A study claims that compared to reactive maintenance, which is believed to consume 40% of your company’s operational and maintenance budget, planned preventive maintenance yields a spectacular ROI of 545 percent (on average).
Not only that but the production goals for your facility may be delayed by several hours or even days in the event of an emergency equipment breakdown. Here are 5 crucial comparisons you must evaluate before you decide to invest corporate funds and restructure your O&M budgets, to explain further;
Repair Focused vs Zero Downtime Focused
Consider a situation in which your equipment fails unexpectedly. You would be required to pay extra money to outsource machine specialists, have missing parts supplied as soon as possible, and pay extra to technicians to work overtime to have it back up and running and function as quickly as possible.
On the other hand, planned downtime enables you to schedule downtime or disperse maintenance chores to minimize disruptions while saving money and reducing the time a machine is out of commission.
Reactive Versus Preventive Maintenance
Equipment failure is inevitable! The next step is to realize the advantages of proactive as opposed to reactive maintenance. Then, the technical expert will locate the issue and respond with a proper fix to get the asset back in operation once it has already broken down.
However, monitoring its maintenance and wear and tear with a pre-planned schedule while it is still running makes it possible to mitigate the risk of failure and unaccounted downtime and avoid such expensive repairs in terms of money and time.
Operational Effectiveness Versus Crisis Management
When a company’s advantages outweigh the resources, it uses to run its business successfully, it is said to be operationally efficient. The operational and maintenance expenditure includes buying and maintaining the firm’s equipment.
If the machine malfunctions, the business will need to use reactive maintenance for crisis management. The run-to-failure scenario will result in significant financial losses for the company. Preventive care would reduce expenses by enabling specialists to discover and stop a substantial failure by carrying out routine maintenance and looking into the asset’s maintenance.
Equipment Longevity vs Equipment Replacement
A machine’s efficiency and longevity decrease the more significant repairs and breakdowns it experiences. By frequently considering its maintenance and planning its upkeep, you extend the asset’s lifespan and, as a result, get more money out of the resource.
A tangible asset’s “Useful Life” is the time frame a business can anticipate using to generate income. For example, the corporation may avoid paying astronomical early-replacement expenses by extending its equipment’s life and ensuring it operates at its best.
Roi Versus Short-term Benefits
A business is supposedly only as resource-efficient as its profits. Every employed and invested resource is viewed as an asset. Therefore, the strategy as developed should not be based on the short-term and immediate benefits it gives but rather on a futuristic Return on Investment model. A machine’s lifecycle comprises normal wear and tear and maintenance.
When planned preventive maintenance is included, the ROI will be at its highest because it considers the costs associated with maintaining the equipment and reduces the likelihood of any unplanned failure, which could result in significant financial losses while the equipment is out of commission.
Businesses that use the reactive maintenance approach may initially view preventive maintenance as an unnecessary overhead expense before realizing how much more expensive and time-consuming it would be to fix the unexpectedly broken-down machinery.
As a result, a maintenance strategy that prioritizes planned preventive maintenance will be effective and efficient & can save costs, time & inconvenience in several situations.