1<!DOCTYPE html>
2
3Anonymous
4/bestp
5/bestp/domrep.nsf
6CC05AB0A13A214CC8525738A005CB9EB
8
9
10
11
12
13
140
15
16
17/bestp/domrep.nsf/products/manufacturing-maintenance-management-structure?opendocument
18
19opendocument
2034.226.234.20
21
22
23www.best-in-class.com
24/bestp/domrep.nsf
25DB




Products & Services Business Operations Operations and Maintenance Structure

Manufacturing Maintenance Management & Structure

ID: 4984


Features:

22 Metrics

4 Best Practices


Pages/Slides: 26


Published: Pre-2014


Delivery Format: Online PDF Document


 

License Options:
close

Single User: Authorizes use by the person who places the order or for whom the order was placed.

Sitewide: Authorizes use of the report for a geographic site. All people at site can view the report for a year and copies can be printed.

Corporate: Authorizes use for the entire company for a year and copies can be printed. No limitations for usage inside the company.




Buy Now

 


  • STUDY OVERVIEW
  • BENCHMARK CLASS
  • SPECIAL OFFER
Non-members: Click here for a complimentary excerpt of Manufacturing Maintenance Management & Structure.


STUDY OVERVIEW
This benchmarking study was conducted to gain insights into how the maintenance function within a manufacturing company is best organized and managed to optimize maintenance schedules and utilization of resources while minimizing equipment downtime. This 26-slide presentation provides key metrics and qualitative lessons learned that will enable organizations to compare the structure and management of their maintenance functions against those of the benchmark class and leverage the practices of other organizations. The study will enable organizations to identify performance gaps and areas for improvement to better manage their maintenance functions.

KEY TOPICS
• How are the maintenance functions structured within manufacturing organizations to maximize efficiency and performance?
• What have manufacturing organizations found to be the benefits of maintenance centralization and what challenges are expected in a transition to centralization?
• How are the maintenance functions organized within manufacturing organizations?
• What are the impacts to outcome benefits due to maintenance centralization?
• What equipment performance measures are utilized and to what degree are they effective?
• Which companies have transitioned to a centralized maintenance function and how was this implemented?
• At what levels within the companies was structural change met with the greatest resistance and how was the change reinforced through incentive planning?
• What impact did structural transition demonstrate on equipment reliability?
• What key issues were identified in transitioning the maintenance function structure with respect to internal communication, teamwork and management buy-in?
• What additional issues were identified with respect to transition of the maintenance structure?
• What positive and negative impacts can maintenance structure have on inventory?
• What are key issues to consider in building a plan for transitioning maintenance structure?

KEY METRICS
• Structure of maintenance function across benchmark companies
• Effectiveness of structural changes on key outcomes
• Effectiveness of metrics for management of equipment performance
• Duration of transition period for maintenance structural changes
• Organizational implementation of maintenance structural changes
• Percentage of management levels identified as most resistant to structural change
• Percentage of benchmark companies implementing changes to incentive plans to reinforce structural transition
• Percentage of companies negatively impacted by transition of the maintenance function structure
• Quantification of improvements to machine reliability upon completion of structural transition

SAMPLE KEY FINDINGS
• The majority of the benchmark class may find worthwhile benefit in a transition to maintenance centralization while considering the issues identified in the study.
• The entire segment of benchmark respondents that have transitioned to a centralized maintenance function met with a positive impact and half of these cases felt little to no negative impact to productivity during the transition.

METHODOLOGY
This research was conducted by Best Practices, LLC through an Internet Benchmarking Exchange project analyzing data from eighteen benchmark companies representing the manufacturing industry.

Industries Profiled:
Manufacturing; Office Supplies; Consumer Products; Automobile; Transportation; Medical Device; Computer Hardware; Chemical


Companies Profiled:
Afrox; Boise Cascade; British American Tobacco; Cadbury Schweppes; Caterpillar; Clover SA; Cummins Engine; Deere; Dow Corning; DuPont Teijin Films; Eastman Kodak; Eaton Corp; Lexmark; Pactiv; REXAM; Sasol; Sonoco; WR Grace

If you purchase Best Practice Database document(s), you will have 30 days from the date of purchase to apply some or all of the cost of the document(s) toward the cost of a Full Access Individual, Pharma, Group or University Membership. Write us at DatabaseTeam@bestpracticesllc.com or call David Guinn at 919-767-9179 if you have any questions.