Maintenance UntangledMaintenance Untangled
Work Management Process · Phase 3 · MU-WMP-003

Schedule Work

Allocate planned work to specific time periods and resources, balancing production, capacity and priorities.

Six-phase framework
IdentifyPlanSchedulePerformRecordAnalyse
Score your site →

Purpose

The Schedule Work phase converts a planned backlog into a firm, achievable weekly schedule. Effective scheduling maximises wrench time, protects proactive work, and gives operations a predictable maintenance window. Poor scheduling burns planned work as reactive fire-fighting.

Scope

  • Weekly routine scheduling, shutdown scheduling and long-term strategy scheduling
  • Resource levelling, backlog management, schedule compliance measurement
  • Coordination between maintenance, operations, engineering and contractors

RCM Foundation

RCM consequence categories drive scheduling priority. When condition monitoring detects a potential failure, the corrective intervention must be scheduled inside the remaining P-F interval — that is a hard constraint, not a target. A healthy schedule is proactive-dominant: reactive work over 20% is an RCM strategy failure, not a scheduling problem.

Process Steps

  1. 01

    Review previous period

    Intent

    Learn from what actually happened last week before drafting the next schedule — every schedule starts by closing the loop on the previous one.

    Inputs
    • Last week's committed schedule and actual completions
    • Break-in log and schedule-breaker Pareto
    • Carry-over work orders and their reasons
    Actions
    • Calculate schedule compliance (jobs completed as scheduled ÷ jobs scheduled)
    • Categorise carry-overs: material, labour, priority change, scope growth, break-in
    • Update the schedule-breaker Pareto with the week's data
    • Identify systemic issues to feed back to Planning or Identify Work
    People

    Scheduler accountable. Planning Leader and Maintenance Leader consulted. Operations Leader receives the number.

    Process

    Fixed 30-minute review at a set time each week. Standard categories for compliance loss.

    Technology

    CMMS schedule-compliance report. Break-in and carry-over categorised on the work order itself, not in a spreadsheet.

    What Good Looks Like
    • Every crew member can point to where this step lives in the CMMS — no shadow spreadsheets.
    • The opposite of: compliance calculated inconsistently week-to-week
    • The opposite of: carry-overs relabelled as 'still in progress'
    • The opposite of: review skipped when it matters most (busy weeks)
    What Bad Looks Like
    • Compliance calculated inconsistently week-to-week — the trend is meaningless
    • Carry-overs relabelled as 'still in progress' — the number lies
    • Review skipped when it matters most (busy weeks) — patterns never learned
    Outputs
    • Compliance number published to leadership
    • Updated schedule-breaker Pareto
    • Actions logged for upstream owners
  2. 02

    Filter Ready-to-Schedule backlog

    Intent

    Only fully planned work orders — materials confirmed, permits ready, labour estimated — are candidates for the schedule.

    Inputs
    • Backlog of work orders in status Ready-to-Schedule
    • Materials, permit and tool readiness flags
    • Priority and must-complete-by dates
    Actions
    • Filter to work orders that pass every readiness check
    • Return not-ready work orders to Planning with reason — do not schedule optimistically
    • Sort candidates by priority and P-F deadline
    • Flag work waiting on long-lead items or shutdown windows
    People

    Scheduler accountable. Planner owns the fix on returned work. Storeperson confirms kitting.

    Process

    Ready-to-Schedule is a hard status with defined criteria — not a label the planner sets when they feel finished.

    Technology

    CMMS readiness view combining material, permit, tool and labour flags on a single screen.

    What Good Looks Like
    • Every crew member can point to where this step lives in the CMMS — no shadow spreadsheets.
    • The opposite of: half-ready work scheduled to fill capacity
    • The opposite of: readiness flags gamed to hit planning KPIs
    • The opposite of: long-lead work permanently pushed right
    What Bad Looks Like
    • Half-ready work scheduled to fill capacity — becomes reactive on execution day
    • Readiness flags gamed to hit planning KPIs — schedule compliance collapses instead
    • Long-lead work permanently pushed right — never scheduled at all
    Outputs
    • Clean candidate list for the scheduling draft
    • Not-ready work orders returned to Planning
  3. 03

    Draft the schedule

    Intent

    Allocate candidate work to days and crews across the schedule horizon, balancing capacity, priority and operational reality.

    Inputs
    • Ready-to-Schedule candidate list
    • Crew availability by day (leave, training, absentee factor)
    • Downday and outage calendar
    Actions
    • Load-level to 80–85% of available hours — leave headroom for break-ins
    • Sequence work by asset and location to minimise travel and set-up
    • Cluster PMs where operationally sensible; separate them when capacity peaks
    • Slot condition-based work inside its P-F deadline — non-negotiable
    • Draft alongside the operations plan — no maintenance-only schedule
    People

    Scheduler accountable. Maintenance Supervisor consulted on crew loading. Operations Leader consulted on downdays and access.

    Process

    Standard capacity model documented. Absentee factor reviewed quarterly. Schedule horizon fixed (typically 1 week firm, 2–4 weeks planned).

    Technology

    CMMS scheduling board with drag-and-drop by day and crew. Capacity vs. load visible in real time.

    What Good Looks Like
    • Every crew member can point to where this step lives in the CMMS — no shadow spreadsheets.
    • The opposite of: 100% capacity loading
    • The opposite of: draft built in isolation from operations
    • The opposite of: pM peaks left unlevelled
    What Bad Looks Like
    • 100% capacity loading — every break-in blows the schedule
    • Draft built in isolation from operations — downdays discovered at the meeting
    • PM peaks left unlevelled — a month of overload followed by a month of drift
    Outputs
    • Draft weekly schedule with work orders assigned by day and crew
  4. 04

    Scheduling meeting

    Intent

    Operations, Maintenance and Planning agree the committed schedule in one short meeting — decisions only.

    Inputs
    • Draft schedule
    • Production plan and downday calendar
    • Constraint list (crew, contractor, material, permit)
    Actions
    • Walk the draft together, day by day
    • Confirm operational access for each downday
    • Adjust for contractor windows and permit constraints
    • Sign off the committed schedule — named signatures, not implied assent
    • Log any scope trades and the reason
    People

    Standing attendees: Operations Leader, Maintenance Leader, Planning Leader, Scheduler. Reliability Engineer as needed.

    Process

    Fixed 30–45 minute meeting at a set time each week. Standard agenda. Decisions only — problems parked for follow-up.

    Technology

    Schedule projected on the wall or shared on screen. Signatures captured digitally against the schedule record.

    What Good Looks Like
    • Every crew member can point to where this step lives in the CMMS — no shadow spreadsheets.
    • The opposite of: meeting becomes a debate
    • The opposite of: operations absent
    • The opposite of: schedule signed but not shared
    What Bad Looks Like
    • Meeting becomes a debate — no schedule committed, planners re-work overnight
    • Operations absent — access discovered wrong on the day
    • Schedule signed but not shared — supervisors run yesterday's plan
    Outputs
    • Committed weekly schedule signed by Operations, Maintenance and Planning
    • Meeting log of trades and reasons
  5. 05

    Publish and freeze

    Intent

    Turn the committed schedule into a firm plan that everyone runs to — the schedule is frozen for scope, capacity may flex.

    Inputs
    • Committed schedule from the meeting
    Actions
    • Publish to Maintenance, Operations, Stores and Contractors at a fixed time
    • Freeze scope: no addition without a break-in approval
    • Confirm materials, permits and tools staged for Day 1 by end of the day prior
    • Communicate any late changes with a formal update — never a corridor conversation
    People

    Scheduler accountable for publication. Supervisors accountable for Day-prior readiness. Planning Leader owns freeze discipline.

    Process

    Publication time is fixed and predictable. Scope changes require a documented break-in approval by named authority.

    Technology

    CMMS or scheduling tool with role-based views. Automatic notification to affected supervisors and contractors.

    What Good Looks Like
    • Every crew member can point to where this step lives in the CMMS — no shadow spreadsheets.
    • The opposite of: schedule published but never frozen
    • The opposite of: late changes by phone
    • The opposite of: day-prior readiness not checked
    What Bad Looks Like
    • Schedule published but never frozen — priorities change hourly, nothing lands
    • Late changes by phone — some crews run the old schedule, some the new
    • Day-prior readiness not checked — first-hour on Monday is a scramble
    Outputs
    • Published committed schedule visible to every stakeholder
    • Day-prior readiness checklist complete
  6. 06

    Manage break-ins

    Intent

    Handle genuine emergent work honestly — captured as its own category, approved by name, and measured as a leading indicator.

    Inputs
    • Emergent safety, environmental or production-critical work
    • Committed schedule and its headroom
    Actions
    • Assess whether the work truly cannot wait — P1 or hard P2 only
    • Route to a named approver (Maintenance Leader or delegate)
    • Displace scheduled work by name — never 'we'll get to it' quietly
    • Log the break-in with cause, approver and displaced work
    • Feed the break-in Pareto — top three causes get upstream action
    People

    Maintenance Leader approves. Scheduler updates the schedule. Operations Leader informed of displacement.

    Process

    Break-in approval is a controlled workflow, not an informal ask. Break-in rate tracked and reported weekly.

    Technology

    CMMS break-in workflow with mandatory cause code and approver signature.

    What Good Looks Like
    • Every crew member can point to where this step lives in the CMMS — no shadow spreadsheets.
    • The opposite of: break-ins disguised as planned work
    • The opposite of: everyone can approve
    • The opposite of: displaced work quietly dropped
    What Bad Looks Like
    • Break-ins disguised as planned work — schedule compliance looks fine while chaos reigns
    • Everyone can approve — the discipline collapses in a fortnight
    • Displaced work quietly dropped — backlog grows in the shadows
    Outputs
    • Approved break-in with named displaced work
    • Break-in log updated for the week

Key Performance Indicators

KPIWhy It MattersHow To MeasureWorld ClassBenchmarkTypical
Schedule complianceSchedule compliance is the single strongest leading indicator of a proactive site — if the frozen schedule holds, wrench time, reliability and cost all follow.Hours executed against the frozen weekly schedule ÷ hours scheduled at freeze. Break-ins do not count as compliant work.≥ 95%≥ 90%40–60%
% available labour scheduledUnscheduled labour is invisible capacity — it gets burned on low-value reactive work and never shows up in the improvement plan.Scheduled crew hours (including PMs, projects, training) ÷ total available crew hours after leave and shift losses.≥ 90%≥ 85%50–70%
Reactive work in the scheduleEvery hour of reactive work displaces two hours of proactive work — a high reactive ratio is a self-perpetuating spiral.Reactive/breakdown work-order hours executed ÷ total maintenance hours executed in the period.< 10%< 15%40–70%
Break-in rateBreak-ins destroy the schedule the moment it is published — they signal weak triage, weak criticality, or a real reliability problem hiding in plain sight.Work orders added to the frozen schedule after freeze ÷ total work orders in the executed schedule.< 5%< 10%25–40%
Backlog (ready to schedule)Backlog is the shock absorber of the schedule. Too little and the schedule starves; too much and the backlog rots and trust collapses.Total planned hours in status ‘Ready to Schedule’ ÷ weekly crew capacity in hours.3–4 weeks2–4 weeks of capacity0–1 week or >12 weeks

Best Practices

  • Schedule work orders down to the operation, not just the header
  • Publish the schedule at a fixed time each week — predictability is the point
  • Load-level PMs across the month, quarter and year — don't cluster PM peaks
  • Track schedule breakers formally and Pareto them — the top three cover 80% of noise
  • Long-lead-time materials scheduled backwards from need date, with an ordering trigger

Common Pitfalls

  • 100% capacity loading — no room for break-ins, everything slips
  • Priority replaces the schedule — everything urgent means nothing is
  • No agreed downday calendar — maintenance and operations argue every week
  • Break-ins disguised as planned work — schedule compliance looks fine while chaos reigns
← Previous phase
Phase 2 · Plan Work
Next phase →
Phase 4 · Perform Work