Download
this case study (PDF). 
CASE STUDY:
Maintenance Work Management Program
Objective
To introduce a formal planning function and apply engineered performance
standards using Universal Maintenance Standards (UMS). UMS provides
a basis for continuous method improvement, developing and maintaining
a backlog of planned work and enhancing service to the facility
users while reducing cost per unit of maintenance service.
Scope
Plan
and measure maintenance work content of operators and the skilled
trades such as mechanics, carpenters, painters, masons, pipefitters,
electricians, sheetmetal workers, welders, laborers, custodians,
automotive mechanics, electronic technicians, IT technicians and
machinists to provide standard practices, method instructions
and a means to maintain an efficient, cost-effective balance between
the workload and workforce.
Methodology
- Introduce
a planning function into the organization
- Train
client planning and supervisory staff in Universal Maintenance
Standard principles and practices
- Validate
existing bench mark data from PNI library
- Develop
and apply UMS methods and times in each area based on improved
methods
- Develop
improved planning, scheduling, dispatching and backlog procedures
in each operation
- Provide
guided application using a team approach, each team consisting
of the consultant, planners, supervisors and technicians
- Overall
direction by joint client-consultant Steering Committee
Results
- Trained
planners and supervisors in activity analysis, method improvement,
UMS development and UMS application techniques
- Developed
mission and policy linked to measurable goals and control indices
- Achieved
planned work coverage of 60% during the consulting phase and
developed a backlog of planned, ready-to-work maintenance assignments
to fully utilize staff.
- Completed
the program on schedule and within budget, achieved cost reduction
goals
- Trained
client staff to expand the program beyond the initial coverage
to other areas
- Accomplished
more work with fewer workers, achieved savings vs cost breakeven
in one and a half years, and a 4:1 return on investment.
