Wat is het belang van de asset voor uw bedrijf, welke impact heeft de asset als het gaat over de opdrachtgrootte, of afhankelijkheid voor het bedrijf?
Was er voor het afsluiten van het onderhoudscontract enige informatie over de onderhoudsbehoeften van de assets? Bijvoorbeeld eerdere onderhoudshistorie, of onderhoudseisen opgegeven door de bouwer/producent van de assets. Is dit ook gebruikt voor het opstellen van het contract?
Was er voor het afsluiten van het contract enige informatie over de failure rate van de assets, bijvoorbeeld eerdere historie, of betrouwbaarheid opgegeven door de bouwer van de assets? Is dit op enige manier meegenomen in het onderhoudscontract?
Contractuele aspecten
Is er een vereiste beschikbaarheid van de assets besproken in het contract? wanneer dit niet het geval is, zou dit zinvol kunnen zijn?
Zijn de kosten van downtime voor het afsluiten van het contract bepaald, en zijn deze in het contract opgenomen als boetes of compensatie? Als dit niet het geval is zou dit zinvol zijn voor deze asset?
Is de looptijd van het contract van invloed op het onderhoud de assets, en op welke manier? Zijn onderhoud strategieën zoals preventief onderhoud en correctief onderhoud bij het opstellen van het contract bepaald, wanneer dit niet het geval is zou dit eventueel beter zijn als dit in het contract wordt opgenomen?
Zijn er eventuele vervangingsonderdelen voor de asset op voorraad, en welke partij is daar verantwoordelijk voor?
Welke partij voert de inspecties uit, en is er afgesproken hoe vaak en op welke manier die inspecties worden uitgevoerd/ wat de kwaliteit van die inspecties moet zijn?
42 Risico’s
Is er bij het onderhoud van deze asset weleens onduidelijkheid over het onderhoud, welk onderhoud door welke partij zou moeten gebeuren, of andere in het contract gemaakte afspraken? Kan dit grote gevolgen hebben voor het bedrijf?
Is er bij deze asset tijdens de contract periode opnieuw onderhandeld over het onderhoud/prijs? Wat was daarvoor de aanleiding? Waren er meerdere aanbieders?
Hoe worden de contractprijs en onderhoudskosten bepaald, is hierbij vaak een verschil tussen de verwachte en werkelijke kosten?
Bij het uitbesteden van activiteiten zoals onderhoud, worden weleens kosten vergeten, is het bij deze asset voorgekomen, en is dit een groot risico bij deze asset of zijn de te verwachten kostenposten gemakkelijk te bepalen?
Is door het uitbesteden van onderhoud de controle op het onderhoud door de eigenaar van de asset verminderd, en hoe wordt hier mee omgegaan?
Is er sprake van een verschil in verwachte kwaliteit en geleverde kwaliteit van onderhoud? Zijn hierover eisen vastgelegd in het contract?
Wat is de invloed van uitbesteden van onderhoud op de innovatie in het onderhoud bijvoorbeeld de onderhoudsmogelijkheden/verbeterde inspectie mogelijkheden?
Komt het voor dat onderhoud niet kan worden gedaan omdat de onderhoudende partij niet voldoende capaciteit heeft om het onderhoud op dat moment uit te voeren, voor bijvoorbeeld correctief onderhoud? Zijn hierover afspraken gemaakt in het contract?
Zijn er verschillen met in contracten afgesproken onderhoud, en onderhoud dat in de praktijk wordt gedaan?
Wordt kennis in het bedrijf minder door het uitbesteden van al het onderhoud? Op welke manier wordt daarmee omgegaan?
Wanneer een asset anders/meer of minder wordt gebruikt dan van te voren is afgesproken, is dit van invloed op het benodigde onderhoud, zijn hier afspraken over gemaakt en welke problemen kunnen daarmee ontstaan?
43 Bekende risico’s bij uitbesteden, (vooral naar andere landen), zijn politieke veranderingen en exchange-rate schommelingen, spelen deze problemen bij het onderhoud van deze asset? Contract type
Door contractvormen kunnen onduidelijkheden ontstaan over verantwoordelijkheden, en kan een stimulans voor innovatie of performance worden verminderd. Is de huidige contractvorm geschikt voor dit type asset, zou een andere contractvorm de risico’s verminderen en/of ook de kosten laaghouden? Welke contractvorm zou dit zijn?
Hieronder staan die risico’s van onderhoudscontracten uit literatuur, zijn er risico’s die niet in deze lijst staan maar wel van toepassing op de asset?
Risico’s
- Minimalisitisch uitvoering van onderhoud, voor de volledige prijs - Afhankelijkheid van één onderhoudspartij
- Bepaling van prijs contract
- Verborgen kosten (transitiekosten, extra managementkosten)
- Verminderde controle (op exacte uitvoering van de onderhoudswerkzaamheden) - Kwaliteitsrisico’s (reputatierisico, door slechte kwaliteit van onderhoud)
- Verminderde innovatie (doordat kosten, doorberekend kunnen worden)
- Capaciteitsrisico’s (voor direct noodzakelijk correctief onderhoud, te weinig personeel) - Verminderde in-house kennis (doordat partij zelf het onderhoud niet uitvoert wordt
kennis van onderhoud zelf minder)
- Veranderende marktomstandigheden. (hierdoor kan gebruik van asset veranderen meer/minder)
- Politieke veranderingen (wanneer partij in ander land zit) - Wisselkoers risico’s (wanneer partij in ander land zit)
44 Hieronder staat een lijst van contractuele aspecten, zijn er nog aspecten niet genoemd in de lijst hieronder die wel een rol spelen voor deze asset bij tijdens het opstellen van het onderhoudscontract of tijdens de onderhoudsperiode voor deze asset?
Maintenance performance - Availability/Downtime
- Reliability (hoe vaak de asset niet operationeel kan zijn, als gevolg van verstoringen) - Response time (tijd die verstrijkt voordat begonnen wordt aan reparatie)
- Repair time System caracteristics
- Time horizon of contract (contractduur) - Repair options (bijv vervangen of repareren)
- Aging system (Een hogere leeftijd van de asset leidt tot grotere onderhoudsbehoefte) - Criticality/impact (de invloed die een asset op het bedrijf heeft)
- Failure rate (mate waarin de assets correctief onderhoud nodig heeft) Cost elements
- Contractor profit (winstmarge voor onderhoudende partij) - Maintenance costs
- Operating costs (gebruikskosten voor assets)
- Cost of downtime (kosten/misgelopen inkomsten die ontstaan wanneer asset niet kan worden gebruikt)
- Inspection costs - Repair cost
- Cost of failure (kosten van gevolgen die ontstaan wanneer de asset kapot gaat bijv. gesprongen leiding)
- Spareparts ownership/pay (welke partij de reserveonderdelen in bezit heeft) - Maintenancestrategy (preventive, corrective, condition-based)
- Quality of maintenance (mate waarin wordt voldaan aan algemene normen, om problemen te voorkomen)
- Maintenance frequency (hoevaak onderhoud wordt uitgevoerd)
- Periodic replacement (asset bevat onderdelen die na bepaalde tijd vervangen moeten worden)
- Run to failure - Inspection interval Control instruments
- Availability/Reliability penalties (boetes voor niet voldoen aan beschikbaarheidseisen) - Downtime compensation (compensatie voor de kosten/misgelopen inkomsten
45
II. Interview analysis’s GSP
Analysis interview Medium voltage power supply network - GSP Critical value of asset
- Consequential damage is very limited - Acceptance of downtime is middling - Asset is extra service, no dependency
LOW
Important factors of maintenance contracts for Groningen Seaports
- Legislation is important because that requires a certain level of maintenance, technical supervision on installation.
- Availability of engineers, there was a failure and there was no personnel available to fix the failure.
- Responsibility over maintenance condition of asset. Outsourced party had no responsibility for the condition of the asset, they only perform a repair job.
- Contract period is important to fulfil legislation for long period.
- Reference inspection at start of contract, to check what installation condition is and what is needed for that installation
- Quality of inspections determined in legislation (NEN 3840)
- Clarity of party that has to (responsible for) operate and maintain installation. - Contract price
- Control on maintenance increased by outsourced inspections, because the only maintenance was corrective repairs, before outsourcing contract.
- Contract improved responsiveness of contractor, because job is not placed at end of queue.
Contract risks at Groningen Seaports - Response time for fixing failures.
- Responsibility for failures, i.e. maintenance condition
- Extra costs for performing maintenance, no knowledge for determination of costs. - Extra management outsourcing costs, not determined and not considered, contract
management time needed. No cost allocation.
46 Contract type
- Searching for other contract type, because there is low knowledge about asset, and GSP does not want worries about it. No risks. Looking for transfer possibilities ownership to other party.
FMEA
- Legislation for Mandatory supervision
- Availability can be worthwhile when importance of asset increases.
- Downtime is not important, clients do not complain if is no power available for a while. - Preventive and corrective maintenance not important, happens only on IR (Installation
responsible) advise.
47 Analysis interview Public lightening network – GSP
Critical value of asset
- Dysfunctionality of a part of network is not that bad. - It should work for safety of road users.
- It is important that lights work, but it is no disaster it doesn’t for a while. Low
Important factors of maintenance contracts for Groningen Seaports
- Inspection moments planned in contract, in dark winter periods, because the lightening network is then most needed.
- Failures fixed in a specified time period, 3 days.
- Availability, not included in contract if not reasonably measurable
- Old, bad maintained assets are more difficult to outsource because of a maintenance backlog
- Decreased maintenance costs as result of outsourcing.
- Material and labour prices determined and described in contract and indexed for inflations etc.
- Response time is important to know when repairs can be expected and to force contracts to perform then in a reasonable time.
- Maintenance condition improved after outsourcing (however there were no inspections before outsourcing, only corrective repairs)
- Penalties for reliability must be high enough to trigger action/motivate from contractor, or might be left out of contract since this may harm a trust relation.
Contract risks at Groningen Seaports
- Maintenance backlog hinders outsourcing possibilities, because contractors fear for unexpected, or difficult maintainable assets.
- Technical knowledge of assets, may increase as a result of outsourcing. Contract type
48 FMEA
- Added value of complete maintenance report is low, if not used as information. - Penalties for reliability must be high enough to trigger action/motivate from contractor,
or might be left out of contract since this may harm a trust relation. Otherwise they add no value.
49 Analysis interview Public Compressed air and nitrogen pipelines – GSP
Critical value of asset
- Delivery of nitrogen to customers of GSP, important settlement condition for new companies.
- Existent companies are highly dependent on the pipeline. - Production of several companies stops, if pipeline is out of order.
HIGH
Important factors of maintenance contracts for Groningen Seaports
- Technical maintenance needs predetermined, before contracting out. But not required availability for customers. The maintenance needs were based on technical reliability, and not on actual failure rate of comparable systems or on desired availabilities. Therefore maintenance needs were under estimated.
- Minimization of failure rate by using materials that need little maintenance. Such as cathodes protection.
- Importance of availability of pipeline was underestimated.
- After maintenance period, 10 years, the lifetime of 30 years should be reachable. - Preventive maintenance and checks on small parts.
- Response time, is important for this asset because downtime should be a short as possible. But was not included in current contract, there is no instrument to force action. - Maintenance was not monitored by GSP during contract period therefore, it was unknown what maintenance was actually performed. This came up when initial contractor was bankrupt. And there were maintenance reports missing. Therefore condition of pipeline was unknown. Maintenance reports are assumed as desirable for GSP in order to monitor the maintenance.
- Level of quality of service, there is no insight in maintenance condition, need request for reports. And measurements of cathode protection were sometimes forgotten. - Planning of inspections, not only yearly but also at what time in the year, otherwise the
interval can fluctuate too much.
- Maintenance contract should unburden the GSP management from maintenance efforts. Now the maintenance is only reactive and it is desirable that it is proactive, which leads to more unburdening.
- Availability of material or engineers to perform maintenance jobs, it happened multiple times that maintenance was delayed because of lack of materials or engineers. - Coordination with involved parties for suitable moment of repairs and inspections. This
50 production companies to plan their production interruptions. To avoid unexpected or extra stoppages of pipeline.
- Critical spare parts on stock to avoid longer interruptions than necessary. Contract risks at Groningen Seaports
- Cathode protection, needs a good maintenance plan, to prevent unnecessary maintenance.
- Importance/criticality for dependent parties should be well identified, to determine maintenance needs.
- Consequential losses because of unavailability of pipelines are high and responsibility of availability is therefore very risky. If responsibility lies on a small contractor and a failure occurs, which results in a availability below requirements. The contractor may face bankruptcy because of large payments for consequential losses. And their cash reserves can be so small that they are not actually able to cover the risks.
- Preventive maintenance is included in contract, but corrective maintenance is not included in maintenance contract. This is a trigger for contractor for underperforming preventive maintenance to be able to perform more corrective repairs.
- If use of pipeline changes, pipeline is used above capacity for example this leads to increased maintenance. If pipeline is out of use, the pipeline receptive for corrosion and therefore needs extra maintenance, pressure on pipeline or more protection. Contract type
- Contract is not comprehensive now. Only preventive maintenance inspections, are included. Contract it is too concise there are no clear agreements about time intervals of inspections, and responsibilities. Furthermore repairs are not included and need action and approval of GSP for every repair. Contract does not unburden management. And can trigger underperforming because bad preventive maintenance (fail of cathode protection) results in extra corrective repairs which means extra profit for contractor.
FMEA
51 Analysis interview Steam pipeline – GSP
Critical value of asset
- Important for settlement condition for new companies - Existent companies are highly dependent on the pipeline
- If pipeline cannot be used, production of several companies stops
- High number of failures harms reputation of GSP, can cause distrust in user agreements of new to build facilitating assets.
HIGH
Important factors of maintenance contracts for Groningen Seaports
- Availability, needs to be as high as possible, and a stoppage should be predictable, users can then finish a whole batch before stoppage.
- Covering downtime costs and fees lead to extreme high contract price - Maintenance condition should be up to date at end of contract period
- Communication model which indicates what communication should be done by which party, and which party is allowed to make maintenance decisions
- Amount ant required spare parts that should be on stock
- Inspection, what will be inspected and results of inspections plus maintenance reports Contract risks at Groningen Seaports
- Availability for maintenance, before contract closing 10 days period for maintenance was assumed as acceptable period. But it is unacceptable for users of the pipeline now, it should be available every moment.
- Notified body inspects installation every 4 years, the installation should meet legislation requirements at those times.
- Improper use of assets by users/clients can cause damage to assets which contractor therefore refuses to repair at own costs
- A package deal, design construct and maintain including response times, fees and compensations, reduce the number of contractors willing to perform maintenance, i.e. outsourcing becomes difficult and reduces possible price competition, which leads to higher contract price.
- Maximum capacity is used, which was not expected, therefore maintenance costs increased, because other parts or technics are needed.
- Client/user expectations of maintenance are different than expectations of contractor.
52 - Contract type was design construct and maintain, with full downtime compensation included. Which led to a very limited number of contractors willing to perform job, therefore price competition was not possible. It could be improved by keeping contract interesting for multiple contractors which may lead to more price competition. FMEA
53 Analysis interview Quay – GSP
Critical value of asset
- Quay is for shipment of coals to a power plant, is it is not available there is a chance that the power plant has to stop.
MEDIUM
Important factors of maintenance contracts for Groningen Seaports
- Availability is important for quay, because there has to be a constant delivery of coals. - Condition after contract period should be decent and well-maintained.
- More control on maintenance condition by outsourcing, because condition is checked by GSP and by the contractor.
- Contract should unburden GSP management from maintenance Contract risks at Groningen Seaports
- GSP gets a claim when the quay is not available at times that it should be.
- Confusion about maintenance responsibilities, where installations of different companies merge.
- Damage caused by third parties.
- Asset is used differently than expected before, the other ship types cause more damage to the quay.
- Corrective repairs of damage caused by third parties, must meet maintenance standards of contractor, otherwise maintenance can be refused. This limits the possibilities to outsourcing those kind of jobs.
Contract type
The contract type is seen as unsuitable, too expensive and too much involvement needed. FMEA
54
III. Interview analysis’s contractors
Analysis interview Medium voltage power supply network – Contractor A
Critical value of asset
- Not dependent on the job, because it enhances only a small amount of total work package of company. But GSP is important client of company for other job types. Willingness for cooperation is high.
LOW
Important factors of maintenance contracts for Groningen Seaports
- Maintenance requirements are important because contractor is responsible for events on installation.
- Reference inspection to determine what is needed to meet that norm.
- Failure rate decreased by inspections which are performed for safety and continuity. - Experience to determine the maintenance needed.
- No required availability determined, there is no interest in it for us, and it is nearly impossible to calculate costs for that.
- Contract period
- Report of maintenance actions, indicates how thorough (quality) the inspections were. - Dependence on third party, if service of third parties increases this will be passed
through.
- Multiple suppliers of maintenance services.
- Control on maintenance condition increases by outsourcing. Because in-house maintenance departments tend to postpone maintenance.
- Innovation increases by outsourcing because of specialism and focus of party in outsourced area.
Contract risks at Groningen Seaports
- Specific required stock for custom made products
- Change of maintenance philosophy over time, may result in unprofitable contracts - Reduced in-house knowledge, there is sometimes a second opinion needed to judge
some proposals. A certain level of knowledge is needed to be able to outsource well. - Changed use of installation, above capacity, under responsibility of contractor.
55 Contract type
- Searching for other ways to deal with the assets, more responsibilities, and transfer of ownership is considered.
FMEA
- Safety is more important than continuity and continuity is more important than failure rate.
- Availability is not important, there is no interest in it for us and, costs or amounts are nearly impossible to calculate.
- Contract period is not important, because maintenance cycle is 5 years, therefore maintenance will be repeated every 5 years. And will not affect maintenance strategy.
56 Analysis interview Public lightening network - Contractor B
Critical value of asset
- Not important volume is 1% of work. - No dependency on the work
- More interesting for prestige, to be active in the seaports sector LOW
Important factors of maintenance contracts for Groningen Seaports - Lower cost price, fixed agreements about repairs
- Only functional inspections, no qualitative inspection, and corrective repairs
- Response time, maximum 3 days to maintain image level of GSP, gives contractor opportunity to combine work.
- Inspection for corrective repairs
- Contract period, influences costs for maintenance, when service level increases, importance of contract period increases because in an aging system more effort is needed to maintain a high service level. And also a short period leads to high price a because investments have to be recovered in a shorter period