Managing and Communicating Change - SMRP

The magazine by practitioners for practitioners

February 2012 | Volume 7, Issue 1 www.smrp.org

Avoid Communication

Failure Mode

4

What is Alliancing?

16

New BoK Products now online

20

SMRP’s Management Transition!

23

Managing and Communicating Change

Features

4 Communication as a Failure Mode To maintain critical asset health assurance, have you factored in all the communication failure modes? Learn from GPAllied’s principal why, when, and how often to facilitate communications as well as an build an effective communications model. MICHAEL ARONEY

10 How Reliability Impacts Shareholder Value Management Resources Group, Inc.’s Director of Reliability Services illustrates the importance of Reliability and its impact on the key areas of generating shareholder value. If reliability is integral to the organization’s culture, this can drive benefits in all facets of the operation. BRUCE HAWKINS, CMRP

16 Alliancing Overview Former Eastman Kodak manager shares details on this new and innovative style of business relationship building, called Alliancing. Major Alliancing principles are reviewed, including the benefits and challenges of this future trend. WIL CAREY, CMRP

Departments2 OFFICeRS And dIReCtORS

2 FROM tHe CHAIR Are you a leader? SMRP’s Board Chair discusses leadership and introduces SMRP new management and staffing company, Kellen Company in Atlanta, GA. STAN MOORE, CMRP

20 BOK CORneR SMRPs Body of Knowledge Product and Business Development manager and Director for BoK showcases newer BoK products: SMRP Knowledge Library and Benchmarking Surveys with member friendly pricing. Find out how these can help you and your company leverage change and growth as well as how you can contribute to the continuous improvement of SMRPs BoK. LAURA B. KEANE AND RON LEONARD, PE, CMRP

21 FROM tHe eXeCUtIVe dIReCtOR Farewell from SMRP’s outgoing Executive Director. BARBARA DUNLAVEY, CMP, CAE

22 FROM tHe eXAM teAM On behalf of the entire Team, CMRP and CMRT Exam Director shares updates on the Spanish, Brazilian Portuguese and electronic exams as well as discusses 2012 plans for growth. Bonus: don’t miss the newest Exam Team Reliability Tip. TERRY HARRIS, CMRP

23 FROM tHe neW MAnAGeMent COMPAnY Press announcing the new SMRP Kellen Company management partnership. The release was written by SMRP’s incoming Executive Director, Jon Krueger. jON KRUEgER

27 SMRPCO SUStAInInG SPOnSORS

26 WelCOMe neW MeMBeRS SMRP welcomes new executive and individual members.

33 neW CMRPS SMRPCO welcomes new certificants

SMRP Solutions ( ISN#1552-5082) is published bi-monthly by the Society for Maintenance and Reliability Professionals, exclusively for SMRP members. The annual subscription rate is $15 for members, which is included in dues. The Society was incorporated as an Illinois not-for profit corporation in 1992 for those in the maintenance profession to share practitioner experiences and network. The Society is dedicated to excellence in maintenance and reliability in all types of manufacturing and services organizations, and promotes maintenance excellence worldwide. SMRP’s Mission is to develop and promote leaders in Reliability and Physical Asset Management.

The products featured in SMRP Solutions are not endorsed by SMRP, and SMRP assumes no responsibility in connection with the purchase or use of such products. The opinions expressed in the articles contained in SMRP Solutions are not necessarily those of the editor or SMRP.

Back Issues: The current issue and back issues of SMRP Solutions can be downloaded from the library area of the SMRP Website. Original versions of the current issue and some back issues of Solutions are available by contacting SMRP Headquarters ($5 per copy for members, $10 per copy for non-members).

SEND ADDRESS CHANGES AND INQUIRIES TO: SMRP Headquarters, 1100 Johnson Ferry Road, Suite 300, Atlanta, GA 30342, 800-950-7354, E-mail: [email protected].

February 2012 Volume 7, Issue 1

4

16

10Reliability and maintenance training for the manufacturing and process industry.

www.idcon.com 1-800-849-2041

We don’t sell engineering services, parts, tools, equipment or software...our independence translates into objective and credible advice and training.

Training

IDCON’s Best Practice Open Seminar Schedule for 2012Course Dates/Raleigh, NCMaintenance Planning and Scheduling / Reliability Based May 9-11, 2012 Spare Parts and Materials Management and November 12-14, 2012Preventive Maintenance / Essential Care and Condition Monitoring May 7-8, 2012 and September 10-11, 2012Root Cause Problem Elimination Training™ September 12-13, 2012 and November 15-16, 2012

For on-site training please call1-800-849-2041

ing pleas041

call

3 SMRP SolutionSFebruary 2012 | Volume 7, Issue 12 SMRP SolutionS February 2012 | Volume 7, Issue 1

FRoM the ChaiR

are you a leader?By stan moore, CmrP ChaIr oF smrP 2011-2012

there are several well known personality

profile tools that are used to determine

personality traits. Maybe your company

has participated in, or has used someone to

conduct assessments for your leadership?

For example, the Small Business Association

government website, www.sba.gov/content/

being-leader, has a listing of leadership traits

developed by Raymond Cattell way back in

1954. Based on an analysis of military leaders, the following list of traits were devel-

oped that characterize an effective leader.

• Emotionalstability: Good leaders must be able to tolerate frustration and stress.

Overall, they must be well-adjusted and have the psychological maturity to deal

with anything they are required to face.

• Dominance: Leaders are often competitive, decisive and usually enjoy overcom-

ing obstacles. Overall, they are assertive in their thinking style as well as their

attitude in dealing with others.

• Enthusiasm:Leaders are usually seen as active, expressive and energetic. They

are often very optimistic and open to change. Overall, they are generally quick

and alert and tend to be uninhibited.

• Conscientiousness: Leaders are often dominated by a sense of duty and tend

to be very exacting in character. They usually have a very high standard of

excellence and an inward desire to do their best. They also have a need for

order and tend to be very self-disciplined.

• Socialboldness: Leaders tend to be spontaneous risk-takers. They are usually

socially aggressive and generally thick-skinned. Overall, they are responsive to

others and tend to be high in emotional stamina.

• Self-assurance: Self-confidence and resiliency are common traits among leaders.

They tend to be free of guilt and have little or no need for approval. They are

generally unaffected by prior mistakes or failures.

• Compulsiveness: Leaders are controlled and very precise in their social inter-

actions. Overall, they are very protective of their integrity and reputation and

consequently tended to be socially aware and careful, abundant in foresight,

and very careful when making decisions or determining specific actions.

• Intuitiveness: Rapid changes in the world today, combined with information

overload result in an inability to know everything. In other words, reasoning

and logic will not get you through all situations. In fact, more and more lead-

ers are learning the value of using their intuition and trusting their gut when

making decisions.

• Empathy:Being able to put yourself in the other person’s shoes is a key trait of

leaders today. Without empathy, you can’t build trust; without trust, you will

never be able to get the best effort from your employees.

• Charisma: People usually perceive leaders as larger than life. Charisma plays

a large part in this perception. Leaders who have charisma are able to arouse

strong emotions in their employees by defining a vision which unites and cap-

tivates them. Using this vision, leaders motivate employees to reach toward a

future goal by tying the goal to substantial personal rewards and values.

Do any of these traits resonate with you? When it comes to the business side of

2012 SMRP officers & Directors

ChairStan Moore, CMRPAscend [email protected]

immediate Past Chair, advisory CommitteeRick Baldridge, CMRPCargill, [email protected]

Vice ChairShon Isenhour, CMRPGP [email protected]

treasurerNick Roberts, [email protected]

SecretaryCraig Seibold, CMRPJohns [email protected]

executive DirectorBarbara Dunlavey, CAE, CMPSMRP301-523-7435

Certification DirectorGreg Yeager, CMRPCargill, [email protected]

Body of Knowledge DirectorRon Leonard, CMRPLife Cycle Engineering, [email protected]

education DirectorButch DiMezzo, CMRPManagement Resources Group, [email protected]

Member Services DirectorHoward Penrose, CMRPDreisilker Electrical [email protected]

outreach DirectorHoward Penrose, CMRPDreisilker Electrical [email protected]

reliability, are we leaders? Do we understand our own

company’s business plan and model? Do we lever-

age our collective expertise in the maintenance and

reliability field to deliver value to our stock holders

or owners? As leaders in this area, our management

looks to us to provide solutions and recommendations

that will improve our ability to produce products reli-

ably and cost-effectively.

SMRP is an enabler in this area, providing its

membership with a variety of tools and resources. The

continuing work of our BoK with the metrics library,

benchmarking, and the online searchable database of

past proceedings are but a few examples. As SMRP

continues to mature and grow, we continue to look for

ways to bring value to our membership. Having said

that, SMRP has recently chosen Kellen Company as

their new association management company. Kellen

Company is a global professional services company,

delivering innovative solutions and new opportuni-

ties to clients, helping them achieve greater levels

of success. Kellen Company serves more than 100

association and corporate clients, representing more

than 10,000 companies and 100,000 professionals

worldwide. Kellen has offices worldwide and is head-

quartered in Atlanta, GA with offices worldwide.

SMRP would also like to acknowledge the service and

support that AMG has provided over the last six years.

We gratefully acknowledge the support of the AMG

staff that has interfaced with the membership over the

years, most notably Maureen Gribble and Ali Sturman.

We also want to thank Barb Dunlavey. Barb has

been our executive director for the past two years and

has helped us to grow in many areas. Her expertise

in association management, especially in the area of

governance and helping the board to function more

strategically has been valuable in helping SMRP grow.

We appreciate her leadership and support of SMRP.

I would also like to welcome Ed Foster to the SMRP

Board as our new Membership Director.

A native of Houston, Ed works for The Mundy

Companies. His positions have ranged from shutdown

planning to ASME Code Quality Control Inspector to

Crew leader to Project Manager. Ed also helped start the

Houston chapter of SMRP. We are excited to have Ed as

our new membership directorate and he is looking for

to the opportunity to serve the membership and “give

back” to the industry. Please join me in welcoming Ed.

You will be hearing from him in the near future!

By the time you read this article, it will be February

of 2012. We will each be engaged in our own areas of

expertise, providing value to our companies and our

families. In our respective leadership roles, we have

the awesome privilege and responsibility to lead

effectively and efficiently. I look forward to 2012, no

doubt filled with challenges, but then aren’t challenges

simply opportunities in disguise?

Project3 12/14/11 2:02 PM Page 1

4 SMRP SolutionS 5 SMRP SolutionSFebruary 2012 | Volume 7, Issue 1February 2012 | Volume 7, Issue 1

Communication as a Failure Mode

By: mIChael aroney, PrInCIPal, GPAllied

this is probably the biggest challenge a leader faces when

trying to get new points across, like communicating to

stakeholders how reliability and maintenance improvement

aligns with business goals. How can he or she be certain the

message is received as intended and rally support? Communi-

cation ability could be one of the most critical skills for imple-

menting a maintenance and reliability initiative, yet it often

receives the least attention.

Asset health assurance is a foundational aspect of mainte-

nance and reliability. Asset health is the percent of assets that

are defect free and is associated with the P-F curve, component

failure modes, and “P”, the point where a defect first presents

itself in the asset with a pending failure. The longer the defect

remains, the greater the loss of functionality until the compo-

nent fails catastrophically. (Figure 1)

In this regard, there are several failure modes that are

routinely identified as contributing to failed projects. Reliability

and maintenance improvement projects, for example, often

fail because of (1) lack of top management support, (2) disen-

gaged workforce, (3) unclear goals, (4) resource constraints, (5)

competing priorities, (6) unclear roles, and (7) ineffective com-

munication. Many papers published by the Project Management

“The single biggest problem in communication

is the illusion that it has taken place.”

—George Bernard Shaw


Communication as a Failure mode Communication as a Failure mode

Institute define project failure as exceeding

time and cost, falling short on providing

the desired functionality, and not achiev-

ing the full return on investment.

Project failure modes, or the ways in

which a project could fail, can be plotted

on a P-F curve in the same fashion as com-

ponent failure was demonstrated in Figure

1. In this perspective, a failure mode for

engaging stakeholders is communication

and the defect is “ineffective communi-

cation”. The longer the defect remains

without correction, the more likely it is that

the project will fail.

Most research on failed performance

improvement initiatives shows com-

munication as the single-most common

denominator. It is communication as a

failure mode that is uniquely human,

therefore highly variable and requires the

most attention. This article addresses com-

munication effectiveness as a failure mode

during the implementation of maintenance

and reliability improvements and provides

three principle-based strategies on Why,

When, and How to share information that

will eliminate the defect of ineffective

communication.

#1 – Know Why to Share Information

“You cannot hear what you do not understand.” —Dr. W. Edwards Deming

PRINCIPLE:Knowledge precedes attitude,

which precedes behavior.

PRINCIPLE:To change results, change

behavior. To change behavior, change the

mental model.

The intent of communicating to

stakeholders during a maintenance and

reliability initiative is to get their buy in

and support by showing them the rel-

evance and application of the change.

The challenge to communication is the

current “mental models” that are at play.

In other words, people will assign meaning

to what they hear based on what makes

sense to them, and what makes sense to

them is what they know, which is heavily

influenced by the current mental model.

Anyone who has played the party game

Telephone, where a phrase is whispered

into someone’s ear and he whispers what

he heard to the next person and so on

until the last person shares what he heard,

which is hilariously nothing like the

original phrase, has seen this challenge at

work. Similarly, anyone who has encoun-

tered a poorly written PM - such as one

that says “Inspect Pump”- knows he can

expect five different individuals to interpret

it five different ways with just about as

many results.

A mental model derives from the

individual’s current knowledge, experi-

ence, and value base and, according to

Hersey and Blanchard in Management of

Organizational Behavior, knowledge influ-

ences attitude, behavior, and commitment.

Overcoming existing mental models is the

challenge of communicating when trying to

start a new initiative in order to overcome

the “another-flavor-of-the-month” percep-

tion in order to gain commitment. People

will add meaning to what they hear based

on what they know and have experienced

in the past. A consistent communication

message and strategy for delivery can

provide new knowledge almost immediately

while the project teams are working on

results that reinforce the new experience.

An excellent example of this concept

is the story of a friend’s wife who wanted

a new car – a sporty, two-seat convertible.

After some research, the friend narrowed

the field to two options, one of which was a

Mazda Miata and the other an Austin Mini

Cooper. She was informed about the auto-

motive evaluations, customer satisfaction

and dependability ratings, and the prices

before heading out to do the test drives.

What was interesting is that she had no

conception of a Mazda Miata, but knew

about the Mini Cooper and had an opinion

about it though she had never driven one.

The friend and his wife went to test drive

the Miata first and then the Mini Cooper.

His wife loved test driving the Miata and on

the way to the BMW dealership to test the

Mini Cooper pointed out at least a dozen

Miatas, commenting on the differences

she noticed between the newer and older

models. The irony is that prior to receiving

new knowledge and having the experience

of test driving one, she could not point out

a Miata if one ran her over.

The same paradigm challenge is at

play during a maintenance and reliability

initiative. Stakeholders will add mean-

ing to what they are told about it based

on what they know and have experienced

in the past. Recently, at a kick-off for an

M&R project, a plant leadership team was

meeting with the workforce during shift

changes to start informing them of what

was going to occur. They were given some

background information on the P-F curve

and told that a condition based mainte-

nance strategy would be put in place to

improve asset reliability and enhance

production capacity. This approach would

allow defects to be identified while the

equipment was still running using

predictive technologies. The question asked

afterward was: “Why are we bypassing

Lock-out/Tag-out procedures with this

new initiative?” There was very little

knowledge of Condition Based Maintenance

and the use of PdM technology, so the

information that was presented was inter-

preted based on what the workforce knew

at the time – a time-based maintenance

strategy using Preventive Maintenance

Routines.

An example of this concept is demon-

strated by the Change Model from Steven

Covey’s The Seven Habits of Highly Effective

People (Figure 2).

According to this model, if new results

are desired (Get), it is necessary to change

behavior (Do), and the most effective way

to change behavior is to change mental

models (See). Effective communication as a

consequence of the current mental models

at play must ensure stakeholders under-

stand at a minimum: (1) Why something

is being done, (2) What the end result will

look like, (3) What’s in it for them/How it

will affect them, (4) What they are expected

to do, and (5) What they can expect from

the management team.

#2 – Know When to Share Information and How Often

“We know what we told him but we don’t know what he heard.”

—Dr. W. Edwards Deming

PRINCIPLE:Informationshouldbeshared

everytimethesituationexperiences

adifferenceinpermanenceorriskto

permanence.

PRINCIPLE:Informationshouldbeshared

assoonasitisavailableandfrequently

untilthemessageisunderstoodbyall.

In the absence of information, people

will make things up that make sense to

them, and it will almost always be nega-

tive. This process is called “closure” and

is a coping mechanism for making sense

of things by filling in gaps. When the

situation changes or might change, either

positively or negatively, information should

be shared with those stakeholders who are

directly or indirectly affected. Secondly,

this information must be uniformly com-

municated in a timely fashion.

The “ineffective communication”

failure mode, in this regard, is when some

managers and supervisors share informa-

tion while others do not. As the workforce

begins to compare notes and there are

differences in what is being said, or not

said, and how it is interpreted, all manner

of creative interpretation will occur.

Information should be communicated at

least six times before it is understood,

and if the information is heard from three

different sources, it is more likely to be

believed.

A wonderful example that demon-

strates this concept, along with human

variation in closing gaps to understand-

ing, is a word-association exercise. Here,

everyone prepares to write down the first

word that comes to their mind when they

hear a key word. The key word is “dog”. The

results when pulsed from each participant

can usually be plotted on an x/y axis with

a resulting bell curve distribution. The

mean will usually end up as “cat” with pet,

pet names, types of dogs, names of dogs,

dog items, etc. forming the outliers.

Assuming the thought “dog” rep-

resented a certain type of dog – in this

case a Husky – the initial responses are

inconsistent and inaccurate. Next, inform

the audience they need clarification of the

project “vision” and they will be given more

information to be taken in context with the

first key word. Next, say “sled” and pulse

for the new understanding. Add additional

information, such as “snow”, “Iditarod”,

and “type of dog”, and each time pulse the

audience for what they are now think-

ing until the variation in understanding

narrows and almost everyone is thinking

“Husky”.

Note that is has taken several commu-

nication initiatives and pulsing to finally

gain an understanding of the original

communication message – “dog”. The key

point is that eliminating the failure mode

of “ineffective communication” requires

constant communication and updates to

information to gain understanding. Thus,

Figure 2: Steven Covey’s Change Model

Change

See

DoGet

Point wherefailure starts

to occur Early Signal 1Early Signal 2

Early Signal 3

Audible Noise

Hot to Touch

Equipment Fails HereBroken

Time

Equ

ipm

ent C

ondi

tion

PdM DetectsProblems Early

Figure 1: Asset Health P-F Curve

Communication as a Failure mode


Communication as a Failure mode

the formula for effec-

tive communication

can be said to be “6X

+ 3X = Dog” (Figure

3). Communicate

the same message

six times to reduce

variation to a common

understanding and

ensure the message is

sent by three differ-

ent people so that it

is more likely to be

believed and accepted.

Finally, communication must provide

information that is relevant to the receiver.

It should target the receiving audience and

provide information that applies to them.

An hourly workforce is going to want to

know how implementing an asset health

assurance approach to maintenance and

reliability is going to affect them. Will

their work change, will they have to learn

new skills, will there be job cuts, who

will participate in the project, and so on.

Supervisors and managers will want to

know how the project will be implemented

given scarce resources and competing pri-

orities and how they will know if they are

making progress, while executives want to

know the return on investment and when

to expect a positive cash flow.

The bottom line is that effective

communication is about managing

stakeholders’ expectations and a realistic

timeline and resource commitment for suc-

cess. The failure that will likely result from

ineffective communication is just one more

“Flavor of the Month”.

#3 – Know How to Share Information

“If you thought you understood what I said, what you heard me say isn’t what I meant.” —Anonymous

PRINCIPLE: As a system matures, the mix

of active and passive communication will

vary. Immature systems require a higher

degree of active communication than do

mature systems.

PRINCIPLE:Active communication is not

merely the acknowledgement of receipt

of the information, but a verification of

comprehension.

Translated, this

means that when

information is shared,

the most important

part is to ensure that

the intended mes-

sage is received and

understood exactly as

the original message

was intended. Figure

4 presents a model for

this concept.

Communication

should never be open

looped. This means that communication

should always include some verification of

understanding. Without verifying that the

original message was received as intended,

the possibility of the receiver misunder-

standing the intent is very high given the

challenge of barriers to communication,

such as noise in the environment and

mental models. The failure that occurs

most often in this regard is the sacrifice

of communication effectiveness for com-

munication efficiency. Many believe in the

checklist approach to informing and once

there is a check in the box, communication

has taken place – preferably via email or

postings on boards, walls, and websites.

It never fails that supervisors and

managers are surprised by the results

of findings during a maintenance and

reliability maturity assessment when the

workforce reports they knew nothing of

what is going on. When asked what they

know about the assessment and Asset

Health Assurance, the response is often

“this is the first time we heard of it”.

When the supervisors and managers are

informed of what the workforce says they

know – which is nothing – their response is

almost always, “But we spent 10 minutes

at each shift change telling them what was

going to happen!” They were efficient, but

ineffective and this communication defect

is now at point P.

As much face-to-face direct commu-

nication with checks for understanding

and opportunities to provide feedback on

understanding is paramount when imple-

menting a maintenance and reliability

improvement initiative. The site leadership

team has to do most of the work in the

Lean ManufacturingThe 8 Wastes

Enterprise/PlantLed

Maintenance Driven

Perf

orm

ance

Lev

els

Loss EliminationOEE

Fix it Before it Breaks

Fix it After it Breaks

Staged Decay

RegressiveState

ReactiveState

PlannedState

ProactiveState

LeanState

VisionLeadership

Long-Term Commitment

Level 1Not Engaged

Level 2Experimenting

Level 3Enlightened

Level 4Good Practice

Level 5Best Practice

Figure 5: Maintenance and Reliability Maturity Continuum

beginning phase of this type of project and

too often, they are “too busy” so they rely

solely on efficient methods of informing.

As organizations become less reactive

and more proactive, the need for frequent,

formal face-to-face communication will

decrease. It is important to note that while

the frequency of face-to-face communi-

cation will decrease, the need for it will

remain. Keeping in the mind the formula

for effective communication, 6X + 3X =

Dog, the face-to-face messages can be

supplemented with other, more efficient

communication methods.

Within an organizational context,

this maturity can be assessed on Steven

Covey’s Maturity Continuum from The

Seven Habits of Highly Effective People,

where the maturity levels are: Dependence,

Independence, and Interdependence.

The higher the cultural maturity, the

less reactive the organization is and the

less need for face-to-face communication.

In terms of reliability, the more process

focused and standardized the organization

is, the better the information and the less

variation exists in how things are done.

Effective communication is embedded in

the way work is done and the communica-

tion culture is one of “interdependence”.

In Figure 5, we see the various stages of

maintenance and reliability from Staged

Decay to Planned State to Loss Elimination

on a maturity continuum.

In the Regressive State, the culture

maturity is dependent and the impact of

ineffective communication is greatest. In

the Proactive State, the culture maturity

is interdependent and effective communi-

cation is built into the way work is done.

The dichotomy is that everyone is running

around in the Reactive State putting out

fires, or in some cases just moving the fires

around, with the belief that there is no time

to communicate effectively, which in turn

leads to ineffective communication and

contributes to the Reactive Environment

in a self-perpetuating cycle. An analogy

to explain this cycle is an example of two

lumber jacks laboring over a two-person

saw to cut down a large tree. When a pass-

erby suggests that they stop to sharpen

their saw and the work will go a lot easier,

the lumber jacks reply, “We can’t stop to

sharpen the saw, we’re too busy sawing.”

Not taking the time to communicate

effectively to stakeholders is a defect that

will contribute to the failure of a mainte-

nance and reliability improvement project.

Interpretation of the following acronym is a

fair indicator of a reactive versus proactive

environment: Figure 4: Closed-Loop Model for Effective Communication

Send

Encode

Idea

Receive

Decode

Idea

Typical Communication(Open Loop)

ReceiverSender

Decode

Receive

Encode

Comprehensive Verification(Closing the Loop)

Send

Figure 3: Formula for Effective Communication, 6X + 3X = Dog

CYAIf you said “cover your assets”, you are

probably in a reactive mode and ineffective

communication can have dramatic adverse

impact. If you said “check your assump-

tions”, you are most likely in a proactive

environment and effective communication

is part of the way things are done.

mike retired from the U.s. navy

after a career flying the F-14 tomcat

and spent the past 17 years leading

organizational excellence programs

involving business process reengineer-

ing for the Department of the navy, the

Department of Defense and numerous

Fortune 1000 companies. over the

last 10 years, mike has worked exclu-

sively with companies in achieving the

full benefit of asset maintenance and

reliability improvements as a part of

their overall operational effectiveness

business strategy. mike is a Principal

advisor of organizational excellence

and Change management for GPAllied

(gpallied.com). he can be contacted at

[email protected] or by phone:

843 469-5458.

10 SMRP SolutionS February 2012 | Volume 7, Issue 1 11 SMRP SolutionSFebruary 2012 | Volume 7, Issue 1

a s reliability professionals, we under-

stand the obvious benefits of lower

manufacturing costs and higher uptime

in embarking on a reliability improvement

initiative. However, many organizations

that are well down this path find that there

are many additional benefits that are seen,

many of which were completely unexpect-

ed. In other words, the payback of reliabil-

ity greatly exceeds the planned benefit that

the original business case was based upon.

Some of these additional benefits are tangi-

ble and measureable; others are intangible

but no less real or important. This paper

will explore some of the reasons behind

these unexpected benefits and may provide

some assistance in determining a business

case for your own reliability initiative.

There are four general areas of value

generation due to a reliability initiative

(refer to Figure 1):

RevenueGrowth – Reliability of

manufacturing systems and equipment

enhances an organization’s ability to

increase revenue through a number of

factors. Even though the business climate

may be such that the market is sold out,

How Reliability Impacts Shareholder Value

By: BrUCe hawkIns, CmrP manaGement resoUrCes GroUP, InC.

many of these factors will still provide the

potential to increase revenue.

CostEffectiveness – A reliable manu-

facturing process makes efficient use of

labor and raw material resources, and

a sound maintenance process makes

efficient use of craft labor and spare parts

resources. Both of these result in the mini-

mum unit cost of manufacturing.

Asset Efficiency – Just as a good reli-

ability program makes efficient use of

financial resources, it also promotes effi-

cient use of physical assets, enhancing the

organization’s ability to maximize return

on those assets.

MarketExpectations – In deciding

to invest in a publicly traded company,

investors tend to look at a number of

Shareholder Value

Revenue Growth

Cost Effectiveness

Asset Efficiency

Market Expectations

Figure 1


how reliabil ity Impacts shareholder Value how reliabil ity Impacts shareholder Value

factors such as a sound balance sheet,

consistently meeting or beating analyst’s

earnings projections, and a consistent

ability to grow dividends. A stable, predict-

able and reliable manufacturing process

enhances an organization’s ability to meet

and exceed these expectations.

Details of the benefit areas are shown

in Figure 2 above and are described in

detail throughout the document.

Revenue GrowthA manufacturing organization has the

potential to grow revenue by increasing

sales volume and increasing pricing (refer

enables the organization to research and

address the sources of common cause

variation, leading to quality improvement.

Consistently higher quality products than

the competition enables the organization to

command premium prices, or at least the

ability to maintain pricing in the face of a

market downturn.

Cost EffectivenessA reliable manufacturing process helps

ensure that the products can be produced

at a minimum unit cost. In most commod-

ity businesses, the low cost producer wins

– it is in the best position to ride through a

potential market downturn while remain-

ing profitable and providing an acceptable

return on assets. Referring to Figure 4

above, a good reliability program can have

a significant impact on Costs of Goods

Sold (COGS) through efficient resource

utilization and the ability to eliminate

unnecessary work.

Operations and maintenance costs

are optimized through ensuring that the

labor and material resources are effi-

ciently deployed in the manufacturing

process. It takes less operating labor for a

manufacturing process that is stable and

operating well than it does for one plagued

by equipment problems. Likewise, properly

planned maintenance work ensures that

maintenance labor resources are used at

maximum efficiency with as few delays

to Figure 3 below). It does this by maximiz-

ing the three factors of Overall Equipment

Effectiveness (OEE) which are Availability,

Throughput and Quality.

Sales volumes are increased by ensur-

ing the physical assets are available to

manufacture products when needed and

can manufacture them at the required

rate. Availability is defined as the per-

centage of time the process is actually

operating compared to when it is sched-

uled to operate. Throughput is defined

as the percentage of actual production

rates or speeds compared to the best

potential run rate or speed. As availability

and throughput improve, the potential

exists to increase production volumes. In

some organizations, market limitations

may preclude the use of this availability

improvement, but ensuring the assets can

run when needed will improve the organi-

zation’s ability to capture a greater share of

the market.

Stable production processes within

statistical control inherently produce

consistent quality products. Unreliable

equipment that frequently fails intro-

duces “special cause” variation into the

process that leads to quality problems. If

these special causes can be eliminated, it

and as little wasted effort as possible.

Ensuring that proactive maintenance

tasks are linked to anticipated failure

modes prevents unnecessary scheduled

maintenance, and a sound predictive

maintenance program that allows the

maintenance function to respond to equip-

ment problems at the first sign of distress

avoids the potential for collateral damage

to other areas of the machine or process.

This has the effect of eliminating work that

is unnecessary; after all, we don’t have to

repair a failure that doesn’t occur!

Waste and energy reduction are also

areas for cost savings. Higher quality as

mentioned above means that there is less

“non-saleable” product to rework or for

disposal. Fewer repairs means there is

less potential hazardous waste to dispose

of. Energy costs are reduced because well

maintained equipment operates more

smoothly; there are also fewer steam and

compressed air leaks and insulation sys-

tems are maintained in good repair.

Asset EfficiencyOne of the key measures of any busi-

ness is the return on assets – how much

money is the business earning relative to the

investment in assets. It is a measure of how

efficient management is at using its assets to

generate earnings. From an investor’s per-

spective, they want to see maximum returns

for minimum investment.

For the purposes of this discussion,

assets can be divided into two categories:

fixed assets and current assets (refer to

Figure 5). Fixed assets are the property,

plant and equipment used to manufac-

ture products. Current assets are those

assets that are expected to be turned into

cash within one year; inventories, includ-

ing spare parts inventories, fall into this

classification.

A reliability program assists with asset

efficiency by helping to maximize output

with a minimum of investment. As we

increase reliability we would be able to

increase asset utilization without invest-

ing in additional capacity (more capital

assets). Also, if we clearly understand the

operating condition of the equipment (its

“health”, so to speak), we have less uncer-

tainty and therefore less of a need to have

redundant spare equipment. Additionally,

if the equipment is appropriately cared for,

its useful life is extended and there is less

need for replacement capital (this also has

the effect of reducing costs due to a reduc-

tion in depreciation expense). The business

has the option to deploy that capital on

items that will increase productivity or

reduce operating costs.

One major expense in some industries

is the scheduled turnaround (also referred

to as shutdowns or outages in some indus-

tries). A good reliability program helps to

maximize the efficiency and effectiveness

Shareholder Value

Revenue Growth

Cost Effectiveness

Asset Efficiency

MarketExpectations

Volume

Price Realization

Operations / Maintenance

Fixed Assets

Current Assets

Company Strengths

Externalities

COGS

Availability

Throughput

Quality

Resource Utilization

Work Elimination

Waste Reduction

Energy Reduction

Utilization

Life Extension

Shutdown Effectiveness

Design for Reliability

Asset Intelligence

Execution

Managerial Effectiveness

Fact-Based Decision Making

Risk Management

Executive Credibility

Spares Inventory

Figure 2

Revenue Growth

Volume

Price Realization

Availability

Throughput

Quality

Asset Efficiency

Fixed Assets

Current Assets

Utilization

Life Extension

Shutdown Effectiveness

Design for Reliability

Spares Inventory

Figure 3 Figure 5

Cost Effectiveness

Operations / Maintenance

COGS

Resource Utilization

Work Elimination

Waste Reduction

Energy ReductionFigure 4

14 SMRP SolutionS February 2012 | Volume 7, Issue 1

how reliabil ity Impacts shareholder Value

15 SMRP SolutionSFebruary 2012 | Volume 7, Issue 1

how reliabil ity Impacts shareholder Value

of the turnaround by ensuring that the

scope of the turnaround is known (the

predictive maintenance program provides

information on asset health and there

are fewer “surprises” when equipment is

opened). Advanced notice of issues and

effective planning of the corrective actions

can help minimize turnaround duration.

Another way that a reliability program

helps increase asset efficiency is through

the “design for reliability” process. Tools

such as Reliability Centered Maintenance

(RCM) used during equipment design can

enable small design changes to be made

before equipment is purchased to eliminate

some failure modes, and thus eliminate

the need for maintenance to mitigate those

failure modes. Maintainability reviews

in the design stage can incorporate ideas

to increase the speed and efficiency of

maintenance actions to reduce ongoing

maintenance and repair costs.

In a reliable plant, spare parts

inventories are minimized for a number

of reasons. There is a lower demand for

parts in a proactive organization because

there are fewer repairs needed. Since the

purpose of inventory is to protect against

risk and uncertainty, lower inventory levels

are required in proactive organizations

because there is less uncertainty – the

predictive program provides information

concerning developing problems. Also,

because the predictive program provides

advanced warning of problems, many parts

can be procured “just in time” instead of

needing to be stocked. Lower inventory

levels also impact COGS due to reduced

carrying costs and frees working capital

for other uses.

beating commitments and quarterly guid-

ance. Only information in the Market can

impact market price, so executives share

some of the information in an effort to

positively influence share price. The more

credibility the company and executive

team has, the more those announcements

will have their intended effect. An organi-

zation can develop credibility by being very

conservative, but that doesn’t do much

for share value growth. If an organization

is going to be aggressive, it has to have

disciplined processes and accurate data.

The company has to be able to forecast

improvements and then deliver against

them.

Measuring Shareholder ValueArguably the best measure of share-

holder value is Return on Assets (ROA).

According to Investopedia, it is “an indica-

tor of how profitable a company is relative

to its total assets. ROA gives an idea as to

how efficient management is at using its

assets to generate earnings.” It is cal-

culated by dividing a company’s annual

earnings by its total assets and is depicted

in Figure 7 below.

Potential investors often use ROA as

a comparative measure between compa-

nies in a similar industry to determine

which has the best value. The assets of

the company are comprised of both debt

and equity. Both of these types of financ-

ing are used to fund the operations of the

company. The ROA figure gives investors

an idea of how effectively the company is

converting the money it has to invest into

net income. The higher the ROA number,

the better, because the company is earning

more money on less investment.

As with any ratio, ROA is increased

by either increasing the numerator or

decreasing the denominator (or both).

Good asset reliability drives each factor in

the correct direction to increase ROA. Net

Income is calculated by subtracting annual

operating costs from revenue generated by

the business. As we have seen, a sound

reliability program increases revenue by

both volume growth and by the ability to

Market ExpectationsIf we consider a discounted cash flow

model for a business, we have forecasted

costs and revenues and a discounted rate

(or risk-adjusted rate) of return. Market

expectations addresses implicit market

perceptions on the magnitude of those

cash flows as well as the perceived risk

(uncertainty and variability). The more

confidence the market has in a particular

organization, the less of a risk “premium”

it will demand relative to others in the

same industry and a higher stock price

should result. The factors that a reliability

program should influence are somewhat

intangible in this area and are shown in

Figure 6.

Reliable physical assets enhance the

market’s perception of an organization in

several ways. If an organization is better

at producing asset information, leverag-

ing that information to make better and

timelier decisions, and ultimately improve

their ability to execute, they will be more

flexible and adaptable to changes in the

marketplace. With those strengths, and

in all likelihood a better cost structure

as a result of those strengths, they will

be better able to position themselves for

market opportunities. This can amount

to significant value reflected in the stock

price.

Organizations with reliable assets

inherently have better knowledge and

information about those assets; it is a

byproduct of understanding how the equip-

ment is supposed to operate and how it can

potentially fail. They understand both the

capacity constraints of the equipment and

the potential consequences of exceeding

those constraints. They also, through

effective condition monitoring, understand

the operating condition and the general

asset health at any point in time so miti-

gating actions can be taken with minimal

disruption to the operation.

The market values consistency and

nimbleness in an organization; consis-

tently being able to deliver on promises

and guidance enhances management’s

credibility. Having the necessary informa-

tion coupled with disciplined processes

to be able to act on that information

enhances management’s effectiveness and

ability to execute. Decisions can be made

on the basis of solid facts and tangible

information versus experience or “gut feel”.

Well-defined systems and work processes

serve to reduce the riskiness in a company

and can lead to reduced uncertainty in

the company’s performance and financial

outcomes.

Risk management is a key capability

that is augmented by good asset reliability.

The more it is integrated into other func-

tions, the more effective an organization

will be at identifying and mitigating risk.

For asset intensive industries it’s only logi-

cal that asset performance represents the

biggest risks. The key to risk management

is information – data and analytical capa-

bilities. Organizations that do not leverage

asset information have to suffer the conse-

quences or operate with a costly safety net

– excess capacity – which leads to higher

operating costs, a higher fixed asset base,

and ultimately lower margins.

There is a great deal of attention that

gets placed on corporate presentations to

the analyst community, and meeting or

increase pricing. It also reduces operat-

ing costs by increasing the efficiency of

resource utilization and eliminating waste,

so both factors are driven in the correct

direction to increase the numerator in the

ROA equation.

Total assets are made up of a combina-

tion of fixed and current assets. As we have

seen above, with a good reliability program

the fixed asset base is lowered by reducing

the need to recapitalize the machinery and

equipment used in production. Current

assets are reduced by minimizing spare

parts inventory. Again, both factors are

driven in the correct direction to reduce

the denominator in the ROA equation (refer

to Figure 7 below). There are few other

initiatives that an organization can imple-

ment that drive each factor in the correct

direction to maximize ROA!

SummaryOrganizations that embrace asset

reliability and focus on implementing the

tools, techniques and technologies neces-

sary to enhance and sustain it nearly

always find that the returns are much

greater than anticipated. When reliability

becomes an integral part of an organiza-

tion’s culture, the discipline and rigor

necessary to launch and sustain it tend to

permeate throughout the organization and

drive benefits in all facets of the operation.

It is doubtful that an organization can

embark on any other initiative that can

have such a far-reaching impact on the

entire business.

Bruce hawkins, CmrP, Director of

reliability services with management

resources Group, Inc.

(www.mrgsolutions.com), is a

management consultant with more

than 35 years of experience in

implementing systems and processes

targeted at improving machinery

reliability. he has extensive experi-

ence at helping companies achieve

significantly improved operating results

while dramatically reducing costs.

an accomplished public speaker and

educator, he has taught over 100

courses in maintenance and reliability

management as well as in reliability

Centered maintenance and root

Cause analysis techniques.

MarketExpectations

Company Strengths

Exernalities

Asset Intelligence

Execution

Managerial Effectiveness

Fact-Based Decision Making

Risk Management

Executive Credibility

Figure 6

Return on Assets (ROA) =Net Income (Earnings)

Total AssetsFigure 7

Shareholder Value= f (ROA)

Net Income(earnings)

Total Assets

Revenue

Costs

Current Assets

Fixed Assets

Figure 8

16 SMRP SolutionS February 2012 | Volume 7, Issue 1 17 SMRP SolutionSFebruary 2012 | Volume 7, Issue 1

Alliancing Overview

What Is Alliancing?

Introduction

a number of large global companies have been at the forefront

of championing alliance relationships across the services

and manufacturing industry. Alliancing is a relatively new in-

novative style of business relationship that differs from tradi-

tional forms of contracting and strategic partnering. This style of

relationship is based on the concept of mutual trust and shared

risk and reward between the client and the service provider. In

practise this means the service provider’s profit is directly linked

to the achievement of pre-determined Key Performance Indica-

tors (KPI’s), which in turn are aligned to the client’s performance

expectations.

Companies that have formed successful alliance style rela-

tionships are aware of the realities of operating in a commercially

competitive environment with the need to reduce overheads

whilst increasing market share. It is this realisation that has

prompted them to move away from the traditional adversarial

style contracting agreements.

Because the rewards derived for the service provider are

solely performance-based, alliancing encourages and empowers

the service provider to deliver whatever innovation and change

that is necessary to improve the performance of client’s asset.

When it works well, alliancing is a most satisfying arrangement

for all concerned. However looking to get the most from an alli-

ance style relationship requires a huge amount of effort, trust

and hard work by all of the parties involved.

The Principles Of Successful AlliancingExperience demonstrates whilst most clients want the benefits

that can be gained from an alliance relationship, most propose a

style of contracting that goes only part of the way towards setting

up an alliance environment where these benefits can be fully

achieved. In some cases, key clauses within the agreements retain

elements of a traditional client / contractor relationship, even

though the client may espouse an alliancing mindset.

For alliance agreements to be successful all parties must

firmly be committed to the use of alliance principles in relation to

the term of the agreement. It is highly recommended that all par-

ties take the time to develop and promote these principles across

their organisations.

The principles for a successful alliance are:

• That the leadership teams must have a common vision, dem-

onstrate commitment and real leadership for the development

of an aligned business relationship.

• The alliance’s true objective is to achieve the client’s busi-

ness expectations in a way that would not be possible

under more traditional contracting arrangements.

• That everyone is rewarded by achieving those objectives

and they are measured by pre-determined KRS’s and KPI’s

• For an alliance to be successful in the long-term there must

be a cultural fit between the parties as a platform for devel-

oping a high level of trust, openness and cooperation.

• A shared set of principles guides all decision-making

• A “no blame” cultural environment

• A “joint ownership” of problems mindset (i.e. “how are we

going to solve this problem?)

• Total transparency in all commercial and financial matters

• They work together to always select the right person, regard-

less of employer

• The senior management teams must lead by example first

in establishing a framework of trust before cascading the

alliancing philosophy down through the teams.

• The trust is then reflected in a the creation of an operating

structure that integrates resources in the most effective way

to achieve the desired outcomes

• Alliance structures encourages and actually demand

that all involved work together to achieve business objec-

tives through innovations and continuous improvement

approaches

• The processes and structure is supported by systems that

are transparent between the parties

• Good alliance agreements are flexible enough to deal with:

• Changes in the client’s objectives and/or its customers

changing objectives

• Market changes and uncertainty

• The changes in behaviour and processes required to

embrace continuous improvement initiatives

• Dynamics caused by personnel changes

Alliancing Best Practice:The top ten lessons learned from best practice companies in

alliance management structures are as follows.

THEY:

• Focus on building the relationship and cooperative cultures

first

• Ensure stakeholders are informed, involved and engaged in

building the relationship

• Develop the processes and practices that will drive the right

behaviours

• Establish realistic benchmarks and performance expecta-

tions or the development of the relationship

• Develop performance measures jointly

• Ensure performance measures are in accordance and

aligned with the client’s corporate goals and strategies

• Articulate qualitative goals for the service delivery arrange-

ment at the start

• Link and balance performance measurements so they cas-

cade up to and down from value drivers for the business

• Design flexibility into the performance measurement

systems

• Measure the fewest number of things with the fewest pos-

sible metrics

How Alliancing And Traditional Contracting Forms Differ:

Traditional contracting:These arrangements by definition are developed to control an

activity and tightly manage the process and cost in a way that can

be enforced in a court of law. They are often based around con-

frontation, adversarial, aggressive and uncooperative relationships

managed on the bases of mistrust with high levels of control and

compliance.

These relationships normally are seen as short term in dura-

tion with little or no incentive for innovation or exceeding contract

expectations. More times than not they are task related and the

contractors are not involved or even encouraged to be engaged

in the total business outcomes. Contracts are normally awarded

on the lowest price, are managed as hard dollar, fixed amounts

where changes to the details of the contract are tightly contested

due to the cost of variations.

Alliance relationships: The active word here is “Relationship”. Contracting is more

likely to be a nameless, faceless hard nose arrangement with little

By: wIl Carey, CmrP


all iancing overview all iancing overview

to no involvement of the service provider. Alliancing on the other

hand promotes active interaction by all parties and encourages

ownership and rewards success.

This type of relationship is normally based on strategic long-

term vision where all parties share both risk and reward. They

focus on core business activities and share resources as required

to achieve aligned business objectives. Above all the relation-

ship must be founded on openness and integrity combined with

a seamless operation where mutual trust and accountability

manage the relationship.

These relationships require a shift in culture and must be

managed by change agents understanding the value and chal-

lenge of the journey. Alliance relationships are not only strategic

in nature they must be seen as critical catalyst for change with

long-term benefits measures by meeting and exceeding pre-

agreed performance expectations.

It must be understood that these forms of business relation-

ships do not just happen. They are not for everyone, they are

not easy and they will not create an improved environment for

businesses unwilling or unable to change. They require vision,

leadership and the energy to stay the journey for the long-term.

For those with the courage and the insight to take this path there

are opportunities to leverage core competencies and manage per-

formance in new and innovative ways.

The Principles Of Successful AlliancingExperience demonstrates the principles for a successful

alliance are:

• The aim is to achieve the client’s objectives, through coop-

erative development

• The alliance is based on a no blame relationship

• Each partner must earn the trust of the other by a clear

focus on joint values and integrity

• Customer satisfaction and health of the relationship are core

business objectives

• Business objectives are achieve by delivering on agreed KRA’s

and KPI’s, operating within a risk & reward environment

• A cultural fit is developed and matured in order to engender

the necessary trust

• The senior management teams demonstrate the alliance

vision, through commitment & leadership

• The operating structure integrates resources, right person

for the job

• The structure encourages innovation and continuous

improvement

• The systems and flow of information is transparent between

the parties

• The agreement is flexible enough to deal with changing

conditions & needs

How Alliancing Benefits Clients• The benefits clients derive from this approach include:

• Team strategy, to create an Incident free operation

• Alliance vision to achieves Lower total system cost

• Innovation and ownership creates opportunities for change

• This approach delivers a sustainable competitive advantage

for all parties

• Implementation of an Open, honest and timely communica-

tions flow

• Maximise reliability improvement at optimum cost

• Reduction of waste and duplication across the business

• Development of skilled, competent and long term workforce

• Implementation of a one team culture for success

Other Less Obvious Advantages:• Because the same things motivate both parties, there is the

potential for a higher degree of cooperation in the execution

of the operating structure than would otherwise be the case

• The degree of transparency and subsequent closeness of

the relationship that is built over time gives greater confi-

dence and assurance that outcomes will be achieved

• Maximum flexibility is achieved with greater access to

information, alliance agreements requires integration of

systems

• Problem solving is a less stressful and non-combative pro-

cess because both parties are equally incentivised to work

together to come up with the best solution without their

own agendas

How The Better Companies Providers Position Themselves

• They aligned their culture and internal processes to

engender alliancing style behaviours in their people. There

is no culture shock as they move through alliance style

structures

• The culture fully embraces alliancing as its preferred and

most common form of relationship

• Their corporate values embrace this new service provide –

client relationship and are demonstrated by the importance

they place on the health of the relationship

Planning For The Alliance

Creating a leadership team with a like-minded approachOne of the first steps in forming an alliance is to appoint a

leadership team or Alliance Board that is equally representative

of both parties. The success of the alliance is critically dependent

on top-level leadership and ongoing support, particularly when

things get hard.

• The Alliance Board establishes the framework for the alli-

ance, including:

• Establishing the guiding principles (values)

• Projecting the Vision and Mission of the relationship

• Approving the alliance objectives and KRA’s and KPI’s

• Ascertain and agree on the scope of the services

• Leading the development of the alliance culture

• Promoting a change management culture

• Determining initial budgets

It is a fundamental principle of alliancing that all of the above

issues are resolved by mutual agreement.

Establishing the risk / reward framework for the allianceThe commercial risk/reward arrangements are established to

suit the needs of the client, and the service provider, both parties

must see value in the agreement. Typically, the commercial risks

and rewards for the both parties are linked to the achievement of

key objectives such as:

• Reduced delivery time

• Reduced costs, through improved operating performance

and optimum life cycling

• Better management of risk

• Enhanced business relationships because of aligned goals

and increased satisfaction,

• Flexibility to adapt to changing circumstances and reduced

cost structures

• Innovation through improvements to existing systems &

introduction of latest technology

• Optimum standards in the areas of quality, safety,

industrial relations, environmental performance, staff

development and introduction of best practice

Once the objectives have been established, these can be

translated into KRA’s and KPI’s and agreed measurement pro-

cesses can be put into place to allow the Alliance board to assess

service delivery performance and make decisions as required

throughout the alliance period.

Implementing The Alliance Stucture

Transition PhaseAlliancing is challenging journey and requires a team effort

and commitment with ongoing daily reaffirmation of what you are

striving to achieve and how we’ve agreed to do it. Typically there

is an initial “taking charge” period where service provider begins

to work on-site.

• Initially the relationship of the parties can be tentative,

cautious and hesitant

• As daily interactions increase, the team’s comfort level

develops and team behaviours such as openness and coop-

eration become commonplace

• As comfort level increase even more people begin to work

together to achieve the mutually established business

objectives

• As challenges begin to be tackled and problems solved,

confidence in the alliance will continue to develop

• Success will breed success and the more wins on the board

all parties will develop trust in the alliance and each other

• It is important to focus on the successes and downplay the

setbacks, particularly in the early stages of the alliance

Decision-makingThe Alliance Board is the prime vehicle for making major

mutually agreed decisions throughout the alliance period. If for

some reason the Alliance Board is unable to reach agreement

the matter is escalated to the senior management teams of the

service provider and the client organisations.

Typical decisions that require attention throughout the alli-

ance agreement may include:

• Determining how the cost of experts, mediators and consul-

tants will be borne, normally shared

• Selecting the KRA’s and KPI and when the risk reward pro-

cess is implemented, normally a grace period to protect the

services providers profit is established during the imple-

mentation phase of building the relationship

• Reviewing all proposals from the “Alliance Management

Team” requiring significant change in order to accrue per-

formance improvements

• Approving scope changes, fee adjustments, overruns and

any other financial decisions

• Undertaking annual reviews of the KPIs and adjusting

them where appropriate

• Making recommendations to the client on all major changes

to the relationship or the term of the agreement

• Approving changes to all key personnel

Ongoing performance managementThe Alliance Board should meet regularly to review progress

against agreed objectives, budgets and specific project plans.

Monthly reports provided by the Alliance Management team

provide a major source of information to the board to assist them

in this process.

Stepped ChangeOnce the issues resulting from the initial transition phase

settle down, both parties start to accelerate their activities

around operating, maintaining and improving the operation of

the asset. This results in the initiation and implementation of

change initiatives that improve systems and processes.

It is critical that change is introduced according to a well-

considered plan. Time is needed to consolidate each major

change before the next generation of change is commenced. You

must develop a management of change process that encourages

keeping all stakeholders informed, involved and engaged in the

development of this new relationship. Get the relationship right

first then measure, monitor, mentor and manage for success.

ClosingI hope this overview of alliancing has been of help to you.

Moving from contracting to alliancing is a journey that is filled

with challenges and change. It is not one for the organisation

looking for a quick fix but it is an opportunity to achieve desired

business goals in a difficult global market place that might not

be other wise possible. Assess what it is you wish to achieve, plan

the journey, execute as a team, build the relationship first, select

performance measures and then measure, monitor, mentor and

manage the journey.

wil worked for eastman kodak in rochester new york for

over 25 years and now lives in australia. he is the regional

asset management technical manager for Parsons

Brinckerhoff and is based in melbourne. wil’s career started

in 1963 and he has been a senior line manager, project man-

ager and consultant with a passion to deliver excellence.


and the Survey for M&R of Facilities Maintenance, which will

open for data collection in the early part of 2012.

The new online evergreen interface allows for data to

be submitted in a secure online environment backed by

enetrix-ADivisionofGallup. All data submitted is strictly

confidential and is encrypted during transmission. In addi-

tion, the save entry feature enables data to be entered in

multiple sessions by multiple users if needed. Participants

also have the ability to track data for a single owner with

multiple facilities.

Participation in the Benchmarking Study is free and open

to both members and nonmembers of SMRP. Reports and

data will be available by subscription, which allows access to

real time data 24 hours a day/7 days a week. Performance of

data can be monitored over time as the database continues

to grow. To check out the new online Benchmarking Study

go to https://smrpbenchmarking.enetrix.com . You can also

access the Study through the newly launched Library of

Knowledge, another exciting new tool launched this year.

SMRP Library of KnowledgeIn addition to housing the new Benchmarking Survey,

SMRP’s Library of Knowledge offers access to more than

a decade of SMRP conference proceedings, all currently

published consensus-based metrics, guidelines for use of the

metrics, and SMRP’s standard glossary of terms.

Each feature of the Library of Knowledge gives users

immediate access to valuable information and tools for

improving M&R. The searchable database of conference

papers and presentations provides practical, real-life experi-

ences that support improvement in M&R. All 67 metrics,

which provide reliable and standardized guidance on how to

measure key performance indicators, are available through

the online knowledge center.

SMRP’s vision is for the Library to become the ultimate

resource for the M&R community. If you have an M&R

issue, you can visit the library and find real time, up-to-date

answers at your fingertips. If your plant is just starting the

reliability journey, you can search for metrics you need to put

in place. If you have been working on a reliability program

and need to know how you’re doing, you can click over to the

benchmarking section and compare yourself to your peers. If

you come up against a problem that you’ve never encountered

before, you can search our conference papers and publica-

tions for answers.

Attendees at this year’s conference showed great

enthusiasm for these new products. If you did not have the

opportunity to view them for yourself in Greensboro, take

a few minutes now and check out these cool new tools at

http://library.smrp.org.

I am very optimistic that the BoK will continue to have

plenty of work in front of them and would invite anyone that

has any interest in becoming part of this significant effort to

contact us through our Project and Business Development

Manager, Laura Keane at [email protected] or myself at

[email protected].


the theme of this issue of Solutions

is “Managing and Communicating

Change” which is a perfect way to lead

us into this discussion on what has been

happening within the BoK. Change is what

the BoK committees are all about, either

in terms of supporting and defining new

change that is needed, managing current

change initiatives that may be going on

with your organizations or reinforcing and/

or maintaining the change for lasting and

sustained benefits and improvements in

the long term.

Change Management is now a com-

petitive advantage for organizations and

leaders that want to ensure successful

implementation and completion of major

corporate, company or site initiatives.

Research on project success continues

to identify change management as a key

focus area for successful completion of

initiatives. Organizational leaders that

have recognized the need to master change

have done so by focusing on and paying

attention to successful execution of their

role within the change initiative.

Change Management, simply stated,

is the process of managing and helping

the people involved in the initiative to be

successful. Organizations are composed

of individuals and we often believe that we

can influence and move the organization

in the direction desired and the people

will follow along. Again, research in this

area indicates that this is not always true,

especially in large organizations. Rather,

it suggest that specific focus on individual

change is a must for overall successful

organization change in order to meet the

business need and Return on Investment

(ROI) desired.

There are numerous Change

Management methodologies that have

made their appearance on the industrial

and commercial scene recently and all

have similar components that meet the

same overall objectives. Basically, effective

change happens when the following are

present:

• Dissatisfaction with the current state

of affairs or operating conditions,

• A vision of what the new state of

affairs or operating conditions look

like, and

• A plan or specific steps that need to

be taken to achieve the new state of

affairs or operating conditions

However, within most all of the numer-

ous methodologies that exist today, there

are a few key nuggets of understanding

that exist and will drive the change to

become “internalized” and “accepted” as

the “way we do business” going forward.

These include:

• A planned approach or model to

follow in preparation for the change

at all levels within the organization,

not just the leadership,

• An implementation strategy that

builds on the plans developed and

ensures that discipline is applied in

effectively rolling out that strategy

and specific actions defined, and

• A recognition that change initiatives

do not survive on their own, but

require reinforcement and recogni-

tion along the way and well into the

future life of the change.

So, how does this relate to the work

that has been and continues to be done

within the BoK. Change Management

begins with a “Planning and Preparation”

phase of change. The BoK has provided a

benchmarking survey tool that provides

a means to gather fundamental informa-

tion about where we are today so that

the vision for the future can be solidi-

fied. Change Management continues with

an “Implementation or Execution” phase

which puts into practice what you have

planned. Best Practices and benchmark

metrics are keys to successful execu-

tion during this phase of change. Lastly,

Change Management involves being able

to sustain and continual improve what is

being done within the new state driven by

the change. The M&R Knowledge Library

is the ticket to support success during this

phase and is rich with information that

can be obtained by members at “no cost”

from the SMRP website.

We have all heard the statement “It’s

hard to believe that another year has….”

but that is truly how I feel again in 2011

as we look back at what has been accom-

plished within the Body of Knowledge

(BoK) Directorate for SMRP membership

during 2011. Because of the continued

commitment and hard work of the BoK

Committees; Best Practices, Benchmarking

and M&R Knowledge, much has been

accomplished. This was highlighted

during the SMRP Annual Conference in

Greensboro this year through the suc-

cess of the BoK booth at that conference.

There were numerous visits to this booth

to review and learn more about the BoK

products available to the SMRP member-

ship. This article will focus on a couple

of the key deliverables premiered at that

conference.

SMRP Benchmarking Survey for Maintenance and Reliability:

This past year SMRP partnered with

enetrix-ADivisionofGallup, to launch its

online evergreen delivery interface for the

Benchmarking Survey. The purpose of the

survey is to provide a means for organiza-

tions to compare their M&R performance

to others in the same or similar indus-

tries. The Benchmarking Study, which is

supported by SMRP’s consensus-based,

standardized metrics and definitions, gives

M&R professionals the ability to measure

performance consistently, make valid com-

parisons, establish achievable goals and

objectives and set realistic expectations.

This is the only M&R survey that is based

entirely on SMRP conscience metrics. It is

an invaluable baseline and comparison tool.

The study’s scope is consistent with

SMRP’s M&R Body of Knowledge which is,

supported by the Five Pillars of Knowledge,

comprised of two survey components: the

Survey for M&R of Production Equipment,

which is currently open for data collection,

BoDy oF KnowleDge (BoK) CoRneR

using BoK Products to Manage and Communicate Change By: ron leonarD, Pe, CmrP, Bok DIreCtor

anD laUra B. keane, BUsIness DeVeloPment anD Bok manaGer

It’s a journey ... to operational excellence.If asset performance, reliability, or integrity is

important to your business, Ivara EXP Enterprise will support and drive the process.

Take the journey with the experts at Ivara.

Visit www.ivara.com or call 1-877-746-3787.

There is no silver bullet

for reliability, performance, integrity.

Client: IvaraProject: SMRP Solutions Half Page Print AdDate: December 2, 2011

Size: 3.75” x 10”Bleed: n/a Colour: CMYK

[email protected] | 519 936 4879

Contact: Sandra DiMatteoEmail: [email protected]: 905-632-8000 ext. 271


ATLANTA,GA–The Society for Maintenance and Reliability Professionals (SMRP) announced that it has selected Kellen Company to provide full-service association management services beginning February 1, 2012. Kellen Company is a global professional services firm with operations in Atlanta, Chicago, New York City, Washington, DC, Brussels and Beijing.

SMRP Chair Stan Moore, Ascend Performance Materials, said the relationship with Kellen will provide the Society with a strategic partner that can help SMRP live its mission, fulfill its vision and enhance the services and programs it offers to members.

“We see this partnership as an essential step in our further development as the premier professional society for leading and advancing Reliability and Physical Asset Management,” said Moore. “We feel that Kellen is a great fit for our organization and look forward to growth in our visibility and outreach, increased benefits for our members and renewed vision.”

SMRP’s global headquarters will be Atlanta, Georgia. Jon Krueger, an experienced association CEO and Kellen account executive, will serve as SMRP’s Executive Director. Russ Lemieux, a Kellen Group Vice President, will serve as Executive Vice President for SMRP. Mr. Lemieux has nearly 30 years of association management experience at Kellen.

“Kellen is extremely excited to partner with such a tremendous industry leader like SMRP,” said Krueger. “We look forward to serving the SMRP members and to working with the Society’s leadership to continuously enhance and grow the organization.

AboutKellenCompanyFounded in 1964, Kellen Company is an accredited association management company. It provides association management, government affairs, public relations, meetings management, creative communications, Web site development and other professional services to associations, as well as individual companies and other organizations. Kellen serves more than 10,000 companies and 100,000 professionals worldwide, either through its more than 100 client associations or directly from office and representation in the United States, Europe, China, the Middle East, India and Southeast Asia. For more information, visit www.kellencompany.com.

this is my last Executive Director

column for Solutions as I take leave

of SMRP. I am proud to have served

this important professional society and

facilitated so many areas of growth for the

community of maintenance and reliability

professionals.

Back in late 2009 when I was inter-

viewed by SMRP leaders, there were three

major mandates given to the new executive

– growth in revenues and reserves, growth

in membership, and growth in outreach for

enhancing the Society’s global M&R com-

munity presence and influence. Together,

we achieved all of these goals.

I am proud to have supported Howard

Penrose and Tim Goshert’s efforts in build-

ing partnerships through international

M&R organizations, domestic government

agencies, corporate and sister society and

association relationships. A short list

includes: GFMAM, ANSI, DoE, DoD, the

Vibration Institute, SME, ASME, STLE,

ASQ, PMEC and the Canadian Metal,

Mining and Metallurgy Assoc.

With strategy and guidance led by Stan

Moore, we achieved some initial growth for

SMRPs Foundation and brought develop-

ment ‘in kind’ services by a fundraising

expert and colleague of mine.

Collaborating with your Business

Development manager, Laura B. Keane, we

were excited to have brought SMRP new

e commerce platforms for SMRPs impor-

tant Body of Knowledge specifically, a new

vendor for our Benchmarking Survey and a

robust SMRP Knowledge Library.

New marketing strategies led to suc-

cesses in both the 2010 and 2011 SMRP

Annual Conference as well as membership

growth of 7%. Each of these growth rates

is well above any growth other associations

or societies are experienced these past two

years.

I am most proud of having supported

and facilitated enough growth in revenue

that SMRP was able to contribute back to

our reserves for the first time in 3 years.

All of these successes could only have

been achieved with the support of a few

key SMRP Volunteer Leaders. The brief

list includes David Staat, CMRP; Michael

Eisenbise, CMRP; Rick Baldridge, CMRP;

Stan Moore, CMRP; Howard Penrose,

CMRP; Timothy Goshert, CMRP; Butch

DiMezzo, CMRP; Terry Harris, CMRP; and

Naomi Angel, SMRPs savvy legal counsel.

I have enjoyed meeting so many of

you, I really enjoyed connecting at the

great Plant Tours and took away great

excitement and enthusiasm from you at the

Annual Conferences.

You, the members, have great sup-

port from your new staff team, led by

Jon Krueger and Russ Lemieux. Even in

the short time I’ve enjoyed working with

Kellen, I have come to know them as pro-

fessionals eager to contribute to SMRP’s

programs and services and a team that

can bring best practices to directly support

the growth strategy of SMRP leaders.

While my tenure with SMRP is coming

to a close, I believe in the many oppor-

tunities for this Society. I sincerely look

forward to hearing about the many future

successes for SMRP!

Thank you all for the opportunity to

serve.

FRoM the exeCutiVe DiReCtoR

KellenCompanySelectedasManagementFirmforSocietyforMaintenance&ReliabilityProfessionals

Fond Farewell By BarB DUnlaVey, CmP, Cae


Society for Maintenance & Reliability Professionals

800-950-7354 [email protected] www.smrp.org

Contact: Jon Krueger, [email protected]

Barb with the GFMAM Representatives and SMRP Board members at the 2011 Annual Conference in Greensboro, NC.


the exam teams are off and running

for 2012. The English exam team has

around 60 new questions that have come

in over the past few months. We will be

reviewing these questions and making

changes, evaluating for international use,

and getting ready to beta test. The exam

team is very serious about getting ques-

tions that are quality and relative to the

Body of Knowledge areas.

The Spanish team will be working

on the candidate guide getting it trans-

lated into Spanish for use for our Latin

American friends whom have interest

in taking the exam. Interest is still high

in Columbia and Peru and we need to

maintain that momentum. There have also

been quite a few exam given in Mexico

and would really like to see those number

increase. Columbia gave 70 Exams in

December, this is a great effort by ACIEM

to improve the credibility of Columbian

reliability experts.

The Brazilian Portuguese exam is

ready and being given at a few venues

in Brazil. ABRAMAN is the Brazilian

maintenance organization and they will be

FRoM the exaM teaM

SaVe the Date!

SMRP’s 2012 Annual Conference is being held October 15-18, 2012

at the Hilton in Orlando, FL. With 50+ educational sessions from the

Five Pillars of SMRP’s Body of Knowledge: Business Management,

Manufacturing Process Reliability, Equipment Reliability, Organization

and Leadership and Work Management; 15+ Workshops; and Plant

Tours the SMRP Conference is your best resource for finding solu-

tions to maintenance & reliability challenges and revitalizing your

profitability! This year marks the 20th anniversary of the Society so

don’t miss the education and celebration!

Check www.smrp.org frequently for updates!

international exams a Focus for SMRPCoBy terry harrIs, CmrP exam DIreCtor, smrPCo

Exam Team Reliability Tip

There are two main reasons for performing an RCM analysis on a process or piece of equipment. The first is

deciding how to maintain the design or required function of the equipment you are working on. Every pro-

cess or piece of equipment in a plant must have its function defined in order to make sure we are performing to

some standard. To determine this performance we must have measures in place to make sure defined functions

are being performed and what is the actual performance.

The second reason for performing an RCM analysis is to develop a complete maintenance strategy that

keeps the equipment performing its intended function. The process looks at every way the components in the

equipment have or can fail. We than ask the questions;

1. Can the failure be predicted using a PdM technology?

2. Can the failure rate be reduced using a Preventive Maintenance task?

3. Can the failure be eliminated with a redesign?

In nearly every RCM process, improvements to the operation and component life cycles will improve.

promoting the exam this year. I am looking

for new team members for the Portuguese

exam team so if you are a CMRP and are

interested please contact me.

The electronic exam that is adminis-

tered by SMT has enough exposures that it

is due for review by looking at the statis-

tic on each question. Questions will be

compared with results of the paper exam

forms. Questions will be replaced and the

exams will be updated.

The chapter question writing contest

will be in happening again this coming

year. It will give a $1000.00 prize to the

chapter turning in the most questions

in 2012 and the prize will be announced

at the annual conference in Orlando

next October. This is a great exercise for

a chapter meeting or for members of a

chapter to work on. If you have questions

or need help with any of the information

please contact me.

Anyone can send questions in for the

exam. Questions you send in are worth

points for your re-certification and are

also worth money. When you send 3 or

more questions in, using the correct form

and from books that have a ISBN number

or publications that are available world-

wide, they are worth $10.00 per question.

Example: 1 or 2 questions are worth noth-

ing dollar wise. 3 questions are $30.00

and $10.00 per question for each after

that number. Please use the question writ-

ing form for the questions.

Something new from the exam team

for this coming year is the “Reliability

Tip”. Members of the Exam Team will

write a reliability tip in each issue in this

section. The tip will be related to an area

of the BOK in hopes of helping your plant

process or have a better understanding

of material contained in the exam. I get

emails and questions often about train-

ing for the CMRP exam. SMRPCO does

not offer any training courses for the

CMRP exam. The exam is based on your

knowledge and experience in the area of

maintenance and reliability. There is a lot

of information on the BOK areas of the

exam in the candidate guide. Many of the

articles in Solutions magazine are great

resources for basic knowledge of exam

related information.

SMRPCo Sustaining SponsorsThe SMRP Certifying Organization (SMRPCO) has developed a program of ben-efits for companies or organization wishing to provide support to the mission of SMRPCO. For an annual contribution of $1000, sponsors receive discounts on exams, recertification fees, and much more! To learn more please visit: www.smrp.og/SMRP_certification/sustaining_members.htm

aBB relIaBIlIty serVICes

aDVanCeD teChnoloGy serVICes, InC.

aeDC/ata

aesseal, InC.

aGrIUm

alCoa InC.

allIeD relIaBIlIty, InC.

aramark FaCIlIty serVICes

asCenD PerFormanCe materIals

asoCIaCIon ColomBIana De InGenIeros (aCIem)

aUstIn InDUstrIal, InC.

BhP BIllIton

BP- GUlF oF mexICo

CaCI, InC

CarGIll, InC.

CommerCIal metals ComPany steel GroUP

Delta aIr lInes

DUBaI alUmInIUm lImIteD

DUPont

e&m solUtIons C.a.

elI lIlly & ComPany

emerson ProCess manaGement

FlUor CorPoratIon

Genon enerGy

Genzyme CorPoratIon

GreenwooD, InC

GUlF soCIety oF maIntenanCe ProFessIonals (GsmP)

holCIm Us, InC.

hormel FooDs

IrVInG PUlP anD PaPer

IVara CorPoratIon

JaCoBs

JaCoBs/maF

JesCo maIntenanCe CorP.

kraFt FooDs

lIFe CyCle enGIneerInG

los alamos natIonal laBoratory

loUIs DreyFUs CommoDItIes

lUmInant Power

maInnoVatIon InC.

manaGement resoUrCes GroUP, InC.

marshall InstItUte

merIDIUm, InC.

mIllerCoors

mosaIC

nexen InC.

noVelIs, InC.

owens CornInG

PePsICo

PFIzer, InC.

PreDICtIVe serVICe

reloGICa

s.m. Cerro VerDe

saBIC InnoVatIVe PlastICs

sasol synthetIC FUels

strateGIC asset manaGement, InC.

t.a. Cook ConsUltants InC.

the CanaDIan InstItUte

the Dow ChemICal ComPany

tUrner InDUstrIes

Ue systems

UGl UnICCo

UnIteD teChnoloGIes/ Pratt & whItney

wells DaIry, InC.

wooD GroUP ColomBIa s.a.

wyle laBoratorIes


CharlesHannah,PEChevron Phillips Chemical Co LP

CurtisHarkeIRISS, INC.

GregHeardCAMS Consulting

SimonHeathEmerson Process Management

WilliamHeeterSwagelok Co.

CraigHenryUniversity of Johannesburg

KenHicksMillerCoors

StephenHicksNova Chemicals Inc.

JoeHinnenkampArmstrong World Industries

MelindaHowardSD Myers Inc.

CharlesHudsonMerck & Company, Inc.

BillyWayneHughesNRG Energy

MichaelHujarSD Myers Inc.

GregoryJeAnsonWESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY

AndreJeffries,CMRPNestle USA

JimmyJohnsonData Architex

MichaelKarre,CMRPRoquette America

WilliamKeaneMerck & Company, Inc.

SteveKillanekSD Myers Inc.

DennisKillebrewPotash Corp White Springs

WillKingston,CMRPBC Hydro

RogerKlineEugene Water & Electric Board

StephenKnonerFlowserve

Executive

aRMStRong woRlD inDuStRieS

Bunge

FlowSeRVe

SD MyeRS inC.

Individuals

(Note: It has come to our attention that there were missing members from the December new member list (August 1- Oct. 31). We apologize about this. Those missing members are now included in this list.)

SamiAlhazmi

SameehAl-SahafiSABIC - YANSAB

MarkAndersonArmstrong World Industries

PaulAndrews,ASQ,CSSBB,CSSGBCliffs Natural Resources

SamsudinAnggariPT Pupuk Kaltim

CarlesArgelichBunge

RafaelArguelles,CMRP,PESisvenca

DanAudetAltaSteel

JohnBahun,CMRPUSPS

ChuckBakerSD Myers Inc.

ChristopherBarclay,CETGeneral Motors

JoeBarnesBP

BillBartonArmstrong World Industries

WalterBehmer,CPMBoehringer Ingelheim

MarkBennettBayer Material Science

JohnBertzArmstrong World Industries

StuartBevanBunge

AndreyBondarevBunge

JohnBorskey

VincentBossDey Pharma

Wicus(al)BothaSasol Synfuels

HamidBouaricha

DanBozdogBunge

DavidBrands,CMRPBoise Inc

MichaelVBrownNew Standard Institute

MattBucherARAMARK Facility Services

ArkadiuszBurnosBalticBerg Consulting

LeonardCaputoNew York Power Authority

BruceCarrSabic Innovative Plastics

LawrenceCarverPCS Phosphate

DavidCederbergBasic American Foods

JamileChamletBunge

RobertChristman,CMRP,CPMMGenzyme Corp, A Sanofi Company

CraigClarkRio Tinto

JamesClemBradleys’ Inc

ConradColesGeorgia-Pacific Corp.

RodneyCollier,ASQEmerson Industrial Automation

DianeColsonEli Lilly & Company

VictorCostec,CMRP,PECenovus

TimCrIstBoehringer Ingelheim, Roxane.

HelioDanesiBunge

JasonDavidsonAsset Maintenance Success

CarlosDavilaBunge

RonDayInfor

EdisondeOliveiraBunge

DavidDePaolisFlowserve

EdgardoDevellukBunge

ShaneDicksonGeorgia Pacific

G.KeithDiepstra,ASQ,CQE,CRERalcorp

BrianDietsch,CMRPBunge

RichardEdwardsPeabody Energy

DavidEisenhawerNova Chemicals Inc.

SérgioFerreiraBunge

DemetrioFloresTipismanaPLUSPETROL

MihalyGabrielBunge

StephanieGonzalezBradleys’ Inc

DouglasGourleyIRISS, INC.

RonGraySubsea7

ArleneGreviPfizer Consumer Healthcare

PaulGriffin,CMRPManagement Resources Group, Inc.

BillGrothInfor

ClayHackney,CMRPPCS Phosphate

NovEMBER 1, 2011 – DECEMBER 31, 2011 new MeMBeRS


NovEMBER 1, 2011 – DECEMBER 31, 2011 new MeMBeRSNovEMBER 1, 2011 – DECEMBER 31, 2011 new MeMBeRS

AndrzejKurdzielBunge

DavidLangston,CMRPTriumph Group

PawelLecinskiBunge

YalingLeiBunge

LeonardoLeiserBunge

GavinLinderman,CMRPSabic Innovative Plastics

GlenLittleLife Cycle Engineering

DavidLumentahDP World

MichaelMachado,ASQAREMAS - Smart Business Solutions

FranciscoMangualGarcia,CMRPJohnson & Johnson

FabioMarettiBunge

AdityoMarhendroPT Pupuk Kaltim

OscarMartinezUrdaneta,CMRPABS Consulting

JeffMauntelESRG

WilliamMayoBabcock & Wilcox

RobertMcArthur,CMRPWeatherford Intl

JosephMcClain,CMRPDuPont

BarryMcGillVinylex Corporation

PeterMcLiverty,CIRMNovaspect

JasonMcMillanConoco Phillips ALPNG

DonaldMehrerPeabody Energy Corp.

R.Merchant,CMRPMichelin North America

JamesMerckOwens Corning

RobertMerrick,CMRP,PEUniversal Studios Orlando

RileyMiethRelaDyne

GabrielMijaresGeorgia Pacific LLC, Wood Products

RobertMiller,CMRPIRISS, Inc

WayneMillerISP Chemicals, Inc.

KellyMillerMeridium, Inc.

RobertMillerIRISS, INC.

William(Bill)Miller,CMM,MMCCity of Des Moines WRF

YuriMinnick

SedatMirzaBunge

JonathanMitchamAlbemarle

ScottMohrAllied Reliability, Inc.

RobertoMoLinaCelanese

BrigidoMontemayorAlcoa

TimMontgomeryAscend Performance Materials

AnthonyMontier,CMRPConstellation Energy

EdmondMoore,ASQ,CQE,CRE,PECH2M Hill

BenMorenoBayer Material Science

LucMorinRio Tinto Alcan

MichaelMorris

RaefMostafaSpanish Egytian Conmpany for LNG production (SEGAS)

KevinMoyers,CMRPScitor

AbduhMuhammadPT Pupuk Kaltim

DanielMullin,CMRPNovelis, Inc.

JosephMuniz,PE

JackMyerRobert Bosch Corp.

EdgarNajeraMaciasA.W. Chesterton Co.

BrianNelsonAmeri-Forge Group

WaldyrNetoBunge

LinhNguyen

TuanNguyen,CMRPSunCoke Energy

AndrewNorman,CMRPNorman and Associates LLC

MunaStellaEbeleNwekeShell Development Company of Nigeria Limited

GeorgeNwIgweChevron Global Upstream

KeithNyeWalmart

CharlesO’ConnellGlobal Brass and Copper dba Olin Brass

TemiOdusanyaY-12 National Security Complex

PaulOgeaNexen Inc.

AdeOladeinde,PERio Tinto Alcan

KenOliphant,PE,PHDJana

DebersonOliveiraBunge

ChristopherOlson,CMRPMillerCoors

JamesOlsonKoch Industries, Inc.

DonnaOppegaardAsset Management Services, LLC

MiguelAngelOrtizValdezASQMillerCoors

JohnOsarenren,PHDIntegrated Agricultural and Industrial Co.

OlusolaOsoNexen Inc.

AlexPadilla,CMRPHess Corporation

EdPappasDuPont Teijin Films

HillaryParhamGPAllied

SangjoonParkNovelis, Inc.

DaveParkerBlount International

NicholasParker,PHDmarathon Oil

RuthParris

ChristophePasselaigueMerck & Company, Inc.

StevePattonSakisui Specialty Chemicals America, LLC

TatePearsonAdvanced Technology Services, Inc.

CarmelitaPenaNova Chemicals Inc.

GerardoPerezBunge

DanielPerkinsKPAQ Industries LLC

GaryPerraultSunCoke Energy

TJPerreaultInfor

KeithPhelps,CMRPNovo Nordisk

BarryPhillipDevelopment &Enhancement Services Ltd.

MarkPorterIrving Oil Refining GP

RobertPriceAgrium

ThomasProkschPfizer, Inc.

KayPulverRio Tinto

AlfonsoQuinteroBueno,CMRPEcopetrol S.A.

BasukiRachmadPT Pupuk Kaltim

RyanRamage,CMRPTeck

CurtisRamsayAscend Performance Materials

DonRasHeldon Inc.

WilliamReaveyCargill, Inc.

TyrelReedTronox, LLC

PaulReinsLiebherr Mining Equipment

JosephReitz,ASQ,CMRP,CSSBBNovelis

DavidReynoldsGoodyear Tire & Rubber Co.

GregRhodesAscend Performance Materials

RaymondRice,CMRPBoehringer Ingelheim Roxane Inc.

RandyRiddell,CMRPInternational Paper

BrianRiddleyMichelin Tire

Jon-michaelRiemerMundy Companies

DebRindlerCrown Equipment

RobertoRiveraSampayo,CMRP,PEPfizer Pharmaceuticals LLC

AndyRodesSEMEQ, Inc.

AlfonsoRodriguezAscend Performance Materials

AdmilsonRomeroPraxair Inc

BibianaRondonSalomon,CMRPAMS Group Ltda

DennisRosenbaum,CMRPRio Tinto

BobRossNexen Inc.

AlanRossSD Myers Inc.

ThomasRowanAES Ironwood

FachrulRoziePT Pupuk Kaltim

WalterRuizBunge

RichardSaariNexen Inc.

CraigSagetAscend Performance Materials

AjitSahooAgrium

GeorgeSaid,ASQ,CMRPSid Richardson Carbon and Energy

KarinSalazarSPECPRO S.A.

AliSalemNexen Inc.

GutembergSalesBunge

DavidSaloggaMueller Co.

JuanSanchezEmerson

EverettSandovalHormel Foods

RicaurteSantamariaDP World

SilvioSantosSEMEQ, Inc.

AnthonySantosuossoA.W. Chesterton

DarrenSarichNexen Inc.

RaymondSarrattThe Timken Company - Gaffney Bearing Plant

KerrySayreUGL Unicco

WhitneySchaperMarathon Oil Company

MarcSchnabelCargill

PhillipSchooleyBoehringer Ingelheim Roxane Inc.

BrettSchroederAsset Performance Networks

CarlSchultz,CMRPSEMEQ, Inc.

AnthonySchwabOwens Corning

DavidSchwartzAscend Performance Materials

MichaelSchwerdtBunge

RichardSergentWalter Energy / Jim Walter Resources

MartinShaffer,PEAscend Performance Materials

MihirShethNexen Inc.

HansSiddharta,CMRPPT. Kaltim pasifik Ammonia


NovEMBER 1, 2011 – DECEMBER 31, 2011 new MeMBeRSNovEMBER 1, 2011 – DECEMBER 31, 2011 new MeMBeRS

DuaneSiemen,CMRPUniversal Studios Orlando

CristianJavierSierraMontañoPEPersonal

JoannaSikorska,CMRPImes Australia

CarlSimardRio Tinto Alcan

GeorgeSimonoffOwens Corning

DavidSkarupa,CMRPAdvanced Technology Services, Inc.

AlexanderSluchokMeridium

AudryKeithSmithAllied Reliability

DuaneSmithBoehringer Ingelheim, Roxane Inc.

JamesSmithIVC Technologies

JeremySmithTF Hudgins, Inc.

JohnnySmithNexen Inc.

KeithSmith,CMRPInfor

KennethSmithWestar Energy

SidSmith,CMRPRockTenn

EdSmithAustin Industrial, Inc.

JasonSmithDuPont Teijin Films

WilliamSmithPPMS, LLC

JamesSnider,CPMMSaint Gobain dba Corhart Refractories

AdamSnyder,CMRPMillerCoors

MaciejSochaczewskiBunge

GaneshSoNowane,ASQTASNEE PETROCHEMICAL

MichaelSowa

RyanSpencerJ.R. Simplot Company

RobertSpurgeon,CIMMCornorstone Chemical Co.

JamesStascavageEngineering Software Reliability Group

JonathanStatonMichelin N.A.

DanielStauftNissan North America, Inc

RobertSteibly,CPE

ThomasSteinmeyer,CMRPUniversal Studios Orlando

JanRogerStenstadvolden,CMRPPabody Energy

DarrenStevensonSwagelok Co.

RodneyStewartHoonda Manufacturing of Alabama

DinoStubosEli Lilly & Company

JeffersonSturkeyInfor

JamesSullivanEthical Search Professionals, Ltd.

ArturSzeferBunge

TeddyJr.TabanaoChevron Geothermal Philippines

AbdulazizTanbalNational Methanol Company

MalcolmTannerEvonik Degussa Corp

EdwardTarkFreeport-McMoRan

TheeraTasanachonSCG Chemicals

MartinTauberBarber Foods

ScottTaylor,CMRPThe Mundy Companies

MartinTerradez,CMRPBunge

DarcyTheriaultNexen Inc.

LeonardThillThill

RickThomasBaxter Healthcare

EdwinThomasAustin Energy

JoppuThomas,CMRPSabic

JamesThompsonUGL Services Unicco Operations

GünterThüringerBunge

HuatTungTingEvonik-Degussa

TroyTobeyMeridium, Inc.

AnaTorrealbaContrerasPetropiar

CleberTorresBunge

FranciscoToRresGomez,ASQ,CMRPPEMEX REFINACION

ThomasTreharneTEZZCO INC.

AlexTrevinoBradleys’ Inc

DavidTrumanSiemens

RussTuckGreater Cincinnati Water Works

RandyTuckerAscend Performance Materials

ShaneTurcottSteel Image

CharlieTurnerRockTenn

EduardoUnda,CMRPPEMEX

MarcelvanVelthovenMainnovation Inc.

MichaelVanVoorhisPIC Group, Inc.

WimVancauwenbergheBEMAS

JasonVaughanFMC

V.j.VenkatramanGenesis Solutions

KarenVeroskyHenkel Corporation

TomVeverkaThe Timken Company

RobertVichichAsset Performance Networks

MarcosVieiraGalp Energia

PaulVillaordunaSuncor Energy Inc.

KyleVincentiUS Gypsum Co.

DonaldVinesDayton Superior

RostislavVoytsekhovskyBunge

SaeedWahdainNexen Inc.

EricWaits

RickWalcerNexen Inc.

CraigWalkerRio Tinto/ Kennecott Utah Copper

ChangQuanWangMichelin

JohnWatson,CMRPNorth American Breweries

GregWatsonCaravan Ingredients

GaryWebbGeorgia Pacific

RonnieWeeksBradleys’ Inc

TimWeilbakerGPAllied

ScottWeiss,CMRPGeorgia-Pacific

RonWhisenantFoster Farms Dairy

EdwinWhite,CMRPFlowserve

MikeWhiteKCP&L

ShelleyWhitener,CMRP,PELogos Technologies, Inc.

JamesWhitleyJones Lang LaSalle

PeterWhitleyKanekaTexas Corp

SteveWhittleAscend Performance Materials

PeterWienholzBunge

DarrinWikoff,CMPGPAllied

AndrewWilkinson,CMRPBunge

TerryWilksAscend Performance Materials

MarcWilliamsTate and Lyle

DeanaWilliamsonWashington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA)

StephanWilliamsonMichelin Tire

RichardWilsonRio Tinto

RileyWilson,PEMeridium

C.MathisWilsonIiiJacobs Industrials Services Inc.

BradWinchellCatalyst Paper

HarveyWinters,ASQ,CMRP,CQEStrategic Asset Management, Inc.

MikeWintersArmstrong World Industries

PrestonWitt,CMRPArcher Daniels Midland

SlawomirWojtalaBunge

LindseyWolf,CMRPTeck Coal LTD

KirkWolfinger,CMRPGPAllied

WaltWoodfinAscend Performance Materials

PaulWottonReliability Engineering Solutions Ltd.

JoeWursterCarpenter Technology Corp.

WayneYankie,CPMMGeorgia Pacific

KeithYarberMorrison Milling

GanisYudikisworoPT Pupuk Kaltim

AmirZaheer,CMRP,PEChevron Canada Limited

ScottZellen,CMRPOwens Corning

GregZembrodt,CMRP,PEWILD Flavors, Inc.

MarkZilavyWestinghouse Electric

FedericoZubiniBunge

305-591-8935 • www.ludeca.com

WatchVIDEOS

Online

ShaftAlignment

Rotalign® ULTRA

VIBXPERT® II

& GeometricMeasurement

VibrationAnalysis

& Balancing

Easy-to-usesolutions for your

maintenance needs!Sales • Rentals • Services

32 33 SMRP SolutionSFebruary 2012 | Volume 7, Issue 1

oCtoBER 1, 2011 – DECEMBER 31, 2011 new CMRPS

DiegoAcosta,CMRPEnintcoLTOA

RobertAdornetto,CMRP

CargillDeicingJuanAguilarSantistebon,CMRPEDEGEL

TrentAiken,CMRPRiotinto

AhmadAlali,CMRP

KNPCAliAlawadhi,CMRPKNPC

RashidAldossary,CMRPSaudiAramco

AliAl-Hamdan,CMRPSaudiAvamcs

AndrewAllen,CMRPJacobs/JT-HO

MichaelAllred,CMRPSandiaNationalLabs

NezarAlshammasi,CMRPSaudiAramco

JuanAmaris,CMRPSouthConsulting

CarlosArochoRivera,CMRPPfizer

MiguelArquez,CMRPAMSGroup

EdwardBagwell,CMRPJacobs

ZetinaBarbosa,CMRPPemex

SeanBarnes,CMRPJacobs/MAF

KimBartlett,CMRPBayer

WilliamBatt,CMRPRioTinto

KerryBaughn,CMRP

LoganAluminumRyanBenning,CMRPHormel

AlanBeran,CMRPTeck

StuartBevan,CMRPBUNGE

GerardBothner,CMRPJacobs/MAF

LarryBramlitt,CMRPJacobs/JT-HO

DavidBrands,CMRPBoiseInc

JavierBravoSanchez,CMRPIntegrityAssessmentServices

TonyBuffington,CMRPVestaPartners,LLC

RyanBurk,CMRPAscendPerformanceMaterials

HectorCamargoMora,CMRPSCM

FedorCanalesHuayllas,CMRPHatchAsociadosS.A.

FranciscoCanoMonroy,CMRPPacificRubiales

AldemarCastilloManrique,CMRPPetrotigerLtd.

TerryClark,CMRPMississippiLime

ArlanCochran,CMRPJacobs/MAF

RichardCrozier,CMRPNovelis

AldoCruz,CMRPPemex

LazaroCruzJimenez,CMRPPemex

CharlesCutlerJr,CMRPPfizer

DedyDarmasetiadi,CMRPPT.KaltimPasificAmoniak

JuanDiazDeza,CMRPHatchAsociados

BrianDietsch,CMRPBungeNorthAmerica

AyepDirmawan,CMRP

JohnDraughn,CMRPATS

RobertDunkel,CMRPHenkelCanadaCorporation

DarrinEaris,CMRPCargill

GregoryElam,CMRPMRG

MichaelEngh,CMRPOwensCorning

ZacharyFijal,CMRPPigott&Associates

RichardFineout,CMRPJacobs/MAFDougFord,CMRPTateandLyle

JoyFrosch,CMRPJacobs/MAF

JoseGanoza,CMRP

FranciscoGarciaRivera,CMRPEcopetrolSA

JeffGarth,CMRPJacobs/MAF

LucGirard,CMRPRioTintoAlcan

ChristianGoernandt,CMRPNovelis

ErwinGomez,CMRPSicelubColombia

WesleyGraf,CMRPManagementResourcesGroup

PaulGriffin,CMRPMRG

JohnGriswald,CMRPManagementResourceGroup

AlfredoGutierrezSanchez,CMRPPetrotiger

DonaldHaapapuru,CMRPAll-TestPro

ClayHackney,CMRPPCSPhosphate

MuhammadHaq,CMRPSaudiAramco

JasonHarris,CMRPBarrick-NorthAmerica

Discover thehidden treasurein your company

Watch the VDM Inside demowww.mainnovation.com

The maintenance manager is under a lot of pressure. The current credit crunch

forces you to improve. But where to start? How can you find the hidden treasure in

your maintenance department? VDM Inside is the Maintenance KPI Dashboard that

provides you with real maintenance intelligence of your cost drivers, performance killers

and underlying causes. With VDM Inside you will finally get a grip on your maintenance

performance. Want to know more? Go to www.vdminside.com

CONTROLLING MAINTENANCE, CREATING VALUE.

MAINNOVATION ad(Eng) 162x229mm.indd 1 07-12-2011 14:54:09


AllenHarris,CMRPCargill

GregHeard,CMRPCamsConsulting

GregoryHeaslip,CMRPJacobs/MAF

JuanHerazo,CMRPTecnicontrolSA

AlbertoHernandez,CMRPOwensCorning

MelissaHoenstine,CMRPSKF

RichardHogsett,CMRPRECSilicon

HamlynHolder,CMRPNeal&MassyWoodGroup

ArthurHolland,CMRPCaterpillarInc.

TamoraHouser,CMRPJacobs/MAF

BillHoward,CMRPJacobs

MuhammadIrshad,CMRPNovaChemicals

JohnItai,CMRPHawaiinElectricCompany,Inc.

EverJimenez,CMRPMineraYanacocha

RussellJimison,CMRPAlbemarleCorp

KennethJohnson,CMRPMichelin

JeffreyJohnson,CMRPJacobs

MichaelKarre,CMRPRoquetteAmorka

VioletKenna,CMRPJacobs/JT-HO

JaneKennedy,CMRPJacobs/MAF

WilsonKingston,CMRPBCHydro

TimKirchner,CMRP

JamesKnott,CMRPNovelis

JayKriner,CMRP

DavidLangston,CMRPTriumphGroup

JamieLaValley,CMRPPeabodyEnergy

VictorLawrence,CMRP

DavidLeaver,CMRPMarathonPetroleumCompany

IanLehrer,CMRPHormel

RichardLeopard,CMRPRobertBosch

JoshuaLissauer,CMRPGPAllied

ShaneLloyd,CMRPMichelinNorthAmerica

SamuelLopez,CMRPPfizerPharmaceuticals

OscarLopez,CMRPConfipetrol

AndresLopez,CMRPBMSSA

GermanLopez,CMRPPEMEX

JoseLopezHernandez,CMRPPemex

MichaelMarrtinez,CMRPBoehringerIngelheim

OscarMartinez,CMRPABSConsulting

KennethMaulsby,CMRPOwensCorningRoofingandAsphalt,LLC

RobertMcArthur,CMRPWeatherfordIntl

JosephMcClain,CMRPDuPont

PhilMcGeever,CMRPABB

DavidMerko,CMRPAgrium

RobertMerrick,CMRPUniversalOrlando

RichardMiller,CMRP

PeterMontgomery,CMRPJacobs/JT-HO

AnthonyMontier,CMRPConstellationEnergy

FernandoMoran,CMRPRYASA

KevinMoyers,CMRP

TonyMurray,CMRPJacobs/MAF

OscarNavas,CMRPConfipetrol

JoseAntonioNayhuaGamarra,CMRPBarrick-Pierina

TuanNguyen,CMRPSuncokeEnergy

MartinNolan,Jr,CMRPChevronOronite

DavidNolting,CMRPJacobs/MAF

IanNorman,CMRPNormanandAssociates,LLC

EricNorman,CMRPPCSPhosphate

JavierOchoaMoreno,CMRPConfipetrolSA

CarlosOvredoCastillo,CMRPGranTierraEnergyColombia

ArturoPachas,CMRPCIAMineraConoestable

AlejandroPadilla,CMRPHessCorporation

OliverPardo,CMRPHatchAsociados

BruceParker,CMRP

AliciaParraBostuza,CMRPFeneyrosSAA




PaulaPeres,CMRPJacobsTechnology

PercyPerezEuerrero,CMRPCorporacion

ArielPerezGelvez,CMRPEcopetrol

DavidPetry,CMRPJacobs/MAF

PaulPohlid,CMRPOwensCorning

ChristopherPond,CMRPGPAllied

JamesPrunty,CMRPJacobs

RyanRamage,CMRPTeck

WillmarRamirez,CMRPEcopetrol

KyleRamsey,CMRPGeorgiaPacific

JohnReay,CMRP

CherylRedmon,CMRPJacobs/MAF

JosephReitz,CMRPNovelis

JoseRicceRamirez,CMRPHatchAsociadosS.A.

RaymondRice,CMRPBoehringerIngelheimRoxaneInc.

WilliamRichards,CMRPManagementResourcesGroup

RobertoRivera-Sampayo,CMRPLCE

JoseRojas,CMRPSouthernPeru

LuisRojasTristan,CMRPCia.MineraAntaminaS.A.

RobertRountree,CMRPAlyeskaPipelineServiceCo.

GeorgeSaid,CMRP

JueanSanchez,CMRP

JoseAntonioSanchezBeltran,CMRPComcelSA

LarrySandifar,CMRPCaterpillarInc.

BillSchlegel,CMRPNovelis

VickieSchmersahl,CMRPJacobs/MAF

RobertShapuras,CMRPNovelis



JamesShelton,CMRPJacobs/JT-HO

HansSiddharta,CMRPPtKaltimPasifikAmoniak

DuaneSiemen,CMRPUniversalStudios

JeromeSimonson,CMRPCargill

CharlesSmith,CMRPInfor

SidSmith,CMRPRockTenn

AudrySmith,CMRP

KatieSowers,CMRPDuPont

RobertSteibly,CMRP

ThomasSteinmeyer,CMRP

BenjaminStevens,CMRPAWChesterton

JohnStieber,CMRPFarmerJohn

MihrezSuleiman,CMRPSaudiAramco

ScottTaylor,CMRPTheMundyCompanies

VictorTeranHenriquez,CMRPTecnicontrol

MartinTerradez,CMRPBungeArgentina

BrentTeubel,CMRPATSPeoria

StacieThomas,CMRPJacobs/MAF

PatriciaThomas,CMRPJacobs

JoppuThomas,CMRPSabic

RalphTileston,CMRPMRG,Inc

RobertTrucksis,CMRPBallCorporation

KatheleenTuleuski,CMRPEnergizer

FredyUribe,CMRPEcopetrolSA

GeorgeValadez,CMRPAlcoa

RicardoVasquezGarcia,CMRPSolucionIndustrialTotal

SergioVidal,CMRPSaudiAramco

PaulVillaorduna,CMRP

MarkVolk,CMRPATS

JeffreyWahl,CMRP

ByranWalker,CMRPJacobs/MAF

ScottWeiss,CMRPGeorgia-Pacific

MichaelWibben,CMRPATS

KentWilcher,CMRPJacobs/JT-HO

AndrewWilkinson,CMRPBungeLTD

RoyWilliams,CMRPJacobs

JesseWiste,CMRPHormel

PrestonWitt,CMRP

LindseyWolf,CMRPTeckCoalLtd

DerekYbarra,CMRPJacobs/MAF

KanYee,CMRPGene

OmarZarka,CMRPBaxter

ScottZellen,CMRPOwensCorning

Society for Maintenance & Reliability Professionals1100 Johnson Ferry Road, Suite 300Atlanta, GA 30342 USAwww.smrp.org

Executive DirectorJon Krueger

678-303-3045

[email protected]

Certification and EducationTim Kline

404-252-3663

[email protected]

Executive Vice PresidentRuss Lemieux

404-252-3663

[email protected]

Exam DirectorTerry Harris, CMRP

937-371-1644

[email protected]

SMRP Product & Business Development ManagerLaura Keane

[email protected]

281-384-5943

Solutions Editorial DepartmentDan Anderson

Communications Chair

Life Cycle Engineering

[email protected]

Barb Dunlavey, CMP, CAE

Content Editor, SMRP

301-523-7435

Ideas Communicated, LLC

Graphic Design

www.ideascommunicated.com

Howard Penrose, CMRP

Contributing Editor

Dreisilker Electrical Motors

[email protected]

SMRP Staff

Managing and Communicating Change - SMRP

Documents

Transcript of Managing and Communicating Change - SMRP