Contracting Maintenance: When to Outsource and When to Keep It In-House (Part I)

When I tour mills, the most common question is whether to outsource maintenance. In this column, I explain which maintenance tasks are best kept in‑house and which should be contracted out, and why.

Variability in workload

A disciplined preventive‑maintenance program keeps daily and weekly tasks predictable, reducing urgent requests for workshops or scaffolding. When your in‑house crew can handle routine work efficiently, outsourcing becomes unnecessary.

Large fluctuations in workload lead to under‑utilized staff and overstaffing—issues that often prompt a move to contract maintenance. However, hiring a contractor does not magically solve this. The contractor will only improve performance if it brings a more efficient system. If your organization has repeatedly failed to sustain improvements internally, it may be due to entrenched politics or union constraints. In such cases, contracting can be a pragmatic solution, but it is not a cure‑all.

Temporary scheduled increase in workload

During planned shutdowns or major outages, outsourcing can be cost‑effective, especially when the contractor also handles planning and scheduling. Still, routine shutdowns every five to seven weeks are typically better managed by in‑house planners.

Core business philosophy

Contractors often claim that maintenance is not core business. In a pulp and paper mill—or any manufacturing plant—this is misleading. Maintenance is integral to equipment reliability, which directly impacts production. Outsourcing should therefore be approached as part of a broader manufacturing contract, not as a separate, non‑core service.

When evaluating maintenance contracts, view equipment‑reliability tasks as core business. It is worth questioning whether maintaining in‑house carpenters, painters, scaffolding crews, masons, tinsmiths, and blacksmiths is cost‑effective. A readily available resource pool can lead to excessive, unnecessary work—such as extra paint jobs or carpentry projects—when users do not bear the full cost.

Equipment reliability stems from preventive maintenance—lubrication, filtration, alignment, cleaning, and operational best practices—as well as diagnostic activities like vibration analysis and basic inspections. Unless a contractor can demonstrate superior performance and cost savings on a comprehensive reliability contract, these activities should remain in‑house.

Lack of skills

If certain specialized skills are rarely used, outsourcing is often the only viable solution. Even a well‑trained in‑house team may struggle to maintain proficiency without frequent application. The current and looming shortage of skilled craftsmen—particularly in the U.S. pulp and paper sector—makes this a compelling argument for contractors who can provide those expertise.

Occasionally, unions restrict training opportunities for their own members, which hampers skill development and leaves them less competitive against contractors. Supporting continuous training benefits both the workforce and the organization.

Christer Idhammar is president of IDCON Inc., a Raleigh, N.C.–based reliability and maintenance management consulting firm that specializes in education, training and implementation of improved operations, reliability and maintenance practices. Contact Christer at 800‑849‑2041 or info@idcon.com.
Management Consultants in Reliability and Maintenance – IDCON
www.idcon.com