9.5 Records Management

According to GFMAM Landscape, the performance of asset-intensive organizations is dependent on the quality and availability of asset data and information. So why does research indicate that 70% of plant operators report 33% to 50% of their asset and process safety information is either missing, incomplete, inconsistent, or outdated? Common complaints from maintenance planners, reliability engineers, facility engineering, process safety and compliance managers include the following: “We can’t find it,” “It’s not complete,” and “We don’t trust it.” As a result, personnel continually make safety, engineering, financial, capital, maintenance, and operational decisions without full access to complete, consistent, and up-to-date information. Such decisions are suboptimal and can cause significant loss. We call this value leakage. Have you ever wondered how much value leakage is costing your organization? Why do the underlying causes of value leakage persist, and what can you do about it? In this presentation, we examine the root causes of value leakage—from incomplete project information handover, to a lack of standards and processes. We then explore a successful framework to improve AIM, including building the business case and return on investment (ROI). Attendees of this presentation will learn how to identify value leakage and the underlying causes; how to calculate the ROI (qualitative and quantitative) of improving asset information management to reduce value leakage; and quick wins and long-term strategies for improving asset information management.

If we were to do reliability analysis on certain assets, which assets are worth our effort and provide the greatest impact? To solve this, our team developed a focused methodology to help us identify which asset types need to be further analyzed in the coming years. Our goal is to identify the asset type that causes the highest generation of lost opportunity cost and the highest maintenance costs. Ideally, the generation of lost opportunity cost should be added to maintenance cost. Lost opportunity cost is calculated from existing operational performance data, which is collected and used for NERC GADS (North American Electric Reliability Corporation Generating Availability Data System) reporting. Maintenance cost is calculated from maintenance history in CMMS (Computerized Maintenance Management System). The operational performance and maintenance history data are illustrated using a Pareto chart. As a result, the asset type that causes the highest generation of lost opportunity cost can be identified from the chart. However, asset types with the highest maintenance costs may not indicate the asset type with the most issues. Besides, the NERC GADS codes may be related to one or more assets in CMMS and, therefore, need a relationship to be created if the costs are to be added.

The Regional Municipality of Durham is a community that makes up the east end of the Greater Toronto Area (GTA), which comprises multiple cities and townships. The region provides a multitude of services to approximately 745,000 residents and maintains $17.85 billion in assets and infrastructure. The region was using several disconnected applications and business processes to manage these services, many of which had limited functionality, reporting, and analytics, as well as a lack of integrations to other systems. In an effort to standardize and streamline these services, the region amalgamated all of the tracking of regional assets, maintenance management, and business technology processes. The region began the process of requirements gathering in 2013; at this time, a steering committee was created to govern the project, and project leads and business subject matter experts were engaged to ensure the product selected met business requirements. In 2015, the region began the procurement process: request for proposal, evaluation, vendor presentation, and negotiations. Maximo was the selected enterprise maintenance management system. Durham used a multi-phased implementation plan—including Planning, Design, Execution, and Closing—which consisted of three go-live dates. This multi-phased approach would span over the course of three years. The initial phase of the project included detailed design, organizational impact analysis, future business process design, future role modifications and development, and multiple-tiered information sessions. The organization identified current operational gaps and business process changes were required. It followed Use Case business processes with some adaptation for operational responsiveness and consistency within the To-Be roles. The business was able to retain current operational practices as much as possible but built in a structured and disciplined approach to maintaining assets. This will influence and impact the quality of analytics and reporting. Through its approach, the region was able to implement a centralized maintenance management system across multiple divisions. This implementation impacted 800 end users across 13 divisions and multiple third-party system integrations. It also performed a readiness assessment of departments, divisions, and areas and organizational, process, and technology criteria. It created a go-live and system support strategy, and monitored system, sustainability, and performance throughout the implementation process.

We are in unprecedented times. Covid-19 wreaked havoc on supply chains; decreased production during times of increased demand. Labor shortages, chip shortages, long lead items turning into “maybe next year, if you’re lucky” items. The Russia Ukraine war added further stress to supply chains through sanctions, port closures, fuel shortages and much more. What once was reliable is now unreliable. So how can companies overcome an unreliable supply chain to maintain their reliability? There are several ways to mitigate unreliability; scenario planning, supplier management, and technology. There is no one size fits all and what may work for one company will not necessarily work for another. Scenario planning involves reviewing every potential situation that could occur, then working through to see how the company would be impacted. Ultimately this results in mitigation plans for each scenario. These can then be reviewed and implemented. Proper Supplier Management includes ensuring all suppliers have their scorecards reviewed on a regular basis. Their information updated and kept current. It can also include reviewing which suppliers can become substitutes for others in the event one is not able to provide the required product in time. Technology is important as it links all the information together. Algorithms can be created to let management know that certain parts are low, equipment is wearing out sooner, it also collects information on suppliers for the scorecards. Overall technology is the glue that binds and provides real time information updates. This presentation will review how to best use technology to help mitigate reliability and supply chain issues.

Applying agile data governance and leveraging 21 century tools and methods to create an ecosystem that supports the success of asset data management strategies. This approach addresses challenges in resourcing for developing strong governance that considers strategic, tactical and operational needs while providing a unique approach to data gathering, quality and quantity of data at a program level.

This will cover the Theory of Technology Implementation: Technology, Process, and People – Pyramid. Any technology implemented is as only as good as the people who use it in the processes you have. With proper training and clear, consistent processes, technology results can be amazing! Mobile has been floating around Plant Maintenance for around a decade but finally got the political will and funding in 2018. We were able to leverage that we were also setting up our Maximo system with Assets and PMs to make them Mobile and reporting friendly, from the start. Our Requirements gathering included realizing that we needed a disconnected solution because we work in many areas without a signal, like Subway track level and we have emergency exit buildings all over the city with no network connection. We chose Maximo Anywhere on Samsung Tab As. We are using the Train the trainer method now with COVID, to limit contacts outside each section. We have a training video produced by IT for basic functionality, but individual training material still needed to be produced. For training of our people we took the slow and steady wins the race approach, allowing each crew to really get personalized support at the beginning of their Tablet use. I always encourage people to ask questions and speak up. I even started a 10 minute rule: If you can’t figure it out in 10 minutes – call/text me! There was also training to be done with Forepeople and Supervisors: How do I see the results? What to do I do with the results? Management has been very happy with results – a picture is worth 1000 words. The Good: Results The Bad: Connectivity issues The Ugly: Early Negotiations over items that when everyone got to test on the tablet, there was an immediate consensus.

We’re currently rolling out an Asset Integrity Management System (AIMS) across our terminal network, which consists of nine terminals across Canada and the U.S. We’re publishing 27 new standards as part of this initiative that cover a variety of topics such as risk assessment, inspection planning, recordkeeping, data management, and relevant codes, standards, and regulations. This presentation will focus on the training and rollout of this program and will highlight some of the lessons learned. Some of the challenges include providing training to a group that spans a large geographical area, having a wide variety of stakeholders who require different levels of knowledge about the program (operations, project management, document control, contractors, management), and ensuring training is effective and leads to a smooth adoption of the changes that come with the new standards. Some of the topics we’ll cover include using the ADKAR model of change management to evaluate how effective your training will be; awareness of the need to change; desire to support and participate in the change; knowledge of how to change; ability to implement required skills and behaviours; reinforcement to sustain the change; tailoring presentations to specific groups; creating short and long versions of modules—building blocks for presentations; tailoring presentations to each group based on required knowledge; having a one-hour “crash course” presentation to give a quick overview to certain groups (upper management, those not directly impacted by standards); giving several opportunities for questions to ensure any potential issues are identified early (standard review, training, pre-publishing); and some tips on encouraging engagement: examples and exercises (real world), visual aids (flowcharts, photos, graphics over text), handouts (quick reference guide, poster, contact sheet, acronym list), and summaries (standard review sheets, single-page overviews).

Too often we hear the struggle of not being able to get the information that is required out of the system. It's like the data has disappeared into a big black hole. Maintenance Staff get frustrated in having to feed a system that is difficult to use and time consuming for what is perceived as little or no benefit. This discussion details what a CMMS can do and how best to realize the benefits from using a CMMS. There are a number of critical success factors in managing your CMMS including:• Organization policies and objectives• staff turnover• training• reduced staffing• database review audits• outdated software

Many organizations have implemented processes and tools to collect data to facilitate informed decision-making. Often, they will seek out best practices and measures to assist in decision-making or rely on technology to guide their basis. In many cases, however, these same organizations approach a gap in tactical deployment and in the ability to draw a connection to the follow-up or pre-emptive actions required to derive value from assets. We'll review the processes for establishing a framework for alignment and priority setting while looking at the techniques used for resiliency and risk management using a technology-agnostic approach. We'll review potential data sources that can be leveraged for decision-making and can reflect the needs and current state of the business environment. Additionally, we'll discuss the relationship and application to the decision-making process.  

The U.K. railway network dates back to 1825 and is the oldest railway in the world. Several electrical assets on the network such as track power cables, switchgears, overhead line isolators, circuit breakers, and insulators are beyond their design life and the business must decide whether to renew or replace them—even though they're still operating at the optimum performance level. These assets are still being maintained at the original regimes; the challenge to the business is to understand the degradation models and change them to achieve different maintenance regimes for the aging assets. The work we're currently undertaking is intended to influence and change our asset policies—in particular, the assignment of asset regimes for assets that remain in service at the end of their design life and beyond. The philosophy behind the maintenance regimes is that they're based on degradation models, which are algorithms that consider various factors such as the environment, the loading, the utilization, the reliability, and the cost for interventions. The approach we pursued was to review the parameters of the degradation models for their “fit,” based on the knowledge asset managers have gained on the ground and through large volumes of asset data. The asset data was analyzed with data visualization software to gain further insight to influence the review of the degradation models. The findings of the work are summarized here: asset population is aging and future renewals bow wave are predicted; asset policy pushes all assets to maximum asset technical life and fix-on or run-to failure; safety-related works prioritized over asset performance/resilience; there's a need to modify some factors associated with the degradation models to cater for extension of technical asset life and maintain a more realistic/sustainable asset renewal profile; composite asset condition scores are required to manage bow wave of asset renewals and implement sustainable obsolescence management techniques (this is predominantly driven by organizational investment decisions where enhancements are the main driver of asset acquisition, making future renewals difficult due to the requirement to renew similar age assets at the same time); and determination of useful asset life required for assets that are being left in service longer than their originally predicted life.