
Guest Post by Robert Pojasek (first posted on CERM ® RISK INSIGHTS – reposted here with permission)
In 2012, ISO’s ‘Joint Technical Coordinating Group’ (JTCG) completed work to provide a high-level structure, text, and common terms and definitions for all future and revised management system standards. All Technical Committees developing management system standards were required to follow Annex SL found in the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 1, Annex SL[i].
As we approach 2019, it is abundantly clear that the high-level structure mandate has been followed by the Technical Committees with mixed results. All the new and revised management systems used the 10-clause structure and all of them include the same definition of risk and risk management. However, the way risk management was used in the different management system standards varied considerably. What can an organization learn from this exercise? [Read more…]



In the previous articles, we looked at what type of analysis to use to evaluate the effectiveness of the PMs and if they are cost effective. Once the PMs have been optimized to ensure they are addressing the right failure modes, then they need to be made efficient. Below is an excerpt from a recent article in 




Would you spend $100 every week to prevent a possible issue that will result in a loss of $10? Probably not, so why is that we do that with our maintenance programs every single day? Often, PM and PdM activities are put into place without any thought to the economic impact of the activity. While in theory the PM or PdM activities will prevent or mitigate the consequences of the failure, is implementing one of these activities the right thing to do?


Ask a question or send along a comment.
Please login to view and use the contact form.