Something we’ve been working on recently is the level of analysis we chose to do. Two parts: what piece of equipment? And what level of detail?
We can start with a criticality assessment Absolutely a useful tool to map out our prioritization. If we have 100% support from all areas, and a lot of time, this is the most logical way to go about it. There are other factors at play.
If we treat EMP development as a knowledge transfer tool, spend the time on the assets of the experienced millwright who is close to retirement. Their knowledge can’t be replaced, but we may capture enough to avoid disaster, and to remember why the machine is set up that way (not “because that’s the way we’ve always done it.”) This strategy is a good reason to break down an analysis by craft.
Chances are, maintenance folks know what the biggest headaches are and will want to work on them. If we’re starting (or restarting) an EMP review process, we may want to let them lead and choose the topic. Establishing buy-in is worth the investment and our interests will dovetail before long.
If we are learning a new software or type of analysis, choose a subject that we’re comfortable with to start. It’s a smart way to ease into a new technology.
These are these factors we’ve been using to prioritize our EMP Development work lately. The level of detail depends on the time and people available.
What other factors impact your EMP Development projects?