Is Run to Failure an Effective Safety Strategy?
There are two key industry maintenance strategies. One is based on a maintenance “turnaround’ where a phase of the plant totally shuts down and through planning, planning, organizing, execution and closeout, a refitted plant is ready for startup. The other simply put is, “run to failure.” It’s loosely based on the concept of if it isn’t broke, don’t fix it.
There is a large computer chip manufacturing plant in Rio Rancho, NM and when I was working construction as a sheet metal worker I had an opportunity to hire on at this plant. Although the job would take me out of field construction it came with a reduction in base pay that could be adjusted with night shift work and in particular, the annual plant year end shutdown and turnaround. A plant has to go offline and as the turnaround progresses overtime opportunities exist as a common piece of the strategy for a speedy restart.
The second maintenance strategy “run to failure” is becoming more and more frequent as in many cases it is more cost effective. Keep in mind that run to failure does not mean they don’t plan for failure. Mission essential processes require detailed planning to reduce the impact of failures and potential loss of production and revenue. The site knows a failure is inevitable and use the planning as a layered defense to keep impact to the minimum.
One evening I was participating in a guy’s night out at a friend’s house. He is a retired engineer at the computer plant in our town. Somehow the subject of their plant turnarounds came up and I was informed that the whole world wide organization had shifted from annual turnarounds to a run to failure maintenance strategy. This corporation is a world leader in chip manufacturing and the decision to change from one strategy to another must have been evident in their bottom line and necessary considering their increasing worldwide competition.
Can either of these strategies can be an effective site safety plan? If the organization is operating in run to failure mode there is great potential to apply that to worker safety. . I have worked at an organization where the run to failure strategy affected a large share of the site safety office. Most were quick to act when an event occurred but there was little planning beforehand. Too many were sitting on ready and not proactive. Again, it it’s not broke, don’t fix it.
In far too many cases the shutdown and turnaround strategy almost always happens after a major accident or near hit event. The other side of this same safety office I worked in was constantly in the field, talking to the workers and getting their input especially on the mission critical systems. The planned turnaround strategy uses the following points.
Safety today is not a choice of either the turnaround or run to failure strategy but quite a bit of both. If your organization adheres to either, always look for opportunities to apply the turnaround strategy to counter a run to failure mode. In run to failure remember it’s not a question of if but a question of when. Prior planning prevents poor performance. As safety professionals we should keep a sharp eye out for workers in the run to failure mode being overworked, exhausted and at risk for injury. That means getting out of the chair, the office and onsite in the field.
There is a large computer chip manufacturing plant in Rio Rancho, NM and when I was working construction as a sheet metal worker I had an opportunity to hire on at this plant. Although the job would take me out of field construction it came with a reduction in base pay that could be adjusted with night shift work and in particular, the annual plant year end shutdown and turnaround. A plant has to go offline and as the turnaround progresses overtime opportunities exist as a common piece of the strategy for a speedy restart.
The second maintenance strategy “run to failure” is becoming more and more frequent as in many cases it is more cost effective. Keep in mind that run to failure does not mean they don’t plan for failure. Mission essential processes require detailed planning to reduce the impact of failures and potential loss of production and revenue. The site knows a failure is inevitable and use the planning as a layered defense to keep impact to the minimum.
One evening I was participating in a guy’s night out at a friend’s house. He is a retired engineer at the computer plant in our town. Somehow the subject of their plant turnarounds came up and I was informed that the whole world wide organization had shifted from annual turnarounds to a run to failure maintenance strategy. This corporation is a world leader in chip manufacturing and the decision to change from one strategy to another must have been evident in their bottom line and necessary considering their increasing worldwide competition.
Can either of these strategies can be an effective site safety plan? If the organization is operating in run to failure mode there is great potential to apply that to worker safety. . I have worked at an organization where the run to failure strategy affected a large share of the site safety office. Most were quick to act when an event occurred but there was little planning beforehand. Too many were sitting on ready and not proactive. Again, it it’s not broke, don’t fix it.
In far too many cases the shutdown and turnaround strategy almost always happens after a major accident or near hit event. The other side of this same safety office I worked in was constantly in the field, talking to the workers and getting their input especially on the mission critical systems. The planned turnaround strategy uses the following points.
- Strategically plan the event
- Detail the plan
- Organize the resources
- Execute the plan
- Closeout the process
- Review and look for improvement opportunities
Safety today is not a choice of either the turnaround or run to failure strategy but quite a bit of both. If your organization adheres to either, always look for opportunities to apply the turnaround strategy to counter a run to failure mode. In run to failure remember it’s not a question of if but a question of when. Prior planning prevents poor performance. As safety professionals we should keep a sharp eye out for workers in the run to failure mode being overworked, exhausted and at risk for injury. That means getting out of the chair, the office and onsite in the field.
