Assessment of Barriers to Knowledge and Experience Transfer in Major Maintenance Activities

Abstract

Systematic failure analysis generally enhances the ability of engineering decision-makers to obtain a holistic view of the causal relationships that often exist within the systems they manage. Such analyses are made more difficult by uncertainties and organisational complexities associated with critical and inevitable industrial maintenance activities such as major overhauls, outages, shutdowns, and turnarounds (MoOSTs). This is perhaps due to the ratio of tasks-to-duration typically permitted. While core themes of MoOSTs including planning, contracts, costing, execution, etc., have been the focus of most research activities, it is worth noting that the ability to successfully transfer and retain MoOSTs knowledge is still under-investigated. Effectively implementing a case study-based approach for data collection, the current study explores the harmonisation of various risk assessments (i.e., fault tree analysis and reliability block diagrams) and multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) tools to investigate perceived barriers to MoOSTs knowledge management and experience transfer. The case study selected for this study is a dual process line all-integrated cement manufacturing plant (the largest of such process configuration in its region). The justification for this choice of industry was driven by the volume and frequency of MoOSTs executed each year (typically 4–1 per process line), thereby providing a good opportunity to interact with industrial experts with immense experience in the management/execution of MoOSTs within their industry. A multilayered methodology was adopted for information gathering, whereby baseline knowledge from an earlier conducted systematic review of MoOSTs practices/approaches provided fundamental theoretical trends, which was then complemented by field-based data (from face-to-face interviews, focus group sessions, questionnaires, and secondary information from company MoOSTs documentation). During the analysis, fault tree analysis (FTA) and reliability block diagrams (RBDs) were simultaneously used to generate the causal relationships and criticality that exist between identified barriers, while the MCDA (in this case analytical hierarchy process) was used to identify and prioritise barriers to MoOSTs knowledge management and experience transfer, based on sensitivity analysis and consistency of approach. The primary aim of this study is to logically conceptualise core barriers/limiters to knowledge in temporary industrial project environments such as MoOSTs, as well as enhance the ability of decision-makers to prioritise learning efforts. The results obtained from analysis of data identify three major main criteria (barriers) and 23 subcriteria ranked according to level of importance as indicated from expert opinions.

Learning How to Learn from Disasters through a Comparative Dichotomy Analysis: Grenfell Tower and Hurricane Katrina Case Studies

“…Hence, an important balance in designing Masters programmes should be geared towards achieving such a balance of a set of dichotomies in terms of engineering and management, technical and social, quantitative and qualitative, and positivist and interpretivist approaches, and emphasis on both single-loop and double-loop learning. In general, both success and failure offer good lessons for continuous improvement within all disciplines [36][37][38][39]73], although most conventional teachings are more inclined towards emphasizing the significance of learning from organizational successes [99,100]. However, some studies [101][102][103] are shifting this paradigm through their argument that the consequences of failures (especially catastrophic failures) are more likely to linger far longer than those of success, which eventually sets the framework that breeds experiential learning [25,55,104].…”

“…For instance, the emerging issues regarding cladding and testing of materials against fire resistance can be associated with the internal perspective, while the issues of trust between victims and authorities are external and are the main issues being covered in the GTD investigation so far. There is hence a need for more research into approaches that can facilitate clarity around decision-making by various agencies to increase trust about intervention [35][36][37][38][39] and also clarity about translations into different languages [40].…”

A Holistic Framework for Supporting Maintenance and Asset Management Life Cycle Decisions for Power Systems

“…The approach to the maintenance costing adopted here is based on the maintenance regimes namely BM, PPM and CBM [85][86][87]. However, the maintenance costing strategy at PLN (West Java) recognises two main maintenance regimes (i.e., preventive and BM).…”

Knowledge Criticality Assessment and Codification Framework for Major Maintenance Activities: A Case Study of Cement Rotary Kiln Plant

“…Major overhauls, outages, shutdowns and turnarounds, collectively denoted by the "MoOSTs" acronym here, are major types of maintenance classified as one of the most critical endeavours. This is because it offers one of the few instances whereby all elements of routine and occasional maintenance activities, including inspections (first level and specific), overhauls, repairs, and part replacements, are performed at a single instance with significant cost implications, in continuous production/operation industries [5][6][7].…”

“…However, comparable levels of technical details were obtained via a field-specific questionnaire and administered using the Delphi technique. The process of expert categorisation for building representative panels, modelling of typical Delphi survey panels, group sizing and establishment of consensus judgments from choosing "averages" of judgement were detailed in a preceding study [5]. The application of group decision-making offers possibilities for deciding which alternatives are best under certain conditions and offering support in providing insights into the decision-making process by varying criterion weights and scores.…”