The debate surrounding the importance of business cases for planning and planners is a fascinating topic. Having experience in the power industry working at plants with and without dedicated planners, the difference is clear. Effective planners play a crucial role when planning is distinct from scheduling, and when they focus on joint prioritization and proper work identification instead of just chasing parts. Despite implementing a planning and work process that significantly reduced backlog and increased availability to 98.5%, assessing the performance of planners remains a challenge for me. While we have established clear criteria for measuring planner productivity such as work orders, prints, permits, special tools, parts, lockout tagouts, etc., evaluating planners' skills in anticipating and planning for every scenario is subjective. Criteria for evaluating planners may include the avoidance of work delays, completeness and accuracy of planning packages, average time for completing medium-priority work orders, cost considerations, the number of workers supported by the planner, and the life cycle of a medium-priority work order. It's important to consider feedback from both management and journeypeople when assessing planner performance. If you have any suggestions or best practices for evaluating planners effectively, I would greatly appreciate your input. Gordon from Livermore, Colorado.
Prior to providing feedback, I am interested in understanding the level of planning execution within your company. You have mentioned a clear distinction between planning and scheduling. Are your planning tools inclusive of work orders, blueprints, permits, specialized tools, parts, lockout tagouts, and other essential elements? It is crucial to define the scope of their responsibilities accurately in order to assess their performance effectively.
Are delays accurately documented and utilized effectively during evaluations, or only the most significant delays are remembered? Are delays due to inadequate planning or lack of adherence to the plan by staff? In terms of workpackages, it is essential to assess a variety of complex, medium-sized, and routine tasks against set standards. Are planning packages consistently accurate, with regular Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) tracking planning precision in the Computerized Maintenance Management System (CMMS)? When evaluating cost, is there a focus on reducing expenses compared to the previous year? Assess the number of workers and planners based on workload complexity and job requirements. For example, comparing planners overseeing different crew sizes based on skill specialization. Evaluate the lifecycle of medium priority orders, considering factors under the planner's control and the impact of others on order duration. Should a planner's performance be judged based on external factors they do not manage?
Highlight the importance of the Planner's responsibilities and their efficiency in performing them. Consider factors such as the quantity of orders planned within a specific timeframe, punctuality in submitting necessary reports, proficiency in utilizing a CMMS, and interpersonal skills for obtaining cooperation from various stakeholders like equipment owners, contractors, craftsmen, and suppliers through effective negotiation.
Hi Gordon, it sounds like you’ve put a lot of thought into your evaluation metrics! One approach that might help is implementing a feedback loop where planners can receive input not just from management but also from the teams that execute their plans. This could include measuring follow-up on how well the plans worked in reality and any adjustments that were needed. Additionally, consider incorporating some qualitative assessments alongside your quantitative metrics—like peer reviews or self-assessments based on specific scenarios they faced. It can be quite revealing to see how planners perceive their own success and challenges. Engaging planners in discussions about their own performance could also foster an environment of continuous improvement. Best of luck!
Hi Gordon, I really appreciate your insights on the role of planners in the power industry. It sounds like you’ve made significant strides in optimizing your processes! One way I’ve found helpful in evaluating planners is to incorporate a peer review system, where planners can evaluate each other's work and provide constructive feedback based on shared experiences. This method not only encourages collaboration and knowledge sharing but also provides a more rounded assessment of their planning skills. Additionally, considering metrics like customer satisfaction from the operational teams can add another layer to the evaluation, giving you a sense of how well plans align with field needs. Good luck!
✅ Work Order Management
✅ Asset Tracking
✅ Preventive Maintenance
✅ Inspection Report
We have received your information. We will share Schedule Demo details on your Mail Id.
Answer: - Effective planners play a crucial role in joint prioritization, proper work identification, and distinguishing planning from scheduling in industries like the power sector.
Answer: - Criteria for measuring planner productivity can include work orders, prints, permits, special tools, parts, lockout tagouts, etc.
Answer: - Subjective aspects of evaluating planners' skills can include their ability to anticipate and plan for various scenarios effectively.
Answer: - Criteria for evaluating planners effectively may include the avoidance of work delays, completeness and accuracy of planning packages, average time for completing medium-priority work orders, cost considerations, number of workers supported by the planner, and the life cycle of a medium-priority work order.
Answer: - Feedback from both management and journeypeople is crucial in assessing planner performance, as it provides a comprehensive perspective on the planner's effectiveness.
Join hundreds of satisfied customers who have transformed their maintenance processes.
Sign up today and start optimizing your workflow.