The distinction between assets and locations can be subtle, and it is often mis-understood. If you compare both applications, you’ll notice that much of the fields and functions are the same. So which one should you use? Or should you use both? Or should you enter the same information and hierarchies into both? I’ve seen many incorrect approaches implemented by well-intentioned people who clearly didn’t understand the way that these two applications are intended to work together.
I like to tell people to think of locations as a representation of the as-built drawings. Locations are like a map of the plant. Assets, on the other hand, are actual, physical, production equipment. From the maintenance perspective, think of it this way: you do work on an asset that is in a location.
What does this mean, and why is it important? Here are a few thoughts to consider.
Assets can move or be replaced, but locations should always stay the same unless there is an actual change to the plant configuration.
For that reason, asset numbers should be sequentially numbered and not codified. Locations, on the contrary, are best numbered to reflect the hierarchy (P&ID, KKS, etc.). Why? If you assign an asset number that contains the unit, and then you swap that asset to a location on another unit, the asset number would no longer correctly reflect the location. In another example, if you replace an asset but want to keep the history of both, you’d have to do something creative like append “-B” to the end of the asset, thus causing the asset number to no longer match the tag.
Although you can create parent/child relationships between both assets and locations, it works best to build the drill-down in the Locations application. It’s also best to assign only one asset to any single location. This approach will make it easy for technicians and other users to locate the location and asset for Work Orders and other records. They’ll be able to drill down the hierarchy until they find the most granular location that applies to the work at hand. Then Maximo will automatically select the asset, if any, that is currently in that location.
One key exception: Bills of Material. If you have an asset hierarchy that is set up as an Item Assembly Structure in Maximo, you may want to consider building the parent/child relationships in the Assets application instead of Locations. This is a complex scenario that I won’t get into in this blog, but please reach out if it’s an issue that you’d like to discuss in depth. Just remember this for now: avoid building out an asset hierarchy if you intend to perform maintenance at the level of any child assets.
Just a couple more thoughts to add to the subject:
Maximo locations are assigned to something called a “System”. DO NOT construe this to mean that you should create a system in Maximo for each plant system (CCW, GEN, etc.). For clarity, I'll use the terms "Maximo System" and "Plant System". With very few exceptions, you should create a single Maximo System for your entire facility, meaning that the highest-level Location will simply be for "the plant". Additional Maximo Systems will cause lots of complications that I’m not going to list right now. Plant Systems should simply be represented by a locations at some level in the hierarchy, not with their own Maximo system.
Most applications accept both a location and an asset. Have you ever noticed that the PM application only allows you to specify one or the other, but not both? Why do you think that is? It’s because a PM is a static record. Unlike a work order, service request, or purchase order, it doesn’t represent and event, but rather a static condition. Consider this: What if you created a PM for a location/asset, but then you swapped the asset out? How would Maximo reconcile that? Would it change all the asset references for that location to the new asset, or would it follow the asset to the new location? Maximo couldn’t possibly know, so it only allows you to provide one or the other. If you want the PM to follow the asset around wherever it moves, then provide the asset number. If you want it to stay in the same location as asset come and go, then provide the location. Don’t worry though – when the PM becomes a work order, Maximo will fill in the blank.
Have I uncovered a deficiency in your location/asset setup? Contrary to common belief, there are ways to fix hierarchies while still preserving existing records (PMs, WO History, etc.). Please reach out to me if you’d like to discuss further.