The Maintenance Execution Gap
Why 70% of Reliability Programmes Fail - and What Actually Closes Them
By Peter Munson, Author & Reliability thought leader
Discover why strong reliability strategies so often fail in execution, and how the Maintenance Execution Framework helps close the gap between analysis, work instructions and results in the field.
Over the past decades, we have gained access to an increasingly sophisticated maintenance and reliability toolkit: RCM, FMEA, risk-based inspection, condition monitoring, predictive analytics and machine learning. Yet strong analytical capabilities do not automatically translate into better maintenance execution. Even when your organisation has completed reliability studies, employs dedicated reliability engineers and reports high preventive maintenance compliance, the technician at the equipment may still receive little more than a generic instruction such as “check pump” or “inspect oil”.
The technical knowledge often exists: manufacturers provide tolerances, vendors define operating limits, and specialists know the relevant acceptance criteria. The challenge is ensuring that this knowledge reaches the person performing the task, in a form that supports correct execution and meaningful feedback. When that connection is missing, a completed work order can still tell you very little about whether the intended maintenance strategy was actually delivered.
This distance between maintenance strategy and what happens at the asset is what the webinar describes as the Maintenance Execution Gap. It shifts the focus from asking only what maintenance should we perform? or who performs it? to a third question: does your maintenance system actually enable people to execute the strategy correctly?
During this webinar, we explore the Maintenance Execution Framework (MEF), which defines seven conditions needed to support effective execution: Reference, Tools, Equipment Access, Continuity, Materials, Safe Restart and Loop Closure. You see how these conditions can be used to diagnose weaknesses in your own maintenance system and how better execution references, planning standards and feedback loops can help translate reliability strategy into consistent field execution.
Content of the webinar
The compliance paradox
- Examples of real maintenance work orders and compliance figures
- Why high PM compliance does not necessarily translate into improved reliability
- Evidence and lessons from aviation, nuclear power and process industries
Why forty years of analysis did not close the gap
- What RCM and FMEA were designed to achieve
- What these methods were not designed to address
- Where the handover from reliability analysis to maintenance execution can break down
The three-layer architecture and the seven MEF conditions
- Strategy: defining what maintenance should be performed
- Enablement: creating the conditions that make correct execution possible
- Execution: carrying out the work in the field
- The seven conditions: Reference, Tools, Equipment Access, Continuity, Materials, Safe Restart and Loop Closure
- Typical field symptoms when one or more conditions are missing
Worked example: a naphtha reflux pump
- Comparison of an original work order with a redesigned execution reference
- Use of acceptance criteria and visual anchors
- How structured findings capture can improve the value of maintenance tasks
What you can do on Monday morning
- A 90-minute self-diagnostic that you can apply to your own CMMS
- Using a critical asset to assess the strength of your enablement layer
- Alternative execution metrics, including findings yield, measurement completion and findings-to-work-order conversion
You learn how to distinguish an analysis problem from an execution problem, assess your maintenance system against the seven MEF conditions, and evaluate whether your work instructions provide technicians with what they need to execute tasks correctly. You also leave with a practical diagnostic that you can apply to your own CMMS. Join the webinar to examine where your own maintenance strategy may be losing effectiveness between analysis and field execution.
Practical information
14:45 Welcome to the BEMAS Live Learning Platform
16:00 Start of the presentation
16:45 Conclusion and Q&A
About the speaker
Peter J. Munson is Founder and Principal of SamOS Industrial Execution and author of The Maintenance Execution Gap: Why RCM Cannot Fix It and What Will.
He began his career as a KC-130 pilot and maintenance manager in the U.S. Marine Corps. After retiring from the military, he moved into industrial reliability and asset management, working primarily with refining, petrochemical and heavy process organisations in North America and Europe. His experience includes maintenance strategy, reliability analysis, preventive maintenance programme design and SAP PM/S4HANA EAM deployment.
Peter founded SamOS Industrial Execution in response to the execution challenges he observed in industrial organisations and reliability improvement programmes. His work focuses on the enablement layer between maintenance strategy and field execution, including execution references, planning standards, PM programme redesign and the CMMS configuration required to support them.
Further reading: The Maintenance Execution Gap
The webinar builds on concepts developed in Peter J. Munson’s book, The Maintenance Execution Gap: Why RCM Cannot Fix It and What Will. The book provides a more detailed examination of the evidence behind the Maintenance Execution Gap and expands on the implementation approach introduced during the webinar.
It follows a centrifugal pump from a conventional two-line work order through to a fully designed execution reference with acceptance criteria, visual anchors and structured findings capture. It also provides practical action sets that readers can use to assess and improve their own maintenance execution system.
The book is available in print and electronic formats through several online channels, including paperback, hardcover and Kindle editions via Amazon, a Nook edition, and direct PDF and EPUB versions. Multi-copy and plant/site licence options are also available.
Participants who wish to explore the subject in greater depth can consult the available editions and purchasing options via the link below.
Keep me posted
BEMAS Corporate Sponsors
