×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Maintenance vs. Operations
5

Maintenance vs. Operations

Maintenance vs. Operations

(OP)
Anyone here ever have to deal with a feuding maintenance group vs. operations group?  Each side blames each other for downtime and I'm stuck in the middle trying to reduce the downtime.

Also on a side note, what do people typically consider "allowable" downtime for product changeover, daily PM, etc?  I think we allow too much downtime (1 hr) per shift.

RE: Maintenance vs. Operations

Each situation is different based on the process, tooling, equipment and condition of the equipment. You will have to dig into what is supposed to occur in PM, product changeover and breakdowns. Then document what actually occurs. Get to know the operators they can give you a great deal of information about machine conditions and current problems. In the end operations and maintenance will have to become team players in both maintaining the equipment and production levels. SPC could be a tool for you and operations to monitor quality and possibly machine conditions. This is a big task. Take small bites but be tenacious and don't allow anybody to sidetrack you from your goal unless your boss says so.

Good Luck,
Bill

RE: Maintenance vs. Operations

(OP)
Thanks.  I've already started to dig.  I've asked the operators and the maintenance group separately...and of course it's still the other one's fault.  I've started to ask what is being done and who is doing it and that's where I've hit a road-block...the facility manager wants me to figure it out and tell them what's wrong with the machines, not that the people are poorly trained or something like that.

RE: Maintenance vs. Operations

Continue your digging. What are the machines supposed to be doing ie number of parts per hour, production rate, or tolerances. New equipment is one of the choices to improving operations however getting the most out of your current equipment should be your current goal. Document what is happening, facts will reduce finger pointing and the root cause of the problem will eventually reach the surface. Look for waste. Machine being down due to lack of a operator. PM supplies not being available. Lack of repetitive maintenance items causing delays. Did the operator do something or didn't do something which caused downtime? Get the emotions out of the decision process.

RE: Maintenance vs. Operations

PennStateIE,
Sounds to me like an opportunity to do some applied brainstorming to begin.  I would have the supervisor for each area select one knowledgable worker and sit down with them together and start listing possible causes with the first rule being that this is not a fault finding session but an effort to find causes.  After the first few cross- discipline causes these folks will work into the area that they know best to find possibilities.  As BillPSU says, stick with it, you will get there.
The amazing result to me about these sessions is that these guys will go back to their respective areas and start doing something about the causes on their own initiative.  I think it is something like because they start to see themselves empowered, they are.

Griffy

RE: Maintenance vs. Operations

Start by looking for common breakdown causes. Seems like management needs to decide if maintenance dept is better off working re-active or pro-active and then commit to it.  You can dig all you want and you will see that if maintenance does not have a say in preventive measures then they will always have to work in corrective mode.  Some places function just fine to work correctively but it sounds like maintenance needs to create a preventive maintenance plan for each piece of equipment and train operators what parts of that they need to comply with. Both sides have to realise life will be easier if they work together in solving it.  If training isn't the best answer then procedures would be the next thing necessary.  It is important that written procedure be created to document responsibility and authority.

Fill what's empty. Empty what's full. And scratch where it itches.

RE: Maintenance vs. Operations

I think if you take a negative approach all you're going to get is finger pointing.  Take a positive approach.  Ask everyone what can be done to improve operations and increase up-time.  Maybe offer some reward for the best suggestions.

Jim Treglio
Molecular Metallurgy, Inc.

RE: Maintenance vs. Operations

Been there, done that.  You're at too low of a level on the corporate totem pole to make a cultural change in a company with a dysfunctional culture.  I've seen these type of problems caused by poor management who allow this non-teamwork condition to exist in the first place.

Imagine a football team where the offense is always blaming the defense and vice-versa for the team's consistent losing record.  You can't drive a car if there's friction in the bearings.

I agree with JTreglio, Ignore the blame storming, collect the data, and let the data speak for itself (inefficiencies, lack of authority/delegations/freedom to act, insufficient funding, poor equipment, insufficient personnel, unqualified personnel, poor incoming quality parts, any of a thousand reasons.  This may be an opportunity to "learn up" on some Six Sigma problem solving methodologies and show (through hard data and facts) where the organizational problems really lie.  Then hopefully someone in the senior ranks will recognize (and want to act on) the truth of the matter.

TygerDawg

RE: Maintenance vs. Operations

(OP)
tygerdawg...You hit it on the nose...I'm too far down the corporate totem pole to make this type of corporate change...especially considering I sit in corporate and the facility is a few hours away, no one seems to listen.  Some management have come to accept the downtime and the finger pointing and have been convinced that major downtime is just part of manufacturing.  

I've been thru 6-sigma training and try to utilize the DMAIC process, but without buy in from the appropriate people I seem to just spin my wheels.

Does anyone have any benchmarks on downtime?  I say anything more than 10% is unacceptable, but they routinely accept upwards of 30%.

Thanks!

RE: Maintenance vs. Operations

As appoximate values which can be aimed at with Total Productive Maintenance Nakajima indicates an availability of more than 90%, an efficiency factor (concerns speed losses) of more than 95% and a quality rate of more than 99%.
He shares your claim and also your observation, that it´s often worse...

RE: Maintenance vs. Operations

Maintenance and production are like arteries, at some point up the structural ladder they merge. It is at this merging that you need to sit down with that individual and discuss some philosophies about the operation. It is here that you will discover through investigative probing, the likelyhood of improvement. The journey begins here, and travels back down through the structure, enlisting key members along the way. Yes, you need to talk with operators, maintenance personal, and employ a variety of tools to encourage action. Downtime is poor terminology, as one could agree that a prolonged reduction in efficiencies can be more detrimental than outright stoppages. One must ascertain the capabilities of the process, and the efficiencies required. From there it's an application of fundamentals.

RE: Maintenance vs. Operations

(OP)
Thanks for your comments.  

BertiSon, What do you mean concerns speed losses?  Do you mean that if a machine can run at 60 units per minute, but more parts fail, quality is decreased, etc. running constantly at this speed, the efficiency is hurt?  

On that note, how does an IE go about measuring that?  If I'm told the machine is rated for 100 units per minute, however I'm told that the machine breaks down more often when running at the speed, what would be a good course of action?

Thanks!

RE: Maintenance vs. Operations

A good course of action would be to learn the process and evaluate the shortfalls. That's usually the easy part. The hard part is devising an action plan to overcome the deficiencies, and selling it to the appropriate management level. Make sure your selling to the right person(s) otherwise your efforts are for not.

RE: Maintenance vs. Operations

I agree with automatic2 on this, but I would suggest that rather than try to sell your action plan to management, sell them hiring an outside consultant to review the situation and prepare an action plan, even going to the extent of finding and recommending a specific consultant that you know you can work with or that you know can do the job.  You see, management almost never listens to their own staff, whom they hired and know are competent.  Rather they listen to consultants about whom they know nothing.  Now, odds are they won't hire the competent consultant that you selected (if you do, mission accomplished), but an incompetent one.  Now, you make sure the consultant knows of the work that you've done, but don't push it on him -- jsut give it to him as "background" material.  Invariably, rather than doing any real work, he'll rewrite your material, since he's not capable of doing the work himself (or too lazy).  Now your action plan can be implemented because management can't deny a plan that they paid money to have developed.

Jim Treglio
Molecular Metallurgy, Inc.

RE: Maintenance vs. Operations

(OP)
Jim,
You don't know how true that is...and very funny!

You know how they got the word "CONSULTANT"?  Combined Con and Insult.

Thanks for the tip...Maybe I should start my own consulting firm, convince management to pay that firm and then give them the same report I already gave them.

RE: Maintenance vs. Operations

"Those that can do, do.
Those that cannot do, teach.
Those that cannot teach, consult."

"Wildfires are dangerous, hard to control, and economically catastrophic."
"Fixed in the next release" should replace "Product First" as the PTC slogan.

Ben Loosli
CAD/CAM System Analyst
Ingersoll-Rand

RE: Maintenance vs. Operations

I appreciate your problem.
I have some machines which need a lot of maintenance. I have asked the production manager to schedule in two days of downtime per machine for an overhaul. He said "No, we can't afford the downtime".
Well, if one breaks down and it takes a week to fix he'd have to live with it. He can afford the downtime. He just doesn't want to.
 So....I'm going to tell him that it IS being shut down, and I AM going to pinch some of your staff to help me.
He can't see the bigger picture, but you can bet that if there was a breakdown, I'll be blamed for not fixing it.

I've also pointed out to the senior management that regular maintenance which is supposed to be carried out by the production staff isn't being done (filter changes and the like). The claim they are, but are lying. So the senior management have okayed either surrepticiously marking filters to proove they've not been changed or starting a paperwork scheme whereby filters have to be signed of as changed and thus a degree of responsibility created.

What I have discovered though is that there are some employees who DO care, and when they see that regular maintenance is better, increases overall production and thus helps their bonuses, are keen on carrying it out (and ratting out their skiving boss to boot!)

Without knowing more details about your exact situation it's hard to comment on where the blame lies.
It rarely lies totally with one group though, and as has been said, the absolute best thing to try to achieve is to get everyone pulling in the same direction!

"I love deadlines. I love the whooshing noise they make as they go past." Douglas Adams

RE: Maintenance vs. Operations

2
Hi,

Production vs. Maintenance- who is reponsible for the downtime?

1. Machine Breakdown causes:
    a. Heat   b. Vibration

   Preventive Maintenance reduces breakdowns caused by heat
   and vibration.
  
   Setup -  Inspects Machine prior to use and reports
            deficiencies to Supervisor. Supervisor logs
            deficiency and Maintenance schedule to fix and
            fix according to risk.

  Operator - Inspect machine operations after it has been
             setup. Report any problem to supervisor.
             (procedure same as before)

  Plant Manager and Maintenance Manager meet to review
  P.M. schedule and Repair Schedule. Production Control
  is in meeting and reports on hot jobs and production to
  inventory. Plant Manager verifies with sales department
  on deliveries promises and safety stock in inventory of
  the part scheduled for production. Maintenance Manager
  estimates downtime required and Plant Manager and Maintenance Manager agree on when to schedule work. Weekends only for critical work ( too expensive).  There is always overcapacity calculated into production lines to allow for scheduled maintenance. What is the problem in your facility? I think you are being taken for a ride or budgets are not adequate to fix it right the first time.

an old Corporate I.E.

RE: Maintenance vs. Operations

1st Get your facts.  What is the current maintenance schedule.  Do the procedures say who does the preventative maintenace and when, is it the Operators or Maintenance. Does anyone have to sign to say they have done it. Without everyone agreeing and understanding their responsibilities you wont be able to go anywhere.

2nd Calculate your Overall Equipment Effectiveness.  This is Utilisation x Speed x Quality.  From the above this appears to be 70% up time x 60% of potential speed x 95% for quality. => OEE =0.7x0.6x0.95 =40% You have got a lot of hidden factory out there. This last figure might help with your arguement to get some help in.

Good luck

RE: Maintenance vs. Operations

In reading all the posts the one thing you must remember is you are dealing with people and they must all "feel" they are not being ignored. I have worked on both sides of the fence and have found if you make each group feel they are making things better they will ,sometimes unknowingly, start to help each other.

For this to occur you must let everyone in on all the informtion you are getting from both groups.

 If it is possible to get the "leader" of each dept to sit with you say 1 hour a week and just make a punch list of "breakdowns" and "repairs completed" and "work stoppages for unknown reasons".

  I am sure you will see a pattern.

#1 the person in charge must be willing to make changes to make things better otherwise all is for not.

   Joe

 

RE: Maintenance vs. Operations

You guys are brutal on the consultant....funny, but brutal.  When working in a situation as PennStateIE has proposed, I often feel like I am hired just so they can have someone to blame.  Upper level management believes they can bring someone in to tell them their problems that they already see but can't get anyone to admit to and then they can do some teambuilding by having everyone gang up on the consultant in a big meeting that lets everyone leave with a little boost in moral.  Often I end up being more of a therapist and sounding board, but that may be exactly what is needed. I try to be extremely upfront with clients and let them know very clearly that you have to want to change to be able to change.  You can lead a horse to water, drag him in and hold his head under, but.........

In these situations, I lobby strongly for management to pick one product/process/etc. and work on that.  Often it is a new product being launched and I get them to put everyone fully behind "we are going to do this one differently".  That way you narrow the scope and focus on getting that one product/process right.  Then you compare it to the other products around it, and hopefully everyone begins to see that the "new way" is better.  Just make sure to involve EVERYONE in the new way so they fell like they had some input.

ZCP
www.phoenix-engineer.com

RE: Maintenance vs. Operations

The pissing contest between, maintence and manufacturing dept's is really common and will cause you many headaches.I have went through the "ropes" in the previous posts to remedy the same issue and what I finally came to is very easy. This solution worked well for a major machine tool manufacturer. Put the person in charge of the mfg. department in charge of the maintenence dept. as well, this will eliminate the pissing contest altogether. Otherwise, ask the maintenence dept if they would like you to hire a couple of people to work weekends and nights to handle the task at hand, and tell them that when things slow down that you will keep the people you "like", its up to them. I have used this a last resort to bring a group back into "focus". I'm sure not all will agree with my solution to the problem, but it works well after the other attempts failed.  

RE: Maintenance vs. Operations

Regarding PennStateIE question in relation to
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anyone here ever have to deal with a feuding maintenance group vs. operations group?  Each side blames each other for downtime and I'm stuck in the middle trying to reduce the downtime.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yes, and at the heart of the issue IMHO I found divergent objects, constraints and sometimes mixed philosopies as to how to deal with downtime.

Regarding PennStateIE question in relation to
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Also on a side note, what do people typically consider "allowable" downtime for product changeover, daily PM, etc?  I think we allow too much downtime (1 hr) per shift.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The word "allowable" is used in production planning to design buffer stock levels and costing in unplanned breakdowns.

Before the days of lean production when machine reliablity varied greatly it was common practise to design processes based on how longs things took to fix.
This I remember being called "Breakdown maintenance philosophy". Now many orginisations still practise this method for there maintenance, and you might say is the defacto philosophy.

I can't emphise more, that before trying to tackle downtime issues, that an organisation understands clearly, which level of maintenance it subscribes to, and more importantly understands the benefits and cons of each philosophy. If the philosophy is of a higher order, the simple questions need to be asked. 1. Is there sufficent resources to do the PM related work and is there enough time production time released to do the PM etc.

I've done and seen grad's stand around machines for hours identifying problem with machines, doing perato analysis etc. All good stuff but if the philosophy isn't clearly spelled out, results in poor cost control.

As yourself what is the  breakdown opportunity cost? Once you know this figure, ie $15,000per minute for a automotive body shop, $100 per minute for a 600 ton press stamp parts out etc. You have power to change things. When you say that breakdown cost us 20minutes nobody really listens, but tell them it cost $300,000 off the bottom line in sales costing the company $150,000 managers start to take notice. If you've ever been at the centre of a car plant running dry of  bodies you'll know how quickly your pay packet looks positively small.

Anyway my point is "every thing should be costed". If your going to buffer a process up, know the cost of running the buffer. Don't just leave it as an unknown. Remember your Process flow diagrams, put a cost on each box. Then assess its probability of failure.

Another thing to watch out for, "The Maintenance manager trying to save money in the maintenance department" I've seen this trick performed by Maintenance managers, one after the other. What they do, to earn their promotion, they cut PM, cost any way they can. They look good on paper, they have saved money. Well after between 1 year and 3 years they move on, leaving a run down facility to the next incumbent.

Maintence dynamics is very tricky, I had the pleasure of working for a wide variety of companies, and the thing that I found was nearly all didn't use risk analysis with costings in there decision making. Take the good old PFMEA, how many of you have put a dollar values against each of the factors? I bet very few. But there is a cost of failure, there is a cost of insurance against that failure etc.

As an IE the trick IMHO is not always to go head to head, but rather to direct the energy. In every case the easiest way has been to put a dollar value against that time study.


Regarding PennStateIE comments in relation to
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm too far down the corporate totem pole to make this type of corporate change...especially considering I sit in corporate and the facility is a few hours away, no one seems to listen.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 I say, "Money talks", times cheap, as an IE thats your greatest weapon. If you don't know what it cost, your only giving half the picture.

But a word of caution, you can fall fowl of manager above you feeling treatened by their incompedence or by your insight. (This happened to me, cost me a nice position)
So before your head down this road read "Conduct Expected, The Unwritten Rules for a successful Business Career" by William Lareau 1985.
It not common sense, it survival. Its a great read. The bit I want to paraphrase, is present the report to your manager, with comments in it commending how brillent your manager was to put you onto this. Let them get the credit for giving you the opportunity to find the potential cost savings. Let him them decide the time and place to push it up the line.

Finally be real careful not to blame anybody, in everybodies eyes they all think there doing the right thing. Say rather it a unidentified opportunity with really great payback times. Make people feel good about their work. Work IMHO is as much about politics as it is about good engineering. I don't think anybody wants to go to work fealing bad.

I've enjoyed thinking about this issue and hope I have helped you other reader,

best regards,

Joewski
Melbourne, Australia

 

RE: Maintenance vs. Operations

Operations and maintanance allways blame each other. It's typical ... when they don't have clear reponsibilities and established team culture.

Clear responsibilities means that it must be formally known which part of downtime "belongs" to operations, which part to maintenance.

In practice that will cover say 70-80% of downtime for which responsibility can be distinguished(in the beginning of your organisational efforts; later, when you properly develop your planned maintenance program and operation procedures this percentage can come up to 90-95%).

For the rest of such downtime (it means 20-30% in the beginning) - the rest will be a little more complex situations/problems for which you cannot decide. For that part of downtime, both groups are responsible. Team culture must be established which also means that both groups will have lower salary next month because some problem is not resolved AND because they didn't cooperate with each other enough.

I talked about responsibility because you mentioned blame (for which I know it is often present), but this is worst-case scenario. Normaly, emphasis must be put on improvement opportunities and encouriging positive behaviour, not on blame.

Acceptable downtime for changeover? That is clear - the lowest time you need to do it properly without quality or output suffering.

Your figure 1 hour per shift realy looks arbitrary to me. You must develop procedures for continual optimisation of maintenance program and changeover procedures. This can start simply with regular weekly meetings which gather people with  the best knowledge of particular machinery (operations AND maintenance together) and asking them to analyze procedures and give suggestions. Every week. Particular experience and good overall technical knowledge about subject is necessary, general talk doesn't help here.

RE: Maintenance vs. Operations

This is why some organizations have maintenance reporting to mfg operations. Manufacturing must have the top authority when problem solving on the shop floor. Maintenance must be subservient.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources