National Academies Press: OpenBook

Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices (2015)

Chapter: Chapter 4: An Approach to Evaluating CMMS Software

« Previous: Chapter 3: Roles and Stakeholders
Page 27
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: An Approach to Evaluating CMMS Software." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 27
Page 28
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: An Approach to Evaluating CMMS Software." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 28
Page 29
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: An Approach to Evaluating CMMS Software." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 29
Page 30
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: An Approach to Evaluating CMMS Software." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 30
Page 31
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: An Approach to Evaluating CMMS Software." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 31
Page 32
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: An Approach to Evaluating CMMS Software." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 32
Page 33
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: An Approach to Evaluating CMMS Software." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 33
Page 34
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: An Approach to Evaluating CMMS Software." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 34
Page 35
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: An Approach to Evaluating CMMS Software." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 35
Page 36
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: An Approach to Evaluating CMMS Software." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 36
Page 37
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: An Approach to Evaluating CMMS Software." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 37
Page 38
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: An Approach to Evaluating CMMS Software." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 38

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Chapter 4: An Approach to Evaluating CMMS Software This section introduces a suggested evaluation approach to choosing a CMMS. This approach does not begin with looking at the software packages available on the market, but starts with identifying the requirements for a CMMS. It focuses on identification of the airport’s needs so that software can be matched to fit those needs. The airport should first identify the assets to manage, determine what asset data will be managed, identify features needed in the CMMS, and then determine anticipated support for future enhancements. This evaluation approach is implemented in the CMMS Evaluation Tool accompanying this Guidebook. A User Guide for this tool is provided in Appendix C. Following the steps discussed in this section will give the airport a roadmap to evaluate CMMS software solutions. But first, it is important to assemble the team of stakeholders discussed in Chapter 3 and devise a plan to evaluate CMMS requirements. The airport manages assets across many categories including facilities, airfield, fleets, pavement, systems, airside structures, and landside structures. A CMMS that can be used for the variety of asset types will be required if the airport decides to manage all its assets with the CMMS. If an airport decides to manage only one type or a limited number of types of assets, a system that is specifically designed for that kind of asset type might be a better choice. Therefore, the first step in evaluating a solution is to identify the assets that will be managed by the airport. By limiting the requirements for a CMMS to specific types of assets, the initial cost of the CMMS implementation can be substantially reduced. That is true even if the software costs are not lower, because the configuration and implementation costs scale to both the type and number of assets to be managed. So it is important to have a list of required assets for management, as well as a list of assets that might be managed in a later phase. The software chosen must meet the long-term need for capabilities, but the initial cost will only include cataloging the required assets and configuring the software to manage those assets. This is an important aspect for airports with limited budgets. It is possible that a small airport might only choose to implement a CMMS for its fleet of vehicles, for example. While the airport will not enjoy the benefit of a full-featured CMMS program, there are benefits to be gained from any limited implementation of a CMMS. It is also likely that most airports already have a pavement management system and will not choose to include pavement management in the requirements for their CMMS. Since January 1, 1995, airports have been required to have an effective pavement management system, if they accept AIP funds for pavement replacement or reconstruction. The required pavement management systems has only four basic elements: 26

• A pavement inventory with dimensions, locations, and maintenance history of the airport’s paved surfaces. • An inspection schedule with detailed annual assessments and monthly drive-by observations. • Inspection records with dates, findings, locations of pavement distress, and remedial actions. • A method to retrieve data at FAA request. Two pavement management systems that were developed under contract with the Army Corps of Engineers are Micro-PAVER and PAVEAIR. They have been implemented broadly at airports and fulfill these basic requirements. The following sections address the four asset selection steps for purposes of determining the best CMMS solution for the airport. These steps are:  Step One: Choose the Assets to Manage in the CMMS  Step Two: Decide What Management Functions to Incorporate into the CMMS  Step Three: Identify Initial Integrations  Step Four: Analyze Workflow to Incorporate into the CMMS Step One. Choose CMMS Assets To determine the best CMMS solution, the airport should begin by choosing which assets they want to accumulate into an asset catalog for management in the CMMS, and the functions that a CMMS is to support in management of those assets. The list of categories of assets that are managed by CMMS at airports can be found in the Managed Assets Section of Chapter 2. For each of those categories of assets, the airport will decide what functions to include in the evaluation criteria for the CMMS. That first step to defining requirements for a CMMS not only catalogs those assets and their functions, but also prioritizes them. The process flow for this first step is shown in Figure 4-1. 27

Figure 4-1 Step 1 – Determining and Prioritizing Assets Step Two. Decide How To Manage the Selected Assets in the CMMS After identifying the asset categories in Step One, now in Step Two an airport should identify how the airport wants to use the CMMS to manage the assets. CMMS functions that can be used to manage assets include: • Work orders • Preventive maintenance • Condition assessments • Condition-based maintenance • Inventory management of spare parts and supplies used in maintenance • Information database for suppliers of spare parts • Tracking maintenance for work through other entities (outside contractors, other departments, other organizations within the state, city, etc.) • Documentation of warranties • Work Scheduling • Maintenance cost history • Chargebacks – cost for parts, labor, asset use, and contractors 28

• Reliability and cost history (Track outages and costs by work order; by machine; by department) • Resource scheduling • Reporting, with rollups by system and/or by facility • Mobile applications For example, if an airport decides to manage passenger-loading bridges with its CMMS, it should then determine which of the functions in the list are required to manage the passenger-loading bridges at the airport. Perhaps chargebacks are not needed. Work orders, however, are probably needed for all asset categories. The airport should then have a list of assets to manage and the related management functions. Budgets, time, and resources may limit the scope of the implementation, so prioritization of the list of assets and functions is important. A prioritization scale should be chosen for selecting the functions that an airport wants to manage in a CMMS implementation. A possible four-tiered scale is shown in Table 4-1. High Mission critical requirement Medium Required eventually but could wait Low A enhancement that would be nice to have when resources permit NR Not required Table 4-1 Prioritization Scale It should be noted, that alternately, it might be advantageous to the airport to prioritize based on planned phases of implementation. Assets to be included in the first phase would have high priority, assets to be added in phase two would have medium priority, assets in later phases would have low priority. Assets that are not planned for inclusion within the expected implementation phases (and budget) would not be required. Primary functions of a CMMS include the various functions listed earlier. Appendix E provides a detailed checklist showing all primary functions grouped by asset types. In this checklist the airport should prioritize functions to implement for each type of asset. Functions prioritized as “High” will be included in the CMMS requirements. The “Medium” priority functions will be included as a consideration based on budget. The “Low” will be listed in the nice-to-have considerations. The “NR” categorized functions will not be included in the requirements. To summarize the process for this first two steps: 1) Identify the assets to manage 2) Identify how to manage each asset (the functions) and prioritize. Step Three. Identify Integrations As discussed in Chapter Two, CMMS can be integrated with other systems that use asset data, such as building management and SCADA systems, financial systems, procurement systems, scheduling systems, inspection systems, safety management systems, GIS, and CAD systems. Some of those integrations might be particularly beneficial. For example, integration with a purchasing system, may be very beneficial if the maintenance management system has an inventory management feature, allowing automatic receipt of 29

inventory into the system. Integration with a purchasing system can trigger generation of a purchase request when spare parts inventory reaches a minimum level, based on the requirement requisition of a part on a work order. Also, scheduling systems can flag the need for additional resources when loads are high. There are other beneficial integrations with other systems, including: • GIS • Logbook • Computer aided dispatch (CAD) • Incident Management System • Procurements • HR/Payroll • Scheduling software • Safety management system • Document management system • Building management systems (please specify) • Warehouse / Inventory • Building Information Management (BIM) Systems There should be consideration for any future integrations that might be desirable including data integration with Building Information Management (BIM) Systems to populate your CMMS with information collected during design and construction. The use of BIM for construction projects is emerging. There is movement towards development of open formats for data, and that should be specified in all design and construction projects on the airport to facilitate data exchange with existing and new applications. Benefits of integrating these systems with a CMMS may include: • Elimination of double entry of data • Faster to update information • Improved data quality • Automatically generated reporting • Up-to-date data improves processes • Easy retrieval data • Greater efficiency of work processes • Automatic generation of work orders • More efficient work practices • Near-immediate access to data gives a better situational awareness • Less hard copy documentation required due to electronic storage and up-to-date data It is difficult to generally gauge the cost of integrations with CMMS software because the costs depend somewhat on the choice of the CMMS. Specifying important integrations will require that RFP responses include the integration cost. However, specifying integrations that are not necessary might cause the implementation costs to be higher than expected. Careful consideration to what integrations are required should be done. If the airport chooses all systems for potential integrations for inclusion in the RFP or the requirements for development, separate pricing should be requested for each integration so that a cost benefit analysis of each can be undertaken. Often, integrations are reserved for later phases in a CMMS implementation, but 30

identified in the original procurement to preclude difficulties with a chosen CMMS in the later phase. It is important to list integrations as future enhancements in the original procurement documents for that reason. There are many potential difficulties when integrating systems from different sources, including proprietary software, outdated applications, and siloed applications (running on networks that are not physically available). Discussions with the airport’s IT department, support staff, and/or vendors supporting the applications can help understand what the particular difficulties of integrations might be. Those problems can be addressed in planning, since they address larger problems that must be solved by organizational strategic thinking. Step Four. Analyze Workflow Management Airports have business processes or workflows that map out how people work in your to accomplish airport operations. These workflows identify what is expected of staff for particular procedures. Workflows are used for work management, operations checklists and standard operating procedures, materials management, and other functions on the airport campus. Understanding these workflows is critical when implementing a CMMS because automating them is one of the main advantages of a CMMS. 
 Documentation of workflow will outline procedure steps and descriptions, desired outcomes, specific responsibilities and accountabilities, and criteria for completion. Workflow is certainly followed within the maintenance organization for routine procedures. Those procedures may be documented and kept up-to-date, or they may be not formalized but just rely on organizational knowledge passed to team members when they are trained in their roles. Whatever the circumstance, those procedures are the basis for the day-to-day operations of the maintenance department. For automation within a CMMS, those workflows must be examined, starting with all documented standard and emergency operating procedures (SOPs and EOPs). It is not uncommon for those procedures to deviate from the way business is really done, and for some portion of operating procedures to be undocumented. Interviews with maintenance staff can help fill in those gaps. After the operating procedures of the maintenance organization is understood, there may also be events that happen outside the maintenance organization that are included in the workflow for a particular procedure. It is important to understand the entire process including the work done outside of the maintenance department. It is the complete workflow, from beginning through to the desired outcome at completion that needs to be evaluated for inclusion in the CMMS. While it is possible to automate part of a workflow, it might be possible to achieve greater benefit at little cost by considering the process start to finish. This evaluation process is depicted in Figure 4-2. 31

Figure 4-2 Analyze Existing Workflows Each of the identified workflows should be analyzed for potential for automation in a CMMS. Some workflow automations that might benefit the airport include: • FAR Part 139 inspections, reporting and record-keeping • NOTAM and field condition reporting • Internal and external safety reporting procedures • Requisitions based on inventory levels • Scheduling preventive maintenance • Sign replacement procedures (see Figure 4-3 below for an example) Figure 4-3 Sign Replacement Procedure Source: Washington State DOT State-Managed Airport Handbook. February 2011. Chapter 4. 32

There is no question that automating workflow in a CMMS can bring efficiencies and benefits to any airport. There is really no question of whether to automate in a CMMS. The question is rather what processes to automate and to what extent. The assessment of workflows at an airport assumes: (1) that the airport understands the point at which the organization will be mature in its implementation of a CMMS, and (2) that the organization understands what a full-featured CMMS can provide. Often, for this reason, an airport (at the start of a CMMS effort) will engage an industry subject matter expert in order to help address any knowledge gaps. There are two kinds of automation. The first is using an internal workflow that is built in to the CMMS; workflow for work orders is a common built-in function. A second kind requires integrations with other systems. For example, some airports have successfully implemented a workflow arrangement between the FAA Part 139 inspection process and the generation and remediation of work orders for areas found deficient in the inspection. That workflow process could require integrations with a computer-aided dispatch system and an inspection (or inspection reporting) system. At Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport, the Operations Airside inspection crews use a PC in their vehicles to track their real-time location on the airfield in performing their shift inspections. The system allows them to indicate whether there are Part 139 discrepancies on the airfield. As shown in Figure 4-4, in the case of a discrepancy, a sub work order is automatically generated that is linked to the inspection, which is then dispatched to the appropriate work crew to perform the remediation. Once the work is completed, a record of the inspection, the work order, is generated and the completion of the work is available as a system record. These records can then be presented to the FAA, if required. Figure 4-4 Typical Workflow This workflow requires data from one system to be distributed to additional systems, and control of the process to flow with the data. A representation of the data flow between the systems is shown in Figure 4- 5. Figure 4-5 Potential integrations for the workflow Ops Airside finds discrepancy WO generated Crew dispatched to repair Completed repair is inspected Asset returned to service Work order closed CAD •Ops Airside reports discrepancy to dispatch •Records available for FAA review CMMS •WO generated •Crew dispatched to repair •Records available for FAA review Inspection System •Completed repair is inspected •Asset returned to service •CMMS •Work order closed •Records available for FAA review 33

Two of the case study reports presented in Appendix B have a similar process for Part 139 discrepancy reporting. Each airport has implemented the automation in the way that is most useful to them. The data flow required depends on the other supporting systems. In some cases, the integrations can require minimal cost and effort. In other cases, the cost and effort might prevent the feasibility of the integration. Even though some workflows requiring integrations can be expensive, some online commercial tools could help achieve workflow automation at a relatively low cost. For example, the Google Map Coordinates feature, as shown in Figures 4-6 and 4-7, allows a company to assign work orders to remotely located staff who can easily be located using Google Map services. Field staff could accept/reject the work orders, update work order status, and notify the dispatcher when work orders are complete using online services. Figure 4-6 Simplified Work Dispatch Figure 4-7 Simplified Work Details This simple solution could allow an airport to electronically dispatch work assignments to field staff located throughout the airport, with assignments made to optimize locations and with the ability to track progress and maintain records of the assignment. This very elementary application for a 10-person operation is available in a subscription-based model at a relatively low annual cost, although there is some additional cost for smart phones and their ongoing airtime costs. While many of the details inherent in a CMMS would not be available, this could enable a small organization to go paperless from a paper-based system. Hence, an initial foray into an automated system can be made at very low cost with some level of benefit. Alternatively, more comprehensive, hosted solutions are available at somewhat higher costs. At the other extreme, overall costs can easily reach in the millions of U.S. dollars for a large-scale enterprise level system with many data sources. 34

The examples are given to help the airport understand the options available for automation. Although automation of workflow will be accomplished in implementation and configuration of the CMMS, during this evaluation process the airport will decide the requirements for the CMMS. Those critical workflows should be identified at that time, so that the CMMS purchased will support the airport requirements. Each candidate workflow should be prioritized for inclusion in the CMMS requirements. Processes that support regulatory compliance might be prioritized “High” because they have significant impact on operations and because automated documentation provides the airport with a record for compliance. After examining documented procedures for candidate workflows, it would be beneficial to develop use cases for the CMMS by interviewing targeted maintenance staff. A use case is associated with a particular function of the system. It describes the way that the CMMS is to be used by the staff, and for what purposes it is used. The use cases could be presented as addenda to an RFP or development requirements. Support for Future Enhancements and Features In specifying the CMMS the airport plans to implement, there should be consideration for the following features, functions, and capabilities, each having an impact on implementation costs: • Inventory Database • Inspections • Preventive Maintenance (PM) • Predictive Testing & Inspection • Proactive Maintenance • Work Request (WR) & Work Order (WO) • Trouble Calls • Work Orders for PM, Repair, ROI • Work Order Estimating • Maintenance History • Material Management • Tool and Equipment Management • Scheduling • Backlog for Maintenance and Repair • Contract Administration • Utilities • Environmental Tracking • CAD Support • Priority System • Warranty Tracking • Management Reports • User Customization • Ad Hoc Query • Data Sharing and Integrations With Other Systems • Presentation Graphics • Warranty • Transaction Recording • Data Import and Export • Bar Coding Data Interface • Archive • Back-up • Licensing • Capacity • User Documentation • Menus/User Interface • Error Handling • Password Protection The complexity of the implementation greatly influences its success and cost. However, a tiered approach to implementation and a specification by the airport that certain features, functions, and capabilities are desired in the future will avoid a dead-end implementation in which the eventual goal cannot be achieved. An airport should include any high priority eventual goal as a future enhancement in the initial RFP or development requirements. 35

A detailed checklist, providing individual features and functionalities for each of the items in the list above is provided in Appendix D. The checklist should be used by the airport not only to define its requirements but also be utilized in the development of an RFP or specifications document for the development of a CMMS. A sample section of the checklist is shown in Table 4-2. Feature/Functionality/Capability Required 1. Inventory Database a. Recording of data for each facility, system, vehicle, and all collateral equipment and inventory b. A unique identifier for each maintained item c. Grouping items by systems and subsystems d. Provide for storing of make, model, location, custody, facilities maintenance standards reference, facilities maintenance requirements reference, financial information, maintenance manuals, and standard reports e. Develop policies, procedures, manual or mechanized to facilitate new data coming from various sources to be added to the database as new facilities are built or modified 2. Inspections a. Permit each item to have an explicit and unique inspection schedule and frequency b. Inspection checklists and guides, with linkages to work orders to account for any remediation needed as a result c. Storage for, or link within the system, to maintenance standards and drawings, prior inspection results, safety, current or pending work orders, and work requests for the system being inspected d. Storage for, or link within the system, to information on plans and coordination requirements e. Provide the means to report on inspections, their results, and the associated work orders generated to remediate issues found to assess the efficacy of the inspection program 3. Preventive Maintenance (PM) a. PM scheduling b. PM work order preparation based on maintenance requirements c. Multiple levels of scheduling based on criticality, use, condition, or calendar term d. Coupling of inventory data, maintenance checklist, parts, safety requirements and special environmental concerns, coordination/outage requirements results of the last PM, diagnostic and maintenance references, drawings, special tool or equipment requirements, and special skill or trade requirements e. Schedule reporting for each week to provide planning for resources and summary schedules f. Capability to schedule future PM dates for increments based on actual completion of a previous PM Table 4-2 CMMS Features and Capabilities Checklist Sample 36

Evaluation Tool Overview The CMMS Evaluation Tool (“Tool”) provides a step-by-step guide through the selection process, including selection of modules and/or features of CMMS for implementation using prioritization and budget. It therefore, requests input from the user about characteristics of the user’s airport, and needs for the CMMS. Industry research was incorporated into the Tool’s specifications and development. The Tool is based on the concept of a decision tree, using high-level questions and the respective users’ answers to document the specific needs of the airport. Based on these answers, the Tool generates a list of requirements that can be used for evaluating software options or for using in a procurement document. The Tool has implemented the evaluation approach in this chapter. In order to ensure the output is meaningful and useful, it is highly recommended that the user not only be familiar with this approach, but also to do the required research, data collection, and decision-making prior to using the Tool. The output of the Tool suggests requirements to be considered for use, but should be modified to fit the airport’s actual requirements. The User’s Guide is provided in Appendix C. 37

Next: Chapter 5: Selection and Implementation of an Airport CMMS »
Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB’s Airport Cooperative Research Program (ACRP) Web-Only Document 23: Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices provides guidance with selecting a CMMS that is most compatible with an airport’s individual needs. Airports use CMMS to help manage airport assets. The report explores ways to integrate a CMMS into airport processes, procedures, and other information technology systems.

This guidebook is accompanied by an evaluation tool, which may help airports with defining their requirements for a CMMS program.

This software is offered as is, without warranty or promise of support of any kind either expressed or implied. Under no circumstance will the National Academy of Sciences or the Transportation Research Board (collectively "TRB") be liable for any loss or damage caused by the installation or operation of this product. TRB makes no representation or warranty of any kind, expressed or implied, in fact or in law, including without limitation, the warranty of merchantability or the warranty of fitness for a particular purpose, and shall not in any case be liable for any consequential or special damages.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!