Phogat 2017

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 16

Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering

Identification of problems in maintenance operations and comparison with manufacturing operations: a


review
Sandeep Phogat, Anil Kumar Gupta,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Sandeep Phogat, Anil Kumar Gupta, (2017) "Identification of problems in maintenance operations and comparison with
manufacturing operations: a review", Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 23 Issue: 2, doi: 10.1108/
JQME-06-2016-0027
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JQME-06-2016-0027
Downloaded on: 21 April 2017, At: 11:49 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 0 other documents.
To copy this document: [email protected]
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 16 times since 2017*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Downloaded by HACETTEPE UNIVERSITY At 11:49 21 April 2017 (PT)

(2017),"Preventive Maintenance (PM) planning: a review", Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 23 Iss 2 pp. -
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JQME-04-2016-0014
(2017),"Prognosis of degradation based on a new dynamic method for Remaining Useful Life prediction", Journal of Quality
in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 23 Iss 2 pp. - http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JQME-03-2016-0012

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:318550 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service
information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please
visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of
more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online
products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication
Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.


Identification of problems in maintenance operations and comparison with
manufacturing operations: a review

Abstract
Purpose – In the present era of rapid globalization, maintenance of manufacturing systems is
extremely important. Different organizations are facing various problems in maintenance
management. Therefore the purpose of the paper is to identify the main problems of maintenance
operations and compare them with the problems in manufacturing operations, deduced from the
available literature of effective maintenance.
Downloaded by HACETTEPE UNIVERSITY At 11:49 21 April 2017 (PT)

Design/methodology/approach – To identify the main problems of maintenance operations and


to compare them with those in manufacturing operations, a large quantity of published literature
was studied. This paper thoroughly categorizes the available literature and reviews it
theoretically.
Findings – Lack of top management support, lack of measurement of overall equipment
effectiveness (OEE), lack of strategic planning and implementation, and various other problems
are the biggest problems of the maintenance operations and manufacturing operations. These
have appeared as major problems in accomplishment of effective maintenance strategies in the
industries.
Research limitations/implications – From findings we can conclude that for good maintenance,
top management is supposed to be supportive in taking different initiatives. Industrial
organizations should focus on improving overall performance of machines identified as OEE
rather than only productivity of machines. This paper will be extremely useful for the
researchers, maintenance professionals and others concerned with maintenance to understand the
significance of maintenance problems in industries.
Originality/value – These findings will be highly valuable for professionals relating to
manufacturing sector desiring to implement effective maintenance approach in the maintenance
management system.
Keywords - Productivity, Manufacturing, Maintenance, OEE, Breakdown, Quality,
Benchmarking, Training.
Paper type - Literature review

1. Introduction
Due to the briskly changing scenario of globalized markets, most of the organizations around the
globe are worried due to the increasing competitors and changing consumers’ demands for
quality products at the lowest costs (Chandra and Shastry, 1998). In this context, many local
firms are losing their market (Khanna and Sharma, 2011). Singh and Sharma (2015) and
Phusavat and Kanchana (2008) have noticed that various factors to gain competitiveness are:
flexibility, quality, reliability, ability to meet demand and supply requirements. Most of the
organizations are trying to improve manufacturing flexibility (Singh and Sharma, 2014). So it is
essential for such firms to spotlight on effective maintenance systems. Alsyouf (2007) and
Ahmed et al. (2005) have noticed that cost reduction can be achieved by increasing the level of
automation in different operations. Automation decreases the requirement of man power
significantly but since the complex machinery is involved in it, maintenance has a significant
role here (Ahuja and Khamba, 2008; Hansson and Backlund, 2003; Garg and Deshmukh, 2006).
Thus there is requirement of responsive maintenance department if they want to do extremely
well in service and subsequently want to raise their market share.
Due to the increasing technical advancements, the stimulus of productivity and quality, is
moving from man to machine. Productivity and quality may be increased only by implementing
well developed and organized maintenance system. So it is significant to understand the
problems faced by the organizations and they should be managed by the experienced
Downloaded by HACETTEPE UNIVERSITY At 11:49 21 April 2017 (PT)

maintenance managers (Mohamed, 2005).


Before the manufacturing revolution in England near the mid of eighteenth century, maintenance
was only adopted by craftsman such as carpenters, black smiths and masons in their work, which
was mostly done by repairing or making a new part . At that time it was very difficult to perform
maintenance as working conditions were tedious. However, after the improvement in the upkeep
field, Jefferson (1785) watched that the parts were being made precisely and they can be traded.
These small but increasing developments slowly made the maintenance work easier. As
maintenance work requires more budget, so it is considered as “essential evil” by top
management (Eti et al., 2007; Cooke, 2003). But this attitude is being replaced by the one which
regards maintenance as the control of reliability and a tactical issue (Eti et al., 2006). The
magnitude of maintenance in cost manage, saving time and others assets by optimizing their
production ability and increasing the overall equipment effectiveness (OEE) has been understood
by the business leaders worldwide. They are at the present using it as a competitive tool to excel
profit (Sherwin, 2000). Due to the increasing advancement in the production technology many
models have came into continuation like the Eindhoven University of Technology model, total
productive maintenance (TPM), total quality maintenance, reliability centered maintenance
(RCM), condition-based maintenance (CBM). Presently the diverse upgrades, for example, low
absconds and blunders, lessened waste can be accomplished just by expanding machine
practicality (Kaynak, 2003; Brah et al., 2002; Hendricks and Singhal, 2001; Hansson and
Eriksson, 2002). Cholasuke et al. (2004) have noticed that even after implementing the proper
maintenance models for achieving productivity goals, the organizations are failing to accomplish
performance targets because of different problems involved in accomplishment of maintenance
system. Cooke (2000) has recognized issues with execution of TPM in light of contextual
analyses however he has not positioned them. So the objectives of this study are to identify
major problems in effective maintenance operations and then compare them with those faced in
manufacturing operations. Remaining paper is structured as follows: Section 2 deals with
maintenance definition and different maintenance strategies, Section 3 deals with literature
review for identifying the problems of maintenance operations and their comparison with
manufacturing operations, finally Section 4 is the concluding remarks.

2. Maintenance definition & strategies

2.1 Maintenance definition


Maintenance is defined [European standard, EN 13306:2001, (2001)] as “the combination of all
technical, administration and management actions during the life cycle of an item intended to
retain it in, or restore it to, a state in which it can deliver the required function (function or a
combination of functions of an item which are considered necessary to provide a given service)”.
This definition explains the endeavor of maintenance and it can help us to understand which part
of an organization is, somehow, fervent to maintenance. We can define maintenance
Downloaded by HACETTEPE UNIVERSITY At 11:49 21 April 2017 (PT)

management as follows [European standard, EN 13306:2001, (2001)]:

“All the activities of the management that determine the maintenance aims or priorities (defined
as targets assigned and accepted by the management and maintenance department), strategies
(defined as a management method required to achieve maintenance objectives), and
responsibilities and implement them by the help of maintenance planning, maintenance control
and supervision, and several improving methods including economic aspects in the
organization.”

Dhillon (2006) defines maintenance as “a collection of actions executed on an asset with the aim
of keeping an asset in, or restoring it to, a specified condition”. The maintenance function is an
essential part of any asset of an intensive organization, and needs to maintain the organization’s
business objectives.

2.2 Maintenance strategies


Maintenance strategies involve different types of tasks which include actions, procedures,
resources, and time. These tasks have to be carried out in accordance with established time
schedules to guarantee maintenance targets. Maintenance planning is the activity of planning
maintenance actions, e. g., inspection, replacement, overhaul, and repair. In particular,
maintenance planning schedules interventions over time, and identifies and allocates necessary
resources for the implementation of maintenance strategies. Obviously, planning is followed by
the execution of maintenance actions and also by the control and supervision of the production
systems: on-site, i.e. at the location where the item is used, on-line, i.e. during the time that the
item is used, i.e. without physical access to the item, etc. Maintenance strategies and planning
can be properly updated on the basis of the feedback data extracted from the item performances.
All these activities have to be properly supported by a maintenance support system made up of
resources, services, and management. The configuration of such a support system depends on
many factors, such as the complexity of maintenance tasks, the skill of the personnel, availability
of the facilities etc. and is therefore a very critical issue in maintenance management. Four
different maintenance strategies are introduced as following:

2.2.1 Corrective maintenance: This option support technique is likewise called putting out
fires upkeep, disappointment based support or breakdown upkeep. In the remedial
support procedure, upkeep is not executed until the disappointment happens (Swanson,
2001). Restorative support is the well known upkeep technique found in industry
(Waeyenbergh and Pintelon, 2002; Mechefske and Wang, 2003). It is considered as an
appropriate approach in the cases where profit margins are large (Sharma et al., 2005). In
any case, such a putting out fires technique for upkeep regularly causes genuine harm to
related facilities, work force and environment. Further it, increments worldwide rivalry
and little overall revenues have constrained support supervisors to apply more powerful
Downloaded by HACETTEPE UNIVERSITY At 11:49 21 April 2017 (PT)

and dependable upkeep systems.


2.2.2 Time-based preventive maintenance: According to trustworthiness characteristics of
equipment, maintenance is performed and planned periodically to decrease frequent and
sudden failure. This maintenance approach is called time-based preventive maintenance,
wherever the term ‘‘time’’ may refer to operating time, calendar time or age of the asset.
Time-based preventive maintenance is useful extensively in industry. For performing
time-based preventive upkeep, a choice emotionally supportive network is required, and
it is frequently hard to characterize the best support interims in light of lacking adequate
chronicled information (Mann et al., 1995). By and large when time-based support
techniques are utilized, most machines are kept up with a lot of helpful life remaining
(Mechefske and Wang, 2003). This regularly prompts superfluous support, even decay of
machines if inaccurate upkeep is executed.
2.2.3 Condition-based maintenance: Maintenance decision is made in condition- based
monitoring depending on the data measured from a set of sensors systems. Today a
number of monitoring techniques are available, such as ultrasonic testing, lubricating
analysis, and vibration monitoring. The checked data of equipment parameters can tell
the engineers whether the situation is normal, allowing the maintenance staff to
implement necessary maintenance before failure come in the place. This maintenance
procedure is regularly utilized for turning and responding machines, e.g. turbines,
divergent pumps and compressors. In any case, impediments and inadequacy in
information scope and quality lessen the viability and exactness of the condition-based
maintenance approach (Al-Najjar and Alsyouf, 2003).
2.2.4 Predictive maintenance: In the literature survey, predictive maintenance is often
referred to the same maintenance strategy as the condition-based maintenance (Sharma et
al., 2005; Mobley, 2002). Predictive maintenance is utilized to speak to the support
methodology that can conjecture the impermanent pattern of execution debasement and
foresee flaws of machines by breaking down the checked parameters information.
Deficiency prognostics is a most recent system utilized by maintenance administration,
which gives maintenance engineers the likelihood to arrange support taking into account
the season of future disappointment and co-occurrence support exercises with production
plans, clients' requests and work force accessibility.

Recently, the smart maintenance system was described by Djurdjanovic et al. (2003), focusing
on mistake prognostic techniques and aimed towards achieving near-zero-downtime performance
of equipments. It is significant mentioning that the equipment failures and corrective procedures
of maintenance cannot be skipped completely when preventive maintenance approaches
(including the time-based, condition- based and predictive maintenance) are applied. This is due
to the stochastic nature of the equipment failure. However, the equipment failure can be reduced
if the preventive maintenance approaches are correctly selected and implemented.
Downloaded by HACETTEPE UNIVERSITY At 11:49 21 April 2017 (PT)

3. Problems identification in maintenance operations and problems comparison with


manufacturing operations:-
Presently a day's all the maintenance operations are in the compass of accomplishing the world-
class level of maintenance, and its credit goes to the robotization in the business (Ahmed et al.,
2005; O'Sullivan et al., 2011). Nonetheless, human inputs are still a critical element. Abilities of
the normal maintenance administrator or laborer is required for mechanized and innovatively
advanced equipments, and most essential a suitable and successful maintenance organization is
required to utilize it viably (Mohamed, 2005). According to Poduval et al. (2015), time,
manpower, money, commitment and resources from all the stake holders are requisite to
implement maintenance job in industries. The organization as a whole should be willing to
change its outlook and adapt the new practices and cultural changes which are compulsory for
the booming and accomplishment of maintenance models. There are many problems in
implementing effective maintenance in organizations. Significant problems identified from the
literature are talked about in taking after segments and compressed in a structure (Table 1).

3.1 Lack of Benchmarking:- Benchmarking is an uninterrupted process to be in motion


towards best in group by achieving large level of maintenance effectiveness standard
frequently (Ahren and Parida, 2009; Raouf and Ben-daya, 1995). The preliminary
benchmarking helps in filling the gap between the established equipment condition as well as
the preferred manufacturing excellence (Ahuja and Khamba, 2007). The main concern of
benchmarking from maintenance point of view is defects in equipment or degradation in
quality of manufacturing equipment and unplanned downtime, (Raouf and Ben-daya, 1995).
Efficient benchmarking of diverse processes ensures customer satisfaction and product
quality (Singh, 2011).
It is conceivable by measuring ones execution as for the "best in class" entertainer (Hansson
and Backlund, 2003). It helps in distinguishing its qualities and shortcomings and gives an
ability to read a compass to the arrangement. It is five stage process: planing; examination;
integration; activity; and implementation and result (Raouf and Ben-Daya, 1995). Shortening
of benchmarking causes low reliability and poor maintainability (Hansson and Backlund,
2003).

3.2 Lack of communication and information:- Communication and information in an industry


implies meaningful and open communication in such a technique that information flows
tangentially creating an unwrapping atmosphere in the organization (Mosadeghrad, 2014). It
includes informal meetings between administration and union representatives to complement
formal communications that helps in increasing interest and acceptance. Lad and Kulkarni
(2010a) have projected a mechanism to association of operational requirements through
machine tool maintenance and reliability parameters, where workers involvement and
understanding could be achieved (Abraham et al., 1999; Pintelon et al., 1999; Tsang and
Downloaded by HACETTEPE UNIVERSITY At 11:49 21 April 2017 (PT)

Chan, 2000; Hansson and Backlund, 2003). Due to lack of communication and information,
not flow laterally, workforce of organization are not capable to report and identify the
sources of reliability and maintenance; and are not capable to put their precious suggestions
for enhancement (Hansson and Backlund, 2003).

3.3 Lack of measurement of OEE:- OEE is evaluation of usefulness of the equipment or


machine or it is the performance indicator (Rolfsen and Langeland, 2012). It depends on
three parameters, i.e. quality rate, system availability rate and performance rate. The main
purpose of maintenance process is to boost OEE and due to improper evaluation of OEE,
maintenance activities cannot be implemented properly (Kumar et al., 2014). The progress of
the business depends mainly on above mentioned three parameters of OEE (Prickett, 1999).
System availability refers to the rate of availability of machine tool. Availability depends on
the system design which determines the systems reliability, maintainability through the aim
with the purpose of system to perform its functions all over its life effectively (Lad and
Kulkarni, 2008). Execution rate lets us know about the misfortunes caused because of
utilization of machine at low execution rate and the corruption of execution is for the most
part because of incomplete maintenance work (Al-Sultan, 1996). Quality rate submit to the
losses come in the place due to the bad quality, due to bad quality more rejections come in
the production lines (Prickett, 1999). Removal of waste such as rework and scrap can be
easily achieved by quality improvement which gives better productivity and thus leads to
reduced cost. Continuous improvement of above mentioned three main parts of OEE should
be an important target. The analysis of these factors can be used for improvement of
individual tool reliability and importantly to stop the repetition of similar type of failures in a
machine tool (Prickett, 1999). But if the organization fails to determine OEE then we are not
capable to monitor important factors affecting performance of the system. Lad and Kulkarni
(2010b) have recommended parameter estimation technique for the machine device
reliability examination to overcome the difficulty of unavailability of the precise breakdown
data collection method.
3.4 Lack of Teamwork:- Team working explains involvement of whole organizations to reduce
the defects, i.e. the industrial wide strategy to achieve excellence where the responsibilities of
all the employees are crucial (Graham et al., 2014; Ledet, 1999). It also helps in achieving
better reliability at lower cost (Ledet, 1999). Not only the maintenance section but the entire
association should ensure the reliable and dependable maintenance system (Madu, 2000).
Traditional factors of maintenance administration like information system, data collection,
etc. are still significant and input factors to get better reliability and maintainability. These
input factors must be synchronized in an interconnected form (Hansson and Backlund, 2003).
But many management have reported that team working between the production and
maintenance department is not only an issue of principle but also an issue of practicability
(Cooke, 2000). Many experiments have shown that proper maintenance activities can be
Downloaded by HACETTEPE UNIVERSITY At 11:49 21 April 2017 (PT)

performed when the whole business unit works towards a common goal, or else sub-
optimization will effects in unachieved targets (Rolfsen and Langeland, 2012).

3.5 Lack of effective performance measures:- For maintenance systems’ effectiveness, apart
from OEE, other performance measures are also equally important. Due to the substantial
cost of maintenance as compared to operational cost, measuring of good performance
becomes most important to survive competition and still being cost effective. Usually
maintenance measures are not the part of performance framework. In favor of this, framed
audits can be voted for to measure efficiency and to recognize area of enhancement (Raouf,
1994; Raouf and Ben-Daya, 1995). To monitor and to take timely decisions, the information
about the output of machine is most important and shortage of this information causes
ineffective and inefficient maintenance process (Parida and Kumar, 2009).

3.6 Lack of commitment of employees:- According to Davis (1997), many manufacturing


organizations failed to employ maintenance system accurately due to demoralized and
reluctant production department, they were in fear of losing job and were unwilling to do
stressful work as they do not see the profits of implementations due to the lack of knowledge
(Hardwick and Winsor, 2001; Karlsson and Ljungberg, 1995; Shin et al., 1998). This can be
overcome by perceiving the workers and unmistakably demonstrating to them the advantages
of executions (Allen and Kilmann, 2001; Hartman, 1992). Since activities are actually
implemented by the workers, thus the employees who are having lack of positive thinking
towards maintenance further increase the cost of maintenance (Hansson and Backlund,
2003). Due to this, fewer resources are spent on other aspects of maintenance.

3.7 Lack of training:- Effective working of maintenance department requires that the managers
and employees have the appropriate knowledge, skills and expertise in the field of quality
management (Mosadeghrad, 2014). It helps in changing the mind set of employees from
traditional maintenance approach to the new and modern approach. It further aides in
lessening the maintenance crew and expands the adaptability as the little maintenance job
could then be done by the normal maintenance staff or the work floor specialists (Nembhard,
2014). It also increases the commitment and brings about the positive behavioural changes.
Training is required with adequate measure of reasonable learning; generally representatives
have a tendency to overlook what they were taught (Hansson and Backlund, 2003). For
example a untrained planner would not be capable to determine job content, duration,
number of workers required, number of spare parts required, etc. (Raouf and Ben-daya,
1995).

3.8 Lack of proper strategic planning and implementation:- Strategies set directions for
deciding operations functions to ensure competitiveness (Singh et al., 2010). These are the
functions that help in integrating the quality requirement with the business activities (Chin et
Downloaded by HACETTEPE UNIVERSITY At 11:49 21 April 2017 (PT)

al., 2002). These are the behaviors to identify and develop the barriers in achieving the most
wanted goals (Hartman, 1992; Hipkin and Lockett, 1995; Shin et al., 1998). They help in
encouraging the subsequent meet-ups and checking the accomplishments like association of
employees and comprehension amongst administration and worker by setting objectives, and
identifying solutions (Abraham et al., 1999; Schawn and Khan, 1994). It also relates
maintenance works with organization’s vision, mission and strategies (Bardoel and Sohal,
1999; Riis et al., 1997). It is observed that lack of proper strategic planning and
implementation can prove to be a bottleneck due to the unclear picture of benefits to
organization from these improvements (Abreu et al., 2013).

3.9 Lack of top management support:- Atkinson (1990) and Jaehn (2000) have analyzed that
maximum number of firms fail due to lack of top management support. Implementation of
maintenance actions in organizations requires major resources like human resources, money
and time. Top management is accountable for providing these resources (Shin et al., 1998;
Hansson and Backlund, 2003). It has become very important to change traditional methods
and organization structure to the new and modern one (Singh et al., 2008). Therefore one of
the major job of top management in current context of business environment is to reorganize
the established organization reporting structure to obtain the maintenance quality and
reliability information on timely basis (Hansson and Backlund, 2003). Major assets need
proper accomplishment and clear perceptive of methodologies and objectiveness of
maintenance systems (Clark, 1991; Hipkin and Lockett, 1995). Genuine objective of
maintenance is to expand OEE and not to decrease the work tally. Asjad et al. (2013) have
recommended supportability based contract options for operating life of mechanical
frameworks. As indicated by them supportability for a client is the capacity of the maker to
execute all the bolster exercises that are required for maintenance of the system, in its best
effective and auspicious way all through the operating life of the equipment, at whatever
point and wherever required.
3.10 Lack of empowerment:- For viable maintenance administration and manufacturing
operations, worker strengthening for taking diverse choices at own levels are critical.
Strengthening intends to build up the groups and to fabricate a developed staff (Mohamed,
2005). Representatives ought to be dynamic members and fulfilled by their employment with
sentiment possession (Hansson and Backlund, 2003; Aghazadeh, 2002; Yamashina, 2000).
To utilize maintenance for upper hand, associations ought to engage workers to adjust forms
according to natural changes (Douglas and Judge, 2001). Lack of empowerment means latent
interest of workers hence there is decrement in effectiveness of maintenance procedure and
productivity.

3.11 Lack of awareness about safety and health:- For the success of any enterprise an
important prerequisite is the safety of people, environment and assets (Narayan, 2012).
Downloaded by HACETTEPE UNIVERSITY At 11:49 21 April 2017 (PT)

According to survey of European agency of health and safety at work in year 2000, 10-15%
of fatal accidents and 15-20% of all accidents were associated with maintenance work. Thus
maintenance is usually regarded as important to operators. They are extra exposed to variety
of hazards with potential harm to their health (Grusenmeyer, 2010). Thusly one of the
principle works of the maintenance department office ought to be to make a safe working
environment with most extreme significance of safety in the plant (Singh et al., 2013). Safety
in plant alludes to individual security and additionally handle of safety. Personal safety is
significant in the industries, but the more important factor is the process safety (Narayan,
2012). Therefore health and safety at workplace should be everyone’s concern.

Table 1: Maintenance operation problems summary


S. Problems in Maintenance References
No. Operations

1 Lack of benchmarking Adebanjo et al. (2010), Singh (2011), Shaaban


and Awni (2014)
2 Lack of communication and Mohamed (2005), Leong et al. (2012)
information
3 Lack of empowerment Yongtao et al. (2014 ), Poduval et al. (2015)
4 Lack of teamwork Rolfsen and Langeland (2012), Aspinwall and
Elgharib (2013)
5 Lack of commitment of employees Singh and Ahuja (2014), Mosadeghrad (2014)
towards maintenance
6 Lack of training Singh et al. (2013), Mosadeghrad (2014)
7 Lack of proper strategic planning Singh et al. (2010), Abreu et al. (2013),
and implementation Mosadeghrad (2014), Ding et al. (2014)
8 Lack of top management support Kodali et al. (2009), Singh et al. (2008), Kumar et
al. (2015)
9 Lack of awareness about safety and Grusenmeyer (2010), Singh et al. (2013),
health Narayan (2012)
10 Lack of effective performance Parida and Kumar (2009), Lad and Kulkarni
measurement (2010a)
11 Lack of measurement of OEE Pophaley and Vyas (2010), Lad and Kulkarni
(2010b)

4. Concluding remarks
Due to the rising competition in the global market and local markets, firms are progressively
realizing the significance of effective maintenance management. This can be helpful in
Downloaded by HACETTEPE UNIVERSITY At 11:49 21 April 2017 (PT)

enhancing the market profit by improving product quality, decreasing rejection, reducing cost,
increasing productivity and by providing best service to the consumers. A lot of models such as
RCM, CBM and TPM are used in the organization to solve maintenance-related problems.
Successful implementation of these models involves many difficulties. This study has identified
main problems of maintenance operations in the accomplishment of efficient maintenance
management organization in the manufacturing operations. These problems are lack of
communication, lack of benchmarking, lack of empowerment, lack of commitment of employees
towards maintenance, lack of teamwork, lack of training, lack of proper strategic planning, lack
of top management support, lack of proper OEE, lack of awareness about safety and health and
lack of effective performance measurement. Managers should focus on these problems
effectively to contain a positive impact of the manufacturing and maintenance operations on the
performance of the industry.
Analysis and findings from the review shows that lack of top management support, lack of focus
on OEE and lack of strategic planning and implementation are the most common problems of
maintenance operations and manufacturing operations in effective maintenance and production
management. Whereas lack of benchmarking is ranked lower than the other problems but it
cannot be fully ignored. These problems can only be reduced by the will and a powerful
leadership which really wants to construct a quality-oriented culture in the industry. These
findings will help management to formulate maintenance and manufacturing strategies. Be that
as it may, before summing up these findings, some observational and contextual investigations
might be completed as a future extent of study.

References

Abreu, J., Martins, P.V., Fernandes, S. and Zacarias, M. (2013), “Business processes
improvement on maintenance management: a case study”, Procedia Technology, Vol. 9, pp. 320-
330.

Adebanjo, D., Abbas, A. and Mann, R. (2010), “An investigation of the adoption and
implementation of benchmarking”, International Journal of Operations & Production
Management, Vol. 30 No. 11, pp. 1140-1169.
Ahmed, S., Hassan, M.H. and Taha, Z. (2005), “TPMcan go beyond maintenance: excerpt froma
case implementation”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 19-42.

Ahren, T. and Parida, A. (2009), “Maintenance performance indicators (MPIs) for benchmarking
the railway infrastructure”, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 247-258.

Ahuja, I.P.S. and Khamba, J.S. (2008), “Assessment of contributions of successful TPM
initiatives towards competitive manufacturing”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance
Engineering, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 356-374.

Ahuja, I.P.S. and Khamba, J.S. (2007), “An evaluation of TPM implementation initiatives in an
Indian manufacturing enterprise”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 13 No. 4,
pp. 338-352.
Downloaded by HACETTEPE UNIVERSITY At 11:49 21 April 2017 (PT)

Al-Najjar, B., Alsyouf, I., 2003. Selecting the most efficient maintenance approach using
fuzzy multiple criteria decision making. International Journal of Production Economics
84, 85–100.

Alsyouf, I. (2007), “The role of maintenance in improving companies’ productivity and


profitability”, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 105 No. 1, pp. 70-78.

Aspinwall, E. and Elgharib, M. (2013), “TPM implementation in large and medium size
organisations”, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 24 No. 5, pp. 688-710.

Bengtsson, M., 2004. Condition based maintenance system technology-where is


development heading? Proceedings of the 17th European Maintenance Congress,
Barcelona, Spain, May 11–13.

Brah, S.A., Tee, S.L. and Rao, B.M. (2002), “Relationship between TQM and
performance of Singapore companies”, International Journal of Quality & Reliability
Management, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 356-379.

Byington, C., Roemer, M.J., Galie, T., 2002. Prognostic enhancements to diagnostic
systems for improved condition- based maintenance. Proceedings of IEEE Aerospace
Conference, vol. 6, Big Sky, USA, March 9–16, pp. 2815–2824.

Chandra, P. and Shastry, T. (1998), “Competitiveness of Indian manufacturing: finding of


the 1997 manufacturing futures survey”, Vikalpa, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 15-25. Mohamed,
O.A. (2005), “Identifying the Barriers Affecting Quality in Maintenance within Libyan
Manufacturing Organisations”, School of Management University of Salford, Salford.

Cholasuke, C., Bhardwa, R. and Antong, J. (2004), “The status of maintenance


management in UK manufacturing organisations: results from a pilot survey”, Journal of
Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 5-15.
Cooke, F.L. (2003), “Plant maintenance strategy: evidence from four British
manufacturing firms”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp.
239-249.

Cooke, F.L. (2000), “Implementing TPM in plant maintenance: some organizational


barriers”, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 17 No. 9, pp.
1003-1016.

Dhillon, B.S. 2006. Maintainability, maintenance and reliability for engineers. Tyler and
Francis Group, pp 1-3.

Ding, S.H., Kamaruddin, S. and Azid, I.A. (2014), “Maintenance policy selection model – a case
study in the palm oil industry”, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 25 No.
Downloaded by HACETTEPE UNIVERSITY At 11:49 21 April 2017 (PT)

3, pp. 415-435.

Djurdjanovic, D., Lee, J., Ni, J., 2003. Watchdog agentan infotronics based prognostics
approach for product performance assessment and prediction. International Journal of
Advanced Engineering Informatics 17, 109–125.

Eti, M., Ogaji, S. and Probert, S. (2007), “Integrating reliability, availability,


maintainability and supportability with risk analysis for improved operation of the Afam
thermal power-station”, Applied Energy, Vol. 84 No. 11, pp. 202-221.

Eti, M., Ogaji, S. and Probert, S. (2006), “Reducing the cost of preventive maintenance
(PM) through adopting a proactive reliability-focused culture”, Applied Energy, Vol. 83
No. 11, pp. 1235-1248.

EN 13306:2001, (2001) Maintenance Terminology. European Standard. CEN (European


Committee for Standardization), Brussels.

Garg, A. and Deshmukh, S.G. (2006), “Maintenance management: literature review and
directions”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 205-238.

Grusenmeyer, C. (2010), “Sous-traitance et accidents”, Exploitation de la base de donnees


EPICEA de l’INRS; CARWH Conference, “Worker Health in a Changing World of Work”,
Toronto, 28-29 May.

Hansson, J. and Backlund, F. (2003), “Managing commitment: increasing the odds for
successful implementation of TQM, TPM or RCM”, International Journal of Quality &
Reliability Management, Vol. 20 No. 9, pp. 993-1008.

Hansson, J. and Eriksson, H. (2002), “The impact of TQM on financial performance”,


Measuring Business Excellence, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 44-54.

Hendricks, K.B. and Singhal, V.R. (2001), “Firm characteristics, total quality
management and financial performance”, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 19
No. 3, pp. 269-285.
Jefferson, T. (1785), “Letter to John Jay (quoted by Durfel, W.F.)”, Journal of the
Franklin Institute, Vol. 137 No. 2, pp. 1894.

Kaynak, H. (2003), “The relationship between total quality management and their effects
on firm performance”, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 405-435.

Khanna, H.K. and Sharma, D.D. (2011), “Identifying and ranking critical success factors
for implementation of total quality management in the Indian manufacturing industry
using TOPSIS”, Asian Journal on Quality, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 124-138.

Kodali, R., Mishra, R.P. and Anand, G. (2009), “Methodology and theory justification of
worldclass maintenance systems using analytic hierarchy constant sum method”, Journal of
Downloaded by HACETTEPE UNIVERSITY At 11:49 21 April 2017 (PT)

Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 47-77.

Kumar, R., Singh, R.K. and Shankar, R. (2015), “Critical success factors for implementation of
supply chain management in Indian small and medium enterprises and their impact on
performance”, IIMB Management Review, Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 92-104.

Lad, B.K. and Kulkarni, M.S. (2010a), “A mechanism for linking user’s operational requirements
with reliability and maintenance schedule for machine tool”, International Journal of Reliability
and Safety, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 343-358.

Lad, B.K. and Kulkarni, M.S. (2010b), “A parameter estimation method for machine tool
reliability analysis using expert judgement”, International Journal of Data Analysis Techniques
and Strategies, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 155-169.

Leong, T.K., Zakuan, N. and Saman, M.Z.M. (2012), “Quality management maintenance and
practices – technical and non-technical approaches”, Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences,
Vol. 65, pp. 688-696.

Mann, L., Saxena, A., Knapp, G.M., 1995. Statistical-based or condition-based


preventive maintenance? Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering 1 (1), 46–59.

Mechefske, C.K., Wang, Z., 2003. Using fuzzy linguistics to select optimum maintenance
and condition monitoring strategies. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 17 (2),
305–316.

Mobley, R.K., 2002. An Introduction to Predictive Maintenance, Second ed. Elsevier


science, New York.

Mohamed, O.A. (2005), “Identifying the Barriers Affecting Quality in Maintenance within
Libyan Manufacturing Organisations”, School of Management University of Salford, Salford.

Mosadeghrad, A.M. (2014), “Why TQM programmes fail? A pathology approach”, The TQM
Journal, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 160-187.

Narayan, V. (2012), “Business performance and maintenance”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance


Engineering, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 183-195.
O’Sullivan, D., Rolstadås, A. and Filos, E. (2011), “Global education in manufacturing strategy”,
Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Vol. 22 No. 5, pp. 663-674.

Parida, A. and Kumar, U. (2009), “Maintenance productivity and performance measurement”, in


Ben-Daya, M., Duffuaa, S.O., Raouf, A., Knezevic, J. and Ait-Kadi, D. (Eds), Handbook of
Maintenance Management and Engineering XXVII, Springer, p. 741.

Poduval, P.S., Pramod, V.R. and Jagathy Raj, V.P. (2015), “Interpretive structural modeling
(ISM) and its application in analyzing factors inhibiting implementation of total productive
maintenance (TPM)”, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 32 No. 3,
pp. 308-331.

Pophaley, M. and Vyas, R.K. (2010), “Plant maintenance management practices in automobile
Downloaded by HACETTEPE UNIVERSITY At 11:49 21 April 2017 (PT)

industries: a retrospective and literature review”, JIEM, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 512-541.

Phusavat, K. and Kanchana, R. (2008), “Future competitiveness: viewpoints from


manufacturers and service providers”, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 108
No. 2, pp. 191-207.

Rolfsen, M. and Langeland, C. (2012), “Successful maintenance practice through team


autonomy”, Employee Relations, Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 306-321.

Sharma, R.K., Kumar, D., Kumar, P., 2005. FLM to select suitable maintenance strategy
in process industries using MISO model. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering
11 (4), 359–374.

Shaaban, M.S. and Awni, A.H. (2014), “Critical success factors for total productive
manufacturing (TPM) deployment at Egyptian FMCG companies”, Journal of Manufacturing
Technology Management, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 393-414.

Sherwin, D. (2000), “A review of overall models for maintenance management”, Journal


of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 138-164.

Singh, R.K. (2011), “Analyzing the interaction of factors for success of total quality management
in SMEs”, Asian Journal on Quality, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 6-19.

Singh, R. K. and Ahuja, I.S. (2014), “Effectiveness of TPM implementation with and without
integration with TQM in Indian manufacturing industries”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance
Engineering, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 415-435.

Singh, R., Gohil, A.M., Shah, D.B. and Desai, S. (2013), “Total productive maintenance (TPM)
implementation in a machine shop: a case study”, Procedia Engineering, Vol. 51, pp. 592-599.

Singh, R.K., Garg, S.K. and Deshmukh, S.G. (2010), “Strategy development by Indian SSIs”,
Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 110 No. 7, pp. 1073-1093.

Singh, R.K., Garg, S.K. and Deshmukh, S.G. (2008), “Strategy development by SMEs for
competitiveness: a review”, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 15 No. 5, pp. 525-547.
Singh, R.K. and Sharma, M.K. (2015), “Selecting competitive supply chain using fuzzy-
AHP and extent analysis”, Journal of Industrial and Production Engineering, Vol. 31 No.
8, pp. 524-538.

Singh, R.K. and Sharma, M.K. (2014), “Prioritizing the alternatives for flexibility in
supply chains”, Production Planning and Control, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 176-192.

Swanson, L., 2001. Linking maintenance strategies to performance. International Journal


of Production Economics 70, 237–244.

Yongtao, T., Liyin, S., Craig, L., Weisheng, L. and Michael, C.H.Y. (2014), “Critical success
factors for building maintenance business: a Hong Kong case study”, Facilities, Vol. 32 Nos 5/6,
pp. 208-225.
Downloaded by HACETTEPE UNIVERSITY At 11:49 21 April 2017 (PT)

Waeyenbergh, G., Pintelon, L., 2004. Maintenance concept development: A case study.
International Journal of Production Economics 89, 395–405.

You might also like