Validation of a Lean Smart Maintenance Maturity Model

Abstract

Rising complexity in industrial asset and maintenance management due to more volatile business environments and megatrends like Industry 4.0 has led to the need for a new perspective on these management domains. The Lean Smart Maintenance (LSM) philosophy, which focuses on both the efficient (lean) and the learning (smart) organization was introduced during the past few years, and a corresponding maturity model (MM) has been developed to guide organizations on their way to asset and maintenance excellence. This paper discusses use cases, in which the usability and the generic aspect of the LSM MM are validated by using data from three different asset management assessment projects in organizations with different types of production. Research results show that the LSM MM can be used as a basis for management system improvement, independent of production types such as one-of-a-kind industry, mass production and continuous production.

Development of a Generic Framework to Assess Asset Management Maturity within Organisations

“…The LSM MM describes, in its simplest form, current states of, e.g., processes, structures, characteristics of maintenance organisations' and indicates potential development paths to increase efficiency and effectivity by reaching a higher level of maturity. The LSM MM was further developed using Hevner's Design Science Research approach (DSR) [6], and this is also used in this publication as a methodological guide. DSR consists of three research cycles: the so-called Relevance Cycle, the Design Cycle (DC), and the Rigor Cycle.…”

“…The LSM MM was validated with existing data from previous projects. [6] To further meet the DC requirements, the derived questionnaire was validated against an actual organisational development project, part of the validation assessment structure and mode described in this publication. The DC is structured as an iterative process that includes the phases of creation and evaluation of artefacts.…”

“…It uses the Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) base architecture and progressive elements to better understand the model's elements. [5,6] It encompasses nine main categories arranged from normative, via strategic to operative management: philosophy & target system, corporate culture, business model & service strategy, asset strategy, maintenance budget & controlling, organisational structure, process organisation, knowledge management and data & technology, with the last two being designed as cross-sectional categories. [5] The basic structure of the model can be viewed in Fig.…”

“…The minimum maturity level in of sub-category within a category then sets the maturity level for the overall category. [5,6] The logic behind the maturity evaluation can be viewed in Fig. 2.…”

“…[1][2][3] Based on these works and past maintenance maturity models (MM), a MM was developed as a tool to guide organisations towards LSM, with a strong focus on current developments in the fields of digitalisation. [4][5][6] For the LSM MM's trouble-free utilisation, a standardised assessment based on semi-structured interviews combined with a document review is used. [5] This scientific contribution intends to answer the question that repeatedly arises in reorganisation projects, which is, 'How must a maturity assessment be structured to obtain the greatest possible density of information (complete & correct) for the maturity rating of the organisation being surveyed with the most efficient use of human resources?…”