Objectives of the Award | Evaluation Criteria | Standards of accomplishment
Objectives of the Award
The objectives of the AMEA are to:
- Encourage organisations on the path to maintenance excellence. Few achieve the peak award; however all are winners as they self-assess, learn, set new objectives and improve. Recognition of the people that deliver the improvement is a key ingredient to success. So everyone who participates is a winner.
- Recognise maintenance excellence based on evaluation of performance, practices, processes, people and business impact.
- Involve peers in the assessment. Assessors are experienced volunteers who test their own understanding and beliefs and grow through the process, and
- Promote industry-wide awareness about the importance of continuous improvement of maintenance, and about its impact upon the health of the whole economy.
The maintenance team identified the AMEA awards as worthwhile criteria to aspire to, given it is independently audited and draws on the experience of a broad range of industrial sites. ... We can always learn something from other industries —
it’s all about getting that wider perspective.
— Simon Mackenzie, CEO Vector, after receiving first AMEA award ever given to a New Zealand based company
The AMEA consider following criteria
- Planning and scheduling
- Maintenance procedures and practices
- Reliability improvement
- Resource management
- Business improvement
Companies and organisations use these criteria to evaluate their management of maintenance and reliability, and better understand its contribution to the business.
The Australasian Maintenance Excellence Awards is a high quality process. It acknowledges maintenance excellence and stands for continuous improvement in maintenance and reliability. It encourages people, best practices and the positive business impacts of maintenance excellence.
Standards of accomplishment
The Awards are set against a standard of accomplishment:
Companies and organisations who wish to enter the AMEA process submit their application. They then create their submission which, after an initial review, is evaluated by a panel of peers. If the submission is of suitable quality the a site evaluation follows.
Sites that are evaluated are then rated. Based on scores, sites may reach Achiever, Finalist or Premier level. In any given year there may be no participants rated at Premier level (or other level), or there may be more than one — it all depends on the quality of submissions and the enthusiasm of participants.