Assessing your company’s operational readiness

A successful asset reliability process requires strong relationships between internal and external stakeholders and an implementation plan that clarifies their roles.

Richard LarsenStephen M. Perry, Ph.D.

Dec 3rd, 2019

The OpX Leadership Network's Asset Reliability Solutions Group developed a roadmap that can enable CPGs to improve manufacturing performance with the four points shown in the graphic above.

While asset reliability (AR) means different things to different companies, one common definition that consistently emerges is the concept of zero unplanned downtime. Most everyone can wrap their head around the frustration of seeing a valuable asset sitting idly for no planned reason. The fallout can be devastating in terms of unplanned maintenance costs, reduced overall equipment effectiveness (OEE), missed deliveries and a myriad of other production problems.

Although there is substantial information and guidance regarding AR, PMMI’s OpX Leadership Network has recently commissioned the OpX Asset Reliability Solutions Group to explore the “white space” in this area to provide a useful and meaningful roadmap for consumer packaged goods (CPG) companies and OEMs of all sizes. This roadmap, focused on CPGs’ current asset base, can enable CPGs to improve manufacturing performance with four points shown in the graphic image below:

To inform and complement the work of the OpX Asset Reliability Solutions Group, one of PMMI’s Vision 2025 sessions at PACK EXPO Las Vegas focused on AR and some of the challenges and solutions.

Most notably, when asked where they were in their respective AR journeys — beginner, intermediate, advanced — most noted that they were just beginning, with a handful in the intermediate to advanced stages. This is an indicator that there is considerable “white space” or room for improvement in the AR process, at least for Vision 2025 participants.

Overwhelmingly, the participants cite organizational dynamics as one of their greatest difficulties in improving AR. Specifically, they point to a traditional culture of silos rather than a culture of collaboration and cross-functional teams in addressing AR improvements. Most participants would like to see cultural changes that would help with AR improvements, such as stronger relationships with internal and external stakeholders, a team approach to the selection and validation of new equipment, and committing the right people to oversee AR – leadership, operations, data analysts, etc.

Another set of AR challenges for Vision 2025 participants revolves around legacy equipment, new technology, and the gathering and use of data. Most cite the difficulty in managing the data they collect, especially ensuring its accuracy, their ability to analyze it effectively and their ability to act upon it effectively to improve AR. To solve some of these problems, most agree that CPGs and OEMs need to build stronger partnerships that are transformational, not transactional. Such partnerships will allow them to focus on operability, maintainability and reliability that can help significantly with AR improvements.

For more information, visit www.opxleadershipnetwork.org.

Honeyville’s AR journey

Richard Larsen, vice president, program management at Honeyville, Inc., is a member of the OpX Leadership Network’s Asset Reliability Solutions Group, which is developing the asset reliability (AR) work product. He shares his insights on the group’s work and how the AR work product can help Honeyville, Inc. along its AR improvement journey.

ProFood World: What challenges were you facing at Honeyville, Inc. regarding asset reliability that motivated you to join the OpX Asset Reliability Solutions Group?

Larsen: As the current vice chair of PMMI’s OpX Leadership Network, I had the opportunity to learn about the OpX Asset Reliability Solutions Group as it was being formed. Many of the challenges that the group was focusing on were front and center for us at Honeyville. I signed up immediately! And once the group put together its charter that focuses on assessing where you are in your AR journey, developing the business case for AR to get leadership buy-in, and developing an implementation plan or roadmap for moving along the journey, I was glad I did!

PFW: How would you describe your company’s current asset reliability process and where do you think you are on the journey from beginner to intermediate to advanced?

Larsen: When purchasing an asset, it is understood that in order to get full utilization of the asset with reliability in daily production and to get the maximum expected ROI, proper care is required.

Honeyville is aggressive in identifying and applying asset management with the goal of avoiding unexpected downtime that would disrupt productivity. This is accomplished by having an aggressive preventive maintenance program using OEM-recommended service and in-house observations with historical data to minimize the risk of production disruption.

This is an ongoing process that continues to develop. Honeyville has much to do on its AR journey to have the type of program that satisfies expectations of full asset reliability. Opportunities with software, procedures, external and internal resources all can help Honeyville greatly improve the often neglected area of reliability for operational and expected life of its assets now and in the future.

PFW: What are the greatest challenges you face in getting from where your current program is to where you would like it to be, e.g. understanding the value of AR to your company, stating the business case for AR, no roadmap to implementation, etc.?

Larsen: There is a multiplicity of opportunities and potential challenges to developing and improving upon asset reliability and utilization. To name a few:

• Fully understanding the asset capability and realistic life of the asset.

• Data gathering is likely one of the greatest issues we face. Productivity data is readily available. Identifying reasons and costs for asset downtime in order to avoid them in the future and having accurate maintenance data are just some of the challenges.

• Identifying and implementing the correct path to serving and maintaining the asset for online reliability and life expectancy is key.

• Finding tools, resources, data, etc. that will help consumer packaged goods (CPG) companies to have the best asset reliability program that fits their operation is also important.

• Getting ownership buy-in. In a lot of ways, taking the time and resources to properly care for company assets is a culture change with management, accounting, operations and maintenance. Setting aside the necessary resources may not provide short-term visible benefits, but can eventually increase productivity, profit and extended life of the asset.

PFW: What role can OEMs play in helping CPGs on this journey to improved technical and operational readiness?

Larsen: I firmly believe that OEMs play a critical part in working with CPGs in understanding how the asset offered by the OEM will function reliably for operational purposes. When assets are purchased, management and accounting expect reliable information regarding the life of the asset for ROI justification and accounting purposes.

OEMs should play an important part in identifying the best asset for the CPG budget and application. Helping the CPG understand how to get the fullest utilization of the asset is critical. Often, aftermarket support is limited to suggested service and a parts list. I believe an asset purchased by a CPG from an OEM establishes a business relationship that, if managed with communication, resources, etc., will result in positive opportunities for both.

The need for education and training materials has reached a level that demands resources to be available for quick, vertical startup for managers, supervisors, maintenance and operators of the asset. With an ever-changing and transient labor force, these resources will ensure that the asset is operational and cared for correctly.