Overview
This survey of CMMS Implementation was conducted on the Plant
Maintenance Resource Center website between May and July 2004. Read the entire
analysis, or click on one of the links below to go to the appropriate section.
- Summary of Key Findings
- Respondent Data
- CMMS Usage
- Reasons for selecting CMMS
- CMMS Comparison
- Implementation Success Factors
- Benefits Achieved
Summary of Key Findings
Voluntary (and confidential) responses were
sought to the survey, and 105 valid responses were received from a wide range of
individuals working across a variety of industries.
The key findings are:
- The five most common CMMS in use were SAP, Maximo, MP2, MIMS/Ellipse and
PMC.
- In comparison with our 2000 survey on this topic, there are significantly
more SAP users and significantly fewer MP2 users in this survey.
- Most systems have been in place only for a few years, but a significant
proportion have been in place for 5 years or more
- Statistical analysis of responses showed no clear correlation between the
conduct of other usual change management activities associated with CMMS
implementation, and the perception of implementation success
- The most commonly stated reasons for selection of the current CMMS were
General functionality and features and Integration with other commercial
software
- In comparison with our 2000 survey on this topic, Integration with other
commercial software was a more significant factor in the selection of the CMMS
- CMMS are seen as being moderate-to hard to use, on average, with Maximo
rating highest in terms of ease of use
- CMMS are, on average, seen as being only moderately well endowed with
functionality and features, although SAP and Maximo rate highly in this area
- CMMS implementations are generally seen as moderately successful, with
little variation between ratings for the top 5 most popular CMMS packages
- Most of those respondents who rated their implementation as poor had
implemented packages other than these most popular packages
- In comparison with our 2000 survey on this topic, relatively fewer
implementations, overall, are rated as being Poor
- The most important factors in implementation success were obtaining Senior
Management committment, and effective training. The relative importance of
slecting the correct CMMS appears to have declined over the last 4 years.
- Overall, most respondents reported that their CMMS implementation has led to
some or significant benefits
Of the 105 valid responses, just under one third half were based in the USA,
with Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom also well represented.
In comparison with our 2000 survey on
this topic, the overall proportion of respondents from the USA has reduced
significantly, and those from other parts of the world increased.
|
Country |
Responses |
% of Total |
|
United States |
31 |
29.5% |
|
Australia |
11 |
10.5% |
|
United Kingdom |
7 |
6.7% |
|
Canada |
6 |
5.7% |
|
India |
4 |
3.8% |
|
Egypt |
4 |
3.8% |
|
Argentina |
2 |
1.9% |
|
Venezuela |
2 |
1.9% |
|
Iran |
2 |
1.9% |
|
South Africa |
2 |
1.9% |
|
Thailand |
2 |
1.9% |
|
Ireland |
2 |
1.9% |
|
Other/Not Specified |
30 |
28.6% |
Respondents came from a wide range of industries.
In comparison with our 2000 survey on
this topic, there are significantly more respondents from
Manufacturing-Petroleum refining, chemicals and associated products, and fewer
from Manufacturing: Other.
|
Industry |
Responses |
% of Total |
|
Manufacturing-Petroleum refining, chemicals and associated products |
15 |
14.3% |
|
Manufacturing-Food, beverages, tobacco |
9 |
8.6% |
|
Oil and Gas-Oil and gas extraction |
8 |
7.6% |
|
Mining-Metal ore |
7 |
6.7% |
|
Manufacturing-Metal products |
7 |
6.7% |
|
Manufacturing: Other |
6 |
5.7% |
|
Utilities-Electricity Generation |
5 |
4.8% |
|
Services-Transport |
4 |
3.8% |
|
Manufacturing-Wood and paper products |
4 |
3.8% |
|
Manufacturing-Non-metallic mineral processing |
4 |
3.8% |
|
Services-Healthcare |
3 |
2.9% |
|
Services-Other |
2 |
1.9% |
|
Utilities-Water, sewerage, drainage |
2 |
1.9% |
|
Services-Education/Academia |
2 |
1.9% |
|
Services-Contract Maintenance/Repairs |
2 |
1.9% |
|
Manufacturing-Machinery and equipment |
1 |
1.0% |
|
Services-Property services/Building Maintenance |
1 |
1.0% |
|
Mining-Services to Mining |
1 |
1.0% |
|
Mining-Other |
1 |
1.0% |
|
Agriculture-Forestry & Logging |
1 |
1.0% |
|
Manufacturing-Printing, publishing, and recorded media |
1 |
1.0% |
|
Other/Not Specified |
19 |
18.1% |
As in our 2000 survey on this topic,
respondents generally came from larger and medium sized organisations.
|
No of
Trades/Craftspeople |
Responses |
% of Total |
|
Large(more than 100 crafts/tradespeople) |
50 |
47.6% |
|
Medium(10 to 100 crafts/tradespeople) |
39 |
37.1% |
|
Small(less than 10 crafts/tradespeople) |
16 |
15.2% |
Detailed Results
This article focuses on some of the more interesting
results, and also reviews the correlation between some of the survey results in
order to determine what factors (if any) are more likely to lead to successful
CMMS Implementation.
CMMS usage
Over 80% of respondents are currently using a CMMS. This is lower than for
our 2000 survey on this topic, where almost
90% of respondents were currently using a CMMS.
|
Does your
workplace currently use a CMMS? |
|
|
Responses |
% of
Total |
|
Yes |
86 |
81.9% |
|
No |
19 |
18.1% |
The five most common CMMS in use include Maximo, SAP, MP2, PMC and MIMS. In
comparison with our 2000 survey on this
topic, there are significantly more SAP users and significantly fewer MP2 users
in this survey. It would appear that the trend towards larger, integrated
business systems may be impacting on those packages operating at the lower end
of the CMMS market.
|
Which CMMS
does your workplace currently use? |
|
CMMS |
Responses |
% of Total |
|
SAP |
26 |
24.8% |
|
Maximo |
14 |
13.3% |
|
MP2 |
6 |
5.7% |
|
MIMS |
5 |
4.8% |
|
PMC |
4 |
3.8% |
|
Mainsaver |
3 |
2.9% |
|
MPAC |
3 |
2.9% |
|
Elke/Maintracker |
2 |
1.9% |
|
AMMS |
2 |
1.9% |
|
Avantis |
1 |
1.0% |
|
Asset controller xp |
1 |
1.0% |
|
BPCS |
1 |
1.0% |
|
Cedar |
1 |
1.0% |
|
CENDEX |
1 |
1.0% |
|
faciliworks |
1 |
1.0% |
|
IMMPOWER |
1 |
1.0% |
|
IFS |
1 |
1.0% |
|
Isis |
1 |
1.0% |
|
ITms Four Rivers |
1 |
1.0% |
|
JD Edwards |
1 |
1.0% |
|
Mainpac |
1 |
1.0% |
|
Maintain it |
1 |
1.0% |
|
Maintenance Manager |
1 |
1.0% |
|
max |
1 |
1.0% |
|
Mex |
1 |
1.0% |
|
MPC Megamation |
1 |
1.0% |
|
Passport |
1 |
1.0% |
|
PC Maint |
1 |
1.0% |
|
PM Soft |
1 |
1.0% |
|
Rimses |
1 |
1.0% |
|
Tabware |
1 |
1.0% |
|
U.S. Postal Service E-Mars |
1 |
1.0% |
|
Workmate |
1 |
1.0% |
|
ZOLES |
1 |
1.0% |
|
Other/Not Specified |
14 |
13.3% |
Most systems have been in place only for a few years, but a significant
proportion have been in place for 5 years or more. In comparison with our 2000 survey on this topic, most systems have
been implemented for longer, on average - could this be as a result of the
pre-Y2K "bubble" in systems implementation activity?
|
How long ago
did you "go live"? |
|
Years |
Responses |
% of Total |
|
In progress |
5 |
4.8% |
|
<1 year |
6 |
5.7% |
|
1-2 years |
17 |
16.2% |
|
2-3 years |
13 |
12.4% |
|
3-4 years |
13 |
12.4% |
|
>4-5 years |
7 |
6.7% |
|
>5 years |
27 |
25.7% |
|
Not Applicable |
17 |
16.2% |
Reasons for selecting a CMMS
A large proportion of respondents were not aware of the reasons for selection
of the current CMMS, but the most commonly stated reasons were General
functionality and features and Integration with other commercial software. In
comparison with our 2000 survey on this
topic, Integration with other commercial software was a more significant factor
in the selection of the CMMS. Ease of Use was seen as being less important in
CMMS selection in this survey than in the previous survey.
|
What was the
most/second most important reason that your workplace chose your current
CMMS? |
|
|
Most
Important |
Second Most
Important |
|
Reason |
Responses |
% of Total |
Responses |
% of Total |
|
Availability in local language version |
0 |
0.0% |
1 |
1.0% |
|
Availability of local support |
1 |
1.0% |
7 |
6.7% |
|
Availability of training |
2 |
1.9% |
1 |
1.0% |
|
Compatibility with previous CMMS software |
4 |
3.8% |
2 |
1.9% |
|
Compatibility with our hardware/operating system |
3 |
2.9% |
3 |
2.9% |
|
Don't know |
24 |
22.9% |
22 |
21.0% |
|
Ease of implementation |
1 |
1.0% |
1 |
1.0% |
|
Ease of Use |
9 |
8.6% |
4 |
3.8% |
|
General functionality and features |
10 |
9.5% |
14 |
13.3% |
|
General reputation of software and its vendor |
4 |
3.8% |
9 |
8.6% |
|
Integration with other commercial software |
16 |
15.2% |
8 |
7.6% |
|
Integration with other technical software |
0 |
0.0% |
2 |
1.9% |
|
It uses the latest technology |
1 |
1.0% |
4 |
3.8% |
|
Other/Not Applicable |
22 |
21.0% |
18 |
17.1% |
|
Price |
7 |
6.7% |
7 |
6.7% |
|
Speed of system response |
1 |
1.0% |
2 |
1.9% |
Amongst the "other" reasons given for selecting their CMMS, respondents
included:
- Already being used in one of our other divisions.
- Best offer to improve my maintenance department
- Can handle enormous amounts of data.
- Coorporate decision
- Dealer is one of our company group
- Wide use across the industry
CMMS are seen as being moderate-to hard to use, on average, with Maximo
rating highest in terms of ease of use, SAP seen as being slightly harder to use
than the average, and other packages outside the most popular five having a wide
range of ease-of-use ratings. In comparison with our 2000 survey on this topic, the ratings for
ease of use of SAP has improved markedly - Maximo continues to stand out in this
area in terms of ease of use.
|
How would you
rate your current CMMS in terms of its ease of use? |
|
|
No of
Responses |
|
CMMS |
Excellent |
Very Good |
Good |
Satisfactory |
Poor |
|
|
Maximo |
3 |
3 |
6 |
2 |
|
|
|
MP2 |
1 |
1 |
3 |
1 |
|
|
|
SAP |
|
6 |
10 |
6 |
3 |
|
|
MIMS |
1 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
|
|
|
PMC |
|
|
2 |
2 |
|
|
|
Other |
4 |
8 |
14 |
6 |
3 |
|
|
Total |
8 |
17 |
28 |
21 |
13 |
|
CMMS are, on average, seen as being only moderately well endowed with
functionality and features, although SAP and Maximo rate highly in this area. In
comparison with our 2000 survey on this
topic, Maximo's ratings in this area appear to have slipped slightly.
|
How would you
rate your current CMMS in terms of its general features and
functionality? |
|
|
No of
Responses |
|
CMMS |
Excellent |
Very Good |
Good |
Satisfactory |
Poor |
|
|
Maximo |
1 |
7 |
4 |
2 |
|
|
|
MP2 |
|
2 |
3 |
1 |
|
|
|
SAP |
1 |
14 |
4 |
5 |
1 |
|
|
MIMS |
1 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
|
|
|
PMC |
|
|
2 |
1 |
1 |
|
|
Other |
4 |
5 |
7 |
12 |
5 |
|
|
Total |
7 |
30 |
20 |
23 |
7 |
|
On average, CMMS implementations are generally seen as moderately successful,
with little variation between ratings for the top 5 most popular CMMS packages.
Most of those respondents who rated their implementation as poor had implemented
packages other than these most popular packages. In comparison with our 2000 survey on this topic, the ratings for SAP
are more balanced in this survey - in the 2000 survey, most ratings were extreme
- people seemed to either love or hate it. It appears that respondents now have
a more considered view of the success of their SAP implementations. In addition,
relatively fewer implementations, overall, are rated as being Poor.
|
Overall, how
would you rate the success of your CMMS implementation? |
|
|
No of
Responses |
|
CMMS |
Excellent |
Very Good |
Good |
Satisfactory |
Poor |
|
|
Maximo |
|
5 |
6 |
2 |
|
|
|
MP2 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
|
1 |
|
|
SAP |
|
5 |
11 |
8 |
1 |
|
|
MIMS |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
|
|
PMC |
|
1 |
2 |
|
1 |
|
|
Other |
2 |
7 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
|
|
Total |
4 |
20 |
29 |
19 |
13 |
|
According to the respondents, the most important factors in their success
were obtaining Senior Management committment, and effective training. In
comparison with our 2000 survey on this
topic, Senior Management committment remains the most important factor in
success, but Training is considered to be significantly more important than in
the last survey. The relative importance of slecting the correct CMMS appears to
have declined over the last 4 years.
|
What do you
consider are the two most important aspects of your implementation that led to
your success? |
|
|
Responses |
|
Factor |
Most
Important |
Second Most
Important |
Total |
|
Senior Management commitment |
15 |
17 |
32 |
|
Effective training |
12 |
17 |
29 |
|
Choosing the right CMMS |
10 |
7 |
17 |
|
Effective Change Management |
10 |
5 |
15 |
|
Focus on business benefits |
5 |
9 |
14 |
|
Adequate budget |
6 |
8 |
14 |
|
Effective BPR |
5 |
8 |
13 |
|
Effective Project Management |
5 |
5 |
10 |
|
CMMS Vendor Support |
7 |
2 |
9 |
|
Consultant support |
4 |
2 |
6 |
Other reasons for success mentioned by respondents included:
- Cost, it was done inhouse.
- Strong and knowledgable end users.
Reinforcing the previous point, the most important area in which respondents
wished they had done better was in the area of training. However, effective
Business Process Reengineering (BPR) was also one area where respondents wished
they had spent more time and effort. In comparison with our 2000 survey on this topic, better BPR and
better Change Management were factors that are now considered to be more
important - Selecting the right CMMS was seen as relatively less important in
2004 compared with 2000.
|
In hindsight,
what is the most important aspect of your implementation that you should have
spent more time and effort on, in order to increase implementation
success? |
|
Factor |
Responses |
Percent |
|
Effective training |
20 |
19.0% |
|
Choosing the right CMMS |
9 |
8.6% |
|
Senior Management commitment |
8 |
7.6% |
|
Effective BPR |
16 |
15.2% |
|
Effective Change Management |
12 |
11.4% |
|
Effective Project Management |
5 |
4.8% |
|
Adequate budget |
5 |
4.8% |
|
Focus on business benefits |
2 |
1.9% |
|
CMMS Vendor Support |
3 |
2.9% |
|
Consultant Support |
1 |
1.0% |
|
Other/Not Applicable |
24 |
22.9% |
Overall, most respondents reported that their CMMS implementation has led to
some or significant benefits. Note that, in the following table, the large
number of "Don't Know/Not Applicable" responses includes those from people who
do not currently use a CMMS.
In comparison with our 2000 survey on
this topic, the overall level of benefits reported seems to have reduced
slightly in some of the "hard" benefit areas, such as labour costs and equipment
availability.
|
|
Size of
Benefits Obtained % of Responses |
|
Area of Benefit |
Significant |
Some |
None |
Don't Know/Not
Applicable |
|
Reductions in Labor Costs |
5.7% |
32.4% |
29.5% |
32.4% |
|
Reductions in Materials Costs |
11.4% |
32.4% |
22.9% |
33.3% |
|
Reductions in Other Costs |
8.6% |
36.2% |
23.8% |
31.4% |
|
Improved Equipment Availability |
9.5% |
37.1% |
21.9% |
31.4% |
|
Improved Equipment Reliability |
13.3% |
41.0% |
15.2% |
30.5% |
|
Improved Cost Control |
35.2% |
23.8% |
16.2% |
24.8% |
|
Improved Maintenance History |
30.5% |
37.1% |
9.5% |
22.9% |
|
Improved Maintenance Planning |
30.5% |
36.2% |
8.6% |
24.3% |
|
Improved Maintenance Scheduling |
28.6% |
39.0% |
6.7% |
25.7% |
|
Improved Maintenance Schedules |
29.5% |
35.2% |
9.5% |
25.7% |
|
Improved Spare Parts Control |
21.9% |
35.2% |
12.4% |
30.5% |
Additional benefits cited by respondents included:
- Upgrade in knowledge
- Equipment Perfomance
- Reduced fire fighting calls and breakdowns
- Standardisation between different maintenance departments
- Enhanced computer literacy, measurement
- Enhanced transparency and accountability
- Trending
- Time sheets of engineers
- Improved control of material tracking & delivery
- Be able to implement Asset maintenance program (RCM/RBI method) in the
organisation
- Inventory control
- Changes in maintenance processes
- Vendor details recorded,
- Improved KPI's control
- Cost projection
|