The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/1355-2511.htm

The impact of the implementation Role and tasks

of maintenance
of management system on the services

perception of role and tasks of

maintenance services and
effectiveness of their functioning Received 20 September 2019
Revised 3 February 2020
Accepted 25 March 2020
Przemysław Dro_zyner
University of Warmia and Mazury, Olsztyn, Poland

Abstract
Purpose – The first goal of the article was to examine how the perception of the role and scope of operation of
maintenance services in the enterprise changes, depending on whether the company has an integrated
management system (IMS), only a quality management system implemented in accordance with ISO 9001 and
in the absence of a formal, certified management system. The second goal was to propose a model for assessing
the quality of maintenance service functioning in enterprise with IMS implemented.
Design/methodology/approach – The author’s experience of over 1,000 audits in enterprises in various
industries: food, automotive, construction, petrochemical, electronic and so on was used in the work. The audits
were carried out in three types of companies: which had IMSs (800 audits), which only had a system
implementation certificate ISO 9001 (140 audits) and without any standardized management system
implemented (so-called second-party audits, commissioned by the client of the audited company.
Findings – The most important conclusion is – the role of UR services in enterprises with the implemented IMS
is much broader and goes beyond the classic framework for planning, implementation and settlement of
maintenance and repair work. Maintenance is understood more broadly and includes in its scope also the safety
of people and the environment, the efficiency of production and consumption of utilities as well as the quality of
products and services. Maintenance issues include not only strictly technical aspects but also economic,
logistic, legal and organizational and management aspects.
Practical implications – Research shows that enterprises, especially those with high technical and
organizational culture, should not treat management systems as costs, but as a driving force for the
implementation of new technologies, new organizational solutions and the development of employees’
competences.
Social implications – Broad views on stakeholders of maintenance services (including employees, their
families, control institutions) and their requirements make enterprises begin to see the need to maintain the so-
called lifetime balance, as well as the safety and comfort of work of employees of these services.
Originality/value – The author did not find in literature any reports on studies of the impact of formal,
certified management systems on the quality of maintenance services; this article shows that this impact is
large and, above all, positive; with such a broad understanding of the role of maintenance, there is a need to
develop a common platform for such seemingly distant concepts as machine technical condition or fatigue life
versus cost accounting and quality management.
Keywords Industrial maintenance, Maintenance performance, Maintenance function
Paper type Research paper

1. The evolution of perception of the role of maintenance services (MSs) in

enterprises
The traditionally and historically perceived scope of activities of the maintenance services
(MSs) concerns production support. The assumption that their main goal is to ensure optimal
availability of devices necessary for the implementation of production or service processes
was widely accepted. The issue of maintenance has evolved in this formula for a long time. Journal of Quality in Maintenance
Engineering
Until the 1940s, that is, in a time of cheap and easily available workforce, the approach of © Emerald Publishing Limited
1355-2511
reactive activities dominated. This meant that the operation of machinery and equipment was DOI 10.1108/JQME-09-2019-0089
JQME carried out only when their technical condition required it. Maintenance activities were
therefore usually carried out as a response to a failure. In the following decades, much more
complex machines began to be operated, having a greater impact on production continuity. In
the event of a breakdown, it was no longer possible to replace the work of these machines with
human power, and downtime caused more and more economic losses. From now on, we can
talk about a preventive approach. Service and inspection began to be planned in terms of both
frequency and scope, but still referred to the effectiveness of service activities, that is,
elimination of failures and maintaining production continuity.
Since the end of the last century, more and more importance has been attached to aspects
of efficiency of activities, maintaining human and environmental safety, compliance with law
and standards and recently sustainable development (Figure 1). In theory and practice,
instead of simple technical services, the concept of maintenance (MS) appeared, although
these activities are still treated as inevitable costs.
The next stage is the period of the concept of prognostic, proactive maintenance,
consisting in monitoring the technical condition of machines, introducing technical
diagnostics and participation of device operators in simple maintenance operations. The
concepts of total productive maintenance (TPM), reliability centered maintenance (RCM), risk
based inspection (RBI), as well as various approaches to maintenance rules have been widely
described in the literature (Table 1).
Currently, in enterprises with high organizational and technical culture, it is recognized
that the MS process has or can have a significant impact not only on the quantity of
production, on the cost and quality of the final product, but also on the safety of people and
the environment. Maintenance is also becoming an important element of sustainable
development (also Table 1).
MSs are becoming an indispensable element of most business processes implemented by
enterprises, ranging from primary security of production continuity through planning,
logistics and sales to HR processes (competences, authorities, working hours of employees of
MS ) to ensure occupational health and safety and environmental protection.
Maintenance costs according to various sources amount to even 5% of the company’s
turnover, representing – depending on the industry – 4–15% of production costs and about
18% of inventory value (Mikler, 2008). Other sources say that maintenance costs are 10–40%
of production costs (Maggard, Rhyne, 1992), 15–50% (Coetzee, 2004) and even 15–70%
(Bevilacqua, Braglia, 2000). Ahlmann (2002) estimates that machinery maintenance costs in
Sweden account for 6.2% of the company’s turnover. According to Wireman (1990), 30% of
the costs incurred for maintaining the traffic result from improper planning of work and
overtime related to it. Actual costs may be much higher. A machine failure can mean financial
losses not only for the costs necessary to repair it but also for the lack of planned production
or penalties related to failure to meet deadlines or environmental pollution (Todinov 2006).

sustainable
development
(meeng current needs
compliance with standards
without diminishing
(meeng
efficiency requirements) chances
(rao of effects future generaons
Figure 1. effecveness to inputs)
Perception of aspects of (achieving goals)
the objectives of
actions throughout 1940 1950r 1980 2000
history
Source(s) : own study
Ramachandra et al. (2019)
Onu and Mbohwa (2019)
Munir et al. (2019)
Moscoso et al. (2019)
Mohamed et al. (2019)
Jasiulewicz-Kaczmarek and Gola
(2019)
Chen et al. (2019)
Bhatia et al. (2019)
Abdi and Taghipour (2019)
Wahyudin and Hasibuan (2018)
Sakib and Wuest (2018)
Mishra and Mungi, (2018)
Lundgren et al. (2018)
Jasiulewicz-Kaczmarek and
_
Zywica (2018)
Farinha (2018)
Agustiady and Cudney (2018)
Reason and Hobbs (2017)
Narimisaa and Narimisa (2017)
Hooi and Leong (2017)
Franciosi et al. (2017)
Afrinaldi et al. (2017)
Roy et al. (2016)
Szczuka and Dro_zyner (2015)
Dro_zyner and Mazur (2014)
Jasiulewicz-Kaczmarek and
Dro_zyner (2013)
Dro_zyner et al. (2011)
_ ołtowski and Nizi
Z nski (2010)
Legutko (2010)
Pintelon et al. (2006)
Farrington-Darby et al. (2005)
_
Zurek (2004)
Mikołajczak et al. (2004)
Swanson (2001)
Fei and Honghui (1998)
The influence of finance factor and employee skills in implementing TPM
Role and tasks
in the SMEs of maintenance
SMEs responsiveness toward sustainable production activities services
Constraints and barriers affecting TPM implementation
A model of maintenance management based on the principles of TPM and
RCM methodologies
Identification and ranking of the critical success factors of RBI
New technologies in planning, implementation, monitoring and analysis of
maintenance processes that support sustainable production in modern
manufacturing companies
The influence of TPM and other lean manufacturing practices on
environmental sustainability
Risk assessment for optimal planning inspection and maintenance
intervals
A repair/replace model with both economic and environmental factors
TPM implementation case study
An overview of condition-based predictive maintenance solutions
Proposal of a system framework for a sustainable approach to
maintenance
A literature review of existing maintenance models
Model of maintenance sustainability performance assessment
Vision of the industrial engineering tools applicable to the management of
physical assets
An overview, introduction and implementation guide to TPM
Management of maintenance error
Comparison of European and US approaches to RBI
TPM relationships with manufacturing performance improvement
Preventive maintenance model that minimizes conventional,
environmental and social costs generated by maintenance interventions
Mathematical model to determine the optimal schedule of preventive
replacement of a component in aspect of economic and environmental
impacts
Future of continuous maintenance within the Industry 4.0 context
Good practices in selected areas of enterprises (including maintenance) in
the aspect of sustainable development
Comparison of process and procedural approaches to maintenance
The role of maintenance in reducing the negative impact of a business on
the environment
The results of employees’ satisfaction survey carried out in different
companies having the integrated management system (ISO 9k, ISO 14k,
ISO 18k & SA 8000) implemented
Issues of modeling states in machine diagnostics and models of machine
operation processes built on their basis
Basics of maintenance, from wear physicochemical processes to modern
maintenance support tools
A framework that can identify and evaluate the effectiveness of a given
maintenance strategy in a company
Problems of understanding and addressing unsafe behavior and negative
safety culture in rail maintenance
The relationship between reliability and the technical object inspection
period
The effects of strategic and risk analysis on the choice of machine
maintenance strategy
The results of a study of the relationship between maintenance strategies Table 1.
and performance Summary of selected
Analysis of various methods of implementing green manufacturing literature
JQME Increasingly, the requirement for safe – in economic, environmental and health and safety –
maintenance is formulated by insurance companies, and insurance rates depend on the
effectiveness of this process. It should also be remembered that MSs make (appropriate or
improper) decisions to carry out maintenance and repair activities, such as machine
inspection, alignment or balancing, but they can also have a positive or negative impact on
technical and technological development through the selection of an operating strategy or
purchasing policy and, consequently, the efficiency and effectiveness of the entire enterprise
(Dro_zyner et al., 2013). Therefore, MS process management concerns the rationalization and
optimization of decision-making processes in both the short and long term (Loska, 2012).

1.1 Purpose and scope of paper

The author, conducting various types of audits in enterprises of various sizes, from various
industries and – above all – with different technical and organizational culture, noticed
differences in the perception of the role and tasks of MS – from the usual implementation of
maintenance and repair work, to the responsibility for maintaining the entire infrastructure
enterprises, including waste management, fire-fighting activities, ensuring safety and so on.
Interestingly, this perception did not depend on the size of the company or industry, but on
the degree of maturity of the organization, expressed, among others, through the
implemented management systems.
Therefore, the aim of the work was set to examine the impact of the maturity of the
enterprise “measured” by implemented management systems (quality, environment, health
and safety, social responsibility) on the functioning of MS.
The scope of work included compilation and analysis of the results of audits carried out in
terms of the number and types of noncompliance raised, for the removal of which
(implementation of corrections and corrective actions) the top management of the audited
companies indicated as responsible MS.
An attempt was also made to interpret the results obtained and to explain the impact of
management system requirements on the perception of the role of MS and the effectiveness of
their operation.

2. The idea of integrated management systems

The beginnings of standardization in production processes date back to the late 1950s. In
1959, standard MIL-Q-9858 was developed, specifying in requirements for US army
suppliers. In 1963, standards have been modified and released as MIL-Q-9858, and its
requirements were the basis for the development and implementation of standards for NATO
(AQAP-1 published in 1969). In the 1970s, quality standards were developed for the
machinery industry and nuclear power. In turn, the first edition of the ISO 9000 series of
standards took place in 1986. These standards have evolved to the current version of ISO
9001: 2015. It should be emphasized that the requirements contained in these standards in no
way relate to the characteristics of the product/service, but only the system in which they
were manufactured or realized. The next most common and industry-wide (generic)
standards are the ISO 14001 (environment management) and ISO 18001 (health and safety
management).
The history of the ISO 14001 standard dates back to the early 1990s, when discussions
about the negative impact of humans on the environment were more and more publicized.
The requirements of ISO 14001 were to have an impact on industry and the economy and
reduce the destructive impact of business activities on the environment.
In 1996, the British Standards Institution (BSI) published BS 8800: 1996 “Guidelines for
Occupational Health and Safety Management Systems,” which later – as a result of BSI’s
cooperation with other standardization bodies and certification bodies – transformed into a Role and tasks
document called OHSAS 18001: 1999 “Occupational health and safety management systems– of maintenance
specification,” and this, in turn, in 2007 – in OHSAS 18001: 2007. In 2018, OHSAS 180001 was
replaced by ISO 45001 standard. After its publication, organizations holding OHSAS 18001
services
certificate have three years to migrate to the new standard.
Initially, the companies were undergoing the process of certification (it means
confirmation fulfilled the requirements of the standards by independent certification
organizations) one, two or all three standards separately, having separate ISO 9001 or ISO
14001 certificates.
Due to some common requirements of these standards – for example, the need for internal
audit, management reviews and continuous improvement, the concept of integration of these
systems appeared in the so-called integrated management systems (IMSs). They are based on
the common requirements of integrated standards based on which, depending on the
industry, sector systems are implemented and integrated, for example, ISO 22000 , IFS, BRC,
HACCP , GMP þ, GMP , GHP in the food industry, AS 9000 in the aviation industry or IATF
16949 in the automotive industry. Generic social responsibility systems – SMETA, SA8000
and information security – ISO 27000 are also increasingly being integrated (Figure 2). For
explanation, SMETA – kind of social responsibility, globally recognized audits, whose
methodology is owned by SEDEX (Ethical Data Exchange, ethical trade service provider) and
is a way to assess responsible supply chain activities, including labor rights, health and
safety, the environment and business ethics.
The integration of the systems causes a synergy effect and a definite increase in the
effectiveness and efficiency of their operation. The question arises as to the impact of such
IMSs on the perception of the role of MS in enterprises in which such systems operate.

3. Course and results of investigations

In the years 2002–2017, over 1,000 audits were carried out in various enterprises: food
processing, automotive, construction, petrochemical, electronic and so on. Audits were
carried out in three types of companies: which had integrated management systems (800

medical branch EN
15224:2013-04E

ISO 9001, 14001,

food branch ISO22000
18001 and other automotive branch
generic standards, IATF 16949
e.g. ISO27000,
SA8000, SMETA

aviation branch AS 9100 Figure 2.

Idea of IMS depending
on the industry
Source(s) : own study
JQME audits), which only had the ISO 9001 system implementation certificate (140 audits) and
without any standardized management system implemented (so-called second-party audits,
90 audits ordered by the client of the audited company).
These were SMETA ethical audits and other ethical audits with a similar methodology (i.e.
based on the ETI Code – Ethical Trade Initiative), the scope of which included verification of
compliance with labor rights, health and safety, the environment and business ethics. In total,
nearly 400 companies were audited, of which more than half were audited two–three–four
times at three-year intervals (resulting from the requirements of SEDEX).
In total, over 5,000 various types of noncompliance (noncompliance with the requirements
of the ISO 9000: 2015 terminology standard) of legal nature (including noncompliance with
labor law, environmental law and health and safety law), normative and quality (including
customer complaints) have been identified. Tables 2–5 summarizes the share of
noncompliance identified during these audits both in the departments of maintenance and
outside these departments, but whose clearance audited management companies indicated
the responsibility of MS. The tables also include the amount of so-called good practices, that
is, actions that go far beyond accepted standards and behaviors.
Examples of noncompliance are presented in photographs 1–3. Nonconformities
regarding labor law include deficiencies in daily and weekly rest, excessive overtime, no or
incomplete assessment of occupational risk (e.g. no assessment of welding risk for
mechanics), no on-the-job training. Customer complaints mainly related to untimely
execution of the order due to machine failure and failure to obtain the required parameters
(e.g. surface quality after machining) due to the technical condition of the machine.

Photo 1 - unlabeled Photo 2 - fire extinguisher Photo 3 - no cover on the

chemical blocked grinder

Noncompliance Total number of Number of nonconformities assigned Participation

aspect nonconformities to the MS area (%)

Environment 800 560 70

Table 2. H&S 900 585 65
Share of Quality 950 380 40
nonconformities Labor law 200 110 55
identified during Other legal 150 75 50
audits assigned to the discrepancies
maintenance area in Customer complaints 200 20 10
enterprises with the Together 3,200 1730 54
implemented IMS GOOD PRACTICES – 10
 The summary of collected data (Tables 1–4 and Figures 3 and 4) shows that: Role and tasks
(1) statistically fewer nonconformities (four per audit) are recorded in enterprises with of maintenance
IMS than in the case of enterprises with the ISO 9001 certified system (seven services
nonconformities per audit) and without certified systems (nine nonconformities per
audit).
(2) definitely more noncompliance was attributed to MS departments in companies with
IMS (54% noncompliance); for enterprises with ISO 9001 and without any certificate,
this share was 25 and 13%, respectively.
(3) only in one category of noncompliance – labor law – the percentage share of
noncompliance assigned to MS departments was the largest in enterprises without
certified management systems.

Noncompliance Total number of Number of nonconformities assigned Participation

aspect nonconformities to the MS area (%)

Environment 250 50 20 Table 3.

The share of
H&S 280 80 29
noncompliance
Quality 300 90 30 identified during
Labor law 50 20 40 audits assigned to the
Other legal 66 5 8 maintenance area in
discrepancies enterprises with the
Customer complaints 60 10 17 implemented ISO 9001
Together 1,006 255 25 quality management
GOOD PRACTICES – 3 system

Noncompliance Total number of Number of nonconformities assigned Participation

aspect nonconformities to the MS area (%)

Environment 200 10 5
Table 4.
H&S 250 Thirty 12
Share of
Quality 200 20 10 nonconformities
Labor law 80 50 63 identified during
Other legal 22 0 0 audits assigned to the
discrepancies maintenance area in
Customer complaints 66 0 0 enterprises without
Together 818 110 13 any certified
GOOD PRACTICES – 0 management system

Table 5.
Number of Number of Statement of the
Management Number of nonconformities Participation Number noncompliance number of identified
system incompatibilities assigned to MS [%] of audits per audit noncompliances and
the number of
Integrated 3,200 1730 54 800 4 noncompliances
ISO 9001 1,006 255 25 140 7 assigned to the MS area
no certified 818 110 13 90 9 depending on the
system company’s
Together 5,024 2095 41 1,030 5 management system
JQME (4) the number of good practices is the largest in enterprises with IMS. In enterprises
without certified management systems, no good practice related to MS was recorded.
First of all, these data show that in companies with implemented IMS, much less
incompatibilities are identified than in others, and they are more often assigned to the MS
departments. This fact shows that the role of MS in enterprises with the implemented IMS is
much broader and goes beyond the classic framework for the planning, execution and
settlement of service and repair work. Maintenance is understood broadly and includes in its
scope also the safety of people and the environment, efficiency of production and
consumption of media and the quality of products and services (Figure 5). In enterprises with
the ISO 9001 system implemented and without certified management systems, very rarely
environmental or safety incompatibilities are assigned to MS departments, because they are

Customer complaints

Other legal discrepancies

Figure 3. Labor law

Percentage summary
of noncompliance Quality
identified in MS
departments for H&S
enterprises with the
implemented IMS, only
the ISO 9001 quality Environment
management system
implemented and 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
without the
implemented and [%]
certified system
divided into categories no formal system ISO9001 IMS
of noncompliance
Source(s) : own study

no formal system

Figure 4. only ISO 9001

Percentage summary
of noncompliance
identified in MS
departments for
enterprises with the
implemented IMS, only IMS
the ISO 9001 (SZ)
quality management
system implemented
and without the 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
implemented and [%]
certified SZ
Source(s) : own study
 Role and tasks
Finished products,
of maintenance
Waste Emission timeliness, quality services

Sewage
Organizational activities:
e.g. selection of strategies
for the operation of
machines and devies,
co-decision on purchasing
Legal new technologies (e.g. in
compliance terms of LCC), proposing
training for production
employees,
implementation of 5s,
TPM.
ENTERPRISE
Maintenance Acivities
Technical activities - Technical activities -
ongoing improving:
e.g. maintenance of the (at the machine level):
desired techinal e.g. selection of
condition of machines, bearings, couplings, new
diagnostics, generation belts, use of
adjustments, balancing, EFF1 class electric
alignment, belt motors, selection of
transmission modern lubricants.
adjustments.

Technical activities - improvement (at the plant level); e.g. selection of effective
pneumatic and hydraulic installations, proper segregation and classification of
waste (including recycling), heat recovery, implementation of reproducible energy
sources, readiness to respond in crisis situations.

Other
(spare parts, consumables) Media Raw materials Figure 5.
Area of maintenance
activities in enterprises
with implemented IMS
Source(s): Drożyner et al. 2013

not identified with such roles. Incompatibilities noted here most often relate to failure to carry
out scheduled maintenance activities and noncompliance with labor law (mainly too many
overtime hours, noncompliance with the length of daily and weekly rest).
In connection with such extension of the role of MS, enterprises are inclined to the view
that the maintenance of machines is not only a cost to be avoided but also an active action that
can constitute an effective contribution to the development of the company (Nizi nski and
Michalski, 2007). From a managerial point of view, it is important that the results of MS’s
activities can be considered in measurable values, and expenditures are relatively easy to
manage. The analysis of tasks that maintenance must meet in the conditions of IMS results in
its potential goals and issues (Table 6).

Maintenance
Objectives Issues

(1) Maintaining quality and continuity (1) Issues of material degradation, wear, diagnosing technical
of production condition
(2) Maintaining work safety (2) Monitoring technical and technological progress Table 6.
(3) Environmental protection (3) Law and standards Objectives and issues
(4) Lifetime balance/business ethics (4) Issues management – LCC, the choice of maintenance of MS in enterprises
strategy, allocating the resources with implemented IMS
JQME It can be seen, MS activities in such systems are interdisciplinary, and achieving
production, quality, environmental and safety-related goals requires engaging in technical
(degradation, wear, diagnostics, technical and technological progress), legal, normative and
management issues. The list of maintenance attributes ceases to be limited to the ability to
efficiently use workshop tools and quickly locate damage, as it is extended by another:
genesis and forecasting of the technical condition, product quality, safety of people and the
environment and technical and technological development.
Given such a broad context of understanding the role of MS in enterprises, the definition
can be adopted: maintenance refers to the technical, economic and organizational activities of
the enterprise regarding its infrastructure, aimed at ensuring the technical safety of
production and optimization of its costs while meeting the requirements of stakeholders. The
technical safety of production includes the safety of:
(1) economic (continuity, timeliness and quality of production),
(2) environmental,
(3) human life and health, including lifetime balance.
Two questions arise: (1) What makes the implementation of IMS to change the perception of
the role of MS in the modern enterprise, managed according to the rules of implemented
systems? (2) How to measure the effectiveness and efficiency of the process as widely
understood maintenance services? In the 19th century, Lord Kelvin (William Thomas) said
that: “If something can not be measured, it cannot be improved...”.
Answers to the aforementioned questions require referring to the concept of quality and
recalling some common requirements of integrated standards. These requirements relate,
inter alia, to the need to identify stakeholders and their requirements, use a process approach,
analyze risks and opportunities, determine employee competencies, carry out measurements
and analyses and improve activities (products, processes and systems). Meeting these
requirements with regard to the role of MS combines technical, economic and organizational
aspects of their activities and provides a framework for a holistic approach to modern MS.

3.1 Quality of the MS process

Plato defined quality as “a certain degree of excellence.” According to ISO 9000: 2015, “quality
is the degree to which a set of inherent properties meets the requirements.” Crosby (1980),
creator of the so-called of quality management absolutes, defined quality in 1979 as
“compliance with requirements.” In turn, for Imai (1997), the creator of the ideas of kaizen and
lean, quality is “everything that can be improved.”
How to understand the definition of quality given by ISO 9000? By “inherent properties”
should be understood as inextricably linked features of the concept (product, service, process,
system) whose quality is defined. In turn, the requirements are expectations of these features
set by various stakeholders: customers, consumers, administrative bodies and the legislator.
The problem is such a description of the MS process in terms of its quality, which will
determine what inherent properties (features) are assigned to it, who are the interested parties
and what are their expectations for these properties.
Undoubtedly, the MS process has interested parties (an example of the result of such
identification is presented in Table 7), whose requirements are met within the resources
owned. Transforming these requirements into measurable goals set for MS processes and
measuring the degree of achievement of these goals allows for assessing the quality of the MS
process in the enterprise in terms of the quality definition given earlier.
The quality of the MS process is the degree of fulfillment of the requirements of
stakeholders of this process, which are expressed in measurable, documented goals of
 Stakeholder
Role and tasks
Requirement Internal External of maintenance
services
Production and technology, including Production, production Customer, new technology suppliers,
punctuality, product or service planning, quality control, research and development units,
quality, technology development logistics departments universities
Competence, including staff Employees Government inspectorates: Office of
qualifications, education, experience Technical Inspection, National Labor
and qualifications Inspectorate
Meeting legal requirements, including Management Government inspectorates: Office of
environmental and health and safety Technical Inspection, National Labor
Inspectorate, The State Sanitary
Inspection, local communities
Compliance with normative Quality control department Clients, certification bodies
requirements, including those
contained in technical and
management standards (such as
ISO9001)
Social, including working hours, pay, Employees, their families Local communities, National Labor Table 7.
leisure hours, accidents, etc. Inspectorate Identification of MS
Economic efficiency, including Management Shareholders process stakeholder
effectiveness of operations requirements

maintenance; the degree of compliance with these requirements is verified at the adopted time
intervals by comparing the current degree of implementation of these requirements with the
planned degree. Goals can be expressed by the assumed values of various indicators, for
example, reliability, durability, availability, overall equipment effectiveness (OEE). A wide
range of other key technical, economic and organizational indicators dedicated to machine
maintenance is proposed in BS EN 15341: 2019 – Maintenance. Maintenance Key
Performance Indicators.
The proposed approach makes it possible to define in a measurable way the quality of the
MS process in a given enterprise. By properly identifying stakeholders and the validity of
their requirements, the selection of meters and their weights can not only measure the
previously defined quality of the MS process but also optimize the activities of other
processes or organizational structures of the company. The necessary condition is to
correctly define the input data to the process, necessary to obtain the required outputs and –
which is obvious – to provide adequate resources (Figure 6).

3.2 Process and procedural approach to MS

In view of the multitude of stakeholders (Table 7), goals and breadth of maintenance issues,
the question arises: whether these activities can be reduced to the procedure specifying the
rules for dealing with technical objects, or whether maintenance should be treated as a
process that can be monitored, measured, analyzed and improved?
The so-called process approach is a requirement of many standards, including the quality
management standard ISO 9001, and its principles have been widely described in the
literature (Kohlbacher, Gruenwald, 2011; Carmignani, 2008; Dro_zyner and Mikołajczak 2007;
Jasiulewicz-Kaczmarek, 2007; Vatn et al., 1996). Using a process approach, it is determined
and analyzed how the elements of the company influence each other and the entire system of
operation.
The term “process” is in turn defined as an activity that processes the input data provided
by process suppliers into the output data received by process customers using their resources
(Figure 7).
JQME Formulating
reqirements
STAKEHOLDERS

MONITORING
- durability, reliability and\
Taking corrective actions availability ratios,
- OEE indicator,
- other KPIs (defined externally or Taking improvement actions
internally).
INPUT DATA
- faulty machines and devices, OUTPUT DATA
- failure reporting, suspected failure, MAINTENANCE SERVICE - efficient infrastructure,
- planned service plans, (MS) completed reviews,
- repair instructions, completed calibrations, calibration of measuring
- technical documentation of machines, MS RESOURCES devices,
- production plans, - budget, - purchasing needs (including training),
- spare and consumable parts, - competent employees, - information about KPI values,
- applicable legal requirements, - workshop infrastructure evidence of compliance with legal requirements, e.g.
-compatibilities formulated during (including diagnostic). waste transfer cards,
audits, - information on working hours,
-information about fairs, scientific - proposals for corrective, preventive and improving
conferences (sources of knowledge actions.
about new technologies). OBJECTIVES
- meeting production and technological
requirements,
-compliance with competence requirements,
- compliance with legal requirements,
- compliance with normative requirements,
- meeting social requirements,
- meeting the requirements of economic
efficiency.

MS QUALITY

Perception
Negative of the stakeholder regarding Positive
the fulfillment of
Figure 6. his requirements
MS process
quality model
Source(s) : own study

process supplier process owner process customer

monitoring

inputs PROCESS outputs

resources
Figure 7.
Idea of process
approach
Source(s) : own study

As part of the process approach, it should therefore be determined what input data
(information, documents, consumables, spare parts, machines) are necessary for the proper
functioning of the process, who is responsible for providing this data, what are the necessary
resources, what should be the outputs of the process and so on.
Process suppliers and customers can be internal and external. For example, the external
supplier is the service provider for the enterprise, and the external customer is the warehouse
that the enterprise supplies. Maintenance is an internal supplier of MSs for the production Role and tasks
process, which in turn is an internal supplier to the sales department. of maintenance
In any case, the customer (both internal and external) has certain requirements that the
supplier seeks to identify. The degree of compliance with these requirements determines the
services
quality of the product or service.
If a process approach to management is adopted, it is necessary to specify for each
identified process implemented in the enterprise:
(1) the purpose of this process,
(2) its owner,
(3) input and output data,
(4) resources (including human resources – e.g. by defining and ensuring competence,
responsibility and authority), methods (including criteria and measures) for
measuring the effectiveness (important for the client of the process) and efficiency
(important for the owner of the process) of the process.
The correct formulation of the process goal(s) is very important. The goals of the processes
under consideration should therefore be formulated precisely, in a measurable way, enabling
monitoring of their implementation.
In the procedural approach, in turn, the rules of conduct are strictly defined in the
instructions and procedures, which – theoretically – should ensure the effectiveness and
efficiency of these activities. However, practice shows that only performance effectiveness is
monitored in this approach. Examples of the activities of the MS in the procedural and
procedural approach are presented in Table 8.

3.3 Continuous improvement

Stakeholders of MS processes are, among others, business owners (management boards,
shareholders) interested in increasing efficiency and improving these processes. This
requirement is becoming more common and maintenance is increasingly seen in terms of both

Description of the task in the

Request procedural approach Description of the task in the process approach

Periodic technical Determining the time and scope of As next to reporting technical reviews, service
inspections the review, implementation of tasks planning (often using mathematical prognostic
and econometric models), registration and
analysis of statistical data (review time, cost, etc.;
implementation of CMMS (Computerized
Maintenance Management System)
Repair Establishing rules for reporting and As next to Root Cause Analysis (RCA) and
removing failures implementation of corrective and preventive
actions; registration and analysis of statistical
data–response time to failure, time and costs of
removal
Diagnostics Mostly informal, limited to visual System diagnostics with registration of
examinations measurement values of diagnostic signals and Table 8.
their comparison with limit and historical values Examples of MS
(trend analysis), service planning based on activity in procedural
forecasting changes in the technical condition of and procedural
objects approaches
JQME economic (Parida, Kumar 2006; Marais, Saleh, 2009) and environmental and social added
value (Liyanage, Kumar 2003) and even with the attribute of innovation (Lee et al., 2014).
The implementation of innovations in MS processes may involve the optimization of these
processes as well as the development and implementation of new solutions based on scientific
research, including, for example, diagnostic and prognostic models. In the first case, it is
common to use typical management tools, such as brainstorming or the Ishikawa diagram,
but also to implement RCM, RBI, TPM, 5S, FMEA or Six Sigma solutions (Dro_zyner, Veith,
2002). Other solutions may concern, among others:
(1) new materials used to manufacture machines (Dursun, Soutis, 2014);
(2) new consumables (Ajukumar, Gandhi, 2013);
(3) lubrication management (Marinkovic et al., 2014; Ismon et al., 2014);
(4) industrial automation with control and measuring devices (Yamada et al., 2015;
Sangregorio et al., 2015; Gowtham and Tandon, 2013);
(5) implementation of research results on mechanisms and symptoms of various
tribological and nontypological wear (Rigamonti, 2016; Azadeh and Zadeh, 2016;
Lewandowski and Oelker, 2014; Jantunen, et al., 2014; Valis et al., 2012).
Companies that have implemented formalized quality, environment, health and safety
management systems are required by the requirements of appropriate standards to
continuously conduct improvement activities. Various tools and methods are used in these
activities: brainstorming, histograms, five whys and Pareto analyses, Ishikawa diagrams,
G8D method (Starzy nska et al., 2010; Mazur and Gołas, 2010). These tools are generally used
to improve management and production processes, but rarely auxiliary processes, which are
considered MS processes.
The widespread use of these classic tools in MS processes began with the emergence of the
concept of TPM. The aforementioned tools are used in maintenance to analyze the causes of
damage – five whys, Ishikawa diagram (Chang and Lin, 2006; Ben Daya, 2009), prioritization
of service activities – Pareto analysis (Borris, 2006), process improvement – brainstorming
(Madu, 2000; Dro_zyner and Hoffa, 2015). Examples of practical applications of these tools
have already been developed in the railway (Kumar et al., 2008), aviation (Al-kaabi et al., 2007;
Vassilakis and Besseris, 2009), automotive (Holtz and 2003), metallurgy (Gajdzik, 2014) and
petrochemical (Prasanna, Desai, 2011).
3.3.1 Example of continuous improvement by using classic quality management tools to
optimize MS processes. In one of the large dairies in north-eastern Poland, a significant
increase in the number of damages to milk centrifuges was observed – from 2–3 damages per
year in 2011 to 15–20 damages in 2014. The main reason for failure of centrifuges was
damage to bearings of the main shaft of the device. In addition to the costs associated with
removing failures, the company incurred significant downtime costs.
The company had an IMS. The emerging failures made it impossible to achieve the quality
goals set for a given year. It was raised in the internal audit as a noncompliance. In such case,
the systemic approach requires the implementation of corrective actions (actions to remove
the cause of noncompliance) preceded, of course, by a prior analysis of the causes. The
noncompliance was “attributed” to the Maintenance Department. It was decided that for
identification of the root causes and proposals for further action, classic quality management
tools would be used: the brainstorming method, Ishikawa diagram and five whys.
The team appointed a technical director, technologist, two mechanics, a foreman and a
production worker. During the meeting (brainstorming), the Ishikawa diagram (adapted to
the 5M method) was created, shown in Figure 8.
 Machine Management Manpower Role and tasks
design overload
lack of poor service of maintenance
error
supervision
lack of
qualificaons
services
movaon
technical incorrect poor service
condion documentaon qualificaons
problem:
repeated bearing
damage
improper service poor quality of
procedures spare parts
improper
washing improperly Figure 8.
procedures selected cleaning Ishikawa diagram for
agents the problem of
Method Materials “repeated bearing
damage”
Source(s) : own study

It was also found that vibration is the direct cause of bearing damage and a five whys method
was proposed to further investigate the problem. The results of the analysis carried out by
this method are shown in Table 9.
The effectiveness of the actions taken (training for employees) is evidenced by the fact that
since mid-2014, no damage to the centrifuges has been registered.
A side effect of the brainstorming was the creation of a collective mind map (Figure 9)
regarding expected actions and analyses in the event of machinery failures relevant to
technological processes. The presented map has become a contribution to the creation of a
“checklist,” which is used to analyze unexpected production events (mainly failures) and
ensures that all relevant aspects related to corrective, preventive and improving actions are
taken into account.
Further activities concerned optimization of repair times. An estimated analysis of the
times of activities carried out from the moment of reporting the failure to the MS until its
removal was made. The following factors were taken into account: failure removal,
completion of necessary tools and documentation, communication with production and
internal communication employees. The results are presented in Table 10 together with the
focus on productive and unproductive time (searching for tools and documentation,
unjustified movement of employees, inefficient communication). It was recognized that in
order to minimize the impact of items 2 and 3 on the total time of repair, it would be beneficial
to implement a 5S system, not only covering the physical equipment of the workshop
(machines, devices, tools) but also cataloging and completing the operation and maintenance

Reply Question

1. Frequent damage to centrifuge bearings why?

2. A high level of bearing vibration is observed why?
3. The spinning bittern is unbalanced why?
4. “Bittern” plates are improperly installed after the centrifuge washing process why? Table 9.
5. Employees do not know that the method of mounting plates after the washing process affects the why? Analysis of five whys
dynamic state (unbalance) of the rotating system for the problem of
Final answer: employees have not been trained in the correct assembly of the centrifuge after washing repeated damage to
Source(s): own study centrifugal bearings
JQME producon economic,
or service? environmental,
people ? H&S ?

machine ? short term

procedures ? long term

why ? effects how to

forecast ?
DAMAGE
check other diagnosc ?
machines repair

agree with to prevent

do we need to producon and do we have
Figure 9. resources ? more frequent
inform the planning
Mind map illustrating
important aspects of customer? service? training?
machine failure
Source(s) : own study

Action Participation [%]

1. Troubleshooting 35
2. Complete the necessary tools 20
3. Complete the necessary documentation 20
Table 10. 4. Communication with production employees 10
Share of individual 5. Internal communication 15
activities in total failure Productive time 70
clearance time (%) Nonproductive time 30

documentation for all machines operated in the plant. As a result, an approximate 30%
reduction in the average failure clearance time was obtained.
The aforementioned example was noted during the audit (audit according to the specific
criteria of the client of the audited company) as a good practice – using a system approach by
Maintenance Department to problem-solving.

4. Summary and conclusions

The conclusion is that the perception of the role and tasks of MS in the enterprise is related to
the “maturity” of the company expressed by the implemented standardized management
systems.
The research consisted in analyzing the quantity and quality of noncompliance audits
raised during three types of enterprises: having an IMS, having only the ISO 9001 system and
operating without any formal management system. Research shows that in companies with
IMS, the number of all nonconformities (per one audit) is smaller than in other companies
(four with IMS, seven with ISO 9001, nine in others). In turn, the share of noncompliance
assigned during these audits to maintenance departments is 50% for companies with IMS,
24% for companies with ISO 9001 and only 13% for others. It can also be seen that the share
of individual six types of noncompliance (regarding the environment, health and safety,
quality, labor law, other legal noncompliance and customer complaints) is distributed
differently: for example, 70% of noncompliance addressed to MS in companies with IMS Role and tasks
concerned environmental issues, while in companies without any system only 5%. There are of maintenance
also significant differences in the number of good practices reported – ten in companies with
IMS, none in a company without a management system.
services
The smaller number of incompatibilities in companies with IMS and the greater number of
good practices can be explained by the higher technical and organizational culture of such
companies, while assigning a greater number of them to MS departments – a much broader
perception of their role and tasks. This also applies to the fact that there is a different
distribution of types of noncompliance in individual enterprises.
The role of MS in enterprises with the implemented IMS is much broader and goes beyond
the classic framework for planning, implementation and accounting for maintenance and
repair work. Maintenance is understood more broadly and includes also the safety of people
and the environment, the efficiency of production and consumption of utilities and the quality
of products and services.
The question arises – why? This is undoubtedly due to the implementation of the
requirements of the implemented standards. For example, all systems require identifying
stakeholders and their requirements for the enterprise. Carrying out such an identification
process for MS shows that the stakeholder is not only production – the efficiency and
effectiveness of MS work are also interested in other entities, both internal (e.g. logistics
departments, human resources) and external (scientific and research units, legal bodies).
Similar effects – a broader view of MS tasks – are caused by the implementation of other
requirements, for example, defining the context of the organization or conducting a risk
analysis.
In turn, adopting a process approach, also required by appropriate standards, the need to
analyze the causes of identified noncompliance, the need for continuous improvement force
MS to be more effective and to increase the effectiveness of operations.
However, it is seen the tendency to change attitude of enterprises to MS processes –
moving away from the view of treating them as costs that need to be minimized and begin to
be perceived as costs that can and must be managed.
Cost management requires a broader view of maintenance issues, which currently
includes not only strictly technical aspects but also economic, logistic, legal and
organizational and management aspects. Decisions to optimize the use of owned resources,
purchase of new resources, implement technical and technological progress and then the
actions resulting from these decisions require both technical and economic knowledge and
management competences.
It can therefore be concluded that the implementation and maintenance of the IMS is – for
MS – a driving force for the development of their scope of activities, role and competences of
employees. It also causes the need to develop a common platform for such seemingly distant
concepts as the technical condition of the machine or fatigue life versus cost accounting and
quality management.
It is worth noting that the growing role of maintenance processes has also been
recognized by standardization bodies. In 2014, the International Organization for
Standardization published the ISO 55001 standard, which is a standard relating to asset
management, including buildings, machinery, vehicles and other technical equipment.
Standard – just like the ones cited in this paper, requires the definition of the context of the
organization, risk analysis, identification of stakeholders and their requirements,
identification of legal requirements and requires work planning. The guidelines for
implementing the asset management system contained in the ISO 55002 standard suggest
using such methods and tools as RCM, FMEA, HAZOP, RCFA. The implementation of the
principles of this standard should have analogous effects for MS services as IMS or even
ISO 9001 itself.
JQME References
Abdi, A. and Taghipour, S. (2019), “Sustainable asset management: a repair-replacement decision
model considering environmental impacts, maintenance quality, and risk”, Computers Industrial
Engineering, Vol. 136, pp. 117-134.
Afrinaldi, F., Tasman, A.M., Zhang, H.C. and Hasan, A. (2017), “Minimizing economic and
environmental impacts through an optimal preventive replacement schedule: model and
application”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 143, pp. 882-893.
Agustiady, T.K. and Cudney, E.A. (2018), “Total productive maintenance”, Total Quality Management
and Business Excellence, pp. 1-8.
Ajukumar, V. and Gandhi, O. (2013), “Evaluation of green maintenance initiatives in design and
development of mechanical systems using an integrated approach”, Journal of Cleaner
Production, Vol. 51, pp. 34-46.
Al-kaabi, H., Potter, A. and Naim, M. (2007), “Insights into the maintenance, repair and verhaul
configurations of European airlines”, Journal of Air Transportation, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 27-42.
Azadeh, A. and Zadeh, S.A. (2016), “An integrated fuzzy analytic hierarchy process and fuzzy
multiple-criteria decision-making simulation approach for maintenance policy selection”,
Simulation, Vol. 92, pp. 3-18.
Bevilacqua, M. and Braglia, M. (2000), “The analytic hierarchy process applied to maintenance
strategy selection”, Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Vol. 70 No. 1, pp. 71-83.
Ben-Daya, M. (2009), “Failure mode and effect analysis”, in Handbook of Maintenance Management
and Engineering, Springer, London, pp. 75-90.
Bhatia, K., Khan, F., Patel, H. and Abbassi, R. (2019), “Dynamic risk-based inspection methodology”,
Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, Vol. 62, p. 103974.
Borris, S. (2006), Total Productive Maintenance, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Carmignani, G. (2008), “Process-based management. A structured approach to provide the best
answers to the ISO 9001 requirements”, Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 14 No. 6,
pp. 803-812.
Chang, J. and Lin, C. (2006), “A study of storage tank accidents”, Journal of Loss Prevention in the
Process Industries, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 51-59.
Chen, P.K., Fortuny-Santos, J., Lujan, I. and Ruiz-de-Arbulo-Lopez, P. (2019), “Sustainable
manufacturing: exploring antecedents and influence of Total Productive Maintenance and
lean manufacturing”, Advances in Mechanical Engineering, Vol. 11 No. 11, p. 1687814019889736.
Coetzee, J.L. (2004), Maintenance, Trafford Publishing, Victoria.
Crosby, P.B. (1980), Quality Is Free: The Art of Making Quality Certain, Vol. 94, McGraw-hill, New
York, NY.
Dro_zyner, P. and Hoffa, P. (2015), Improving Maintenance Processes Using Quality Management Tools,
Logistics, No. 6, pp. 75-79.
Dro_zyner, P. and Mazur, A. (2014), Process Approach in Maintenance Management (UR) 1, Logistics,
No. 6, pp. 45-50.
Dro_zyner, P. and Veith, E. (2002), “Risk based inspection methodology overview”, Diagnostics, Vol. 27,
pp. 82-88.
Dro_zyner, P., Mikołajczak, P., Szuszkiewicz, J. and Jasiulewicz-Kaczmarek, M. (2011), “Management
standardization versus quality of working life”, International Conference on Ergonomics and
Health Aspects of Work with Computers, Springer, Berlin - Heidelberg, pp. 30-39.
Dro_zyner, P. and Mikołajczak, P. (2007), “Assessment of the effectiveness of machine and device
operation”, Eksploatacja i Niezawodnosc–Maintenance and Reliability, Vol. 3 No. 35, pp. 72-75.
Dursun, T. and Soutis, C. (2014), “Recent developments in advanced aircraft aluminum alloys”,
Materials and Design, Vol. 56, pp. 862-871.
Farinha, J.M.T. (2018), Asset Maintenance Engineering Methodologies, CRC Press. Role and tasks
Farrington-Darby, T., Pickup, L. and Wilson, J. (2005), “Safety culture in railway maintenance”, Safety of maintenance
Science, Vol. 43 No. 1, pp. 39-60.
services
Fei, L. and Honghui, Z.H.Y. (1998), “Green manufacturing - the sustainable development model of
modern manufacturing industries”, China Mechanical Engineering, Vol. 9 No. 6, pp. 76-78.
Franciosi, C., Lambiase, A. and Miranda, S. (2017), “Sustainable maintenance: a periodic preventive
maintenance model with sustainable spare parts management”, IFAC-PapersOnLine, Vol. 50
No. 1, pp. 13692-13697.
Gajdzik, B. (2014), “Autonomous and professional maintenance in metallurgical enterprise as activities
within total productive maintenance”, Metalurgija, Vol. 53 No. 2, pp. 269-272.
Gowtham, A. and Tandon, V. (2013), “Apparatus and method for optimizing maintenance and other
operations of field devices in a process control system using user-defined device
configurations”, US Patent No, Vol. 8 No. 555, pp. 190-198.
Holtz, R. and Campbell, P. (2003), “Six Sigma: its implementation in Ford’s facility management and
maintenance functions”, Journal of Facilities Management, Vol. 2 No. 4, pp. 320-329.
Hooi, L.W. and Leong, T.Y. (2017), “Total productive maintenance and manufacturing performance
improvement”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering.
Ismon, M., Zaman, I. and Ghazali, M.I. (2014), “Condition monitoring of variable speed worm gearbox
lubricated with different viscosity oils”, Applied Mechanics and Materials, Vols 773-774,
pp. 178-182.
Jantunen, E., Arnaiz, A., Baglee, D. and Fumagalli, L. (2014), “Identification of wear statistics to
determine the need for a new approach to maintenance”, Euromaintenance, 5-7 May 2014,
Helsinki Finland.
Jasiulewicz-Kaczmarek, M. and Dro_zyner, P. (2013), “The role of maintenance in reducing the negative
impact of a business on the environment”, in Erechtchoukova, M.G., Khaiter, P.A. and
Golinska, P., Sustainability Appraisal: Quantitative Methods and Mathematical Techniques for
Environmental Performance Evaluations, EcoProduction, Springer-Verlag, Berlin - Heidelberg,
pp. 142-166.
Jasiulewicz-Kaczmarek, M. and Gola, A. (2019), “Maintenance 4.0 technologies for sustainable
manufacturing-an overview”, IFAC-PapersOnLine, Vol. 52 No. 10, pp. 91-96.
_
Jasiulewicz-Kaczmarek, M. and Zywica, P. (2018), “The concept of maintenance sustainability
performance assessment by integrating balanced scorecard with non-additive fuzzy integral”,
Eksploatacja i Niezawodnosc, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 650-661.
Jasiulewicz-Kaczmarek, M. (2007), “The principle of ‘process approach’ in maintaining traffic”, in
Fertsch, M., Grzybowska, K. and Stachowiak, A. (Eds), Logistics and Production Management -
New Challenges and Distant Borders, Pozna
n.
Kohlbacher, M. and Gruenwald, S. (2011), “Process orientation conceptualization and easurement”,
Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 267-283.
Kumar, S., Espling, U. and Kumar, U. (2008), “Holistic procedure for rail maintenance in Sweden”,
Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part F: Journal of Rail and Rapid
Transit, Vol. 222 No. 4, pp. 331-344.
Lee, J., Kao, H.-A. and Yang, S. (2014), “Service innovation and smart analytics for industry 4.0 and big
data environment”, Procedia CIRP, Vol. 16, pp. 3-8.
Legutko, S. (2010), Fundamentals of Machinery and Equipment Operation, WSiP, Warsaw.
Lewandowski, M. and Oelker, S. (2014), “Towards autonomous control in maintenance and spare part
logistics - challenges and opportunities for preacting maintenance concepts”, Procedia
Technology, Vol. 15, pp. 333-340.
JQME Liyanage, P. and Kumar, U. (2003), “Towards a value-based view on operations and maintenance
performance management”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 9 No. 4,
pp. 333-350.
Lundgren, C., Skoogh, A. and Bokrantz, J. (2018), “Quantifying the effects of maintenance–a literature
review of maintenance models”, Procedia CIRP, Vol. 72, pp. 1305-1310.
Madu, C. (2000), “Competing through maintenance strategies”, International Journal of Quality and
Reliability Management, Vol. 17 No. 9, pp. 937-949.
Maggard, B. and Rhyne, D. (1992), “Total productive maintenance: a timely integration of production
and maintenance”, Production and Inventory Management Journal, Vol. 33 No. 4, pp. 6-10.
Marais, K. and Saleh, J. (2009), “Beyond its cost, the value of maintenance: an analytical framework for
capturing its net present value”, Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Vol. 94 No. 2,
pp. 644-657.
Marinkovic, A., Markovic, S. and Minewitsch, A. (2014), “Lubrication and maintenance of thrust ball
bearing in bucket wheel excavators”, Tribologie und Schmierungstechnik, Vol. 61 No. 4,
pp. 44-48.
Mazur, A. and Gołas, H. (2011), “Application of pro-quality methods and tools for production process
improvement”, in Borkowski, S. and Krynke, M. (Eds), Improvement of Production Processes,
Trnava, Publisher Tripsoft, pp. 99-114.
Mikler, J. (2008), “Effective management of the maintenance process”, Review of methods, [online]
available at: www.utrzymanieruchu.pl.
Mikołajczak, P., Michalski, R. and Dro_zyner, P. (2004), “Selection of machine maintenance strategy in
terms of damage risk”, Technical Sciences, Supplement, pp. 161-172.
Mishra, R.P. and Mungi, P. (2018), “A system framework for a sustainable approach to maintenance”,
in Sustainable Operations in India, Springer, Singapore, pp. 79-91.
Mohamed, R., Che Hassan, C.R. and Hamid, M.D. (2019), “Critical success factors of risk-based
inspection”, Process Safety Progress, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 4-20.
Moscoso, C., Fernandez, A., Viacava, G. and Raymundo, C. (2019), “Integral model of maintenance
management based on TPM and RCM principles to increase machine availability in a
manufacturing company”, in International Conference on Human Interaction and Emerging
Technologies, Springer, Cham, pp. 878-884.
Munir, M.A., Zaheer, M.A., Haider, M., Rafique, M.Z., Rasool, M.A. and Amjad, M.S. (2019), “Problems
and barriers affecting total productive maintenance implementation, engineering”, Technology
Applied Science Research, Vol. 9 No. 5, pp. 4818-4823.
Narimisaa, M.R. and Narimisa, M.R. (2017), “Technical inspection engineering, the study of risk based
inspection in process industries”, International Journal of Advanced Biotechnology Ans
Research, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 460-465.
Onu, P. and Mbohwa, C. (2019), “Sustainable production: new thinking for SMEs”, in Journal of
Physics: Conference Series, Vol. 1378, No. 2, p. 022072, IOP Publishing.
Parida, A. and Kumar, U. (2006), “Maintenance performance measurement (MPM): issues and
challenges”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 239-251.
Pintelon, L., Pinjala, S.K. and Vereecke, A. (2006), “Evaluating the effectiveness of maintenance
strategies”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 7-20.
Prasanna, N. and Desai, T. (2011), “Quality circle implementation for maintenance management in
petrochemical industry”, Journal of Engineering Research and Studies, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 155-162.
Ramachandra, C.G., Srinivas, T.R., Rishi, J.P., Raghavendra, M.J. and Kamath, A. (2019), “A survey
approach to study the influence of finance factor and workforce skills in implementing TPM in
selected SMEs”, International Journal of Production Engineering, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 5-12.
Reason, J. and Hobbs, A. (2017), Managing Maintenance Error: A Practical Guide, CRC Press.
Rigamonti, M., Baraldi, P., Zio, E., Alessi, A., Astigarraga, D. and Galarza, A. (2016), “Identification of Role and tasks
the degradation state for condition-based maintenance of insulated gate bipolar transistors: a
self-organizing map approach”, Microelectronics Reliability, Vol. 60, pp. 48-61. of maintenance
Roy, R., Stark, R., Tracht, K., Takata, S. and Mori, M. (2016), “Continuous maintenance and the future–
services
Foundations and technological challenges”, Cirp Annals, Vol. 65 No. 2, pp. 667-688.
Sakib, N. and Wuest, T. (2018), “Challenges and opportunities of condition-based predictive
maintenance: a review”, Procedia CIRP, Vol. 78, pp. 267-272.
Sangregorio, P., Cologni, A.L., Owen, F.C. and Previdi, F. (2015), “Remote maintenance system for
semi-automated manufacturing machines, research and technologies for society and industry
leveraging a better tomorrow”, 1st International Forum on IEEE.
Starzy
nska, B., Hamrol, A. and Grabowska, M. (2010), Quality Manager’s Guide. Compendium of
Knowledge about Quality Tools, Pozna
n University of Technology Publishing House, Pozna
n.
Swanson, L. (2001), “Linking maintenance strategies to performance”, International Journal of
Production Economics, Vol. 70 No. 3, pp. 237-244.
Szczuka, M. and Dro_zyner, P. (2015), “Method of characterization of good practices of corporate social
responsibility”, Logistics, Vol. 6 CD 1, pp. 456-461.
Valis, D., Koucky, M. and Zak, L. (2012), “On approaches for non-direct determination of system
deterioration”, Operation and Reliability, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 33-41.
Vassilakis, E. and Besseris, G. (2009), “An application of TQM tools at a maintenance division of a
large aerospace company”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 15 No. 1,
pp. 31-46.
Vatn, J., Hokstad, P. and Bodsberg, L. (1996), “An overall model for maintenance optimization”,
Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Vol. 51 No. 3, pp. 241-257.
Wahyudin, B.I.S. and Hasibuan, S. (2019), Analysis for Enhancing Quality and Productivity Using
Overall Equipment Effectiveness and Statistical Process Control in Manufacturing Industry Case
Study, Manufacturing Industry Sport Shoes in Tangerang Region.
Wireman, T. (1990), World Class Maintenance Management, Industrial Press, New York.
Yamada, T., Yoshio, M. and Tohru, A. (2015), “Plant monitor and control device and a maintenance
support method thereof”, S. Patent No., Vol. 8, pp. 930,000.
_ ołtowski, B. and Nizi
Z nski, S. (2010), Modeling of Exploitation Processes, Scientific Publisher of the
Institute of Sustainable Technologies PIB.
_
Zurek, J. (2004), “Analysis of the exploitation system from the point of view of costs and reliability”,
Problems of Machine Operation, Vol. 39 No. 4, pp. 117-126.

Corresponding author
Przemysław Dro_zyner can be contacted at: przemyslaw.drozyner@uwm.edu.pl

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com