Is this KPI value reasonable?
Thread Content
Is this KPI value reasonable? A chlor-alkali company is carrying out maintenance and replacement work; the planned time for completing this process is 12 hours. A KPI has been set, with a penalty of 500 yuan for each additional hour of delay. The workshop completed the replacement task on time and handed it over to the maintenance department; however, when blind flanges were installed for maintenance, the acetylene pipeline was not replaced thoroughly, resulting in a flash explosion ； Question: 1. Was the incomplete replacement caused by rushing to meet the KPI targets? 2. Should time be set as a KPI value for replacement?
As long as the equipment is in maintenance mode, supervisors and staff at all levels keep pressing for action, urgently demanding it
This post was last edited by On the road_lXN1e on 2021-5-31 17:19. 1. Is the incomplete replacement due to trying to rush things by setting KPI values? There are many reasons for incomplete replacement, and time is just one of them. How was the task handed over? This is the key point. 2. Should time be set as a KPI value for replacement? For replacement, a time threshold should be set as a KPI value; the focus should be on establishing reasonable KPI values that are well-founded and in line with operational procedures.
This should be something the company’s leadership will consider, right?
Whether it’s this reason or not, an accident inevitably leads people to think that it was caused by a rush to meet deadlines. At least it’s one of the reasons.
This post was last edited by Yu Qin on 2021-6-2 at 13:53. The original poster has raised a good question; such situations are indeed common in production environments. However, it’s not necessarily accurate to attribute all accidents to a lack of time, or to label them as cases where production was given priority over safety. Think about it – is there only one factor that can lead to a certain outcome? If there is indeed only one, then it can be determined that it is the inevitable factor! In fact, apart from time, there are other factors: whether the replacement scheme is reasonable, whether there are procedures to guide the replacement process, and whether the results of the replacement can be verified, etc. Of course, if there are no problems with any of these, then the only possibility is that the timeline is insufficient; this is not the same as whether a time limit has been set or not. In fact, some companies and industries have included parking replacement time in their systems and regulations.
Therefore, a replacement setting time is necessary; it just needs to have its rationality demonstrated! It cannot be simply assumed that accidents occur due to the setting of time limits. Furthermore, to determine whether a replacement is qualified, it cannot be determined solely by how long it has been since the replacement was made; rather, tests must be conducted to check whether it meets the qualification standards! Taking it a step further, tasks such as removing and installing blind flanges, opening pipeline equipment, and performing hot work all require approval through proper procedures; if the equipment handles hazardous materials, sampling for testing is also necessary.
It is considered unreasonable; replacement analysis is meant to be based on the adequacy of the data analyzed, and time cannot serve as a basis for KPI values. Even if the replacement is deemed acceptable, analysis must still be conducted before proceeding with the operation, as required by GB30871.