Situation
Business units used different asset names, work classifications and maintenance practices. The UK division ran SAP PM, while another territory had an on-premises Maximo estate. Group reporting required reconciliation.
MaxIron responsibility
MaxIron held implementation, migration, cloud build and support. Group asset management and unit leads approved the common operating model, documented exceptions and data reconciliation rules.
Operating model, SAP migration, database conversion, cloud consolidation, role-based enablement and BAU support
Delivery
The team agreed the operating model before migrating units, mapped SAP assets and work history, converted SQL Server to DB2 during the build, and sequenced go-lives behind unit readiness gates.
Group asset management and unit leads agreed asset naming, work types and preventive-maintenance definitions. Named signatories decided the reconciliation rule for each data domain before trial loads. Each unit had a readiness gate and its own cutover date.
Platform and connections
Cloud-hosted IBM Maximo on DB2; group ERP for purchase orders, invoices and cost centres
Outcome
The group programme completed in 13 months. The UK SAP migration reached go-live in eight months; the second territory moved to cloud in under three months. Group planned-maintenance reporting draws on a common Maximo model.
Scope and decisions
Mobile execution, report variants specific to individual units and non-finance integrations were deferred by written agreement. Local variation remained as a documented exception with a reason. Programme timings are the published timings for this group.
Delivery lessons
Settle reconciliation rules before loading data, agree local exceptions with unit leads and use parallel infrastructure, application and data tracks where a second territory can overlap the main migration.
Next conversation
Bring the unit operating models, source-platform inventory, data ownership, reporting definitions and required cutover dates to a consolidation assessment.
Evidence basis
This brief summarises the published anonymised engagement. Client-identifying names, sites and records are withheld. Reference discussions are subject to client permission and NDA where required. Published durations and outcomes relate to this estate; another programme requires assessment of its scope and operating constraints.