Maximo Open Forum

 View Only
  • 1.  Work Order Priority vs. Asset, Location and even SR Priority

    Posted 06-16-2021 12:55
    The out-of-the-box work order priority field is simply a number field that allows you to enter a number up to 9999999. Most organizations tie it to a simple domain or turn on one of the IBM algorithms in the back end. My understanding is that the algorithms add up the asset priority and the location priority and then can add an additional field value to get a calculated work order priority. This is a great way to take the "personal" decision out of work order priority and make it based on data. For this to work appropriately, all (or at least most) of the Locations and Assets need a priority number where 1 is the lowest priority. They can go as high as they want in this rating.

    So, having said all of this, why is the out-of-the-box Service Request priority field tied to a domain where 1 = emergency and 4 = lowest priority? This makes absolutely no sense. This is against all of the algorithms available in the Work Order.

    Can I ask how organizations out there are prioritizing their work orders? Are you using a similar domain to the SR - where 1 = emergency and 4 = lowest priority? or are you using a reverse domain where 1 = lowest priority and 4 (or higher) is an emergency?

    Are any organizations using the algorithms?
    #EndUser
    #Reporting
    #Scheduling
    #WorkManagement

    ------------------------------
    Anne Antonelli
    Technology Training & Consulting, Inc.
    ------------------------------


  • 2.  RE: Work Order Priority vs. Asset, Location and even SR Priority

    Posted 06-17-2021 13:47
    I love the question, I've wrangled with it on and off for a long time now, and I'm eager to see other people's feedback.

    For the question about the SR being ranked 1 - 4 with 1 = emergency, I believe that comes from the IT industry, ITIL guidelines (see https://wiki.en.it-processmaps.com/index.php/Checklist_Incident_Priority).  I really think IBM adopted it some 15 or so years ago to get an ITIL or PinkVerify certification stamp of approval for supporting IT processes, and didn't consider the flow-through to Work Orders.

    There are so many sources of Priority!  For SR's, you could set an Internal Priority on a Ticket Template.  There's also the Reported Priority field that the customer can fill out.  Both of these use the 1 - 4 scale with 1 being Urgent that you mentioned.  If a customer is using the Self-Service Work Center, the last step is the option to check a box as to whether or not the Request is "High Importance" -- if they check the box, Reported Priority = 2; if not, Reported Priority = 3.  So there's no possibility there for a 1 or a 4 to be reported.

    Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but, OOTB, that Priority info on the SR DOESN'T flow over to the Work Order (I tried this on the demo site yesterday, and it didn't cross over).  I believe this is controlled by the TICKET2WO Crossover Domain.  You could add a row to the domain to take one of those fields to the WO Priority field, or create conditions and/or sequencing to control the logic of which one copies over.  Don't know if that could work with a calculation or not, like take the average of the Reported and Internal Priorities, rounded either up or down (that would be an interesting experiment. . .).

    If you also use Control Desk there's more, as there's a Priority Matrix that, IIRC, uses a similar (maybe the same) numbering scale to compare Impact against Urgency to come up with (at least the Internal) Priority.

    Then for Work Orders. . .there's the WOPRIORITY field, Locations have a Priority, Assets have a Priority, People can have a Priority (did I miss any)?

    I have the feeling my dream solution to this would be something like:  use a Script to calculate the priority at a certain point in the "workflow" -- probably when we change the status to WSCH.  It would check all the places where a Priority could be, weight them if we wanted to do that, add them together, and divide by however many inputs there were.  And then I'm going to add some escalations on top of that if there are deadlines (FNL Constraints) or SLA's or Target Finishes that are approaching -- take the existing WOPRIORITY value and subtract 1, thereby making it a HIGHER priority.  So yes, I'm a believer that a lower Priority number should mean higher Priority, like the DEFCON system or the old Ford slogan, "Quality is Job 1."

    I don't have Maximo Scheduler, so I don't really know if that would cause any problems.  For Assignment Manager, when you set the Priority Preferences, of course there's no algorithm that'll do what I'm dreaming of here, but worse, the response times are required to be smaller/sooner as the Priority number gets HIGHER not lower.  So yes, this is completely backwards from how SR's are built.  (But, we're not using Assignment Manager, so it's not really an issue for me at this point. . .)

    For what it's worth, just about every demo I've ever seen had people using LOWER numbers to mean HIGHER priority.

    Definitely interested in input from the rest of the community here!

    ------------------------------
    Travis Herron
    Pensacola Christian College
    ------------------------------



  • 3.  RE: Work Order Priority vs. Asset, Location and even SR Priority

    Posted 06-17-2021 16:04

    We use a very simple P1-P5.

    1 - Emergency
    2 - Urgent 
    3 - High 
    4 - Medium 
    5 - Low 

    Since we are in Hospitality and customer facing our priorities are not based entirely on the issue, but who is impacted.  

    Ex. A light out in an office is lower (P4) than a light out in the "front of house" corridor (P3), then a light out in a customers hotel room would be the highest (P2).

    We save our "SOS" fire, water, all hands on deck for the P1s. 

    Claudia



    ------------------------------
    Claudia Gonzalez
    Caesars Entertainment
    ------------------------------



  • 4.  RE: Work Order Priority vs. Asset, Location and even SR Priority

    Posted 06-17-2021 23:38
    Great question, but also a lot of confusion too.

    In the work order application, there is the work order priority and location/asset priority fields are displayed, with the third being the calculated priority which is hidden.  Calc priority is defined by the following matrix that can be accessed from two places, but typically it from the Assignment Manager.  I have extended this to accommodate how a client wanted the ranking and to allow for the reverse 999 (low) to 0 (emergency).
    So the work order priority is just OOTB a plain integer field with no lookup to assist the user.  Most companies apply a domain and use a range of either 0-5 or 1-5.  Emergency work in ANZ is usually 0, however, when you look up at the matrix it supports the model the 5 is the highest.

    Location/asset priority is the priority set on either/both the location/asset with the asset winning if applied to both.  Again, plain integer OOTB and most normally assign a domain.  This unlike the work order priority is usually a result of performing some engineering assessment on the criticality of the location/asset to the business.

    So let's assume that WO=4 and Loc/Asset = 5, this would result in either null, 4, 5, 9, 13, 14 as the calculated priority.  For the same given asset, but with a different work order priority of 2, this would result in null, 2, 5, 7, 9, 12.  The concept is that if you have a whole lot of work orders priorities at 1, which one needs attending to first.  So the calculated priority gives the relative ranking and is displayed OOTB  in the assignment manager.  For the work order and scheduler, you have to choose to display it.

    What about the SR?

    The history of the product has been outlined correctly as the SR was born out of PSDI/MRO Software build of their TAMIT version of Maximo and the loss of the Work Request app going from v4 to v5.  So, ITIL comes into play and that's why there is a different range, a lookup and it doesn't crossover to the work order.

    Can we have both or not?
    This assumes that you want to crossover a priority from the SR to the work order, but which.  The intended purpose of the Reported priority is the subjective priority (just like the WOPROORITY) as set by the end-user, either via the self-service app or through the agent when raising the ticket.  The Internal Priority is just that, an interpretation, objective (like the calculated priority) of the users desire vs the companies requirements.  A lot of times using the standard SR, it's set via either the Ticket Template or/and the classification.

    The answer should be to crossover the internal priority.

    But wait, there's the ICD product?
    Another poster is correct, in ICD they still have the Reported Priority, but also use Impact Vs Urgency which has a matrix behind it to derive the Internal Priority.  You decide in the matrix the Impact Vs Urgency = Internal Priority.

    Now what?
    So, you have an Internal Priority of 3 is this the same as your work order priority?  This is where it get more confusing.  If SR is 0 is urgent and 5 is low, and the work order priority is 5 as high and 0 is low, they don't match or even mean the same thing...apples vs oranges.  Does it matter?  Not if
    a) you're not crossing over to the work order
    b) you're not using the calculated priority

    The truth?
    In my long experience, most companies have not used or cared about the calculated priority.  Only those boffins that work at a highly detailed WBS level do.  So, let's take that out of the running.  Now, what about the SR-WO?  If you do decide to crossover, most of my clients will assign the same domain to the SR Reported Priority, SR Internal Priority, WO Work Order Priority, PM Priority and Job Priority.  With the location and asset Priority having the same range, but a different domain as this should be criticality based and has nothing to do with the work.

    What if you want to leave it as-is or use the reverse ranking?
    Go ahead, use a domain, Maximo does not care?  However, let's say the SR is still the 0 (urgent)-5 (low) and the work order the other way around then for the crossover to mean something the simplest solution is to use an automation script that says if the original source is from an SR, then using a case statement reassign the 3 to a 2 (for example).

    If you want to use the reverse ranking in the work order AND care about the calculated priority, then there are two ways forward.
    1) Insert the new calculations as options to the Work Order Priority Calculation
    2) Use an automation script to calculate the answer to however your company desires the ranking

    What about the work order response time?
    Sadly, another lonely aspect of the work order is not well used.  As a result of the calculated field, it then derives the Respond By date field.  Again, this is hidden but has a purpose.  Think of this as the standard SLA without using the SLA application.  Now you have an agreed time by which you have agreed to respond by.  NB: your company has to provide the definition of what "respond by" means.  In some companies it means the work order status is changed or an owner is assigned, but you have to decide what that is.  Even if you use the SLA application one of the commitments is your response and I hop eoyu can guess where that ends up.

    In conclusion, whichever is the order of priority, your company must decide first, then you can worry about values crossing over and is that needs to be reversed or recalculated.  Just be consistent and use lookup's rather than just numbers.  Finally, my preference has always been 0=emgerency, 1=high (do in 4 hours), 2=med (do in 2 days), 3= med (do in 7 week), 4=low (keep around for spare time/parking/deferred).  BTW: if you do choose 4, then you should have a review date so you can either a) keep until a new review date b) increase the priority and get working on it or c) cancel it so the backlog is managed.

    ------------------------------
    Craig Kokay
    ISW
    ------------------------------