Maintenance Performance Metrics for Manufacturing Industry

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate various maintenance performance indicators (MPIs) within the perspective of maintenance metrics conducted by the managerial personnel for achieving the specified production target. In this paper, a conceptual framework has been developed, that provides guideline for choosing maintenance performance metrics for a typical manufacturing industry. It seeks to align maintenance objective with the performance indicators and provides a link between the two. Operations and maintenance of manufacturing system are of great economic importance. The review of literature on maintenance performance indicators and their measurement has been summarized under the five categories of metrics; functional metrics, equipment performance metrics, maintenance process metrics, periodicity metrics and OEE metrics. The review indicates that quantitative metrics for measuring maintenance performance are lacking. To address this gap, maintenance performance metrics has been proposed.

A Suggested Approach for Maintenance Performance Framework: An Aircraft Maintenance Organization as a case study

“…In this section, the review of literature will emphasize the importance of maintenance, MPM, and management (MPIs), and Maintenance Performance Measurement frameworks. Maintenance incorporates the engineering decisions and related actions that are needed for the optimization of specified equipment function [17]. Plant maintenance is part of the strategic business processes of the companies that forms an integral part of the business practices which adds value to the industry [18 and 19].…”

“…The MPM framework should provide decision-makers with a solution for performance measurements by connecting them straightforwardly with the organizational hierarchy comprising of financial and non-financial indicators. However, there is little literature available that covers the development of a systematic approach to PM in maintenance [17].…”

“…Kumar, Soni and Agnihotri [17] explained that the framework backings the holistic process by illustrating boundaries and specifying dimensions. Kaplan and Norton [24] developed a balanced scorecard performance measurement framework that focused on financial aspects, customers, internal processes, learning and growth, which allowed them to make observations from both financial and non-financial perspectives.…”

Impact of overall equipment effectiveness on return on investment in the Nigerian cement manufacturing industry

“…Bangar, Hemlata & Jagmohan (2013) [21] carried out a research investigation in Indian on "Improving overall equipment effectiveness by implementing total productive maintenance in auto industry" The results of the study shows significant positive relationship between OEE that is above 85% and manufacturing performance. Kumar, Soni & Geeta, (2013) [22] conducted a study in Bhopal on "Maintenance performance metrics for manufacturing industry". The finding of the study shows that overall equipment effectiveness at 90% is a critical success factor influencing survival, profitability and competitive advantage of manufacturing organization.…”

Supply chain strategy in the luxury fashion industry: impacts on performance indicators

“…),Chan (2003),Shepherd and G€ unter (2011),Thilakarathna et al (2015) N/A M # Stock keeping unit (SKU)Shepherd and G€ unter (2011),Gunasekaran et al (2004),Bhagwat and Sharma (2007) N/A M ProductivityGunasekaran et al (2004), Kumar Hurreeram et al (2007,Gunasekaran et al (2004),Otto and Kotzab (2003),Kumar (2013), Kumar Hurreeram et al (2014) L M % of non-compliance on total products Gunasekaran et al (2004), Sellitto et al (2015), Kumar Hurreeram et al (2014) A M Make cycle time Yeh et al (2010), Pinna et al (2017), SCOR (RS.2.2) N/A D Inventory turnover Lapide (2000), Shepherd and G€ unter (2011), Otto and Kotzab (2003), Battista and Schiraldi (2013), Papakiriakopoulos and Pramatari (2010) N/A D Transportation costs Beamon (1999), Cai et al (2009), Chan (2003), Gunasekaran et al (2004), Kumar Hurreeram et al (2014), Otto and Kotzab (2003), Shepherd and G€ unter (2011), Thilakarathna et al (2015), SCOR (CO.3.022) L D Customer response time (service level) Beamon (1999), Bhagwat and Sharma (2007), Cai et al (2009), Chan (2003), De Felice and Petrillo (2013), Gunasekaran et al (2004), Lapide (2000), Otto and Kotzab (2003), Sellitto et al (2015), Shepherd and G€ unter (2011) A D # of on-time deliveries Beamon (1999), Chae (2009), Chan (2003), De Felice and Petrillo (2013), Lapide (2000), Sellitto et al (2015), Shepherd and G€ unter (2011), Thilakarathna et al Shepherd and G€ unter (2011), Gunasekaran et al ), Cai et al (2009), Chan (2003), Otto and Kotzab (2003), Shepherd and G€ unter (2011), Thilakarathna et al (2015) L D # back order Beamon (1999), Shepherd and G€ unter (2011), Thilakarathna et al (2015) L D # lost sales Mattila et al (2002) L D Sell-thought (%) Beamon (1999), Cai et al (2009), Mattila et al (2002), Moore and Fairhurst (2003), Shepherd and G€ unter (delivered in full (quantity) Beamon (1999), SCOR (RL 2et al (2002), Sellitto et al (2015), Kumar Hurreeram et al (2014) A Note(s): NPD: new product development; P: plan; S: source; M: make; D: delivery; R: return; L: lean; A: agile; N/A: not applicable Table…”