Primary purposes of equipment upgrade/repair administration include ensuring mission success of personnel in the Field by making sure all equipment is fit for use & kept in good working order.
The useful working life of equipment critical to mission success in the Field can be determined through scheduled upgrade/repair simulation checks on quality of support provided.
Here we provide practical set of guidelines for equipment upgrade/repair simulations to be adapted as required based on mission requirements.
Equipment upgrade/repair simulations are important organisational function with implications for engineers, procurement officials & field agents who in the end, are the real customers since mobile operations in theatre are the backbone to achieving mission success.
Client success in the field depends on smart upgrade/repair simulations for mobile equipment critical to mission success. Proper equipment upgrade/repair support provided to installations is not only an asset administration problem to solve, but is also central part of requirements designed to protect critical field agents in theatre of operations.
Day to day actions detailed by work orders designed to monitor condition of mobile equipment is primarily the responsibility of specific personnel, for example, those functioning in engineering or procurement capacities to provide for critical checks or dishing out the cash required for well-functioning upgrade/repair support operations.
All procurement actions, upgrade/repair techniques & subsequent use by agents in the field should be compliant with standards set by organisation for acceptance process & performance testing during real-world, mobile use of equipment required to achieve mission success at multiple installation locations.
Given the wide functional range of individual equipment types/sizes & requirements to invest considerable time & resources at different organisational levels for assessment of equipment prior to purchase, it is important to design smart procurement systems to meet the requirements of mobile operations at multiple locations.
Where there exist functional procurement systems, for example, an oversight committee to keep tabs on work order generation for equipment upgrade/repair support services, better mission results can be achieved when there are processes in place to assess requirements of field agents who will use the equipment, instead of making decisions based purely on fiscal factors.
It is easy for procurement personnel to become confused by the vast array of requirements submitted by field agents who need equipment fast, often at multiple, remote installations with complex & technical specs features spelled out in requests for service/support operations.
Purchasing personnel groups may not be knowledgeable enough to do a good job of meeting technical requirements of agents in Field at speed required so often times it is essential to seek expert advice of professionals trained for administration of upgrade/repair simulation operations.
Organising priority-based equipment upgrade/repair work order job requirements assessments should be main goal for the administration so field agents will be sure to achieve robust selection processes with full diligence without compromising requirements for mission success of mobile, in-theatre calls to action.
Suppliers can be a good resource for obtaining specific information about critical equipment, but remember they have their own unique set of objectives that usually do not line up with mission requirements of field agents responsible for carrying out mobile operations.
Your organisation must create robust procurement practise & processes for ensuring purchasing actions avoid costly decisions not meeting form, fit or function requirements for achieving mission success, potentially leading to results not up to original intentions of mission. Administrators must consider consultations with experts familiar with responsibilities related to particular types/sizes of equipment.
When accepting equipment for trials/testing, several general considerations come into play. For one example, if the proposed equipment purchase action is large or expensive, it is well worth taking time to put in additional work directed at initial consultations & assessment processes to increase likelihood that equipment type/size will meet intended purpose of being useful to field agents carrying out mobile mission sets.
When purchasing equipment, especially during the design/redesign of work orders for upgrade/repair support operations, it is essential to contact field agents responsible for end-use of the product so there are no miscommunications as to feature criteria support for form, fit or function requirements.
The selection process employed during the determination of work order design for critical equipment upgrade/repair support services must start with an assessment of Task, Area & Group of field agent location at installations.
The purchasing team is enabled to contract suppliers of equipment so all equipment upgrade/repair simulation models performing required applications can be identified. Design technical specs must be received by administration for each identified supplier.
Following initial review of equipment specs submitted by suppliers it is essential to scope out specs not suited for required form, fit or function of the application so elimination is possible.
Information from any recent performance or field-testing evaluations must be included in the tender process, since some evaluations have been found to be incomplete in past equipment upgrade/repair service operations.
As a final point to be considered by organisational administrators charged with determining equipment upgrade/repair requirements by agents in the Field & subsequent procurement actions to be carried out is the adaptability of equipment to increase mission success rates.
Administrative decisions must include fiscal factors, form, fit or function of the equipment purchase & utilisation in the Field. Key questions to ask during initial assessment process include:
1) Future Proofing: Will equipment require replacement in Field if suppliers are no longer able to provide items critical to mission success, for example, spare parts required for upgrade/replace simulations?
2) Condition State: Will equipment serve any change in upgrade/repair service condition?
3) Compatibility: Will equipment be compatible & integrate quickly with existing products or what is to be purchased at later dates?
4) Appropriateness: Is equipment fit for purpose—able to carry out mission tasks intended at inception of requirements process?
5) Accessibility: Does mission layout in field for which equipment is purchased allow for equipment to be charged quickly/easily?
6) Accuracy: Can equipment be deployed in the right place at the right time?
7) Value for Money: What is the expected service life of equipment? Will this meet requirements of future missions?
8) Servicing: Will equipment require routine servicing? What is the cost of servicing & support qualifications required for action?
9) Training: Will equipment operators in field require additional training for use at right location? Will supplier provide initial training if specs are new to mission?
10) Funding: Has funding allocated for equipment requirements included costs of purchasing & subsequent training?
The useful working life of equipment critical to mission success in the Field can be determined through scheduled upgrade/repair simulation checks on quality of support provided.
Here we provide practical set of guidelines for equipment upgrade/repair simulations to be adapted as required based on mission requirements.
Equipment upgrade/repair simulations are important organisational function with implications for engineers, procurement officials & field agents who in the end, are the real customers since mobile operations in theatre are the backbone to achieving mission success.
Client success in the field depends on smart upgrade/repair simulations for mobile equipment critical to mission success. Proper equipment upgrade/repair support provided to installations is not only an asset administration problem to solve, but is also central part of requirements designed to protect critical field agents in theatre of operations.
Day to day actions detailed by work orders designed to monitor condition of mobile equipment is primarily the responsibility of specific personnel, for example, those functioning in engineering or procurement capacities to provide for critical checks or dishing out the cash required for well-functioning upgrade/repair support operations.
All procurement actions, upgrade/repair techniques & subsequent use by agents in the field should be compliant with standards set by organisation for acceptance process & performance testing during real-world, mobile use of equipment required to achieve mission success at multiple installation locations.
Given the wide functional range of individual equipment types/sizes & requirements to invest considerable time & resources at different organisational levels for assessment of equipment prior to purchase, it is important to design smart procurement systems to meet the requirements of mobile operations at multiple locations.
Where there exist functional procurement systems, for example, an oversight committee to keep tabs on work order generation for equipment upgrade/repair support services, better mission results can be achieved when there are processes in place to assess requirements of field agents who will use the equipment, instead of making decisions based purely on fiscal factors.
It is easy for procurement personnel to become confused by the vast array of requirements submitted by field agents who need equipment fast, often at multiple, remote installations with complex & technical specs features spelled out in requests for service/support operations.
Purchasing personnel groups may not be knowledgeable enough to do a good job of meeting technical requirements of agents in Field at speed required so often times it is essential to seek expert advice of professionals trained for administration of upgrade/repair simulation operations.
Organising priority-based equipment upgrade/repair work order job requirements assessments should be main goal for the administration so field agents will be sure to achieve robust selection processes with full diligence without compromising requirements for mission success of mobile, in-theatre calls to action.
Suppliers can be a good resource for obtaining specific information about critical equipment, but remember they have their own unique set of objectives that usually do not line up with mission requirements of field agents responsible for carrying out mobile operations.
Your organisation must create robust procurement practise & processes for ensuring purchasing actions avoid costly decisions not meeting form, fit or function requirements for achieving mission success, potentially leading to results not up to original intentions of mission. Administrators must consider consultations with experts familiar with responsibilities related to particular types/sizes of equipment.
When accepting equipment for trials/testing, several general considerations come into play. For one example, if the proposed equipment purchase action is large or expensive, it is well worth taking time to put in additional work directed at initial consultations & assessment processes to increase likelihood that equipment type/size will meet intended purpose of being useful to field agents carrying out mobile mission sets.
When purchasing equipment, especially during the design/redesign of work orders for upgrade/repair support operations, it is essential to contact field agents responsible for end-use of the product so there are no miscommunications as to feature criteria support for form, fit or function requirements.
The selection process employed during the determination of work order design for critical equipment upgrade/repair support services must start with an assessment of Task, Area & Group of field agent location at installations.
The purchasing team is enabled to contract suppliers of equipment so all equipment upgrade/repair simulation models performing required applications can be identified. Design technical specs must be received by administration for each identified supplier.
Following initial review of equipment specs submitted by suppliers it is essential to scope out specs not suited for required form, fit or function of the application so elimination is possible.
Information from any recent performance or field-testing evaluations must be included in the tender process, since some evaluations have been found to be incomplete in past equipment upgrade/repair service operations.
As a final point to be considered by organisational administrators charged with determining equipment upgrade/repair requirements by agents in the Field & subsequent procurement actions to be carried out is the adaptability of equipment to increase mission success rates.
Administrative decisions must include fiscal factors, form, fit or function of the equipment purchase & utilisation in the Field. Key questions to ask during initial assessment process include:
1) Future Proofing: Will equipment require replacement in Field if suppliers are no longer able to provide items critical to mission success, for example, spare parts required for upgrade/replace simulations?
2) Condition State: Will equipment serve any change in upgrade/repair service condition?
3) Compatibility: Will equipment be compatible & integrate quickly with existing products or what is to be purchased at later dates?
4) Appropriateness: Is equipment fit for purpose—able to carry out mission tasks intended at inception of requirements process?
5) Accessibility: Does mission layout in field for which equipment is purchased allow for equipment to be charged quickly/easily?
6) Accuracy: Can equipment be deployed in the right place at the right time?
7) Value for Money: What is the expected service life of equipment? Will this meet requirements of future missions?
8) Servicing: Will equipment require routine servicing? What is the cost of servicing & support qualifications required for action?
9) Training: Will equipment operators in field require additional training for use at right location? Will supplier provide initial training if specs are new to mission?
10) Funding: Has funding allocated for equipment requirements included costs of purchasing & subsequent training?
RSS Feed