W6__Hamda__ Pareto
Priority Index (PPI) for Maintenance team __
1-
Problem Definition
Since the
efficiency of each plant either Power Plant, Water Plant or other Industrial
plant depends firstly on the efficiency and the life of its machines, because
the high efficiency of machines means high efficiency of plants which will
cause high quality of plant’s products. In order to ensure and keep the high
efficiency of machines (Gas Turbines, Steam Turbines, and others) the plant
scheduled a maintenance program (major inspection program) for such unit during
a period of time (in Winter season). For that maintenance program, the project
company may select a maintenance team either Internal Maintenance team
(group of employees who work on the plant in maintenance department), Local
Maintenance team (maintenance company where its location is in Oman), or Global
Maintenance team (from outside Oman).
2-
Identify the Feasible Alternative
Three alternatives will be compared in this
blog:
-
Option
1: Local maintenance team.
-
Option
2: Global maintenance team.
-
Option
3: Internal maintenance team.
3-
Development of the outcome of Alternative
The feasible
alternatives will be compared using Pareto Priority Index
(PPI), by calculating the PPI using the below formula:
PPI= (Savings * Probability) / (Costs * Time of
Completion- “years”)
There are 4
items to be known and considered in calculating the PPI as mentioned in the
above formula such as:
·
Cost
(USD): the cost of implementing the option. In plant
case, it’ll consider the salary of the team for a period of one year, in
addition to the other costs.
·
Saving
(USD): the returns that the team is expected to present to the company in
the form of savings (the money that the plant may save during the maintenance
program) during a period of one year.
·
Time
of completion (years): the time it
takes to implement the option of selecting the suitable team for maintenance
purpose.
·
Probability
of success: how likely the team
is going to succeed in their task during that period of time.
4-
Selection
Criteria
The team with the high and biggest PPI value shall the plant selected as
the main maintenance team for the maintenance program.
5-
Analysis and
comparison of the Alternative
The following table 1 summarizes the value of the inputs used each
of the alternatives and the resulting PPI.
Options
|
Cost ($)
|
Savings ($)
|
Time (year)
|
Probability
(%)
|
PPI
|
Option 1
|
70,000
|
90,000
|
0.5
|
70 %
|
1.8
|
Option 2
|
100,000
|
110,000
|
0.75
|
80 %
|
1.17
|
Option 3
|
30,000
|
50,000
|
0.33
|
90 %
|
4.54
|
6-
Selection of
the preferred Alternative
Options
|
PPI value
|
Rank (highest to lowest)
|
Option 1: Local maintenance team.
|
1.8
|
2
|
Option 2: Global maintenance team.
|
1.17
|
3
|
Option 3: Internal maintenance team.
|
4.54
|
1
|
From table 2:
it is clear that option 3 which is (selecting Internal Maintenance team)
in order to do the maintenance program during the inspection period has the
highest and biggest PPI value. So, the plant based on that value shall select
this team.
7-
Performance
Monitoring and the Post Evaluation of result
Selecting any team to do a specific task during a specific period of
time is depending on main items such as the cost, savings, the time of
completing the work and the probability of doing the work successfully by that
team. The highest value of PPI which depends on that data, means the high
priority of selecting that option. PPI analysis can be done from one time to
another by updating the data.
References:
1-
Tommy Hendarto, 2017,W11_TH_Pareto
Priority Index for Gas Station Project, Retrieved on 11 December from https://emeraldaace2017.com/2017/11/13/w11_th_pareto-prority-index-for-gas-station-project/
2-
Jared Munk, 2014, The Six Sigma Approach to Project
Selection, Retrieved on 11 December from http://www.sixsigmadaily.com/the-six-sigma-approach-to-project-selection/
3-
Yaarub Alnaabi ,2017, W5_YN_Pareto Priority Index, Retrieved on 11 December from https://emeraldaace2017.com/2017/11/13/w11_th_pareto-prority-index-for-gas-station-project/
Hmmmmmm........ Great case study but I am worried about what MIGHT be bias in your analysis? IF hiring INTERNAL people was such a great deal then why are hospitals, universities and even many factories now OUTSOURCING maintenance services? IF having your own internal maintenance was orders of magnitude BETTER then why is this no longer a global trend?
ReplyDeleteI am going to accept your blog posting but I would hope you do a bit more research on this topic as your conclusions CLEARLY are not consistent with what most of the rest of the world is doing right now:
https://www.iofficecorp.com/blog/3-reasons-to-outsource-your-facilities-management-and-3-reasons-not-to
https://www.chem.info/article/2014/05/pros-cons-outsourced-vs-house-maintenance
http://feedforward.com.au/hr_outsourcing.htm
http://www.engineerlive.com/content/maintenance-house-or-outsource
https://www.efficientplantmag.com/2004/09/maintenance-outsourcing-is-the-answer-or-is-it/
http://www.lvb.com/article/20151214/lvb01/312119989/property-maintenance-outsource-or-perform-inhouse
Looking forward to another blog posting either confirming or refuting your original findings.
BR,
Dr. PDG, Jakarta