Building a Seamless Partnership Between Maintenance Planning and Storeroom Operations

When maintenance planning lacks structure, storerooms experience erratic parts usage, inflated safety stock, higher expenses, and widespread frustration. An under‑configured Computerized Maintenance Management System (CMMS) can worsen the problem. This article explores how to dismantle silos and forge a productive partnership where planning and storeroom activities intersect.

Typical Findings

Across plants, approaches to maintenance planning, scheduling, and MRO storeroom management differ markedly. The following observations, drawn from both assessments and real‑world experience, illustrate common pitfalls:

• Only about 10% of planners/schedulers are utilized to their full potential.
• Most organizations combine planning and scheduling into a single role, rather than separating the functions.
• Storerooms often hold more than 50% obsolete spare parts—parts no longer needed by the plant—wasting valuable resources each year.
• In 45% of surveyed storerooms, silos still exist between departments.
• Planners spend an average of five hours per eight‑hour day hunting for and sourcing parts needed for scheduled work.
• Only 10% of a planner’s time is dedicated to true planning.
• Nearly 65% of storerooms report poor inter‑departmental communication, leading to excess costs and lost opportunities.
• More than 30% of storerooms do not perform cycle counting.
• Almost 45% of storerooms rely on a single KPI—inventory value—ignoring other performance metrics.
• Maintenance technicians waste 22% of their day searching for parts.
• Most organizations either fail to document key processes or store documentation in inaccessible digital “black holes.”

These challenges can feel overwhelming—like eating an elephant. However, progress is achievable by breaking issues into manageable pieces and developing a clear, phased roadmap.

You may wonder, “Where do I start?” With poorly written procedures and reliance on tribal knowledge, it’s best to begin by clarifying core processes.

Processes Before Tools

In many facilities, maintenance and storeroom staff communicate through CMMS or Enterprise Asset Management (EAM) systems that automate workflows. Ideally, these business processes are defined before the system goes live. Unfortunately, that isn’t always the case.

Auditing processes is essential to prevent bad habits from becoming standard practice. When deviations are detected, investigate whether changes in the environment justify the new behavior.

Revisit processes every 18 months to drive continuous improvement. Lean techniques like value‑stream mapping can uncover hidden opportunities for efficiency.

Process maps clarify roles: who does what, when, and how. From these maps, create a RACI matrix to assign responsibility, accountability, consultation, and information needs. While time‑intensive, this clarity eliminates duplication of effort—such as the scenario where a planner’s quotes were discarded by a storeroom buyer.

CMMS/EAM Configuration

Once processes are codified, embed them into the CMMS. Proper configuration hinges on accurate functional location and equipment hierarchies. The equipment numbering should cease once the maintenance strategy ends; deeper levels represent parts.

Many implementations omit detailed nameplate data and fail to populate Bill‑of‑Materials (BOM) from manufacturer manuals or project drawings. A comprehensive BOM—including both stock and non‑stock items—reduces the time maintenance and storeroom teams spend hunting parts.

Ongoing data collection and population are critical. Accurate BOMs empower storeroom managers to make informed stocking decisions and ensure every part has a documented “where‑used” relationship.

Communication Handshakes

Poor communication often surfaces because interfaces between functions are informal. A CMMS can formalize these interactions. Think of each interface as a handshake that confirms information flow:

• Planner to procurement or storeroom buyer.
• Procurement to storeroom (if procurement is a separate function).
• Storeroom to scheduler—job ready for scheduling.
• Scheduler to storeroom for kit staging or delivery.
• Maintenance back to storeroom for unused kit parts or rebuildable items.

Status flags in the CMMS—such as Awaiting Materials, Ready to Schedule, Scheduled, Completed, and Closed—track progress. Supplement with verbal updates, meetings, and email, guided by a meeting checklist to avoid missing critical steps.

John Kotter warns that we under‑communicate by a factor of 10 to 100. Leveraging shared metrics—e.g., mean time to repair (MTTR) or inventory turnover—aligns all stakeholders toward common asset reliability goals.

Purchasing Outside the Storeroom Process

Some organizations use purchase cards or ad‑hoc buying to circumvent process barriers. While expedient, this practice can lead to:

• Purchases not linked to an asset or inventory item, undermining BOM integrity.
• Inability to trace true maintenance costs.
• Loss of parts‑usage data, preventing accurate stocking and safety‑stock calculations.
• Inability to rotate inventory, causing shelf‑life‑expiration of items like V‑belts or bearings.

Ensure all purchases flow through the CMMS so that parts can be tracked, issued, and rotated effectively.

Bringing It All Together

Success hinges on shared objectives: reliability, availability, cost reduction, safety, environmental compliance, and quality. Maintenance and storeroom functions should be equal partners, not subservient to one another. Mutual collaboration unlocks the full value of both functions.

Read more on maintenance planning and scheduling:

The What, Why and How of Wrench Time

Time Zones Create Maintenance Planning Lag

How a Planner and Scheduler Should Deal with an Urgent Job

This article was previously published in the Reliable Plant 2019 Conference Proceedings.