User Adoption Metrics

Technology and physical asset management are two areas that go hand in hand. From mobile working solutions, to ERP systems, to niche reliability programs, we find almost every aspect of what we do is becoming more and more dependent on technological solutions.

Yet why is it then that often we feel as if we are treading water? Our companies spend a fortune, often in the millions, to implement the latest gadgets, gizmos and fads - but for some reason they don't make a difference?

I'm sure there are many reasons for this but one of the most dramatic is a failure to take into account the vital area of user adoption. Without making sure that users are entering AND using the system it is never going to do what we want it to do.

These are some widely applicable metrics that I have been using over the years. Note: They do not replace a comprehensive data scorecard for ongoing management, but they do give a good idea as to how effectively the implementation and take-up strategies have been.

All of these are monthly metrics, but they could also be generated with greater or lesser frequency depending on your specific requirements. Again, just some basic ideas designed to generate thought at your company. These measures are aimed at a standard CMMS style implementation.

The image above is the Eason Matrix. This shows the different levels of intervention required to get user adoption up to an effective level during the implementation of any corporate software.

It clearly shows that the difficulty in user adoption grows depending on the scale of the implementation program. A program focused on a big-bang style solution will often find itself fighting to get users to embrace the new technology. While a longer more managed implementation path will meet with less resistance and be more likely to result in effective implementation.

The selection of which method to use in adoption will depend on a range of variables, and the type of metrics and dashboards that can be used will also change along with this.

System Usage

Always the first point of call. If your users are not logging in then there is no way they are going to be good adopters of the technology. However, just because they are logged in does not mean that they are either, so I use a few additional measures.

• Users logged in week (Out of total users with access) - Weekly

• Users not logged in each week (Out of total users with access) - Weekly

• Number of work orders / requests generated (Out of total users with the ability to generate work orders or requests) - Weekly

• Routine Maintenance regimes added (Out of users authorized to add routine maintenance regimes) - Weekly (This is only useful at the beginning of an implementation)

• Open actions per role versus past period - Weekly (Good where there are authorization processes in place)

Data Quality
This is a vital element of any adoption framework and will assist to tell you whether the correct fields are filled out, and if they are filled out with the correct data.

• Data integrity of issued work orders / requests (All fields filled that are expected to be filled)

• Data quality of work orders (Fields filled out with incorrect data) This is an interesting metric because it assumes that there has been some forethought when implementing the CMMS. (See CMMS: A Time Saving Implementation, available on Amazon)

• Key non required fields filled out (measurement of the quality of data above the minimum requirements)

• Work order versus HR comparative reports (To make sure that the figures within the work orders match the figures from HR management)

Business Performance

If the implementation has been carried out for all the right reasons then the ultimate test of effectiveness will be the changes to performance.

For a CMMS there are many areas of this but the key one is on efficiency. So measures such as the following would be adequate:

• Schedule compliance

• Schedule confidence - Percentage of "planned" work orders within the finalized schedule.

• Delay reductions

There are of course many more and each implementation is different, but hopefully these provide at least some food for thought when you are looking to try and determine whether your newest technology investment is being used as you would like it to be.