Managing Work Order/Snagging Report (WO/SR) using FMEA (Failure Mode and Effect Analysis): A Case Study of the Hospitality Department in the Middle East

The Department of Hospitality provides support services to a major health care provider in the Middle East. This department has experienced a problem of the high number of work orders/snagging reports that resulted in four warning letters regarding the decrease in landscape maintenance quality. To deal with this business issue, the aims of this study include identifying possible causes of the problem, proposing solutions, and outlining an implementation plan for the short-, medium-, and long-term. A conceptual framework of gap analysis using FMEA (Failure Mode and Effect Analysis) is proposed to manage work orders/snagging reports. A questionnaire was developed based on FMEA to measure the degree of severity, occurrence, and detection. Data collection was conducted through questionnaires administered to 12 respondents, consisting of five managers, two supervisors, and five engineers. Results show that, based on a root cause analysis using a Fishbone diagram, there were 20 possible causes of the problem. Based on the RPN (risk priority number), the order or priority of these possible causes as follows: (1) Environment (2 possible causes), (2) Machinery (3 possible causes), (3) Materials (3 possible causes), (4) Planning (4 possible causes), (5) Workforce (4 possible causes), and (6) Method/Process (4 possible causes). Proposed recommendations include: prioritizing high-impact areas by immediately focus on addressing the highest-ranking issues, which are environmental adaptations, systematic application through ensuring a systematic application of all proposed solutions across relevant operational areas, fostering a cross-functional collaboration among operations, procurement, human resources; planning departments to ensure integrated and effective implementation, and phased strategy into short-, medium-, and long-term implementation, and continuous performance monitoring. 

Introduction

A leading secondary and tertiary healthcare provider in the Middle East has been dedicated to delivering the safest, most effective, and compassionate care to all its patients. This company manages fifteen hospitals, the Ambulance Service, and home and residential care services. In January 2016, the company became the first healthcare system globally to have all its hospitals accredited by Joint Commission International under the Academic Medical Center accreditation program. The Ambulance Service, Home Healthcare Service, Stroke Service, and Palliative Care have all received this prestigious accreditation since 2011. In addition, the company was also the first hospital system in the Middle East to achieve institutional accreditation from the Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education—International (ACGME-I), demonstrating excellence in training medical graduates through residency, internship, and fellowship programs.

The company has been concerned with its outsourced landscape and irrigation maintenance services from 2020 to 2024. The primary concern is the declining efficiency of landscape and irrigation maintenance operations. This refers to work orders’ reduced effectiveness and productivity for maintaining and managing landscapes and associated irrigation systems. The decline in efficiency has been noticeable in the 2020–2024 period. This could be observed over months or even years, reflecting a gradual deterioration in landscape and irrigation maintenance performance. This issue is observed in various locations where landscape and irrigation maintenance services are provided. It can affect businesses of the company where landscape and irrigation systems require regular upkeep to remain visually appealing and healthy. During the maintenance period from 2020 to 2024, the company raised work orders/snagging reports with the contractor for 107 numbers. In landscape maintenance, the contractor has replaced 60 non-performing date palms, 138 trees, 1625 shrubs and hedges, 1230 m² of groundcovers, and 1828 m² of grass. At the same time, they replaced one irrigation controller, 347 irrigation solenoid valves, 12 quick-coupling valves, 1722 irrigation sprinklers, and 7000 m of irrigation drip-line pipes. The extent of the issue significantly impacts the financial and operational aspects of landscape and irrigation maintenance. Some indicators of the issue’s importance include increased maintenance costs, higher resource consumption, reduced end-user satisfaction, and operational delays. Inefficient practices may lead to higher resource consumption, like increased water usage, electricity consumption, and the need for additional materials (e.g., fertilizers and pesticides), further driving up costs. The decline in maintenance efficiency can result in unsatisfactory outcomes for end users, leading to complaints and negative reviews. Inefficient maintenance practices can cause delays in completing projects or fulfilling service requests, disrupting schedules, and impacting overall business operations. Working closely with a dependable landscape contractor is necessary to ensure these areas remain aesthetically pleasing and well-maintained. Regularly assessing their performance is crucial to ensuring they meet the desired standards.

This research aims to critically evaluate the existing landscape and irrigation maintenance operations to identify factors that contributing to the declining performance as supported by the high number of work order/snagging report (WO/SR) and recommend changes needed in the new Request for Proposal (RFP) to improve the quality of landscape and irrigation at the Hospitality Department ZXC Healthcare Facilities. This research seeks to gather information, analyze data, and derive insights to help improve the landscape irrigation maintenance practices within the Hospitality Department of the company. The findings can be used to develop strategies, design interventions, and implement changes that will enhance the quality, efficiency, and sustainability of the landscape maintenance services provided by the contractor. Therefore, the major objectives of this research include: (1) to identify factors contributing to the unsatisfactory performance of the existing landscape and irrigation maintenance contract, (2) to develop a comprehensive business solution to address the identified root causes of poor performance in landscape and irrigation maintenance, and (3) to outline a comprehensive implementation plan for the proposed business solution, ensuring enhanced landscape and irrigation maintenance services provided by the contractor.

Theoretical Foundation and Framework

FMEA (Failure Mode and Effect Analysis)

This study adopts FMEA (Failure Mode and Effect Analysis) as a tool to achieve the research objectives. FMEA (Failure Mode and Effects Analysis) is a systematic, proactive method to identify potential failure modes within a system, process, or product, evaluate their causes and effects, and prioritize actions to eliminate or reduce the likelihood of these failures (Sharma & Srivastava, 2017; Jacobs & Chase, 2018). This analytical tool helps organizations anticipate potential problems, understand their impact, and develop preventive measures before they occur, thereby minimizing risks and improving overall performance. The core of FMEA involves identifying potential failures in business processes, assessing the risk associated with each failure based on its severity, the likelihood of its occurrence, and the ability to detect it early, and then implementing corrective actions to mitigate these risks. This systematic approach allows for a structured evaluation of risks, enabling organizations to prioritize interventions that will most effectively reduce the impact of potential failures on business value and ensure processes are revised to be more efficient and compliant with standards, such as Service Level Agreements (SLAs). The purpose of the FMEA is to take actions to eliminate or reduce failures, starting with the highest-priority ones. The FMEA also documents current knowledge and actions about the risks of failures for continuous improvement (Tague, 2023).

Conceptual Framework

The conceptual framework of this study is based on the current issue of the high number of work orders or snagging reports (WR/SO) faced by the Hospitality Department. This framework adopts a “gap analysis” approach to identify and bridge the gap between the current and desired future states through proposed strategies (Project Management Institute (PMI), 2017) as shown in Fig. 1. The Current State (Existing Condition) describes the current condition from the business value aspect and the challenges faced, including the project contract value is suboptimal due to risks not being systematically managed and high potential for project delays, uncontrolled costs, disruptions in service quality that impact client satisfaction, and the absence of a structured risk management approach. The Future State involves future targets or plans by determining the goals to be achieved based on the contract or SLA (Service Level Agreement), including financial targets, profitability, operational efficiency, contract compliance, improved company reputation, client satisfaction, and service sustainability.

Fig. 1. Conceptual framework.

The Proposed Strategy is a bridge between the Current State and the Future State by adopting FMEA (Failure Mode and Effects Analysis) as a tool for managing service quality risks in the future. This strategy involves identifying potential failures in business processes, conducting risk assessment based on severity, likelihood of occurrence, and early detection, implementing corrective actions to reduce the impact of risks on the business, and revising systems and processes to be more efficient by SLA standards. This framework is expected to facilitate business gap analysis, ensuring that the implemented strategies can mitigate risks and enhance long-term business value. (Clamp, 2005; Parker & Bryan, 2017).

Research Design

Major steps of this study are shown in Fig. 2. The process begins with identifying the business issue, which is the core problem or challenge that needs resolution. Recognizing the issue is crucial, as it sets the direction for the entire research. Once the problem is clearly defined, the next step involves conducting a literature review to gain a theoretical foundation, which entails studying major models and previous research relevant to the issue. This helps establish a conceptual framework for this research.

Fig. 2. Research steps.

Following the literature review is the Data Collection phase, where relevant data is gathered through surveys, interviews, observations, or existing databases. The collected data provides empirical evidence to support or refute assumptions made during the earlier stages. The number and positions of respondents are shown in Table I. Of the twelve respondents, three were from the company (Program Manager Landscape, Senior Gardening Supervisor, and Gardening Supervisor) and nine were from the contractor.

Table I. List of Respondents

No.	Position	Working experience (years)
1.	Program Manager Landscape (company)	20
2.	Senior Gardening Supervisor (company)	28
3.	Gardening Supervisor (company)	15
4.	Project Manager Landscape (contractor)	12
5.	Project Manager Landscape (contractor)	20
6.	Project Manager Landscape (contractor)	13
7.	Project Manager Landscape	5
8.	Landscape Engineer (contractor)	20
9.	Landscape Engineer (contractor)	18
10.	Senior Irrigation Engineer (contractor)	12
11.	Irrigation Engineer (contractor)	10
12.	Irrigation Engineer (contractor)	8

The process then moves to Data Analysis, where the gathered information is methodically examined to uncover patterns, trends, and insights related to the business issue. This analysis is critical in understanding the root causes of the problem and evaluating the impact of various factors using a fishbone diagram (Ishikawa, 1976; Watson & Spiridonova, 2019). The final step in the flowchart is formulating practical recommendations and evidence-based solutions derived from the data analysis. These recommendations aim to resolve the identified business issue, improve performance, and support decision-making processes. Overall, the flowchart emphasizes a logical and systematic framework that integrates theoretical grounding with empirical investigation to develop actionable strategies for business improvement.

The data analysis for this study was primarily conducted using the robust Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) approach. This systematic methodology began consolidating all possible causes of the identified problems, specifically those contributing to high Work Order/Snagging Reports (Ramdhan, 2017; Syarnubiet al., 2021), by gathering and integrating data from all respondents involved in the landscape and irrigation maintenance project. For each identified cause, a critical step involved calculating its Risk Priority Number (RPN) score. This RPN was determined by multiplying three key risk factors, each typically rated on a defined scale of 1-4: Severity (S), which assesses the impact of the failure; Occurrence (O), which measures the likelihood of the failure happening; and Detection (D), which evaluates the ability to detect the failure before it causes significant impact. The revised scale was used to ease the respondents in expressing their judgments on the Severity, Occurrence, and Detection.

The resulting RPN values provided a quantitative measure of risk for each specific problem cause. Following the RPN calculation for all individual causes, the analysis determined the overall rank of all possible causes from the highest to the lowest RPN value. This ranking mechanism was crucial for systematically prioritizing the issues, highlighting which problems pose the most significant risk to the project’s performance. Furthermore, the data was aggregated to derive average RPNs for broader categories (e.g., Environment, Machineries, Planning, Materials, Workforce, Method/Process), providing an overarching strategic perspective on the most problematic areas and informing the development of targeted, high-impact solutions.

Results

Identification of Possible Causes

The results detail an investigation into high Work Order/Snagging Report (WO/SR) occurrences in the company landscape maintenance, using a fishbone diagram to categorize problems into Workforce, Machinery, Environment, Materials, Planning, and Method/Process. The fishbone diagram follows the investigation to identify the problem related to the work order or snagging report. This study utilizes fishbone diagrams to analyze various decisions related to the number of work orders or snagging reports that can enhance performance in the maintenance landscape at ZXC company and in the Middle East region. The results of the analysis are shown in Table II and Fig. 3. These results show 20 possible causes of the problem of a high number of work orders/snagging reports.

Table II. List of Possible Causes

Category	Possible causes
Workforce	1. Shortage of workforce
	2. Unskilled laborers
	3. Foreman/Supervisor is not following the Standard Operating Procedure
	4. Hold for contractor management support
Machinery	1. Machinery breakdown
	2. No maintenance schedule for machinery
	3. Shortage of machinery
Environment	1. Short working hours in summer
	2. High temperature and humidity in summer
Materials	1. Plants, pesticides, fertilizers, or irrigation spare parts are not available
	2. The procurement process is delayed
	3. Plants, pesticides, fertilizers, or irrigation spare parts are not correct
Planning	1. No prioritized Work Order/Snagging Report
	2. Lack of planning
	3. The maintenance schedule is not correct
	4. The instruction work order/ Snagging report is not clear
Method/Process	1. Lack of communication
	2. Tightening of the work permit system
	3. Overtime is restricted
	4. Highly reactive to the maintenance schedule

Fig. 3. Fishbone diagram of Work order/Snagging report.

Calculating RPN (Risk Priority Number)

Table III shows the summary of the total Risk Priority Number (RPN) score of the possible causes behind a “High Work Order/Snagging Report,” categorized into six main areas: Workforce, Machinery, Environment, Materials, Planning, and Method/Process. For each category, specific causes of problems are listed, along with corresponding data from 12 respondents to get the “Total RPN” (Risk Priority Number) score, which likely indicates the severity or impact of each cause.

Table III. Total RPN Values

Possible causes	Total RPN
1. Shortage of workforce	345
2. Unskilled laborers	223
3. Foreman/Supervisor is not following the Standard Operating Procedure	272
4. Hold for contractor management support	222
1. Machinery breakdown	351
2. No maintenance schedule for machinery	391
3. Shortage of machinery	354
1. Short working hours in summer	418
2. High temperature and humidity in summer	530
1. Plants, pesticides, fertilizers, or irrigation spare parts are not available.	298
2. The procurement process is delayed.	365
3. Plants, pesticides, fertilizers, or irrigation spare parts are not correct	296
1. No prioritized Work Order/Snagging Report	321
2. Lack of planning	329
3. The maintenance schedule is not correct.	321
4. The Instruction Work Order/ Snagging Report is not clear	280
1. Lack of communication	299
2. Tightening of the work permit system	209
3. Overtime is restricted.	271
4. Highly reactive to the maintenance schedule	256

Table III shows a comprehensive Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) that systematically identifies and quantifies the various root causes contributing to the declining performance of the landscape and irrigation maintenance project, as evidenced by a consistently high volume of Work Order/Snagging Reports (WO/SR). The table presents categories of issues, specific problem causes, and their associated Risk Priority Numbers (RPN), which are calculated by multiplying Severity, Occurrence, and Detection scores. The high RPN values across multiple categories directly indicate critical areas where performance is significantly hampered. For instance, environmental factors emerge as the most impactful, with “High temperature and humidity in summer” scoring an RPN of 530, and “Short working time in summer” at 418, signifying that adverse climatic conditions are a primary driver of inefficiency and delays. Machinery-related issues also show a substantial impact on performance, highlighted by “No maintenance schedule for machinery” (RPN 391), “Shortage of machinery” (RPN 354), and “Machinery breakdown” (RPN 351), indicating critical deficiencies in equipment availability and upkeep that lead to service disruptions. Furthermore, materials management issues, particularly “The procurement process is delayed” (RPN 365), significantly contribute to project setbacks. Challenges within the workforce, such as “Shortage of workforce” (RPN 345), and systemic weaknesses in planning, including “Lack of planning” (RPN 329) and “No prioritized Work Order/Snagging Report” (RPN 321), also underscore the operational inefficiencies leading to performance decline. Even Method/Process issues like “Lack of communication” (RPN 299) contribute to the suboptimal state. The cumulative effect of these highly ranked causes directly translates to unsatisfactory project performance, manifesting as frequent rework, unmet deadlines, uncontrolled costs, and compromised service quality for the client.

Overall Ranks of Possible Causes

As each category has a different number of possible causes, an average of each category is calculated by dividing the total RPN values of all possible causes by the number of possible causes, and the results are used to determine their ranks as shown in Table IV.

Table IV. Ranks of Average RPN

Category	Average RPN	Rank
Environment	474.0	1
Machinery	465.3	2
Materials	319.7	3
Planning	312.8	4
Workforce	265.5	5
Method/Process	258.8	6

The overall average ranking further reinforces this, with Environment, Machinery, and Material identified as the top three categories by average RPN (474.00, 365.33, and 319.67, respectively), providing clear evidence of where the performance decline is most acutely felt and requiring targeted interventions. The table provides a quantitative breakdown of factors contributing to an increased workload, as indicated by the High Work Order/Snagging Report. Their high RPN scores highlight environmental and machinery-related issues as the most critical areas; materials, planning, workforce, and method/process follow these.

Proposed Solutions

Based on the comprehensive Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) and the overall ranking of possible causes, the proposed solutions should strategically target the highest-impact issues to effectively reduce Work Order/Snagging Report (WO/SR) occurrences and bridge the business value gap. The proposed solutions are categorized by areas of concern:

1. Environment (Highest Impact): For “High temperature and humidity in summer” (Rank 1, RPN 530) and “Short working hours in summer” (Rank 2, RPN 418):

● Implement Adaptive Work Schedules: Introduce flexible working hours or staggered shifts during peak summer temperatures to optimize productivity and ensure worker well-being.

● Invest in Climate Control Measures: Explore and implement solutions like temporary shaded areas, cooling stations, or improved ventilation in critical outdoor work zones.

● Provide Hydration and Rest Breaks: Mandate frequent hydration breaks and designated rest areas to mitigate the effects of high temperature and humidity on workforce efficiency.

● Utilize Off-Peak Hours: Schedule heavy-duty or time-sensitive work during cooler parts of the day or night, where feasible.

2. Machineries (High Impact): For “No maintenance schedule for machineries” (Rank 3, RPN 391), “Shortage of machineries” (Rank 5, RPN 354), and “Machineries breakdown” (Rank 6, RPN 351):

● Establish a Robust Preventive Maintenance (PM) Program: Develop and strictly adhere to a comprehensive PM schedule for all machinery, including regular inspections, servicing, and part replacements, to prevent breakdowns.

● Implement Predictive Maintenance Technologies: Use sensors and data analytics to monitor machinery health in real time, allowing for proactive maintenance before failures occur.

● Optimize Machinery Utilization and Allocation: Conduct an audit of current machinery usage to ensure optimal deployment and identify underutilized assets.

● Strategic Machinery Procurement/Leasing: Develop a long-term plan for machinery acquisition or leasing to address shortages and ensure the right equipment is available when needed.

● Maintain Critical Spare Parts Inventory: Ensure a readily available stock of essential spare parts for key machinery to minimize downtime during repairs

3. Materials (Significant Impact): For “Procurement process is delayed” (Rank 4, RPN 365), “Plants, pesticides, fertilizers, or irrigation ● spare parts not available” (Rank 12, RPN 298), and “Plants, pesticides, fertilizers, or irrigation spare parts are not correct” (Rank 13, RPN 296):

● Streamline Procurement Workflow: Digitize and automate parts of the procurement process to reduce manual delays and bottlenecks.

● Diversify Supplier Base: Establish relationships with multiple reliable suppliers to reduce dependency and mitigate risks associated with single-source failures or delays.

● Implement Just-In-Time (JIT) or Optimized Inventory Management: Balance the need for material availability with inventory costs, ensuring critical materials are on hand without excessive stock.

● Improve Specification Clarity and Quality Control: Enhance communication with suppliers regarding material specifications and implement stricter quality checks upon delivery to prevent the use of incorrect materials.

4. Planning (Moderate Impact): For “Lack of planning” (Rank 8, RPN 329), “No prioritized Work Order/Snagging Report” (Rank 9, RPN 321), “Maintenance schedule is not correct” (Rank 10, RPN 321), and “Instruction Work Order/Snagging Report is not clear” (Rank 14, RPN 280):

● Implement a Centralized Planning System: Utilize project management software or a dedicated planning tool to create, prioritize, and track all Work Orders and Snagging Reports.

● Develop Detailed Project Plans: Ensure all projects and maintenance activities have clear, comprehensive plans with defined scopes, timelines, and resource allocations.

● Standardized Work Order/Snagging Report Templates: Create clear, standardized templates for work orders, snagging reports, and instruction work orders to ensure all necessary information is provided and understood.

● Regular Planning Review Meetings: Conduct frequent meetings to review and adjust plans in response to progress, emerging issues, and shifting priorities.

5. Workforce (Moderate Impact): For “Shortage of workforce” (Rank 7, RPN 345), “Foreman/Supervisor is not following the Standards Operational Procedure” (Rank 15, RPN 272), “Unskilled laborers” (Rank 18, RPN 223), and “Hold for contractor management support” (Rank 19, RPN 222):

● Strategic Recruitment and Retention: Develop proactive recruitment strategies and implement attractive retention programs to address workforce shortages.

● Comprehensive Training and Development Programs: Offer regular training sessions for all labors, emphasizing skill development and adherence to Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs).

● Reinforce Supervisor Training on SOP Adherence: Conduct targeted training and regular audits for foremen and supervisors to ensure strict compliance with SOPs and effective team management

● Cross-Training Initiatives: Train staff in multiple tasks to increase flexibility and reduce vulnerability to individual skill gaps or absences.

6. Method/Process (Lower but Still Significant Impact): For “Lack of communication” (Rank 11, RPN 299), “Overtime is restricted” (Rank 16, RPN 271), “Highly reactive for the maintenance schedule” (Rank 17, RPN 256), and “Tightening of work permit system” (Rank 20, RPN 209):

● Enhance Communication Channels: Implement structured communication protocols (e.g., daily briefings, digital platforms) to ensure timely and transparent information flow across all teams and departments.

● Review and Optimize Work Permit System: Assess the current work permit system to identify bottlenecks and streamline the approval process, ensuring safety is not compromised.

● Balance Overtime Policies: Review overtime restrictions to ensure flexibility for urgent tasks while balancing cost management and employee well-being.

● Shift from Reactive to Proactive Maintenance Culture: Reinforce the importance of preventive and predictive maintenance through training and incentives, moving away from a purely reactive approach.

By systematically addressing these identified causes, especially those with the highest RPNs, the organization can significantly reduce the volume of Work Order/Snagging Reports, mitigate operational risks, and ultimately enhance its long-term business value and reputation. This comprehensive approach aligns with the principles of effective Risk Management using FMEA, ensuring that proposed strategies directly target the identified gaps between the current and desired future states.

Conclusion and Recommendation

Conclusion

The analysis identifies that the unsatisfactory performance stems from a multifaceted array of root causes, with the most critical being environmental factors (specifically, high temperature and humidity, and short working hours in summer, which hold the highest RPNs of 530 and 418, respectively). This is closely followed by significant deficiencies in machinery management, including the absence of a systematic maintenance schedule (RPN 391), shortage of machinery (RPN 354), and frequent breakdowns (RPN 351). Furthermore, procurement delays for essential materials (RPN 365) represent a substantial bottleneck. Other contributing factors include planning inadequacies, such as unprioritized work orders and incorrect maintenance schedules, workforce issues, including shortages and a lack of skilled laborers, and less impactful but still relevant method/process challenges, including poor communication and a reactive maintenance culture.

Recommendations

The implementation plan for the proposed business solutions should follow a phased and prioritized approach, directly guided by the FMEA’s RPN scores to ensure maximum impact. Specifically, the recommendations for implementation include:

• Prioritize High-Impact Areas: Immediately focus on addressing the highest-ranking issues, which are environmental adaptations (e.g., adaptive work schedules, climate control) and machinery management (e.g., initiating Preventive Maintenance (PM) and Predictive Maintenance (PdM) programs). Improvements to the procurement process should be closely followed.

• Systematic Application: Ensure a systematic application of all proposed solutions across relevant operational areas.

• Foster Cross-Functional Collaboration: Promote strong collaboration among operations, procurement, human resources, and planning departments to ensure integrated and effective implementation.

• Phased Implementation Strategy: Phase 1 (Immediate & High Impact), Phase 2 (Mid-term & Sustained Improvement), and Phase 3 (Long-term & Cultural Shift). These implementation plans are shown in Tables V–VII, respectively, outlining activities and suggested Persons in Charge (PICs). The schedule is indicative and can be adjusted based on specific organizational timelines and resources.

Table V. Phase I Implementation

No.	Activity	PIC	Schedule
1.	Roll out adaptive work schedules (e.g., staggered shifts, earlier starts)	Operations Manager, HR Department	Q1 (M1-3)
2.	Initiate localized climate control measures (e.g., portable fans, shaded areas, hydration stations)	Operations Manager, Facilities Management	Q1 (M1-3)
3.	Implement initial Preventive Maintenance (PM) programs for critical machinery (e.g., irrigation pumps, mowers)	Maintenance Manager, Operations Manager	Q1 (M1-3)
4.	Streamline urgent procurement processes for critical spare parts and materials (e.g., express approval, direct vendor contact)	Procurement Head, Maintenance Manager	Q1 (M1-3)
5.	Establish regular cross-functional review meetings (Operations, Maintenance, Procurement, HR, Planning)	Project Manager, Senior Operations Lead	Ongoing from Q1
6.	Define key performance indicators (KPIs) for reducing work order (WO) and snagging report (SR) volumes, as well as cost and quality.	Project Manager, IT/Data Analyst	Q1 (M1)
7.	Set up initial monitoring dashboards for WO/SR performance	IT/Data Analyst, Project Manager	Q1 (M1-2)

Table VI. Phase II Implementation

No.	Activity	PIC	Schedule
1.	Implement comprehensive training programs for the entire workforce (skills, SOP adherence, safety).	HR Department Operations Manager	Q2-Q3 (M4-9)
2.	Develop and initiate cross-training initiatives for key personnel roles.	HR Department Operations Manager	Q2-Q3 (M4-9)
3.	Implement a centralized planning system or project management software for WO/SRs.	Planning Manager, IT Department	Q2-Q3 (M4-9)
4.	Standardized Work Order/Snagging Report templates and instruction clarity.	Planning Manager, Operations Manager	Q2 (M4-6)
5.	Diversify supplier relationships for critical materials (e.g., plants, pesticides, irrigation parts).	Procurement Head	Q2-Q3 (M4-9)
6.	Conduct pilot projects for Predictive Maintenance (PdM) technologies.	Maintenance Manager, IT Department	Q2-Q3 (M4-9)
7.	Implement comprehensive training programs for the entire workforce (skills, SOP adherence, safety).	HR Department, Operations Manager	Q2-Q3 (M4-9)

Table VII. Phase III Implementation

No.	Activity	PIC	Schedule
1.	Foster a proactive maintenance culture through workshops, incentives, and leadership advocacy	Maintenance Manager, HR Department, Senior Management	Ongoing from Q4
2.	Optimize work permit system (e.g., digitalize, streamline approval workflows)	Operations Manager, Safety Officer, IT Department	Q4+ (M10-12)
3.	Review and balance overtime policies for operational flexibility	HR Department Operations Manager	Q4+ (M10-12)
4.	Conduct periodic comprehensive reviews of processes, RPNs, and overall system effectiveness	Project Manager, Senior Management	Biannually (e.g., Q2 & Q4)
5.	Establish advanced continuous performance monitoring (e.g., trend analysis, predictive analytics)	IT/Data Analyst, Project Manager	Ongoing from Q3+

We thank our respondents for their invaluable time in participating in this study.

Conflict of Interest

Conflict of Interest: We do not have any conflict of interest.