SMRP METRIC GUIDELINE
3.0 Determining Leading and Lagging Indicators
SMRP METRICS GUIDELINE
3.0 Determining Leading and Lagging Indicators Guidelines provide additional information or further clarification on component terms used in SMRP Best Practice Metrics. This guideline is used as an aid for determining whether an indicator is leading or lagging. This guideline is not intended to be a thorough prescription but rather an explanation on how to determine, define and use leading and lagging indicators from a SMRP Best Practice Metrics standpoint.
A. DEFINITION Lagging Indicator An indicator that measures performance after the business or process result starts to follow a particular pattern or trend. Lagging indicators confirm long-term trends, but do not predict them.
Leading Indicator An indicator that measures performance before the business or process result starts to follow a particular pattern or trend. Leading indicators can sometimes be used to predict changes and trends.
B. PURPOSE The purpose of leading and lagging indicators is to measure the performance of the maintenance and reliability process. Leading and lagging indicators provide information so that positive trends can be reinforced and unfavorable trends can be corrected.
C. DISCUSSION OF LEADING AND LAGGING INDICATORS The purpose of running a business is to create shareholder value by providing a distinct product or service. Creating value starts with the needs of the customer and continues through producing a quality product and delivering it on time at a competitive price. The maintenance function is a key stakeholder in this value stream; however, maintenance as a function cannot achieve this alone. The maintenance and reliability process represents the collection of “all” stakeholder tasks required to support the manufacturing or service function. The output of a healthy maintenance and reliability process is optimal asset reliability at optimal cost, which contributes to maximum shareholder value. The maintenance and reliability process is a supply chain. If a step in the process is skipped or performed at a substandard level, the process fails to maximize its contribution. There are three sets of measurable components that make up the maintenance and reliability process (see Figure 2: Components of the Maintenance and Reliability Process). • • •
Management processes and behaviors (mission and vision, people skills) Operational execution (operations, design and maintenance) Manufacturing performance (availability, quality, cost and benefits)
© 2009 by SMRP
PAGE 1 of 5
PUBLICATION DATE: October 3, 2009
Each component is a process on its own which can be measured using both leading and lagging indicators. These indicators are used to determine the quality of each process. In this context the components of the maintenance and reliability process can be both leading and lagging indicators, depending on where in the process the indicators are used. There is a cause and effect relationship between leading and lagging; the action being measured will cause a resulting action or effect which is also being measured. This means that a given measure could be both a lagging measure for a previous cause in the chain and a leading measure for a following effect. There are a series of causes and effects in the chain until the final lagging measures are reached. Figure 1 (Leading and Lagging Indicator Mapping) illustrates the concept of an indicator being both leading and lagging depending on the application of the metric. Preventive maintenance (PM) compliance is used to measure how much PM work was completed as scheduled. In this case, it is a lagging indicator or result of how much PM work is completed when viewed in the context of work execution. However, when viewed as an indicator of equipment reliability, PM compliance is a leading indicator of the reliability process. The higher an organization’s PM compliance, the more likely this will lead to improved equipment reliability. Similarly, improved equipment reliability will lead to reduced maintenance cost, which is a lagging indicator of the overall maintenance process.
Figure 1: Leading and Lagging Indicator Mapping When considering a leading measure, it is beneficial to express it in terms of what it is a leading measure for, i.e. what is the lagging measure that will be affected?
© 2009 by SMRP
PAGE 2 of 5
PUBLICATION DATE: October 3, 2009
Figure 2 Components of the Maintenance and Reliability Process depicts the relationship between the different maintenance and reliability processes components and the concept of leading and lagging indicators. The final result of a behavior and process is a lagging indicator. However, it can be a leading indicator for the operational execution. In this context, the lagging indicators of one component can also be viewed as the leading indicators of another dependent component.
Figure 2: Components of the Maintenance and Reliability Process
© 2009 by SMRP
PAGE 3 of 5
PUBLICATION DATE: October 3, 2009
Examples of Leading and Lagging Indicators, and their relationship with the SMRP Best Practice metrics are provided in Table 2. The metrics are categorized in accordance with the SMRP Body of Knowledge.
Behaviors & Processess BoK - Business & Management Maintenance Margin (COGS) Maintenance Unit Cost Maintenance Cost per RAV BoK - Manufacturing Process Reliability OEE Availability Total Operating Time BoK - Equipment Reliability Systems Covered by Criticality Analysis Scheduled Downtime Unscheduled Downtime MTBF BoK - People Skills Rework Maintenance Training - $ Maintenance Training -MHRs BoK - Work Management Corrective Maintenance Hours Preventive Maintenance Hours Condition Based Maintenance Hours Planned Work Reactive Work Proactive Work Schedule Compliance Hours Schedule Compliance Work Orders Standing Work Orders Work Order Aging Planned Backlog
Operational Execution
Manufactoring Performance Lagging Lagging Lagging Lagging Lagging Lagging
Lagging
Leading Lagging Lagging Lagging
Leading Lagging Lagging Leading
Lagging Lagging Lagging
Leading Leading Leading
Leading Leading Leading
Lagging Lagging Lagging Leading Lagging Lagging Leading Leading Leading Leading Leading
Leading Leading Leading Leading Leading Leading Leading Leading Leading Leading Leading
Lagging Lagging Lagging
Lagging Lagging
Table 1: Leading and Lagging Indicators
D. CONCLUSION The use of leading and lagging indicators is an important component of the maintenance and reliability process. Leading indicators measure the process and are used to predict changes and trends. Lagging indicators measure results and confirm long-term trends. Whether an indicator is a leading or lagging indicator depends on where in the process the indicator is applied. A lagging indicator of one process component can be a leading indicator of another process component. Whether leading or lagging, performance indicators should be used confirm process performance. These indicators help build on successes and can lead to improvement where unfavorable trends exist.
© 2009 by SMRP
PAGE 4 of 5
PUBLICATION DATE: October 3, 2009
F. REFERENCES •
Olver, Richard Agrium Planner Ratios and Planning and Scheduling Metrics September 2004 rev 5
•
Mather, Daryl Techniques for Applying Leading or Lagging Metrics Immediately! http://www.reliabilityweb.com
•
Lagging Indicator http://baystreet.investopedia.com/terms/l/laggingindicator.asp
•
Murphy, Joseph Perspectives on Measure, http://www.staffing.org/articles/JosephMurphy.arco0016jm.asp
•
Leading Indicator http://www.investorwords.com/2741/leading.indicator.html
•
Rostykus, Walt and Egbert, Joshua Key Measures for Successful Improvement http://curiouscat.com/invest/leadingindicators.cfm
•
Life Cycle Engineering Me and My Key Performance Indicators – Lagging and Leading Maintenance Excellence News, Issue 8, http://www.lce.com/newsltr/newsltr8.htm
© 2009 by SMRP
PAGE 5 of 5
PUBLICATION DATE: October 3, 2009
