We have got IT covered

Which division do you need?

Blog Archive

Sep 10 (1)

Aug 10 (8)

Jul 10 (10)

Jun 10 (8)

May 10 (14)

Apr 10 (20)

Mar 10 (10)

Feb 10 (3)

Our Blog

Blog RSS

Paul Saunders, 15th June 2010

Why isn't MRO Software Simpler?

9 comments

Last week we attended the 2010 Airline & Aerospace MRO & Operations IT Conference in Frankfurt.  
One of the disappointments for us at the conference was the lack of real innovation in the design of the MRO business systems that were on show. Whilst many other industries are abstracting away the complexities of the process, workflow or machine, MRO enterprise software vendors seem to be particularly proud of the complexity and functional overload of their software solutions.  On more than one occasion we had CEOs and Sales Directors alike explain to us just how fantastically bewildering their systems were and how users were demanding more and more complex, feature rich solutions to their problems.

We had hoped that truly service orientated solutions would be available by now, solutions that hide the complexity behind a simple, easy to use interface, designed to do a specific job very well. We’ve all seen how glass cockpits over recent years have simplified a pilot’s role, even though the complexity behind the UI has increased beyond recognition.

Here’s the cockpit for the Concorde designed back in the sixties.  So complex it took three people to fly it.

Copyright Dr Richard Murray and licensed for reuse under a Creative Commons Licence.

 
Compare that to the latest generation A380, a much cleaner, simpler user interface that focuses on the essentials for flying.

Copyright Naddsy and licensed for reuse under a Creative Commons License.

Whilst the human factors within the cockpit have been analyzed ad infinitum, the human factors in the hanger seem to have been hugely overlooked.  Are maintenance engineers and their managers really demanding more and more complex systems?  The folk selling them software seem to think so.  I’m sorry but I just don’t buy it.

Other than in the MRO sector when did you last hear users clamoring for more complex software?  In the bleeding edge industry of social media users are demanding “magical” user experiences that delight through ultra-simple applications that focus on doing one function and performing it perfectly.  This sector is thriving and the trends created are spilling out into the rest of IT.  Using web design as an example, modern web sites are becoming simpler and simpler with loads of white space and clear calls to action being the norm.  Take these two examples of airline websites.  I wouldn’t mind betting which site has the better conversion rate per visitor.

The current American Airlines website, voted one of the world’s worst airline websites.

 
The award winning Nature Air website uses a simple and clear call to action.



OK, maybe I’m being a bit harsh.  It’s taken the best part of 40 years to move cockpit design from the Buck Rogers style instrumentation of the past to a more rationalized, simplified next generation cockpit panel.  The technology has certainly helped this outcome over the years.  To be fair, developing a new interface for Enterprise software is no walk in the park.  It could be thousands of man hours in design, build and testing before a vendor has completely retooled their entire system.  But if you’re buying enterprise software now, with a life cycle of 5 maybe 10 years, it could be out of date by the time you’ve finished implementing it in 18 to 24 months’ time.  But I don’t see any enterprise MRO software even heading in the right direction yet.

The wall to wall enterprise solutions of yesterday simply don’t cut it when it comes to simplifying processes and keeping engineer non-productive time to a minimum.  The age of features is dead.  Software developers should be focusing on distilling features and processes to their bare minimum functional requirements and performing those functions perfectly with a simple intuitive interface that anyone can understand.  They should be building their software around services which can be consumed by any application to perform the function they operate.  Engineers like spanners because they have evolved to be to most simple and elegant tool for the job.  MRO enterprise software has a lot of evolving to do it seems.

So why is MRO Enterprise software so far behind the times?  Is it lack of investment or a simple lack of innovation and foresight in the MRO market?  Let me know what you think.

Andy Bloxham, 15th June 2010 at 9:33am

What a great article! You are spot on. In fact, I think that you will find most engineers just want to get on with the job and not be bogged down by extremely complex systems that make their life more difficult and frustrating. Lets face it, Human Factors in Maintenance is a critical area and overloading people involved in Safety Crtical Tasks (including Planners to Technicians) is wrong. I agree that the systems and processes should be as simple as possible whilst performing the correct function. It would help Safety and Save Money!

Paul Saunders, 15th June 2010 at 9:40am

Thanks for the comment Andy.
If there's one thing that I take with me from my time working with IT systems in the MRO industry is the mantra of Licensed Engineers: "I just want to get aircraft out of the door!!"

Amir Bhatti, 15th June 2010 at 8:03pm

Well, I tend to agree with Paul. If you want to make MRO solutions simpler for people (licensed technicians and engineers) provide them with the smart phones with the MRO application installed.
I certified planes for 14 years......and "was" of an opinion - get it out the hangar.
Smart phones would really solve the problems of the people who work on the aircraft - they will then have the ability to remotely log on and do their stuff after they performed component replacement, repair, modification, inspection etc etc. On top of it the smart phones can enhance their turn around times as well - they will have the ability to manage their documents. They can also utilize smart phones for getting information from interactive electronic technical manuals.

Paul Saunders, 16th June 2010 at 8:38am

Amir,
Thank you for your comment. Your opinion is in keeping with many licensed engineers I have worked with. The idea of using smart phones in a hangar environment is a perfect example of where developers need to strive to simplify and distill their applications to the bear minimum of what is essential. It is impossible to replicate the full desktop app UI on even the largest smart phone screen. So you have to remove all of the chaff and "nice to haves" to generate something practical and useful. The subject of smart phones in a hangar environment is one that is controversial for human factor reasons. This subject is addressed by our friends at A2Baero on their blog here: http://www.a2baero.co.uk/?p=157

Andy, 17th June 2010 at 2:34am

Quite amused at your article. At the MRO IT Conference, you heard from the top down that users demand more complex IT. Well, we've heard from the bottom up that users think MRO IT generally sucks. As a matter of fact, much of the IT never actually reaches the front line engineers, because they'd rather do it the same way that its been done for the last umpteen years than to tackle the intricacies of a bloated IT platform.
Just my personal perspective here, but if you look at many of the IT firms that supply "solutions", they seem to be so far removed from the actual day to day operations that they don't really understand how their product is used (or not used....even if paid for). If you're evaluating MRO IT, you're forced to choose between shoehorning your operation into a suite that really doesn't fit, or sticking with the tried and true.....the Excel spreadsheet, handwritten notes, or the "IT" that was originally developed 25 years ago. I could easily name several airlines who stick with the latter.

Paul Saunders, 17th June 2010 at 7:34pm

We have shared the same experiences by the sounds of it Andy... I think there can be some middle ground between the familiar shoehorn and Excel approaches that you describe. I don't underestimate just how complex MRO and other aerospace IT sectors are, but I believe that by adopting up to date practises MRO IT solution vendors could provide really simple software for ultra-complex problems.  I've not seen an MRO solution yet with true SOA or who have offered APIs. I've already been thinking about a series of blogs which outlines what some of these technologies mean to software users... these comments and those on LinkedIn have convinced me that I need to crack on with that ASAP. Watch this space.... oh and thanks for your valued comments.
Paul

Paul Saunders, 22nd June 2010 at 8:49am

For information there is loads of debate going on with this subject on LinkedIn on the Aircraft LifeCycle Wikinomics Group discussion board here:
http://bit.ly/b6FYNa

Aleksandra, 23rd June 2010 at 1:07pm

Hi Paul, very interesting article :)
My relatively small experience, comparing to you, on the other side (MRO software trainer & installer) shows that end users want to do things in the simpliest way. Which is: WITHOUT LEARNING ANY NEW FANCY STUFF... No matter how much new fancy stuff we provide them we always realize afterwards that these people use our new fancy tools to ... load the data to Excel or Access database...
Not sure what it says about our software, one could argue it should have more options, which for example excel and access provide now, but in my opinion most people don't have time/energy to learn this new stuff anyway. They have already learned Excel and they are happy with it. So at times I think that MRO software should provide seamless links to Excel and other stuff, working both ways, and limit the requests to engineers to learn any new stuff too often... In Poland we have a saying: "better is the worst enemy of good"...

Scandinavian countries are the only ones I know of that truly want IT innovation - they are used to do everything online and with latest high-tech tools, so most MRO software packages look like DOS systems to them...

My 3 pennies :) Cheers!

Paul Saunders, 24th June 2010 at 1:31pm

Hej Aleksandra,
Some interesting thoughts... many thanks for your comment.
Paul

This article has 9 comments

Bookmark this...

Linked In Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon Reddit Facebook Propeller