Risks of Contractual Fines for Failures in the Industrial Production Process and the Relation with the Importance of the Qualification of the Work in the Maintenance

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes on Multidisciplinary Industrial Engineering book series (LNMUINEN)


Industrial failures are associated with poor maintenance planning, directly affecting organizational productivity. When equipment failures occur, established contracts allow fines to be imposed on organizations, sometimes due to delivery delays or product failures due to poor quality. The aim of this paper was to perform a literature review on the elements that cause risks of contractual fines due to equipment unavailability. To perform this work, a literature review was made based on published scientific articles on topics of predictive maintenance, preventive maintenance and corrective maintenance, production planning and control (PPC), financial risks for contractual fines and availability of machinery in industrial processes, as well as maintenance workforce qualification. Maintenance and operation, as the most important administrative and operational functions of production, are responsible for meeting the following requirements: quality, speed, reliability, flexibility and cost. As a result, it was found in the literature that a well-trained and motivated maintenance team performs higher quality short-term tasks, reducing machine repair times, and reducing the number of fines for failure to meet contractual deadlines. These results were corroborated by verification in four supply chain companies in the agricultural and construction machinery sector.


Maintenance planning Contractual risks Maintenance workforce 



Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná (PUCPR), Instituto Federal do Paraná (IFPR) and Universidade Tecnológica Federal do Paraná (UTFPR).


  1. 1.
    Hui, Y.V., Leung, L.C., Linn, R.: Optimal machining conditions with costs of quality and tool maintenance for turning. Int. J. Prod. Res. 39(4), 647–665 (2001)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ahmad, S., Schroeder, R.G.: The impact of human resource management practices on operational performance: recognizing country and industry differences. J. Oper. Manage. 21(1), 19–43 (2003)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Khan, F.I., Haddara, M.: Risk-based maintenance (RBM): a new approach for process plant inspection and maintenance. Process Saf. Prog. 23(4), 252–265 (2004)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Alsyouf, I.: The role of maintenance in improving companies’ productivity and profitability. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 105(1), 70–78 (2007)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Al-Najjar, B.: The lack of maintenance and not maintenance which costs: a model to describe and quantify the impact of vibration-based maintenance on company’s business. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 107(1), 260–273 (2007)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kans, M.: An approach for determining the requirements of computerized maintenance management systems. Comput. Ind. 59(1), 32–40 (2008)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lee, H.H.Y., Scott, D.: Overview of maintenance strategy, acceptable maintenance standard and resources from a building maintenance operation perspective. J. Build. Apprais. 4(1), 269–278 (2009)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ma, Y., Chu, C., Zuo, C.: A survey of scheduling with deterministic machine availability constraints. Comput. Ind. Eng. 58(2), 199–211 (2010)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Simões, J.M., Gomes, C.F., Yasin, M.M.: A literature review of maintenance performance measurement: a conceptual framework and directions for future research. JQME 17(2), 116–137 (2011)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Peng, D.X., Schroeder, R.G., Shah, R.: Competitive priorities, plant improvement and innovation capabilities, and operational performance: a test of two forms of fit. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manage. 31(5), 484–510 (2011)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jabbour, C.J.C., da Silva, M.E., Paiva, E.L., Almada, F.C.: Environmental management in Brazil: is it a completely competitive priority? J. Clean. Prod. 21(1), 11–22 (2012)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Choudhari, S.C., Adil, G.K., Ananthakumar, U.: Configuration of manufacturing strategy decision areas in line production system: five case studies. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 64(1), 459–474 (2013)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fitouhi, M., Nourelfath, M.: Integrating noncyclical preventive maintenance scheduling and production planning for multi-state systems. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 121(1), 175–186 (2014)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lu, Z., Cui, W., Han, X.: Integrated production and preventive maintenance scheduling for a single machine with failure uncertainty. Comput. Ind. Eng. 80(1), 236–244 (2014)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Tavares, L.A.: Business Centered Maintenance. NAT, Rio de Janeiro (2005)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Díaz, E., Martín, M.L.: Un análisis de las configuraciones genéricas de la estrategia de producción de empresas industriales españolas. CEDE 10(32), 149–176 (2007)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Burgess, C.J.C.: A Tutorial on support vector machine pattern recognition. Data Min. Knowl. Disc. 2(2), 121–167 (1998)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Calantone, R.J., Cavusgil, S.T., Zhao, Y.: Learning orientation, firm innovation capability, and firm performance. Ind. Mark. Manage. 31(6), 515–524 (2002)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cárdenas Aguirre, D.M., Castrillón Gómez, Ó.D., Becerra Rodríguez, F., García, A., Giraldo García, J.A., Ibarra Mirón, S., Zapata Gómez, A.: Gestión de la Producción: Una Aproximación Conceptual. Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Unibiblos, Bogotá (2008)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kathuria, R., Porth, S.J., Kathuria, N.N., Kohli, T.K.: Competitive priorities and strategic consensus in emerging economies: evidence from India. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manage. 30(8), 879–896 (2010)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Slack, N., Lewis, M.: Operations Strategy. Harlow, England (2017)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Longoni, A., Cagliano, R.: Environmental and social sustainability priorities: their integration in operations strategies. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manage. 35(2), 216–245 (2015)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Maletič, D., Maletič, M., Gomišček, B.: The impact of quality management orientation on maintenance performance. Int. J. Prod. Res. 52(6), 1744–1754 (2014)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Luo, W., Cheng, T.C.E., Ji, M.: Single-machine scheduling with a variable maintenance activity. Comput. Ind. Eng. 79(1), 168–174 (2015)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ishizaka, A., Nemery, P.: Assigning machines to incomparable maintenance strategies with ELECTRE-SORT. Omega 47(1), 45–59 (2014)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Robson, K., Trimble, R., MacIntyre, J.: Creating and sustaining a maintenance strategy: a practical guide. J. Bus. Adm. Res. 2(1), 77–84 (2013)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Brown, S.J., May, I.L.: Risk-based hazardous protection and prevention by inspection and maintenance. Trans. ASME J. Press. Vessel Technol. 122(3), 362–367 (2003)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Arendt, J.S.: Using quantitative risk assessment in the chemical process industry. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 29(1), 133–149 (1990)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kaufman, D.L., Lewis, M.E.: Machine maintenance with workload considerations. Nav. Res. Logist. 54(7), 750–766 (2007)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Garza-Reyes, J.A.: From measuring overall equipment effectiveness (OEE) to overall resource effectiveness (ORE). JQME 21(4), 506–527 (2015)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Mhada, F.A., Hajji, R.M., Gharbi, A., Pellerin, R.: Production control of unreliable manufacturing systems producing defective items. JQME 17(3), 238–253 (2011)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Federal Institute of Parana (IFPR)CuritibaBrazil
  2. 2.Industrial and Systems Engineering (PPGEPS)Pontificia Universidade Catolica do Parana (PUCPR)CuritibaBrazil
  3. 3.Universidade Tecnologica Federal do Parana (UTFPR)Pato BrancoBrazil

Personalised recommendations