All Member Open Forum

While reviewing the SMRP Best Practices (pp. 202–204), I noticed a potential ambiguity that I would like to open for discussion.

In the sample calculation, planned backlog is explicitly described as work not yet ready to be scheduled, and ready work is treated as a separate category. However, the formula for Planned Backlog (weeks) sums Planned Work + Ready Work, and the Best-in-Class Target Value later refers to Total Backlog (available and unavailable).

Conceptually, planned backlog and ready backlog represent different levels of work maturity within the work management process. From that perspective, the formula appears to be calculating a total backlog horizon, rather than planned backlog in the strict sense.

My question for the group:

Is SMRP intentionally using "planned backlog" as an operational synonym for total backlog (planned + ready) when expressed in weeks, or would it be more appropriate to distinguish these as separate indicators to better assess planning and scheduling maturity?

I am interested in how others interpret and apply this distinction in practice.

------------------------------
Luis Valencia Morón
Gerente General
Asset Healt Management E.I.R.L.
Lima
------------------------------

Thank you Michael for the clarification.
I understand that the Planned Backlog intentionally includes both Planned Work (not yet ready to be scheduled) and Ready Work.
This metric provides a comprehensive view of all planned work, not just what is immediately executable, which is very useful for resource planning and workload visibility.

However, we often encounter Unplanned Backlogs, which can impact the Planned Backlog by consuming resources, delaying scheduled tasks, and affecting overall maintenance efficiency.
This highlights the importance of focusing on proactive and predictive maintenance to reduce unplanned work and better manage the planned workload.

Francois KINGUE.
Senior mechanic, Perenco Rio Del Rey/Cegelec.
kincovi@gmail.com.
SMRP member.

---------------------------------
FRANCOIS VIVIAN KINGUE NJANJO
Mechanic
Cegelec Cameroon
Douala
---------------------------------



Original Message:
Sent: 01-08-2026
From: Michael Raible
Subject: RE: "Planned Backlog" vs. "Total Backlog" terminology in Best Practices

Metric 5.4.8 Planned Backlog has been revised for the upcoming 7th Edition.  The metric definition for the 7th edition is as follows: "This metric combines the quantity of work that has been fully planned for execution but is not ready to be scheduled and work that is ready to be performed (also known as ready work).

Please note that Qualification 6 states "Planned Backlog work may not be ready to schedule for various reasons, such as timing associated with equipment availability, environmental issues or concerns, turnaround planning, availability of materials, availability of tools or equipment (e.g. crane), awaiting equipment access from production, etc.". Note the emphasis on MAY NOT BE READY to SCHEDULE.

Planned backlog is work which has gone through a formal planning process whether it is scheduled or not.  Ready Work is work which has been prepared for execution (necessary planning has been completed along with necessary materials, etc.).  Therefore the total planned backlog is Planned Work + Ready Work.

I agree that the formula is calculating the total backlog horizon and this is an intentional decision by the committee.

-------------------------------

Michael Raible

Best Practices Chair

SMRP

-------------------------------

Thank you for the clarifications provided.

Based on the explanations, my takeaway is that in the context of SMRP Best Practices, Planned Backlog (as defined in Metric 5.4.8) is being used as an operational term to represent the total volume of planned work, regardless of its scheduling readiness. In other words, when expressed in weeks, Planned Backlog effectively represents the Total Planned Backlog, composed of both Planned Work (not yet ready to be scheduled) and Ready Work.

From an operational workload-horizon perspective, this approach makes sense, since excluding ready work would underestimate the actual demand against available capacity. However, from a conceptual and diagnostic standpoint, this terminology can be misleading, as planned backlog and ready backlog represent different maturity levels within the work management process.

For organizations seeking greater clarity in planning and scheduling maturity, it may be beneficial to explicitly distinguish:

• Planned Backlog (not ready).
• Ready Backlog.
• Total Backlog.

While still using the SMRP metric as a consolidated horizon indicator.

This distinction preserves the practical intent of the metric while improving analytical transparency and communication within maintenance and reliability organizations.

------------------------------
Luis Valencia Morón
Gerente General
Asset Healt Management E.I.R.L.
Lima
------------------------------

This image is referenced to the publication "GloMe". It is in collaboration with SMRP BoK committee and EFNMS European Reliability Consortium. 
Luis I appreciate your reference. My findings lead to the partnership between maintenance and operational teams. The consideration for MTTR in the Best Practices was agreed upon by the committee members to keep the metric solely for maintenance purposes. The many factors involved in the partnership between maintenance and operations can be brought into play for the overall consideration of MTTR. The metric was also written not to a specific industry, but as a general rule that can be applied across industry. The BoK Committee members cover a wide spectrum of industry, and I find it very interesting to listen to the many rules and regulations that industry has and specific rules that each company have to apply understand the application. I think we agree, mostly on the fact that MTTR; even though it can be used across several assets, certainly applies best to individual assets. I would suggest that and I have actually had to develop a KPI for when Maintenance is completed on a repair, to determine when the asset was started. The factors that you noted and I agree withhold; I think is the right way to look at the overall picture. But solely for maintenance purposes a lot can be captured in the form of labor and material required to improve maintenance team operations, especially during the planning and scheduling factors. I think another benefit of capturing labor and material is storeroom inventory optimization. That can be another discussion. I'm curious what your thoughts are on how the EFMNS graphic identified in the GloMe publication might be. 

------------------------------
Terry Alexander
Sr. Reliability Engineer
Life Cycle Engineering
Charleston SC
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-10-2026 07:56 PM
From: Luis Valencia Morón
Subject: "Planned Backlog" vs. "Total Backlog" terminology in Best Practices

Thank you for the clarifications provided.

Based on the explanations, my takeaway is that in the context of SMRP Best Practices, Planned Backlog (as defined in Metric 5.4.8) is being used as an operational term to represent the total volume of planned work, regardless of its scheduling readiness. In other words, when expressed in weeks, Planned Backlog effectively represents the Total Planned Backlog, composed of both Planned Work (not yet ready to be scheduled) and Ready Work.

From an operational workload-horizon perspective, this approach makes sense, since excluding ready work would underestimate the actual demand against available capacity. However, from a conceptual and diagnostic standpoint, this terminology can be misleading, as planned backlog and ready backlog represent different maturity levels within the work management process.

For organizations seeking greater clarity in planning and scheduling maturity, it may be beneficial to explicitly distinguish:

• Planned Backlog (not ready).
• Ready Backlog.
• Total Backlog.

While still using the SMRP metric as a consolidated horizon indicator.

This distinction preserves the practical intent of the metric while improving analytical transparency and communication within maintenance and reliability organizations.

------------------------------
Luis Valencia Morón
Gerente General
Asset Healt Management E.I.R.L.
Lima
------------------------------