A defensible view of the estate, in time for the decisions that matter

IBM Maximo Health scores assets across the estate against criticality, condition and consequence. It uses what is already in Manage — hierarchy, classification, work history, condition fields — and the operational signal that Monitor provides where available. The output is a prioritised view of the estate that the maintenance plan, the capital plan and the audit evidence trail can all defend.

When Health earns its licence

Health pays off when two things are true. The asset register in Manage is reasonably complete and structured. There is a real decision waiting for the answer: a capital plan being built, a maintenance budget being challenged, an audit being prepared, an asset class going off-warranty. Without a decision waiting on it, Health produces an interesting score and not much action. With a decision waiting on it, Health is one of the few MAS suite components that pays back on day one.

What we deliver

• Readiness assessment against the Manage asset register, criticality data and the decision the score has to support
• Scoring model design: criticality, condition, consequence, calibrated to the operating reality of the estate, not generic templates
• Health configuration on top of Manage and, where available, Monitor
• Capital and maintenance integration so the score drives plan revisions, not a separate dashboard
• ISO 55001-aligned evidence that the basis for decisions is documented, repeatable and reviewable
• Managed run-state on our cloud, with model recalibration and operational support owned by the same team that runs Manage

The APM model in plain English

Health is one corner of what IBM and the wider asset-management community call APM — Asset Performance Management. The model has four ideas in it and they are worth being precise about, because they decide whether the score on the screen is meaningful.

• Criticality is what the asset matters to. It is not a property of the asset on its own; it is a property of the asset in the operating context. The same pump in two plants can have very different criticality. Health gets this from Manage, calibrated to the operation.
• Condition is what the asset is doing right now. Pulled from inspection records, work history, and where Monitor is in place, from live operational signal. Where the condition data is thin, the score reflects that and we say so.
• Consequence is what happens if the asset fails — safety, environmental, production, regulatory, financial. This is the conversation that turns a number into a decision; it is also the conversation operators most often skip.
• Risk is the product of those three, expressed in a way an executive committee, a regulator and an engineer can all read. Health is, in essence, a way to make risk-based maintenance defensible.

Two further ideas show up in the wider APM conversation and are worth flagging here. Failure mode (FMEA / FMECA) is the discipline of asking how an asset fails, not just whether it fails — the same pump can fail in three different ways with three different consequences. Asset Investment Optimization (AIO) is the layer above Health that turns the score into a financially-optimised plan against a budget and a risk appetite. Both are inside MAS today; both are useful when the underlying scoring is right.

How this fits with the rest of the programme

Health complements Monitor on the same asset class, and is often a useful precursor to Predict — it identifies the assets where Predict is most likely to pay back. It also produces some of the evidence ISO 55001 auditors expect, alongside the broader operating model work covered in ISO 55001 asset management system: what it really means.