SKF Operator Driven Reliability

Elearning course transcript

Special Notes for iPad Users

For iPad users, this course plays in the “Articulate mobile player app”, available free from the App store.
The app offers a download option for offline learning, but please note that if wish to be able to print your
course completion certificate then you need to be on-line when you take the end-of-course test.
To continue, you can click the Home icon on the screen to return to the Welcome page of the course.

Module 1: Introduction
Welcome
Welcome to the interactive course about Operator Driven Reliability. This course comprises about 90 slides
with audio and text narration. The estimated study time is approximately two hours. We hope you will enjoy
the course and find its contents useful in your daily work.
This course comprises five lessons. In the pages that follow we will outline the learning objectives for each
lesson.

Learning objectives by lesson

1. On completion of this lesson you will be able to explain the meaning of four 4 basic terms related to
industrial asset management, and to correctly employ these terms when discussing ODR projects. You will
also be able to list three key issues that are key to the success of an ODR project.
2. After completing the Reliability-lesson, you will be able to describe the describe six common failure
patterns that may be exhibited by process machinery, discuss the implications of these patterns for
maintenance strategy, and explain the role of ODR in relation to each of these failure patterns.
3. In this lesson, you will learn to explain how ODR can be the nucleus of an overall asset management plan,
describe the similarities and differences between ODR and Total Productive Maintenance (TPM), and
explain how ODR and TPM can coexist to form a natural partnership.
4. After completing the lesson ODR components you will be able to: describe the three key elements that
make up ODR, explain the origin and evolution of ODR, explain why ODR needs a sound technical basis,
and describe the role of ODR within the wider arena of Asset Management.
5. And finally, the learning objectives for the lesson ODR involvement are: explain how Operators impact on
condition monitoring activities, identify four key benefits of a successful ODR program, identify three
strategies that an organisation needs to implement in order for ODR to be successful, and describe how
continuous improvement can impact on ODR.

Module 2:
Lesson 1: Terminology
What is maintenance?
We conduct maintenance because we think there is greater “risk” associated with not doing so. Costs arise
from the consequences of equipment failure. Therefore, maintenance is and always has been a risk control
measure and maintenance is conducted because it is thought that it would cost more if no maintenance is
conducted. Maintenance is actions taken to reduce or eliminate the consequences of equipment failure.
Maintenance is and always has been a risk control measure. As with all risk measures, the basics of risk
management must be applied if the measure is to be effective.
Let’s now look at how this compares with the traditional approach to maintenance.

Page 1 of 13
“Traditional” maintenance
The maintenance program in place in most organisations has been typically derived as a result of a
combination of factors, which may include:
• Relevant legislation and standards
• Machinery vendor recommendations, often applied without question
• Reactions to past plant problems
• Application of new maintenance technologies for their own sake, without questioning whether this
technology is really needed.
Therefore, traditional maintenance is largely defined by judgment and experience, and without any clearly
documented justification. Such a “traditional” approach to maintenance often exhibits some serious
shortcomings, which may include a failure to focus maintenance on critical equipment combined with failure to
take account of failure characteristics. In consequence, potential failures of critical machinery are often not
addressed. The lack of any clearly documented justification means that prescribed maintenance activities may
not be effective, and may (in fact) not even be worth doing at all!

Maintainability
Maintainability is the likelihood that an item or asset can be restored to the operating condition within a stated
period of time under stated maintenance support conditions. A simple measure of this is the Mean Time to
Repair, or MTTR.

Reliability
Reliability is the likelihood that an item will operate without failure for a stated period of time under stated
operating conditions. It’s often expressed as a probability.
A key measure of reliability is the Mean Time Between failures (MTBF).

Availability
Availability is the likelihood that an item will be available when required, given a stated operational use and
stated support conditions. Under steady state conditions, this becomes the proportion of time that an item is
available.

Being profitable
All organisations need to be profitable and this is governed by maintaining the required output and controlling
operating costs, a specific goal being increasing plant availability. This goal is achieved through specific
actions, looking at reliability issues and at maintainability. These actions result in specific tasks such as
procedural improvements, reduced operator errors, or training and tool availability.

Reliability vs maintenance
So if we look at Maintenance versus reliability, maintenance ensures that an asset continues to fulfill its
intended function. Therefore, maintenance is a process of keeping constant what that asset is designed to
deliver. Reliability on the other hand is a process that involves analysis, monitoring, and optimization. It is
continuous and dynamic, and must have linkage to the required operating context, required equipment
performance, and operational requirements. Reliability is therefore a process of continuous improvement
focusing on the operational requirements of the asset instead of simply maintaining a function.

What is “Operator Driven Reliability”?

If reliability is a process of continuous improvement focusing on the operation requirements, we are already
taking logs! So what is Operator Driven Reliability?
Is watch-keeping enough to make a measurable contribution to your first line reliability?

Operator Driven Reliability

• ODR is a company-wide, team-based process that optimizes the operation of an industrial production plant
and augments classic operator duties.

Page 2 of 13
• ODR impacts equipment effectiveness, contributing to optimal production and financial return on
investment.
• ODR incorporates operational, technical, and financial metrics, balanced to best meet the business plan of
the industrial enterprise.
Reliability-focused companies recognize the critically important role of the equipment or process operator.
The contributions of the operator are necessary because they are the first to notice deviations from a normal
operating condition. And the operators are best equipped to understand the interactions between process and
equipment behavior. Therefore, the Best-in-Class companies are poised to pursue Operator Driven Reliability
initiatives.

If we look at the operator involvement in plant reliability, many modern process plants train their operating
technicians to have a general understanding of the manufacturing processes, process safety, basic asset
preservation, and even interpersonal skills. Operator involvement in reliability efforts has to at a minimum
ensure the preservation of a plant’s assets. Operators are the first line of defense, the first ones to spot
deviations from normal operation. For optimum effectiveness, they should be used in that capacity, i.e.,
certain data collection and some first line analysis and action should be assigned to operators.

The experience gained by SKF Reliability Systems in real world conditions in a wide range of industries shows
that achieving competitive productivity and increased profitability through asset management depends on a
balance of key factors.
Click on each factor to explore further.

• There must be strong leadership dedicated to developing proactive people that work as a team and are
willing to embrace expanded roles. People are the first and most important aspect of a successful program,
although they are not always treated as such. It is important that the people understand why they are
performing the duties requested in order to ensure ownership and proactive involvement.
• Processes are the 2nd most important aspect. This is all about how to properly conduct and manage
maintenance. Standardised routines add structure to the work that gets done. As processes become more
effective, people become more productive.
• Systems and technology represent the tools used by the people implementing the processes chosen.
These systems and technology tools are the enablers, and they typically get most of the attention in
maintenance management. Some organizations focus their energy on the people and processes, with only
basic tools and rudimentary technology, but still often achieve high performance levels. Generally however,
emphasizing technology without excellence in managing processes and people will bring only limited
success.

Lesson 2: Reliability
Classic failure profiles
• Before we discuss specific maintenance practices that assure plant reliability, let’s first consider reliability
or how things fail by equipment failure patterns. The traditional view of maintenance typically assumes that
equipment will ultimately wear out. Maintenance routines are thus scheduled to be conducted before this
wear-out period, with the objective of restoring the equipment to its original operability. Referring to the
picture here – preventative maintenance, or PM (interval based), often takes the form of periodically
overhauling, repairing, or otherwise taking equipment apart, replacing certain parts, and reassembling.
This assumes that a given set of equipment will experience a few random, constant failures, but after a
time will enter a period where the conditional probability of failure rises sharply (the wear-out zone).
Therefore, the invasive PM (overhaul, repair, etc.) should be done just prior to entering the wear-out zone.
The drawback is that it assumes that you know the equipment life and that equipment truly fails in this way!

• Another common view of age related failure is what’s known as the biological model or the “bathtub curve.”
This thinking contends that equipment has a greater chance of failure when very young (infant mortality)
followed by a stable period, then is unreliable when very old. However, documented research into

Page 3 of 13
 equipment failure probability and advanced age has shown that such a view of equipment life is over-
simplistic and not typical of most machinery. There is a difficulty in selecting the correct maintenance tactic.
Which action and schedule is most appropriate when considering costs, plant downtime, and risks? From a
technical viewpoint, you need to understand how the failure happened and if there was any way you could
have prevented it. Three major studies were conducted by United Airlines, Bromberg, and the US Navy,
the results of which have had a major impact on the way in which maintenance is now regarded.

Three major studies

The three studies considered the failure patterns exhibited by a wide range of equipment as it aged, revealed
that there is no “typical” failure pattern, but that equipment falls into one of six categories, as shown in the
graphic. Furthermore, the studies revealed that a significant proportion of equipment reveals in fact, no “wear-
out” characteristic, casting considerable doubt over the value of time-based maintenance interventions.
The studies showed, then that there are six recognised failure types. Click on each of the failure curves for
more information about each type.
• Bathtub: These machines show a high probability of failure at the beginning and end of their life.
Consequently two tactics, at least, are necessary to deal with early and end of life problems. This is a
combination of worst new and worst old.
• “Worst old” machines are subject to age related failures showing rapid increase in failures at a particular
point of use. These are the least common failure mechanism of all, but for these machines routine, time-
based maintenance is effective.
• Slow Ageing machines show steadily increasing probability of failure with age and usually when equipment
is in contact with product. Use rebuild or component replacement tactics to counter this problem.
• Machines showing the Best new failure pattern are not subject to age-related failures, except at beginning
of life, and routine maintenance based upon age is generally ineffective. As with all random mechanisms,
maintenance “on condition” is the best tactic.
• Constant failure machines exhibit only random failures, which are not age related, and therefore routine
time-based maintenance is ineffective.
• Worst new is the most common failure pattern exhibited by complex equipment. Once the infant mortality
problem is solved, routine maintenance plays a minor role.

So, the key points that emerged from these studies showed that failure isn’t usually related directly to age or
use. Neither is failure easily predicted, so restorative or replacement maintenance based on time or use won’t
normally help to improve the failure odds.
The implications of infant mortality mean that major overhauls can be a bad idea because you end up at a
higher failure probability in the most dominant patterns.
Unless the equipment comes into direct contact with the product or processed material (for example raw
material in pipes), or unless it is a simple device, age probably will have little impact on whether it fails.
Therefore, condition based maintenance techniques are going to be more effective.

Even where the failure pattern is known, it doesn’t necessarily tell you which maintenance tactic to use.
Economic studies may dictate that you run to failure despite there being good prospects of predicting
replacement because the failure pattern was age related.
How many plants have data of a quality and standard to be able to allow the determination of the conditional
probability of failure by type?
Most people have come to accept intuitively the bathtub failure pattern. However, data indicates this only
applies to some 3-4% of equipment.

From the curves and depending on which of the three studies you choose, infant mortality or early life failures
represents some 29-68% of failures. This typically means within 60-90 days of start-up.
This then has a profound implication relative to a given plant’s maintenance strategy.
Planned maintenance schedules typically make no allowance for these infant mortality failures. Indeed these
failures are more properly eliminated through better design, procurement, installation, commissioning, start-

Page 4 of 13
up, and operational practices; not through “planned maintenance”. Now consider the role of operators via a
structured, integrated operator driven reliability (ODR) program.

The next biggest age related failure pattern is constant and again, depending on the study, makes up 14-42%
of failures.
This also has a profound implication on your maintenance strategy.
If your conditional probability of failure is a constant random series of events, then the best strategy is to
assure that you have good condition monitoring in place to detect the onset of failure and developing failure
long before they become serious, allowing for planning and scheduling.

Conclusions
When combining infant mortality and constant failure rate patterns, this makes up some 71-82% of all failures.
So developing and applying a maintenance strategy that specifically addresses these failure patterns will have
a profoundly positive effect on your maintenance and operational performance. Assuring that these failures
are eliminated or mitigated is essential to assure that ODR is a “contributor” to “asset management.”

Lesson 3: ODR overview

Why do many asset management initiatives fail?
Many asset management change initiatives fail to achieve the performance improvements that were expected
of them. The first and foremost generic reason for this is the neglect to establish, with a high degree of
certainty, just exactly if there is a problem, why and how it matters – prior to looking to tackle that problem.
So how does SKF’s Operator Driven Reliability program avoid this pitfall? There must be documented clarity
on what each unique ODR Program is designed to tackle.

ODR essentials
Maintenance work undertaken has to be appropriate to the technical characteristics of equipment failure and it
must be worth doing by being effective in avoiding or reducing the consequences of failure.
This results in a commercially acceptable risk and must be cost effective.

SKF AEO process

This is the SKF Asset Management work management process. It is divided into 4 main facets and is a living
program in that it supports continual improvement. At the top level a Maintenance Strategy project is driven by
business goals and determines what activities are covered in Planned Maintenance, Proactive Reliability
Maintenance, and Operator Driven Reliability. This also determines what information is to be collected and
analysed by the operator.

ODR is a subset of the AEO process

So ODR is a sub-set of the AEO work management process. The maintenance strategy project determines
the technology to be used, along with tasks to be done.

Stages of effective asset management

Developing a reliability focused maintenance program is an ongoing process that begins with determining
where your reliability and maintenance practices lie in the range of reactive to proactive maintenance, and
then adjusting them to improve efficiency. The process is never finished. A successful program is dynamic in
nature, incorporating and retaining the most efficient mix of reactive, preventative, predictive, and proactive
maintenance, as well as measures enabling operator driven reliability. The diagram illustrates the range of
maintenance practices and the diagram shows the stages to effective asset management from minimum to
maximum efficiency. It can be seen that Operator Driven Reliability is placed pretty high with an efficiency of
greater than 80% with Operator involvement and commitment.

Page 5 of 13
ODR – a living, dynamic program
ODR is a subset of Asset Management and recognizes that reliability does not belong to any one plant
function alone - rather that “reliability is a cross functional responsibility.” ODR is a “continuous dynamic (i.e.,
living-program) and not the arbitrary deployment of available hardware/software.” ODR is based on sound
principles and process flow - that is “honed” to the individual plant requirements functionally and specific
business conditions. It must be a) workable and b) flexible enough (in range/scope) to accommodate differing
degrees of operator driven reliability and can be a stand alone program - but is ideally part of an overall asset
efficiency optimization program.

Four plant functions

Now lets consider four plant functions: Namely Maintenance, Performance, Operation, and Integrity. These
are encompassed under the Asset Management sphere and are interlinked. In the preceding lessons we’ve
already considered some aspects of maintenance. Click on the other three functions to explore them further.

1. Performance has such measures as:

- Dynamic (Cyclic) Performance Management
- Quality
- Productivity
- Efficiency
- Optimal Configuration/Throughput/Set-Up
- Waste (Losses) Measurement
- Business Based - Availability
2. Considerations in the area of Plant Integrity include robustness, containment, assured “integrity”,
environmentally “sound”, safe To “operate”, fitness for “purpose”, “worth” insuring, and last but not least
“compliance” with regulations and mandatory standards.
3. Measures associated with Operation typically consider:
- Cleaning
- Basic Care and Attention
- Minor Adjustments
- Log-keeping / Watch-keeping
- Stop / Start / Run
- Raw Material Movement
- Inventory Management
- Inspection

ODR as a nucleus
ODR can be the nucleus of an overall asset management plan by bringing the respective programs into
mutual focus and avoiding any areas of duplication and/or omission between all the parallel programs at the
site. In Operator Driven Reliability the plant operator becomes a key player in all of these functions. He has
and uses his unique knowledge regarding such areas as function, failure, loss, consequence, performance,
efficiency and reliability. Typically the operator in an ODR program becomes the owner of the
Lubing/Greasing Program. He is also an important member of the Maintenance Strategy Review (MSR) team,
and also provides vital input to the Root Cause Failure Analysis (RCFA) process. In operator driven reliability
the operator assumes a high degree of “ownership” of his plant.

ODR augments operator duties

ODR thus augments “classic” operator duties with an intention to create ownership of machine and process,
and sustain an interest in the well-being of the machine and the quality of the product.
In addition, it promotes knowledge of equipment function and an awareness of the consequences of loss of
function. ODR asks and answers:
• What does it do?
• How does it work?
• What are the correct operating conditions, e.g., temperature, pressure, alignment?

Page 6 of 13
• What can go wrong, and what can I do when it does?
• How does it matter ? (for example, what are the likely costs, losses, or risks)

ODR and Total Productive Maintenance (TPM)

But just a minute!
Operators taking ownership of their plant?
Isn’t that what Total Productive Maintenance (or TPM) is all about?

Total Productive Maintenance

Well yes. TPM does place emphasis on “operator equipment management ”or “autonomous maintenance” as
it’s often called. TPM, though, is a company-wide team-based effort to build quality into equipment and to
improve overall equipment effectiveness.
• It is total in that all employees are involved, and it aims to eliminate all accidents, defects, and breakdowns.
• It is Productive because actions are performed while production goes on, and troubles for production are
minimized.
• And it relates to Maintenance in that it seeks to keep equipment clean and in good condition, and to
lubricate and repair as appropriate.
ODR, then, has a lot in common with TPM, but they are not synonymous. ODR can be a subset of a TPM
program. The SKF view is that ODR increases classic operator duties, which means that ODR is an
improvement upon classic operator role (hence TPM if that was the culture present) - by enhancing the
contribution that it makes to the total business result.

Japanese Institute of Plant Management

The Japanese Institute of Plant Maintenance describes Operator Equipment Management (“autonomous
maintenance”) as just the first of the eight pillars of Total Productive Maintenance. An ODR program in fact
spans more than one of these pillars. Indeed, it could be argued that elements of ODR span all eight pillars,
and thereby help support the whole TPM structure. Consider the graphic.

How are TPM and ODR related?

So ODR can operate as a subset of a Total Productive Maintenance (TPM) program. Operating in this way,
ODR complements TPM by bringing coordination and direction to the activity, rather than allowing an informal
policy to develop whereby individuals go around trying to do perceived good things.

TPM and ODR

Irrespective of whether ODR operates stand-alone, or as a subset of some wider program, ODR shares a
number of common ideas with the TPM concept.
• ODR aims to increase Overall Equipment Effectiveness (OEE), and to improve existing planned
maintenance systems.
• ODR argues that the operator is the best condition monitor, and realizes that training must be provided to
upgrade operations and maintenance skills.
• And a key issue for success with ODR is that it must involve everyone and utilize cross-functional
teamwork.

Overall Equipment Effectiveness

• Successful implementation of ODR will affect OEE.
• OEE figures are determined by combining the availability and performance of your equipment with the
quality of parts made.
• OEE measures the efficiency of the machine during its planned loading time.
• Planned downtime does not affect the OEE figure

Page 7 of 13
TPM failed for some
Many companies have implemented TPM but not all have achieved the expected improvement in
performance. Why then should ODR work? True ODR is structured, systematic, dynamic, and has a clear
technical and financial basis for content.
ODR can be implemented manageably. Total Productive Maintenance (TPM) programs, on the other hand,
often fail due to being all encompassing, and attempting to achieve too much, too soon.

ODR and TPM

Summarizing then: ODR does not need TPM to exist, function, and succeed and in situations where “classic
TPM” is absent ODR can be implemented in isolation. Where TPM is pre-existing or planned, ODR can
admirably “complement” and even “structure and support” TPM.

Lesson 4: ODR components

Three elements of ODR
Operator driven reliability essentially comprises three elements, as depicted here.
1. Equipment Operating Procedures (or EOPs) typically originate from the Original Equipment Manufacturer
at plant start-up, but may then undergo a process of evolution, in line with developing experience and
expertise in plant operation.
2. Operator Involved Maintenance (OIM) describes the activities that address daily coordination needs
between equipment operators and the maintenance department. Examples would include initiating
maintenance work-orders, arranging for machines to be made available, so that necessary maintenance
work can be carried out, organizing necessary permits, etc. The term OIM also encompasses operator
participation in other, reliability-related activities such as root cause failure analysis or maintenance
strategy review processes. A prime objective of OIM is to improve the support strategy for the equipment.
OIM ensures that operations understands and fulfills its contributory role in ensuring plant-wide reliability.
3. Finally, Operator Performed Maintenance (or OPM) relates to maintenance tasks that are actually
undertaken by machine operators to decrease equipment downtime. Examples would include inspection,
cleaning, minor adjustments and repairs, etc.
Asset Management
So these three elements, equipment operating procedures along with operator involved maintenance and
operator performed maintenance together form ODR.
ODR is an inherent subset of a Preventive Maintenance philosophy, which in turn is a subset of an overall
asset management strategy.

Where does ODR fit?

Predictive maintenance (PdM) is also a subset of preventive maintenance. Depending on the “flavour” of
Operator Driven Reliability and the type of predictive maintenance program that is in place (or required), ODR
can be a subset of PdM or vice versa.

Enablers and constraints

Parallel trends in the maintenance world are the growth of reliability-improvement technologies such as
Process Control, and Computerized Maintenance Management Systems (CMMS). It is these new generations
of handheld equipment (enabling technology) that have enabled operators to be equipped differently and
focus on reliability. Combining these trends together, the term ODR emerged. However, human factors such
as culture, engagement and commitment are pivotal to ODR success.

Functional interaction
Operator Performed Maintenance does not mean that operators accept responsibility for all maintenance
activities. It does mean that they are responsible for knowing when they need to carry out simple preventive
tasks themselves, and when they should call in maintenance experts to repair problems that they (the
operators) have identified. Operator Involved Maintenance is the process, which facilitates the necessary
dialogue.

Page 8 of 13
Successful implementation of OPM activities will inevitably impact upon the OIM dialogue, and thus by
definition ODR comes into being. Embracing an ODR approach frees up maintenance time allowing new and
more powerful monitoring and diagnostic technologies to be taken on board (as appropriate), without running
the risk of basic maintenance tasks being neglected.

ODR essentials
An ODR program recognizes that there is an implicit advantage to having operatives involved in the
maintenance of their equipment. Therefore, for it to be considered effective, it must:
• Work: ODR tasks must be appropriate to the technical characteristics of equipment failure.
• Be worth doing; in other words be effective in avoiding or reducing the consequences of failure (including
safety and environmental considerations, - resulting in acceptable, commercial risk).
Consequently, operator driven reliability (ODR) tasks must have both a technical rationale through a robust
technical process of FMEA / RCM / RBM and a commercial rationale through business based targets and a
criticality analysis process. Otherwise ODR breaks down into groups of people trying to do “good things”.
ODR requires a sound technical basis. We must know which ODR technology to deploy, and on which
equipment.
There must also be a clear indication of how often it must be done and there must be an action plan in place
to respond to the results obtained through such measurements and observations. In addition, it must be clear
who will be assigned with the tasks indicated by these results and when the tasks must be completed.
An important element of the program is that we learn and adapt continuously.
In order to satisfy these conditions ODR should result from a structured technical process such as Failure
Modes and Effects Analysis, Reliability Centred Maintenance, or Risk Based Maintenance.

ODR Content
Reliability Centred Maintenance (or as a minimum Failure Modes and Effects Analysis) should ideally be the
“driver” for asset management task content and frequency and hence should provide the technical rationale
for ODR content initially.

Barriers to ODR
Increasingly, maintenance managers seek to involve operations personnel in these inspection activities.
These people already patrol the plant regularly as part of their operations duties. Indeed, their familiarity and
experience with the plant can be a great asset to the inspection program as they are usually very quick to spot
abnormal features such as strange noises, raised temperatures, etc. Unfortunately, it isn’t always easy to
harness this experience. There may exist very real cultural and organizational barriers to the introduction of
such a program. The situation is compounded even further when the operator is expected to undertake more
than just inspection. This type of maintenance activity is frequently viewed as being for the benefit of the
maintenance department rather than a benefit for the good of the company. Gaining the interdepartmental co-
operation required for success may require addressing a number of political issues within the company.
The competence of operations staff to undertake such activities may be called into question. Sometimes, an
attempt to introduce such activities may bring old prejudices to the surface. Some operations staff may be
mistrustful of management’s true motivation for introducing the program, and there is always, of course, some
degree of resistance to change.

Maintenance attitudes to ODR

The maintenance craftsman is often sceptical regarding the viability of such a program. He may question the
willingness of the operations staff to participate in the program. His past experience may suggest to him that
operations have a cavalier attitude towards the machinery, and that many machinery problems result from the
race to achieve daily output targets irrespective of cost or consequences in terms of machine damage.
He will also question the competence of the operations staff to undertake the work since they lack his
technical training and experience.
The fear may exist that they will do more harm than good. Underlying this may be the fear that tasks that were
traditionally the responsibility of the maintenance team are being delegated elsewhere to reduce job positions.

Page 9 of 13
Operations attitudes to ODR
Similarly, the process operator may not have trouble finding excuses for his non-participation. He is, of
course, a busy man. He simply doesn’t have time to do maintenance jobs. Anyway, why should he? Will he be
paid any more for his trouble? His pay may well be based (at least in part) on achievement of production
targets, so any operational problem will inevitably take precedence over these “non-productive” activities. He
needs to be assured that his immediate supervisors support the program, lest their instructions and directives
conflict. The operator may also be suspicious of management’s true reason for instigating such a program. Is
this program really a covert version of the watchman’s clock? Is management really trying to verify the
operator walks the plant regularly? If management is suggesting that the operator has time to do this
additional activity are they then suggesting that he’s currently under-employed? Is the operator’s job security
at risk?

Culture
All too often senior management views maintenance as a function that adds cost to the organization, whilst
production adds value.
• Maintenance is often viewed as a necessary evil. Unfortunately, there does exist within many companies a
culture of blame. Poor quality maintenance and consequent disruption is often cited by production
management as the prime reason for non-achievement of production targets.
• Similarly, maintenance management often complains that production management doesn’t allow access to
the plant for routine maintenance, hence the high level of unscheduled downtime.
In many organizations maintenance & operations function virtually independently of each other, each with
separate objectives and structures.

Changing the culture

Overcoming these issues requires individuals to fully recognize and respect the skills and experience of other
parties. Any disputes need to be discussed and settled in an environment of courtesy and co-operation, with
all parties contributing to discussions in a frank and honest manner. On a practical level, modern computer
technology can be employed to overcome some practical difficulties by facilitating a two-way interface
between maintenance and operations. However, unless the underlying organizational culture is one of
ownership, then it is unlikely that investment in this area will achieve its optimum return.

ODR vs other operator-based maintenance programs

So lets just recap again, and consider how Operator Driven Reliability differs from other operator-based
maintenance programs.
OBM (Operator Based Maintenance) stresses the involvement of operators in maintenance tasks and the
sharing of ownership. It implies operators are performing basic maintenance such as Machine checks,
lubrication and more. It implies that operators are skilled enough to perform maintenance but often lacks a
technical basis (such as failure modes and effects analysis).
Operator Driven Reliability, on the other hand, evolves from OBM using enabling technology such as CMMS
systems, PDAs etc that allows us to equip operators differently. The focus is on mutual team-based approach
to reliability improvement as opposed to “retention of function” through maintenance
Recall that EOP + OPM + OIM = ODR Key differences between OBM and ODR are therefore:
• A sound technical and financial rationale
• appropriate enabling technology and
• A reliability focus.
ODR makes use not only the availability of singular technology (PDA's) but rather a suite of reliability
improvement technologies; the underlying intent being that of reliability improvement.
So the focus is clear, the technology has evolved and emerged to support the reliability improvement.

Page 10 of 13
Lesson 5: ODR involvement
Prerequisites to ODR
The main pre-requisite to a successful ODR program is a well defined plan, ideally resulting from a failure
modes and effects analysis. The plan needs to be clearly communicated to all involved, and then
implemented faithfully, resisting any temptation to deviate. Everyone involved must be willing to approach the
program with an open mind, and be receptive to the changes and improvements in work practices and
relationships that will result.

Is ODR what operators are supposed to do?

ODR involvement is sometimes seen as a distraction from the operator’s primary function, which is the
generation of output (that is to say product). The advantage of the structured, ODR approach is that it
provides a technical basis, and financial tracking to justify their continuing involvement. The enabling
technologies also helps them to do it more efficiently.

Tools and software

A range of tools and software systems is available to support the implementation of ODR, and full training in
their use is naturally provided. However it should be remembered that ODR is not the arbitrary use of the
hardware and software for it’s own sake. ODR is a process, not an IT system. Indeed, it can be implemented
manually, but this is not ideal.

Automated tools
The advantage of using the automatic tools is that the operator can easily compare ODR data to predefined
set-points and alarm conditions. Furthermore, these tools can also automatically provide guidance for actions
that should be taken and tasks to be performed in the event that specific out of limit conditions occur.

Action plan
It is important to have in place an action plan so that the operator knows what to do when out-of-limit
situations arise. The operator should be equipped and trained to deal with remedial actions that are within his
area of competence. Equally importantly the operator should understand when maintenance staff need to be
involved and of the process for instigating their timely intervention. It is also important that maintenance staff
react in a proper and timely manner to maintenance work requests arising from ODR.

ODR will enhance an existing PdM program

We learned earlier that the heart of a successful ODR program is a well defined maintenance strategy. As the
maintenance strategy review is performed, the condition monitoring program is better defined and, if an
existing condition monitoring program is in place, then this may suggest improvements to the existing
program. The amount of monitoring might increase or decrease, but the program content (for example
machines, parameters and routes) will be better defined. As ODR becomes part of the overall maintenance
process, the periodic reviews will influence the maintenance to be performed and the condition monitoring
routes and their content.

ODR will drive changes to established PM program.

The existing Preventive Maintenance program will be influenced by a successfully implemented ODR, in a
manner similar to the condition monitoring program.

Page 11 of 13
Interfaces to other systems
If ODR is being implemented to work with other systems or programs, sign-off procedures must be
established. If other metrics or observations are being collected/calculated by the ODR program, formal or
automated sign-off’s of data need to be passed and operating standards established. Examples would be
automated (or formalized) sign-off’s to:
• Planning
• Maintenance (Computerized Maintenance Management System)
• Reliability (Root cause failure analysis and condition monitoring data)
• Operations (Performance, Safety, and Environmental)

Automated ODR benefits

The use of automated, paperless systems carries many significant benefits in terms of time savings, accuracy
and accountability. Modern computer systems facilitate an easier, two-way interface between maintenance
and operations. However, unless the underlying organizational culture is one of ownership, then it is unlikely
that investment in this area will achieve its optimum return.

Is ODR just operators with data collectors?

Remember, though, that there’s more to ODR than simply equipping operators with data collectors.
ODR is not an IT system, it’s a PROCESS.
ODR can, in fact, be implemented manually, though this may place some limitations on the scope of the
program, and this is therefore not considered the “best practice” approach to ODR.

Avoiding ODR failure

ODR programs can fail when too many initiatives are begun without a structured technical approach.
It is important that operators involved in the program are trained in the use of the tools and the goals of the
program so that all tasks and responsibilities are clear to everyone. It is also important to ensure that the basic
program is running smoothly before taking the next step.

ODR benefits
Let us summarize.
The involvement of focused, trained and more knowledgeable operators means that there are more eyes
watching critical process systems. This increased monitoring results in earlier failure detection.
When plant failures do occur ODR promotes proactive root cause failure analysis, defining opportunities for
continuous improvement and faster execution of operational changes. The combination of benefits can have a
significant effect on the bottom line.
In addition to direct performance improvements, successful implementation of ODR can have a significant
beneficial effect on the working environment. Enhanced cooperation between departments and individuals
reduces friction and unites the team with a common focus and objectives. The improved two-way dialogue
between maintenance and production often has a knock-on effect on other areas of maintenance. This
facilitates earlier identification of reliability issues, more informed and timely discussion regarding possible
solutions, and easier implementation of corrective activities.

Remember
In order for a Operator Driven Reliability program to be successful it requires:
• A corporate culture willing to embrace the need for change.
• Commitment to implementing new technologies with requisite financial, training and personnel resources.
• Willingness to support processes for implementing cultural and technology changes.

Culture change
A structured change management training program at the Operator level as well as for supervisors and
managers, (along with coaching and mentoring), must be part of the process in order to succeed in changing
the culture.

Page 12 of 13
And finally……
Regulary scheduled reviews of successes and gaps in the program will ensure that KPIs are met. Everyone
can then celebrate the positive financial impacts of a successful ODR program and ensure a continuing
improvement of maintenance programs.

Page 13 of 13