Received: 29 April 2022 Revised: 20 June 2022 Accepted: 30 June 2022

DOI: 10.1002/eng2.12555

TUTORIAL

A practical application of methodologies to determine asset

criticality and work order prioritization

Lar English1 Akilu Yunusa-Kaltungo2

1
Gas Networks Ireland, Cork, Ireland
2
School of Mechanical, Aerospace and
Civil Engineering, University of
Manchester, Manchester, UK
Correspondence
Lar English, Gas Networks Ireland, P.O.
Box 51, Gasworks Road, Cork, Ireland.
Email: lar.english@gasnetworks.ie
Akilu Yunusa-Kaltungo, School of
Mechanical, Aerospace and Civil
Engineering, University of Manchester,
Manchester, UK.
Email: akilu.kaltungo@manchester.ac.uk
Abstract
The ability of a company to prioritize work orders is an essential part of man-
aging work which in turn is vital when it comes to delivering maintenance
services. The authors have drafted a tutorial paper that outlines a real-world
application of practices which determine asset criticality and work order pri-
oritization. The paper initially provides a background on the estate of the
featured facilities department. An approach is then provided to determine
asset criticality across an asset register which factors in the importance of
each site in relation to the overall mission of the estate. The final step is to
use asset criticality, work urgency and a time factor to address work order
prioritization. If a company wishes to adopt the approach in this paper but
does not possess a Computerized Maintenance Management System (CMMS)
with the required functionality, they could instead utilize a spreadsheet-based
approach incorporating data exports from their resident CMMS. While this
paper features data from the facilities management industry, the approach is
agnostic and can be implemented by maintenance departments regardless of
the industry.

KEYWORDS
asset criticality, CMMS, facilities management, work order prioritization, work planning, work
scheduling

J E L C L A S S I F I C AT I O N
Engineering Education

1 I N T RO DU CT ION

Work order prioritization is a vital component of a work management solution which is essential to deliver maintenance
services. Employing a disciplined method of work order prioritization will remove tasks that are done on impulse and
allow work to be delivered based on its true impact on the overall operation of equipment. It also enables the maintenance
function to be delivered in a much more effective manner.1 A commonly accepted fact in industry is that a planned and
scheduled work order is approximately three to four times less expensive than an unplanned work order.2 Work order
prioritization is key to planning and scheduling of work orders. There are numerous methods which can be applied to

This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the
original work is properly cited.
© 2022 The Authors. Engineering Reports published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Engineering Reports. 2022;e12555. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/eng2 1 of 13

https://doi.org/10.1002/eng2.12555
2 of 13 ENGLISH and YUNUSA-KALTUNGO

T A B L E 1 Estate categorization
Large office Regional office Satellite offices Asset operations sites

Networks Services Centre (NSC)a Mallow Galway Leixlip

Gasworks Roada Castlebar N5 Donegal Limerick Gasworks
Colvill House Amiens Street Waterford
Webworks Donmoy House Citywest
Foley Street Harbourmaster Mullingar
Kilkenny
Cavan
Midleton
Limerick (Annacotty)
Limerick (Dooradoyle)
a
These buildings are operated 24 h, 365 days a year, to support Gas Control and Grid Control in Gas Networks Ireland.

work order prioritization. One method involves multiplying applied scores for equipment criticality and the effect of
the task or work to be done. Once a product is achieved, real-world limitations on execution of the task or work are
considered.3 Dunn offers that a work order’s priority should reflect the business risk in relation to the fault or failure the
work order is raised to address.4 Another method is to create a work priority index through multiplying applied scores
for asset criticality and work priority.5 Shiver advises that organizations should utilize a priority matrix chart with the
estimated time to the potential breakdown or functional failure on one side and the consequences of failure on the other
side.6 Hamdi et al. in developing a work order prioritization approach for medical equipment, assess the function of
the affected equipment; the location of use; the workload in the hospital containing the failed equipment; the presence
of redundant equipment; the time since the maintenance request was raised; and the distance to the nearest hospital
containing the same type of equipment for which maintenance is requested.7 Chen et al. apply an algorithm that considers
four factors, namely, the problem type, the level of emergency, the distance between components, and location.8 The
purpose of this paper is to demonstrate a methodology for determining asset criticality which will in turn enable the
delivery of systems-based work order prioritization. The layout of the paper is structured to provide a background on
the operating context first, then deal with asset criticality and finally to address work order prioritization. The scope
of this paper is the assets under the remit of the Ervia facilities department. Ervia is an Irish commercial semi-state
multi-utility company responsible for the delivery of Ireland’s national gas and water infrastructure and services.9 Gas
infrastructure is delivered through the Gas Networks Ireland (GNI) subsidiary. Water infrastructure is delivered through
the Irish Water (IW) subsidiary. A limitation of the approach taken is that the criticality assessment can be described
as qualitative as opposed to quantitative. There are a numbers reasons for this approach: there is a pressing need to
deliver criticality scoring; there is the lack of resources available to perform a quantitative assessment and; the costs of
conducting a quantitative study would possibly outweigh the benefits. Should the necessity arise, a quantitative study can
be performed at a future date.

2 BAC KG RO U N D

The remit of the Ervia facilities department comprises mainly of commercial offices. An asset operations portfolio
will develop from 2021 onwards after the successful on-boarding of the Leixlip water treatment plant (WTP). Table 1
details the categorization of the facilities department properties. A large office typically contains greater than 250
desks; a regional office typically contains between 100 and 250 desks and; a satellite office typically contains less
than 100 desks. Asset operations sites are categorized as per the satellite offices. Ervia utilizes the eMaint® Com-
puterized Maintenance Management System (CMMS) for administration of its maintenance activities. Work order
prioritization was previously carried out by employing the knowledge and experience of the technical and management
teams.
ENGLISH and YUNUSA-KALTUNGO 3 of 13

T A B L E 2 Service delivery matrix

Service provided Large office Regional office Satellite office

Planned maintenance Yes Yes Yes

Unplanned maintenance Yes Yes Yes
Technician/mobile technician Yes Yes Yesa
General/mobile operative Yes Yes Yesb
Facilties manager Yes Yes Yesc
Office moves and removals Yes Yes Yes
De-icing/clearing walkways Yes Yes No
Space management Yes Yes Yes
UPS to critical systems Yes Yes Yes
Generator Yes No No
Synchronization panel Yes No No
a
Mobile technician services only.
b
Mobile general operative services only.
c Managed remotely.

The Ervia facilities department has compiled a Business Charter which sets out the service level for each of the office
categories. A summary of the services is detailed in Table 2. Planned and unplanned maintenance is a service item for all
offices which in turn means all their assets are in scope for a criticality score.

3 ASSET C RITICALITY

Developing an approach for asset criticality is an essential step on the path to implementing a solution for work order
prioritization. ISO 55000 defines a critical asset as an asset that has “potential to significantly impact on the achievement
of the organisation’s objectives’ and that ’assets can be safety-critical, environment-critical or performance-critical”.10 This
section will initially define the concept of Mission Dependency Index (MDI) and then its application to the Ervia facilities
department estate. From there the asset criticality scoring methodology is detailed. The final subsection features a capture
of the entire Ervia facilities department asset base plotted in a criticality curve.

3.1 Mission dependency index

The first component used in the asset criticality study is MDI. MDI can be defined as an indicator of mission-related impor-
tance of infrastructure elements. MDI is an operational risk management metric used to communicate the relative impor-
tance of a facility in terms of mission criticality. It does this by evaluating mission infrastructure “intra”-dependencies
(infrastructure directly controlled by the operator/user) and support mission infrastructure “inter”-dependencies (infras-
tructure controlled by other operators/users).11

3.2 Ervia facilities department MDI approach

The Ervia facilities department approach is to create four MDI rankings and assign a ranking to each site in the estate. The
MDI ranking aligns with the estate categorization as detailed in Table 1. The logic to this approach is that an MDI ranking
is assigned based on the impact of asset/systems/site failure. The more people affected by the failure, the higher the MDI
ranking. Exceptions to this approach are Gasworks Road (GWR) Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) and
the Networks Services Centre (NSC) Gas Control. These areas have a higher MDI ranking than the sites they are contained
in, as they provide full-time support to national gas infrastructure. For this reason, they are assigned a Very High MDI
4 of 13 ENGLISH and YUNUSA-KALTUNGO

ranking. If a system central to the operation of the Very High MDI ranked sites, for example electricity distribution, fails
the impact could be felt nationwide as these sites control and monitor the gas network. The High, Medium and Low
MDI rankings are assigned to sites based on their designation as a large office, regional office, satellite office or asset
operations site. If a system central to the operation of the High, Medium and Low MDI ranked sites, fails the impact is
directly proportional to the number of occupants in the building hence the designation of High MDI ranking for offices
that contain greater than 250 desks; Medium MDI ranking for offices that contain between 100 and 250 desks and; Low
MDI ranking for offices that contain less than 100 desks. Table 3 lists the properties in the facilities department estate,
their MDI ranking, additional definition and comments.

3.3 Asset criticality scoring methodology

As discussed in Section 3.2, consequence of failure is the key component in designating scores for asset criticality. Likeli-
hood of failure is not a factor as analysis of the CMMS records produced no discernible trends in asset breakdowns. This is
due to a tendency in the Ervia facilities estate for replacing assets based on a need for improved performance as opposed
to the assets reaching end-of-life due to repeated failures. A consequence of this approach is a dearth of data concerning
asset failures. As such the approach to asset criticality scoring can be described as tilting toward qualitative as opposed to
quantitative.
To arrive at an accurate criticality score, the following series of questions were asked:

1. Does failure of the asset pose a threat to safety or the environment?

2. Does failure of the asset pose a threat to business operations? *

* Note: Gas Control and Grid Control are examples of highly critical business locations and their assets are rated
accordingly. Assets, whose failure affects staff comfort, are important but less critical than Gas Control and Grid Control
assets.
For a more quantitative study that may be conducted in future, the following questions can be included in the
assessment:

3. What is the cost of repairing or replacing the asset?

4. How many times has the asset failed in the previous 12 months?
5. Are there alternative means of achieving the asset’s function?

Table 4 lists the designated criticality scores for each MDI location.

3.4 Asset criticality curve

There are 9353 assets listed with Active status in the Ervia instance of the eMaint CMMS. Each asset is given a criticality
score using the definitions in Table 4. The criticality value of an asset can be considered dynamic in nature as it may change
during the asset lifetime.12 A change in the operational context of an asset may result in its criticality value increasing
or decreasing. An example of this is if a back-up electricity generator is reconfigured to provide power to an emergency
lighting system, its criticality value will increase as it now supports a life safety system. Failure of the back-up generator
presents a risk to building occupants in the event of an evacuation during a power cut in low light level conditions. While
it is not practical to include the asset register in this paper, the complete list of assets and their associated criticality scores
is available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. As a summary, the resultant data from the criticality
scoring exercise has been plotted in a graph which is featured in Figure 1.

4 WO RK ORDER PRIORITIZATION

Work order prioritization is the next logical step that follows an agreed approach to asset criticality. An option for prior-
itization is to employ the Ranking Index for Maintenance Expenditure (RIME) methodology. This section will initially
ENGLISH and YUNUSA-KALTUNGO 5 of 13

T A B L E 3 Mission dependency index (MDI) ranking matrix

Buildings/areas MDI ranking Definition Comments
GWR SCADA Very High Area operates 24/7 to support Grid This area that had to be occupied during the
Control. COVID-19 pandemic.
NSC Gas Control Very High Area operates 24/7 to support Gas This area that had to be occupied during the
Control. COVID-19 pandemic.
GWR High Designated a Large office: Typically, Staff were able to work from home during the
greater than 250 desks. COVID-19 pandemic with key processes
maintained.
NSC High Designated a Large office: Typically,
greater than 250 desks.
Webworks High Designated a Large office: Typically,
greater than 250 desks.
Foley St. High Designated a Large office: Typically,
greater than 250 desks.
Colville House High Designated a Large office: Typically,
greater than 250 desks.
Mallow Medium Designated a Regional office:
Typically, greater than 100 desks.
Castlebar N5 Medium Designated a Regional office:
Typically, greater than 100 desks.
Amiens Street Medium Designated a Regional office:
Typically, greater than 100 desks.
Donmoy House Medium Designated a Regional office:
Typically, greater than 100 desks.
Harbourmaster Medium Designated a Regional office:
Typically, greater than 100 desks.
Galway Low Designated a Satellite office:
Typically, less than 100 desks.
Donegal Low Designated a Satellite office:
Typically, less than 100 desks.
Waterford Low Designated a Satellite office:
Typically, less than 100 desks.
Citywest Low Designated a Satellite office: Normally a Disaster Recovery (DR) site for Gas
Typically, less than 100 desks. Control but being utilized 24/7 during the
COVID-19 pandemic. MDI Ranking reflects
normal operation that is, not in a pandemic.
Mullingar Low Designated a Satellite office: Staff were able to work from home during the
Typically, less than 100 desks. COVID-19 pandemic with key processes
maintained.
Kilkenny Low Designated a Satellite office:
Typically, less than 100 desks.
Cavan Low Designated a Satellite office:
Typically, less than 100 desks.
Midleton Low Designated a Satellite office: Normally a DR site for Grid Control but being
Typically, less than 100 desks. utilized 24/7 during the COVID-19 pandemic. MDI
Ranking reflects normal operation, that is, not in a
pandemic.
Limerick (Annacotty) Low Designated a Satellite office: Staff were able to work from home during the
Typically, less than 100 desks. COVID-19 pandemic with key processes
maintained.
Limerick (Dooradoyle) Low Designated a Satellite office:
Typically, less than 100 desks.
Leixlip Low IW Asset Operations site. Status is equal to Satellite office with less than 100
desks present.
Limerick Gasworks Low GNI Asset Operations site. No office staff present.
6 of 13 ENGLISH and YUNUSA-KALTUNGO

T A B L E 4 Criticality scores per mission dependency index (MDI) location type

Criticality Definition

14 High criticality assets in a Very High MDI location

12 Medium criticality assets in a Very High MDI location
10 High criticality assets in a High MDI location
8 Medium criticality assets in a High MDI location
6 High criticality assets in a Medium MDI location
5 Medium criticality assets in a Medium MDI location
4 High criticality assets in a Low MDI location
3 Medium criticality assets in a Low MDI location
2 Noncritical assets in all locations

FIGURE 1 Asset criticality graph

define RIME and then explore the specific configuration available in the eMaint CMMS. The final subsection will feature
a demonstration of the Ervia facilities department’s work order prioritization approach.

4.1 Ranking index for maintenance expenditure

The ability to define a RIME ranking makes prioritizing assets simple and enables maintenance teams to streamline how
they spend their time and efforts.13 RIME helps replace emotion with logic. It is known in industry that maintenance
decisions are often based on emotion and not what makes the best business sense.14 An advantage of this methodology
is that functionality exists in the eMaint CMMS currently used by the Ervia facilities department.

4.2 eMaint CMMS RIME configuration

RIME combines the work order priority, asset criticality score, and amount of time since the work order was raised. The
RIME Rank on the work order prioritizes the work that needs to be completed based on three variables that are specified
by the CMMS owner. This method of ranking maintenance work orders is based on an index that combines both the work
classification priority and asset criticality score, to produce a single RIME number that is then used by the maintenance
team to prioritize the work. The RIME Rank is based on three values: the priority of the work order, the RIME Code of the
ENGLISH and YUNUSA-KALTUNGO 7 of 13

T A B L E 5 Priority scores per work order type

Priority Work order type Definition Subdefinition

10 Reactive
8 Statutory
6 Preventive
Maintenance
6 Safety Activity
4 Corrective
4 Follow-Up
4 Capital Projects
3 Scheduled Task
Response to a serious equipment issue.
Recurring activity with legal obligation
to be performed.
Recurring technical activity.
Recurring safety activity.
Response to an equipment running
issue.
Raised due to observations made during
a planned activity.
Generated as part of self-delivered
projects.
Recurring non-technical activity.
More urgent than a Corrective work order.
Business critical maintenance.
Refers to monthly safety walks.
Less urgent than a Reactive work order
(can be deferred until next visit).
Less urgent than a Reactive work order
(can be deferred until next visit).
Includes large-scale activities such as
replacement of an emergency
lighting system.

3 Landlord Maintenance Recurring Landlord activity. Includes preventive and statutory items.
2 Small Project Works Minor works completed outside of Includes small-scale activities such as
planned maintenance. painting a room or door.
2 Administration Ad-hoc non-technical activity.

2 Calibration Calibration of maintenance equipment.

asset and the Factor. Two of the three are specified on the work order and the asset forms. (Priority = work order priority,
RIME Code = asset criticality). The third is the Factor and that value is based on the following calculation:
( )
TD − WOD
F= × 5, (1)
7

where F = Factor, T D = Today’s Date, and WOD = Work Order Date.

The Factor considers how long the work order has been open. The Factor is calculated each day along with the RIME
Rank and not stored in the CMMS. The following is the formula for calculating RIME scores as configured via a workflow
in the eMaint CMMS:

RR = (P × RC) + F (2)

where RR = RIME Rank, P = Priority, RC = RIME Code, and F = Factor.

Additional information on the eMaint CMMS RIME workflow is that it runs daily and updates the RIME Rank value
on the work orders. There are associated fields on both the work order and asset forms within the eMaint CMMS. Priority
(wo.priority) is a value that is automatically populated on the work order form after it is created depending on what
type of work needs to be done. This can also be set on the Preventive Maintenance (PM) form to populate on the work
order after it is generated. Table 5 details the priority scores per work order type for the Ervia facilities department. RIME
Code (compinfo.rimecode) is a value that is populated on the asset form and reflects the criticality ranking for the asset
depending on how critical the piece of equipment is to the facilities department.

4.3 Demonstration of work order prioritization applied in CMMS

This subsection combines the elements already explored in the paper and demonstrates deployment within the
eMaint CMMS as used by the Ervia facilities department. Table 6 contains an export from the work order table
 8 of 13

T A B L E 6 Ranking index for maintenance expenditure (RIME) export from eMaint computerized maintenance management system
RIME
ranking Asset Assign
WO No. index Site WO Type description WO date Brief description to type

68016 253 Colvill house Follow Up Colvill house February 16, 2021 Following on from Emergency lighting test Facilities technician
failures reported
67224 243 Citywest Follow Up Building January 27, 2021 COVID 19 FUWO from 65948. Repairs to Facilities technician
the emergency lighting CW
68629 241 Gasworks road Follow Up Distribution March 4, 2021 FUWO: Portable appliance testing 12 FACILITIES
Boards monthly TECHNICIAN
67778 237 Foley street Small Project Foley street February 10, 2021 Please install Electric power shower Facilities technician
Works
67779 237 Foley street Small Project Foley street February 10, 2021 Please supply power to electric shower and Facilities technician
Works terminate
68029 228 Leixlip wtp Capital Projects Emergency February 17, 2021 FUWO: Emergency Lighting 3 Facilities technician
power monthly-Upper Sludge
68030 228 Leixlip wtp Capital Projects Emergency February 17, 2021 FUWO: Emergency Lighting 3 Facilities technician
power monthly-Lower Sludge
70626 203 Gasworks road Follow up Electrical April 27, 2021 FUWO: Fuwo from rcd loop test Facilities technician
distribution
71230 191 Foley street Corrective Electrical May 14, 2021 Please review existing Cylon CT cabling Facilities technician
distribution installation in Main LV room
69576 190 Citywest Small Project Building March 31, 2021 Covid 19 - Carpark Lighting Upgrade Facilities manager
Works
71162 186 Gasworks road Follow up Air handling May 10, 2021 FUWO: Fire dampers functional check 12 Facilities technician
monthly
72016 184 NSC Preventive External blinds June 3, 2021 Solar blind maintenance 12 monthly Air conditioning
Maintenance
70642 182 Webworks Small Project Internal fabric April 28, 2021 Replace metal ceiling tiles following General operative
Works emergency lighting project
70664 181 Webworks Small Project Building April 29, 2021 Fit mesh to Grills on south side of building Facilities technician
Works to capture leaves and debris 2021
(Continues)
ENGLISH and YUNUSA-KALTUNGO
T A B L E 6 (Continued)
RIME
ranking Asset Assign
WO No. index Site WO Type description WO date Brief description to type

70655 177 Midleton compressor Follow up Distribution April 29, 2021 FUWO: FUWO: Pat testing to be completed Facilities technician
station boards in control room after covid 19
ENGLISH and YUNUSA-KALTUNGO

70657 177 Waterford Follow up Main April 29, 2021 FUWO: Inspection and remedial works Facilities technician
distribution may be required
board
70687 177 Webworks Small Project Footpaths April 30, 2021 Re paint floor markings and add pedestrian Contractor
Works carparks walkway
roads
70640 174 Midleton compressor Follow Up Air conditioning April 28, 2021 FUWO: Hvac maintenance - replace 2 Facilities technician
station pumps
70654 169 Midleton compressor Small Project Building April 29, 2021 Core hole in kitchen wall for extract General operative
station Works
72007 169 Webworks Follow up BMS June 2, 2021 FUWO: FUWO: Bms service 6 monthly Building management
71232 167 Waterford Follow up Distribution May 14, 2021 FUWO: Emergency lighting test 3 monthly Facilities technician
boards
72696 161 NSC Corrective Building June 25, 2021 Covid 19 - Lock broken on Extractor server Facilities technician
room door 2nd floor tower
73174 153 NSC Follow Up Building July 6, 2021 FWUP 9 external lights not working Facilities technician
72692 145 Citywest Preventive Distribution June 25, 2021 Portable appliance testing 48 monthly Facilities technician
Maintenance boards
72988 132 Kilkenny smithlands Follow Up UPS July 1, 2021 Replace fans in UPS as per manufacturers Electrical
recommendations FU from 696,421
74836 124 Foley street Preventive BMS August 27, 2021 Bms service 6 monthly Building management
Maintenance
74839 124 Colvill house Preventive BMS August 27, 2021 Bms service 6 monthly Building management
Maintenance
(Continues)
9 of 13
 10 of 13

T A B L E 6 (Continued)
RIME
ranking Asset Assign
WO No. index Site WO Type description WO date Brief description to type

77978 99 Foley street Statutory Water November 14, 2021 Calorifier service 6 monthly Technical coordinator
78246 95 NSC Statutory Fire suppression November 20, 2021 Fire suppression (ansul r-102) 6 monthly Disabled toilet alar
78357 94 Foley street Statutory Intruder November 22, 2021 Intruder alarm service 6 monthly Access control
detection
78436 93 Colvill house Statutory Water November 23, 2021 Bacterial & legionella sampling plus Water quality
monitoring monthly
78437 93 Foley street Statutory Water November 23, 2021 Bacterial & legionella sampling plus Water quality
monitoring monthly
78504 91 NSC Statutory Intruder November 25, 2021 Intruder alarm service 6 monthly Access control
detection
76748 91 Mallow Statutory Safety October 12, 2021 Building & fire risk assessment 24 monthly Facilities manager
77534 89 NSC Preventive Electrical November 1, 2021 Power factor correction unit service 12 Electrical
Maintenance distribution monthly
78811 87 Foley street Statutory Passenger lift December 1, 2021 Lift insurance inspection 6 monthly Technical coordinator
78828 87 NSC Statutory Gas leak December 1, 2021 Gas leak detection 6 monthly Disabled toilet alar
detection
77923 81 NSC Preventive Building November 11, 2021 Solar blinds 12 monthly Air conditioning
Maintenance
ENGLISH and YUNUSA-KALTUNGO
ENGLISH and YUNUSA-KALTUNGO 11 of 13

in the Ervia instance of the eMaint CMMS. In the table, work orders are sorted from the highest to lowest val-
ues depending on their RIME Ranking Index scores. The RIME Ranking Index scores are calculated by a work-
flow in the CMMS using the formulae documented in Section 4.2. The table demonstrates that work orders open
since the beginning of 2021, although of relatively low criticality, have a higher ranking than the work orders
opened later in the year. This is due to the time Factor which helps ensure that all work orders will eventually be
completed.
The export in Table 6 demonstrates the successful application of work order prioritization delivered using the RIME
methodology. The data was exported on the December 11, 2021 and contains the top 38 work orders sorted from the
highest to lowest values depending on their RIME Ranking Index scores. Using Equations (2) and (3), the following
demonstrates how a RIME Rank score of 203 was achieved for work order number 70626.
( )
December 11, 2021 − April 27, 2021
× 5 = 163. (3)
7
(4 × 10) + 163 = 203 (4)

In order to foster clarity, an extract of the full list of work orders has been used for demonstration here, since it would
be impracticable to analyze all 355 work orders that were open on that date, and their associated RIME Ranking Index
scores. To validate the approach taken in this paper, asset criticality and work order priority scores were arrived at through
a skilled forum of department members with a wide range of work experience in industries such as pharmaceutical and
medical device manufacturing. The RIME methodology deployed in the CMMS was initially ran in parallel with the
existing process of work order prioritization via internal expert opinion of the maintenance technicians and managers.
This allowed both for minor adjustments in the configuration and for trust to build in the algorithm. An additional proof
of validation is that RIME is a tool built within the eMaint CMMS after extracting knowledge from their multiple clients
across many industries.

5 CO NCLUDING REMARKS

This tutorial paper documents the approach taken in a criticality assessment of the assets under the remit of the Ervia
facilities department. It also presents a solution for work order prioritization. Both items are essential elements in enabling
the department to provide a work order prioritization solution to IW and GNI. The novelty of this paper is that its layered
solution provides work order prioritization for assets on multiple sites which incorporates asset criticality scoring based on
the consequence of failure of the asset and the importance of the site, in which the asset resides, in relation to the mission
of the organization. Although the department intends to abide by the RIME, an option will always exist for management
to override work order prioritization should they feel it appropriate. Reasons for overriding RIME include emergency
works that have not been entered to the CMMS. Should an organization wish to use a RIME type solution but do not have
a CMMS with the associated functionality, the solution could instead be built in a spreadsheet using the approach in this
paper and data exports from their proprietary CMMS. While this paper was drafted using data from a specific facilities
department, the approach is such that it can be adopted by any maintenance department regardless of the industry it
resides in. In the longer term, in relation to the Ervia facilities department there may be a need to revisit this study with
inclusion of a quantitative asset criticality assessment. Further long-term opportunities include developing a Facilities
Condition Index (FCI). FCI can be defined as an analytical method for an organization to benchmark the condition of
its buildings and infrastructure. Through monitoring of asset criticality, MDI, RIME and FCI, organizations can make
data-driven decisions in relation to asset investment and maintenance.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors wish to thank Fluke for allowing the authors to feature its cloud-based eMaint CMMS and associated
RIME functionality. This paper did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or
not-for-profit sectors.

PEER REVIEW
The peer review history for this article is available at https://publons.com/publon/10.1002/eng2.12555.
12 of 13 ENGLISH and YUNUSA-KALTUNGO

DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The authors have no conflict of interest relevant to this article.

ORCID
Lar English https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8061-0399
Akilu Yunusa-Kaltungo https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5138-3783

REFERENCES
1. Reliability Web. Work order prioritization. Reliability Web [Online]. Accessed March 6, 2022. https://reliabilityweb.com/articles/entry/
work_order_prioritization.
2. Prometheus Group. 11 Disadvantages of a Reactive Maintenance Program. Prometheus Group [Online]; 9 July 2020. Accessed March 9,
2022. https://www.prometheusgroup.com/posts/11-disadvantages-of-a-reactive-maintenance-program
3. ReliabilityWeb. Work order prioritization. ReliabilityWeb [Online]. Accessed June 18, 2022. https://reliabilityweb.com/articles/entry/
work_order_prioritization
4. Dunn S. How to prioritise maintenance work orders. Assetivity; 7 January 2019. Accessed June 18, 2022. https://www.assetivity.com.au/
articles/maintenance-management/how-to-prioritise-maintenance-work-orders/
5. Prometheus Group. Creating a work priority index: 4 essential steps. Prometheus Group [Online]; 2 July 2020. Accessed June 18, 2022.
https://www.prometheusgroup.com/posts/creating-a-work-priority-index-4-essential-steps
6. Shiver J. Prioritizing maintenance work orders. Reliableplant [Online]. Accessed June 18, 2022. https://www.reliableplant.com/Read/
28953/maintenance-work-orders
7. Hamdi N, Oweis R, Abu Zraiq H, Abu Sammour D. An intelligent healthcare management system: a new approach in work-order
prioritization for medical equipment maintenance requests. J Med Syst. 2012;36:557-567.
8. Chen W, Chen K, Cheng JC, Wang Q, Gan VJ. BIM-based framework for automatic scheduling of facility maintenance work orders.
Automat Construct. 2018;91:15-30.
9. Ervia. Who we are. Ervia [Online]; 2019. Accessed March 6, 2022. http://www.ervia.ie/who-we-are/
10. International Standards Organisation. ISO 55000:2014 Asset Management — Overview, Principles and Terminology. ISO; 2014.
11. Antelman. Mission dependency index validation report NFESC special publication SP-2113-SHR. Naval Facilities Engineering Service
Center; 2002.
12. English L, Yunusa-Kaltungo A, Kidd M, Labib A. Development of a complementary framework for implementing asset register solutions.
Eng Rep. 2022;4(6):e12493.
13. eMaint. What is a CMMS used for? Fluke Corporation [Online]. Accessed February 9, 2021. https://www.emaint.com/what-is-a-cmms/
what-is-a-cmms-used-for/
14. Mahoney G. Work prioritization: emotion vs. logic. Reliabilityweb.com [Online]. Accessed February 8, 2021. https://reliabilityweb.com/
articles/entry/work_prioritization_emotion_vs._logic

AU THOR BIOGRAPHIES

Lar English is employed as a Contracts and Maintenance Manager in Gas Networks Ireland.
Having 20 years’ experience as a maintenance practitioner, he has completed an MSc at the Uni-
versity of Manchester in Reliability Engineering and Asset Management. English is a Chartered
Engineer (CEng) and Member of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers (IMechE).

Akilu Yunusa-Kaltungo, BEng, MSc, PGDip-Mgt, PhD, CEng, FIMechE, FHEA, obtained his
first degree in Mechanical Engineering from the University of Maiduguri, Nigeria. He then
joined LafargeHolcim Cement PLC, first as a junior Methods/Reliability engineer and later as the
Maintenance Team Leader on a multimillion pounds coal grinding plant project. In 2008, Akilu
moved to the United Kingdom for his MSc in Maintenance Engineering and Asset Management
(now known as Reliability Engineering and Asset Management) at the School of Mechanical,
Aerospace and Civil Engineering (MACE), during which his MSc dissertation won the European
Federation for National Maintenance Societies Award for “Best Master’s Thesis in Maintenance
ENGLISH and YUNUSA-KALTUNGO 13 of 13

Engineering from the United Kingdom.” Upon completing his MSc in 2009, Akilu re-joined LafargeHolcim PLC where
he served as training and learning manager; health and safety manager; and maintenance manager. In late 2012,
Akilu returned to the University of Manchester for his PhD in Condition Monitoring of Rotating Machines, with
particular interest in the development of data fusion techniques that can simplify fault detection and classification.
During this time, he authored over 30 refereed papers, a book and reviewed more than 90 research articles published
in internationally recognized journals and conference proceedings. Akilu has been a lecturer in Plant Reliability and
Maintenance Engineering within the School of MACE since November 2015. He is currently principal investigator for
two research projects.

How to cite this article: English L, Yunusa-Kaltungo A. A practical application of methodologies to determine
asset criticality and work order prioritization. Engineering Reports. 2022;e12555. doi: 10.1002/eng2.12555