How often should work order effectiveness be reviewed?

Should we review annually to see if we can extend some periods between work orders, eliminate others etc...?

Thanks in advance.

Terry O

May we know what types of work orders that need to be reviewed periodically? Corrective or preventive maintenance work orders?

For PM, yes I guess so to suit to local operating context and data.

For CM, it should be reviewed before proceeding with the job.

It appears that you are referring to PM effectiveness insteads of WO effectiveness, is that correct?

Or are you asking whether to review CM work orders to identify bad actors?

Terry:

There is a process used in the US Coast Guard and Navy referred to as the Maintenance Effectiveness Review (MER). The purpose is to periodically review different PM/PdM tasks in order to determine if they are effective and to provide the logic necessary to extend or reduce the frequency of planned maintenance. The process involves the results of work orders, RCFA, condition-based inspections, etc.

Howard

Josh: From the phrase "if we can extend some periods between work orders" I understand Terry is talking about Preventive Maintenance (PM). Corrective Maintenance (CM) is not time based.

I think the PM Program review should be perform annually. If you work at a plant with thounsands pieces of equipment/instruments in the PM & Calibration (Cal) Programs the task could be prorrated through the year, each month near 10% of the PM schedules are reviewed for:
* Merit of the PM/Cal instructions: do we really need to do this? in that frequency?
* Is there a regulation, insurance, or other non technical reason to perform this task? Can we change that?
* Check previous realibility studies, any pending actions?
* Has the usage of this equipment changed, should we adjust the PM frequency due to an increase/decrease in production? For example, equipment running two shifts per day after running just one shift per day may need adjustment in the lubrication, filters change, belts adjustment PM tasks frequecy.

For CM we should think if there is a way to predict or prevent the failure; and if this way is cost effective. Probably during the order planning some ideas will come up, but I doubt each time a maintenance notification reaches the planning group there will be time to write down changes to PM, PdM or CAL instructions. Best way is to run pareto analysis of "bad actors", expensive CM orders, or repetitive CM orders and dceal with them; again in a monthly basis.

Normally, our data collection should be 4 concept:
- Completely : review before job close in CMMS
- Accuracy : review before job closed in CMMS
- Timely : review every time job completed
- Usually : review after generate failure report

Terrence,
To some extent, this may be industry-dependent. In continuous process industries, some PM frequencies can be 2, 3 or 4 years. Many others will be every 3 or 6 months. In most cases, the effect on reliability can take 3 or 4 consequetive PMs, so in my view a review frequency of 3-4 years will be adequate. After all, reviews themselves take time and effort, and implementing their results, including alterations in CMMS can take a few months.

PM compliance, on the other hand, has a strong influence on reliability, and is an area where many companies fall by the wayside. It is an important KPI to monitor and control. Compliance trends should be reviewed annually, in addition to routine tracking monthly.

Every time a change in the PM instructions/ frequency is being processed, ask yourself:
Is this the only equipment which need this change?

If it is in priority state, take note of the critical and non-critical work orders to be accomplish.