Why is it so difficult to advance device management?
Thread Content
Managing equipment is very difficult, as anyone who works with equipment knows. Why is it so difficult? I think, first of all, there are too many theoretical books, both domestically and internationally; there are an overwhelming number of books on equipment management. However, many of them contain purely rational, theoretical concepts. Moreover, the various management techniques discussed in these books lack mechanisms and approaches for coordination among them – they basically operate in isolation, each following its own approach, seemingly perfect. But once it comes to the comprehensive management of a company’s equipment, it becomes clear that what was described as so clear in theory isn’t very practical at all, and in fact, most of it is useless. Our efforts in comprehensive equipment management have yielded poor results, and it is difficult to sustain such efforts; this has become the current situation regarding comprehensive equipment management in various industries and organizations. I have been working in equipment management for over 20 years. My career started with the maintenance and major repairs of rotating equipment, then moved on to managing equipment at production facilities (branch plants). I later took charge of the comprehensive management of company equipment within the mechanical equipment department (a corporate functional department), and eventually became responsible for the overall equipment management of the group company, overseeing equipment management for both existing operations as well as new projects related to expansion and construction. In essence, I have been involved in the entire process of equipment management, including selection, procurement, installation and commissioning, operation, major repairs, and disposal. In every stage of this entire process, there have been successful practices that have proven effective and been recognized by everyone within the company; overall, the organization, guidance, and advancement of comprehensive equipment management have been quite successful. As I mentioned in my previous reply to HaiChuan’s post titled “Real cases show why TPM cannot be implemented effectively”: whether the implementation of TPM can proceed effectively and in an orderly manner depends mainly on the company-level leader responsible for this task, as well as his own qualities, competence, capabilities, and authority regarding TPM. If the company’s TPM framework, organizational structure, work processes, and resource allocation are not planned and developed through him, from a corporate perspective and at a high level, by considering all aspects of the equipment’s lifespan as well as the coordination between the equipment and production processes, between the equipment and technological processes, and between the equipment and automated control systems, then TPM will be nothing more than a formality. I am responsible for the leadership’s commitment (not just participation); even things such as work forms, work standards, equipment allocation, human resources support, and assessment systems are all drafted by me before being refined by the relevant functional departments at various levels. Therefore, the scales are unified, operations are synchronized, the evaluation priorities for participating departments and personnel vary, and benefits are organically coordinated. In short, it’s all part of a whole plan. To implement TPM, it is first necessary to analyze aspects such as the company’s production equipment, operating processes, raw and auxiliary materials, energy supply, sales market, and spare parts availability. thereafter, at the company level, planning and organization should be carried out in a categorized and hierarchical manner, based on the characteristics of the equipment and following the principles outlined earlier. To implement TPM by following the books, to do TPM just for the sake of TPM – such an approach is bound to fail; it will surely be despised by employees and managers at all levels. The only outcome will be a grand start and a miserable end!
In my opinion, the quality of equipment manufacturers varies greatly; there are too many OEM products, and custom-made equipment comes with its own specific requirements. The competence of management personnel also differs significantly. No matter how good a management system may be, it can only be effectively implemented if there are qualified managers and high-quality equipment manufacturing. Especially these days, most companies win bids at low prices, which makes it difficult to avoid problems related to equipment quality, thereby increasing the challenges in equipment management.
This post was last edited by ybcity on 2018-4-12 at 12:25. I took over a self-owned power plant that never operated properly from the time it was put into use, and this situation persisted for almost 8 years. During that period, the continuous operation time of the furnace never exceeded one month; at its worst, the furnace had to be started up every day. Initially, experts from Tsinghua University’s boiler engineering department were even invited to the site for on-site investigations; their conclusion was that the quality of the coal differed too much from what was specified in the design, resulting in a mismatch between the performance of the machine and the boiler. It was under such circumstances that I took over the management of this power plant. It took me 3 months to review the reports and visit the sites, asking the statistical department to reorganize, analyze, and synthesize the historical data according to my requirements. Eventually, I developed an annual work plan along with the key performance indicators (the electricity and heat generation volumes were twice the targets set by the group company; my deputies were shocked.....;P). Each of my deputies then received an A4 sheet from me, on which were outlined their key tasks, plans, and objectives for each month of the first half of the year, along with specific methods and steps for carrying out those tasks. There seemed to be no changes in the first month, a slight improvement appeared in the second month, and by the third month, the monthly targets set for the annual plan had been achieved. The assistants started to get a little excited. The goals set for the first half of the year were largely achieved, and my assistants were very excited. Following my plan, they managed to meet the annual targets, with the actual amount of electricity generated and heat supplied that year exceeding the total generated over any three years from the previous eight years! It’s still the same people; whenever I go to a new workplace, I go there alone, without bringing a group of people with me. I rely on the people available there, using them to help themselves overcome their challenges!
Equipment management involves many aspects, including equipment, people, and systems, and it spans the entire lifecycle.
This is indeed a difficult problem – does it rely more on technology or on management?
The original poster is amazing – someone who is capable of achieving great things
It is crucial to develop one’s own theory and stick to one’s own ideas.
The original poster wrote very well, and it’s also very enlightening.
Equipment management involves various aspects, and in my opinion the key factor is people
How many books on “process technology management” can you find in the world? How many books on “comprehensive equipment management” can you find? So it’s not hard to understand why device management is such a challenge