Jeff George
Well Known Member
Does anyone here have experience with Equipment Maintenance in JDE? My company is considering purchasing Maximo for this functionality, but if JDE can do everything Maximo can then we should use 9.1.
RussellCodlin
Reputable Poster
Equipment maintenance is fairly strong in 9.1 and certainly far more cost effective to implement than a Maximo implementation if you already have JDE operating. We have experience working with both products and for most customers they will never use the capabilities in Maximo that differentiates it from JDE. Don't get me wrong, Maximo is a very strong product and is better than JDE in certain situations but those situations are fairly rare. Especially when you look at the weaknesses of Maximo with regards to cost control and the integration cost to JDE to enable things like procurement etc to function correctly.
Jeff George
Well Known Member
Thanks for the reply, Russell. I'm looking at the docs now, but PM is not my strong area. I will pass along your advice to my director and see if it helps in the decision making.
Jeff George
Well Known Member
One of the reasons Maximo is being considered is because of the 'workflows' and because we need to do calibrations of pharmaceutical manufacturing equipment to remain compliant. I see that the Equipment Management in 9.1 allows approval routings throughout the life of the PM work order. Is this similar to, or a good substitute for, workflows? I sat through a long Maximo demo but my background is in CNC, Distribution and Manufacturing, and it was a bit overwhelming. I don't know that Maximo has any special functionality for tracking calibrations that JDE does not, but I could be wrong.
RussellCodlin
Reputable Poster
There's a few ways to skin the calibration cat as it were.
If you just need to demonstrate that the calibration was done and record the result then standard PM's in JDE are fine. You can track compliance in terms of interval between calibrations and you can also store results as either just unstructured data against the PM work order or alternatively through supplemental data.
If you require something more sophisticated, for example you complete a calibration test and need to perform an action (eg a shutdown work order) based on whether it is within tolerance, then it is not directly in standard JDE. In saying that we work with fairly sophisticated maintenance customers and have an add on enhancement for JDE that integrates Quality Management with Condition Based Maintenance which we support. Basically this allows you to define test specifications (a group of one or more tests) to be performed on a PM. The specification then defines, for the piece of equipment or group of equipment, what the pass/fail as well as warning tolerances/criteria are. If those are exceeded you can then configure a response, eg create a CBM alert which will trigger a workflow and depending on config also trigger a new work order.
In terms of pharmaceuticals, companies such as Shire (used to be Baxter/Baxalta) currently use JDE maintenance so there's references out there.
One thing I will note is that in our experience this does happen when Maximo is being considered. What I mean by "this" is that the business owners for asset management will look for specific things that they can latch on to so that they can discount JDE and push Maximo. The real reason is not because they can't meet the business requirement with JDE but more because of human nature. The benefit to them of Maximo is three fold: one - they get a shiny new toy to play with whereas JDE is boring, two: it will be their system and they will have far more control and power than if they come into the JDE fold and three: Maximo is the 800 pound gorilla in the room in terms of asset management which means an implementation on their CV looks much better from their stand point than a JDE one.
A classic example of this was a large customer that was already using JDE and had rolled out CAM but now needed to roll it out into a new division. They pushed back and said they absolutely had to have Maximo because of one key reason which was that it had out of the box integration to Microsoft Project and ESRI and JDE did not. What was the reality:
1. Neither of those things were core requirements and ultimately were not implemented because of this and the fact that no integration works out of the box
2. They spent about $1M developing integrations between Maximo and JDE because of business requirements regarding financials and procurement
3. Their core business was actually service billing and this is something JDE is much stronger at than Maximo. That was the biggest pain point because their billing and cost control requirements were fairly complex and required significant development in Maximo to deliver what was still a rather ordinary solution.
4. They already owned full CAM and Service Management in JDE and the division was already covered by their enterprise license with Oracle. The Maximo license bill alone was several million dollars just for their division and when they wanted to bring on sub-contractors they had to scrap it because of licensing costs.
It was a multi-million dollar mistake driven by a couple people that wanted their own little empire to control rather than an objective assessment of the pros and cons between Maximo and JDE.
If you just need to demonstrate that the calibration was done and record the result then standard PM's in JDE are fine. You can track compliance in terms of interval between calibrations and you can also store results as either just unstructured data against the PM work order or alternatively through supplemental data.
If you require something more sophisticated, for example you complete a calibration test and need to perform an action (eg a shutdown work order) based on whether it is within tolerance, then it is not directly in standard JDE. In saying that we work with fairly sophisticated maintenance customers and have an add on enhancement for JDE that integrates Quality Management with Condition Based Maintenance which we support. Basically this allows you to define test specifications (a group of one or more tests) to be performed on a PM. The specification then defines, for the piece of equipment or group of equipment, what the pass/fail as well as warning tolerances/criteria are. If those are exceeded you can then configure a response, eg create a CBM alert which will trigger a workflow and depending on config also trigger a new work order.
In terms of pharmaceuticals, companies such as Shire (used to be Baxter/Baxalta) currently use JDE maintenance so there's references out there.
One thing I will note is that in our experience this does happen when Maximo is being considered. What I mean by "this" is that the business owners for asset management will look for specific things that they can latch on to so that they can discount JDE and push Maximo. The real reason is not because they can't meet the business requirement with JDE but more because of human nature. The benefit to them of Maximo is three fold: one - they get a shiny new toy to play with whereas JDE is boring, two: it will be their system and they will have far more control and power than if they come into the JDE fold and three: Maximo is the 800 pound gorilla in the room in terms of asset management which means an implementation on their CV looks much better from their stand point than a JDE one.
A classic example of this was a large customer that was already using JDE and had rolled out CAM but now needed to roll it out into a new division. They pushed back and said they absolutely had to have Maximo because of one key reason which was that it had out of the box integration to Microsoft Project and ESRI and JDE did not. What was the reality:
1. Neither of those things were core requirements and ultimately were not implemented because of this and the fact that no integration works out of the box
2. They spent about $1M developing integrations between Maximo and JDE because of business requirements regarding financials and procurement
3. Their core business was actually service billing and this is something JDE is much stronger at than Maximo. That was the biggest pain point because their billing and cost control requirements were fairly complex and required significant development in Maximo to deliver what was still a rather ordinary solution.
4. They already owned full CAM and Service Management in JDE and the division was already covered by their enterprise license with Oracle. The Maximo license bill alone was several million dollars just for their division and when they wanted to bring on sub-contractors they had to scrap it because of licensing costs.
It was a multi-million dollar mistake driven by a couple people that wanted their own little empire to control rather than an objective assessment of the pros and cons between Maximo and JDE.
Similar threads
- JDE GC Analyst
- JD Edwards® EnterpriseOne Applications
- toky701202
- JD Edwards® EnterpriseOne Technical
- mariordz76
- JD Edwards® EnterpriseOne Applications
