Plan Work

Purpose

The Plan Work phase turns approved work orders into complete job packages. Effective planning eliminates rework, chronic parts shortages and safety incidents. Its output is a job plan that a crew can pick up and execute without waiting for information.

Scope

All corrective, preventive, predictive, condition-based and improvement work
Job plan development and Standard Job Plan library management
Safety planning, isolation planning and risk assessment
Shutdown and outage planning

RCM Foundation

Planning is where RCM decisions become physical procedures. On-Condition, Scheduled Restoration, Scheduled Discard, Failure-Finding, Redesign and Run-to-Failure each demand a different plan complexity and level of rigour. Consequence category (Safety/Environmental vs Hidden vs Operational vs Non-Operational) dictates planning depth — Safety failures get the deepest plans, run-to-failure gets a reactive Standard Job Plan for speed.

Process Steps

01
Screen the work order
Intent
Confirm the work order is genuinely ready for planning so the planner's time is spent building the job, not chasing intake gaps.
Inputs
- Approved work request converted to a work order in status Ready for Planning
- Asset criticality rating and current maintenance strategy for the equipment
- Standard Job Plan library
Actions
- Verify the description, functional location, priority and safety flags are complete and consistent
- Reject and return work orders that fail the Identify Work quality bar — do not fix them silently
- Check the Standard Job Plan library for an existing plan for this failure mode before starting from scratch
- Confirm work-order type (Corrective, PM, PdM, Improvement, Modification) matches the actual scope
People
Planner accountable. Planning Leader consulted on rejections. Maintenance Leader informed of returned work.
Process
Standard screening checklist. Rejections use standard reason codes and go back to the originating leader — never to the requester directly.
Technology
CMMS planning queue with age flags. Standard Job Plan library searchable by asset class and failure mode.
What Good Looks Like
- Every crew member can point to where this step lives in the CMMS — no shadow spreadsheets.
- The opposite of: planner accepts poor work orders to keep the peace
- The opposite of: standard Job Plan library ignored
- The opposite of: wrong work-order type
What Bad Looks Like
- Planner accepts poor work orders to keep the peace — planning quality collapses
- Standard Job Plan library ignored — the same job is re-planned from scratch every time
- Wrong work-order type — reactive work hidden inside PM buckets and reporting lies
Outputs
- Work order accepted into the planning queue, or returned with reason
- Standard Job Plan reference attached where one exists
02
Site inspection
Intent
Ground-truth the job at the asset before spending time planning — surprises found on paper cost minutes, surprises found on the day cost shifts.
Inputs
- Screened work order
- Asset drawings, P&IDs and previous work history
- Site access, isolation and permit requirements
Actions
- Physically walk to the asset with the work order in hand
- Verify the defect, take photos and measurements
- Identify isolation points, access constraints, scaffolding or lifting needs
- Confirm nearby hazards, live services and operational impact
- Talk to the operator and last crew who worked the asset
People
Planner accountable. Operator and Maintenance Supervisor consulted on the walk. Reliability Engineer joins for complex or repeat failures.
Process
Site inspection is mandatory for non-Standard Job Plan work above a defined size (e.g. > 8 hours). Standard walk-down checklist used every time.
Technology
Mobile CMMS to photograph and annotate at the asset. Digital drawing viewer on tablet — no paper hunts.
What Good Looks Like
- Every crew member can point to where this step lives in the CMMS — no shadow spreadsheets.
- The opposite of: planning from the desk
- The opposite of: isolations discovered on the day
- The opposite of: operator not consulted
What Bad Looks Like
- Planning from the desk — job walked only on execution day
- Isolations discovered on the day — permit and outage windows blown
- Operator not consulted — the actual symptom is different from the written one
Outputs
- Site-inspection notes and photos attached to the work order
- Confirmed isolation list, access plan and rigging needs
03
Scope definition
Intent
State exactly what will be done, in what order, to what quality standard — so the crew executes a plan, not an interpretation.
Inputs
- Site inspection findings
- Standard Job Plan library, OEM manuals, engineering standards
- Failure history for the asset and failure mode
Actions
- Start from an Standard Job Plan where one exists; adapt rather than rewrite
- Break the job into operations in execution sequence
- Define quality standard, tolerances and hold points for each operation
- Reference drawings, procedures and standards by number, not by description
- Note commissioning and functional test steps up-front
People
Planner accountable. Reliability Engineer consulted for critical assets. Tradesperson consulted for constructability.
Process
Every non-trivial job produces an Standard Job Plan candidate — the library grows by default, not by exception.
Technology
CMMS operation list with linked documents. Standard Job Plan versioning with review dates.
What Good Looks Like
- Every crew member can point to where this step lives in the CMMS — no shadow spreadsheets.
- The opposite of: free-text instructions instead of operations
- The opposite of: quality standards implied rather than stated
- The opposite of: commissioning bolted on at the end
What Bad Looks Like
- Free-text instructions instead of operations — no learning captured, no reuse
- Quality standards implied rather than stated — every crew works to a different bar
- Commissioning bolted on at the end — infant-mortality failures follow
Outputs
- Operation list with sequence, standard and hold points
- New or updated Standard Job Plan where the work is repeatable
04
Materials planning
Intent
Ensure every part needed is identified, available and physically kitted before the job is allowed to schedule.
Inputs
- Bill of materials for the asset
- Store inventory, on-order and lead-time data
- Vendor and contractor spares catalogues
Actions
- Identify parts by material number and quantity — no free-text 'sundries'
- Check on-hand stock; reserve immediately against the work order
- Raise purchase requisitions for shortfalls with need-by dates
- Kit critical spares physically and stage them against the work order
- Flag long-lead items and set the earliest schedulable date on the work order
People
Planner accountable. Storeperson kits and confirms. Buyer / procurement expedite shortfalls. Reliability Engineer consulted on non-standard parts.
Process
Work order does not move to Ready-to-Schedule until materials show as reserved or kitted. Standard kitting bins per work order.
Technology
CMMS materials module linked to inventory and procurement. Reservation shows on the work order; kitting status visible to the scheduler.
What Good Looks Like
- Every crew member can point to where this step lives in the CMMS — no shadow spreadsheets.
- The opposite of: 'Sundries' or free-text parts
- The opposite of: reservations made but never kitted
- The opposite of: long-lead items not flagged
What Bad Looks Like
- 'Sundries' or free-text parts — nothing reserved, crew scavenges on the day
- Reservations made but never kitted — parts issued to another job first
- Long-lead items not flagged — job scheduled and then cancelled at 03:00
Outputs
- Materials list with reservations and PO status
- Kitting complete flag and staging location
- Earliest schedulable date driven by material availability
05
Labour and tools
Intent
State honestly what crafts, hours, skills and equipment are required so the scheduler can level-load and the supervisor can staff the job.
Inputs
- Historical actuals from similar completed work orders
- Craft/skill matrix and contractor rate table
- Special-tool and calibrated-instrument register
Actions
- Estimate hours per craft per operation using historical data — not gut feel
- Specify required skill level and any tickets (EWP, confined-space, high-voltage)
- List special tools, lifting equipment, calibrated instruments and their required condition
- Identify contractor scope where applicable, with rate code
- Book long-lead tools (cranes, scaffold, specialist rigs) against the work order
People
Planner accountable. Maintenance Supervisor validates estimates. Contractor coordinator consulted for external scope.
Process
Estimates use standard skill levels and historical benchmarks. Every completed job updates the benchmark.
Technology
CMMS labour and tool booking. Tool register with availability calendar and calibration due dates.
What Good Looks Like
- Every crew member can point to where this step lives in the CMMS — no shadow spreadsheets.
- The opposite of: estimates copied job-to-job without learning from actuals
- The opposite of: special tools discovered missing on execution day
- The opposite of: contractor scope planned separately from the parent work order
What Bad Looks Like
- Estimates copied job-to-job without learning from actuals
- Special tools discovered missing on execution day
- Contractor scope planned separately from the parent work order — coordination fails
Outputs
- Labour estimate by craft and operation
- Tools and equipment list booked against the work order
06
Safety pack
Intent
Build the safety envelope for the job so the crew executes inside a defined boundary — permits, isolations, JSA and controls all attached before release.
Inputs
- Job Safety Management flags from Identify Work
- Isolation register, permit matrix, JSA library
- SDS, environmental controls, emergency response plan
Actions
- Build the isolation list with tag numbers and sequence
- Draft or attach the permit(s): hot work, confined space, working at height, isolation, excavation
- Attach or write the JSA / SWMS — reference the library first
- List PPE and control measures per operation
- Note operator support requirements (isolation, standby, hold-back)
People
Planner accountable. HSE consulted for non-standard hazards. Maintenance Supervisor and Operations Leader confirm isolations.
Process
No work order is released without a completed safety pack. JSA library is versioned and reviewed at set intervals.
Technology
CMMS permit and isolation modules linked to the work order. JSA library searchable by task and hazard.
What Good Looks Like
- Every crew member can point to where this step lives in the CMMS — no shadow spreadsheets.
- The opposite of: permits arranged on the day
- The opposite of: isolation list drafted from memory
- The opposite of: jSA written as a formality
What Bad Looks Like
- Permits arranged on the day — job stops waiting for signatures
- Isolation list drafted from memory — a live source is missed
- JSA written as a formality — hazards genuine to the job are never surfaced
Outputs
- Safety pack attached to the work order — isolations, permits, JSA, PPE, environmental controls
07
Package and release
Intent
Deliver a single self-contained job pack that the crew can execute from start to finish without hunting for information.
Inputs
- Scope, materials, labour, tools and safety pack from prior steps
- Drawings, procedures, Standard Job Plan references and checklists
Actions
- Assemble the job pack: cover sheet, operations, safety pack, materials list, drawings, procedures, checklists
- Cross-check that every operation references its documents, hold points and quality standard
- Peer-review with another planner or the Maintenance Supervisor for high-risk or high-value work
- Move status to Ready-to-Schedule and hand off to the Scheduler
People
Planner accountable. Planning Leader owns pack quality. Maintenance Supervisor is the customer — if the pack is not executable, it comes back.
Process
Standard pack template. Peer review mandatory above a defined risk or hours threshold. 'Ready-to-Schedule' is a hard status, not a label.
Technology
CMMS job-pack assembly generates a single PDF / mobile view. Version control on all attached documents.
What Good Looks Like
- Every crew member can point to where this step lives in the CMMS — no shadow spreadsheets.
- The opposite of: half-planned work released to keep the schedule full
- The opposite of: documents referenced but not attached
- The opposite of: no peer review
What Bad Looks Like
- Half-planned work released to keep the schedule full — reactive work in a planned wrapper
- Documents referenced but not attached — crew hunts the intranet on the day
- No peer review — planner blind spots repeat every job
Outputs
- Complete job pack attached to the work order
- Work order in status Ready-to-Schedule

Key Performance Indicators

KPI	Why It Matters	How To Measure	World Class	Benchmark	Typical
Work orders planned before scheduling	Unplanned work orders in the schedule are the single biggest driver of low wrench time — the crew waits for parts, permits and information instead of turning tools.	Count of work orders reaching status ‘Ready to Schedule’ with a complete job plan ÷ total work orders released to the weekly schedule.	≥ 98%	≥ 95%	40–60%
Planner-to-tradesperson ratio	Under-resourced planning is a false economy — one planner buried in reactive work cannot keep 30 tradespeople productive, and wrench time collapses.	Head-count of dedicated maintenance planners ÷ total wage-roll tradespeople they support (exclude supervisors and contractors on lump-sum work).	1 : 15	1 : 15–20	1 : 30–40
Labour estimate accuracy	Estimates drive the schedule, the crew size and the shutdown budget — sloppy estimates mean either idle crews or blown windows.	For each closed work order: \|actual hours − planned hours\| ÷ planned hours. Report the median and the % of jobs inside tolerance.	± 10%	± 15%	± 40–60%
Material availability at execution	A missing $2 gasket parks a $200k crew. Material availability at the tool is the make-or-break of the weekly schedule.	Count of scheduled work orders where every kitted part was physically available at start-of-shift ÷ total scheduled work orders.	≥ 99%	≥ 98%	70–85%
Wrench time (tools-on-task)	Wrench time is the ultimate proof that planning worked — a high number means the crew found parts, permits, drawings and access ready to go.	Sampled work-face study or badge/tool data: direct hands-on-tool minutes ÷ paid crew minutes across the shift.	≥ 65%	≥ 55%	25–35%
Standard Job Plan coverage of routine work	Standard Job Plans lock in learning — without them every repeat job is re-planned from scratch and improvements never stick.	Count of work orders executed against a linked Standard Job Plan ÷ total repeatable work orders in the period.	≥ 90%	≥ 80%	20–40%

Best Practices

Planning and scheduling are separate roles — combining them produces poor results in both
Planner focus is +4 weeks out — protect them from reactive work
Every completed job feeds back to plan accuracy — the Standard Job Plan library only improves with feedback
Kit critical spares physically and verify against the work order before schedule commit
Palmer's Planning Principles — plan for the deficiency, use standard skill levels, plan-for-scheduling