One of the enduring debates around spare parts management is to do with spare parts standardization.
That is, if we standardize our plant and equipment, we would then be able to hold a standardized set of spare parts?
In this short video Phillip Slater explains the pros and cons of spare parts standardization.
Spare Parts Standardization: The Pros and Cons
Video Transcript
Hi, my name is Phillip Slater and for the next couple of minutes I’d just like to give you something to think about.
One of the enduring debates around spare parts management is to do with standardization, and that is if we standardize our plant and equipment, we would then be able to hold a standardized set of spare parts?
That would mean, fewer spare parts, perhaps greater buying potential because you’d have greater volume of individual parts, greater familiarity with the parts with both your maintenance teams and with your spare parts management.
However, there are some downsides with the standardization argument.
For example: Missed innovation, if you standardize all of your equipment you’re stuck with your oldest technology and you might miss the opportunity to then have new equipment which is far more efficient in its operation.
Which means you then have these operational inefficiencies that you are building into your plant and equipment. All for the sake of not having to manage a more diverse range of spare parts.
Then there’s the problem of lowest cost pricing, because proponents of standardization are usually trying to look at the lowest cost option for pricing. So, don’t get me wrong, I’m all for saving money and having lowest costs in your business.
But if your driver is solely cost, you are likely then to potentially buy inferior spare parts. So, you need to balance out these arguments.
So, if you’re thinking about going down standardization route, you need to try and get a handle on whether the benefits that you will get will outweigh the negatives.
My name is Phillip Slater.
and that’s something to think about.
Click here for information on our Practitioner Playbook.
Posted by: Phillip Slater