About client
Maintenance scheduling at a multi-facility UAE aluminium operation ran against static workforce data. Procify Maintenance Planning Board gave planners a live, SAP-native environment to plan, schedule, and dispatch — replacing theoretical capacity assumptions with real-time visibility across both production facilities.
The planning environment
A high-volume, high-complexity operation
Managing maintenance at industrial scale is fundamentally a coordination problem. Work orders, resources, permits, and capacity data all have to align — across multiple work centers, multiple shifts, and multiple facilities — before a single technician picks up a tool. For this UAE-based aluminium producer, that coordination challenge was running ahead of the tools available.
At a glance:
- 15–20 work centers per planner
- 30–32 operations per work center, per day
- 500–800 work orders per week
- ~1,000 total operations per week
Standard SAP PM was not built for this level of planning demand. Three structural gaps were limiting the operation — not through any failure of discipline, but through a tooling and visibility ceiling.
The challenge
Three structural gaps
Capacity data was static In standard SAP PM, work center capacity is defined in master data: total hours per team, per day, configured once and updated rarely. When a technician takes leave, when half a team attends training, when resources move between work centers mid-shift — none of that appears in the system. Scheduling runs against theoretical availability. The plan says the workforce is there. The reality is different.
No forward visibility at operational scale Existing views could not render 10–15 work centers simultaneously in a usable format, and performance constraints made them unreliable at this scale. Planners managing complex, multi-center environments had no consolidated, single-screen view of the week ahead. Proactive load rebalancing — moving operations before a work center hit capacity — was impractical.
Compliance was unmeasured At close of each execution week, there was no structured mechanism to measure what happened: which planned jobs were completed as scheduled, which were handled as breakdown work, and which planned jobs were dropped to accommodate emergencies. Without that baseline, performance trends were invisible and continuous improvement had no foundation.
The solution
A single SAP-native planning environmen
Maventic deployed Procify Maintenance Planning Board across the client’s UAE production facilities — giving maintenance planners and supervisors a single, SAP-integrated environment to plan, schedule, and dispatch work orders across all work centers and shifts. No third-party planning tool is required; no parallel system to maintain.
- Planning — Rounds definition and tracking, material management per job, permit integration in workflow, asset master enrichment.
- Scheduling — Resource levelling, criticality-based prioritisation, asset-availability scheduling, ad-hoc and breakdown scheduling.
- Dispatching — Prerequisite checks before release, skills-matched technician assignment, real-time task status tracking.
All three areas share a Gantt chart view, reports and dashboards (Planned vs. Actual Timeline, SLA Adherence, MTTR, First Time Fix Rate), alerts and notifications, and a single-screen planner workspace — all operating natively within SAP PM.
Capability 01 — Available capacity management Scheduling against the workforce that is actually there. A planner looking at a scheduled week normally sees capacity as SAP defines it: fixed hours per work center, per day, from master data — data that doesn’t update when a technician takes leave or resources are re-allocated mid-shift. Procify Maintenance Planning Board lets planners adjust available capacity dynamically, without modifying SAP master data, at two levels: work center level (adjusting total available hours for a team on a given day) and resource level (marking an individual technician unavailable, with planning capacity recalculated across affected work centers). The schedule reflects the actual workforce — not a static assumption.
Capability 02 — Look Ahead Report Every work center. One screen. Direct action. The Look Ahead Report gives planners a full-screen, week-ahead view of load distribution across all work centers — including available vs. theoretical capacity, loading percentage, overloaded days (>100%) and underloaded days (<25%), and a single-screen summary across all work centers. Planners act directly from the report, without navigating elsewhere: transferring an operation to a different day, adjusting order dates for workload distribution, or increasing work center capacity for a defined period.
Capability 03 — Compliance Report Measuring what actually happened — so the plan gets better every week. The Compliance Report gives maintenance teams a structured, post-execution view of each week’s performance, tracking planned operations, final confirmations, actual hours booked, unplanned operations, and unplanned actual hours. Three compliance KPIs are tracked weekly: Schedule Compliance (% of planned operations completed as scheduled), Man-Hours Schedule Compliance (planned vs. actual man-hours on planned work), and Man-Hour Utilisation (total hours across planned and unplanned work combined — 100% is achievable and measurable even as the planned/unplanned mix shifts mid-week).
The outcome
From static assumptions to live intelligence
The client’s maintenance planning operation moved from static, theoretical scheduling to live capacity intelligence across both production facilities.
- Capacity — Planners now schedule against actual workforce availability, not a master data assumption that may not reflect who is on the floor.
- Visibility — A single-screen forward view of load across every work center simultaneously, with the ability to rebalance before a work center hits capacity, not after.
- Measurement — Schedule adherence measured for the first time — planned vs. actual, every week, at the work center and area level.
For a multi-facility operation managing hundreds of work orders weekly across complex preventive and breakdown maintenance programmes, the difference is structural. The planning environment now has the visibility and the data it needs to perform — and to keep improving.