At the moment of publishing this post, in 2021, Total Productive Maintenance (TPM) turns 50 after official launch in 1971. In the Western world, TPM was hype in the late 1970s until mid-1980s when its shine faded before Lean Manufacturing.2021, Total Productive Maintenance (TPM) turns 50 after official launch in 1971. In the Western world, TPM was hype in the late 1970s until mid-1980s when its shine faded before Lean Manufacturing.
A Total Productive Maintenance program required (still requires when going the JIPM way) the systematic deployment of 8 pillars and a 3 to 5 year commitment in order to reach World Class level. For most companies that gave it a try, TPM programs barely went beyond two pillars out of eight, and did not stand the test of time.
TPM 8 pillars
TPM is a framework of 8 pillars aiming at getting the most out of lines, machines and equipment, especially by reducing machine downtime and increasing machine availability. The 8 pillars are:
- Autonomous Maintenance
- Planned Maintenance
- Quality Maintenance
- Focused Improvement
- Early Equipment Maintenance
- Education and Training
- Health, Safety & Environment
- TPM in Office
From my experience, Autonomous Maintenance and Planned Maintenance were the most deployed TPM pillars and those that stood best the test of time. Quality Maintenance pillar collided and gave way to the Total Quality Management (TQM) movement (and later ISO900x standards), which from its name was less Maintenance-and-Manufacturing connoted, thus got more attention.
Focused Improvement collided with Continuous Improvement, Kaizen and finally Lean getting predominant. The last 4 pillars were intended to spread TPM beyond manufacturing in an attempt to turn Total Productive Maintenance into Total Productive Management, a trick that failed because – I believe – of the numerous alternative methods and approaches and the growing importance of Lean.
Except for Autonomous Maintenance and Planned Maintenance, I have scarcely seen the other pillars implemented.
Autonomous Maintenance
Autonomous Maintenance is about involving operators in the basics of tending their machines, mostly daily cleaning, lubrication, check all tightenings and minor replacement of parts. The aim of Autonomous Maintenance is manifold:
- Free valuable maintenance expert time by pushing mundane and simple tasks to non-specialized personnel, who is trained to take over
- Develop the sense of ownership of the machine users and thus nudge them to pay more respect to machines
- Enrich the operators’ job content and empower them to perform the low level maintenance tasks and routines
- Develop operators to team up with maintenance technicians, using their intimate knowledge of the machine and their human sensors for early warning of possible breakdown or failure, and assist the experts for repairs
- Reduce the machine downtime by better tending, greater care and operators’ commitment
- …
Production management did not always welcome this hybridation as it meant reducing productive time to allow the daily maintenance operations, and before that agreeing to invest in operators’ training.
However, with fewer downtime, the Autonomous Maintenance Return On Investment was in some cases a good deal. It was probably this prospective that favored Autonomous Maintenance as one of the most deployed TPM pillars, from my experience.
Planned Maintenance
In 2021, preventive maintenance or even predictive maintenance seems to be quite common, boosted by Industry 4.0 or Smart Manufacturing and supporting softwares. But until the mid-1980s, except in some industries, maintenance policies were rather limited to “fix when broken” or periodic checks with systematic replacement of some pre-identified parts.
TPM and Planned Maintenance brought advanced techniques of preventive maintenance, condition-based maintenance and the like to a greater number of companies. This is maybe the second most deployed TPM pillar.
Bad timing and/or need for Leap of faith?
Long after TPM’s heyday in Europe one may wonder if TPM’s timing was bad, considering all the other ‘japanese methods’ that become trendy almost at the same time. Those having witnessed this frenzy surely remember the jokes about the ‘flavor of the month’, the coming and passing of new methods, with more Japanese words.
Another hypothesis is that the required commitment over a 3 to 5 year program required a Leap of faith to invest in training and consultants’ fees for a vague promise of performance. Even in the mid 1970s, 3 to 5 years was becoming an uncertain horizon as well as the typical CEO’s ‘shelf life’ in the company. Japanese people surely had – and probably still have – a different perception of time and capacity to plan for the long term, compared to westerners. Therefore, in my opinion, TPM was doomed because of unfortunate bad timing and the required long-term commitment.
Your comments and testimonials are welcome in comments.
Advertisements in this post are not under my control. I don’t endorse nor have any vested interest in those offers.
Chris HOHMANN 