This is an archive of the Maximo Yahoo Community. The content of this pages may be a sometimes obsolete so please check post dates.
Thanks to the community owner Christopher Wanko for providing the content.
Should buildings be Assets or Locations or Both? What is the best practice for this? What are the pros/cons?
Thank you in advance,
Lonnie Stone
@LonStone3
That is a great question and we have been struggling with it for a while. I think they should be both. Having a location provides the ability to take advantage of all the location application functionality such as the drilldown and systems. Creating as an asset gives the ability to assign spare parts and develop the asset hierarchy and roll up costs.
V/R
Kevin
From: MAXIMO@yahoogroups.com [mailto:MAXIMO@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Lonnie Stone
Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2014 7:02 AM
To: MAXIMO@yahoogroups.com; Lon Stone; Ricky White
Subject: [External] [MAXIMO List] Best Practice for Buildings
Should buildings be Assets or Locations or Both? What is the best practice for this? What are the pros/cons?
Thank you in advance,
Lonnie Stone
@LonStone3
Setting buildings up as both is exactly what we had done, and I will caution that a lot of thought should be put into this methodology before going this direction. We are currently moving away from this because it has proven problematic. Couple things to think about.
1. Be sure the link between the ASSET representing the building and the LOCATION is well defined. One of the issues we had was that we used naming convention to represent the link between the two and all it took was a small typo and things broke. Using a classification might be a better idea, or even some custom flag added to the ASSET object.
2. Enforce the one to one relationship somehow. If you have functionality or reporting that depends on both existing, you're going to have to enforce that both are created at the same time, or at least before being set to OPERATING.
3. Are spare parts really appropriately allocated to the building itself? Or is this more appropriate to some ASSET within the building or location?
4. You can report on rolled up costs without needing to use an ASSET, it's just a simple SUM in a report.
These are just a few of the things that we have encountered in our setup. I'm sure this decision is largely dependent on your individual organizations business practices, and setting up both can be made to work. Just be sure to approach the overall decision with a lot of thought.
-Chris H
-----Original Message-----
From: MAXIMO@yahoogroups.com [mailto:MAXIMO@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Egolf, Kevin (TechOps Solutions, International)
Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2014 7:38 AM
To: MAXIMO@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [External] [MAXIMO List] Best Practice for Buildings
That is a great question and we have been struggling with it for a while. I think they should be both. Having a location provides the ability to take advantage of all the location application functionality such as the drilldown and systems. Creating as an asset gives the ability to assign spare parts and develop the asset hierarchy and roll up costs.
V/R
Kevin
From: MAXIMO@yahoogroups.com [mailto:MAXIMO@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Lonnie Stone
Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2014 7:02 AM
To: MAXIMO@yahoogroups.com; Lon Stone; Ricky White
Subject: [External] [MAXIMO List] Best Practice for Buildings
Should buildings be Assets or Locations or Both? What is the best practice for this? What are the pros/cons?
Thank you in advance,
Lonnie Stone
@LonStone3
Config mgt app from ccmdb sccd cans be useful here providing a logical asset object
Sent from my iPhone
> On 10 Apr 2014, at 13:04, "Hanna, Christopher A CTR" <christopher.a.hanna@uscg.mil> wrote:
>
> Setting buildings up as both is exactly what we had done, and I will caution that a lot of thought should be put into this methodology before going this direction. We are currently moving away from this because it has proven problematic. Couple things to think about.
>
> 1. Be sure the link between the ASSET representing the building and the LOCATION is well defined. One of the issues we had was that we used naming convention to represent the link between the two and all it took was a small typo and things broke. Using a classification might be a better idea, or even some custom flag added to the ASSET object.
>
> 2. Enforce the one to one relationship somehow. If you have functionality or reporting that depends on both existing, you're going to have to enforce that both are created at the same time, or at least before being set to OPERATING.
>
> 3. Are spare parts really appropriately allocated to the building itself? Or is this more appropriate to some ASSET within the building or location?
>
> 4. You can report on rolled up costs without needing to use an ASSET, it's just a simple SUM in a report.
>
> These are just a few of the things that we have encountered in our setup. I'm sure this decision is largely dependent on your individual organizations business practices, and setting up both can be made to work. Just be sure to approach the overall decision with a lot of thought.
>
> -Chris H
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: MAXIMO@yahoogroups.com [mailto:MAXIMO@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Egolf, Kevin (TechOps Solutions, International)
> Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2014 7:38 AM
> To: MAXIMO@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: RE: [External] [MAXIMO List] Best Practice for Buildings
>
> That is a great question and we have been struggling with it for a while. I think they should be both. Having a location provides the ability to take advantage of all the location application functionality such as the drilldown and systems. Creating as an asset gives the ability to assign spare parts and develop the asset hierarchy and roll up costs.
>
> V/R
>
> Kevin
>
> From: MAXIMO@yahoogroups.com [mailto:MAXIMO@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Lonnie Stone
> Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2014 7:02 AM
> To: MAXIMO@yahoogroups.com; Lon Stone; Ricky White
> Subject: [External] [MAXIMO List] Best Practice for Buildings
>
> Should buildings be Assets or Locations or Both? What is the best practice for this? What are the pros/cons?
>
> Thank you in advance,
>
> Lonnie Stone
> @LonStone3
>
>
Locations can be thought of as "functional".....a place where a function(s) occurs, where a process or product is made. These FUNCTIONAL LOCATIONS allow you to organize your assets in logical ways using Parent-Child relationships that make sense to all your users....not just to a handful that can decode some complicated naming convention. Your Location setup should represent the plant floor perfectly. A lot of times, people grab site drawings and follow them to layout the location hierarchy.
Assets (i.e. equipment) are what get installed into Locations. You can move them in and out, organize them in a hierarchy using the same Parent-Child settings, etc. Work you do that consumes labor and materials will be done on Assets...not Locations. If you have a well-thought hierarchy you will find that you won't write WO's on Locations. If you catch yourself writing them, you should look at your hierarchy because it's missing an asset. You can still allocate costs to the Location.....but those should be costs that don't apply to a specific Asset (maybe inspections for air leaks, or training or ??).
Eric
From: MAXIMO@yahoogroups.com [mailto:MAXIMO@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Lonnie Stone
Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2014 6:02 AM
To: MAXIMO@yahoogroups.com; Lon Stone; Ricky White
Subject: [MAXIMO List] Best Practice for Buildings
Should buildings be Assets or Locations or Both? What is the best practice for this? What are the pros/cons?
Thank you in advance,
Lonnie Stone
@LonStone3
Lonnie: We have buildings both as Assets and Locations. Children of the buildings can include heating systems and other utilities that are oil field specific here. If there are special doors that require maintenance, you can add those also.
From: MAXIMO@yahoogroups.com [mailto:MAXIMO@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Lonnie Stone
Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2014 5:02 AM
To: MAXIMO@yahoogroups.com; Lon Stone; Ricky White
Subject: [MAXIMO List] Best Practice for Buildings
Should buildings be Assets or Locations or Both? What is the best practice for this? What are the pros/cons?
Thank you in advance,
Lonnie Stone
@LonStone3
This email communication and any files transmitted with it may contain
confidential and or proprietary information and is provided for the use of the
intended recipient only. Any review, retransmission or dissemination of this
information by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you
receive this email in error, please contact the sender and delete this
communication and any copies immediately. Thank you.
http://www.cenovus.com