Hi Maintiger -
I agree that there are lots of costs. Just for the record, I think CWorks has a SQL Server upgrade for those who need it after the database grows. Lots of organisations like the idea of shoes but like to start wearing slippers until they get the hang of someting on their feet and find that it is an improvement.
Regards
Steve

Thanks for your thoughts folks.

I think I've decided on Smart Maintenance by Smartware Group. Yes, it does sit atop Access, but upgrading it to the SQL version is definitely an option down the road, and is a relatively straightfoward upgrade, Smartware assures us. SM has a really slick interface like someone said earlier in the thread; generation of PMs and WOs is very fluid.

We have two small plants, one gas one coal, and they are 200 miles from each other. They operate in such different manners currently, that making them use the same database is silly--apples and oranges in a bananas world. So right now, there will be a CMMS "station", a single isolated computer running the software at each plant, where supervisors can sit down and log work orders and track inventory. For performance feedback, I'm thinking they'll just generate quarterly reports of KPI's to HQ.

The more I read about Predictive Maintenance and CMMS software, it becomes apparent that there are no quick/hard answers to any situation, you have to go with what fits your plant and personnel. The hardware and software you buy arent nearly as important as the implementation. The important things are to be thorough with the implementation, openminded to new and different solutions, and to get the guys on the floor to buy into it.

~Sam

Hi Sam,
Now that you have made that decision, what are you going to fill you CMMS with in terms of PM Work Orders.

quote:

The hardware and software you buy arent nearly as important as the implementation. The important things are to be thorough with the implementation, openminded to new and different solutions, and to get the guys on the floor to buy into it.

Have you thought about the reaction of your people if you fill the CMMS with rubbbish PMs as opposed to getting good PM's in place? This is a leading question - but a lot of CMMS implementations fail because when they move they take all the rubish and upload it without doing any cleaning up, rationalisation and review.
Steve

Hi Steve,

quote:

Lots of organisations like the idea of shoes but like to start wearing slippers until they get the hang of someting on their feet and find that it is an improvement.

and this is the reason why a lot of CMMS implementations fail. Buying a pair of slippers causes costs and requires reorganization. Then you find the slippers are not suitable for your business. You need better/other functionality, you need better support, ... Maybe you need boots.
But everybody inluding your menagement knows now, that the CMMS (your slippers) was not fullfiling your needs.
And due to this fact nobody will support your in buying the next pair of boots.

So you should know very well before starting a CMMS project what are your requirements and select a good fitting tool.

Hi Maintiger,
I don't disagree with you - I was referring to the MS Access vs SQL Server issue. Slippers being the MS ACcess and SQL Server being the boots. In many of the applications that provide a MS Access version, this version has the fundamentals programmed in. SQL Server has a little bit more for the experienced user. We write PMO2000 maintenance analysis software (we do not sell CMMS) and take the same approach. A number of our clients use the MS Access version - some stay there and some migrate to SQL Server.
Regards
Steve