The following outline is a review of the various software options we demoed for preventive maintenance. I’ve listed them in order of preferred recommendation. The top three, however, are the most viable options for our goals.

MPulse:

MPulse was one of the easiest and least complex software we looked at. Its ease of use is coupled with the most features available to us. The key feature they have that no other software utilized was the inclusion of predictive maintenance. While preventive maintenance is continual, predictive maintenance only pertains to maintenance based on irregularities in a machines performance. This means that the meters attached to the machines on the floor will send data directly to our MPulse software and based on that data, it can generate a work order. It does so by utilizing the parameters you set for each machine and meter. If the meter reads data that is outside of the ideal range, an email will be sent to maintenance and is recorded in the system. This is useful in predicting potential breakdowns. This is an extra feature that can be purchased, which is a main reason for choosing MPulse over other software. The rest of MPulse is very similar to the other software we have reviewed. The initial dashboard can be customized to show specific reports, and update them in real time if need be. Also on the dashboard is inventory, asset management, work orders, PMs, and a calendar view. The inventory analysis is pretty standard as it is with other software. You can create re-order points and auto-generate POs based on inventory. MPulse, however, like a few other software systems allows you to assign inventory to specific assets, PMs and work orders. This allows for easy tracking of inventory and eliminates the need for going in and manually updating inventory. This will decrease purchase errors and ensure you don’t over order a certain part or that you don’t have a shortage of parts. As far as PMs go, you can choose to auto-generate PMs at any time interval, what is known as “set and forget”, as well as customize the form to include any information that is needed for that procedure. There is also a comment section where maintenance can add comments about the machine or update on the status of the PM or work order. The same goes for work orders, minus the ability to auto-generate them at certain time intervals. MPulse also has a very in depth, but easy to use reporting system. There are a large number of fields you can select from to create just about any report, over any time period. Unlike other robust reporting systems, MPulse is very intuitive and easy to pick up on. MPulse also features a mobile platform so that work orders and PMs can be accessed directly from your phone and allow the maintenance team to see what need is while they are still on the floor. The downside to MPulse is the price. There are two payment options, you can purchase the license for a one-time fee, or simply subscribe for a yearly fee. The purchase option is the most expensive, while the subscription cost less. The subscription pricing is also the most expensive compared to the pricing of the other subscription models. MPulse also uses a pay per user model, so unlike Hippo and FMX, it is not unlimited users. Although this is more expensive, I believe that MPulse is the best option to move forward due to the inclusion of predictive maintenance system, total features and overall ease of use.

Hippo CMMS:

Hippo CMMS software is fairly user friendly, however it does not have as many “bonus features” as other software demos called them. Hippo has a limited number of features but, the features they do have are well put together and fairly straightforward. There are two dashboards that come with the software with the option to add an advanced dashboard for an additional fee. I believe the advanced dashboard would be overkill, and is not worth paying an additional fee. The dashboards that come standard include an interactive calendar and a standard dashboard. The interactive calendar is very intuitive and easy to pick up on. It is color coded with a very wide array of different options. You can change the date of PMs and work orders, which is very convenient and eliminates the need to go back into the standard dashboard to update due dates. You can also edit both PMs and work order from the calendar which is a great feature to have. The standard dashboard houses just about everything else in the system. From here you can go to inventory, work orders, PMs, or reports. In the inventory page, you can assign specific parts to different assets, auto-generate PO’s , set re-order points as well as enter in the value you would like to order once that point is reached. When it comes to work orders, maintenance has the option to close out work orders, add their hours and even mark the parts that they use, which then pulls the parts out of inventory and updates the amount available. Much of the system is automated. They give you the option to “set and forget” your PM schedule, as well as email you when a new PM is generated to ensure that maintenance is actually being followed through on. In addition to the auto-generation of PM’s, you can also set Hippo to auto-generate a number of preset reports and have those reports emailed to you. This type of notification type is useful because Hippo also has a mobile app so that this can be checked on your mobile phone and then be opened directly in their mobile platform. The basic features that Hippo prides itself on are actually very well done and come with most of the other software that we demoed, however the main appeal with Hippo comes with its attractive price. They only cost about 60% of the next cheapest option. On top of being cheap, Hippo allows for unlimited users. For the price they offer, it’s hard to find a better option and this software should be taken into serious consideration.

FMX:

FMX was another very user friendly software with a lot of flexibility. Like Hippo, they have an interactive calendar, which streamlines scheduling and rescheduling maintenance tasks. Also, unlike Hippo, FMX will not allow you to double book tasks at the same time. An interactive calendar is a great feature to have and saves a lot time if an issue with scheduling arises. As with the other software we looked at, FMX also has inventory analysis. This allows for the usual re-order points and generation of PO’s. Unlike Hippo as well, you have much more freedom to customize the fields within the inventory page. An additional feature that is limited to FMX is the ability to attach QR codes to assets. This allows for the ability to scan the code on a given piece of machinery and it will bring up all data tied that asset. Data can include

maintenance history, procedure for fixing different parts on the machine, or even a list of parts that are associated with that machine. When it comes to PMs and work orders, it is all very straightforward. You have the ability to “set and forget” PMs, as well as the ability to not auto generate a PM until the previous one is completed, that way machines are sticking with their correct maintenance time frame. Also, you can create task lists separate from a specific PM so that it can then be attached to future PMs. Customization is great to have when it comes to work orders. While the majority of the work orders you use will be created after the fact, any data need such as inventory, the machine it was on, the cost, or procedure can all be added if they are not already built into the form provided. Also, FMX has a mobile platform, which allows for the maintenance team to access PMs while they are still on the floor. FMX also has a very robust reporting system with a very large number of preset reports you can generate. All this is included but it is more complex than the other reporting systems we looked at, which greatly affects the ease of use. Reporting is a very large part of the maintenance software and it may not be the easiest system to use. Regardless of the ease of use, it is one of the more in depth reporting systems available and can still be of great use. Also, there is no extra fee for the number of users, which is a huge advantage. As far as pricing, it comes right in the middle of pack. Due to the large number of extra features that are included as well as the number of users allowed, this software should be strongly considered.

MicroMain:

MicroMain is user friendly but not everything was as simple as it could have been. For the most part, the software was very straightforward, however it also came across as too basic. You can do the bare minimum when it comes to preventive maintenance software. They give you the ability to create PM’s, work orders, and manage inventory. The calendar that displays the PM’s and work order is not interactive, which makes it more difficult to find certain maintenance requests as well as tougher to change the due date of a PM or work order. While it is easy to read and decipher, making changes eliminates the added bonus of being easy to read. When it comes to PM’s and work orders, they are fairly easy and self-explanatory. They have all the expected features, such as, assign to a member of maintenance, assign a due date, auto generate over a certain amount of time and have a comment section to add a list of steps to follow for PMs. They do have the option as well to have anyone submit a work order for an extra fee, but for our purposes that would be a waste of money and would be much easier to just Luis or Alfredo generate a work order after they complete a job so that the work is still logged. Like the other software we demoed, they have very in depth inventory analysis. You can set re-order point and include a quantity to order if a re-order point is met. When you generate a new PO all the inventory below its re-order point will appear, and depending on if you attach price to a part, the cost will appear as well. Attaching cost to parts is recommended because it allows for you to generate more detailed reports, such as cost of maintenance on a certain machine, as long as maintenance log what parts were used. With some of the other software we saw, you can just attach the parts needed for a PM, which is attached to a certain asset or machine. This allows for easy tracking of parts, however this is not an option in MicroMain. The responsibility would fall

on maintenance to enter in what parts, which can lead to errors in cost and inventory. This can eliminate the ROI of the software and is a huge fault with this software. Being the second most expensive software, and having a few streamlining problems, I would recommend that we do not move forward with this software.

EMaint:

EMaint was the most complex of the five software systems we demoed. A large part of this software requires the user to input and schedule everything manually, which defeats the purpose of the software in most cases. A key feature that other software we tested had was the ability to “set and forget”. This means that the reports, PM’s, purchase orders could be auto-generated as opposed to needing the user to come in and continually request one of these. The reporting, although not automated was very detailed and in-depth, and like most of the others that we previewed, came with a number of preset reports that could be generated. They also have very detailed inventory management, which includes re-order points as well as being able to store pricing and the amount that should be ordered if a re-order point is reached. You are not able to attach parts to certain assets which can make maintenance tough and eliminates a main use that we are looking for in a software. The lack of automated abilities within their system highly limits EMaint’s overall effectiveness. The PM forms were not customizable either which is not a huge drawback but something worth noting. When it comes to pricing, eMaint comes in with the second cheapest first year and the third cheapest total over the first five years. They do meet most of the requirements that we are looking for in a preventive maintenance system, however it is not the most user friendly and requires much more work from the user’s side than all of the other software systems we demoed. I would not recommend this as the software we move forward with.