by Malcolm Schulstad & Aliesha Aden
I recently attended a training session and couldn’t help but notice a maintenance technician who was clearly overwhelmed by his workload. To him, the idea of adding yet another IoT technology, no matter how efficient, felt like just another burden. Sure, he acknowledged that FitMachine could spot problems earlier than their current setup (once he learned how to interpret the data), but he still thought it was pointless.
He wasn’t the only one. Several other technicians chimed in with similar feelings, all of them so busy that they were literally taking the training calls between jobs.
Run-to-Failure as a Corporate Strategy
The real sticking point turned out to be a corporate maintenance policy that flat-out said: “Don’t touch these assets.” Their directive was to simply let them run until they failed, at which point standby assets could take over.
Now, I’m not going to pretend I know all the number-crunching behind that decision. Possibly it does look better on a balance sheet. But from talking to these technicians, it’s obvious they’re already stretched thin—and their company even has a triage team to decide which maintenance issues get attention first.
Wasteful and Stressful
Letting equipment fail beyond repair before swapping it out might work on paper, but from a wider perspective, it feels incredibly wasteful. We’re in an era where everyone, businesses included, needs to be more mindful of how we use our resources. Plus, the constant break-fix firefighting puts extra strain on the people in the field, who are just trying to keep everything running.
Fix the Bigger Picture
It’d be easy to label these technicians as resistant to change, but really, they’re shining a light on a deeper truth: if your official policy is “run to failure,” then bringing in a new sensor or technology won’t solve the fundamental issue. All you’ll do is discover that your assets are failing, without actually preventing it.
On the financial side, maybe run-to-failure can make sense in specific cases. But as resources tighten and we look for more sustainable ways to operate, sticking to a “throwaway” mindset seems short-sighted in the long run.
Moving Away from Throwaway Culture
Embracing something like FitMachine or any other tech isn’t just about plugging in sensors; it’s about rethinking how you approach maintenance and asset life cycles. What might look like cost savings today can turn into a hidden expense tomorrow, both environmentally and operationally.
Ultimately, it’s not just about adopting new tools. It’s about shifting policies, corporate priorities, and the way we view equipment and resources. If you don’t address the underlying cause, no amount of technology will magically solve the problem.
I believe we should be moving away from a culture of disposal and towards one of continual improvement. That involves rethinking how we manage assets, conserving resources wherever possible, and giving the people on the ground enough support and breathing room to do their jobs well.
Lasting Change Takes Commitment
From my perspective, the real challenge lies in convincing entire organisations, not just the maintenance crew—to move away from short-term fixes and focus on sustainable, long-term strategies. It can’t just be about the bottom line; it also has to factor in workforce well-being and environmental impact.
If we’re being honest, it’s tough to help companies that aren’t genuinely ready to change. But for those that are willing to take a closer look and maybe rewrite a few policies, the benefits can be huge: more efficient maintenance, happier technicians, and fewer resources thrown away.
I’d love to hear others’ experiences. Have you seen a run-to-failure policy in action? Did it end up costing more or saving money? In a world where we’re all rethinking how we do things, every perspective helps.