We can’t keep doing what we have always done and expect different results. 70% of maintenance and reliability projects fail due to poor execution. Learn why and what you can do to improve your odds. This is a short and easy read focused on discipline of execution.

1. We optimize your people, processes, and technology so that you
can achieve sustainable, reliable results
A GPAllied White Paper
Establishing the Discipline of Executing
We can’t keep doing what we have always done
and expect different results.
70% of maintenance and reliability projects fail due to poor execution.
Learn why and what you can do to improve your odds.
By: Michael J. Aroney, Principal
February 21, 2013
A DIVISION OF ALLIED RELIABILITY GROUP
4200 Faber Place Drive
Charleston, SC 29405
888.335.8276
www.gpallied.com

3. © 2013 GPAllied Page 1
Contents
A Reliability Improvement Project Is Like a Piece
of Equipment ............................................................1
What to Execute........................................................3
How to Execute.........................................................3
Summary...................................................................5
A Reliability Improvement Project Is
Like a Piece of Equipment
An asset or piece of equipment and its components
have failure modes that can be plotted on a P-F curve
(Figure 1) based on when a defect first presents itself,
progressive loss of functionality, and eventual failure.
“P” is the point at which a defect presents itself and
failure starts to occur. Without any repair to eliminate
the defect, its severity will increase, functionality will
decrease, and failure will occur at point “F”. At this
point, it typically costs four (4) times the amount and
takes ten (10) times the effort to make a repair than if
the defect were removed somewhere before point “F”.
How Predictive Maintenance (PdM) Works – Early Identification of Defects
Figure 1: P-F Curve

4. Page 2 Establishing the Discipline of Executing
The objective then is to use methods that will allow
for the early detection of defects to provide ample
time for corrective and mitigating actions to eliminate
them and restore functionality. This requires an
optimized mix of Condition Based Maintenance (CBM)
technologies and Preventive Maintenance (PM)
inspections focused on failure modes.
This approach allows for an early identification of
defects as close to point “P” as possible. It provides
time to plan the work needed to eliminate the defect
and take mitigating actions to eliminate the likelihood
that a particular defect will reoccur or lessen the
severity of impact to the asset if it does present itself
again. Early identification and elimination of defects
and actions to prevent their reoccurrence is a risk
mitigation strategy to ensure that the functionality of
the asset is maintained. For assets, this is what we
would call an optimized Equipment Maintenance Plan
(EMP).
Reliability and maintenance process improvement
projects are like assets. A project has components and
each component has failure modes. When a defect is
introduced to a project’s component, it will lose
functionality until point “F” is reached. Project failure
is defined as exceeding the project scope in terms of
cost and time, underachieving target functionality,
and not providing the return on investment in the
business case for change.
A project’s major components typically fall into the
following categories:
• Active leadership engagement and
governance;
• Effective communication;
• Training that develops understanding,
knowledge, and ability to execute;
• An organization aligned to reinforce new
behaviors and results;
• Employees that are actively engaged in design
and implementation of the project’s
functionality; and
• Buy-in by all members of the organization
affected by the project.
Sample Failure Modes
Listed here are some failure modes that are
associated with these project components.
Active Leadership Engagement and Governance:
• Lack of skill.
• Too busy to actively participate.
• Not setting priorities on competing initiatives.
• Implementation responsibility delegated
completely to supervisors.
Effective Communication:
• No formal communication process.
• Ineffective communication.
• No feedback mechanism established.
• Low participation in communication by
managers and supervisors.
Training That Develops Understanding, Knowledge
and Ability to Execute:
• Short cuts, especially on understanding (5
days to 1 day).
• Focus on technical training only and
neglecting the development of execution
skills when 30% of the challenge is technical
and 70% is execution.
• Training that does not address the four (4)
levels of learning: like it, learn it, use it,
improve performance.
An Organization Aligned to Reinforce New Behaviors
and Results:
• 30% of an organization’s performance
challenges are technical in nature while 70%
of the challenges are organizational, yet the
norm is to focus 100% of a project’s effort on
only the technical issues.
• Every organization is perfectly aligned for the
results it gets. Failure to realign its controls
and mechanisms to reinforce new behaviors
will result in a failed project – often referred
to as a “flavor of the month”.

5. © 2013 GPAllied Page 3
• Strong silos resulting in process
fragmentation characterized by the attitude
of “that’s not my job”.
• It is too hard to use the Computerized
Maintenance Management System (CMMS),
resulting in work-arounds.
Employees That Are Actively Engaged in Design and
Implementation of the Project’s Functionality:
• Low trust and empowerment – “us/them”
adversarial relationship.
• Culture of “dependency” – there is a lack of
initiative and people are waiting to be told
what to do.
• Not understanding “how will it affect me”.
• No business case for change and burning
platform.
Buy-in by All Members of the Organization Affected
by the Project:
• Poor past successes with project
implementations – “here we go again”
mentality resulting in a “hunker down”
response.
• Not identifying “what’s in it for me”.
• Functional affiliation – agreeing that change
must occur, but it is “them” who need to
change.
What to Execute
70% of project failures are due to poor execution.
There are four (4) key disciplines to execution and by
addressing the six (6) critical project components of a
project that are listed above, the organization will
achieve the discipline to execute effectively by: 1)
engaging people and keeping them focused on goals,
2) establishing what must be done to achieve these
goals, 3) keeping the organization focused on what
matters, and 4) keeping the organization accountable
for results.
How to Execute
The methods used to establish a discipline of
execution enable the organization’s leadership to
filter through all of the competing priorities that
detract from a project’s successful implementation.
To accomplish this, a charter is established defining
the business case for change, the current state, the
target state, and a strategy for closing the gaps. Then
a governance structure is established (Figure 2) with
clearly defined goals, roles, and expectations for
execution and a method for tracking progress.
Figure 2: Governance Structure Example

6. Page 4 Establishing the Discipline of Executing
The governance structure in the asset/project defect
analogy executes the EMP, and in the case of the
asset reliability improvement project, a Project
Maintenance Plan. In this regard, the Corporate
Executive Steering Group and Site Leadership Team
play the role of reliability engineers. The Process
Champions are the maintenance engineers. The
Project Teams are the craftsmen. The Change
Management Team is the PdM/PM technicians, the
Site Facilitator is the asset reliability project manager,
and the Corporate Facilitator is the asset reliability
program manager.
The Project Teams, the craftsmen, are commissioned
and trained to reengineer the maintenance and
reliability processes and establish standards and
methods that will ensure effective asset health
management. The net results are improved reliability,
increased capacity, and lower operating cost. The
Project Team Champions are responsible for ensuring
that the gaps between current state and target state
are “fixed” and the project functionality is achieved.
The Change Management Team, the PdM/PM
technicians, monitors and inspects the project
execution to identify “defects” such as the ones that
were previously identified. These defects, if not
removed, will prevent the project’s full functionality
from being achieved and contribute to its eventual
failure by becoming another poorly executed “flavor
of the month”. Defects identified by this project CBM
process are identified as technical or organizational by
the Change Management Team analysts. Technical
defects are handed over to the Champions for
“fixing”. Organizational defects require that the
Leadership Team, and in some cases the Executive
Steering Group, are engaged to eliminate the defect
through an organization change or through their
active participation to mitigate its reoccurrence. The
governance structure has a supporting process and
tools that facilitate execution of the project and
greatly increase the likelihood of success. An example
governance process and the associated tools are
shown in Figure 3.
Figure 3: Governance Process and Tools for Execution

7. © 2013 GPAllied Page 5
Summary
The difference between doing the same old things
and expecting different results and actually getting
different results is seeing and doing things differently.
As previously stated, 70% of project failures are due
to poor execution. Achieving success requires a
discipline of execution. The organization must be
aligned to engage people and keep them focused on
goals. If people do not know the goals, let alone what
to do to achieve them on a day-to-day basis, then
failure is predictable. Additionally, the organization
must keep score and be held accountable for results.
The governance structure and process outlined here
provides the mechanisms for how to execute. They
allow leadership to filter through all of the competing
priorities and ensure successful execution of
performance changes. It all starts with aligning the
leadership on a common goal and establishing the
business case for change, a vision of the target state’s
goals, and how progress and accountability will be
achieved. Put the pieces in place to drive the
discipline to engage, execute, and sustain.

8. © 2013 GPAllied Establishing the Discipline of Executing
About GPAllied
GPAllied is the most diverse manufacturing and
industrial reliability and operations consulting,
training, and services company in the world. This
diversity enables us to develop significant value
propositions for our clients by delivering solutions
across different industries, geographies, and—most
importantly—across different aspects of an operation.
As a result of our commitment to delivering greater
value to our manufacturing and industrial clients, we
have brought together premiere industry leading
experts to form the GPAllied team. Our specialists
demonstrate expertise across all industry sectors and
specialty fields including: Lean, Reliability Engineering,
Six Sigma, Condition Monitoring, Change
Management, Maintenance Planning and Scheduling,
Workforce Development, and Craft Skills Training.
For more information about GPAllied, please contact:
World Headquarters
888.335.8276
info@gpallied.com
www.gpallied.com