,
1992.
5. Riis, J.O., “Situational production management: a practical theory for the development and
application of production management”, Production Planning and Control, Vol. 5 No. 3,
1994, pp. 240-52.
6. Riis, J.O., “The use of production management concepts in the design of production
management systems”, Production Planning and Control, Vol. 1 No. 1, 1990, pp. 45-52.
7. Riis, J.O., “Integration and manufacturing strategy”, Computers in Industry, Vol. 19, 1992,
pp. 37-50.
8. Nakajima, S., Introduction to Total Productive Maintenance (TPM), Productivity Press,
Cambridge, MA, 1988.
9. Tajiri, M. and Gotoh, F., TPM Implementation: A Japanese Approach, McGraw-Hill, New
York, NY, 1992.
10. Thorsteinsson, U., “Stringskoncept for vedligehold”, Driftsteknisk Institut, Danmarks
Tekniske, Højskole, 1990 (in Danish).
11. Niebel, B.S., Engineering Maintenance Management, Marcel Dekker, New York, NY, 1994.
12. Thorsteinsson, U. and Hage, C., “Maintenance management profiles for industrial systems”,
in Holmberg, K. and Folkeson, A. (Eds), Operational Reliability and Systematic Maintenance,
Elsevier Applied Science, 1991, pp. 283-303.
13. Hipkin, I. and Lockett, A., “A study of maintenance technology implementation”, Omega
International Journal of Management Science, Vol. 23 No. 1, 1995, pp. 79-88.