Jump to content
Test ×

UptimeJim

Member
  • Content Count

    24
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    9

UptimeJim last won the day on May 13

UptimeJim had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

28 Excellent

1 Follower

About UptimeJim

  • Rank
    Member

Personal Information

  • Name
    James Reyes-Picknell
  • Headline
    Helping companies by telling them the truth, not what they want to hear
  • Current Position
    Principal Consultant
  • Company
    Conscious Asset
  • Industry
    Management Consulting
  • Location
    Barrie, ON, Canada
  • LinkedIn Profile

Recent Profile Visitors

169 profile views
  1. Greetings Raul, I'd go so far as to say they won't just struggle, they will fail without that sponsorship. Some changes, usually minor ones, are within a single manager's control. In Maintenance you might control some training budget, and how your own crews interact. For instance, you can get problems identified using Condition Monitoring to be dealt with in a timely manner by planners and field supervisors so the benefits of Condition Monitoring are realized. That's something I've noticed does not always happen, and it is within your control. But something that will cross departmental bo
  2. Raul - great topic and should be on a "must read" list for anyone who expects to get results! Those persons need to be in that senior executive sponsorship role. Andrej makes an excellent point about that. Without support at a senior enough level, we in the M&R world can only hope to make minor process changes to those processes we actually control. Most of the rest of it, where much of the value is potentially generated, requires cross functional collaboration. In turn, that requires the executive sponsorship or it is highly unlikely to happen, at least in most organizations.
  3. Well described Raul. The failure mode must have a time or usage based distribution. In Weibull analysis it has a beta value greater than 1. The larger the value, the more strongly related to aging the failure is. As in all proactive work we are aiming to reduce the risks of failure. We do that by reducing what happens when the failure occurs (consequence mitigation) or by reducing the probability it will happen. With age related failures, where preventive measures can be effective, they actually prevent most of the failures if they are performed at an early enough time. I've seen quite a
  4. Raul - like you I'm comparing numbers between countries. Earlier in the year I was in Australia with a client so I'm watching Australia and Canada, as well as the UK and USA. Australia and Canada had similar numbers for a while but Canada's have grown much faster. Our measures here were less strict and slower. The UK and USA - both very slow and very lax. The US doesn't even have a single health care system to speak of so they are really in rough shape. I think Boris in the UK got a lesson on "herd immunity" and fortunately for him, survived. Given the timing of the crisis, a lot of retired Ca
  5. Here in Canada we have shutdown non-essential businesses, closed borders and restricted internal travel. Big gathering spots (malls, sport events) are closed. People are being asked to "stay home" and most businesses have sent people home. Social distancing is being practiced when going out (e.g.: shopping for groceries, walking for exercise, etc.). When I get out for walking the dogs or my own exercise I am seeing a lot more people gardening, walking, riding bicycles and all keeping distance. I notice more people now than when things are "normal". Our biggest growth in our cases is from
  6. Greetings Raul, Senior management (i.e.: those with true P&L responsibility and strategic decision making authority) need to be made aware of the business impact of NOT acting and the costs associated with taking action. If there is truly a valid business case (and there often is), and the costs do not exceed their ability to pay (the company must have money or be able to find money to pay for it), then they will want to take action. Their next questions will be about "how to" do it. This where it pays to have some outside help. Internal resources are often inexperienced at mana
  7. A challenge that must be solved. I have a passion for teaching and solving problems. The former is often required as a part of the latter. Anytime I share some information I feel good. It's gratifying to be recognized for what I do, but more importantly, it's fulfilling to help others.
  8. Raul, it is indeed key for senior management to "get it" and, if they want results, to support the effort actively. It will be important to bridge the silos and collaborate - something that many companies are not all that good at (although they'd probably argue that they are). I've done a lot of work with senior management teams and leaders who want change and a lot more with managers (e.g.: Mtc Mgr) who also want change. The former can achieve it, the latter might, but not without a lot of struggle. Lately I've been helping maintenance managers get the right messaging to the right ears.
  9. Raul said, "Finding companies/plants that work in a run to failure culture is definitely not a hard task and I am pretty sure that we all have gone through this situation before at least once." I'd go much further than to say it's not a hard task. It's downright easy to find them. As trainer and adviser who is often asked to help with cost reduction or to improve availability, it is that "break then fix" culture that I am frequently confronted with. To me it's endemic and it's usually a systemic problem as described by Ramesh. We do reward the wrong behavior and then enhance it by allowing tho
  10. I like the use of "metric" as opposed to KPI. Regarding availability of "tailors" - few have them in-house, but everyone has access. Jim
  11. Andrej - I agree with the fewer is better premise and that the set of KPIs used will mature with the organization. I believe it is key to really think through what information those KPIs can provide and how it might be interpreted or misinterpreted. The example of misusing MTBF (above) is a case in point. I've seen "downtime" used in a way that drove massive investments in spares that were simply not needed. I've seen availability (in its various forms) used to mislead general management into thinking things were just fine, when in fact, they were not. We can choose from among many KPIs t
  12. Greetings, The situation of a production manager challenging data validity because his experience doesn't match the number he sees on the monitor is quite common. Firstly, the use of MTBF as a form of performance measure is probably not wise - it's useful (with other parameters) in reliability work but rather meaningless on its own, particularly as an indicator of production performance. Secondly, the concept of "mean" is not well understood. Mean, is but one parameter used in a continuous distribution function to describe failure experience. Using it alone is akin to describing a person
  13. I've done a lot of reliability work as have a number of my colleagues. MTBF is one of the parameters needed to do proper analysis (e.g.: Weibull) so it's a valuable piece of information. Of course knowing whether the failure is age / usage related, random or infant mortality is also very important in making decisions about failure management approaches. Unless we run our own "studies" to capture data that we can rely on, most of us will rely on data captured in the CMMS/EAM. All too often that data is not fit for purpose, at least not without a considerable amount of effort to scrub it cl
  14. My first CMMS was a home grown system called, "Dynamic Equipment Information Systems" (DEIS) at the PetroChemical complex where I worked as a maintenance engineer. It was a very basic work order system that provided job plan details, parts lists and history. Each job was recorded in text fields and all the history was printed with any work order. The thickness of the work order print out was an indicator of troublesome equipment, or a long BOM. Our refinery (next door) was using a paper based system. Both worked well for work management and since discipline of recording what was found wrong an
  15. Raul - I believe that having contracts for parts supply is a good idea, regardless of when executed. For fast moving parts that should be easy to set up as the supplier will have a more or less guaranteed income. For slower moving items it could be challenging - how does the supplier get compensated for effectively storing items on behalf of the company that may or may not use them? For items that may never be used, the problem becomes even more complex. Those latter items are "insurance spares" in every sense of the words. As for tacking the maintenance planning - it also must be done a
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy and use of We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue..