25 Years of Industrial Lessons: What Still Needs Improvement

Half a quarter of a century ago, I left the U.S. Navy’s nuclear submarine program. The precision, discipline, and preventive‑maintenance culture I’d witnessed onboard set a benchmark that I now compare to the civilian sector.

In the years that followed, I saw a stark contrast. Many factories operated with:

• Minimal redundancy—one faulty pump could bring an entire plant to a halt.
• Sanitary systems that had been altered over time, compromising hygiene.
• Components selected for upfront cost rather than long‑term reliability.

Operator training was rudimentary: “Press the green button in the morning, the red at night, and call maintenance if anything breaks.” There was no guidance for abnormal conditions, allowing minor issues to snowball.

Standard operating procedures, when they existed, were tucked away on dusty shelves, and maintenance was predominantly reactive.

Through this experience, I embarked on a career dedicated to closing these gaps. While individual factories have shown modest progress, the industry as a whole still lags in several critical areas.

My recent return to plants I once worked with highlights these persistent challenges:

• Advanced technologies like mix‑proof sanitary valves and PLCs have arrived, yet change control remains weak and redundancy is scarce.
• Safety training has improved, but operational knowledge remains superficial.
• SOPs continue to languish on shelves; automation offers consistency only where it is explicitly programmed.
• Maintenance practices are still largely reactive. Despite predictive‑maintenance tools, many machines run to failure, forcing costly capital outlays.

Had we applied the same rigor to all facets of manufacturing, today’s factories would be running on modern ERP systems, not legacy Windows Workgroups or spreadsheets.

I understand that many engineers and maintenance professionals have made commendable strides locally. My point, however, is broader: after 25 years, shouldn’t every facility—large or small—have advanced further? Where do you stand?