IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v13y2020i7p1721-d341448.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessment of Barriers to Knowledge and Experience Transfer in Major Maintenance Activities

Author

Listed:
  • Lilian. O. Iheukwumere-Esotu

    (Department of Mechanical, Aerospace and Civil Engineering, The University of Manchester, Oxford Rd, Manchester M13 9PL, UK)

  • Akilu Yunusa Kaltungo

    (Department of Mechanical, Aerospace and Civil Engineering, The University of Manchester, Oxford Rd, Manchester M13 9PL, UK)

Abstract

Systematic failure analysis generally enhances the ability of engineering decision-makers to obtain a holistic view of the causal relationships that often exist within the systems they manage. Such analyses are made more difficult by uncertainties and organisational complexities associated with critical and inevitable industrial maintenance activities such as major overhauls, outages, shutdowns, and turnarounds (MoOSTs). This is perhaps due to the ratio of tasks-to-duration typically permitted. While core themes of MoOSTs including planning, contracts, costing, execution, etc., have been the focus of most research activities, it is worth noting that the ability to successfully transfer and retain MoOSTs knowledge is still under-investigated. Effectively implementing a case study-based approach for data collection, the current study explores the harmonisation of various risk assessments (i.e., fault tree analysis and reliability block diagrams) and multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) tools to investigate perceived barriers to MoOSTs knowledge management and experience transfer. The case study selected for this study is a dual process line all-integrated cement manufacturing plant (the largest of such process configuration in its region). The justification for this choice of industry was driven by the volume and frequency of MoOSTs executed each year (typically 4–1 per process line), thereby providing a good opportunity to interact with industrial experts with immense experience in the management/execution of MoOSTs within their industry. A multilayered methodology was adopted for information gathering, whereby baseline knowledge from an earlier conducted systematic review of MoOSTs practices/approaches provided fundamental theoretical trends, which was then complemented by field-based data (from face-to-face interviews, focus group sessions, questionnaires, and secondary information from company MoOSTs documentation). During the analysis, fault tree analysis (FTA) and reliability block diagrams (RBDs) were simultaneously used to generate the causal relationships and criticality that exist between identified barriers, while the MCDA (in this case analytical hierarchy process) was used to identify and prioritise barriers to MoOSTs knowledge management and experience transfer, based on sensitivity analysis and consistency of approach. The primary aim of this study is to logically conceptualise core barriers/limiters to knowledge in temporary industrial project environments such as MoOSTs, as well as enhance the ability of decision-makers to prioritise learning efforts. The results obtained from analysis of data identify three major main criteria (barriers) and 23 subcriteria ranked according to level of importance as indicated from expert opinions.

Suggested Citation

  • Lilian. O. Iheukwumere-Esotu & Akilu Yunusa Kaltungo, 2020. "Assessment of Barriers to Knowledge and Experience Transfer in Major Maintenance Activities," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-24, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:13:y:2020:i:7:p:1721-:d:341448
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/7/1721/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/7/1721/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Saaty, Thomas L., 1990. "How to make a decision: The analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 9-26, September.
    2. Volkanovski, Andrija & ÄŒepin, Marko & Mavko, Borut, 2009. "Application of the fault tree analysis for assessment of power system reliability," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 94(6), pages 1116-1127.
    3. Maurizio Bevilacqua & Filippo Emanuele Ciarapica & Giancarlo Giacchetta & Barbara Marchetti, 2012. "Development of an innovative criticality index for turnaround management in an oil refinery," International Journal of Productivity and Quality Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 9(4), pages 519-544.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Anna Zielińska-Chmielewska & Dobrosława Mruk-Tomczak & Anna Wielicka-Regulska, 2021. "Qualitative Research on Solving Difficulties in Maintaining Continuity of Food Supply Chain on the Meat Market during the COVID-19 Pandemic," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-19, September.
    2. Giovanni Rinaldi & Philipp R. Thies & Lars Johanning, 2021. "Current Status and Future Trends in the Operation and Maintenance of Offshore Wind Turbines: A Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-28, April.
    3. Lilian Ogechi Iheukwumere-Esotu & Akilu Yunusa-Kaltungo, 2022. "Development of an Interactive Web-Based Knowledge Management Platform for Major Maintenance Activities: Case Study of Cement Manufacturing System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-23, September.
    4. Lilian. O. Iheukwumere-Esotu & Akilu Yunusa-Kaltungo, 2021. "Knowledge Criticality Assessment and Codification Framework for Major Maintenance Activities: A Case Study of Cement Rotary Kiln Plant," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-21, April.
    5. Małgorzata Jasiulewicz-Kaczmarek & Katarzyna Antosz & Ryszard Wyczółkowski & Dariusz Mazurkiewicz & Bo Sun & Cheng Qian & Yi Ren, 2021. "Application of MICMAC, Fuzzy AHP, and Fuzzy TOPSIS for Evaluation of the Maintenance Factors Affecting Sustainable Manufacturing," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-30, March.
    6. Dania K. Abideen & Akilu Yunusa-Kaltungo & Patrick Manu & Clara Cheung, 2022. "A Systematic Review of the Extent to Which BIM Is Integrated into Operation and Maintenance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-55, July.
    7. Kiki Ayu & Akilu Yunusa-Kaltungo, 2020. "A Holistic Framework for Supporting Maintenance and Asset Management Life Cycle Decisions for Power Systems," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-32, April.
    8. Maria Iglesias-Mendoza & Akilu Yunusa-Kaltungo & Sara Hadleigh-Dunn & Ashraf Labib, 2021. "Learning How to Learn from Disasters through a Comparative Dichotomy Analysis: Grenfell Tower and Hurricane Katrina Case Studies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-18, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lilian. O. Iheukwumere-Esotu & Akilu Yunusa-Kaltungo, 2021. "Knowledge Criticality Assessment and Codification Framework for Major Maintenance Activities: A Case Study of Cement Rotary Kiln Plant," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-21, April.
    2. Chemweno, Peter & Pintelon, Liliane & Van Horenbeek, Adriaan & Muchiri, Peter, 2015. "Development of a risk assessment selection methodology for asset maintenance decision making: An analytic network process (ANP) approach," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 170(PB), pages 663-676.
    3. Flavio Martins & Maria Fatima Almeida & Rodrigo Calili & Agatha Oliveira, 2020. "Design Thinking Applied to Smart Home Projects: A User-Centric and Sustainable Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-27, December.
    4. Jochen Wulf, 2020. "Development of an AHP hierarchy for managing omnichannel capabilities: a design science research approach," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 13(1), pages 39-68, April.
    5. Wu, Zhangsheng & Li, Yue & Wang, Rong & Xu, Xu & Ren, Dongyang & Huang, Quanzhong & Xiong, Yunwu & Huang, Guanhua, 2023. "Evaluation of irrigation water saving and salinity control practices of maize and sunflower in the upper Yellow River basin with an agro-hydrological model based method," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 278(C).
    6. D’Inverno, Giovanna & Carosi, Laura & Romano, Giulia & Guerrini, Andrea, 2018. "Water pollution in wastewater treatment plants: An efficiency analysis with undesirable output," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 269(1), pages 24-34.
    7. Nermin Kişi, 2019. "A Strategic Approach to Sustainable Tourism Development Using the A’WOT Hybrid Method: A Case Study of Zonguldak, Turkey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-19, February.
    8. Ayodele, T.R. & Ogunjuyigbe, A.S.O. & Odigie, O. & Munda, J.L., 2018. "A multi-criteria GIS based model for wind farm site selection using interval type-2 fuzzy analytic hierarchy process: The case study of Nigeria," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 228(C), pages 1853-1869.
    9. V. Srinivasan & G. Shainesh & Anand K. Sharma, 2015. "An approach to prioritize customer-based, cost-effective service enhancements," The Service Industries Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(14), pages 747-762, October.
    10. Patricija Bajec & Danijela Tuljak-Suban, 2019. "An Integrated Analytic Hierarchy Process—Slack Based Measure-Data Envelopment Analysis Model for Evaluating the Efficiency of Logistics Service Providers Considering Undesirable Performance Criteria," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-18, April.
    11. Abareshi, Maryam & Zaferanieh, Mehdi, 2019. "A bi-level capacitated P-median facility location problem with the most likely allocation solution," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 1-20.
    12. Datu Buyung Agusdinata & Wenjuan Liu & Sinta Sulistyo & Philippe LeBillon & Je'anne Wegner, 2023. "Evaluating sustainability impacts of critical mineral extractions: Integration of life cycle sustainability assessment and SDGs frameworks," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 27(3), pages 746-759, June.
    13. Xinxin Liu & Xiaosheng Wang & Haiying Guo & Xiaojie An, 2021. "Benefit Allocation in Shared Water-Saving Management Contract Projects Based on Modified Expected Shapley Value," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 35(1), pages 39-62, January.
    14. Sushil, 2019. "Efficient interpretive ranking process incorporating implicit and transitive dominance relationships," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 283(1), pages 1489-1516, December.
    15. Kokaraki, Nikoleta & Hopfe, Christina J. & Robinson, Elaine & Nikolaidou, Elli, 2019. "Testing the reliability of deterministic multi-criteria decision-making methods using building performance simulation," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 991-1007.
    16. Hossein Yousefi & Saheb Ghanbari Motlagh & Mohammad Montazeri, 2022. "Multi-Criteria Decision-Making System for Wind Farm Site-Selection Using Geographic Information System (GIS): Case Study of Semnan Province, Iran," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-27, June.
    17. Moumita Palchaudhuri & Sujata Biswas, 2016. "Application of AHP with GIS in drought risk assessment for Puruliya district, India," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 84(3), pages 1905-1920, December.
    18. Kadir Kaan GÖNCÜ & Onur ÇETIN, 2022. "Evaluation Of Location Selection Criteria For Coordination Management Centers And Logistic Support Units In Disaster Areas With Ahp Method," Prizren Social Science Journal, SHIKS, vol. 6(2), pages 15-23, August.
    19. Tommaso Ortalli & Andrea Di Martino & Michela Longo & Dario Zaninelli, 2024. "Make-or-Buy Policy Decision in Maintenance Planning for Mobility: A Multi-Criteria Approach," Logistics, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-18, May.
    20. Kik, M.C. & Claassen, G.D.H. & Meuwissen, M.P.M. & Smit, A.B. & Saatkamp, H.W., 2021. "Actor analysis for sustainable soil management – A case study from the Netherlands," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:13:y:2020:i:7:p:1721-:d:341448. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.