Use case

Improve Store Operating Levels and Save Money

CHALLENGES

Consistent Serviceability & Safety Across All Locations:  A large national retailer was unable to determine if each store met company standards for serviceability and safety, in part, because store-related deficiencies and hazards were acknowledged only when a store called to report a problem. The stores that called the most got the most attention and had the highest maintenance spend. Stores that never called got almost no attention and had the lowest maintenance spend. Too much was being spent at stores that didn’t need it and too little at stores that did. Furthermore, the company was consistently being exposed to unnecessary safety liability risk.

Expensive Callbacks:  There was no easy way to assess and verify quality and completeness of work performed by vendors and contractors. Was the vendor fixing the problem or not? Money was being wasted on frequent call-backs as there was no way to prove the vendor didn’t fix the problem the first time.

Prioritizing Asset Replacement:  The inability to compare and stack-rank store deficiencies based on actual condition, remediation options, criticality, and importance resulted in sub-optimal capital investment where lower priority deficiencies were being funded while much higher priority deficiencies were being skipped for future years.

SOLUTION

Mobile application: FieldFLEX Work Management + Inspections

FieldFLEX installed and configured their work management with integrated inspections to improve oversight and operating level at all locations.

  1. Store condition and safety inspections were created and pushed out to all stores for regular update. This improved work prioritization and brought sub-par stores up to company standards while reducing overall maintenance spend.
  2. Pin-drop locating feature allow inspectors/assessors to drop a location marker on a floor plan or map to locate and evaluate equipment or other deficiencies.
  3. Equipment and facility deficiencies are ranked and prioritized to support an optimized maintenance plan and/or capital replacement plan.
  4. Maintenance plans generate scheduled work orders which are dispatched to vendors based on criticality and approved funding.
  5. Vendors update tasks in real-time so maintenance managers, store or facilities managers have visibility into status, can verify repair accuracy and vendor time spent on-site.

RESULTS

  1. Better visibility into condition of facilities and what deficiencies exist.
  2. Optimized capital investment – prioritized spend based on deficiency severity, criticality, and importance.
  3. Vendors and contractors tightly managed and made accountable – performance measured.
  4. Reduction of call backs.
  5. Improved service warranty management.

KEY OUTCOMES

  1. Optimized maintenance spend.
  2. Normalized deficiency identification and resolution – ability to identify, triage and resolve all issues and deficiencies in a standardized way.
  3. Task verification of repair and maintenance identifies vendor performance and short-comings.
  4. 13% savings on maintenance spend in 12 months.

Are you ready to mobilize?