Linking maintenance strategies to performance

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-5273(00)00067-0Get rights and content

Abstract

In order to achieve world-class performance, more and more companies are replacing their reactive, fire-fighting strategies for maintenance with proactive strategies like preventive and predictive maintenance and aggressive strategies like total productive maintenance (TPM). While these newer maintenance strategies require increased commitments to training, resources and integration, they also promise to improve performance. This paper reports the results of a study of the relationship between maintenance strategies and performance. Based on the responses from a survey of plant managers and maintenance managers, the analysis shows strong positive relationships between proactive and aggressive maintenance strategies and performance.

Introduction

In order to achieve world-class performance , more and more companies are undertaking efforts to improve quality and productivity and reduce costs. For more and more companies, part of this effort has included an examination of the activities of the maintenance function. Effective maintenance is critical to many operations. It extends equipment life, improves equipment availability and retains equipment in proper condition. Conversely, poorly maintained equipment may lead to more frequent equipment failures, poor utilization of equipment and delayed production schedules. Misaligned or malfunctioning equipment may result in scrap or products of questionable quality. Finally, poor maintenance may mean more frequent equipment replacement because of shorter life.

Traditionally, many companies employed a reactive strategy for maintenance, fixing machines only when they stopped working. More recently, improved technology and the increased sophistication of maintenance personnel have led some companies to replace this type of reactive approach. A proactive strategy for maintenance utilizes preventive and predictive maintenance activities that prevent equipment failures from occurring. An aggressive strategy, like total productive maintenance (TPM), focuses on actually improving the function and design of the production equipment. While these newer maintenance strategies require greater commitments in terms of training, resources and integration, they are also expected to provide higher levels of equipment and plant performance.

The purpose of this article is to empirically examine the performance implications of these different strategies for maintenance. As a part of the study, exploratory factor analysis is utilized to determine whether the use of specific maintenance practices can be explained by these three maintenance strategies.

Section snippets

Review of the literature

Many authors have described different strategies for maintenance management. Bateman [1] described three basic types of maintenance programs, including reactive, preventive and predictive maintenance. Preventive and predictive maintenance represent two proactive strategies by which companies can avoid equipment breakdowns. Weil [2] added another approach in his description of the maintenance continuum by including TPM. TPM is an aggressive maintenance approach that seeks to improve equipment

The research methodology

The information reported here is a part of a survey of maintenance management practices. To be included in the sample, each plant had to be primarily involved in a metalworking industry. The industries included: primary metals (Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) 33), fabricated metal products (SIC 34), industrial and metalworking machinery (SIC 35), precision instruments (SIC 36), and transportation equipment (SIC 37).

The plants included in the survey sample were identified using the

Discussion

The intent of this paper was to explore different maintenance strategies and their relationship with maintenance and plant performance. The results of the exploratory factor analysis are consistent with the three different maintenance strategies described in the literature. Factor 3 is consistent with the traditional reactive strategy for managing maintenance. Under this approach, maintenance views its role as installing equipment and repairing equipment once it breaks.

Factor 2 is consistent

References (17)

  • C Gits

    Design of maintenance concepts

    International Journal of Production Economics

    (1992)
  • J Bateman

    Preventive maintenanceStand alone manufacturing compared with cellular manufacturing

    Industrial Management

    (1995)
  • N Weil

    Make the most of maintenance

    Manufacturing Engineering

    (1998)
  • N Paz et al.

    Maintenance schedulingIssues results and research needs

    International Journal of Operations and Production Management

    (1994)
  • K Gallimore et al.

    A framework for developing maintenance strategies

    Production, Inventory Management Journal

    (1988)
  • D.K Vanzile et al.

    Measuring and controlling machine performance

  • F Herbaty

    Handbook of Maintenance Management Cost Effective Practices

    (1990)
  • R Eade

    The importance of predictive maintenance

    Iron Age New Steel

    (1997)
There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (469)

  • Optimizing the preventive maintenance frequency with causal machine learning

    2023, International Journal of Production Economics
View all citing articles on Scopus
View full text