Jump to content
Test ×
  • 0
Ted

Suggestions

Question

Hello members, I have a real life question to as about a situation that is going on right now with our store managers. We use a CMMS called iMaint and within that program/package we have there is an ability for the store managers to use the web requestor to put in work requests for repairs to the building or equipment or both and them work orders are sent to out R&M techs via iMaint mobile. The stores for some reason have not been using the web requestor or very minimal at best. I have sent emails to all store managers reminding them of the web requestor as well as a procedure typed out in word. It has not been successful to much, stores still don't use the web requestor. I escalated this issue to the director of the stores in SW Ontario and he sent out an email to the stores stating that the R&M's will not answer to any phone calls for repairs (basically laying the hammer down) it has had limited success. 

My questions are as follows:

1) What is the next step to get the stores to use the web requestor?

2) How do we get stores to stop calling the R&M guys? (yes they have refused calls but due to store managers pressure they receive them)

3) would it be a good idea for me as the planner of all the stores (30 stores in total) to send an email to start to find out from them what the issue is?

4) would it be a good idea to visit the stores after the initial email to meet the store managers face to face and reshow them how to use the requestor?

I look forward to all your suggestions and advice about this issue

Ted Harris
Maintenance Planner
Farm Boy Canada

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0

Terry,

Hello! Been in the same situation as you and frankly, as any good attorney would have it, you have answered your own question in my opinion.

I agree with your thinking that meeting these people face to face either individually or in a group setting is always a good start to find out what their concerns are to gain insight to the lack of action. Of course, you will need to use more EQ than IQ as you will need to play the role of detective.

In short, getting work completed is relatively easy, getting people to perform work is normally not that easy!

As I tend to ramble on regarding such topics, if you have any questions about the aforementioned please feel to ask. As there are quite a few other members with a host of experience for such issues, hopefully they will provide some feed back as well.

Have a great weekend!

Sincerely,

Jim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

 

Hi Ted, I have using preventive maintenance plan for 30+ equipment/electro drives, there is 2 jobs one standard and one specific based on statistics and reliability of spare parts

standard job:
every day 2 buildings with 2 or 3 elevator / every months with standard operation (check Speed Governors, electric engine, all connectors on every station, cleaning and oiling Elevator Rails and check doors/cabin) need 2 hours, distance from next building in day plan is 10(20) km, 

non standard job : based on history records  (statistics replacement of equipment) I have using from sales order (work order) from ADempiere ERP systems directly from database using SQL from tables c_orderline which give me information about reliability of equipment (switches, electric breakers...)  and googled sql query for calculation dates, and forums.(ADempiere is open source so I can get info direct from database)

On examples from all work orders, switch breaker 32A, 380V from Cet Ef business partner on building
with average working functionality from 567 days its plan to be replacement every 1,5-1,7 years from history records
and usage parameters (number of cycles, etc)
 
For your problem my idea is to creating 'preventive plan' how to change critical spare parts (heaters/switches...) from 
history records from sales orders(maintenance orders from 7-8 years previous period) for spare parts
with small costs (iMaint systems as any ERP should have this information) - this way can save your time to replace this component when it happen in future.

regards,

Gordan


 

 

STATISTICS_REL_A.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Hi @Ted, thanks for sharing that real life issue.

Couple of thoughts - first of all, go visit a couple of stores and see what the real issue is. Why are people not using the CMMS work request feature?

What are the barriers? And do the people understand the importance / value it adds for you and your team?

Typically I have found that in instances like these it would be good to agree a focal point for each site/store who enters the work requests (or maybe a couple). You then have someone you can train, coach and it should also help communication.

As @Jim Vantyghem mentioned these issues are often a lot about how you deal with people and a good viewpoint is to consider "WIIFM" or "What's In It For Me?"

What doe the stores personnel get out of using the CMMS work request feature. If you can show them how it makes their life easier, less frustrating etc. then you should be on to a winner.

Please let us knowhow you go in a future update.

Kind regards,

Erik

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Erik,

The "What's In It For Me?" is probably the most conscious or, more so, subconscious question we all ask of ourselves. We all need a reason or a purpose to perform or not perform a task. As I have stated before (and will continue to do so), it is the human side as much as a the technical side of reliability maintenance that needs our attention.

Getting a task completed is relatively easy, getting people to complete a task is a more challenging task!

Have a great day!

Sincerely,

Jim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Hi @Ted,

I agree with the replies above. Showing people how they might benefit from filling the requests properly is a great way to begin with.

Additionally, I would do two more things:

1- Define the minimal information that should be filled in the requests. If such information has not been filled, iMaint should not allow the user to progress with the creation of the request. This "minimal information" should be enough to have solid information to help you and the team to do your tasks, as well as to keep a good history of the events;

2- Initially, step #1 may decrease the requests created on iMaint. In order to tackle that, I would still allow the Store Managers to call instead of creating requests, but only for emergencies; however, they would not call the M&R guys, they should call someone who is in a higher hierarchical level, such as the M&R Manager or even your director. This could inhibit them of not using the system, as the "pressure strategy" would not work with higher levels. For those requests done via call, they should go to the system after solving the issue and create the request straightaway. A KPI could be created so you could track that and have a more precise information when you need to get some help from your manager/director.

 

However, these should only be done after focusing on what @Erik Hupje and @Jim Vantyghem have said.

 

Regards,

Raul Martins

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • 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..