CMMS systems automate most of the logistical functions performed by maintenance staff and management. CMMS systems come with many options and have many advantages over manual maintenance tracking systems. Depending on the complexity of the system chosen, typical CMMS functions may include the following:

• Work order generation, prioritization, and tracking by  equipment/component.

• Historical tracking of all work orders generated which become sortable by equipment, date, person responding, etc.

• Tracking of scheduled and unscheduled maintenance activities.

• Storing of maintenance procedures as well as all warranty information by component.

• Storing of all technical documentation or procedures by component.

• Real-time reports of ongoing work activity.

• Calendar- or run-time-based preventive maintenance work order generation.

• Capital and labor cost tracking by component as well as shortest, median, and longest times to close a work order by component.

• Complete parts and materials inventory control with automated reorder capability.

• PDA interface to streamline input and work order generation.

• Outside service call/dispatch capabilities.

Many CMMS programs can now interface with existing energy management and control systems (EMCS) as well as property management systems. Coupling these capabilities allows for conditionbased monitoring and component energy use profiles.

While CMMS can go a long way toward automating and improving the efficiency of most O&M programs, there are some common pitfalls. These include the following:

One of the greatest benefits of the CMMS is the elimination of paperwork and manual tracking activities, thus enabling the building staff to become more productive. It should be noted that the functionality of a CMMS lies in its ability to collect and store information in an easily retrievable format.

• Detection of impending problems before a failure occurs resulting in fewer failures and customer complaints.

• Achieving a higher level of planned maintenance activities that enables a more efficient use of staff resources.

• Affecting inventory control enabling better spare parts forecasting to eliminate shortages and minimize existing inventory.

As reported in A.T. Kearney’s and Industry Week’s

survey of 558 companies that are currently using a

computerized maintenance management system

(DPSI 1994), companies reported an average of:

28.3% increase in maintenance productivity

20.1% reduction in equipment downtime

19.4% savings in lower material costs

17.8% reduction in MRO inventory

14.5 months average payback time.