[210] Why have CM science and CBM delivery failed to achieve their full potential in the PPM delivery industry?

Back in the mid-1970s, when first introduced to the concept of condition monitoring (CM) and condition-based maintenance (CBM), the expectation was that within very few years the practice of time-based planned preventative maintenance would be a thing of the past.
The developing CM technologies, the advancement in computing and a greater understanding of how equipment fails and the mechanisms needed to mitigate, reduce and eliminate the failure cause promised an end to traditional maintenance practices.
Jumping forward 40 years, we now live in a world where in everyday life equipment reliability is a given:

• Cars start first time, whatever the weather, rarely break down and need only minor servicing;

• TVs last forever; and

• Domestic appliances come with a free ten-year guarantee. 

So why, after 40 years, do the vast majority of industries still work a predominantly time-based, ‘take it apart to find out how/why it’s still working’ planned preventative maintenance-based maintenance strategy.
Why, after 40+ years, do we still have to make the argument, in many cases unsuccessfully, for a CM-based, CBM strategy?
Why do we still have to try to convince industry that it is better to gear the maintenance department to identify and eliminate the failure causes rather than to have an efficient process for managing failure and its consequences?  
The paper will attempt, based on the author’s extensive experience in the CM industry, to provide insight, answers and solutions these questions.