Adopting a maintenance strategy to improve maintenance effectiveness

(1)

Adopting a maintenance strategy to improve maintenance

effectiveness

(TPH)

Author:

Tim Rainier Groote

Student number:

S3785483

Course name:

Master Thesis

Supervisor Rug:

Dr. E. Croonen

(2)

Acknowledgements

(3)

Abstract

Purpose – Adopt a problem-solving research approach to evaluate the current maintenance strategy

and the effectiveness of the given maintenance strategy within TPH. The interrelationship between the maintenance strategy and the effectiveness of the maintenance strategy is researched. In conclusion, recommendations are given.

Design/methodology/approach – The frameworks are developed using 1. The maintenance strategy

decision elements formulated by Pintelon, Pinjala and Vereecke, and 2. The four-stages framework on manufacturing strategy from Hayes and Wheelwright. The first model is used to research the

fulfillment of the maintenance strategy. The second model is used to test the effectiveness of the given maintenance strategy. To acquire a clear understanding of the frameworks and their usefulness the topic is elaborated in the literature review.

Findings – The fulfillment of the current maintenance strategy of TPH is rated as a maintenance

strategy with low effectivity. The interviewees suggested various improvements in order to increase the maintenance strategy effectiveness. The fulfillment of maintenance is not standardized throughout the departments of TPH. The findings derived from the results are presented in the recommendation section.

Practical implications – The maintenance strategy decision elements help to fulfill the various

elements of TPH’s maintenance strategy. Given the current position of maintenance, the four-stages framework used in this paper suggests the strategic direction to progress for long-term effectiveness. It helps in stimulating managers to manage maintenance with a strategic mindset.

Limitations – Two respondents have given feedback about the accessibility of the questionnaire. They

thought the questions were difficult to understand. This could have influence on the stage they were assigned to. From the fifteen respondents, eight respondents are assigned to a stage and seven respondents could not be assigned to a stage. From the fifteen potential interviewees eleven participated to the interview. Interviewees from every department participated, however for some departments only one interviewee participated. This makes it hard to compare internal results for the departments.

Keywords: Maintenance, Maintenance Strategy, Maintenance strategy decision elements, Four-stages

model

(4)

1. Introduction

TP is a company providing various kinds of packaging. The current research focuses on TPH which is a manufacturing plant that serves the Nutrition market. TP has set up an improvement program called TP improvement program in order to continuously improve the organization’s activities. TP improvement program was introduced as part of the long-term strategy. Maintenance is one of the focus areas from the TP improvement program. Although maintenance is one of TPH’s focus areas, there is limited knowledge available about TPH’s maintenance strategy and the effectiveness of the strategy. There is a maintenance strategy, however, the maintenance strategy is pursued limited in the daily activities. The goal of the current study is to map the current maintenance strategy, the effectiveness of the current maintenance strategy and to provide recommendations to TPH on how to further improve the effectiveness of the maintenance strategy.

A maintenance strategy is a systematic approach to upkeep the facilities and equipment. It involves identification, researching and execution of repairs, replace and inspect decisions and is concerned with formulating the best life plan for each unit of the plant (Kelly, 1997a). In the literature there are multiple definitions of maintenance strategy. Researchers have used divergent approaches to define a maintenance strategy. Some researchers only use maintenance policies to describe the maintenance strategy (Bevilacqua & Braglia, 2000), while others consider maintenance strategy as a mix of elements like maintenance policies, backup equipment and equipment upgrades (Kevin & Penlesky, 1988). An extensive framework that can be used to map the maintenance strategy is developed by Pintelon, Pinjala and Vereecke (2006).

The framework of Pintelon et al. (2006) is defined as a series of unified and integrated pattern of decisions made in four structural and six infrastructure decision elements. The four structural decision elements can be seen as maintenance resources. They are termed as structural, because decisions made in those areas are generally assumed to be fixed. The six infrastructure elements can be viewed as maintenance management elements. The decision elements in the infrastructure are assumed to be more flexible when it comes to adjusting these elements. These structural and infrastructure elements are interrelated and are used as a descriptive tool in order to determine the current state of affairs when it comes to the maintenance strategy (Pintelon et al., 2006). By using the framework of Pintelon et al. (2006) it is possible to map the fulfillment of TPH’s current maintenance strategy. However, it does not describe the effectiveness of the maintenance strategy. Knowledge about the effectiveness of the current maintenance strategy is important for the prospective direction of the maintenance strategy. That is why the current research combines the usage of the framework of Pintelon et al. (2006) with the four-stages framework of Hayes and Wheelwright (1984).

(6)

by Chase and Hayes (1991). The model helps to map the most important operational factors that must be addressed in the operations strategy formulation process, to position the organization’s operations in relation to the organization’s operations of its competitors and to provide clear answers to the key strategic audit questions of ‘where are we now?’ and ‘where do we want to be?’ (Hayes & Wheelwright, 1984). The model tests the effectiveness of a particular maintenance strategy for a particular unit or organization in overall by placing it in one of the four-stages. The higher the stage, the more effective the maintenance strategy.

The current research is a problem-solving research. When doing a problem-solving research, it is important to identify and analyze a problem for a company. The aim of this research is to examine the current maintenance strategy for TPH. In order to determine how the decision elements of the maintenance strategy are set, the framework of Pintelon et al. (2006) is used. The fulfillment of the maintenance strategy decision elements is mapped by using information derived from the interviews with employees of TPH. The second aim of this research is to determine the effectivity of the current maintenance strategy. This is done by implementing the four-stages framework of Hayes and Wheelwright (1984). The questionnaire that is related to the four-stages model assesses a range of speciﬁc operational factors as well as the strategic role of the operation overall. The questionnaire is conducted with employees of TPH. Finally, a link is made between the maintenance strategy decision elements, the effectiveness of the maintenance strategy and the interrelationship between the maintenance strategy decision elements and the effectiveness of the maintenance strategy. The link is made in order to understand the underlying mechanisms between the decision elements of the maintenance strategy and the effectiveness of the maintenance strategy. This leads to the following research question:

Research Question

‘’What is the current maintenance strategy of TPH, how effective is the maintenance strategy and how is it possible to increase the maintenance effectivity?’’

The current research is divided into three steps. Figure 1 on the next page shows an overview that visualizes the steps.

1. The first step is to map the current maintenance strategy of TPH by means of the maintenance strategy decision elements of Pintelon et al. (2006). The maintenance strategy decision elements will give insight in the fulfillment of the maintenance strategy. The current maintenance strategy is analyzed for production departments 1, 2 and 3 and staff department 1. These departments provide maintenance proceedings and are heavily relying on maintenance.

(7)

effectiveness of the maintenance strategy. The current maintenance strategy effectiveness is analyzed for production departments 1, 2 and 3 and staff departments 1 and 2.

3. The third step is to link the maintenance decision elements from step one to the effectiveness of the maintenance strategy from step two and check whether and how they are interrelated. The in-depth insights originated from the interviews are compared to the results of the questionnaire. The main questions for step three are: ‘’Which decision elements have the largest influence on the maintenance

strategy effectiveness and why?’’, and ‘’How is it possible to increase the maintenance effectivity?’’.

The findings are compared to the literature in order to understand the underlying mechanisms and to strengthen the recommendations.

Figure 1: The steps of the current research

The thesis opens with a literature review. In the literature review the definition of maintenance, maintenance strategies, the maintenance strategy decision elements framework and the four-stages model are discussed. The literature review includes existing frameworks that are used in the current research. Secondly, the methodology is presented. The methodology includes the case of analysis, the problem statement, the method of data collection and the data analysis. The results are then discussed. The conclusion gives an answer to the research question. Finally, the thesis ends with the discussion and limitations of the current research.

(8)

The literature review starts with explaining existing literature relevant to the subject of the current research. In addition, the conceptual model is represented in this chapter.

2.1 What is maintenance?

The literature defines maintenance in multiple ways. Definitions and the meaning of maintenance collected from various literatures are as given below. Maintenance has been defined as the combination of technical and associated administrative actions intended to retain an item or system in, or restore it to, a state in which it can perform its required function (ISO 14224, 2006). Further, Dhillon (2002) defined maintenance as all actions appropriate for retaining an item/part/equipment in or restoring it to a given condition. Proper maintenance needs technical skills, techniques, and methods to properly utilize the assets like factories, power plants, vehicles, equipment’s and machines. The key objective of maintenance is to ensure system function (availability, efficiency and product quality), system life (asset management) and system safety with low energy consumption (Dhillon, 2002). Poorly maintained machines or equipment’s may lead to random breakdowns causing unavailability for production or service. The main purpose of maintenance engineering is to reduce the adverse effects of breakdown and to increase the availability at a low cost, in order to increase performance and improve the dependability level (Simeu-Abazi & Sassine, 2001). The key objective of maintenance management is “total asset life cycle optimization” i.e., maximization of availability of plant/equipment and reliability of these assets in order to achieve operational/business objectives. Therefore, maintenance is not only dealing with technology issues, but it is rather a mix of management, operations, technology and business strategies (Pintelon & Parodi-Herz, 2008).

2.2 Maintenance strategy

A maintenance strategy consists of multiple elements. The definition of the elements is as given below. A maintenance strategy is a systematic approach to upkeep the facilities and equipment and it varies per facility. It involves identification, researching and execution of many repairs, replace and inspect decisions and is concerned with formulating the best life plan for each unit of the plant, in coordination with production and other functions concerned (Kelly, 1997b). It describes what events (e.g. failure, passing of time, condition) trigger what type of maintenance action (inspection, repair or replacement).Thus, selecting the best sustainable maintenance strategy depends on several factors such as the goals of maintenance, the nature of the facility or the equipment to be maintained, work flow patterns (process focus, product focus) and the work environment (Gallimore & Penlesky, 1988; Pintelon & Gelders, 1992). Maintenance strategy consists of a mix of maintenance policies and maintenance techniques (Dekker, 1996).

(9)

maintenance (CM), preventive maintenance and predictive maintenance (PM and PdM). Corrective maintenance is a maintenance task performed to identify, isolate, and resolve a breakdown so that the failed equipment, machine, or system can be restored to an operational condition. Preventive maintenance is a routine for periodically inspecting equipment, machines or systems with the goal of noticing small problems and fixing them before major ones develop. Predictive maintenance techniques are designed to help determine the condition of in-service equipment in order to estimate when maintenance should be performed (Swanson, 2001).

Maintenance management concepts have to be reviewed with perspectives of business activities such as operational, tactical and strategic. Therefore, maintenance strategies are the methods of transforming business objectives into maintenance objectives (Velmurugan & Dingra, 2015). A maintenance plan can be developed by identifying the current potential gaps in maintenance performance (Crepo & Gupta, 2005).

Maintenance tactics or approaches are the activities required to implement the strategy. This deals with the management processes, human resource and physical asset infrastructure (Campbell & Reyes-Picknell, 2006). The maintenance strategy is to create a direction of how to accomplish the maintenance objectives such as availability, and reliability with a structured approach (Waeyenbergh & Pintelon, 2002). Further, critical success factors such as maintenance personnel must have thorough knowledge to prevent failures in early stages. Management skills including planning, human resource management and task management, ability to exploit maintenance history trends and opportunities are pointed out by Velmurugan and Dingra (2015).

Pintelon and Gelders (1992), identified and discussed various areas of maintenance management. The areas addressed in their study are: 1. System design aspects of maintenance management in operations management environment, 2. Maintenance decision making, and 3. Managerial tools available for making decision making in maintenance management. They pointed out that the maintenance approaches do not stipulate any maintenance policy explicitly. Nevertheless, there is considerable impact on maintenance policy since these reflect the management viewpoint on maintenance. Further, Pintelon and Gelders (1992) pointed out that the preparing maintenance budget must involve explicit insights of all the maintenance costs and their impact on organizations revenue and profit.

2.3 The Maintenance Strategy Decision Elements (Step 1, shown in figure 1)

(10)

1. Maintenance capacity, 2. Maintenance facilities, 3. Maintenance technology, and 4. Vertical integration. They are termed as structural, because decisions made in those areas are assumed to be fixed. For example, a company that outsources its entire maintenance activities cannot revert to in- house maintenance immediately. This requires enough time and capital investment to gather the necessary resources and skills. The majority of the maintenance budget is used for the fulfillment of the structural elements (Pintelon et al., 2006). The six infrastructure elements can be seen as maintenance management elements. The six infrastructure elements include: 1. Maintenance organization, 2. Maintenance policy and concepts, 3. Maintenance planning and control systems, 4. Human resources, 5. Maintenance modifications and 6. Maintenance performance measurement and reward systems. The infrastructure decision elements are generally linked with specific operating aspects of a company like the production process, size, degree of automation, etc. (Pintelon et al., 2006). For example, with increasing interdependency and automation of equipment companies tend to have more decentralized maintenance organization structure (Swanson, 1997). It should be emphasized that both structural and infrastructure decision elements are closely interrelated. For example, if structural elements are considered as the maintenance resources, the decisions taken in the infrastructure elements decide on how effectively the resources are utilized. The decision elements can have a major impact on the maintenance function’s ability to implement and support the company’s business strategy (Pintelon et al., 2006).

Structural decision elements

Maintenance capacity Capacity in terms of work force, supervisory and management staff. Shift patterns of work force, temporary hiring of work force

Maintenance facilities Tools, equipment, spares, workforce specialization (mechanics, electricians, etc.), location of workforce

Maintenance technology Predictive maintenance, or condition monitoring technology, expert systems, maintenance technology (intelligent maintenance) Vertical integration In-house maintenance versus outsourcing and relationship with suppliers

Infrastructure decision elements

Maintenance organization Organization structure (centralized, decentralized, or mixed), responsibilities

Maintenance policy and concepts

Policies like corrective, preventive and predictive maintenance. Concepts like total productive maintenance (TPM),

reliability centred maintenance (RCM)

Maintenance planning and control systems Maintenance activity planning, scheduling. Control of spares, costs, etc. Computerized maintenance management systems (CMMS)

Human resources Recruitment policies, training and development of workforce and staff. Culture and management style

Maintenance modifications Maintenance modifications, equipment design improvements, new equipment installations and new machine design support Maintenance performance measurement and reward systems Performance recognition, reporting and reward systems,

Overall equipment effectiveness (OEE) and balanced score card (BSC)

(11)

2.4 Four-stages model (Step 2, shown in figure 1)

Recognition of the importance of the role of operations in the overall competitive success of an organization is attributed to Skinner (1969). Hayes and Wheelwright (1984) have built on to this work by introducing a four-stages model that identiﬁes four diﬀerent strategic roles that the operations function might have within an organization. Table 2 below captures the essence of the model, describing the role of, objectives for and expectations of operations at each of the stages. The higher the stage, the more effective the maintenance strategy.

Stage Operations role Objectives for operations Expectations of operations

Stage 1 Internally neutral Minimize operations negative impact Operations as a necessary evil Stage 2 Externally neutral Achieve parity with competitors Follow industry best practice Stage 3 Internally

supportive

Provide credible support to the business strategy

Operations strategy developed to support business strategy

Stage 4 Externally

supportive Provide the source of competitive advantage

Operations strategy developed to drive business strategy

Table 2: Essence of the Four-stages model

Its originators (Hayes & Wheelwright 1984; Chase & Hayes 1991) argue that using the four-stages model in an analysis of operations oﬀers managers three main beneﬁts. First, it helps to pinpoint the key operational factors that must be addressed in the operations strategy formulation process. Second, it helps to position the organization’s operations in relation to the organization’s operations of its competitors. Third and, they suggest, most importantly, it helps to provide clear answers to the key strategic audit questions of ‘where are we now?’ and ‘where do we want to be?’ (Barnes & Rowbotham, 2004a). The characteristics of the four-stages are shown in appendix 1, table 12.

Hayes and Wheelwright (1984) recognize that the different factors in an organization’s operations (e.g. the management of quality, technology, workforce, etc.) may be at different stages of development and that an overall classification in accordance with the four-stages model must be made by assessing the balance between the different factors. They also highlight that an organization’s position within the classification can be dynamic and that progression and regression from one stage to another is possible. However, the four-stages model is ultimately prescriptive in nature, with Stage 4 being seen as the only desirable destination if competitive success is to be assured. No advice is offered on the assessment of individual operational factor or how to determine the balance between them. All that is provided are broad descriptions of the four-stages. Thus, the assessment of the operation overall is a highly subjective matter.

(12)

takes the lead in organizational strategy formulation. Whichever approach is taken, eﬀective operations strategy development requires an informed understanding of existing resources, process and capabilities (Slack & Lewis 2002). A meaningful assessment of an organization’s current position in the four-stages model requires a detailed analysis of a range of speciﬁc operational factors as well as an assessment of strategic role of operations overall. Such an assessment would be a useful part of any analysis of current operations strategy, as realized, and help point the way to required changes (Barnes & Rowbotham, 2004a). The fulfillment of the maintenance strategy decision elements helps with the analysis of the current operations strategy.

The criteria of the Four-stages model generally fall into two groups. The first group examines two types of consistencies, namely internal and external. For instance, one maintenance strategy is considered better than another to the degree that it displays more internal consistency and/or external consistency. The internal consistency is within the maintenance function and across functions in the business unit. The external consistency is between the maintenance function and the environment of the business unit. The second group of criteria concerns the degree to which the maintenance strategy enhances the competitive advantage of a company. These criteria include setting priorities, directing attention to opportunities and providing maintenance capabilities (Barnes & Rowbotham, 2004a). Based on the consistency and contribution criteria, Hayes and Wheelwright developed a four-stages framework for manufacturing’s strategic role in a company. Table 3 below shows the four-stages framework.

A description of the four-stages is described by (Barnes & Rowbotham, 2004a) and is explained below:

Stage 1 companies regard maintenance mainly as a manufacturing overhead and do not realize

its full potential. They consider maintenance as a necessary evil and nothing more than a mere inevitable part of production. They outsource majority of their maintenance activities and rely heavily on either

Stage 1 – Minimize manufacturing’s negative potential – “internally neutral” External experts are used in making decisions about strategic manufacturing issues

Internal management control systems are the primary means for monitoring manufacturing performance Manufacturing is kept flexible and reactive

Stage 2 – Achieve parity (neutrality) with competitors – “externally neutral” “Industry practice” is followed

The planning horizon for manufacturing investment decisions is extended to incorporate a single business cycle Capital investment is regarded as the primary means for catching up to competition or achieving a competitive edge

Stage 3 – Provide credible support to the business strategy – “internally supportive” Manufacturing investments are screened for consistency with the business strategy

Changes in business strategy are automatically translated into manufacturing implications Longer-term manufacturing developments and trends are systematically addressed

Stage 4 – Pursue a manufacturing-based competitive advantage – “externally supportive” Efforts are made to anticipate the potential of new manufacturing practices and technologies

Manufacturing is centrally involved in major marketing and engineering decisions Long-range programs are pursued in order to acquire capabilities in advance of needs

Source: Adapted from Hayes and Wheelwright (1984)

(13)

original equipment manufacturers (OEM) or outside maintenance service providers in solving complex equipment problems. In general, stage one companies do not manage maintenance professionally. They just try to minimize maintenance’s negative potential.

Stage 2 companies differ slightly from stage one companies. They intend to improve

maintenance but lack internal expertise. Hence, they try to acquire and follow their competitors’ maintenance best practices. To gain maintenance cost advantages they even replace some equipment or components by following their competitors. They even carry out a reasonable level of preventive maintenance activities to improve their performance. They consider their competitors as a benchmark and try to follow them. They strive for competitive neutrality on the maintenance function rather than internal neutrality.

Stage 3 companies incorporate maintenance considerations in the overall business and

manufacturing strategies. However, they do not consider maintenance as a potential source of cost savings and competitive advantage. They equip maintenance with necessary expertise, skills and training to perform complex maintenance tasks. They carry out more proactive maintenance policies like preventive and predictive maintenance. They plan and schedule their maintenance activities efficiently through high CMMS use. However, they do not integrate maintenance into engineering. They consider maintenance only as a service function. They address long-term maintenance developments and trends systematically. They formulate maintenance mission statements in structuring and guiding maintenance activities over an extended time horizon. However, they do not carry out continuous improvements and equipment design modifications to a great extent. In general, stage three companies do not give equal attention to maintenance in comparison to other functions. Hence, they cannot recognize the full potential of the maintenance function.

Stage 4 companies foresee maintenance as a potential source of cost savings and competitive

advantage. They often integrate maintenance into engineering and actively involve maintenance in major capital investment decisions. By integrating maintenance with engineering, long-term maintenance requirements can be considered beforehand while acquiring the assets. This foresightedness enables the maintenance function to gain vast amounts of time and money in dealing with reliability problems (Moubray, 2003). Stage 4 companies regard the maintenance function as an equal partner in the company, capable of providing input to others as well as managing itself.

(14)

train their maintenance staff and crew quickly. In short, stage four companies try to seek a balance of excellence in maintenance by pursuing an externally supportive role (Barnes & Rowbotham, 2004a).

Despite its widespread acceptance amongst operations management academics, reviewers of the literature (Al-Rasby, 1996; Lillis, 2000) report very little practical application of the model in subsequent research based on the four-stages model. Examples are included in table 4 below.

The examples of table 4 represent the different methods of how the four-stages model is used by multiple authors throughout the years. The four-stages model is used in various circumstances, with different goals and results.

2.5 Conceptual model

The conceptual model is shown in figure 2 on the next page. Expected is that the maintenance strategy decision elements (shown in table 1 on page 12) influence the effectiveness of the maintenance strategy. In practical terms each maintenance strategy decision element can be visualized as a button that the management can rotate. For example: the management could choose to rotate the ‘’Maintenance Policy’’ button to: 1. Corrective maintenance, 2. Preventive maintenance or 3. Predictive maintenance. When the management decides to rotate the ‘’Maintenance Policy’’ button, this will have an influence on 1. The current maintenance strategy, and 2. The effectiveness of the maintenance strategy. There should be an internal consistency among the strategy elements (structural and infrastructure elements) that make up the maintenance strategy. It should also be externally consistent with the business environment (for example governmental restraints on safety and the environment). Eventually, after the fulfillment of the maintenance strategy decision elements, the effectiveness of the maintenance strategy is determined by the four-stages model of Hayes and Wheelwright.

Author(s): Year: Goal of research: Results:

Misterek et al. & Bates et al. 1995 Exploring the links between manufacturing strategy formulation and organizational culture. Rejected the questions relating to Stages 1 and 2 from their analysis because of unreliable scales.

Hum and Leow 1996 Assign 55 Singaporean electronics companies to one or other of the model’s stages.

Questions were based on the ‘dichotomous comparison provided by Hayes et al. (1988)’ between stages 2 and 4 (Hum and Leow 1996, p.7), and so do not speciﬁcally probe for stages 1 and 3.

Newman and Hanna 1996 Investigate the linkages between environmental management and manufacturing strategy The analysis was based on a general question which asked respondents to indicate which stage best described their company

Hum 2000 Assess the strategic contribution of operations in a third-party logistics company. Reaserch relied entirely on qualitative data gathered in an interview with the company’s Managing Director.

Swamidas et al. 2001 Assign companies to one of the four stages on the basis of the averaged response of managers to single sentence

descriptors for each stage. Map the roles of manufacturing and marketing managers in the strategy development process. Gilgeous 2001

Test the hypothesis that there are four stages using a detailed questionnaire probing manufacturing choice, the involvement of manufacturing managers in setting strategy, the attitude of top managers towards manufacturing, preferred manufacturing actions, manufacturing capabilities and manufacturing performance.

It was only possible to ﬁnd evidence to support the existence of stages 2 or 3.

(15)

(16)

3. Methodology

The methodology explains the case of analysis, the problem statement, the method of data collection and the data analysis. The data collection consists of quantitative data (questionnaire), qualitative data (semi-structured interviews), and secondary data. The data collection and data analysis sections are divided in the three steps as represented in figure 1 in the introduction.

Case of analysis

The case study includes a problem-solving question. TP is a company providing high quality and recyclable metal packaging. Within these markets’ TP offers various types of products. The locations of TP are subdivided into 1. Office, 2. Manufacturing, and 3. R&D. The manufacturing location of the current research is located in Holland. TPH is producing two products. The manufacturing location has nine units. There are two support units. Currently, there are 418 employees active.

Problem statement

There is limited knowledge about the current maintenance strategy and the effectiveness of the current maintenance strategy within TPH. There is a maintenance strategy within TPH. However, the maintenance strategy is not pursued in the daily activities. Maintenance is seen as a secondary function.

Data collection

Data is collected through various data collection methods. By combining multiple observers, theories, methods, and empirical material, the research has a larger change to overcome the weakness or intrinsic biases and the problems that come from single method, single-observer, and single-theory studies (Eisenhardt, 1989).

Step 1: Map the current Maintenance Strategy

The first data collection method are interviews. Semi structured interviews are collected in order to fulfill the maintenance strategy decision elements. The maintenance strategy decision elements are conducted on the functional- and organizational level. Interviews were conducted with employees of TPH. 11 of the 15 interviewees participated with the interview. The interviews are conducted face-to-face at the respondent’s places of work and Skype (due to the Coronavirus) and are recorded to ensure that data capture is as accurate as possible. The five departments of interest are: production departments 1, 2 and 3 and staff departments 1 and 2. The interviewees enable intraorganizational (for example exploring any inconsistencies between respondents in the same organization) comparisons to be made. All of the interviewees work in operational managerial roles. Appendix 4, 5 and 6 show the actual interviews as carried out with the interviewees.

(17)

and an explanation of the TP improvement program!. Focus area 5, TP improvement program

Step 2: Determine the effectiveness of the Maintenance Strategy

The third data collection method is a questionnaire. The questionnaire is not used for statistical testing but rather for determining in which stage of the four-stages model of Wheelwright and Hayes (1985) the production departments of TPH are located. The questions from the article of Barnes and Rowbotham (2004b) are used in the current research in order to implement the four-stages model of Hayes and Wheelwright in the proper way. Some of the statements are reformulated in order to enlarge the understandability. In order to achieve a high response rate, the questionnaire is restricted to 33 statements. The questions can be ascribed to the following topics: customers, quality, technology, workforce, innovation, strategic processes and operations objectives. The number of questions per topic is represented in appendix 2, table 13. The questionnaire was administered on the functional level. Fifteen out of the fifteen respondents responded to the questionnaire. Respondent were asked to give their job title and their function within TPH. The respondents were then categorized by function. The categories include production departments 1, 2 and 3 and staff department 1. The respondents fulfill various roles within TPH in multiple departments. The aim of the questionnaire is to analyze in which stage TPH is positioned in the four-stages model on the unit- and organizational level. The statements are presented in a random order to prevent desired answers. The questionnaire is piloted with the senior project manager of TPH. The questions of the questionnaire are shown in appendix 3, table 14.

Step 3: Link the maintenance decision elements from step one to the effectiveness of the

maintenance strategy from step two and check whether and how they are interrelated.

The third step merges step one and two to see how the fulfillment of the maintenance strategy determines the effectiveness of the maintenance strategy. The results will be compared with previous findings from empirical literature. No additional data collection method is used for step three.

Data analysis

After the data is collected, Eisenhardt’s (1989) method for data analysis is used. This implies starting with analyzing (read, code and interpret) the results of the interviews and the questionnaire.

Step 1: Map the current Maintenance Strategy

(18)

data for words and phrases most commonly used by respondents, and Primary and secondary data comparisons – comparing the findings of interviews with the findings of the literature and discussing differences between them. In conclusion the data is summarized.

Step 2: Determine the effectiveness of the Maintenance Strategy

The four-stages model of Hayes and Wheelwright (1984) will make it possible to assign each unit of the case of analysis to one of the four-stages. The results are compared across the units. 33 statements about various topics were asked. Respondents answered based on a five-point Likert scale. The guidelines for the five-point Likert Scale are shown in table 5 on

the right. The responses to each statement are weighted according to the Likert scale, with “Definite agreement with a stage” carrying 5 points, “Agreement with a stage” 4, “Neutral” 3, “Disagreement with a stage” 2 and “Definite

disagreement with a stage” 1. Scores above 3 are treated as indicating that the statement reflects a characteristic of the company. The mean scores for all of the respondents in each department were then used to suggest an appropriate classification under the four-stages model. Each statement aims to identify whether or not an organization’s operations have the characteristics of one of the four-stages. In order to assign an operation overall to one of the model’s stages, some means of assessing the balance or center of gravity between the different factors was required. Thus, it was necessary to develop a set of decision rules that might identify the one “dominant” stage. To stand up to scrutiny, the decision rules would at least have to be true to the spirit of the four-stages concept. As such, it seemed reasonable to require that a clear majority of positive responses is needed in order to classify a questionnaire in a particular stage. The current research adapted the methodology guidelines of the research of Barnes and Rowbotham (2004a). The decision rules are as follows:

1. A minimum of 60 per cent of the total statements for that stage (Table 6 shows the number of positive responses needed) 2. Positive response on the acid test

Some statements are more significant than others. These “acid test” statements capturing the essence of each stage, were identified as follows:

Stage 1: Overall, we seek simply to minimize any negative effects operations might have on

organizational performance.

Stage 2: Overall, we seek parity of performance in our operations with the leading organizations in our

sector.

Stage 3: Overall, we expect operations decisions to be derived from, and dictated by the organization’s

Table 6: Number of positive responses needed

5 Definite agreement with a stage 4 Agreement with a stage

3 Neutral

2 Disagreement with a stage

1 Definite disagreement with a stage

Interperation Likert Scale

Table 5: Guidelines of the five-point Likert Scale

Stage Positive responses needed

Stage 1 5

Stage 2 6

Stage 3 4

(19)

strategy and operations management automatically translate our organizational strategy into operations implications.

Stage 4: Our operations strategy is not derived from our organizational strategy, rather our

organizational and operations strategies are developed jointly in a mutually supportive manner.

These statements draw directly on wording used by Hayes and Wheelwright to describe the most important characteristics of each stage of the model. As such, respondents should arguably be able to designate their organization to one stage based on these statements alone. Thus, in order to classify a questionnaire in one of the model’s four-stages required: (1) a positive response to the relevant acid test statement(s); and (2) a designated minimum number of positive responses (equivalent to 60 per cent) for the relevant stage. Data descriptions are made by using EXCEL.

Step 3: Link the maintenance decision elements from step one to the effectiveness of the

maintenance strategy from step two and check whether and how they are interrelated.

(20)

4. Results

The results section is divided in the three steps as represented in the introduction. In the first step the results of the fulfillment of the maintenance strategy are explained. The second step describes the results of the maintenance strategy effectiveness. The third step links the maintenance decision elements from step one to the effectiveness of the maintenance strategy from step two and checks whether and how they are interrelated.

Step 1: Map the current Maintenance Strategy

The fulfillment of the maintenance decision elements is executed with the contribution of the interviews. The interview protocols are presented in appendix 4, 5 and 6. The interview scheme shows the answers of the departments. Table 7 below shows an oversight of the fulfillment of the maintenance strategy decision elements including production departments 1, 2 and 3 and staff department 1.

1. Structural decision elements

Maintenance capacity

In total 59 of the 418 employees are executing maintenance related activities. This is a percentage of 14,1% of the total employment. Temporary workmen are employed when necessary. The technical assistants of the departments are responsible for the execution of the maintenance. Currently, there is no overseeing maintenance manager that lives up to the realization and implementation of the maintenance strategy.

Maintenance facilities

Tools, equipment, spares and the location of the workforce are well accessible according to the interviewees. Workforce specialization is missing in some occasions which results in hiring external employees for specialized maintenance activities.

Maintenance technology

Table 7: Completion of the maintenance strategy decision elements

Department: Production Department 1 Production Department 2 Production Department 3 Staff Department 1 Structural decision elements

Maintenance crew: 11 Maintenance crew: 7 Maintenance crew: 9 Maintenance crew: 32

No overseeing maintenance manager No overseeing maintenance manager No overseeing maintenance manager No overseeing maintenance manager Tools, equipment and spares are well accessible Tools, equipment and spares are well accessible Tools, equipment and spares are well accessible Tools, equipment and spares are well accessible

Workforce specialization misses sometimes Workforce specialization misses sometimes Workforce specialization misses sometimes Workforce specialization misses sometimes

Vertical integration* In house: 90% Outsourced: 10% In house: 80% Outsourced: 20% In house: 40% Outsourced: 60% In house: 90% Outsourced: 10%

Infrastructure decision elements

Maintenance organization Decentralized Decentralized Decentralized Centralized

Maintenance policies No track record. However, the majority is corrective No track record. However, the majority is corrective No track record. However, the majority is corrective No track record. However, the majority is corrective

No CMMS yet No CMMS yet No CMMS yet No CMMS yet

Experience employees to determine planning Experience employees to determine planning Experience employees to determine planning Experience employees to determine planning Standard training procedure for starting employees Standard training procedure for starting employees Standard training procedure for starting employees Standard training procedure for starting employees

No regular training sessions No regular training sessions No regular training sessions No regular training sessions Maintenance modifications Very high equipment design modifications Very high equipment design modifications Very high equipment design modifications In consultation with the production departments Maintenance performance measurement and reward

systems Bbest KPI: 31% Bbest KPI: 31% Bbest KPI: 31% Bbest KPI: 31%

* This is an estimation derived from the interviews Human resources

Maintenance capacity Maintenance facilities

Maintenance technology Limited maintenance technology is integrated Limited maintenance technology is integrated Limited maintenance technology is integrated Limited maintenance technology is integrated

(21)

Limited maintenance technologies are used at production departments 1, 2 and 3 and staff department 1. One technology that is used to a limited extent is: 3D measurements. This technology is used to check for tooling/spare parts accuracy and specifications. There is an ambition to implement condition-based maintenance within the departments.

‘’Maintenance technologies are used to a limited extent.’’ – Each department

Vertical integration

The departments have different percentages of the execution of in-house activities against outsourcing. Production department 1 does 90% of its maintenance in-house and outsources 10%. Production department 2 does 80% of its maintenance in house and outsources 20%. Production department 3 does 40% of its maintenance activities in house and outsources 60%. Finally, staff department 1 executes 90% of its maintenance in house and outsources 10%. The maintenance activities that are outsourced due to the complexity of the machines is done by external parties which are done by third parties and original equipment manufacturers (OEM). There are agreements with the concerned supplier about specific conditions, like: 1. The delivery of spare parts need to be delivered within 24 hours, and 2. A service engineer of the concerned supplier needs to be able to arrive within 36 hours if there would be a significant problem with a particular machine. A contract is made with suppliers before machines are bought.

Conclusion: The maintenance crew cover 14,1% of the total workforce. There is no overseeing

maintenance manager that carries out the maintenance strategy. The technical assistants of production departments 1, 2 and 3 and the department leader of staff department 1 are responsible for the effectiveness of the maintenance function. Limited maintenance technologies are used at production departments 1, 2 and 3 and staff department 1. Roughly 25% of the maintenance activities of TPH are outsourced, while 75% of the maintenance activities are done in house. External parties are hired when maintenance issues become too complex.

2. Infrastructural decision elements

Maintenance organization

There is a mixed maintenance organization. Maintenance of production departments 1, 2 and 3 are organized decentral while staff department 1 is organized central.

Maintenance policies

(22)

a larger scale. Currently, production departments 2, 3 and staff department 1 are using BOP (Bedrijfsonderhouds programma, translated: Business Maintenance Program) and production department 1 is using the TP Line Monitoring (TLM) logbook function to register malfunctions. Next to BOP, production department 3 uses Printplan. BOP enables to register malfunctions and to show planned maintenance/periodic inspections. TLM enables to record the stagnations and to show planned maintenance. Printplan has the same functions as BOP. Checklists and inspection lists are used at the departments to judge the condition of a spare part.

This year TPH will implement SAP PM throughout the whole plant. SAP PM will provide tools that make it possible to track the data regarding corrective- and preventive maintenance. Insights about the percentage of preventive maintenance against corrective maintenance will be available with the implementation of SAP.

‘Maintenance interventions are not categorized since the right tools are not available.’’ – Each

department

Maintenance planning and control system

There is no standardized way of working when it comes to the maintenance planning and schedule. Each department uses their own method to fullfill the maintenance planning and schedule. Excel is used in each department to make the yearly maintenance planning whereby the experience of the maintenance crew (technical assistants) is used to determine the planning. There is no computerized maintenance management system to use as a tool for the maintenance planning.

TPH has a central warehouse to store spare parts. In the central warehouse, the maintenance mechanics need to fill in a receipt when taking a spare part. The receipt is written manually. Thereafter, the receipt is processed in the system digitally by the employees of the central warehouse. The interviewees indicated that mistakes are made sometimes during the fulfillment of the receipts. This results in an incorrect oversight of the stock. Each year the central warehouse is balanced. Each department has unregistered stock in their department warehouse. There is a second warehouse within the Toolshop. Parts for stamps and cutting units are stored in this warehouse. Besides, the measuring equipment is calibrated periodically here.

When SAP is implemented, the central warehouse will process information with a scanning system. The scanning system will save time and decrease the change of making mistakes (not filling in receipt or filling in receipt incorrect). The unregistered stock of the department warehouses will be registered in order to control the flow of stock.

‘’SAP could be more user friendly. Besides, the option to add photos to a specific malfunction would be an improvement’’. – Technical Assistant production department 2

(23)

the possibility to extract data from SAP so that the maintenance employees have a quick overview about certain malfunction on the production lines. – Technical Assistants production department 3 ‘’ 1. A system needs to provide tools to make reports (overviews of for example: most common malfunctions the last quarter). 2. A dashboard could provide a quick overview of the current state regarding maintenance ‘’. – Department Leader staff department 1

Human Resources

There is a standard training procedure if employees are new. Maintenance employees will train their skills with the machinery from the particular department they will work in. Within production departments 1, 2 and 3 and staff department 1 there are no standard training sessions each year. Only if a new machine or production line is implemented, training will be given. Production department 3 has a refresh course once every while.

‘’ A well thought analysis (standard way of analysis that needs to be adapted by every maintenance employee) of the problem is something that can be improved. Not everybody is capable of carrying out a qualitative analysis. Training sessions could be a solution to the problem. We depend on each other and need to rely on each other. ‘’ – Technical Assistant production department 2

‘’ The analysis tools and the way analysis are done. Currently, the way we do analysis is inadequate. I think production department 1 needs to invest in education and technical support employees for a better performance. I think we can improve our education. There is a lack in technical personnel with a particular level of knowledge. ‘’ – Department leader production department 1

‘’ The way we analyze maintenance related issues. An expended qualitative analyzation can provide insights about a certain malfunction and the cause of the malfunction. We need to have the facts right about malfunctions and not base our conclusions on experiences of the mechanics. Besides, the training sessions for the operators could be improved. Sometimes malfunctions are operator errors. This is entitled as maintenance while this is not always the case. ‘’ – Department manager staff department

1

‘’The training sessions for electrical and mechanical employees can be made longer. Currently, the training sessions of the electrical and mechanical employees are very short. This could be extended so that the training can result in more explicit knowledge about the machine. Besides, a training for standardizing a problem analysis in the method of working for the electrical and mechanical employees can prevent corrective breakdowns. ‘’ – Senior Project Manager staff department 2

‘’In order to improve our maintenance function, the maintenance function needs to work in a standardized way. Currently, maintenance solutions are found based on the experience of the maintenance mechanics. A lot of time is spent to restore settings. With for example a Poka-yoke strategy this could be prevented since there would be only one right setting. The maintenance function needs to have a structure.’’ – Plant manager staff department 2

Maintenance modifications

(24)

is not always possible. Production department 3 installed a completely new print line in 2019 and this year TPH is investing in another brand-new print line. Both replacing two older print lines. In an interview with the technical assistant of production department 2 stated was: ‘’More or less 100% of the production lines are modified’’. Production department 3 modifies their production lines where needed in order to meet market demand, product quality or improve operational performance in terms of output, machine reliability or product capability. Production department 2 modifies their production lines where needed in order to meet market demand, product quality or improve operational performance in terms of output, machine reliability or product capability. In the interview with the technical assistant of production department 2, stated was: ‘’It is hard to say the percentage of modifications we did for the machines’’. During the setup of a project there is a constant conversation between 1. The department where the project is implemented, 2. Electrical and mechanical engineers and 3. The project team. Maintenance employees (electrical and mechanical engineers) are involved during the setup of a project. Before a machine is ordered there are conversations with the supplier. A technical scope of supply is set, which describes a full set of requirements and expectations from TP towards the supplier, such as: 1. Description requested equipment, 2. List of electrical and mechanical components, 3. Safety and maintenance topics, 4. Service, 5. Training, 6. Acceptance and 7. Project management.

Maintenance performance measurement and reward system

In the TP improvement program, the overall KPI for maintenance is measured with three sub KPI’s, which are: 1. Cost/Earned Line hours 2. Line efficiency (OEE) and 3. Spoilage/Earned line hours. It is not possible to see the line efficiency on production line level. In the third quarter of 2019 the overall KPI was 31% against a TP Plant Average KPI of 46,1%. The KPI is 15,1% below average. From the 44 plants that were ranked based on the TP improvement program maintenance KPI, TPH was ranked 35th_.

There is a major difference between the maintenance KPI of TP’s best practitioners and the maintenance KPI of TPH. Internal knowledge within the TP plants related to maintenance is not spread currently though there are best practices.

Conclusion: The maintenance organization has a mixed structure. Tools to record data related to the

(25)

Average KPI of 46,1%.

Step 2: Determine the effectiveness of the Maintenance Strategy

Examination of the data showed that no respondents agreed with all the statements from one stage and disagreed with all the statements of the remaining stages. There are no respondents that agreed with all the statements in one of the four-stages. All the respondents (except two respondents) identified positively with at least one of the statements in the remaining stages. Responses were spread across all four-stages. Some respondents revealed inconsistencies by having, for example, an “agree” response to more than one statement on a single factor (e.g. quality). Moreover, the “agree” responses were not necessarily in contiguous stages. Such responses are not necessarily inconsistent with the logic of four-stages model (Barnes & Rowbotham, 2004a). The methodology of the current research enabled eight responses (53.3%) to be classified into one dominant stage as follows:

stage 1-5 stage 2-0 stage 3-2 stage 4-1

Clearly, these are results that fit the four-stages model. One response (7%) could be classified into two stages. However, the respondent is classified into stage 1 and 3 which are not adjacent stages. As Hayes and Wheelwright present their four-stages classification as a continuum, it follows that responses that

fall into two adjacent stages fit the logic of the model. Thus, the one response also arguably fit the model. Additionally, two responses (13%) could be classified into all the four-stages, and four responses (27%) could not be categorized into any of the stages using these decision rules. These are responses that clearly do not fit the logic of the four-stages model. Table 8 summarizes these results.

Results Questionairre

Single stage 8 53%

Two adjecant stages Three adjecant stages

Responses fitting the four stage model

Two non-adjecant stages 1 7%

All stages 2 13%

No stage 4 27%

Responses not fitting the four stage model Total Percentage 100% 53% 47% 7 15 8 Number

(26)

From the three respondents of production department 1, two respondents fit in stage 1. One respondent of production department 2 fits in stage three. Production department 1 and staff departments 1 and 2 all have one respondent that fit stage 1. Besides, staff department 2 has one respondent that fits stage three and production department 3 has one respondent that fits stage 4. The inequalities between the results of departments could be the result of the various fulfillments of maintenance. Table 9 below summarizes the results of the questionnaire per department. As showed in table 9, the majority of the respondents positioned the maintenance strategy effectiveness of TPH in stage 1, which is the stage with the lowest effectivity.

Table 9: Results per department

Step 3: Link the maintenance decision elements from step one to the effectiveness of the

maintenance strategy from step two and check whether and how they are interrelated.

The fulfillment of the maintenance strategy decision elements from step one determines the effectiveness of the maintenance strategy. Information derived from the fulfillment of the maintenance strategy decision elements contributes to the argument of why TPH is placed in stage 1 of the four-stages model by 62,5% of the legit responses. In addition, it can be argued that the fulfillment of maintenance differs per department. Currently, the departments determine their own fulfillment of the maintenance strategy decision elements which delivers various results. The maintenance strategy decision elements: maintenance facilities, maintenance technology, maintenance policies, maintenance planning and control system, human resources and maintenance performance measurement/reward systems are the cause that TPH is positioned in the stage with the lowest effectivity. The fulfillment of the maintenance strategy decision elements match with all the characteristics of stage 1 and have one similarity with a stage 2 characteristic of the stages model. The stage 2 characteristics of the four-stages model that applies to TPH is: “Even though the majority of maintenance is carried out on a reactive basis, a reasonable amount of preventive maintenance is also done”. The fulfillment of the maintenance strategy decision elements is interrelated to the effectiveness of the maintenance strategy.

Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Stage 4 Two non-adjecant stages All stages No stage

Production department 1 2 1 3 Production department 2 1 2 3 Production department 3 1 1 1 3 Staff department 1 1 1 1 3 Staff department 2 1 1 1 3 Totaal: 5 2 1 1 2 4 15 Totaal:

Fitting the four stages model Not fitting the four stages model

(27)

5. Conclusion & Recommendations

The research question of the current research is: ‘’What is the current maintenance strategy of TPH, how effective is the maintenance strategy and how is it possible to increase the maintenance effectivity?’’. The conclusion provides an answer to the research question. The conclusion and recommendations section are divided in the three steps as represented in figure 1 in the introduction.

What is the current maintenance strategy of TPH? (Step 1)

The maintenance crew cover 14,1% of the total workforce. There is no overseeing maintenance manager that carries out the maintenance strategy. The technical assistants of production department 1, 2 and three and the department leader of staff department 1 are responsible for the effectiveness of the maintenance function. Limited maintenance technologies are used at production departments 1, 2 and 3 and staff department 1. Roughly 25% of the maintenance activities of TPH are outsourced, while 75% of the maintenance activities are done in house. External parties are hired when maintenance issues become too complex.

The maintenance organization has a mixed structure. Tools to record data related to the policies are limited. Therefore, insights regarding the maintenance policies are limited. This results in the fact that current statistics regarding corrective- and preventive maintenance are restricted. There is no coherence between the maintenance systems used in the departments. The planning and schedule are based on the experience of the maintenance crew (technical assistants). There is no CMMS system yet that support the development of the planning and scheduling. Spare parts are stored in the central warehouse. A receipt is filled in manually and processed digitally by one of the two central warehouse employees. In addition to the central warehouse each department has its own department warehouse with unregistered stock. In the TP improvement program the overall KPI for maintenance is measured with three sub KPI’s, which are: 1. Cost/Earned Line hours 2. Line efficiency (OEE) and 3. Spoilage/Earned line hours. In the third quarter of 2019 the overall KPI was 31% against a TP Plant Average KPI of 46,1%.

How effective is the maintenance strategy? (Step 2)

(28)

manufacturing – and finally amongst the decision categories (structural and infrastructure) that make up the maintenance strategy (Pintelon et al., 2006). This way of thinking prevents companies from recognizing the full potential of the maintenance function. The maintenance function is not integrated within staff department 2. The technical assistants carry the responsibility for the effectiveness of the maintenance function. Each department have their own technical assistant and carries out maintenance in their own way. The strategic objectives of the maintenance function are not consistent with the strategy of the other business units. Therefore, concluded can be the internal consistency is not high. The external consistency is well arranged. There is constant consultation between the municipality and TPH about environmental and legal issues. The legal safety restrictions are arranged by the safety department within TPH.

How is it possible to increase the maintenance effectivity? (Step 3)

Considering the ongoing projects within TPH, the current research recommends to TPH to strive for the switch from stage 1-2 to stage 3 as displayed in table 10 below. In order to switch to stage 3 TPH needs to consider changing the structure with respect to certain maintenance strategy decision elements. The recommendations map the most common notified improvements regarding to maintenance derived from the interviews. Empirical literature is used to strengthen the recommendations.

Table 11 below shows an example of Pintelon et al. (2006) that describes the fulfillment of the maintenance strategy decision elements of a stage three company (Company X). If you compare the

(29)

fulfillment of the decision elements of Company X with the current fulfillment of the decision elements of TPH, there are major differences. In order for TPH to switch to stage three, particular decision elements need to be adjusted. The maintenance strategy decision elements: maintenance facilities, maintenance technology, maintenance policies, maintenance planning and control system, human resources and maintenance performance measurement/reward systems are divergent from the decision elements of a stage three company. Table 11 shows the recommended fulfillment of the maintenance strategy decision elements in order to switch to stage three of the four-stages model.

1. Structural decision elements

Maintenance capacity

Currently, there is no overseeing maintenance manager that lives up to the realization and implementation of the maintenance strategy. Creating division of labour for maintenance tasks to be performed and coordination of results to achieve a common maintenance goal must be capabilities of maintenance managers (Campbell & Jardine, 2001). The coordination to achieve results or set goals for the maintenance function misses due to the absence of an overseeing maintenance manager. The implementation of a maintenance strategy is a great challenge for maintenance managers (Alsyouf, 2007). By the time an overseeing maintenance manager is employed within TPH, recommended is to oversee the maintenance strategy and set goals within a certain time frame.

Maintenance facilities

Workforce specialization is missing in some occasions which results in hiring external employees for specialized maintenance activities. External employees are only hired to solve the maintenance issue. Recommended is to not only hire the external employee for a solution to the maintenance issue, but also provide education to the maintenance crew about that specific issue.

Table 11: Various fulfillments of the maintenance strategy decision elements

Company X Current situation TPH Recommended situation TPH

Structural decision elements

Maintenance crew: 59 Maintenance crew: 59 No overseeing maintenance manager An overseeing maintenance manager Tools, equipment and spares are well accessible Tools, equipment and spares are well accessible

Workforce specialization misses sometimes High workforce specialization

Vertical integration* In house: 60% Outsourced: 40% In house: 75% Outsourced: 25% In house: 60% Outsourced: 40% Infrastructure decision elements

Maintenance organization Decentralized Combination of centralized/decentralized Combination of centralized/decentralized Maintenance policies CM, 30%; PM, 40%; PDM, 30% Limited track record. However, the majority is corrective CM, 30%; PM, 40%; PDM, 30%

No CMMS yet

Experience employees to determine planning Standard training procedure for starting employees

No regular training sessions

Maintenance modifications Very few or no equipment design modifications Very high equipment design modifications Very high equipment design modifications Maintenance performance measurement and reward

systems Overall equipment effectiveness (OEE) at 70% TP improvement model: 31%

Internal bechmarking with best market practices and an overall equipment effectiveness (OEE) of 70%

Source: Pintelon et al. (2006)

Implement predictive maintenance or condition monitoring technology

Integrated CMMS use (high and effective usage) Professional staff, high training (120 hours per year) Maintenance capacity

Maintenance facilities

Maintenance technology 30% usage of condition monitoring technology 48, temporary workmen when required

High workforce specialization

Limited maintenance technology is integrated

Maintenance planning and control systems

Adopting a maintenance strategy to improve maintenance effectiveness