I believe PM Compliance is not an effective metric for measuring regulatory compliance (ex. BP Texas City).

What is it you really want to know?

Maybe you want to know if the PM is Effective at preventing or predicting a specific failure mode or modes or is effective to keep people safe and our environmentally pristine, and by the way meeting regulatory compliance at the same time.

We don't care about "we did the PM" on time if the PM is not effective.

What are your thoughts?

Mon Dec 28, 06:48:10 AM CST

Ricky,
you are spot on with your comment. I don't see much point in companies measuring PM Compliance when their programs are poor in the first place.
We run PM rationalization and review programs for all types of industries and find gaping holes in Oil and Gas PM programs as well as large areas of duplication and overservicing. It makes no sense at all to strive to complete 100% of something that is over 30% rubbish.
In some oil and gas industry reviews, barely 20% of the original maintenance program survived the PMO review we did.
And - PM Compliance should not be a measure. Non compliance should be an exception report. This is far beyond what most companies can consider at the moment, but where I started work many years ago, we had the right PM and we did it. If we did not achieve the PM on time, then it was a non compliance. We did not track non compliance because our benchmark was 100% on time each time.
Regards
Steve
www.pmoptimisation.com.au

Mon Dec 28, 02:44:07 PM CST