Before I put in my two cents, I would like to know what you all think in regard to this subject or if you have a similar story, please feel free to share your experience.
I recently had two separate customers share with me stories about hiring people/consultants who claimed to be "RCM Experts", in both cases their "expert" turned out to have very little experience actually facilitating a RCM analysis. One had attended a RCM public offering, recorded their analysis in MS Excel, and worked with their RCM team 1 day a week for 14 weeks and in the team delivered a PM focused maintenance strategy because their facilitator told them that they were "not ready for PdM and it would cost too much for them to get started".
There were lots of red flags within the 14 weeks that they worked on this project but the pressing questions were not asked until after the team presented their new maintenance strategy. Following this disappointment they did a little homework and found out their experienced facilitator could not provide a single reference in regard to his RCM experience other than his 3 day course certificate.
Company number two was slightly more aggressive in making the discovery that their newly hired RCM expert had little to no experience facilitating the RCM process. It turns out that company number 2 has a few certified CMRP's and one happened to attend the RCM team training that was being put on by their newly hired consultant. After a few pressing questions it turned out that Mr. RCM Expert was a new hire and had yet to attend formal RCM training and had never even sat in on a single RCM analysis!
After hearing two stories within 1 month I figured that others must have had similar experiences. I don't know about you, but any time we hired a consultant I expect and expert in that subject to show up. Getting anything less is fraudulent.
Monday, March 29, 2010
Friday, March 26, 2010
Using RCM Blitz and AHM to Develop a Complete Maintenance Plan
From the first day that RCM Blitz™ became tool that I offered both training and facilitation in Reliability Centered Maintenance services I have told my customers that RCM should only be applied to assets where we will be able to show a return on investment in improved reliability as well as reduction in health, safety and environment incidents and accidents.
More than 10 years later I now can stand behind a tool that will quickly help your company build a viable maintenance plan for the remaining balance of your plant assets. The Asset Health Matrix developed by Allied Reliability Inc. and available through GPAllied is without a doubt a straight forward and comprehensive solution for building sound maintenance strategy for your non-critical assets.
In looking at 100% of the assets you maintain at your site of facility Reliability Centered Maintenance or RCM Blitz™ will provide a complete maintenance strategy for the top 5 to 20 percent of your assets based on actual failure modes resulting from your operating context and environment. For the remaining assets or balance of plant, the 10% that have the lowest criticality will receive a Run to Failure strategy 70 to 85 percent of non-critical assets will receive a maintenance plan developed by assessing common failure modes within the Asset Health Matrix.
The important thing to understand in regard to the Asset Health Matrix is this is NOT just a simple list of predetermined failure modes. This is a tool that takes into account your specific business and the consequences of each failure as it applies to your world building a unique and cost effective equipment maintenance plan.
To learn more about RCM Blitz™ and the Asset Health Matrix please click on the links, e-mail me at plucknetted@alliedreliability.com or call me at 585-329-7040.
More than 10 years later I now can stand behind a tool that will quickly help your company build a viable maintenance plan for the remaining balance of your plant assets. The Asset Health Matrix developed by Allied Reliability Inc. and available through GPAllied is without a doubt a straight forward and comprehensive solution for building sound maintenance strategy for your non-critical assets.
In looking at 100% of the assets you maintain at your site of facility Reliability Centered Maintenance or RCM Blitz™ will provide a complete maintenance strategy for the top 5 to 20 percent of your assets based on actual failure modes resulting from your operating context and environment. For the remaining assets or balance of plant, the 10% that have the lowest criticality will receive a Run to Failure strategy 70 to 85 percent of non-critical assets will receive a maintenance plan developed by assessing common failure modes within the Asset Health Matrix.
The important thing to understand in regard to the Asset Health Matrix is this is NOT just a simple list of predetermined failure modes. This is a tool that takes into account your specific business and the consequences of each failure as it applies to your world building a unique and cost effective equipment maintenance plan.
To learn more about RCM Blitz™ and the Asset Health Matrix please click on the links, e-mail me at plucknetted@alliedreliability.com or call me at 585-329-7040.
Monday, March 22, 2010
Are We Ready for RCM Blitz™?
I got an e-mail from a new potential customer yesterday, it was one of those that starts out with, "We really like what you do, we like the RCM Blitz™ process, we think it could help us to significantly improve how we perform maintenance on our assets, however our management and CMMS system are not ready to handle the structure and discipline that comes with completing a RCM analysis. We are going to work on implementing a new CMMS system this year and I think next year we will be closer to being ready for RCM Blitz."
As you close out a e-mail this reads like this as a consultant you are left to wonder in regard to how a company comes to decide it they are ready to perform and implement a RCM analysis. Is my company ready for RCM Blitz™?
I wish I had an easy answer. A simple questioner that one could fill out in a excel spread sheet, circle some numbers and come up with a magic score that says "Congratulations! You scored a perfect 1600 and you are now ready for your first RCM Blitz™ analysis!"
The fact is I have something easier than a questioner and spreadsheet. Having been in the RCM consulting business for over 10 years I have come to determine a company is ready when a group or single individual is ready to take on the responsibility of doing the following items;
1) Build a business case for performing your first RCM analysis by selecting a critical asset that is suffering from human or equipment based losses.
2) Gather the drawings and upfront information necessary to begin your analysis.
3) Select a small team of experts to work with an experienced RCM facilitator to complete the analysis.
4) Develop and track the implementation of the tasks developed in your RCM analysis.
5) Continue to track the reliability measures of this asset and report on the success that resulted from implementing and performing your RCM tasks.
The five steps listed above should take no more than three months to complete and be able to begin showing the improvement that will result from completing and implementing a RCM Blitz™ analysis. And, you should all take note that there is not a single step that asks, if your corporate managers are ready for RCM or what CMMS system you are using, or if there is an interface to automatically transfer the tasks from the RCM database to your CMMS system.
Plain and simple, a company is ready for RCM Blitz™ the day they first recognize that that having unreliable equipment and costly maintenance is affecting the profits of your business.
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
It's All About The Failure Modes
While there are many places that new RCM facilitators fall down when it comes to facilitating a thorough and useful RCM analysis, most errors in the process start at the failure mode level. Writing good failure modes requires an expert level of understanding of hundreds of different of components. What is the component intended to do (Function) and what are the ways that this component can fail (Failure Modes).
Through the years I have tried a couple of different ways to teach how to write good failure modes. In performing hundreds of RCM Blitz™ analyses with different facilitators, and practitioners for companies around the world we have come to understand that good failure modes should be written in three parts.
Part - Problem - Specific Cause of Failure
As an example: Cooling water pump bearing (Part) seizes (Problem) due to lack of lubrication (Specific Cause of Failure)
The part is the location or source of where the failure mode begins. Looking at the cooling water pump listed above, a rookie facilitator might be tempted to say the cooling water pump failed and while this is true, where did the failure begin? It began when the bearing was not lubricated.
The problem portion of the three part failure mode is the undesired condition that results from specific cause of failure. If we neglect to lubricate the cooling pump bearing it will vibrate, heat up and eventually seize. While the bearing has been failing for some time when it seizes we now have a problem.
The third part of a good failure mode is the specific cause of failure. As we write each failure mode we should recognize that the purpose of RCM is to develop a task that will clearly mitigate the cause. If we don't get the specific cause written at the correct level your team will never select develop a good mitigating task. Again with the end in mind if we miss the specific cause the outcome of your analysis will surely miss the failure mode.
So what exactly is a specific cause of failure? This is where experience in Root Cause Analysis or Cause Mapping becomes extremely valuable. Failure Modes are all about understanding the relationship between cause and effect. The trick is to learn to discuss each failure mode at a level where a sound maintenance task can mitigate or eliminate the failure mode. To understand this lets go back to the cooling water pump.
Cooling Tower Pump Fails - Some would consider this a failure mode, I would not it only contains two pieces of a three part failure mode, the pump and at a high level, the problem. How would one mitigate this failure? Is there a maintenance task to detect, reduce or eliminate this failure mode? Would this task be applicable and effective in detecting, eliminating or mitigating this failure mode? Being honest, this failure mode is nearly useless. The only way to deal with this failure mode is to replace the pump.
Cooling Tower Pump Bearing Fails - Again, just two parts here, there is not enough information here to make a sound task decision. Some would say that we could perform vibration analysis and detect the bearing failure. While in most cases this might be true, without knowing the specific cause we cannot be sure. In many cases there are specific causes of failure where vibration analysis is clearly not the best task for mitigating the failure mode. As an example, I don't want to use vibration analysis to tell me that we have not lubricated a bearing.
Cooling tower pump bearing seizes due to improper lubrication - While we have three parts here, how do I deal with this specific cause of failure? What does improper lubrication mean? There could be several specific causes buried within this one failure mode. For instance improper lubrication could mean, too much lubrication, not enough lubrication, the incorrect type of lubrication, lubrication at the incorrect interval. It is extremely important to remember we need to have the specific cause written at a level where we know the maintenance task will be both applicable and effective in eliminating the failure mode. Each of the separate causes listed in regard to lubrication would result in a different mitigating task. Combine the causes and we now risk missing a failure mode and a task.
Remember, the failure modes we identify are the key to developing our complete maintenance strategy and most important failure modes to identify the failures that result from the context and environment in which we operate our equipment.
More information on writing good failure modes can be found in my book Reliability Centered Maintenance using RCM Blitz™
Through the years I have tried a couple of different ways to teach how to write good failure modes. In performing hundreds of RCM Blitz™ analyses with different facilitators, and practitioners for companies around the world we have come to understand that good failure modes should be written in three parts.
Part - Problem - Specific Cause of Failure
As an example: Cooling water pump bearing (Part) seizes (Problem) due to lack of lubrication (Specific Cause of Failure)
The part is the location or source of where the failure mode begins. Looking at the cooling water pump listed above, a rookie facilitator might be tempted to say the cooling water pump failed and while this is true, where did the failure begin? It began when the bearing was not lubricated.
The problem portion of the three part failure mode is the undesired condition that results from specific cause of failure. If we neglect to lubricate the cooling pump bearing it will vibrate, heat up and eventually seize. While the bearing has been failing for some time when it seizes we now have a problem.
The third part of a good failure mode is the specific cause of failure. As we write each failure mode we should recognize that the purpose of RCM is to develop a task that will clearly mitigate the cause. If we don't get the specific cause written at the correct level your team will never select develop a good mitigating task. Again with the end in mind if we miss the specific cause the outcome of your analysis will surely miss the failure mode.
So what exactly is a specific cause of failure? This is where experience in Root Cause Analysis or Cause Mapping becomes extremely valuable. Failure Modes are all about understanding the relationship between cause and effect. The trick is to learn to discuss each failure mode at a level where a sound maintenance task can mitigate or eliminate the failure mode. To understand this lets go back to the cooling water pump.
Cooling Tower Pump Fails - Some would consider this a failure mode, I would not it only contains two pieces of a three part failure mode, the pump and at a high level, the problem. How would one mitigate this failure? Is there a maintenance task to detect, reduce or eliminate this failure mode? Would this task be applicable and effective in detecting, eliminating or mitigating this failure mode? Being honest, this failure mode is nearly useless. The only way to deal with this failure mode is to replace the pump.
Cooling Tower Pump Bearing Fails - Again, just two parts here, there is not enough information here to make a sound task decision. Some would say that we could perform vibration analysis and detect the bearing failure. While in most cases this might be true, without knowing the specific cause we cannot be sure. In many cases there are specific causes of failure where vibration analysis is clearly not the best task for mitigating the failure mode. As an example, I don't want to use vibration analysis to tell me that we have not lubricated a bearing.
Cooling tower pump bearing seizes due to improper lubrication - While we have three parts here, how do I deal with this specific cause of failure? What does improper lubrication mean? There could be several specific causes buried within this one failure mode. For instance improper lubrication could mean, too much lubrication, not enough lubrication, the incorrect type of lubrication, lubrication at the incorrect interval. It is extremely important to remember we need to have the specific cause written at a level where we know the maintenance task will be both applicable and effective in eliminating the failure mode. Each of the separate causes listed in regard to lubrication would result in a different mitigating task. Combine the causes and we now risk missing a failure mode and a task.
Remember, the failure modes we identify are the key to developing our complete maintenance strategy and most important failure modes to identify the failures that result from the context and environment in which we operate our equipment.
More information on writing good failure modes can be found in my book Reliability Centered Maintenance using RCM Blitz™
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Let's Just Call it RCE - Reliability Centered Everything
I get mad at Stan Nowlan and Howard Heap from time to time. Fifteen years ago their work titled Reliability Centered Maintenance became the focus of my life when I first discovered the impact that RCM could have on manufacturing reliability. Since that time, I have authored somewhere around twenty articles on the subject, been a featured speaker at nearly three conferences a year and last year I even completed a book on the subject, describing what I see as the most effective way to complete a RCM analysis as well as the impact it can have on equipment and process reliability (Reliability Centered Maintenance using RCM Blitz™). For those who have taken the time to become educated in what a good RCM analysis is all about, the know power of this tool and where it applies. I know from experience, Reliability Centered Maintenance can and will deliver incredible results.
So, why am I mad at Stan Nowlan and Howard Heap?
Well, they are the two men responsible for putting the "maintenance" tag on what should have been called Reliability Centered Everything. For those who are in the know when it comes to RCM forgive me while I attempt to enlighten those who believe the word "Maintenance" somehow makes RCM incomplete. From the time I first began to learn what RCM was and how it should be applied I understood one thing to perfectly clear, the process does not work nearly as well without a cross functional team that includes representatives from Maintenance, Engineering, and Operations. This cross functional team is required because we need to understand the failure modes that could result from the context and environment in which we operate our equipment. One should note that the word operate or operator has been used more in this paragraph than the word maintenance. This makes me wonder from time to time why old Nowlan and Heap didn't call their process Reliability Centered Operations?
The second thing I learned as I studied up on RCM was the importance of discussing all likely failure modes; this would include failure modes that result from improper design, operation or maintenance as they applied to the components that make up the system. These failure modes should be discussed in terms of how each of the failures could impact our business and RCM decision logic should be applied to mitigate each failure mode by developing a corresponding maintenance task.
So, as we look at the process of analyzing failure modes we will discuss failure modes that could have been engineered into the equipment in the design phase. Excuse me, why did they not call this Reliability Centered Design?
As the team works to develop tasks for mitigating failure modes we will assign maintenance tasks to the various trades as well as equipment operators. Hello, pardon me; did you say we will assign maintenance tasks to the operators? Are you sure this is not Reliability Centered Operations? This is just down right confusing, are talking about equipment operators or maintenance mechanics?
Believe it or not even the original Reliability Centered Maintenance methodology assigned maintenance tasks to the equipment operator. The operators they were referring to were the pilot and co-pilot, each is assigned several maintenance tasks in the form of an operator check lists that are completed each time they operate the equipment. The equipment operators at manufacturing facilities around the world should also have similar tasks that put in place to ensure the equipment is fit to function as well as other tasks that look to detect potential failures based on operating or process conditions. The difference between Reliability Centered Maintenance and other tools that look to involve the operating crew in set up, change over and maintenance is when we assign tasks in RCM the operator is well aware as to why this task needs to be completed and the potential consequences to our business if we elect to not perform the task.
Thanks to Nowlan and Heap lots of things these days are becoming "Reliability Centered" today. I performed a Google search and discovered we have Reliability Centered Sales, Reliability Centered Lubrication, Reliability Centered Design, Reliability Centered Risk Management and Reliability Centered Engineering. The reality is while they all claim reliability centered something other than maintenance, I happen to know that everything they are trying to sell or do is already covered by Reliability Centered Maintenance.
While I don't wish to be any older than I am today, I sure would love to have had the opportunity to meet Stan Nowlan and Howard Heap. Our meeting would start with me asking for two signatures on my well read Nowlan and Heap RCM document and once that was completed I would ask the question that might satisfy the masses who are afraid of the word Maintenance.
"Guys, why didn't you call it Reliability Centered Everything?"
If you are interested in learning more about Reliability Centered Maintenance or RCM Blitz™, GPAllied is offering public courses in locations around the world. Please click on the RCM Blitz link for more information.
So, why am I mad at Stan Nowlan and Howard Heap?
Well, they are the two men responsible for putting the "maintenance" tag on what should have been called Reliability Centered Everything. For those who are in the know when it comes to RCM forgive me while I attempt to enlighten those who believe the word "Maintenance" somehow makes RCM incomplete. From the time I first began to learn what RCM was and how it should be applied I understood one thing to perfectly clear, the process does not work nearly as well without a cross functional team that includes representatives from Maintenance, Engineering, and Operations. This cross functional team is required because we need to understand the failure modes that could result from the context and environment in which we operate our equipment. One should note that the word operate or operator has been used more in this paragraph than the word maintenance. This makes me wonder from time to time why old Nowlan and Heap didn't call their process Reliability Centered Operations?
The second thing I learned as I studied up on RCM was the importance of discussing all likely failure modes; this would include failure modes that result from improper design, operation or maintenance as they applied to the components that make up the system. These failure modes should be discussed in terms of how each of the failures could impact our business and RCM decision logic should be applied to mitigate each failure mode by developing a corresponding maintenance task.
So, as we look at the process of analyzing failure modes we will discuss failure modes that could have been engineered into the equipment in the design phase. Excuse me, why did they not call this Reliability Centered Design?
As the team works to develop tasks for mitigating failure modes we will assign maintenance tasks to the various trades as well as equipment operators. Hello, pardon me; did you say we will assign maintenance tasks to the operators? Are you sure this is not Reliability Centered Operations? This is just down right confusing, are talking about equipment operators or maintenance mechanics?
Believe it or not even the original Reliability Centered Maintenance methodology assigned maintenance tasks to the equipment operator. The operators they were referring to were the pilot and co-pilot, each is assigned several maintenance tasks in the form of an operator check lists that are completed each time they operate the equipment. The equipment operators at manufacturing facilities around the world should also have similar tasks that put in place to ensure the equipment is fit to function as well as other tasks that look to detect potential failures based on operating or process conditions. The difference between Reliability Centered Maintenance and other tools that look to involve the operating crew in set up, change over and maintenance is when we assign tasks in RCM the operator is well aware as to why this task needs to be completed and the potential consequences to our business if we elect to not perform the task.
Thanks to Nowlan and Heap lots of things these days are becoming "Reliability Centered" today. I performed a Google search and discovered we have Reliability Centered Sales, Reliability Centered Lubrication, Reliability Centered Design, Reliability Centered Risk Management and Reliability Centered Engineering. The reality is while they all claim reliability centered something other than maintenance, I happen to know that everything they are trying to sell or do is already covered by Reliability Centered Maintenance.
While I don't wish to be any older than I am today, I sure would love to have had the opportunity to meet Stan Nowlan and Howard Heap. Our meeting would start with me asking for two signatures on my well read Nowlan and Heap RCM document and once that was completed I would ask the question that might satisfy the masses who are afraid of the word Maintenance.
"Guys, why didn't you call it Reliability Centered Everything?"
If you are interested in learning more about Reliability Centered Maintenance or RCM Blitz™, GPAllied is offering public courses in locations around the world. Please click on the RCM Blitz link for more information.
Friday, February 12, 2010
Why do RCM Implementations Fail?
RCM Implementations don't fail, believe me if you understand what your getting into upfront, use a proven process to select your asset for analysis AND you commit the resources, your implementation will be a huge success.
In looking through the above posts, I can clearly remember performing my first RCM analysis and the ordeal that followed as we struggled to:
a) See the value in the analysis we had just completed (Someone told us that RCM should be performed on every piece of equipment at our plant so we selected one of our most common assets.
b) Free up the resources necessary to implement the tasks that came out of the analysis.
Lets be honest here, one of the biggest reasons why companies fail to implement is because we as consultants don't give them clear detailed expectations on what the full RCM cycle is and in many cases when it becomes clear that Reliability Centered Maintenance is more than the analysis they have neither the time or resources necessary to implement.
This is something I think we all have struggled with at one time or another and again as I think back to the struggles of my first RCM, if understood what was really involved in completing a successful implementation I would have made darn sure we selected a winner and made very clear to my managers what the full cycle of a RCM analysis really is.
1. Select a critical asset that is suffering from equipment related operational, speed or quality losses
2. Baseline reliability data for this asset (How do you know if you improved if you never measured upfront?)
3. Perform all necessary upfront work to ensure we have the right people to perform the analysis and all the information the team will need to ensure a thorough and accurate analysis
4. Train the team and perform the analysis
5. Task assignment
6. Implementation - Get agreement upfront, this work is not hard and it should not take more than 3 months. I now have a third customer who completes implementation in 3 weeks.
7. Track and report results including Return on Investment. Step 7 is directly related to step 1.
Think about it, the companies we work with on a day to day basis to all kinds of things that are more difficult than RCM in fact the facilities their equipment resides in required a major amount of planning and resources to construct but before they started they had a plan and a budget.
I have yet to have someone call me to perform a RCM analysis on a plant that never got finished. Supply a good plan, communicate the potential benefits, resources and budget required to complete the project and we will have a winner. Last but not least, don't start your second RCM until your first on is at least 80% implemented.
In looking through the above posts, I can clearly remember performing my first RCM analysis and the ordeal that followed as we struggled to:
a) See the value in the analysis we had just completed (Someone told us that RCM should be performed on every piece of equipment at our plant so we selected one of our most common assets.
b) Free up the resources necessary to implement the tasks that came out of the analysis.
Lets be honest here, one of the biggest reasons why companies fail to implement is because we as consultants don't give them clear detailed expectations on what the full RCM cycle is and in many cases when it becomes clear that Reliability Centered Maintenance is more than the analysis they have neither the time or resources necessary to implement.
This is something I think we all have struggled with at one time or another and again as I think back to the struggles of my first RCM, if understood what was really involved in completing a successful implementation I would have made darn sure we selected a winner and made very clear to my managers what the full cycle of a RCM analysis really is.
1. Select a critical asset that is suffering from equipment related operational, speed or quality losses
2. Baseline reliability data for this asset (How do you know if you improved if you never measured upfront?)
3. Perform all necessary upfront work to ensure we have the right people to perform the analysis and all the information the team will need to ensure a thorough and accurate analysis
4. Train the team and perform the analysis
5. Task assignment
6. Implementation - Get agreement upfront, this work is not hard and it should not take more than 3 months. I now have a third customer who completes implementation in 3 weeks.
7. Track and report results including Return on Investment. Step 7 is directly related to step 1.
Think about it, the companies we work with on a day to day basis to all kinds of things that are more difficult than RCM in fact the facilities their equipment resides in required a major amount of planning and resources to construct but before they started they had a plan and a budget.
I have yet to have someone call me to perform a RCM analysis on a plant that never got finished. Supply a good plan, communicate the potential benefits, resources and budget required to complete the project and we will have a winner. Last but not least, don't start your second RCM until your first on is at least 80% implemented.
Help Your Effort Off To a Good Start With a Quick Win
I couldn't begin to estimate how many times I have told new and potential customers the importance of selecting the right assets for your first RCM Blitz™ analysis. While it would be fantastic if every company we worked with understood the power and results that can be delivered through a focused and thorough analysis, the truth of the matter is there is nothing I enjoy more than being given one shot to come in and show the results that this tool can deliver.
While our customers at times can struggle through the process of implementing the tasks that were produced through the analysis they just as quickly are thrilled as they witness the improvement in reliability that is a direct result of their new maintenance strategy. With a new found sense of energy what started out as a one-time shot to give RCM Blitz™ a chance now turns into a client who understands what we mean when we say Reliability Centered Maintenance should deliver a return on investment through improved manufacturing reliability and a reduction in health, safety and environmental incidents and accidents.
When it comes to RCM there is nothing more important than getting your effort off to a good start with a quick win. Wins deliver the proof necessary to gain lasting support throughout your business and the resources required to deliver world class results.
At Allied Reliability and GPAllied we know what it takes to deliver these results. Every one of our RCM Blitz™ instructors and facilitators has years of experience in maintenance and reliability AND each has had to attend extensive training and mentoring to achieve certification in the process. The end result is a team of experts who can come to your facility and teach you how to make RCM Blitz™ part of your continuous improvement effort.
If your interested in learning more about RCM Blitz™ feel free to contact me directly through e-mail at plucknetted@alliedreliability.com or by phone at 585-329-7040. Information in regard to RCM Blitz™ and public courses available around the world can be found at http://www.alliedreliability.com/gpalliedtraining/us_middle_east_asia.asp
While our customers at times can struggle through the process of implementing the tasks that were produced through the analysis they just as quickly are thrilled as they witness the improvement in reliability that is a direct result of their new maintenance strategy. With a new found sense of energy what started out as a one-time shot to give RCM Blitz™ a chance now turns into a client who understands what we mean when we say Reliability Centered Maintenance should deliver a return on investment through improved manufacturing reliability and a reduction in health, safety and environmental incidents and accidents.
When it comes to RCM there is nothing more important than getting your effort off to a good start with a quick win. Wins deliver the proof necessary to gain lasting support throughout your business and the resources required to deliver world class results.
At Allied Reliability and GPAllied we know what it takes to deliver these results. Every one of our RCM Blitz™ instructors and facilitators has years of experience in maintenance and reliability AND each has had to attend extensive training and mentoring to achieve certification in the process. The end result is a team of experts who can come to your facility and teach you how to make RCM Blitz™ part of your continuous improvement effort.
If your interested in learning more about RCM Blitz™ feel free to contact me directly through e-mail at plucknetted@alliedreliability.com or by phone at 585-329-7040. Information in regard to RCM Blitz™ and public courses available around the world can be found at http://www.alliedreliability.com/gpalliedtraining/us_middle_east_asia.asp
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
