Contingency Factors Influencing Implementation of Physical Asset Management Practices

Open access

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this empirical study is to examine the role of two contingency factors, i.e. uncertainty and competitiveness in relation to physical asset management (PAM) practices as well as to maintenance key performance indicators. The research is based on a premise that PAM, which was defined by risk management practices, performance assessment practices, life cycle management practices, and policy & strategy practices, has become an indispensable element of strategic thinking of asset owners as well as maintenance and asset managers. The purpose of this study is to advance the understanding of how organizations that face high or low level of uncertainty and competitiveness respond in terms of PAM deployment.

Methodology/Approach: This study employed a data set based on a large-scale survey among organizations in six European countries (i.e. Slovenia, Poland, Greece, Sweden, Turkey and Slovakia). Data were collected from 138 organizations located in the above-mentioned countries to conduct the study.

Findings: The results show that organizations that are faced with high level of uncertainty and competitiveness are more engaged in the deployment of PAM practices. Moreover, results show that when organizations are facing high levels of competitiveness they are using KPIs to a greater extent than organizations under low levels of competitiveness.

Originality/value: From a theoretical perspective, this study contributes to the contingency theory by providing empirical evidence whether a context-dependent approach to PAM is needed. The findings also provide insights for managers on how to respond to the competitive pressure as well as how to customize PAM practices in order to adapt to the changes in dynamic organizational environment.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Al-Najjar B. (2002). Company´s business and competitiveness enhancement: A model of integrated vibration- based maintenance impact on company´s effectiveness. In Proceedings of COMADEM 2002: 15th International Congress on Condition Monitoring and Diagnostic Engineering Management. Paper presented at Condition monitoring and diagnostic engineering management (COMADEM 2002) Sep.2-4 2002 Birmingham UK (pp. 238-248).

  • Al-Najjar B. (2007). The lack of maintenance and not maintenance which costs: A model to describe and quantify the impact of vibration-based maintenance on company’s business. International Journal of Production Economics 107(1) 260-273 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2006.09.005

  • Amadi-Echendu J. E. Willett R. J. Brown K. A. Lee J. Mathew J. Vyas N. & Yang B.-S. (2007). What is engineering asset management? In Proceedings 2nd World Congress on Engineering Asset Management and the 4th International Conference on Condition Monitoring pp. 116-129.

  • Attwater A. Wang J. Q. Parlikad A. & Russel P. (2014). Measuring the performance of asset management systems. In Asset Management Conference 2014 (pp. 1-6). IET.

  • BSI (1984). Glossary of maintenance terms in Terotechnology. British Standard Institution (BSI) London; BS 3811.

  • Cohen J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.

  • Crespo Marquez A. & Gupta J. N. D. (2006). Contemporary maintenance management: process framework and supporting pillars. Omega 34(3) 313-326. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2004.11.003

  • Donaldson L. (2001). The Contingency Theory of Organisation. Sage Thousand Oaks.

  • Dreyer B. & Grønhaug K. (2004). Uncertainty flexibility and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of business research 57(5) 484-494 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(02)00315-6

  • Duijm J. N. Fiévez C. Gerbec M. Hauptmanns U. & Konstandinidou M. (2008). Management of health safety and environment in process industry. Safety Science 46(6) 908-290 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2007.11.003

  • EFNMS (2009). A Definition of Asset Management. Minutes of the meeting. European Federation of National Maintenance Societies. Trondheim. Norway

  • EFNMS-EAMC (2012). How organizations manage their physical assets in practice EFNMS Asset Management Survey (EFNMS). Retrieved from http://www.hms-gr.eu/t/files/EAMCSurvey2011ReportFinal02122012.pdf

  • Emmanouilidis C. & Komonen K. (2013). Physical asset management practices in industry: comparisons between Greece and other EU countries. In V. Prabhu M. Taisch D. Kiritsis (Eds.) Advances in production management systems. Sustainable production and service supply chains IFIP advances in information and communication technology (pp. 509-516). New York Springer http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41263-9_63

  • EN 13306:2010. (2010). Maintenance Terminology. European Standard. CEN (European Committee for Standardization) Brussels.

  • Field A. (2005). Discovering Statistics Using SPSS (Introducing Statistical Methods series). London: Sage Publications Ltd; Second Edition.

  • Frolov V. Ma L. Sun Y. & Bandara W. (2010). Identifying Core Functions of Asset Management. In Amadi- Echendu J.E.; Brown K.; Willett R.; MathewJ. (Eds.) Definitions Concepts and Scope of Engineering Asset Management London & New York Springer London 1sted. Vol. 1 pp. 19-31 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84996-178-3_2

  • ISO 55000 (2014). Asset management - Overview principles and terminology

  • Jansen J. J. P. Van Den Bosch F. A. J. & Volberda H. W. (2006). Exploratory Innovation Exploitative Innovation and Performance: Effects of Organizational Antecedents and Environmental Moderators. Management Science 52(11) 1661-1674 http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1060.0576

  • Komonen K. Kortelainen H. & Räikkönen M. (2012). Corporate Asset Management for Industrial Companies: An Integrated Business-Driven Approach. In: Van der Lei T. Herder P. & Wijnia Y. (Eds.) Asset Management: State of the Art in Europe from a Life Cycle Perspective (pp. 47-63). Springer Science Business Media B. V http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2724-3_4

  • Kumar R. (2005). Research Methodology: A Step-by-Step Guide for Beginners (2nd ed.) London: Sage Publications Ltd.

  • Maletič D. (2015). Interaction between Quality Management Production and Maintenance Performance PhD thesis Faculty of Organizational Sciences University of Maribor Kranj.

  • Maletič D. Maletič M. & Gomišček B. (2012). The relationship between continuous improvement and maintenance performance. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering 18(1) 30 - 41 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13552511211226175

  • Maletič D. Maletič M. Al-Najjar B. & Gomišček B. (2014). The role of maintenance in improving company’s competitiveness and profitability: A case study in a textile company. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management 25(4) 441-456 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JMTM-04-2013-0033

  • Maletič D. Maletič M. Al-Najjar B. Gotzamani K. Gianni M. Kalinowski T. B. Pačaiová H. Nagyová A. & Gomišček B. (2016). The role of contingency factors in physical asset management: An empirical examination. In: Euromaintenance 2016 proceedings: Paper presented at Euromaintenance 2016 (pp. 93-99).

  • Matusik S. F. & Hill C. W. (1998). The utilization of contingent work knowledge creation and competitive advantage. Academy of management review 23(4) 680-697.

  • Mitchell J.S. (2002). Physical Asset Management Handbook 3rd ed. Clarion Technical Publishers Houston TX.

  • Muchiri P. Pintelon L. Gelders L. & Martin H. (2011). Development of maintenance function performance measurement framework and indicators. International Journal of Production Economics 131(1) 295 - 302 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2010.04.039

  • Neely A.D. (1994). Performance Measurement System Design - Third Phase Draft of the Fourth Section of the Performance Measurement System Design Workbook. Centre for Business Performance Judge Institute of Management Studies Cambridge MA.

  • Pacaiova H. Glatz J. & Kacvinsky S. (2012). Positive and negative aspect in application of maintenance management philosophy. Journal of Applied Engineering Science 10(2): 99-105 http://dx.doi.org/:10.5937/jaes10-2131

  • Parida A. (2016). Asset performance measurement and management: Bridging the gap between failure and success. In: Euromaintenance 2016 proceedings: Paper presented at Euromaintenance 2016 (pp. 109-116

  • Parida A. Kumar U. Galar D. & Stenström C. (2015). Performance measurement and management for maintenance: a literature review. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering 21(1) 2 - 33 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JQME-10-2013-0067

  • Porter M. (1985). Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance. Free Press New York.

  • Ratnayake R. M. C. (2013). Sustainable Asset Performance: The Role of PAS 55 1&2 and Human Factors. International Journal of Sustainable Engineering 6(3) no.1 198-211 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19397038.2012.756074

  • Ratnayake R. M. C. & Markeset T. (2012). Asset Integrity Management for Sustainable Industrial Operations: Measuring the Performance. International Journal of Sustainable Engineering 5(2) 145-158 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19397038.2011.581391

  • Roda I. & Macchi M. (2016). Studying the funding principles for integrating Asset Management in Operations: an empirical research in production companies. In: 3rd IFAC Workshop on Advanced Maintenance Engineering Services and Technology AMEST 2016 - Biarritz France 19-21 October 2016. IFAC-PapersOnLine 49(28) 1-6 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ifacol.2016.11.001

  • Schuman C. A. & Brent A. C. (2005). Asset life cycle management: towards improving physical asset performance in the process industry. International Journal of Operations & Production Management 25(6) 566 - 579 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01443570510599728

  • Sila I. (2007). Examining the effects of contextual factors on TQM and performance through the lens of organizational theories: an empirical study. Journal of Operations Management 25(1) 83-109 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2006.02.003

  • Simões J. M. Gomes C. F. & Yasin M. M. (2011). A literature review of maintenance performance measurement: a conceptual framework and directions for future research. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering 17(2) 116-37 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13552511111134565

  • Simões J. M. Gomes C. F. & Yasin M. M. (2016). Changing role of maintenance in business organisations: measurement versus strategic orientation. International Journal of Production Research 54(11) 3329-3346 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2015.1106611

  • Wireman T. (1998). Developing Performance Indicators for Managing Maintenance. New York: Industrial Press.

  • Zhang D Linderman K. & Schroeder R. G. (2012). The moderating role of contextual factors on quality management practices. Journal of Operations Management 30(1-2) 12-23 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2011.05.001

Search
Journal information
Impact Factor


CiteScore 2018: 0.87

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.179
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.529

Cited By
Metrics
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 601 415 23
PDF Downloads 259 195 9