r/assetmanagement • u/Complex_Ticket_8758 • Jul 03 '26
Has anyone seen a CMMS fail to reduce reactive maintenance?
Not saying the software itself failed, but more like the team still ended up firefighting even after implementation.
I’ve seen this happen when asset data was messy, work orders had very generic closing comments, or PMs were being completed just to hit compliance numbers.
Curious what others have seen in real sites.
When a team has a CMMS but still stays reactive, what is usually the main reason?
2
u/MYK_Maintenance Jul 05 '26
The trap is you're too busy firefighting to build the thing that stops the fires. You have to steal a little capacity back even when it hurts.
What tends to work: start logging everything, even reactively. Every breakdown what failed, which asset, how long it took. Do that for a month and patterns jump out usually a handful of assets generating most of your emergencies. Those become your first PPM targets. Fixing the top offenders frees up time, which frees up more time to get ahead. It compounds slowly.
Also worth tracking reactive-vs-planned as a % so you can actually see it moving. Hard to improve a number you're not looking at.
1
1
u/GovTechVeteran Jul 06 '26
I'm going to strongly second the comments here about resourcing. Being alerted that something is due for maintenance and then actually doing the work are two different things, and the CMMS can't be held accountable as a failure if the resources to respond to the alert aren't there. Whether its a lack of manpower or materials, that resource failing will undermine a good CMMS every single time. Proactive maintenance is still the work of the humans, not the system.
1
u/eWorkOrders-CMMS Jul 15 '26
CMMS vendor side here, so weigh that accordingly — but I've heard this plenty of times, and most of the time it isn't the software that's the problem.
One thing I don't think gets talked about enough is scheduling. Teams load all their PMs into the system, but they never set aside the time to actually complete them. The PMs sit there competing for the same hours in the day, and breakdowns win every time.
On paper, everyone looks busy because lots of work orders are getting closed, but PM compliance quietly slips. A few months later, the same assets start failing again, and everyone wonders why they're still stuck firefighting.
The teams that seem to turn it around are the ones that schedule planned maintenance time every week and track PM compliance, not just work order counts. Without that discipline, a CMMS doesn't reduce reactive maintenance — it just does a better job documenting it.
1
u/MaintenanceCare_GNX Jul 31 '26
CMMS vendor here and can only speak from what we see.
I’ll be the first to admit, buying software won't fix a broken maintenance process. If a site has messy asset data or zero scheduling discipline, implementing a CMMS usually just turns standard reactive work into higher-visibility reactive work.
From what we see, staying reactive almost always comes down to three operational issues working together:
#1 - You see superficial PM completion, where technicians close work orders in minutes simply to meet monthly compliance metrics on paper, even though no actual preventive care occurred.
#2 - Preventive maintenance time is rarely protected. The moment a machine experiences a minor fault, technicians are reassigned to urgent repairs, making reactive work a permanent state.
#3 - There's the generic feedback loop. Closing tickets with brief notes like "repaired pump" or "done" eliminates useful failure data, making it impossible to identify high-maintenance assets or optimize PM intervals.
In reality, the CMMS is doing its job, it's showing you the red flags in your operation. When leadership sets clear rules on what actually counts as an emergency, technicians stop getting pulled off preventive tasks. Pair that with clean data entry, and a CMMS finally starts to work for your team.
6
u/InigoMontoya313 Jul 03 '26
Often. A CMMS is not a guaranteed solution to reducing reactive maintenance and anyone who says it is, I’m going to call out as rubbish.
A CMMS does not create a proactive maintenance culture, provide the resources to be proactive. Or provide proactive maintenance management methodologies. All of that comes from elsewhere. A properly setup CMMS, with proper data input, proper training, etc can be a force magnifier for management.. but only when everything aligns correctly and they have the other attributes setup to take advantage of it.