You may be aware of the common misunderstanding and lack of appreciation for the maintenance activity that creates this problem.  We recall one plant manager telling us that of all the departments that reported to him, maintenance was the one that he understood least.  Because the maintenance function remains somewhat of a mystery in many organizations, efforts to aggressively draw it into organizational change programs are difficult and time consuming.  Maintenance craftsmen are often accustomed to working alone or in pairs but seldom in teams.  Come on,  this is the ‘90’s!  Teams are the way we do business now.

This problem has been around for a long time.  It is quite common to see maintenance functions minimally monitored and regulated by managers, yet their budgets represent a large percentage of the organizations’ budgets.  Five to fifteen percent of total sales can be tied up in the direct cost of maintenance.   According to expert estimates, we spend about 700 billion dollars a year on maintenance in the United States.  Experts say that approximately one-third, 230 billion dollars, is wasted.   Now that is an opportunity for improvement.  TPM changes the problem by giving us a system to help us to become more efficient…by optimizing maintenance dollars. 

A combination of poor productivity, lack of standards, inadequate supervision, insufficient training, ineffective storeroom control, minimal administrative systems, and poor planning and scheduling contribute to this situation.  A major contributor to the problem is that maintenance is often too busy fighting fires to prevent them…and production helps to keep it that way.  You know it’s true.

However, with increasing emphasis on improving organizational efficiency and productivity, maintenance is not only being called upon to be just a player, but is even expected to be a leader in organizational improvement efforts.  It makes sense that quality and manufacturing improvement initiatives depend on reliable equipment to produce quick and defect-free products.  This places a heavy burden on improving the conditions that prevent equipment from being efficient now.

With the emphasis on running leaner organizations, it is unrealistic to expect organizations to beef up their maintenance functions to meet this new demand.  Instead, it makes more sense to use existing resources more productively.  So, doesn’t it seem logical to redistribute some of the responsibility of equipment upkeep to others involved with equipment use…the equipment operators?  If you said no, I’ll deal with you later.

The burden is then on maintenance to correct the problems and return for more lists.