Home        About       Contact
1



Priority Scale/Levels
A scale of the relative priority of facilities, assets, conditions, maintenance and other matters, which is determined by relative criticality.

Purpose of Prioritization:
  • To rank items in order from highest to lowest
  • To facilitate decision-making
Priority rankings are typically arranged into 3-tiers or 5-tiers. Included below are various examples.




Classification #1: By Action
Listed below is a five tiered priority ranking scheme for physical conditions associated with individual assets:
Detailed discussions on these five tiers of priority can be found on the corresponding pages of this glossary.



Classification #2
Listed below is a 6 tiered priority ranking scheme for conditions associated with individual assets:  


  • P6. Emergency.  Safety of life or property threatened; immediate mission impact; loss of utilities. Begin immediately; divert resources as necessary; overtime may be authorized.
  • P5. Urgent.  Maintenance or repair work required for continued facility operation; should be completed to ensure continuous operation of the facility and to restore healthful environment. Not a life-threatening emergency. Respond upon completion of current work but within a specified period of time (specified by local Center, such as same day or within 4 hours).
  • P4. High Priority.  Work that is to support the mission on a priority basis or to meet project deadlines. Complete in order of receipt with mission work taking priority.
  • P3. Medium Priority (Routine). The facilities maintenance work can be scheduled routinely within the capability of the facilities maintenance organization. Facilities work is subject to availability of resources, and may be consolidated by facility or zone or as directed to obtain efficiency of operation.
  • P2. Low Priority (Discretionary).  Work that is desired but not essential to protect, preserve, or restore facilities and equipment; typically, new work that is not tied to a specific mission milestone.
  • P1. No Priority (Deferral).  Work that may be safely, operationally, and economically postponed. The work should be done, but cannot be scheduled because of higher priority work, funds shortage, work site access, or conditions outside the control of the maintenance organization. The work may be reclassified if conditions permit.

Classification #3
Listed below is a three tiered of mission criticality for facilities contemplated by the Mission Dependency Index:
Further discussions on these three tiers of criticality can be found on the corresponding pages of this glossary.



Classification #4
Listed below
is a four faceted priority scheme that plots the relationship between the urgency and importance of items on the urgency-importance matrix.
Detailed discussions on these four facets can be found on the corresponding pages of this glossary.



Classification #5
The following four-facet classification provides priority rankings for individual facilities/buildings within a portfolio based upon  a Portfolio Condition-Priority Matrix (PCPM).
Some of the related concepts include: mission dependency index (MDI).



Classification #6: by Risk:
The next classification uses a risk matrix / criticality matrix to derive priority:
Further discussions on PoF x CoF can be found on the corresponding pages of this glossary.



Classification #7
The next classification utilizes multivariate analysis to draw correlations between variables to establish priorities classes using a matrix tool.

Further discussions on each of these matrices can be found on the corresponding pages of this glossary.



Classification #8: by Purpose/Function/Driver
The next classification

  • Safety
  • Durability
  • Aesthetics
Further discussions on each of these concepts can be found on the corresponding pages of this glossary.



Classification #9: by level
The next classification is based on the asset hierarchy.


The principles of ISO 55001 help to ensure that optimization is achieved through mindful balance and measured trade-offs between decision-making criteria
Fig. The principles of ISO 55001 help to ensure that optimization is achieved through mindful balance and measured trade-offs between decision-making criteria.


The "currently critical" phase in the deterioration of an asset represented by the "red zone" on an asset degradation model
Fig. The "currently critical" phase in the deterioration of an asset represented by the "red zone" on an asset degradation model.



Risk-based decision making is at the heart of asset management and this requires mindful consideration of the relationship between the probability of failure (PoF) and the consequences of failure (CoF). The complexities of these correlations can sometimes be captured on a risk matrix.
Fig. Risk-based decision making is at the heart of asset management and this requires mindful consideration of the relationship between the probability of failure (PoF) and the consequences of failure (CoF). The complexities of these correlations can sometimes be captured on a risk matrix.



Prioritization organized by coloured location tags
Fig. Prioritization organized by coloured location tags where "red" indicates high priority, "orange" is medium priority and "green" is relatively low priority.


Prioritization organized by seasonal bar chart.
Fig. Prioritization organized by seasonal bar chart where "red" indicates high priority and other colour indicate relatively lower priority tasks.


I. Care is strategizing in order to allocate limited resources across a portfolio of buildings
Fig. I. Care is strategizing in order to efficiently and effectively allocate the limited resources across a portfolio of buildings.



Scatter plot of facilities mapped to the three tiered Mission Dependency Index (MDI).
Fig. Scatter plot of facilities mapped to the three tiered Mission Dependency Index (MDI).


I. Care is establishing priorities for the different assets but is fighting forces that necessitate periodic re-prioritization.
Fig. I. Care is establishing priorities for the different assets but is fighting the "forces" that necessitate periodic re-evaluation and re-prioritization.



Chessboard analogy to illustrate competing priorities as one of the operational challenges
Fig. Chessboard analogy to illustrate competing priorities as one of the operational challenges in asset management.



Sample of an array of facilities mapped on a grid with FCI along the horizontal axis and MDI along the vertical axis
Fig. Sample of an array of  facilities mapped on a grid with FCI along the horizontal axis and MDI along the vertical axis.


I. Care is trying to re-align his building’s magnetic north and thereby use his building as a sundial to cast a shadow to identify all the critical assets
Fig.  I. Care is trying to re-align his building’s magnetic north to geodetic true north and thereby use his building as a sundial to cast the right shadow and identify all the critical assets


Criticality matrix with four quadrants to help prioritize action.
Fig. Criticality matrix with four quadrants to help prioritize action based on the relationship between importance and urgency.


The relationship between Consequences of Failure (CoF) represented on the vertical (y-axis) and Probability of Failure (PoF) on the horizontal (x-axis) of a criticality/risk matrix.
Fig. The relationship between Consequences of Failure (CoF) represented on the vertical (y-axis) and Probability of Failure (PoF) on the horizontal (x-axis) of a criticality/risk matrix
.


Different prioritization criteria for maintenance, repairs and renewals
Fig. Different prioritization criteria for maintenance, repairs and renewals.

Prioritization by purpose using pressure washing as an example
Fig. Prioritization by purpose using pressure washing as an example.


Prioritization by graded scale within a single system
Fig.  Prioritization by graded scale within a single system.

See also:


(c) Copyright Asset Insights, 2000-2013, All Rights Reserved - "Insight, foresight and oversight of assets"