Article IJQRM

See
discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/279174646
Maintenance management models: a

study of the published literature to
identify empirical evidence A greater
practical focus is need
Article in International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management May 2015
CITATIONS
READS
349
3 authors, including:
Kym Fraser
University of South Australia
22 PUBLICATIONS 72 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Bill Tseng
University of Texas at El Paso
67 PUBLICATIONS 637 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Available from: Kym Fraser

Retrieved on: 26 October 2016
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0265-671X.htm
RELIABILITY PAPER
Maintenance management
models: a study of the
published literature to identify
empirical evidence
A greater practical focus is needed
Maintenance
management
models
635
Received 16 November 2013
Revised 9 October 2014
Accepted 14 January 2015
Kym Fraser
Barbara Hardy Institute, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia
Hans-Henrik Hvolby
Centre for Logistics, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark, and
Tzu-Liang (Bill) Tseng

Department of Industrial, Manufacturing and System Engineering,
University of Texas, El Paso, Texas, USA
Abstract
Purpose Maintenance and its management has moved from being considered a necessary evil to
being of strategic importance for most competitive organisations around the world. In terms of the
identification and use of organisational-wide maintenance management models the picture is not clears
from both a literature and practical perspective. The purpose of this paper is to shed light on the
various models and their use in real-world applications, and in doing so, explores the gap between
academic research and practice.
Design/methodology/approach For this paper two comprehensive reviews of the literature
were undertaken, first, to identify and categorise the various maintenance management models,
and second, to determine the depth of empirical evidence for the popular models in real-world
applications. Descriptive analysis of both the practical examples and empirical evidence rates (EER)
for maintenance related journals is provided.
Findings Within the literature 37 maintenance management models were identified
and categorised. From these, three models were found to be popular: total productive maintenance
(TPM), condition based maintenance, and reliability centred maintenance. While several thousand
papers discussed these three models, only 82 articles were found to provide empirical evidence.
Research limitations/implications While providing a sound foundation for future research the
outcomes are based solely on academic literature. Analysis of EER outside the field of maintenance is
needed to make comparisons.
Practical implications The paper offers practitioners a detailed contemporary overview of
maintenance management models along with tabulated results of practical examples to present day
organisations. Such practical-focused papers are very limited within academic literature.
Social implications With EER as low as 1.5 per cent for some journals this paper acts as
a reminder to researchers that they have an obligation to society to spend taxpayer funded research
on addressing social needs and real-world problems.
Originality/value This paper makes a concerted attempt to link academic research with
management and operational practitioners. While the paper is critical of the current academic
imbalance between theory and practice, a number of suggestions to improve EER are offered in
the conclusions.
Keywords Literature review, Management models, Maintenance, Empirical evidence
Paper type Literature review
International Journal of Quality &

Reliability Management
Vol. 32 No. 6, 2015
pp. 635-664
Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0265-671X
DOI 10.1108/IJQRM-11-2013-0185
IJQRM
32,6
636
1. Introduction
According to a US National Research Council Report, one of the research priorities
of US manufacturing is equipment reliability, maintainability, and supportability
(Moubray, 2003). Supporting this view, Kutucuoglu et al. (2001, p. 173) stated Over the
past decade, plant maintenance has evolved to be one of the most important areas in the
business environment. Historically though, organisations have viewed maintenance
and its associated costs as a necessary evil and an impediment to departmental
budgets (Cooke, 2000; Duffuaa and Andijani, 1999; Zio, 2009). However, this negative
sentiment is progressively being replaced by an evolving view that recognises
reliability and maintenance as being of critical importance to the success and long-term
future of an organisation. In recent years, industry managers have been gradually
warming to the idea that maintenance can be a profit generating function rather than
merely a cost centre (Fore and Mudavanhu, 2011; Veldman et al., 2011b). When it comes
to issues such as reliability, availability, safety, quality, and cost-effectiveness levels
of plant and equipment there is no doubt that the cost of maintenance can be high,
often representing a significant portion of recurrent budgets (Ahmadi et al., 2010a;
Al-Najjar and Alsyouf, 2003).
Lofsten (1999) indicates that between 15 and 40 per cent of the total production
cost is attributed to maintenance activity in the factory. Muthu et al. (2000) go further
by suggesting that maintenance department costs represent from 15 to 70 per cent of
total production costs. Dekker (1996) explained that next to energy costs, maintenance
spending can be the largest part of the operational budget. In another study, Wireman
(1990) found that maintenance costs had increased to US $600 billion for a group
of US firms, which represented a 300 per cent raise over the previous ten year period.
With the ever increasing reliance and use of technological advances such as robots,
automation, and computerised plant and equipment the cost of maintenance is
likely to continue to raise (Blanchard, 1997; Lofsten, 1999). As an example, in the
capital-intensive industries, such as the process industry, Koochaki et al. (2011) state
that unplanned downtime costs up to US $250,000 per hour. While the cost of
maintenance and plant reliability can be high in many organisations, the cost of poor
maintenance is a cost no firm will be able to afford in the medium-to-long term.
It is therefore paramount that the various departments, such as manufacturing,
production, engineering, consider maintenance as a complementary, interdependent
function. Companies who can effectively infuse the maintenance function into its
primary activities will save time, money, and other resources in dealing with reliability,
availability, maintainability, and performance issues (Moubray, 2003; Saraswat and
Yadava, 2008). With ever increasing competitive global pressures it is essential that
companies gain greater understanding of maintenance management programmes in an
effort to optimise both overall equipment effectiveness and productivity. With a
continuing spotlight on quality improvement, just-in-time and lean manufacturing, the
availability and reliability of plant and equipment is vital. Low productivity, downtime,
and poor machine performance is often linked to inadequate plant maintenance, which
in turn can lead to reduced production levels, increasing costs, lost market
opportunities, and lower profits (Cholasuke et al., 2004). These pressures have given
firms worldwide the motivation to explore and embrace proactive maintenance
strategies over the traditional reactive firefighting methods (Ahuja and Khamba, 2007;
Sharma et al., 2005).
With maintenance and its management being of strategic importance to
organisations, it is an opportune time to explore the links between research and
practice in this field. Carnero (2006) summed up the situation by stating the setting up
of a predictive maintenance programme is a strategic decision that until now has
lacked analysis of questions related to its setting up, management and control (p. 945).
A number of researchers in the field have argued that mathematical analysis and
techniques, rather than empirical evidence to real problems in industry, have been
central in the majority of papers on maintenance models (Dekker, 1996; Fraser, 2014;
Ireland and Dale, 2001; Marquez and Heguedas, 2002; Veldman et al., 2011a). Dekker
(1996, p. 235) states It is astonishing how little attention is paid either to make results
worthwhile or understandable to practitioners, or to justify models on real problems.
Rausand (1998) takes a stronger stance by claiming there is more isolation between
practitioners of maintenance and the researchers than in any other professional
activity (p. 130). In a discussion on problems and challenges of reliability engineering,
Zio (2009) argued that the maintenance literature is strongly biased towards new
computational developments, which are of questionable practical value. In the
conclusions of a recent paper on condition-based maintenance (CBM), Veldman et al.
(2011a) encouraged scholars to further investigate the actual use of maintenance
models in various industrial settings, and thereby, help industry to achieve its
operational goals.
Therefore, the key objective of this paper is to explore the maintenance management
literature and analyse the empirical examples linked to practice/industry. This process
is undertaken in three steps by first reviewing the maintenance literature and
identifying the various maintenance management models discussed within it. Second,
while the number of maintenance related papers in the literature is high (numbering in
the thousands), only papers providing empirical evidence are analysed, with the focus
being on the demographics of the research. Papers which are entirely theoretical,
conceptual or mathematical are not analysed. Lastly, while a number of writers in the
maintenance field suggest theres a gap between theory and practice, no empirical
evidence is provided. By separating the empirical examples within the literature from
those which are purely theoretical/mathematical, this paper seeks to provide some
quantification of the issue and demonstrate empirical evidence rates (EER) for the
leading databases and journals in the field.
2. Identification of maintenance management models in literature
This section seeks to identify the various models associated with maintenance and
the management of maintenance. The review targeted textbooks and journals, in hard
copy and online, from a university library which subscribes to a comprehensive
range of journals and journal databases. This range included Emerald, EbscoHost
(Taylor & Francis), ScienceDirect (Elsevier), SAGE, SpringerLink, Wiley InterScience
and Compendex, which represents the leading journal publications in the areas of
management, engineering, operations, production, manufacturing, quality, and
reliability and maintenance. In an attempt to keep findings contemporary the search
for empirical evidence linking popular maintenance models to practice was restricted to
articles published within the last 16 years (1995-2010). Each database was searched
using the models name and/or keywords associated with various models.
A common occurrence when reviewing literature is the fact that authors use an
array of terms and words to describe the same or similar concept. The study of
maintenance management is no different with terms such as: maintenance models;
maintenance methods; maintenance techniques; maintenance systems; maintenance
types; maintenance philosophies; and maintenance strategies regularly used
Maintenance
management
models
637
IJQRM
32,6
638
throughout the literature to describe the same notion on maintenance (the titles of
articles listed in the reference section of this paper provides a good example). In an
attempt to create consistency, this paper choose to use the term model/s when
discussing the various methods, techniques, systems, types, philosophies, strategies of
maintenance management.
The review to identify the various maintenance models within the literature
uncovered four significant previous reviews. In his 1998 maintenance management
handbook, Stoneham (1998) described seven models. In a 2000 critique of overall
models for maintenance management, Sherwin (2000) also discusses seven models.
In a 2004 review to determine different maintenance models, Mostafa (2004) lists 18.
Finally, in 2006 Garg and Deshmukh (2006) identified ten models. The various
maintenance models identified in the four reviews are listed below:
(1) In describing the most important maintenance models, Stoneham (1998)
identified the following:
breakdown maintenance;
total productive maintenance (TPM);
CBM;
reliability-centred maintenance (RCM);
run-to-destruction;
pre-planned maintenance; and
campaign maintenance.
(2) In a review of overall models for maintenance management, Sherwin (2000)

listed the following:
basic terotechnology model;
advanced terotechnological model;
total quality maintenance (TQMain);
The Eindhoven University of Technology (EUT) model;
RCM;
TPM; and
Kellys philosophy.
(3) In a literature review to determine the different maintenance models,

Mostafa (2004) listed the following 18:
scheduled maintenance;
CBM;
condition monitoring (CM);
RCM;
TPM;
TQMain;
predictive condition monitoring;
maintenance management metric;
operating maintenance training and administration;
run-to-failure;
corrective maintenance;
planned maintenance;
preventive maintenance (PM);
equipment asset management;
preactive maintenance;
productive reliability;
proactive maintenance; and
profit centre maintenance.
(4) And finally, in a review of maintenance management models, Garg and

Deshmukh (2006) listed the following ten:
PM;
CBM;
TPM;
RCM;
computerised maintenance management system (CMMS);
predictive maintenance;
outsourcing;
effectiveness-centred maintenance;
strategic maintenance management; and
risk based maintenance.
Of the 42 models listed in the four reviews above, only five were found to be listed more
than once: TPM, RCM, CBM, TQMain, and PM. These five models were repeated
ten times, which therefore left 32 different models being identified from the four
reviews. During the search to discover the various maintenance management models
another five models were identified: age-based maintenance (Crocker and Kumar, 2000);
availability-based maintenance (Organ et al., 1997); e-maintenance (Candell et al., 2009;
Levrat et al., 2008); time-based maintenance (Yamashina and Otani, 2001); and
value-driven maintenance planning (Rosqvist et al., 2009). Therefore, removing the ten
repeated models and adding the five newly identified ones resulted in a total of 37
differently named maintenance management models to be further analysed.
Having identified the various models the next step was to describe and determine
how popular each model was within the literature. The search of journal databases
found that all models received very limited support within the maintenance literature,
Maintenance
management
models
639
IJQRM
32,6
640
except four, TPM, RCM, CBM, and CM. While several thousand articles were found on
these four, only one to three articles were found on each of the remaining 33 models.
Table I lists and analyses the 37 models including the source(s), main focus of each
model, the benefits and/or requirements, their practical application, and the type of
evidence provided in the literature.
Two key areas of focus for this paper were to identify holistic (organisational-wide)
maintenance management models, and second, identify and present empirical evidence
of these models in practice (see Section 3). In regards to the first focus area, the practical
application of models, it was found that four out of the 37 models, CM, predictive
condition monitoring, run-to-destruction, and run-to-failure were presented in the
literature as having a purely singular focus for the management of maintenance
(see Table I). Singular meaning that these four models were commonly applied to
individually selected equipment, or for a single maintenance application.
**Note** While CM is a popular research area in the literature, it does not represent
a holistic, integrated maintenance management model. Most CM papers tended to focus
on a single application within the field of maintenance. As an example, Al-Najjar and
Wang (2001) discuss the need for CM to detect faults and make decisions on roller
bearings in paper mills; Beebe (2003) describes using CM to provide data on steam
turbines for power generation, and Price (2002) recommends the use of CM to monitor
tube thickness in boiler tubes in power stations. Yella et al. (2009) explores the use of
CM to monitor the condition of wooden railway sleepers, which in many places is
performed manually by human inspections. An area of maintenance popular with the
use of CM is in the monitoring of oil and lubricants in their various applications
(Newell, 1999; Ochonski, 2007). In an attempt to convert CM from a singular platform
into a holistic model Al-Najjar (1996) present TQMain. While CM is not further
analysed in this paper, it should be noted that the other three popular models discussed
(TPM, CBM, and RCM) use CM techniques within their holistic approaches to
maintenance management.
While 37 differently named models were identified, further analysis of these models
indicates a number of similarities. Approximately half (18 models) share either a similar
focus and/or the benefits/requirements are homogeneous. Models which offered only
minor or subtle variations were: basic/advanced terotechnology; age-based/time-based/
scheduled maintenance; availability-based/campaign maintenance; breakdown/
corrective maintenance; CM/predictive condition monitoring; effectiveness-centred/TQMain;
planned/pre-planned/preactive/scheduled maintenance; and run-to-destruction/
run-to-failure. In regards to similarities it could be argued that the model name, PM,
has a broad generic meaning for maintenance. Mostafa (2004) described PM as being a
practice which takes into account the planning, scheduling and corrective functions
before plant and equipment is in a condition to fail. Another point of similarity is the
fact that many models are a direct extension or based on the platform of the three
prominent models identified, TPM, RCM, and CBM. A common theme to emerge from a
majority of models was the need for the maintenance model to be integrated with the
organisations information and data systems, which it turn, would ensure greater
control and improve decision making.
It should also be acknowledged that listing and comparing all 37 various methods,
techniques, systems, types, philosophies, strategies found in the literature as models
can be problematic (refer to second paragraph in this section). For example, it could be
argued that CBM is a strategy, which could be either implemented before embarking on
RCM or integrated into both TPM and RCM. Further, run-to-failure and CM are not
Jonsson (1997);
Sherwin (2000)
Crocker and Kumar

(2000)
Organ et al. (1997)
Advanced tero
technological model
Age-based maintenance
Availability-based
maintenance
Carnero and Noves

(2006); Gomez and
Carnero (2011)
(see Table II)
Computerised maintenance
management system
Condition-based
maintenance
Campaign maintenance
Price (2002);
Yamashina and
Otani (2001)
Stoneham (1998)
Breakdown maintenance
Basic terotechnology model Parkes (1970)
Source
Model
Benefits/requirements
Moves focus from life-cycle- Integrates TQM/terotechnology/LCP.

cost (LCC) to life-cycle-profit Requires integrated IT system
(LCP)
An extension of RCM
Allows better management of items
that fail due to wear and/or related
to age
An extension to both
Needs to be integrated with
RCM and TPM
manufacturing resource planning
(MRP) system
Focus on maintaining
Establishes information feedbacks
systems life cycle
to maintain systems life cycle
Action is taken once the
Applied quickly with limited resources
item/equipment has failed
and information. A high risk and
commercially expensive strategy
Replaces regular maintenance
Simular to shutdown
programme but completion
maintenance. Used when
non-maintenance restraints time-frames are limited
take priority e.g. military
operations
Integrates the firms IT system with
Provides capabilities to
store, retrieve, and analyse the maintenance system. Used in
conjunction with a maintenance
information
management system e.g. TPM
CBM allows a reliable, accurate
Based on the monitoring
and detection of equipment assessment of service life while
to determine vital warnings reducing reliance on maintenance
personnel
of impending failure
Main focus
Holistic
Holistic
Holistic or
singular
Holistic or
singular
Holistic
Holistic
Holistic
Holistic
Practical
application:
holistic/singular
(continued )
Empirical and
theoretical
Empirical and
theoretical
Empirical
Theoretical
Theoretical
Theoretical
Theoretical
Theoretical
Literature
evidence:
empirical/
theoretical
Maintenance
management
models
641
Table I.
Model description
and categorisation
Source
(see **Note**)
Kajko-Mattsson
(2002)
Pun et al. (2002)
Candell et al. (2009),

Levrat et al. (2008)
Mitchell (1998)
Kelly (1989)
Condition monitoring
Corrective maintenance
Effectiveness-centred
maintenance
E-maintenance
Equipment asset
management
Kellys philosophy
Table I.
Model
Similar to CBM where
condition monitoring of
selected equipment is
undertaken to detect
potential failures
Addresses unplanned
breakdowns and failures so
plant and equipment can be
returned to full operation
quickly
Built on the philosophy of
doing the right things as
compared to doing things
right
Combines the computerised
maintenance system with
the internet and ecollaboration services
Maximising the integration
efficiency of the firms
technology, administration
and best practice
knowledge
Control of reliability
through the physical control
of engineering systems
Main focus
Empirical
Empirical
Holistic
Requires management processes to

identify defects and eliminate root
causes
Encompasses the concepts of TQMain Holistic

and features of TPM and RCM to
provides a more effective maintenance
system
Used in conjunction with CBM. Ideal Holistic
for military and commercial aircraft
operators to reduce aircraft downtime
Theoretical
Holistic
Develops links between quality and
maintenance. Mixture of elements from
TPM, RCM and terotechnology
(continued )
Theoretical
Optimise value and usefulness from
production processes and
manufacturing plant/equipment
Holistic
Theoretical
Empirical and
theoretical
Singular
Literature
evidence:
empirical/
theoretical
CM is commonly applied to
individually selected equipment.
Should be integrated with other
maintenance programmes
642
Practical
application:
holistic/singular
IJQRM
32,6
Mostafa (2004)
Maintenance management
metric
Main focus
The management of
maintenance is recognised
as a value-adding process
for the firms assets and
resources
Operating maintenance
Meador (1997)
An organisational-wide
training and administration
programme involving all
people, plant, equipment,
and supporting
infrastructure
Outsourcing
Garg and Deshmukh The transferring of the
(2006), Martin (1997) firms maintenance
programme to external third
parties is argued to improve
maintenance outcomes
while reducing costs
Planned maintenance
Mostafa (2004),
Maintenance functions
Vineyard et al. (2000) performed on a pre-planned
basis
Preactive maintenance
Donovan (1998)
Details the maintenance
requirements of new plant,
equipment, processes before
their operation begins,
including engineering
changes and capital
expansions
Source
Model
Firms able to determine optimal

intervals for various machines and
failure types
Provides early evaluation of
maintenance costs and man-hour
requirements
Holistic or
singular
Holistic or
singular
(continued )
Theoretical
Empirical
Theoretical
Holistic or
While firm can concentrate on core
competencies, the maintenance service selected areas/
items
contract still requires management
Theoretical
Theoretical
Holistic
Literature
evidence:
empirical/
theoretical
Holistic
All aspects of firm are considered
integrated into one combined system
e.g. operations, maintenance, training,
administration, etc.
Systematically improves the cost per

unit of production and maximises
overall equipment effectiveness
Practical
application:
holistic/singular
Maintenance
management
models
643
Table I.
Productive reliability
Proactive maintenance
Preventive maintenance
Pre-planned maintenance
Predictive maintenance
Nicholas (2000)
Predictive condition
monitoring
Main focus
Uses condition monitoring

techniques to record
machine condition and
notify of looming failure
Allows maintenance to be
Carnero (2006),
McKone and Weiss carried out on a predictive
basis (when required) in
(2002)
place of recommended
schedules and time periods
Stoneham (1998),
Divides the working
Vineyard et al. (2000) calendar into discrete
separate elements and
assigns PPM jobs to the
various elements
Alardhi et al. (2007) The frequency of
maintenance is determined
by time, production volume,
and machine condition
Mostafa (2004)
A proactive approach is
focused on decreasing the
total maintenance needed
and optimising the life of
plant and equipment
Toy and Wogninrich Uses TPM as a platform
(2000)
with an emphasis on
increasing capacity and
reducing costs, achieved by
Source
Table I.
Model
Empirical
Theoretical
Holistic or
singular
Holistic
Effect analysis techniques including

failure mode needs to be utilised
(continued )
Theoretical
Empirical
Able to determine optimal intervals for Holistic or

singular
various machines and failure types.
PPM can attract criticism for overservicing
Holistic
Theoretical
Recommended to be use in conjunction Holistic or

singular
with traditional periodic preventive
maintenance programmes
PM can assist to prevent unexpected

break-downs by detecting problems
long before failure, and it doing so,
increase the life of the asset
Individual maintenance activities are
re-engineered to enable preventive/
predictive maintenance practices
Theoretical
Literature
evidence:
empirical/
theoretical
Singular
The various condition monitoring
techniques can be integrated with the
IT applications
644
Practical
application:
holistic/singular
IJQRM
32,6
Source
Bond (1994)
(see Table II)
Khan and Haddara

(2003)
Stoneham (1998)
Yam et al. (2000)
Model
Profit centre maintenance
Reliability-centred
maintenance
Risk-based maintenance
Run-to-destruction
Run-to-failure
continuously improving the

maintenance system
The maintenance function
should be viewed as a profit
generating activity
An asset maintenance
management system
oriented towards
maintenance critical
industries such as airlines,
power plants
Evaluates risk associated
with unanticipated failure of
plant and equipment and
considers the
implementation of cost
effective strategies
Reactive approach.
Equipment is used normally
until it fails, then discarded
or replaced
Reactive approach.
Equipment is used normally
until it fails, then discarded
or replaced
Main focus
Singular
Requires very little ongoing and
routine maintenance. Suitable for
small, non-critical, low cost equipment
Normally confined to carefully selected Singular

equipment and the consequences of
failure known and accepted in advance
Holistic
While minimising the probability of
system failure, risk analysis also
evaluates other consequences such as:
safety, economic, and environment
Assets are optimised to maximise their Holistic

full value as opposed to seeking the
least costs
Undertakes a full physical evaluation Holistic
of asset/s to design a maintenance
programme which will ensure its
ongoing reliability
Practical
application:
holistic/singular
(continued )
Theoretical
Theoretical
Theoretical
Empirical and
theoretical
Theoretical
Literature
evidence:
empirical/
theoretical
Maintenance
management
models
645
Table I.
Value-driven maintenance
planning
Total quality maintenance
The Eindhoven University

of Technology
Total productive
maintenance
Time-based maintenance
Strategic maintenance
management
Maintenance system is timebased and the servicing and

replacement of components
is based on their age
Murthy et al. (2002) An overall business
perspective which further
builds on TPM and RCM
Maintenance activity based
Yamashina and
Otani (2001)
on a time period
Coetzee (1997)
Developed to fill gaps in
terotechnology models.
(see Table II)
An organisation-wide asset
maintenance management
philosophy which integrates
all aspects of the firm
(operators, materials,
quality, energy, safety, etc.)
with the maintenance
operations
Converts a singular
Al-Najjar (1996),
platform (CM) into a
Al-Najjar and
holistic model
Wang (2001)
Rosqvist et al. (2009) Enhancement of RCM with
company, plant and
maintenance objectives
being integrated
Mostafa (2004),
Nagarur and
Kaewplang (1999)
Scheduled maintenance
Main focus
Source
Table I.
Model
Holistic
Theoretical
Holistic or
singular
Holistic
Theoretical
Theoretical
Empirical and
theoretical
Theoretical
Empirical and
theoretical
Theoretical
Literature
evidence:
empirical/
theoretical
Holistic
Holistic
Recommends production schedules
should incorporate time for
maintenance
Relies on the utilisation of knowledge Holistic
and expertise within plant
Integrates technical, commercial, and

operational aspects of business with
maintenance programme
Economically beneficial when
dispersion of the item lifetime is small
Lists 14 sub-functions of maintenance
but no links to IT system
Designed to be integrated with JIT,
TQM, employee involvement and
environmental/organisational factors
Firms able to determine optimal timing Holistic or

of maintenance
singular
646
Practical
application:
holistic/singular
IJQRM
32,6
likely to be classed as maintenance models but strategies used in conjunction with an

overall maintenance management model. Clearly some models are more
comprehensive and can be applied across the whole organisation (such as TPM),
while RCM and CBM are more specific models which can form part of the firms total
integrated maintenance model.
When analysing the 37 models an important consideration, especially for this paper,
is the level of empirical evidence found in the literature. While theoretical examples and
descriptions can be found for all of the models, documented practical evidence (real
world examples) was found for only 12 models (32 per cent). When the four popular
models (TPM, RCM, CBM, and CM) are removed less than a one-fourth of the remaining
33 models have any empirical evidence on which the model can be practically
evaluated. Adding to the empirical limitations of these remaining models is the fact that
only a few papers exist on each of the models and a number of the models are based on
the four popular models. In the case of practitioners, the emphasis on empirical
evidence is important because it allows the model to be evaluated in a real world
environment. For them, developing an understanding of issues surrounding the
suitability and adaptability of various models are key points. Having limited practical
evidence on the various models is problematic and not desirable.
Having taken a broad look at the wide range of maintenance models the focus will
now narrow into examining the more prominent models (TPM, RCM, CBM) to establish
the level of documented use in real world applications.
3. Empirical examples of popular models in literature
The search undertaken in Section 2 showed that there were several thousand articles
on the three dominant models within the literature: TPM, CBM, and RCM. (For
statistical data on number of articles refer to Table IV in Section 4). A series of
keywords was used on each of the databases to identify articles which may contain
empirical evidence. Many hundreds of articles were identified to warrant close
examination and the content of each of these articles was analysed to determine the
type and nature of the likely practical evidence within, e.g. the illustration of real
world examples. It was found that hundreds of articles offered no empirical evidence
and therefore were discarded due to the content being entirely theoretical, conceptual,
or mathematical. Most articles of this nature used mathematical derived methods such
as: nonlinear analysis, algorithms, fuzzy logic, statistical modelling, simulation, and
optimisation. While mathematical based models are very popular in the maintenance
literature, two prominent maintenance authors, Sherwin and Al-Najjar (1999) wrote
how they were not convinced about the usefulness of the many mathematically
complex and difficult models available (p. 203). Mei and Ding (2009) added support by
arguing that many mathematical models are very complex and difficult to implement
in practice.
With the removal of hundreds of articles, due to their purely conceptual or
theoretical nature, a clearer picture emerged on the quantity of empirical real world
evidence linked to the popular models. The process produced a final list of 82 articles
(up to and including the year 2010) and these can be viewed in Table II. Each of the 82
articles were examined to establish the identification of model, nature of empirical
evidence, origin of authors and location of research, and the researched sector and
industries. The empirical evidence provided in these articles involved methods such as
surveys, interviews, case studies, and anecdotal experience. To clarify anecdotal
experience papers classified as anecdotal were personal accounts of the author/s
Maintenance
management
models
647
Jones
Yamashina
Bohoris et al.
Sherwin and Jonsson
Tsang
Mann et al.
Al-Najjar
Srikrishna et al.
McAdam and Duffner
Carannante et al.
Martorell et al.
Jonsson
Cigolini and Turco
Blanchard
Organ et al.
Prickett
Riis et al.
Edwards et al.
Jardine et al.
Ljungberg
Regan and Dale
Bamber et al.
Jardine et al.
Pintelon et al.
Prickett
Sherwin
Yam et al.
Liptrot and Palarchio
Cooke
Ben-Daya
Table II.
Empirical examples
of popular models
in literature
1995
1995
1995
1995
1995
1995
1996
1996
1996
1996
1996
1997
1997
1997
1997
1997
1997
1998
1998
1998
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
Author
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
USA
Japan
UK
Sweden
Hong Kong
USA
Sweden
India
UK/Ireland
UK
Spain
Sweden
Italy
USA
UK
UK
Denmark/USA
UK
Canada
Sweden
UK
UK
Canada
Belgium/Thailand
UK
Sweden
Hong Kong
Canada
UK
Saudi Arabia
Case study
Descriptive
Case study
Anecdotal
Anecdotal
Anecdotal
Anecdotal
Descriptive
Case study
Comparison
Pilot study
Survey
Case study
Descriptive
Anecdotal
Anecdotal
Anecdotal
Anecdotal
Anecdotal
Survey
Case study
Case study
Case study
Case study
Case study
Anecdotal
Comparison
Case study
Case study
Anecdotal
USA
Japan
UK
India
Ireland
UK/Japan
Spain
Sweden
Italy
USA
Sweden
UK
UK
Canada
Belgium
UK/Finland
Various
Canada
UK
Manuf/energy
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
General
General
General
Energy
Manufacturing
Operations
Energy
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
General
General
Manufacturing
Construction
General
Manufacturing
Foundry
Manufacturing
Food process
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
General
Energy
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
General
(continued )
Various
Various
Automotive
General
General
General
General
Power plant
Semi/conduc
Foundry
Power plant
Various
Various
General
General
General
General
Plant and equip
General
Machinery
Bearing
Various
Plant and equip
Automotive
General
General
Power plant
Steel plant
Various
General
Models
TPM CBM RCM Researchers base Research methodology Research location Research sector Research industry
648
Year
IJQRM
32,6
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2001
2001
2002
2002
2002
2002
2002
2002
2002
2003
2003
2003
2003
2004
2004
2004
2004
2004
2005
2005
2005
2005
2005
Year
Bamber et al.
Al-Hassan et al.
Yamashina
Dal et al.
Wang et al.
Muthu et al.
Tsang and Chan
Cua et al.
Ireland and Dale
Dhillon
El-Haram and Horner
van der Wal and Lynn
Ferrari et al.
Deshpande and Modak
Quinn
Waier
Backlund and Akersten
Carretero et al.
Hansson et al.
Sun et al.
Smith and Hinchcliffe
Ahmed et al.
Birkner
Brah and Chong
Cigolini and Rossi
Chan et al.
Patra et al.
Caputo and Pelagagge
Ahmed et al.
Seth and Tripathi
Author
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UK
UK
Japan
UK
UK/Netherlands
India
Hong Kong
USA
UK
USA
UK
South Africa
Italy
India
USA
USA
Sweden
Spain/France
Sweden
Hong Kong
USA
Malaysia
Germany
Singapore
Italy
Hong Kong
India
Italy
Malaysia
India
Case study
Anecdotal
Anecdotal
Case study
Case study
Case study
Case study
Survey
Case study
Anecdotal
Pilot study
Case study
Case study
Case study
Case study
Descriptive
Case study
Case study
Case study
Case study
Case study
Survey
Case study
Survey
Case study
Case study
Case study
Case study
Case study
Survey
UK
UK
UK
India
China
Various
UK
UK
South Africa
Italy
India
USA
USA
Sweden
Spain
Sweden
Hong Kong
USA
Malaysia
Germany
Singapore
Italy
Hong Kong
India
Italy
Malaysia
India
Manufacturing
General
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Production
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
General
Construction
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Construction
Health care
Energy
Transport
Manuf/energy
Manufacturing
Various
Manufacturing
Energy
Manuf/service
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Service
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
(continued )
Installation/sys
General
Various
Airbags
Soft drinks
Cement
Semi/c equip
Part suppliers
Various
General
Housing
Paper
Ceramics
Steel plant
Housing
Hospitals
Hydropower
Railway
Equip/hydpower
Electronic
Various
Various
Distrbution
Various
General
Semi/c equip
Libraries
Paper
Semi/c equip
Various
Models
Maintenance
management
models
649
Table II.
Table II.
2005 Bevilacqua et al.

2006 Bonavia and Martin
2006 Sharma et al.
2006 Pinjala et al.
2006 Rodrigues and Hatakeyama
2006 Ciarapica and Giacchetta
2006 Eti et al.
2007 Ahuja and Khamba
2007 Tsarouhas
2007 Aiquang
2008a Ahuja and Khamba
2008 Ramesh et al.
2009 Doyle et al.
2009 Chen
2009 Ahuja and Kumar
2009 Brax and Jonsson
2009 Ahuja and Khamba
2010 Chinese and Ghirardo
2010 Lazim and Ramayah
2010 Pophaley and Vyas
2010b Ahmadi et al.
2010 Orosa et al.
2011b Veldman et al.
2011 Chen and Meng
2011 Fore and Mudavanhu
Total
82
Note: | Denotes model/s discussed
Author
|
|
|
|
54
14
in article
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26
|
Italy
Spain
India
Belgium
Brazil
Italy
Nigeria/UK
India
Greece
China
India
India
Canada
Taiwan
India
Finland/Sweden
India
Italy
Malaysia
India
Sweden
Spain/Portugal
The Netherlands
China
South Africa
Case study
Survey
Case study
Survey
Anecdotal
Case study
Anecdotal
Case study
Case study
Descriptive
Survey
Case study
Case study
Case study
Case study
Case study
Survey
Survey
Survey
Case study
Case study
Case study
Case study
Case study
Case study
Italy
Spain
India
Belgium
Italy
India
Greece
China
India
India
Canada
Taiwan
India
Sweden
India
Italy
Malaysia
India
Sweden
Spain
The Netherlands
China
South Africa
Energy
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
General
Energy
General
Manufacturing
Production
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Energy
Energy
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Transport
Energy
Energy
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Oil refinery
Ceramic tiles
Spare parts
Various
General
Power plant
General
Steel plant
Food
Part suppliers
Various
Tyres
Power plant
Power plant
Steel plant
Industrial equip
Various
Various
Various
Automotive
Aviation
Wind farm
Gas production
Automotive
Timber mill
Models
650
Year
IJQRM
32,6
experience/s working and researching in the field. These articles, while providing
empirical evidence, must be viewed with caution as no empirical data was presented,
only a personal view, therefore the use of the term anecdotal.
To better analyse the empirical nature of the studies presented in Table II each
paper is split into six defined groups: name of model, home base of researcher, research
methodology, location research undertaken, broad research sector, and specific
research industry. While a total of 82 studies are listed, nine articles discuss more than
one model therefore the three popular models are represented a total of 94 times
(Table III).
In regards to articles with empirical evidence clearly TPM has been a popular choice
among researchers covering maintenance management models. Within the 82 articles
analysed TPM was applied in 57 per cent of the practical examples, followed by RCM
(28 per cent) and CBM (15 per cent). Having said that, in 2001 Ireland and Dale
commented that there was little in the way of empirical studies on TPM. Even though
when compared to the other two models TPM fares much better, it would seem that
there is a general lack of detailed empirical work in this particular area.
The overall yearly rate of published empirical research over the 16 years has
remained reasonably consistent (average of 5.13 per year), with an abnormally high
rate of publications occurring in 2000 (12 publications). While the empirical research on
TPM has stayed consistent over the past 16 years it would seem that the empirical
examples for CBM and RCM are on the decline. Seven articles were published on CBM
during the five years from 1995 to 1999, but for the next 11 years only another seven
Model popularity
TPM
RCM
CBM
57% [54]
28% [26]
15% [14]
Research sector
Manufacturing
Energy
General classification
57% (47)
15% (12)
15% (12)
Researchers base
UK
India
Sweden
USA
Italy
HK/Taiwan
Canada
Spain
Japan/China
Malaysia
21%
15%
11%
11%
9%
7%
5%
5%
4%
4%
(17)
(12)
(9)
(9)
(7)
(6)
(4)
(4)
(3)
(3)
Notes: [ ] Studies of models; ( ) No. of articles
Research methodology
Case study
Anecdotal
Survey
Descriptive
Comparison
Pilot study
55%
20%
15%
6%
2%
2%
Research industry
Power plants
Semiconductor
Steel mills
Part suppliers
Automotive
Research location
India
UK
Italy
Sweden
USA
Japan/China
Spain
Canada
HK/Taiwan
Malaysia
Maintenance
management
models
651
(45)
(16)
(12)
(5)
(2)
(2)
(8)
(4)
(4)
(3)
(3)
18%
17%
11%
9%
8%
6%
6%
5%
5%
5%
(12)
(11)
(7)
(6)
(5)
(4)
(4)
(3)
(3)
Table III.
(3) Analysis of empirical
articles
IJQRM
32,6
652
were produced. In regards to RCM, 22 articles were published between 1995 and 2004
(ten years) and only four in the last six years.
Analysis of the research sectors shows that manufacturing (57 per cent) is the
dominant sector for research, followed by the energy sector (15 per centand a general
classification (15 per cent). These broad sectors can be narrowed into specific
industries, with power plants (eight articles) proving popular for maintenance research,
followed by steel mills and the semiconductor industries with four each, and part
suppliers and the automotive industry with three articles each. Interestingly, out of
82 empirical papers only three have direct practical links to the automotive industry.
In global terms the automotive industry is a huge industry with a heavy influence on
competitive manufacturing around the world. The industry provided researchers with
many practical examples of modern improvement strategies such as TPM, just-in-time,
total quality management, lean manufacturing, flexible manufacturing systems, and
world class manufacturing.
Finally, in respect to the location country of both the research and researchers the
UK and India performed strongly in both areas. The UK provided 21 per cent of
the authors researching maintenance models, with India next on 15 per cent, while
the leading research location was India (18 per cent), closely followed by the UK on
17 per cent. After the UK and India, three countries, Sweden, USA, and Italy, filled the
next positions for both sets of rankings. At this point we think it is worth noting the
research performance of countries in East Asia. This region contains two of the worlds
economic powerhouses in Japan and mainland China, but these two countries produced
only two and one studies, respectively. When you consider that TPM, the dominant
research model, was developed in Japan, and small countries like Hong Kong and
Taiwan published five and one studies, respectively, the combined total of three
publications from Japan and mainland China seem disproportionately low. The same
argument could be mounted against the other economic and research powerhouse,
the USA. In regards to the home base of researchers three countries out-rank the USA
and this number increases to four when considering the location where research was
undertaken. It is also worth pointing out the research undertaken by authors in the UK
and USA (32 per cent of total) greatly reduced for the second-half of the study period,
with only one study each produced after 2002. This may indicate that research
maturity may have peaked in the early 2000s for these researchers in this area of study.
For a description and overview of the three most popular maintenance management
models found in the literature refer to Fraser et al. (2011). If a deeper analysis of the
individual models is required, Ahuja and Khamba (2008b) provide an in-depth review
of TPM. For an empirical-based typology of CBM, including relevant characteristics
and requirements refer to Veldman et al. (2011b). In the case of RCM, a comprehensive
discussion is presented by Smith and Hinchcliffe (2004).
4. The need for a greater practical focus
During the process of researching for this paper and reading the literature it became
evident that while there seem to be a large amount of material on maintenance models,
examples of empirical work was very limited. Therefore, in the introduction of this
paper the perceived gap between theory and practice with regards to maintenance was
discussed. With the objective of this paper being on identifying empirical links in
the literature it is worth analysing this point in more depth. It would seem that the
number of empirical studies identified, as presented in the previous section, would be
considered low. In an attempt to quantify or present a picture of the research
publication output for the maintenance models investigated in this paper, further
analysis was undertaken of maintenance related databases and journals.
Table IV presents the number of articles found within three of the major databases
that publish maintenance related research. Using the model name as a keyword phrase
(Total Productive Maintenance) the advanced search facility of each database was
utilised to determine the total number of articles which contained the keyword phase as
a whole, not the individual words. Two searches were undertaken, one on the full text
of published articles (these figure represent the larger of the two figures shown in Table
IV), and the second search used only the title, abstract, and keywords of published
articles.
As can be seen from Table IV, the three databases produced a total of 2,431 articles
on the three popular maintenance models. If the search for each model is contained
within the title, abstract, and keywords then the figure drops to 368 articles. To
determine the ratios of empirical output, further analysis of Table II is needed. Table II
presented 82 articles with examples of empirical research, and from this list, 74 articles
(90 per cent) were sourced from the three databases shown in Table IV. Therefore, from
a full text perspective, for every 32.85 articles which discusses these models, one
article provides empirical evidence, a ratio of nearly 33:1or an EER of 3 per cent. When
the maintenance models are listed in either title, abstract, or keyword the ratio drops to
5:1 or an EER of 20 per cent.
To give an indication of the leading journals in the field of maintenance the
following table is presented. Table V lists the top five journals within each database
which contributed the most number of articles in Table IV.
Of the 15 journals listed in Table V 13 were referenced in this paper, and these 13
journals represented 67 per cent of the total books/articles referenced in this paper
Maintenance
management
models
653
Major databases
Popular maintenance models
TPM
CBM
RCM
Totals
Emerald
EbscoHost
ScienceDirect
(Elsevier)
Totals
328/55
151/19
129/14
608/88
322/43
257/62
114/14
693/119
251/27
610/86
269/48
1,130/161
901/125
1,018/167
512/76
2,431/368
Table IV.
Published articles
on each maintenance
model (1995-2010)
Table V.
Top five journals
in each database
(by volume)
Emerald
EbscoHost
Elsevier
Journal of Quality in Maintenance

Engineering
International Journal of Quality
and Reliability Management
International Journal of Operations
and Production Management
The TQM Journal
Production, Planning and Control

International Journal of Production
Research
International Journal of Advanced
Manufacturing Technology
Total Quality Management
Journal of Manufacturing
Technology Management
International Journal of Reliability,

Quality and Safety Engineering
Reliability Engineering
and System Safety
International Journal of
Production Economics
European Journal of
Operational Research**
Mechanical Systems and
Signal Processing**
Journal of Operations
Management
IJQRM
32,6
654
Table VI.
Empirical evidence
rates of the three
leading maintenance
journals: comparison
between total papers
published and
papers with
empirical evidence
(1995-2010)
(94 out of 141). The two journals in the table not represented in this paper are denoted
with **. Further analysis of the 141 books/articles referenced in this paper shows that
the leading journals (by volume) are the reliability/maintenance dedicated journals:
Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering; Reliability Engineering & System Safety;
and the International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management. Taking into account
the empirical focus of this paper it is noteworthy that six non-maintenance journals:
International Journal of Operations & Production Management; Production Planning &
Control; The TQM Journal; Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management; Total
Quality Management; and Industrial Management & Data Systems provided more
empirical examples (articles) with links to real world maintenance applications than
the dedicated maintenance journal Reliability Engineering & System Safety.
To take the issue of empirical research further, it is worthwhile to evaluate the
empirical performance of the three leading journals which are dedicated to maintenance
and reliability research. Again the search uses the same method as undertaken for
Table IV with two searches conducted, one of the full text and the other of title,
abstract, keywords. This data is then compared with the number of empirical articles
presented in Table II.
As mentioned above the three leading dedicated maintenance journals listed in
Table VI were also the most referenced journals in this paper. Table VI provides the
number articles published for each journal and each model, and then the figures are
compared to the empirical evidence presented in Table II. Over the period from 1995 to
2010 a total of 493 articles were publish on the three maintenance models by the three
journals. For the same period, these three journals provided 39 articles with empirical
evidence. This therefore provides an EER of 8 per cent for the articles published or
38 per cent if only the title, abstract, and keywords are analysed. In regard to the
actual maintenance models, CBM had close to the highest amount of publications but
the EER was much lower than the other two models. While it would seem that
the empirical rates presented in Table VI for the three popular maintenance models is
low, to gain a better understanding, these figures need to be compared with EER for
other research areas outside of the field of maintenance.
Having said that, what is compelling among the figures in Table VI is the empirical
performance of the journal Reliability Engineering & System Safety. Providing an EER
of 1.5 per centfor over 200 full text published articles must be considered extremely
low. Even when the analysis is done on articles with the name of the maintenance
Leading dedicated maintenance journals

Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering
Reliability Engineering and System Safety
International Journal of Quality and Reliability
Management
Totals
No. of times model represented (Table II)
Empirical rate of total articles (%)
Maintenance
models
TPM CBM RCM Totals
Empirical evidence
(Table II)
No. of
Rate
articles
(%)
75/23 88/15 79/11 242/49

15/ 89/23 99/19 203/42
26/8 10/1 12/2 48/11
29
3
7
12/59
1.5/7
15/64
116/ 187/
31
39
23
8
20/74 4/21
39
8/38
190/
32
18
9/56
493/
102
49
10/48
model listed in either title, abstract, or keywords, the EER lifts only marginally to
7 per cent. This is a very low value when compared to the EER of the other two leading
maintenance journals; Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering (59 per cent)
and the International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management (64 per cent). What is
the point of journals, such as Reliability Engineering & System Safety, publishing nearly
all mathematical/theoretical/conceptual research which has no testing, evaluation or
links to practice? With the world having endless problems to be solved, questions
must be asked about the value of journals which virtually make no attempt to link
their research to solving practical real world problems. Interestingly, in Reliability
Engineering & System Safety aims and scope it states An important aim is to achieve
a balance between academic material and practical applications. Clearly, it would seem
that the journal places very little importance on such claims.
5. Conclusions
This paper set out to explore the academic literature for empirical examples of
maintenance models, and in doing so, condensed a large amount of material into a
digestible taxonomy on maintenance management models. For practitioners, the paper
offers a detailed contemporary overview of an area, which for too long, has not been
given the strategic attention by business managers it now demands. Information
about the range of maintenance management models along with references to present
day organisations will assist practitioners to consider more effective links/integration
between their core and maintenance operations.
From an outcome point of view it is hoped that this paper will have it greatest
impact on the current mindset of the research world. The Introduction of this paper
clearly demonstrates two issues; the importance of maintenance management to
modern organisations, and second, the lack of creditable links between academic
research and practice/industry. The findings of this paper and the analysis undertaken
in Section 4 would tend to add support to this perceived notion that maintenance
theory, in many respects, is de-coupled from practical applications. From the several
thousand articles published on the three popular models only 82 provided empirical
evidence or links to practice. Even when journals dedicated to maintenance are
analysed the average EER is 8 per cent for nearly 500 articles. This therefore leaves a
very high percentage of articles which are purely theory based.
With maintenance being an applied research field and maintenance management
being of strategic importance for nearly every competitive organisation, it is the view of
the authors that a much greater effort must be made by academia and researchers to
produce research outcomes linked to solving real world problems. It is hoped that by
providing evidence of the gap between research and practice will bring the necessary
awareness to improve the current situation. To assist the change process the authors
list a number of suggestions to advance the current poor position:
All peer-reviewed articles should, on front page, indicate the practical and/or
social contribution the article is making to solve a real-world problem. Emerald
with their structured abstract have taken steps to achieving this aim but the
headings Practical implications and Social implications should be made
mandatory instead of if applicable.
Academics need to adjust their research premise from the current dominant focus
of the literature presents this problem to one which aligns with practice has
this problem to solve. This issue often start at the PhD level with most
Maintenance
management
models
655
candidates repeatedly told by their supervisors you must find a gap in the
literature.
IJQRM
32,6
656
Research bodies which oversee the administration of allocated government funds

(taxpayers money) for national research need to ensure that funding is spent on
achieving society-focused outcomes, and in doing so, make research institutions/
universities accountable for such outcomes.
In fulfilling their relevance to society, universities need to develop stronger

practical thinking academics and therefore research cultures to solving societys
needs.
Universities, who pay huge amounts of money for access to online journals,
should in turn apply pressure on publishers to classify or bundle journals into
their practical or theoretical orientation. Subscribing to empirical based/focused
journals will assist and encourage research academics towards a practical
realignment.
Editors and journals have a central role to play in addressing the current
imbalance between theory and practice. Many would argue that publishing
endless variations to a theoretical formula for a fictional maintenance issue is
totally meaningless. But many journals continue to publish large quantities of
such material, and clearly, many so-called top tier journals are not immune from
this problem.
In closing, while theory and conceptualisation are important to developing our

understanding of a problem, the real benefit comes from being able to convert the
theoretical work into meaningful practical solutions. Therefore, in the name of
relevance it is important for academia and research academics to remain vigilant and
focused on the needs of practitioners, and ensure taxpayers dollars are maximised by
helping to solve a never-ending list of real world problems.
References
Ahmadi, A., Gupta, S., Karim, R. and Kumar, U. (2010a), Selection of maintenance strategy for
aircraft systems using multi-criteria decision making methodologies, International Journal
of Reliability, Quality and Safety Engineering, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 223-243.
Ahmadi, A., Soderholm, P. and Kumar, U. (2010b), On aircraft scheduled maintenance
program development, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 16 No. 3,
pp. 229-255.
Ahmed, S., Hassan, M. and Taha, Z. (2004), State of implementation of TPM in SMIs: a survey
study in Malaysia, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 10 No. 2,
pp. 93-106.
Ahmed, S., Hassan, M. and Taha, Z. (2005), TPM can go beyond maintenance: excerpt
from a case implementation, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 11 No. 1,
pp. 19-42.
Ahuja, I. and Khamba, J. (2007), An evaluation of TPM implementation initiatives in an Indian
manufacturing enterprise, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 13 No. 4,
pp. 338-352.
Ahuja, I. and Khamba, J. (2008a), Justification of total productive maintenance initiatives in
Indian manufacturing industry for achieving core competitiveness, Journal of
Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 19 No. 5, pp. 645-669.
Ahuja, I. and Khamba, J. (2008b), Total productive maintenance: literature review and
directions, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 25 No. 7,
pp. 709-756.
Ahuja, I. and Khamba, J. (2009), Evolving indigenous TPM methodology for Indian
manufacturing industry, International Journal of Technology, Policy and Management,
Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 29-73.
Ahuja, I. and Kumar, P. (2009), A case study of total productive maintenance implementation
at precision tube mills, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 15 No. 3,
pp. 241-258.
Aiquang, L. (2007), Fresh grounds for improvement, Manufacturing, Vol. 86 No. 5,
pp. 24-27.
Alardhi, M., Hannam, R. and Labib, A. (2007), Preventive maintenance scheduling for multicogeneration plants with production constraints, Journal of Quality in Maintenance
Engineering, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 276-292.
Al-Hassan, K., Chan, J. and Metcalfe, A. (2000), The role of total productive maintenance in
business excellence, Total Quality Management, Vol. 11 Nos 4-6, pp. 596-601.
Al-Najjar, B. (1996), Total quality maintenance. An approach for continuous reduction in
costs of quality products, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 2 No. 3,
pp. 4-20.
Al-Najjar, B. and Alsyouf, I. (2003), Selecting the most efficient maintenance approach using
fuzzy multiple criteria decision making, International Journal of Production Economics,
Vol. 84 No. 1, pp. 85-100.
Al-Najjar, B. and Wang, W. (2001), A conceptual model for fault detection and decision making
for rolling element bearings in paper mills, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering,
Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 192-206.
Backlund, F. and Akersten, P.A. (2003), RCM introduction: process and requirements
management aspects, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 9 No. 3,
pp. 250-264.
Bamber, C., Sharp, J. and Hides, M. (1999), Factors affecting successful implementation of total
productive maintenance. A UK manufacturing case study perspective, Journal of Quality
in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 162-181.
Bamber, C., Sharp, J. and Hides, M. (2000), Developing management systems towards integrated
manufacturing: a case study perspective, Integrated Manufacturing Systems, Vol. 11 No. 7,
pp. 454-461.
Beebe, R. (2003), Condition monitoring of steam turbines by performance analysis, Journal of
Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 102-112.
Ben-Daya, M. (2000), You may need RCM to enhance TPM implementation, Journal of Quality in
Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 82-85.
Bevilacqua, M., Ciarapica, F., Giacchetta, G. and Bertolini, M. (2005), An application of BPR and
RCM methods to an oil refinery turnaround process, Production Planning and Control,
Vol. 16 No. 7, pp. 716-732.
Birkner, P. (2004), Field experience with a condition-based maintenance program of 20-kV XLPE
distribution system using IRC-analysis, IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 19
No. 1, pp. 3-8.
Blanchard, S. (1997), An enhanced approach for implementing total productive maintenance in
the manufacturing environment, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 3
No. 2, pp. 69-80.
Maintenance
management
models
657
IJQRM
32,6
658
Bohoris, G.A., Vamvalis, C., Trace, W. and Ignatiadou, K. (1995), TPM implementation in
Land-Rover with the assistance of a CMMS, Journal of Quality in Maintenance
Bonavia, T. and Martin, J. (2006), An empirical study of lean production in the ceramic tile
industry in Spain, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 26
No. 5, pp. 505-531.
Bond, T.H. (1994), Implementing profit-centered maintenance, P/PM Technology, December,
p. 59.
Brah, S.A. and Chong, W.K. (2004), Relationship between total maintenance and performance,
International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 42 No. 12, pp. 2383-2401.
Brax, S. and Jonsson, K. (2009), Developing integrated solution offerings for remote diagnostics.
A comparative case study of two manufacturers, International Journal of Operations &
Production Management, Vol. 29 No. 5, pp. 539-560.
Candell, O., Karim, R. and Soderholm, P. (2009), eMaintenance Information logistics for
maintenance support, Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, Vol. 25 No. 6,
pp. 937-944.
Caputo, A. and Pelagagge, P. (2005), Introduction of an integrated maintenance system in the
tissue paper sector, Production Planning and Control, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 243-254.
Carannante, T., Haigh, R. and Morris, D. (1996), Implementing total productive maintenance:
a comparative study of the UK and Japanese foundry industries, Total Quality
Management, Vol. 7 No. 6, pp. 605-611.
Carnero, M. (2006), An evaluation system of the setting up of predictive maintenance
programmes, Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Vol. 91 No. 8, pp. 945-963.
Carnero, M. and Noves, J. (2006), Selection of computerised maintenance management system by
means of multicriteria, Production Planning and Control, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 335-354.
Carretero, J., Perez, J., Garcia-Carballeira, F., Calderon, A., Fernandez, J., Garcia, J., Lozano, A.,
Cardona, L., Cotaina, N. and Prete, P. (2003), Applying RCM in large scale systems:
a case study with railway networks, Reliability Engineering & System Safety, Vol. 82 No. 3,
pp. 257-273.
Chan, F., Lau, H., Ip, R., Chan, H. and Kong, S. (2005), Implementation of total productive
maintenance: a case study, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 95 No. 1,
pp. 71-94.
Chen, L. and Meng, B. (2011), How to apply TPM in equipment management for Chinese
enterprises, Chinese Business Review, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 137-145.
Chen, T.-L. (2009), Real-time turbine maintenance system, Expert Systems with Applications,
Vol. 36 No. 4, pp. 8676-8681.
Chinese, D. and Ghirardo, G. (2010), Maintenance management in Italian manufacturing
firms matters of size and matters of strategy, Journal of Quality in Maintenance
Cholasuke, C., Bhardwa, R. and Antong, J. (2004), The status of maintenance management in UK
manufacturing organisations: results from a pilot survey, Journal of Quality in
Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 5-15.
Ciarapica, F.E. and Giacchetta, G. (2006), Managing the condition-based maintenance of a
combined-cycle power plant: an approach using soft computing techniques, Journal of
Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 316-325.
Cigolini, R. and Turco, F. (1997), Total productive maintenance practices: a survey in Italy,
Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 259-272.
Cigolini, R. and Rossi, T. (2004), Improving productivity of automated tissue converting lines:
an empirical model and a case study, Production Planning and Control, Vol. 15 No. 5,
pp. 550-563.
Coetzee, J.L. (1997), Maintenance, Maintenance Publishers, Hatfield, Pretoria.
Cooke, F.L. (2000), Implementing TPM in plant maintenance: some organisational barriers,
International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 17 No. 9, pp. 1003-1016.
Crocker, J. and Kumar, U. (2000), Age-related maintenance versus reliability centred
maintenance: a case study on aero-engines, Reliability Engineering and System Safety,
Vol. 67 No. 2, pp. 113-118.
Cua, K., McKone, K. and Schroeder, R. (2001), Relationships between implementation of TQM,
JIT, and TPM and manufacturing performance, Journal of Operations Management,
Vol. 19 No. 6, pp. 675-694.
Dal, B., Tugwell, P. and Greatbanks, R. (2000), Overall equipment effectiveness as a measure of
operational improvement. A practical analysis, International Journal of Operations &
Production Management, Vol. 20 No. 12, pp. 1488-1502.
Dekker, R. (1996), Applications of maintenance optimization models: a review and analysis,
Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Vol. 51 No. 3, pp. 229-240.
Deshpande, V. and Modak, J. (2002), Application of RCM to a medium scale industry, Reliability
Engineering and System Safety, Vol. 77 No. 1, pp. 31-43.
Dhillon, B.S. (2002), Engineering Maintenance: A Modern Approach, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
Donovan, A. (1998), Improving business competitiveness through preactive maintenance
management, P/PM Technology, June, p. 54.
Doyle, E., Lee, C.-G. and Cho, D. (2009), Justification for the next generation of maintenance
modelling techniques, Journal of the Operational Research Society, Vol. 60 No. 4,
pp. 461-470.
Duffuaa, S. and Andijani, A. (1999), An integrated simulation model for effective planning of
maintenance operations for Saudi Arabian airlines (SAUDIA), Production Planning and
Control, Vol. 10 No. 6, pp. 579-584.
Edwards, D.J., Holt, G.D. and Harris, F.C. (1998), Predictive maintenance techniques and their
relevance to construction plant, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 4
No. 1, pp. 25-37.
El-Haram, M. and Horner, M. (2002), Practical application of RCM to local authority housing:
a pilot study, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 135-143.
Eti, M., Ogaji, S. and Probert, S. (2006), Development and implementation of preventivemaintenance practices in Nigerian industries, Applied Energy, Vol. 83 No. 10,
pp. 1163-1179.
Ferrari, E., Pareschi, A., Persona, A. and Regattieri, A. (2002), TPM: situation and procedure for a
soft introduction in Italian factories, The TQM Magazine, Vol. 14 No. 6, pp. 350-358.
Fore, S. and Mudavanhu, T. (2011), Application of RCM for a chipping and sawing mill, Journal
of Engineering, Design and Technology, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 204-226.
Fraser, K. (2014), Facilities management: the strategic selection of a maintenance system,
Journal of Facilities Management, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 18-37.
Fraser, K., Hvolby, H. and Watanabe, C. (2011), A review of the three most popular maintenance
systems: how well is the energy sector represented?, International Journal of Global Energy
Issues, Vol. 35 No. 4, pp. 287-309.
Garg, A. and Deshmukh, S. (2006), Maintenance management: literature review and directions,
Maintenance
management
models
659
IJQRM
32,6
660
Gomez, A. and Carnero, M. (2011), Selection of a computerised maintenance management

system: a case study in a regional health service, Production Planning and Control, Vol. 22
No. 4, pp. 426-436.
Hansson J., Backlund, F. and Lycke, L. (2003), Managing commitment: increasing the odds for
successful implementation of TQM, TPM or RCM, International Journal of Quality &
Reliability Management, Vol. 20 No. 9, pp. 993-1008.
Ireland, F. and Dale, B. (2001), A study of total productive maintenance implementation, Journal
of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 183-191.
Jardine, A.K.S., Joseph, T. and Banjevic, D. (1999), Optimizing condition-based maintenance
decisions for vibration monitoring, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 5
No. 3, pp. 192-202.
Jardine, A.K.S., Makis, V., Banjevic, D., Braticevic, D. and Ennis, M. (1998), A decision
optimisation model for condition-based maintenance, Journal of Quality in Maintenance
Jones, R.B. (1995), Risk-Based Management: A Reliability Centered Approach, Gulf Publishing
Company, Houston, TX.
Jonsson, P. (1997), The status of maintenance management in Swedish manufacturing firms,
Kajko-Mattsson, M. (2002), Problem management maturity within corrective maintenance,
Journal of Software Maintenance and Evolution: Research and Practice, Vol. 14 No. 3,
pp. 197-227.
Kelly, A. (1989), Maintenance and its management, Conference Communication, London.
Khan, F. and Haddara, M. (2003), Risk based maintenance: a quantitative approach for
maintenance/inspection scheduling and planning, Journal of Loss Prevention in the
Process Industries, Vol. 16 No. 6, pp. 561-573.
Koochaki, J., Bokhorst, J., Wortmann, H. and Klingenberg, W. (2011), Evaluating condition based
maintenance effectiveness for two processes in series, Journal of Quality in Maintenance
Kutucuoglu, K., Hamali, J., Irani, Z. and Sharp, J. (2001), A framework for managing maintenance
using performance measurement systems, International Journal of Operations &
Production Management, Vol. 21 Nos 1-2, pp. 173-194.
Lazim, H. and Ramayah, T. (2010), Maintenance strategy in Malaysian manufacturing
companies: a total productive maintenance (TPM) approach, Business Strategy Series,
Vol. 11 No. 6, pp. 387-396.
Levrat, E., Iung, B. and Crespo-Marquez, A. (2008), E-maintenance: review and conceptual
framework, Production Planning and Control, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 408-429.
Liptrot, D. and Palarchio, G. (2000), Utilizing advanced maintenance practices and information
technology to achieve maximum equipment reliability, International Journal of Quality &
Reliability Management, Vol. 17 No. 8, pp. 919-928.
Ljungberg, O. (1998), Measurement of overall equipment effectiveness as a basis for TPM
activities, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 18 No. 5,
pp. 495-507.
Lofsten, H. (1999), Management of industrial maintenance economic evaluation of maintenance
policies, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 19 No. 7,
pp. 716-737.
McAdam, R. and Duffner, A. (1996), Implementation of total productive maintenance in support
of an established total quality programme, Total Quality Management, Vol. 7 No. 6,
pp. 613-630.
McKone, K. and Weiss, E. (2002), Guidelines for implementing predictive maintenance,

Production and Operations Management, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 109-124.
Mann, L., Saxena, A. and Knapp, G.M. (1995), Statistical-based or condition-based preventive
maintenance, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 46-59.
Marquez, A. and Heguedas, A. (2002), Models for maintenance optimization: a study for
repairable systems and finite time periods, Reliability Engineering and System Safety,
Vol. 75 No. 3, pp. 367-377.
Martin, H. (1997), Contracting out maintenance and a plan for future research, Journal of Quality
in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 81-90.
Martorell, S., Serradell, V. and Verdu, G. (1996), Safety-related equipment prioritization for
reliability centered maintenance purposes based on a plant specific level 1 PSA*,
Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Vol. 52 No. 1, pp. 35-44.
Meador, R.J. (1997), Technology advances for operation and maintenance, paper presented at
the Predictive Maintenance Technology National Conference, Dallas, TX, 1-4 December,
pp. 1-4.
Mei, T. and Ding, X. (2009), Condition monitoring of rail vehicle suspensions based on changes in
system dynamic interactions, Vehicle System Dynamics, Vol. 47 No. 9, pp. 1167-1181.
Mitchell, J. (1998), Equipment asset management a 21st century requirement for competitive
success, P/PM Technology, February, p. 24.
Mostafa, S.I. (2004), Implementation of proactive maintenance in the Egyptian glass company,
Moubray, J. (2003), Twenty-first century maintenance organization: part 1 the asset
management model, Maintenance Technology, Applied Technology Publications,
Barrington, IL.
Murthy, D., Atrens, A. and Eccleston, J. (2002), Strategic maintenance management, Journal of
Muthu, S., Devadasan, S., Ahmed, S., Suresh, P. and Baladhandayutham, R. (2000),
Benchmarking for strategic maintenance quality improvement, Benchmarking: An
International Journal, Vol. 7 No. 4, pp. 293-303.
Nagarur, N. and Kaewplang, J. (1999), An object-oriented decision support system for
maintenance management, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 5 No. 3,
pp. 248-257.
Newell, G. (1999), Oil analysis cost-effective machine condition monitoring technique, Industrial
Lubrication and Tribology, Vol. 51 No. 3, pp. 119-124.
Nicholas, J.R. (2000), Lessons learned from 100+ predictive condition monitoring program
audit, paper presented at the Predictive Maintenance Technology National Conference,
Norman, OK, 13-16 November.
Ochonski, W. (2007), Sliding bearings lubricated with magnetic fluids, Industrial Lubrication
and Tribology, Vol. 59 No. 6, pp. 252-265.
Organ, M., Whitehead, T. and Evans, M. (1997), Availability-based maintenance within an asset
management programme, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 3 No. 4,
pp. 221-232.
Orosa, J., Oliveira, A. and Costa, A. (2010), New procedure for wind farm maintenance,
Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 110 No. 6, pp. 861-882.
Parkes, D. (1970), Operational research in maintenance, in Jardine, A.K.S. (Ed.), University of
Manchester Press, Manchester, pp. 1-7.
Maintenance
management
models
661
IJQRM
32,6
Patra, N., Tripathy, J. and Choudhary, B. (2005), Implementing the office total productive
maintenance (office TPM) program: a library case study, Library Review, Vol. 54 No. 7,
pp. 415-424.
Pinjala, S., Pintelon, L. and Vereecke, A. (2006), An empirical investigation on the relationship
between business and maintenance strategies, International Journal of Production
Economics, Vol. 104 No. 1, pp. 214-229.
662
Pintelon, L., Nagarur, N. and Van Puyvelde, F. (1999), Case study: RCM yes, no or maybe?,
Pophaley, M. and Vyas, R. (2010), Optimizing maintenance management efforts by the
application of TOC: a case study, The IUP Journal of Operations Management, Vol. IX
No. 3, pp. 48-61.
Price, J. (2002), The economics of repeated tube thickness surveys, International Journal of
Pressure Vessels and Piping, Vol. 79 Nos 8-10, pp. 555-559.
Prickett, P. (1997), A Petri-net based machine tool maintenance management system, Industrial
Management & Data Systems, Vol. 97 No. 4, pp. 143-149.
Prickett, P. (1999), An integrated approach to autonomous maintenance management,
Integrated Manufacturing Systems, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 233-242.
Pun, K., Chin, K., Chow, M. and Lau, H. (2002), An effectiveness-centered approach to
maintenance management: a case study, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering,
Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 346-368.
Quinn, B. (2002), From preventive to condition-based maintenance, Pollution Engineering,
Vol. 34 No. 8, pp. 38-39.
Ramesh, V., Sceenivasa Prasad, K. and Srinivas, T. (2008), Implementation of total productive
manufacturing concept with reference to lean manufacturing in a processing industry in
Mysore: a practical approach, The ICFAI University Journal of Operations Management,
Vol. 7 No. 4, pp. 45-57.
Rausand, M. (1998), Reliability centered maintenance, Reliability Engineering and System Safety,
Vol. 60 No. 2, pp. 121-132.
Regan, S. and Dale, B. (1999), Survival to success: the case of RHP Bearings, Blackburn, The
TQM Magazine, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 22-28.
Riis, J.O., Luxhj, J.T. and Thorsteinsson, U. (1997), A situational maintenance model,
International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 14 No. 4,
pp. 349-366.
Rodrigues, M. and Hatakeyama, K. (2006), Analysis of the fall of TPM in companies, Journal of
Materials Processing Technology, Vol. 179 Nos 1-3, pp. 276-279.
Rosqvist, T., Laakso, K. and Reunanen, M. (2009), Value-driven maintenance planning for
a production plant, Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Vol. 94 No. 1,
pp. 97-110.
Saraswat, S. and Yadava, G. (2008), An overview on reliability, availability, maintainability
and supportability (RAMS) engineering, International Journal of Quality & Reliability
Management, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 330-344.
Seth, D. and Tripathi, D. (2005), Relationship between TQM and TPM implementation factors
and business performance of manufacturing industry in Indian context, International
Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 256-277.
Sharma, R., Kumar, D. and Kumar, P. (2005), FLM to select suitable maintenance strategy
in process industries using MISO model, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering,
Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 359-374.
Sharma, R., Kumar, D. and Kumar, P. (2006), Manufacturing excellence through TPM
implementation: a practical analysis, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 106
No. 2, pp. 256-280.
Sherwin, D.J. (2000), A review of overall models for maintenance management, Journal of
Sherwin, D.J. and Al-Najjar, B. (1999), Practical models for condition monitoring inspection
intervals, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 203-220.
Sherwin, D.J. and Jonsson, P. (1995), TQM, maintenance and plant availability, Journal of
Smith, A.M. and Hinchcliffe, G.R. (2004), RCM: Gateway to World Class Maintenance, Elsevier
Butterworth-Heinemann, Burlington, MA.
Srikrishna, G.S., Yadava, G.S. and Rao, P.N. (1996), Reliability-centred maintenance applied
to power plant auxiliaries, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 2 No. 1,
pp. 3-14.
Stoneham, D. (1998), The Maintenance Management and Technology Handbook, 1st ed., Elsevier
Advanced Technology, Oxford.
Sun, H., Yam, R. and Wai-Keung, N. (2003), The implementation and evaluation of total
productive maintenance (TPM) an action case study in a Hong Kong manufacturing
company, International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 22 Nos 3-4,
pp. 224-228.
Toy, E.H. and Wogninrich, T.J. (2000), Productive reliability through OM&E, P/PM Technology,
December, p. 44.
Tsang, A. and Chan, P. (2000), TPM implementation in China: a case study, International
Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 144-157.
Tsang, A.H.C. (1995), Condition-based maintenance: tools and decision making, Journal of
Tsarouhas, P. (2007), Implementation of total productive maintenance in food industry: a case
study, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 5-18.
van der Wal, R. and Lynn, D. (2002), Total productive maintenance in a South African pulp and
paper company: a case study, The TQM Magazine, Vol. 14 No. 6, pp. 359-366.
Veldman, J., Klingenberg, W. and Wortmann, H. (2011a), Managing condition-based
maintenance technology, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 17 No. 1,
pp. 40-62.
Veldman, J., Wortmann, H. and Klingenberg, W. (2011b), Typology of condition based
Vineyard, M., Amoako-Gyampah, K. and Meredith, J. (2000), An evaluation of maintenance
policies for flexible manufacturing systems: a case study, International Journal of
Operations & Production Management, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 409-426.
Waier, P. (2002), In sync, Health Facilities Management, Vol. 15 No. 6, pp. 26-31.
Wang, W., Scarf, P. and Smith, M. (2000), On the application of a model of condition-based
maintenance, Journal of the Operational Research Society, Vol. 51 No. 11, pp. 1218-1227.
Wireman, T. (1990), World Class Maintenance Management, Industrial Press Inc., New York, NY.
Yam, R., Tse, P., Ling, L. and Fung, F. (2000), Enhancement of maintenance management
through benchmarking, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 6 No. 4,
pp. 224-240.
Yamashina, H. (1995), Japanese manufacturing strategy and the role of total productive
Maintenance
management
models
663
IJQRM
32,6
664
Yamashina, H. (2000), Challenge to world-class manufacturing, International Journal of Quality

& Reliability Management, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 132-143.
Yamashina, H. and Otani, S. (2001), Cost-optimized maintenance of the elevator single unit
case, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 49-70.
Yella, S., Dougherty, M. and Gupta, N. (2009), Condition monitoring of wooden railway sleepers,
Transportation Research Part C, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 38-55.
Zio, E. (2009), Reliability engineering: old problems and new challenges, Reliability Engineering
and System Safety, Vol. 94 No. 2, pp. 125-141.
About the authors
Kym Fraser is a Researcher at the University of South Australia in Adelaide. He is also an
Adjunct Professor at the University of Brawijaya and Ciputra University in Indonesia, and
Aalborg University in Denmark. He has a PhD in Manufacturing Management and holds degrees
in business, accounting, economics, and engineering. He has 35 years of business and academic
experience in Australia and abroad, having held senior management positions in both
government and private enterprises, specialising in service and operations management. He is
the current chair of the Manufacturing Society of Australia (ManSA) and has published over
70 research articles in internationally refereed journals and conferences. Professor Kym Fraser is
the corresponding author and can be contacted at: kym.fraser@unisa.edu.au
Hans-Henrik Hvolby is a Professor at the Centre for Logistics, Aalborg University in Denmark
and a Visiting Professor at the University of South Australia. He has published more than 130
peer-reviewed papers and serves as an Associate Editor for two international journals and is on
the editorial boards of five other international journals. He has managed or participated in more
than ten research and industrial collaboration projects funded by national programmes and EU.
His present scope of work includes supply chain planning, value chain diagnostics,
manufacturing information systems, and order management.
Tzu-Liang (Bill) Tseng is an Associate Professor of Industrial, Manufacturing and Systems
Engineering at the University of Texas at El Paso (UTEP). He received his MS Degree in Decision
Sciences at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and his PhD Degree in Industrial Engineering
at the University of Iowa. His research focuses on the computational intelligence, data mining,
bio-informatics, and advanced manufacturing. Dr Tseng published in many refereed journals
such as IEEE Transactions, IIE Transaction, Journal of Manufacturing Systems and others. He
has been serving as a Principle Investigator of many research projects, funded by NSF, NASA,
DoEd, and KSEF. He is currently serving as an Editor of Journal of Computer Standards &
Interfaces.
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

Article IJQRM

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Article IJQRM

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at:

Maintenance management models: a

Available from: Kym Fraser

Tzu-Liang (Bill) Tseng

International Journal of Quality &

total productive maintenance (TPM);

reliability-centred maintenance (RCM);

pre-planned maintenance; and

(2) In a review of overall models for maintenance management, Sherwin (2000)

basic terotechnology model;

advanced terotechnological model;

total quality maintenance (TQMain);

The Eindhoven University of Technology (EUT) model;

(3) In a literature review to determine the different maintenance models,

condition monitoring (CM);

predictive condition monitoring;

maintenance management metric;

operating maintenance training and administration;

preventive maintenance (PM);

equipment asset management;

proactive maintenance; and

profit centre maintenance.

(4) And finally, in a review of maintenance management models, Garg and

computerised maintenance management system (CMMS);

strategic maintenance management; and

risk based maintenance.

Crocker and Kumar

Organ et al. (1997)

Carnero and Noves

(see Table II)

Basic terotechnology model Parkes (1970)

Moves focus from life-cycle- Integrates TQM/terotechnology/LCP.

Pun et al. (2002)

Candell et al. (2009),

Requires management processes to

Encompasses the concepts of TQMain Holistic

Firms able to determine optimal

Systematically improves the cost per

Uses condition monitoring

Effect analysis techniques including

Able to determine optimal intervals for Holistic or

Recommended to be use in conjunction Holistic or

PM can assist to prevent unexpected

(see Table II)

Khan and Haddara

Yam et al. (2000)

Profit centre maintenance

continuously improving the

Normally confined to carefully selected Singular

Assets are optimised to maximise their Holistic

Total quality maintenance

The Eindhoven University

Maintenance system is timebased and the servicing and

Integrates technical, commercial, and

Firms able to determine optimal timing Holistic or

likely to be classed as maintenance models but strategies used in conjunction with an

2005 Bevilacqua et al.

Notes: [ ] Studies of models; ( ) No. of articles

Journal of Quality in Maintenance

Production, Planning and Control

International Journal of Reliability,

Leading dedicated maintenance journals

75/23 88/15 79/11 242/49