Accendo Reliability

Your Reliability Engineering Professional Development Site

  • Home
  • About
    • Contributors
    • About Us
    • Colophon
    • Survey
  • Reliability.fm
  • Articles
    • CRE Preparation Notes
    • NoMTBF
    • on Leadership & Career
      • Advanced Engineering Culture
      • ASQR&R
      • Engineering Leadership
      • Managing in the 2000s
      • Product Development and Process Improvement
    • on Maintenance Reliability
      • Aasan Asset Management
      • AI & Predictive Maintenance
      • Asset Management in the Mining Industry
      • CMMS and Maintenance Management
      • CMMS and Reliability
      • Conscious Asset
      • EAM & CMMS
      • Everyday RCM
      • History of Maintenance Management
      • Life Cycle Asset Management
      • Maintenance and Reliability
      • Maintenance Management
      • Plant Maintenance
      • Process Plant Reliability Engineering
      • RCM Blitz®
      • ReliabilityXperience
      • Rob’s Reliability Project
      • The Intelligent Transformer Blog
      • The People Side of Maintenance
      • The Reliability Mindset
    • on Product Reliability
      • Accelerated Reliability
      • Achieving the Benefits of Reliability
      • Apex Ridge
      • Field Reliability Data Analysis
      • Metals Engineering and Product Reliability
      • Musings on Reliability and Maintenance Topics
      • Product Validation
      • Reliability by Design
      • Reliability Competence
      • Reliability Engineering Insights
      • Reliability in Emerging Technology
      • Reliability Knowledge
    • on Risk & Safety
      • CERM® Risk Insights
      • Equipment Risk and Reliability in Downhole Applications
      • Operational Risk Process Safety
    • on Systems Thinking
      • Communicating with FINESSE
      • The RCA
    • on Tools & Techniques
      • Big Data & Analytics
      • Experimental Design for NPD
      • Innovative Thinking in Reliability and Durability
      • Inside and Beyond HALT
      • Inside FMEA
      • Institute of Quality & Reliability
      • Integral Concepts
      • Learning from Failures
      • Progress in Field Reliability?
      • R for Engineering
      • Reliability Engineering Using Python
      • Reliability Reflections
      • Statistical Methods for Failure-Time Data
      • Testing 1 2 3
      • The Manufacturing Academy
  • eBooks
  • Resources
    • Accendo Authors
    • FMEA Resources
    • Glossary
    • Feed Forward Publications
    • Openings
    • Books
    • Webinar Sources
    • Podcasts
  • Courses
    • Your Courses
    • Live Courses
      • Introduction to Reliability Engineering & Accelerated Testings Course Landing Page
      • Advanced Accelerated Testing Course Landing Page
    • Integral Concepts Courses
      • Reliability Analysis Methods Course Landing Page
      • Applied Reliability Analysis Course Landing Page
      • Statistics, Hypothesis Testing, & Regression Modeling Course Landing Page
      • Measurement System Assessment Course Landing Page
      • SPC & Process Capability Course Landing Page
      • Design of Experiments Course Landing Page
    • The Manufacturing Academy Courses
      • An Introduction to Reliability Engineering
      • Reliability Engineering Statistics
      • An Introduction to Quality Engineering
      • Quality Engineering Statistics
      • FMEA in Practice
      • Process Capability Analysis course
      • Root Cause Analysis and the 8D Corrective Action Process course
      • Return on Investment online course
    • Industrial Metallurgist Courses
    • FMEA courses Powered by The Luminous Group
    • Foundations of RCM online course
    • Reliability Engineering for Heavy Industry
    • How to be an Online Student
    • Quondam Courses
  • Calendar
    • Call for Papers Listing
    • Upcoming Webinars
    • Webinar Calendar
  • Login
    • Member Home
  • Barringer Process Reliability Introduction Course Landing Page
  • Upcoming Live Events
You are here: Home / Articles / Do we not think

by Fred Schenkelberg Leave a Comment

Do we not think

Do we not think

as reliability professionals anymore?

During a normal day, we unconsciously tie our shoes, brush our teeth and drive to work, mostly by routine and without too much conscious thinking about the tasks. Occasionally we answer the phone and have to think a little about the conversation. Or we design an experiment for the next project, thinking we can save time by using the same test as last time. Then we slip comfortably into a routine. Do we not think anymore?

Reliability engineering is thinking.

Think situationally

We have to fit the right tasks and tools to the specific and current situation. Materials, designs, processes, customer environments and reliability expectations all change over time. We know more about failure modes and mechanisms over time. Our experience continues to grow. Being reliability engineers, we consider the situation and recommend a course of action based on our knowledge. We recommend studies or experiments, we advise on design practices and process controls. We are knowledge workers. We are paid to think.

So, do some refuse to think? Slipping into a routine, running the same studies and tests, preparing the same plans, implementing the same techniques, is comfortable and saves time. And, generally doesn’t work very well. When we step out of the role of a thinking reliability engineer, we pass opportunities without noticing. We move blindly to the next task. We believe that having a lot of activity is doing our job. No. Doing our job is thinking and doing the right activities.

The other day a friend told me about an online conversation where someone said, “MTBF and Reliability are not related and should not be confused.” or something to that effect. My friend, being aware of my campaign to eradicate the use of MTBF, thought this was a new and troubling argument to continue using MTBF. I agree. It is troubling. How many of us, reliability professionals, have stopped thinking? How many do not take the time or exert the effort to learn the basic concepts of reliability engineering? How many have been training and believe there is one set of tools to apply to every project? How many are just moving through the day in a routine?

As you start your day, going through the routines that bring to your place of work, set a daily reminder to stop and think. Why are you doing the specific tasks you are doing today? Do you know why something has to be done with a specific technique? Ask ‘why’ all day along. Make yourself see the world around you and ask yourself, ‘Am I seeing what I expect or not? Why?’. Each task should have a purpose and value.

Doing a component life study may have the purpose of finding failure modes and mechanisms. Does the work lead to that goal? Are we using the right technique? Could we do this better? Are there better ways to get this done? If you’re running a time terminated demonstration test and do not expect any failures, you might not be thinking. If you expect to pass your HALT, you probably fell into an unconscious routine. If you use MTBF to estimate your maintenance schedule, you certainly are not thinking.

Stop it – wake up, and think.

I really like reliability engineering and would say I’m a campion of the profession. It is because every day I have to think. New designs, new materials, new components, new challenges, and every project is different with different constraints and objectives. We are expected to learn something every day. We get to work across the entire product life-cycle and with nearly every function in the organization. We move from a vendor meeting exploring the process stability of a painted finish to briefing the project team on the status of remaining reliability risks. We have the opportunity to apply our skills, knowledge and thinking prowess every day. It is up to us to do so.

So what do you think? (or do you?)

Filed Under: Articles, Musings on Reliability and Maintenance Topics, on Product Reliability

About Fred Schenkelberg

I am the reliability expert at FMS Reliability, a reliability engineering and management consulting firm I founded in 2004. I left Hewlett Packard (HP)’s Reliability Team, where I helped create a culture of reliability across the corporation, to assist other organizations.

« Hazard to Reliability Functions
Unreasonable »

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Article by Fred Schenkelberg
in the Musings series

Join Accendo

Receive information and updates about articles and many other resources offered by Accendo Reliability by becoming a member.

It’s free and only takes a minute.

Join Today

Recent Articles

  • How a Mission Statement Drives Behavioral Change in Organizations
  • Gremlins today
  • The Power of Vision in Leadership and Organizational Success
  • 3 Types of MTBF Stories
  • ALT: An in Depth Description

© 2025 FMS Reliability · Privacy Policy · Terms of Service · Cookies Policy