In an increasingly demanding industrial environment, maintenance management faces a number of challenges that affect its effectiveness and, ultimately, the operability of equipment. Factors such as budget constraints and the need to maximize the availability and reliability of operational assets are just some of the elements that complicate this task. As industrial activities become more complex, so do maintenance strategies, which must be adapted to ensure not only the fulfillment of economic and organizational objectives, but also to extend the useful life of equipment.
In this context, performance indicators represent fundamental tools through which organizations can evaluate and improve their maintenance management by measuring performance, thus ensuring that resources are used efficiently and effectively.
[post_relacionado]By using appropriate indicators for each area, organizations optimize the use of resources (efficiency), and achieve their maintenance objectives (effectiveness), improving the operability and reliability of assets over time (effectiveness). This allows for more strategic management that is aligned with organizational objectives.
What are KPIs in maintenance and why are they important?
As cited by Viveros, et al. (2013) modern maintenance management includes all those activities aimed at determining maintenance objectives and priorities, strategies, and responsibilities. All this facilitates the planning, scheduling, and control of maintenance execution.
These authors state that the logical sequence of the usual maintenance work cycle traditionally starts with work identification, planning, scheduling, work assignment, execution, and analysis process with continuous improvement. However, they state that maintenance management should be approached from the strategic and operational approaches.
To establish expected performance against corporate objectives and performance baselines, it is essential to define clear performance indicators. These indicators, also known as key performance indicators (KPIs), are essential metrics that allow the effectiveness and efficiency of activities within specific processes, such as maintenance management, to be evaluated. They provide quantifiable data that facilitate the analysis and evaluation of the operational performance of organizations. In addition, these indicators are determinant in decision-making and the implementation of continuous improvement strategies.
According to Amendola (n.d.), maintenance indicators and business planning systems associated with the area of effectiveness, allow the evaluation of the operational behavior of facilities, systems, equipment, devices, and components, thus making it possible to implement a maintenance plan aimed at improving maintenance work.
The importance of these indicators lies in providing a clear view of the current state of maintenance, allowing managers to identify areas for improvement and set realistic objectives. Each indicator must be linked to a specific goal within the organization; the indicator will be your guiding tool in the process. Therefore, it is necessary to ask yourself: What are you trying to achieve? Is it feasible for the organization? In what time frame should it be achieved? It is essential to be specific and establish clear criteria that define the fulfillment of the goal.
Characteristics of the indicators
The indicators must comply with the following characteristics:
- Denote specificity, be well-defined and, objective, and should not give rise to misinterpretation and confusion.
- Be quantifiable, based on numerical, clear, precise, and measurable data, in a way that allows tracking, comparison, and analysis of measurements over a period of time.
- Achievable, each indicator has realistic targets associated with it, which the organization should be able to meet.
- Accessible and cost-effective, obtaining the indicators should be simple for those responsible for maintenance and their collection cost should not exceed the value provided by the analysis of the process or activity in question.
- Temporarily defined, limited to a specific time frame.
Indicator classification
To control maintenance management, each organization establishes its own measurement, evaluation, and control model. The process usually starts with the identification and definition of the key indicators, followed by their measurement and analysis, and finally, the implementation of improvements or solutions based on the results obtained.
Performance indicators can be classified according to the level of analysis in the organization. At the operational level, they focus on equipment characteristics and performance; at the intermediate level, they are considered tactical and address process efficiency and execution; while, at the strategic level, they are aligned with organizational objectives and maintenance goals. At this last level, we find the KPIs (Key Performance Indicators), which directly measure progress towards overall maintenance objectives.
According to the literature consulted, including that described by Limble CMMS (2024) maintenance metrics can be grouped according to the type of KPI. Examples of these categories include maintenance work efficiency, associated costs and expenses, asset reliability and performance, workplace safety and compliance, downtime, and spare parts inventory management.
While metrics provide raw data, indicators evaluate the performance of this data, and KPIs focus on those aspects directly linked to strategic maintenance objectives, allowing organizations to make well-founded decisions and optimize the operation.
Another classification vision is described by Renovetec Institute (2021), which indicates that indicators can be grouped as availability, cost, work order, material, and incident indicators. If you want to know more about this typology, you can consult the following video.
SMRP: global benchmark in maintenance KPIs
A valuable benchmark in the classification of indicators is that presented by the Society for Maintenance & Reliability Professionals (SMRP), which has developed the SMRP Body of Knowledge, providing a knowledge framework with five pillars that serve as a standard for maintenance and reliability management, covering business management, process reliability, equipment reliability, organization and leadership, and work management.
For example, in the case of the equipment reliability pillar, the activities used to select and apply the most suitable maintenance practices are considered, so that work is carried out in accordance with capabilities in a safe and effective manner. To do this, it is necessary to determine equipment reliability expectations, evaluate reliability, establish a strategic plan to ensure the reliability of existing equipment, establish a strategy to ensure the reliability of new equipment, justify costs, and implement plans by making the necessary improvements.
The indicators established for this pillar include: systems covered by criticality analysis, total downtime, scheduled downtime, unscheduled downtime, mean time between failures, mean time to repair/replace, mean time between maintenance, mean downtime, and mean time to failure.
Thus, for each pillar of the SMRP, it is recommended to follow a set of specific key indicators that can be adapted to the reality and needs of each organization.
Below are some examples of indicators commonly used in the maintenance execution phase:
Aquí tienes la traducción literal al inglés de la tabla:
| Indicator | Description | Formula |
|---|---|---|
| Backlog (pending work) | Expresses the time required to complete the work orders ready to be scheduled (LPP) in a specialty, expressed in weeks. It includes the activities of the different types of maintenance that have not been carried out. | Backlog = pending work hours / available weekly capacity |
| Availability | Availability is the percentage of time that the asset is actually operating (uptime) compared to when it is scheduled to operate (gross time). This is also called Operational Availability. | Availability = Uptime (hours) / [Total available time (hours) – Downtime (hours)] × 100 |
| Failure Rate | Reflects how many times a piece of equipment or system fails during a given period of time. | Failure rate = Number of failures / Total hours |
| Mean Time To Fail (MTBF) | Reliability indicator that measures the average time an equipment or system operates without failing. | MTBF = Total uptime / Number of failures |
| Mean Time To Repair (MTTR) | Measures the average time it takes to diagnose and repair an equipment or system once it has failed. | MTTR = Repair time / Number of failures |
Common errors in the use of performance indicators
- Failure to update KPIs regularly: KPIs must evolve along with changes in business strategy and environmental conditions. Ignoring the need to update KPIs can lead to decisions based on outdated data. It is critical that they respond to the organization’s maintenance focus and strategies.
- Data misinterpretation: Lack of understanding on how to interpret KPIs can result in erroneous conclusions. They must be analyzed in their proper dimension.
- Not acting on KPIs: Ignoring the information available and making unjustified and unsupported decisions undermines the strategic vision of the organization. This leads to a lack of continuous improvement in maintenance processes.
- Ignoring feedback from operational personnel: Designing KPIs without considering the opinion of the personnel executing the maintenance can generate disconnections. This limits the effectiveness of the indicators, as they do not reflect the realities of daily work.
- Omitting frequent monitoring and analysis of performance metrics: If metrics are not regularly tracked, improvement or problem-solving actions are directly affected. Metrics are the starting basis for improvement actions.
Conclusions
Performance indicators are fundamental tools to optimize and control maintenance management in any industrial organization. Their proper implementation allows not only to measure the efficiency and effectiveness of activities, systems, or equipment, but also to identify areas for continuous improvement, ensuring that resources are used optimally.
In an environment of increasing complexity, the ability to maximize equipment availability and reliability, extend equipment life, or otherwise consider timely replacement, is significant to maintaining competitiveness, profitability, and sustainability. By integrating indicators such as equipment availability, failure rate, MTBF, and MTTR, organizations can support and improve decision-making, aligning their efforts with strategic and operational objectives.
The interpretation of performance indicators in maintenance management must be comprehensive to ensure a complete view of performance. In many cases, you can achieve efficiencies by reducing repair times or costs, but this does not always mean that effectiveness or efficiency is being achieved.
A fragmented evaluation of indicators can lead to erroneous decisions. Therefore, it is essential to analyze results in a systemic manner, ensuring that resources are optimized without sacrificing the achievement of objectives or the continuous improvement of operations.
References
- Amendola, L. (s.f). Indicadores de confiabilidad propulsores en la gestión de mantenimiento. Reliabilityweb-Es. www.klaron.net
- Azoy Capote, A., (2014). Método para el cálculo de indicadores de mantenimiento. Revista Ingeniería Agrícola, 4(4), 45-49.
- Limble CMMS (2024). Maintenance KPIs Explained: The Metrics that Matter. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Irvu5bVCH6o
- Limble (2024). Maintenance KPIs: A Simple Guide. https://limblecmms.com/blog/maintenance-kpi/
- Los Pilares del Cuerpo del Conocimiento de la SMRP – Mantenimiento – Confiabilidad – BIMAN. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3jylf0Vt7I&t=625s
- Renovetec Institute (2021). Key Performance Indicators (KPI’s) for Maintenance. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJvZMerNOoc
- Society for Maintenance & Reliability Professionals. https://smrp.org/SMRP-Library
- Viveros, P; Stegmaier, R; Kristjanpoller, F; Barbera, L; Crespo, A. (2013). Propuesta de un modelo de gestión de mantenimiento y sus principales herramientas de apoyo. Ingeniare. Revista chilena de ingeniería, 21 (1), 125-138.