‘Don’t just fix it. Improve it!’

“Don’t Just Fix It, Improve It! A Journey to the Precision Domain” by Winston P. Ledet, Winston J. Ledet, Sherri M. Abshire

Who should read this book?

1. Plant Managers: this book offers a practical and engaging perspective to gain valuable insights into the challenges and strategies for achieving benchmark results in your operational setting.
2. Maintenance Managers: this book provides real-world scenarios, lessons and practical ideas for implementing Total Productive Maintenance (TPM).
3. Continuous Improvement Managers & Lean Experts: this book delves into the nuances of implementing TPM and explores the emotional and systemic aspects of change, offering valuable lessons for driving improvement initiatives. It helps you broaden the understanding of Lean and Operational Excellence.

Why you should read this book (or not)?

The book, similar to E. Goldrath’s “The Goal,” excels in capturing the emotional journey of a recently promoted plant manager embarking on a quest to achieve benchmark results. It illuminates how individuals perceive and interpret reality differently, underscoring the human element in operational management.

In contrast to other works, this narrative delves into the emotional and resistance aspects of implementing Total Productive Maintenance (TPM) alongside theoretical discussions. By providing a unique perspective on system dynamics, the book enables readers to comprehend the interconnectedness of various elements in operational management. It also elucidates paradoxes and the challenging choices that must be navigated in the real world, thereby offering a deeper understanding of the challenges associated with implementing TPM.

From my personal standpoint, this is essential reading for any plant manager or maintenance manager. It unravels many facets of TPM, a cornerstone in the operational management systems of world-class manufacturers. The book is not merely theoretical; it adeptly explains the arduous decisions that need to be made and articulates the formidable challenges in implementing TPM. Nevertheless, it does not provide a straightforward roadmap for implementing TPM. Don’t hesitate to reach out to learn more about how to get started.

This book stands out among the few that I’ve revisited multiple times due to its layered complexity, making it challenging to grasp all the intricate details in a single reading.

Interesting extracts

(Original plan red.) “First, the plant would have to put together a preventive maintenance (PM) program. The idea was to identify all of the wear parts in the plant an create a cycle for checking and replacing them. (…) Second, they would put in place a predictive maintenance (PdM) program. The subteam would focus on detecting problems through monitoring and inspection. They would then write work orders based on inspections, and maintenance would repair the issue before there was a failure. (…) Third, they would put a proactive maintenance program in place called reliability centered maintenance (RCM). RCM is a comprehensive methodology for cataloging all of the failures. Once the failure modes and effects were identified, strategies would be developed to deal with each. (…) Finally, there was the computerised maintenance management system (CMMS). (…) Robert also suggested that they conduct a full plant assessment that included both a review of metrics and a survey of employee practices. (…) This plan is really taking shape, Jennings I was wondering what kind of budget you had to put behind this. It just seems that all of these programs, at least in the beginning, are going to take some investment. (…) James, there is no extra budget for this effort. You have your operating budget. You have to make it fit within that. You saw the benchmark figures this morning – 30% cost savings. Surely 30% cost savings will fund the effort.”

“Chance went on to elaborate, “So, if the goal is to increase both throughput and added value, are PMs a helpful means or not? You are taking the equipment down when it could be running, reducing production, and swapping out parts that may or may not be bad, to accomplish a lower failure rate. (…) To achieve your goals, it would seem to me that you want only the PMs that have a decent shot of eliminating a defect. PMs that don’t eliminate a defect are simply wasting production and costing time and money. (…) And there are 2 types of defects that could come in with any PM which create a potential vicious feedback loop. First there are defects that we will call workmanship defects. These are imperfections that are introduced by the maintenance folks when they do a repair. When they do a job poorly, or don’t have the right skills to do the job, they can introduce new defects. The second source of defects is from the parts we use. When parts are substandard, or simply wrong, they can also introduce defects. The MIT team has researched this and the probability of adding those defects in any given job is over 15%, so your probability of taking a defect out better be higher than that or you are just going backwards. (…) What I used to do was my maintenance team keep a log of defects found in replaced parts. If the find rate was low, we upped the time between PMs.” “

“Our goal is to make production, stay safe and deliver value. Lower maintenance cost will be a consequence of doing that in the right way.”

(Check on executing the original plan red.) “ James had to admit that they had executed the plan like clockwork. However, the results were still lagging. Costs were totally out of control. (…) Then there was the Computerised Maintenance Management System (CMMS), or the “Consultant Money Making System” as the plant employees called it. It was nothing short of a disaster. The old system could not handle all of the new types of work: planning, scheduling, PMs, inspections, and RCMs. More than ever, James saw the need for the system, but that was not the issue. The process of putting it in, gathering the data and redefining their equipment hierarchy was overwhelming. More and more time was being sucked away from the operations, maintenance, and engineering teams to feed the new system the data it required. To cut the time and cost, they were now seriously considering not loading any historical data. This seemed crazy to James. If they didn’t load their historical data, it would take another two or three years before they would have adequate data in the system. Of course, all of the time committed so far did not include the upcoming training on the new system for everyone at the plant. what a catch twenty-two, James thought. He knew they needed to have a system to put in planned maintenance, but getting the system installed was taking so much time from the resources required to do planned maintenance that is was jeopardizing the program.”

“There was this fellow who lived in a valley, and he had trading to do with a village in a nearby valley. However, between the two villages there was quite a large mountain. The man sized up the situation and saw clearly that the most direct route to the other village was right over that mountain. So for some time, he loaded up his pack and hiked over that rugged mountain pass to do his trading. Now it happened that there was also a lady in the same village who also wanted to trade with the other village on the other side of the mountain. However, when she sized up the situation, she saw the easiest way to the village was around the mountain. Oh sure, it was longer, but it was flat and the road was smooth and reliable. One day, the two met and began discussing their trading, and their approaches to get to the other village.  The man ridiculed the woman for taking such an indirect route., but she convinced him to give it a try on his next trip. The man was astonished. He arrived at the same village, in less time and with less effort, by taking what seemed to be a longer route.”

“Ownership worked at his site because almost everyone held a common vision of what they were trying to accomplish. They knew what the objective was, and they all knew how they intended to get there. Without that, empowerment would have just led to chaos. The Defect Elimination Game had helped create that common purpose and vision.”

“The goals are to satisfy customers, maximize throughput and keep your license to operate. The means will change over time. When pursuing planned work, eliminate the reactive work first, making the path much smoother. RCM and other top-down defect analyses can be extremely effective, but only if they are action-oriented. Don’t automate a broken process. Fix it first and then automate.”

“The reason the planned work was higher because the total number of work orders were down.”

“The planned domain is unstable. As soon as we stopped the MRS program, planned maintenance was not sustainable and the percent of planned jobs dropped quickly.”

“There are lots of ways to cut costs, some good, some not so good. If we treat it as a goal, it’s easy to pursue the not so good ideas because they seem like legitimate ways to hit the goal. However, when we focus on eliminating failures, each action is more likely to be right for the long term and also eliminate costs as a consequence.”