Quick Glance Case Study: Equipment Maintenance

“The Failure Mode and Effects Analysis and 5 Whys technique were critical in helping us to really understand the root cause of the waste and find a way forward to build our leaner future state”

After completing a ChangeWise Lean Practitioner training course, one candidate submitted the following work-place project to gain their qualification to LCS Level 1c.

The Business Challenge

Our client is responsible for 170 items of equipment that are critical in ensuring business services are delivered effectively and safely. This includes 4,270 individual maintenance jobs.

The maintenance process for this equipment was inefficient, causing wasted time, effort, cost, energy, and poor customer service.  An end-to-end Lean review was required to assess the maintenance process.

Photo by Sergey Zolkin on Unsplash

Key people involved from client site

Planned Maintenance Work Manager, Maintenance Performance Project Manager and Data Analysis Team Leader

Lean Methodology Employed

DMAIC (Define, Measure, Analise, Improve, Control)

The candidate completed a full Lean review of the end-to-end current state process.

Various Lean methodologies were employed, specifically SIPOC, Value Stream Mapping, Value and Non-Value Add Analysis, 7 Wastes, Gap Analysis, Root Cause Analysis, 5 Whys, Cause and Effect diagrams.

Key Current State Findings and Techniques

An analysis of the suppliers, their inputs, the process, outputs and customers for equipment maintenance was completed. A Current State Process map was then created to show the relationship between suppliers, customers the input and the outputs.

These activities highlighted that equipment maintenance was reactive, rather than preventative planned work.

A root-cause brainstorming workshop was set-up to analyse the causes of waste and non-value add processing associated with the reactive approach.

The five whys technique was applied:

Photo by Marcel Strauß on Unsplash

1. Why is the equipment maintained by reactive work as opposed to planned maintenance, so adding cost, time lost and risk to the business?

Because the site owners, on whose behalf the equipment is maintained, will not fund the spare parts.

2. Why?

Because it is an upfront cost that could be avoided if the site does not break down, whereas if it does break down the cost of reinstatement comes from a different budget – even though that cost is higher (preventative maintenance would come from the site owners budget).

3. Why?

That is the way the budgets are set-up and it is the responsibility of the site owner to keep within budget (so if the money can come from a different budget there is less risk on their budget). This can lead to the site breaking down, incurring wasted activity on reactive work.

The site owners do not want to own preventative maintenance budget as they are not confident equipment is being serviced effectively.

4. Why?

Because the replaced spares used do not always resolve equipment issues, more effective repair is required to make the managers feel confident.

5. Why?

Failure cause assumed to be failure of a specific part of the equipment.

FMEA data (see below) was required to identify the true failure cause. Site visits were also required to ensure that the correct asset types were recorded so it is definitely the correct size parts bought once preventative maintenance was identified.

Value Analysis helped to identify the main areas of waste within the process, including time, inventory and defects. For example; spare parts were often ordered after the service visit, necessitating a revisit. If preventative maintenance approaches were used, a number of waste issues including extra time and work that does not add value to the customer, could be eliminated.

Failure Mode Analysis was also completed for the equipment to better understand key causes of equipment failure. The Lean Improvement Team also travelled to the equipment site in order to see the actual equipment and record accurate details regarding makes and models. These were sent to the supplier so that actual costs of replacement parts could be obtained.

Outcomes and Benefits

An ideal future state was agreed:

Correct critical parts ordered – Job raised – Parts fitted at service – No equipment issues

Benefits:

• Reduced customer effort for the planned maintenance team
• Preventative maintenance also enabled reduced work for the site owner and reactive maintenance team and ultimately, the bill paying external end customer
• Process simplified by removal of the wasteful steps identified in the Value Analysis
• Eliminate the steps of ordering parts after raising and accepting the service job
• Eliminate reactive work
• Combine ordering parts needed for the service with the raising of the jobs for the service so that delivery of the parts coincides with delivery of the maintenance work
• Automate triggering work order raising with spare parts availability
• Relocate spare parts storage and spares requirement scheduling and raising to suppliers. This eliminates wasted energy – so less electricity is needed to run the equipment as they operate more efficiently.
• Closer partnership between supplier and customer.
• Increased quality in terms of serviceability of the equipment – so fewer risks in terms of failures – the maintained equipment is less likely to fail.
• Reduction of errors and potential inventory waste – so correct parts are ordered and save wasted unneeded parts remaining in the warehouse.
• Reduced defects achieved through Visual Management in terms of on-site auditing with site visits taking place by and manager.

These changes resulted in a reduction of 828 man-hours, allowing resources to be redistributed on more value-add activities for the customer.

In Summary

The 5 Why’s method was a really helpful way of getting to the root cause of the equipment issues, it quickly and effectively helped us to create an action plan and agree a far leaner future state.

Preventative (rather than reactive), maintenance will enable quick financial and non-financial wins through removing significant waste from the process, reducing operating costs, decreasing the likelihood of defects and improving supplier, client and customer relationships.

Photo by Danielle MacInnes on Unsplash

Interested in looking at how you can increase your bottom line and improve customer experience though optimising your equipment? Contact us at info@changewise.co.uk and let’s talk about how we can help.

ChangeWise believes employee engagement is the foundation for successful Change. Training and coaching your people to use simple continuous improvement techniques will enable your organisation to continuously adapt and stay ahead in a constantly changing and challenging environment.

For updates and interesting Lean Change insights, connect with us on LinkedIn.

Find out more about our  training courses at www.changewise.co.uk