When preventive maintenance becomes preventive paperwork
Maintenance supervisor in a Jeddah hospital showed me his Maximo dashboard last month.
Outstanding PMs: 287
He scrolled through the list.
“See this one? Chiller filter inspection. We do it.”
“This one? Pump bearing check. We do it.”
“This one? Fire pump monthly test. We definitely do it.”
I asked: “So why are they showing overdue?”
He smiled. “Because closing the PM in Maximo takes longer than doing the actual work.”
The PM That Takes 2 Minutes to Do, 12 Minutes to Close
Let’s walk through what actually happens.
Technician walks to the equipment. Takes 2 minutes. Opens panel. Checks bearing temperature with infrared gun. Takes 30 seconds. Listens for abnormal noise. Takes 15 seconds. Everything’s fine. Closes panel. Takes 30 seconds.
Total actual work: 3 minutes, 15 seconds.
Now he has to close the PM in Maximo.
Pulls out tablet. Opens Maximo. Takes 40 seconds (login + loading).
Finds the work order. Takes 30 seconds (scrolling through list).
Clicks “Actual Start” button. Enters time. Takes 20 seconds.
Changes status to “In Progress.” Takes 15 seconds.
Scrolls down to find “Task” section. Takes 10 seconds.
Completes the task checkbox. Takes 10 seconds.
Scrolls to “Actual Finish.” Enters time. Takes 20 seconds.
Looks for failure code dropdown. Required field, can’t skip. Takes 5 seconds to find.
Opens dropdown. 89 options. Scrolls looking for “No Issues Found.” Takes 35 seconds.
Selects it. Scrolls back up. Takes 10 seconds.
Changes status to “Complete.” Takes 10 seconds.
Clicks Save. Takes 15 seconds.
Error message: “Labor hours required.”
Goes to Labor tab. Takes 15 seconds.
Enters labor hours. Takes 25 seconds.
Clicks Save again. Takes 15 seconds.
PM closes successfully.
Total time in Maximo: 4 minutes, 40 seconds.
Time doing actual maintenance: 3 minutes, 15 seconds.
The system took longer than the work.
What Happens Next
Technician has 8 more PMs on his list today.
If he closes each one properly: 8 × 4:40 = 37 minutes
If he just does the work and closes them all at end of shift: 8 minutes
Guess which one happens?
By 4 PM, he’s completed all the work. Equipment is maintained.
He sits down, opens Maximo, and rapid-closes all 8 PMs.
Status: Complete. Labor: 0.5 hours each. Failure code: blank or random pick. Actual start/finish: estimated.
The maintenance happened.
The data is garbage.
The PM Completion Rate Lie
Manufacturing plant in Egypt proudly showed us their metrics:
PM Completion Rate: 94%
Management was happy. “Our maintenance discipline is excellent.”
We asked to see PM effectiveness data.
Blank stares.
“How do you know the PMs are actually preventing failures?”
They pulled up the completion report. “Look, 94% completed on time.”
We dug deeper.
Pulled 90 days of completed PMs. Checked the data quality.
Labor hours recorded: 47% blank
Failure codes: 81% blank
Task completion details: 23% filled
Actual start/finish times: 68% showed exact same time (meaning estimated, not real)
PMs were getting “completed.”
But the data proved nobody was actually capturing what happened during those completions.
The Mobile Maximo Myth
“Just give them mobile devices. Then they can close PMs on the spot.”
We hear this constantly.
Here’s what actually happens.
Plant manager bought 15 tablets for technicians. Loaded Maximo mobile app.
First week: technicians used them.
Second week: half the tablets stayed in the office.
Third week: 3 tablets still in use.
We asked why.
Technician 1: “Screen times out every 2 minutes. I’m in the middle of entering data, screen locks, I have to log back in.”
Technician 2: “Mobile app doesn’t show all the fields. I enter what I can on mobile, then have to redo it on desktop anyway.”
Technician 3: “Tablet battery dies by 1 PM. Charging stations are back in the office, so I walk back, charge it, but then I’m already at a computer so I just use that.”
Technician 4: “I’m wearing gloves. Touchscreen doesn’t work. I take gloves off, do Maximo, put gloves back on. Easier to just remember the WO number and close it later.”
Mobile Maximo can work.
But if the mobile workflow requires the same 15 steps as desktop, nobody’s going to use it in the field.
The PM Design That Actually Gets Closed
University in Saudi Arabia had the same problem. PMs completed, data quality terrible.
We rebuilt their PM structure with one goal: close it in under 60 seconds.
Old PM for HVAC filter check:
Work order opens with 6 tabs: Details, Plans, Actuals, Tasks, Materials, Related Records.
Required fields: Actual start, actual finish, labor hours, failure code, task completion checkboxes (7 tasks), supervisor approval.
Average close time: 5 minutes, 20 seconds.
New PM for HVAC filter check:
Custom start center view showing only PM work orders.
One-click action button: “Complete PM – Normal”
Clicking it auto-fills:
- Status: Complete
- Actual start: Current timestamp minus 30 minutes
- Actual finish: Current timestamp
- Labor: 0.5 hours (preset based on PM type)
- Failure code: “No issues found”
- Tasks: All marked complete
Technician sees confirmation screen: “PM completed. Any issues to report?”
Two buttons: “No, everything normal” or “Yes, add notes”
95% of the time: clicks “No, everything normal.” PM closes. Done.
Close time: 8 seconds.
If there IS an issue, clicking “Yes” opens text field for notes and failure code dropdown (only 8 options, not 89).
Close time with issue reporting: 45 seconds.
The Results
Before redesign:
- PM completion rate: 91%
- Average close time: 4:40
- Data quality (fields properly filled): 31%
- Technician satisfaction: Low (constant complaints)
After redesign:
- PM completion rate: 97%
- Average close time: 0:12
- Data quality: 88%
- Technician satisfaction: “Finally, Maximo doesn’t waste my time”
The maintenance work didn’t change.
The data entry friction disappeared.
The Three-Click Rule
After rebuilding PMs for twelve clients, we learned this:
If closing a routine PM takes more than three clicks, completion quality drops.
Click 1: Open the PM
Click 2: Confirm work done normally
Click 3: Save/Close
Anything beyond that, you’re asking technicians to do data entry instead of maintenance.
And they’ll choose maintenance every time.
Because that’s their job.
The Failure Code Problem
We covered this in the previous article, but it’s worth repeating here.
Hospital had 340 failure codes.
Technician doing a PM has to pick one to close the work order.
If everything was fine, which code do you pick?
They had options like:
- “NO ABNORMALITIES DETECTED”
- “WITHIN NORMAL PARAMETERS”
- “SATISFACTORY CONDITION”
- “NO ACTION REQUIRED”
Four ways to say the same thing.
Technician picks randomly or leaves it blank because who knows which one is “correct.”
Simple fix:
One code: “Normal – No Issues”
That’s it.
If there’s a problem, different codes appear. But for 90% of PMs where everything is fine, there’s one obvious choice.
Completion rate jumped.
The Labor Hour Theater
Maximo requires labor hours for completed work orders.
So technicians enter them.
Except they’re mostly fiction.
We analyzed labor hours for repetitive PMs over 6 months at a manufacturing plant.
PM: Monthly motor inspection
Equipment: 47 identical motors spread across facility.
Same PM, same work, same technician.
Labor hours recorded:
Motor 1: 0.5 hours Motor 2: 1.0 hours
Motor 3: 0.3 hours Motor 4: 0.8 hours Motor 5: 0.5 hours
Same work. Labor varies by 233%.
Why? Because the technician closes PMs in batches at end of day and estimates the hours.
Better approach:
Pre-set labor hours based on PM type.
Motor inspection PM? Auto-fills 0.5 hours.
If it actually took longer (found a problem, did extra work), technician can change it.
But 90% of the time, the preset is accurate and saves guessing.
Result:
Labor hour accuracy went from 34% to 91%.
Maintenance cost reports became trustworthy.
The Supervisor Approval Bottleneck
Hospital required supervisor approval on all completed PMs.
Seems like good control.
Reality:
Technician completes PM at 10 AM. Status: “Waiting Approval.”
Supervisor is in meetings, doing rounds, handling emergencies.
Checks Maximo at 4 PM. Sees 23 PMs waiting approval.
Clicks “Approve All.”
Takes 30 seconds.
Supervisor approved 23 PMs without reading a single one.
The approval added zero value. It just added a 6-hour delay.
We asked: “What are you checking when you approve?”
Supervisor: “Honestly? Nothing. I trust my team did the work. If there was a problem, they’d tell me directly, not write it in Maximo.”
Solution:
Removed approval requirement for routine PMs.
Kept it only for PMs that require spare parts over $500 (real cost control).
PM close time dropped. Supervisor workload dropped. Nothing bad happened.
The ROI Nobody Talks About
Manufacturing plant, 450 assets, 2,800 PMs annually.
Before PM workflow redesign:
Average close time: 4 minutes, 40 seconds per PM
Total annual time spent closing PMs: 2,800 × 4:40 = 13,067 minutes = 218 hours
Labor cost: 218 hours × $42/hour = $9,156 annually spent on PM data entry
After PM workflow redesign:
Average close time: 12 seconds per PM
Total annual time: 2,800 × 0:12 = 560 minutes = 9.3 hours
Labor cost: 9.3 hours × $42 = $390 annually
Time saved: 208.7 hours
Cost saved: $8,766 annually
Plus side benefit:
Data quality improved, so they could actually analyze PM effectiveness.
Found 18 PMs that never caught issues in 2+ years. Eliminated them.
Saved another 180 hours annually.
Total annual benefit: $16,300
Project cost to redesign workflows: $3,800
Payback: 11 weeks
What To Do
Pick your most common PM type.
Motor inspection. Filter change. Whatever you do most.
Shadow a technician doing it.
Time the actual work: ____ minutes
Time the Maximo data entry: ____ minutes
If data entry takes longer than the work, you have a problem.
Ask the technician:
“What would make closing this PM faster?”
Listen carefully. They know exactly where the friction is.
Test one simplified workflow.
Pick 5 PMs. Rebuild the close process to be 3 clicks maximum.
Run it for 30 days.
Measure close time and data quality.
If it works, expand.
The Honest Truth
Your technicians aren’t ignoring PMs because they’re lazy.
They’re ignoring the data entry because it takes longer than the actual maintenance.
And when forced to choose between maintaining equipment and maintaining Maximo data quality, they choose equipment.
Every time.
As they should.
Your job is to make both possible.
Make closing a PM so fast that there’s no reason to skip it.
Want to see where your PM workflow is slowing your team down?
We’ll shadow your technicians for half a day.
Time their actual work vs system time.
Show you exactly where the friction is.
No cost. Just observation and recommendations.
Contact Innexa. Let’s fix your PM workflow.
About Innexa IT Solutions
Innexa works exclusively with IBM Maximo and Maximo Application Suite for asset-intensive organizations across Egypt and the GCC. We support clients in building asset performance capabilities through disciplined data practices, integration clarity, and practical execution roadmaps grounded in real operational environments.