#AssetandFacilitiesManagement
#Maximo

Hi Nancy,

Maximo does not have the capability to have sub-sites out of the box and given that you say each facility will have their own security groups, storerooms and work orders this level of control is again at a site level. If you create the facilities as locations then you would need to configure similar capabilities that the standard site rules do out of the box but using the location hierarchy. For example using data restrictions etc which would require a lot of detailed design work before implementing this approach.

My initial thought would be to have each facility as its own site so rather then decrease the number of sites, increase them so you can utilise the out of the box data segregation rules.

------------------------------
Steve Lee
Maximo Technical Sales Specialist
IBM
Leeds
------------------------------

Nancy,

You should be able to use Data Restrictions in the Security Groups application with conditional expressions to segregate data in a similar way that occurs naturally with Sites in Maximo. It will take some careful planning and some elbow grease, but you can effectively separate work orders, assets, locations, storerooms, etc. all using Data Restrictions.

Alex


------------------------------
Alex Walter
A3J Group
------------------------------

I have to agree with Steve here. I see some organizations that are resistant to create sites even when they make sense. Facilities with their own security groups, storerooms, work orders, etc. makes me think they're operating in an independent manner. What is the motivation for having them inside the same site? IE what can't they do today that they would be able to do inside a single site? 

There's so much that the Maximo framework does automatically around sites that you lose when you have to build it yourself. In version 4 of Maximo when there wasn't a site concept a lot of customers implemented their own data restrictions based on location hierarchy for example. But to add that type of restriction to assets, locations, work orders, PMs, etc. is a time intensive activity and potentially error prone because we continuously add new capabilities. Potentially worth noting that qualified data restrictions (hiding records that don't match the criteria you define) only work on the main object.

------------------------------
Steven Shull
------------------------------

I agree with Steve and Steve (and not just because I am a Steve).  I think maybe we need the rest of the story to be sure, but in looking at the diagram, I might lean towards recommending Utility and Generation as organizations with 1 or more sites under each.  This makes even more sense if items and/or vendors are not shared between them (they can be shared if desired, but this would be another benefit if they are different).  My one concern would be potentially duplicated GL structure, but perhaps that is different as well?

------------------------------
Steve Hauptman
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Mon October 17, 2022 09:11 AM
From: Steven Shull
Subject: One Site with Multiple Facilities

I have to agree with Steve here. I see some organizations that are resistant to create sites even when they make sense. Facilities with their own security groups, storerooms, work orders, etc. makes me think they're operating in an independent manner. What is the motivation for having them inside the same site? IE what can't they do today that they would be able to do inside a single site? 

There's so much that the Maximo framework does automatically around sites that you lose when you have to build it yourself. In version 4 of Maximo when there wasn't a site concept a lot of customers implemented their own data restrictions based on location hierarchy for example. But to add that type of restriction to assets, locations, work orders, PMs, etc. is a time intensive activity and potentially error prone because we continuously add new capabilities. Potentially worth noting that qualified data restrictions (hiding records that don't match the criteria you define) only work on the main object.

------------------------------
Steven Shull
------------------------------

Well I am not a Steve but I will pile on with "los Tres Stevarinos!"  Ha!  The use of Sites and Orgs is often under-utilised.  The addition of Org is a great idea especially if the Generation and Utility business have slightly different GL Structure or components.

ONe thing I might caution on is overuse of security groups.  IN my view, Security Groups shoddy be role based, such that a technician at one site is a technician at any other site.  Unless there are substantially different functions that roles perform from site to site (a supply chain specialist does the same job whether in a utility or pet food manufacturer, right?) You can then couple the site specific groups to access data peculiar to the given site.  This makes a very efficient security group setup.  Also when you process transfers from one site to another the user simply is moved from one site security group to another site security group and not multiples.  Just some thoughts.

------------------------------
Bradley K. Downing , MBA
Solutions Engineer
IBM
Bakersfield CA
------------------------------

Nancy - Well, I also agree with the three Steve's and a Bradley. A Site is for data separation and an organization is for data sharing. Look at the main objects which are set at the Site level which you can do in Database Configuration and ask yourself the question does it make sense for this data to be separated, one facility from another. If the answer is generally yes, then each facility should be in its own site.

Making the decision about Org and Site structures can be easy and sometimes very difficult. It can require a lot of background knowledge of the business and a bit of forward thinking. The terms you used "security groups, warehouse, work orders, etc" point strongly to one facility = one site, but you used the term etc, which just might point in another direction, but my guess is it will not.

Remember a user has one Default Insert Site (in their profile). They would not thank you if data were being entered centrally and retrospectively and they need to keep on changing their profile.

------------------------------
Andrew Jeffery
Maximo SME
ZNAPZ b.v
Barnstaple
0777 1847873
------------------------------