| Engineering and Support Logistics Audit Methodology | |
|
SCOPE This document presents a macro view of TSII's methodology and intent when conducting an "on site" engineering and support logistics audit. The actual audit element details are numerous, contained in TSII's audit and pre-project planning instruction sets and manuals. In general the audit is designed to examine administration, effectiveness and costs for 4 functional areas; 1) Engineering - workflow management, 2) Storeroom Management - possession costs, 3) Purchasing - acquisition costs, 4) Systems and Technology. The audits are matched against known industry standards, like operations within a group (where data is available) and internal expectations. From this information an "opportunities for improvement" & matrix with supporting project plan and costs are derived. |
 |
|
Philosophy Studies made over the last 35 years in organizational effectiveness have clearly demonstrated that improvement in performance is more a function of how we "manage" than any other factor. Improvements in performance are not necessarily dependent on systems, procedures and special techniques alone, but rather in a balanced attack, carefully guided by sound management principles and philosophies. Of these, organization, communication, planning and scheduling, motivation and control (measurement) are most critical. There is no lack of tools that we can apply to the job of controlling the Engineering Activity. The effort is to construct a plan which ensures we use the appropriate tools in the right sequence or combination to measure performance and identify obstacles to further improvements. Establishing the Baseline The Engineering Audit was created to provide an analytical tool to study, understand and evaluate the Engineering Function in any type of organization. This "objective" approach identifies key "controllable factors" (e.g. man-hours, job release schedule) affecting Engineering's performance, productivity and costs. Controllable is key. Sixty percent of these factors are directly controlled by Engineering Managers, for which they are/can be held accountable. For 25% of the factors Engineering finds itself in a selling or negotiating relationship with other operating functions having approximately equal influence. The remaining 15% are within the exclusive province of operations or administration: Engineering may "ask" but is not in a strong negotiating position to influence the decision. The areas where the balance of influence is spread throughout other operating departments must be closely examined. All too frequently these inter-departmental relationships are the result of the natural balancing of internal pressures within the organization - like water seeking its own level. The strongest personalities often govern the final outcome. It is clear that an Engineering Audit, if it is to be worth the effort, must have a purpose; and that purpose is to optimise engineering performance, reducing its per TEU influence. This means work. There is no easy simple way to appraise engineering performance - such appraisal cannot be reduced to evaluation of one or two charts or reports. To get an adequate composite appraisal four steps must be taken:
Following this procedure will enable management to do three things:
End Project Objective Organise the Engineering/Maintenance Activity to do only that work which is necessary. To accomplish this; A systematic program is required to assure desired equipment reliability and, over a period of time, eliminate all maintenance work that can be economically dispensed with. This is done in numerous ways, but principally through imaginative Engineering systems review and control programs. |
|
MAINTENANCE AUDIT SERVICES
