Forum help

On a current implementation we are considering omitting independent creation and management of notifications, instead creating work orders directly with automatic creation of notifications in the background, with order and notifications having a 1:1 relationship. This avoids the need for multiple transactions to view outstanding work and appears to make the whole work order management process simpler. Notification information such as damage codes, malfunction data etc. can still be entered through the order. Any opinions on this approach? Thanks.

In our set up we independently raise Notifcations to record defects, if we have resource these are turned to PM orders (instructions to work).

If we omitted this and proceeded directly to PM orders it is likely that we would have many, many PM orders without actuals due to lack of resource.

So for us it is very much needed, having the notifcations record the defect allows us to plan and priortise these works and formulate some plan of attack, however we get at least 300+ notifications per month on a wide variety of failures.

Your approach would simply not work for us.

How many breakdowns would you expect? for me that would determine whether the notifcation route would be valid.

Our practic, notification can be only for perform the job, it mean not necessary to open the order(Some job not require planing that mean no require resources) For instance: operator tightening the both for stop small leak, then he will recording activities in notification.

Thanks for the replies. It is likely that the situation arises in all businesses when work requests are made but the work cannot be done due to resource contraints or other reasons. My view is that one of the keys to making a CMMS work effectively is to regularly review this backlog and make the decision to cancel the request (with suitably recorded reason) or leave in the work queue with meaningful priority & scheduled dates if valid. If this is done regularly, ideally with predefined criteria, then the work order list should remain meaningful. If a SAP Work Order is at CRTD status then this can be cancelled by means of business closure as not complete ie. change to CLSD NCMP status. A history is therefore maintained, and the system is kept "clean". This approach avoids the problem of having open notifications, and open work orders, which do not have a 1:1 relationship and therefore have to be managed independently.

A couple of years ago I was involved in a migration exercise from a legacy CMMS to a new system. From the previous 10 years, there were 50000 (50K) incomplete work orders in the system, the vast majority of which we cancelled at migration to avoid loading the new system with meaningless records. This must be a familiar scenario to many CMMS users, but is one which should be avoided where possible.

Regarding SAP notifications in particular, I've come across people using notifications to manage work where no additional costs require recording (labour / materials etc.). This ensures a work history is kept without the complexities of using work orders. Do any other systems use the concept of notifications to anyone's knowledge? All the other systems I've come across use work orders only, with suitable status control.

Again, thanks for the replies.

Logical,

You seem to have the answers to your Question, the last part of your last response is applicable to a good number of organizations and indeed would make your Maintenance Execution process simple. I'll rather stop at the Notification stage if there's been no implication on Costs and at the same time I'll like to track Maintenance history / equipment availability. However, I'll advise you put in place a good system of work evaluation / prioritization to make sure only items that are evaluated as such proceed to Work Order creation stage.

I have not much luck with direct to work order protocols. In fact the notification system works best when managed correctly. More people that have the ability to write work orders means there will be duplicates and mistakes. It should be up to the Planner/scheduler to "validate" the work, make sure the resources are available and schedule the work accordingly. In case of emergency work order, notifications should still be used (written). To track reliability and review the work, even after completion, before it is "validated" and eventually (technically) closed. If your backlog grows out of control, then I would say you are not managing the system correctly or you do not the the resourses to complete the amount of work being generated (Work Center Capacity).

Which is exactly the problem at my company, lack of resource!

quote:

Originally posted by January39:
Which is exactly the problem at my company, lack of resource!

Curcumventing aspects of the SAP program will not resolve your issues with lack of resources or man power at your facility. This needs to be addressed, it is a seperate issue. Simplifing the proceedure may seem like a good idea but may lead to more trouble in the future. I do not know why you (or your company) would impliment such a program like SAP and not take full advantage of it.