Use of Integration PM-PS for Effective
Long-Term Planning
Joseph Layani, PMP
Société de Transport de Montréal –
Montreal Transit Commission
Produced by:
Supported by:
What I’ll Cover
Introduction & Overview
Trigger points & Key challenges
Journey to Success
Integration Process and Achievements
Key points to Take Home
Questions
Introduction & Overview
STM in numbers
• 405 million of transits per
years
• 9600 employees
• 2 main operational
branches: Buses and
Subway
• Total assets values:
> 14 billions US$
Buses (1700 on 210 lines),
o Infrastructures ( > 200
locations all over the city of
Montreal)
o Subway fixed assets (5 lines,
68 stations)
o Rolling stocks ( >760 subway
cars)
o
Introduction & Overview
SAP-EAM at STM in numbers
• PM for the maintenance of :
Buses (since 2002),
o Infrastructures (since 2006)
o Subway fixed assets (since 2010),
o Rolling stocks (on-going project)
o
• Portal is used by maintenance end-users
• BW and BI-BO for KPIs production
• PS for Infras. projects only (since December 2012)
SAP-PS for Infrastructure projects lifecycle
Project Initialization
Project control
• Report in CO
(Internal order)
once a month
Project
Planning
• Based on engineers
estimates
• In a third party
software by projects
coordinators (Eng.
Dept.)
Project execution
Project Closing
Slide 5
• External : PO to
contractors in MM-SRV
and Serv. entry
• Internal : PM work orders
by maintenance planners
Maintenance
Planning
•In SAP-PM
•Based on
•Maint. Plans simulation,
•breakdown estimate
• & projects
•Use of Maintenance Work Centers
Long term planning process
PM work
orders
Infrastructure
Projects planners
Estimated
projects work
hours for
internal
resources
Preventive
maintenance
backlog
(hours/WC)
Preventive
maintenance
( hours / work
centers)
Overall
needed
working
hours
PM task
lists
Infrastructure
Maintenance planners
Corrective
maintenance
(hours /WC)
based on
historic data
Infrastructure
Maintenance Manager
PM work
orders
Trigger points
Engineering
Maintenance vs. Engineering
Lack of integration : Maintenance
• Impossible to compare project estimates, made in the
third party software, with the planning made in PM
High level work area vs. PM work centers
o Annual Maint. team capacity allotted to projects : imprecise
o
• Impossible to adjust the planned vs. actual
o
Only CO reporting, by the end of the posting period, for cost
reporting – no advancement calculations
Key challenges
Simplify the projects planning process
• Productivity improvement for the Eng. Group
Match the project resource plan with PM capacity
• More accurate human resource planning
Get a complete view of assets costs (by locations)
• Consolidation of project and maintenance costs per FL
SAP-PS project Roadmap
Implement SAP-PS as a project planning tools
o Get rid of the 3rd party software
o Convert more than 400 active projects
o Develop a combined capacity management
o Create relevant reporting and KPIs
o
Kick-off
October 2011
Support & BI
deployment
Blueprint
(PS & BI)
May 2012
(6 months)
Realization
and tests
September 2012
(5months)
Conversion &
user training
November 2012
(2 months)
December
3rd 2012
Important Considerations
Change management
• Planning tool : Department for infra. projects PS
• Cost collectors : Finance department follow Infra. projects with
•
WBS instead of internal orders
Work Centers usage: Maintenance planners have to share
“their” PM work centers with Project planners

Implication of High Management (communications)
 Compose a Project team with Maintenance, Engineers and
Finance members
Technical considerations
Use of PM-PS integration points
• WBS elements are linked to the FL on which the project is
•
•
•
performed
Project activities for internal resources are planned with a
control key that allows “capacity requirement”
PM order affectation to projects leads to an automatic
replacement of the activity control key (no capacity req.)
Work Centers usage must be changed from “Maintenance”
usage to “All task list types” usage
Results
Business process integration
Infrastructure Maintenance planners
Functional Location
Project
WBS
Network Activity
(Internal labor)
Link
Maintenance Order
for projects
Infrastructure project planners
Long term project planning
Work Centers
Short term planning
Results
Business process integration
Project
Functional
Location
WBS
Network Activity
(Internal labor)
Capacity requirement is disabled
for project activity
Infrastructure project planners
Work
Centers
Maintenance Order
for projects
Short term planning
Infrastructure Maintenance planners
Long term planning process - improvement
PM
PM/
BW
Backlog for
preventive
maintenance
(hours/WC)
Calculated PM
work hours for
preventive
maintenance
Infrastructure Projects planners
Estimated
projects work
hours for internal
work centers
PS
Infrastructure Maintenance planners
Total work
hours
(Planned)
BO
Infrastructure Maintenance Manager
Estimated
corrective work
hours /WC
based on
historic data
PM
More accurate Capacity estimate
Project planners
• Are able to give to the maintenance sections
o
An estimate based on all project activities using the same work
centers as the maintenance dept. (Electricians, Mechanics,
Plumbers…)
• Are able to use PM historic data to plan new projects
o
Work centers utilization in PM orders related to projects
• Are able to adjust project plans according to
maintenance section work load  capacity leveling
More effective decision making
Maintenance managers
• Are able to challenge their participation to projects in
regard to their preventive vs. curative objectives
o
By using overall projects analysis and regular PM reporting
Maintenance planners
• Are able to react to change of project timeframe
o
Overall work hours needed is adjusted once a month
Short term planning process
Project work orders are created at
the right time
 no more “floating” orders in the
system
PM order capacity requirements
replace the initial PS activity
capacity requirement
 No duplication of resources
requirement in the project
Slide 17
Configuration point
Slide 18
Our way to EAM consolidation
Use of Functional location in PS
• Complete Cost analysis per FLOC includes PS data
o
Investment planning per location  Maintenance deficit reduction
• Asset lifecycle evaluation Definition of an Asset “Health”
indicator
o
based on BW data and BO reporting
Key Points to Take Home
Gap Reduction between 2 planning groups
• Integration leads to interactions  Better Productivity
Work centers  resources integration
o Functional location  object integration
o
More decision making tools
• Better project execution follow up
o
Standard PS, BW and BO reporting and analysis
Change management consideration
o
o
Communication and User training is the key of success
Test team must involve a large panel of end-users
Thank you
Questions
Slide 21
Joseph Layani, PMP
Société de Transport de Montréal
jlayani@stm.info
Produced by:
Supported by: