Use of Integration PM-PS for Effective

Long-Term Planning
Joseph Layani, PMP
Société de Transport de Montréal –
Montreal Transit Commission

Produced by: Supported by:

What I’ll Cover
Introduction & Overview
Trigger points & Key challenges
Journey to Success
Integration Process and Achievements
Key points to Take Home
Questions
Introduction & Overview
STM in numbers
• 405 million of transits per
years
• 9600 employees
• 2 main operational
branches: Buses and
Subway
• Total assets values:
> 14 billions US$
o Buses (1700 on 210 lines),
o Infrastructures ( > 200
locations all over the city of
Montreal)
o Subway fixed assets (5 lines,
68 stations)
o Rolling stocks ( >760 subway
cars)
Introduction & Overview
SAP-EAM at STM in numbers
• PM for the maintenance of :
o Buses (since 2002),
o Infrastructures (since 2006)
o Subway fixed assets (since 2010),
o Rolling stocks (on-going project)

• Portal is used by maintenance end-users

• BW and BI-BO for KPIs production
• PS for Infras. projects only (since December 2012)
 SAP-PS for Infrastructure projects lifecycle
Project Initialization

Project
Project control Planning
• Report in CO • Based on engineers
(Internal order) estimates
once a month
• In a third party Maintenance
software by projects
coordinators (Eng. Planning
Dept.)

•In SAP-PM
Project execution •Based on
•Maint. Plans simulation,
• External : PO to •breakdown estimate
contractors in MM-SRV
• & projects
Project Closing and Serv. entry
•Use of Maintenance Work Centers
• Internal : PM work orders
by maintenance planners

Slide 5
 Long term planning process
PM task
PM work Preventive Preventive lists
orders
maintenance maintenance
backlog ( hours / work
Infrastructure (hours/WC) centers) Infrastructure
Projects planners Maintenance planners

Estimated Corrective
projects work maintenance
hours for (hours /WC)
internal Overall based on
resources needed historic data
working PM work
orders
hours Infrastructure
Maintenance Manager
Trigger points
Engineering
Maintenance vs. Engineering
Lack of integration : Maintenance
• Impossible to compare project estimates, made in the
third party software, with the planning made in PM
o High level work area vs. PM work centers
o Annual Maint. team capacity allotted to projects : imprecise

• Impossible to adjust the planned vs. actual

o Only CO reporting, by the end of the posting period, for cost
reporting – no advancement calculations
Key challenges
Simplify the projects planning process
• Productivity improvement for the Eng. Group

Match the project resource plan with PM capacity

• More accurate human resource planning

Get a complete view of assets costs (by locations)

• Consolidation of project and maintenance costs per FL
SAP-PS project Roadmap
o Implement SAP-PS as a project planning tools
o Get rid of the 3rd party software
o Convert more than 400 active projects
o Develop a combined capacity management
o Create relevant reporting and KPIs

Support & BI
deployment
Kick-off
Blueprint Realization Conversion &
(PS & BI) and tests user training
May 2012 September 2012 November 2012 December
October 2011
(6 months) (5months) (2 months) 3rd 2012
Important Considerations
Change management
• Planning tool : Department for infra. projects PS
• Cost collectors : Finance department follow Infra. projects with
WBS instead of internal orders
• Work Centers usage: Maintenance planners have to share
“their” PM work centers with Project planners

 Implication of High Management (communications)

 Compose a Project team with Maintenance, Engineers and
Finance members
Technical considerations
Use of PM-PS integration points
• WBS elements are linked to the FL on which the project is
performed
• Project activities for internal resources are planned with a
control key that allows “capacity requirement”
• PM order affectation to projects leads to an automatic
replacement of the activity control key (no capacity req.)
• Work Centers usage must be changed from “Maintenance”
usage to “All task list types” usage
 Results
Business process integration
Infrastructure Maintenance planners

Project Functional Location

WBS
Maintenance Order
Network Activity
Link for projects
(Internal labor)
Infrastructure project planners

Long term project planning Short term planning

Work Centers
 Results
Business process integration

Project
Functional
Location
WBS

Network Activity Work

(Internal labor) Centers

Capacity requirement is disabled

for project activity Maintenance Order
for projects

Infrastructure project planners Infrastructure Maintenance planners

Short term planning
 Long term planning process - improvement
PM/
BW
PM Backlog for Calculated PM
preventive work hours for
maintenance preventive
(hours/WC) maintenance

Infrastructure Projects planners Infrastructure Maintenance planners

PM
Estimated Estimated
corrective work
projects work
hours /WC
hours for internal based on
work centers Total work historic data
PS hours
(Planned)
BO

Infrastructure Maintenance Manager

More accurate Capacity estimate
Project planners
• Are able to give to the maintenance sections
o An estimate based on all project activities using the same work
centers as the maintenance dept. (Electricians, Mechanics,
Plumbers…)
• Are able to use PM historic data to plan new projects
o Work centers utilization in PM orders related to projects

• Are able to adjust project plans according to

maintenance section work load  capacity leveling
More effective decision making

Maintenance managers
• Are able to challenge their participation to projects in
regard to their preventive vs. curative objectives
o By using overall projects analysis and regular PM reporting

Maintenance planners
• Are able to react to change of project timeframe
o Overall work hours needed is adjusted once a month
Short term planning process

Project work orders are created at

the right time
 no more “floating” orders in the
system

PM order capacity requirements

replace the initial PS activity
capacity requirement
 No duplication of resources
requirement in the project

Slide 17
Configuration point

Slide 18
Our way to EAM consolidation
Use of Functional location in PS
• Complete Cost analysis per FLOC includes PS data
o Investment planning per location  Maintenance deficit reduction

• Asset lifecycle evaluation Definition of an Asset “Health”

indicator
o based on BW data and BO reporting
Key Points to Take Home
Gap Reduction between 2 planning groups
• Integration leads to interactions  Better Productivity
o Work centers  resources integration
o Functional location  object integration

More decision making tools

• Better project execution follow up
o Standard PS, BW and BO reporting and analysis
Change management consideration
o Communication and User training is the key of success
o Test team must involve a large panel of end-users
 Thank you
Questions

Slide 21
Joseph Layani, PMP
Société de Transport de Montréal
jlayani@stm.info

Produced by: Supported by: