True or false: The forecast doesn’t matter to spare parts inventory management.

At first glance, this statement seems obviously false. After all, forecasts are crucial for planning stock levels, right?

It depends on what you mean by a “forecast”. If you mean an old-school single-number forecast (“demand for item CX218b will be 3 units next week and 6 units the week after”), then no. If you broaden the meaning of forecast to include a probability distribution taking account of uncertainties in both demand and supply, then yes.

The key reality is that many items, especially spare and service parts, have unpredictable, intermittent demand. (Supplier lead times can also be erratic, especially when parts are sourced from a backlogged OEM.)  We have observed that while manufacturers and distributors typically experience intermittent demand on just 20% or more of their items the percentage grows to 80%+ for MRO based businesses.  This means historical data often show periods of zero demand interspersed with random periods of non-zero demand. Sometimes, these non-zero demands are as low as 1 or 2 units, while at other times, they unexpectedly spike to quantities several times larger than their average.

This isn’t like the kind of data usually faced by your peer “demand planners” in retail, consumer products, and food and beverage. Those folks usually deal with larger quantities having proportionately less randomness. And they can surf on prediction-enhancing features like trends and stable seasonal patterns. Instead, spare parts usage is much more random, throwing a monkey wrench into the planning process, even in the minority of cases in which there are detectable seasonal variations.

In the realm of intermittent demand, the best forecast available will significantly deviate from the actual demand. Unlike consumer products with medium to high volume and frequency, a service part’s forecast can miss the mark by hundreds of percentage points. A forecast of one or two units, on average, will always miss when the actual demand is zero. Even with advanced business intelligence or machine learning algorithms, the error in forecasting the non-zero demands will still be substantial.

Perhaps because of the difficulty of statistical forecasting in the inventory domain, inventory planning in practice often relies on intuition and planner knowledge. Unfortunately, this approach doesn’t scale across tens of thousands of parts. Intuition just cannot cope with the full range of demand and lead time possibilities, let alone accurately estimate the  probability of each possible scenario. Even if your company has one or two exceptional intuitive forecasters, personnel retirements and product line reorganizations mean that intuitive forecasting can’t be relied on going forward.

The solution lies in shifting focus from traditional forecasts to predicting probabilities for each potential demand and lead time scenario. This shift transforms the conversation from an unrealistic “one number plan” to a range of numbers with associated probabilities. By predicting probabilities for each demand and lead time possibility, you can better align stock levels with the risk tolerance for each group of parts.

Software that generates demand and lead time scenarios, repeating this process tens of thousands of times, can accurately simulate how current stocking policies will perform against these policies. If the performance in the simulation falls short and you are predicted to stock out more often than you are comfortable with or you are left with excess inventory, conducting what-if scenarios allows adjustments to policies. You can then predict how these revised policies will fare against random demands and lead times. You can conduct this process iteratively and refine it with each new what-if scenario or lean on system prescribed policies that optimally strike a balance between risk and costs.

So, if you are planning service and spare parts inventories, stop worrying about predicting demand the way traditional retail and CPG demand planners do it. Focus instead on how your stocking policies will withstand the randomness of the future, adjusting them based on your risk tolerance. To do this, you’ll need the right set of decision support software, and this is how Smart Software can help.

Do MRO companies genuinely prioritize reducing excess spare parts inventory? From an organizational standpoint, our experience suggests not necessarily. Boardroom discussions typically revolve around expanding fleets, acquiring new customers, meeting service level agreements (SLAs), modernizing infrastructure, and maximizing uptime. In industries where assets supported by spare parts cost hundreds of millions or generate significant revenue (e.g., mining or oil & gas), the value of the inventory just doesn’t raise any eyebrows, and organizations tend to overlook massive amounts of excessive inventory.

Consider a public transit agency.  In most major cities, the annual operating budgets will exceed $3 billion.  Capital expenses for trains, subway cars, and infrastructure may reach hundreds of millions annually. Consequently, a spare parts inventory valued at $150 million might not grab the attention of the CFO or general manager, as it represents a small percentage of the balance sheet.  Moreover, in MRO-based industries, many parts need to support equipment fleets for a decade or more, making additional stock a necessary asset. In some sectors like utilities, holding extra stock can even be incentivized to ensure that equipment is kept in a state of good repair.

We have seen concerns about excess stock arise when warehouse space is limited. I recall, early in my career, witnessing a public transit agency’s rail yard filled with rusted axles valued at over $100,000 each.  I was told the axles were forced to be exposed to the elements due to insufficient warehouse space. The opportunity cost associated with the space consumed by extra stock becomes a consideration when warehouse capacity is exhausted. The primary consideration that trumps all other decisions is how the stock ensures high service levels for internal and external customers.  Inventory planners worry far more about blowback from stockouts than they do from overbuying.  When a missing part leads to an SLA breach or downed production line, resulting in millions in penalties and unrecoverable production output, it is understandable.

Asset-intensive companies are missing one giant point. That is, the extra stock doesn’t insulate against stockouts; it contributes to them. The more excess you have, the lower your overall service level because the cash needed to purchase parts is finite, and cash spent on excess stock means there isn’t cash available for the parts that need it.  Even publicly funded MRO businesses, like utilities and transit agencies, acknowledge the need to optimize spending, now more than ever.  As one materials manager shared, “We can no longer fix problems with bags of cash from Washington.”  So, they must do more with less, ensuring optimal allocation across the tens of thousands of parts they manage.

This is where state-of-the-art inventory optimization software comes in, predicting the required inventory for targeted service levels, identifying when stock levels yield negative returns, and recommending reallocations for improved overall service levels.  Smart Software has helped asset intensive MRO based businesses optimize reorder levels across each part for decades. Give us a call to learn more. 

What’s different about inventory planning for Maintenance, Repair, and Operations (MRO) compared to inventory planning in manufacturing and distribution environments? In short, it’s the nature of the demand patterns combined with the lack of actionable business knowledge.

Demand Patterns

Manufacturers and distributors tend to focus on the top sellers that generate the majority of their revenue. These items typically have high demand that is relatively easy to forecast with traditional time series models that capitalize on predictable trend and/or seasonality.  In contrast, MRO planners almost always deal with intermittent demand, which is more sparse, more random, and harder to forecast.  Furthermore, the fundamental quantities of interest are different. MRO planners ultimately care most about the “when” question:  When will something break? Whereas the others focus on the “how much” question of units sold.

Business Knowledge

Manufacturing and distribution planners can often count on gathering customer and sales feedback, which can be combined with statistical methods to improve forecast accuracy. On the other hand, bearings, gears, consumable parts, and repairable parts are rarely willing to share their opinions. With MRO, business knowledge about which parts will be needed and when just isn’t reliable (excepting planned maintenance when higher-volume consumable parts are replaced). So, MRO inventory planning success goes only as far as their probability models’ ability to predict future usage takes them. And since demand is so intermittent, they can’t get past Go with traditional approaches.

Methods for MRO

In practice, it is common for MRO and asset-intensive businesses to manage inventories by resorting to static Min/Max levels based on subjective multiples of average usage, supplemented by occasional manual overrides based on gut feel. The process becomes a bad mixture of static and reactive, with the result that a lot of time and money is wasted on expediting.

There are alternative planning methods based more on math and data, though this style of planning is less common in MRO than in the other domains. There are two leading approaches to modeling part and machine breakdown: models based on reliability theory and “condition-based maintenance” models based on real-time monitoring.

Reliability Models

Reliability models are the simpler of the two and require less data. They assume that all items of the same type, say a certain spare part, are statistically equivalent. Their key component is a “hazard function”, which describes the risk of failure in the next little interval of time. The hazard function can be translated into something better suited for decision making: the “survival function”, which is the probability that the item is still working after X amount of use (where X might be expressed in days, months, miles, uses, etc.). Figure 1 shows a constant hazard function and its corresponding survival function.

Figure 1: Constant hazard function and its survival function

A hazard function that doesn’t change implies that only random accidents will cause a failure. In contrast, a hazard function that increases over time implies that the item is wearing out. And a decreasing hazard function implies that an item is settling in. Figure 2 shows an increasing hazard function and its corresponding survival function.

Figure 2: Increasing hazard function and its survival function

Reliability models are often used for inexpensive parts, such as mechanical fasteners, whose replacement may be neither difficult nor expensive (but still might be essential).

Condition-Based Maintenance

Models based on real-time monitoring are used to support condition-based maintenance (CBM) for expensive items like jet engines. These models use data from sensors embedded in the items themselves. Such data are usually complex and proprietary, as are the probability models supported by the data. The payoff from real-time monitoring is that you can see trouble coming, i.e., the deterioration is made visible, and forecasts can predict when the item will hit its red line and therefore need to be taken off the field of play. This allows individualized, pro-active maintenance or replacement of the item.

Figure 3 illustrates the kind of data used in CBM. Each time the system is used, there is a contribution to its cumulative wear and tear. (However, note that sometimes use can improve the condition of the unit, as when rain helps keep a piece of machinery cool). You can see the general trend upward toward a red line after which the unit will require maintenance. You can extrapolate the cumulative wear to estimate when it will hit the red line and plan accordingly.

Figure 3: Illustrating real-time monitoring for condition-based maintenance

To my knowledge, nobody makes such models of their finished goods customers to predict when and how much they will next order, perhaps because the customers would object to wearing brain monitors all the time. But CBM, with its complex monitoring and modeling, is gaining in popularity for can’t-fail systems like jet engines. Meanwhile, classical reliability models still have a lot of value for managing large fleets of cheaper but still essential items.

Smart’s approach
The above condition-based maintenance and reliability approaches require an excessive data collection and cleansing burden that many MRO companies are unable to manage. For those companies, Smart offers an approach that does not require development of reliability models. Instead, it exploits usage data in a different way. It leverages probability-based models of both usage and supplier lead times to simulate thousands of possible scenarios for replenishment lead times and demand.  The result is an accurate distribution of demand and lead times for each consumable part that can be exploited to determine optimal stocking parameters.   Figure 4 shows a simulation that begins with a scenario for spare part demand (upper plot) then produces a scenario of on-hand supply for particular choices of Min/Max values (lower line). Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) can be estimated by averaging the results of many such simulations.

Figure 4: An example of a simulation of spare part demand and on-hand inventory

You can read about Smart’s approach to forecasting spare parts here: https://smartcorp.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Probabilistic-Forecasting-for-Intermittent-Demand.pdf

Managing spare parts presents numerous challenges, such as unexpected breakdowns, changing schedules, and inconsistent demand patterns. Traditional forecasting methods and manual approaches are ineffective in dealing with these complexities. To overcome these challenges, this blog outlines key strategies that prioritize service levels, utilize probabilistic methods to calculate reorder points, regularly adjust stocking policies, and implement a dedicated planning process to avoid excessive inventory. Explore these strategies to optimize spare parts inventory and improve operational efficiency.

Bottom Line Upfront

​1.Inventory Management is Risk Management.

2.Can’t manage risk well or at scale with subjective planning – Need to know service vs. cost.

3.It’s not supply & demand variability that are the problem – it’s how you handle it.

4.Spare parts have intermittent demand so traditional methods don’t work.

5.Rule of thumb approaches don’t account for demand variability and misallocate stock.

6.Use Service Level Driven Planning  (service vs. cost tradeoffs) to drive stock decisions.

7.Probabilistic approaches such as bootstrapping yield accurate estimates of reorder points.

8.Classify parts and assign service level targets by class.

9.Recalibrate often – thousands of parts have old, stale reorder points.

10.Repairable parts require special treatment.

Do Focus on the Real Root Causes

Intermittent Demand

• Slow moving, irregular or sporadic with a large percentage of zero values.
• Non-zero values are mixed in randomly – spikes are large and varied.
• Isn’t bell shaped (demand is not Normally distributed around the average.)
• At least 70% of a typical Utility’s parts are intermittently demanded.

Normal Demand

• Very few periods of zero demand (exception is seasonal parts.)
• Often exhibits trend, seasonal, or cyclical patterns.
• Lower levels of demand variability.
• Is bell-shaped (demand is Normally distributed around the average.)

Don’t rely on averages

• OK for determining typical usage over longer periods of time.
• Often forecasts more “accurately” than some advanced methods.
• But…insufficient for determining what to stock.

Don’t Buffer with Multiples of Averages

Example:  Two equally important parts so let’s treat them the same.
We’ll order more  when On Hand Inventory ≤ 2 x Avg Lead Time Demand.

Do use Service Level tradeoff curves to compute safety stock

Standard Normal Probabilities

OK for normal demand. Doesn’t work with intermittent demand!

Don’t use Normal (Bell Shaped) Distributions

• You’ll get the tradeoff curve wrong:

– e.g., You’ll target 95% but achieve 85%.

– e.g., You’ll target 99% but achieve 91%.

• This is a huge miss with costly implications:

– You’ll stock out more often than expected.

– You’ll start to add subjective buffers to compensate and then overstock.

– Lack of trust/second-guessing of outputs paralyzes planning.

Why Traditional Methods Fail on Intermittent Demand: 

Traditional Methods are not designed to address core issues in spare parts management.

Need: Probability distribution (not bell-shaped) of demand over variable lead time.

• Get: Prediction of average demand in each month, not a total over lead time.
• Get: Bolted-on model of variability, usually the Normal model, usually wrong.

Need: Exposure of tradeoffs between item availability and cost of inventory.

• Get: None of this; instead, get a lot of inconsistent, ad-hoc decisions.

Do use Statistical Bootstrapping to Predict the Distribution:

Then exploit the distribution to optimize stocking policies.

How does Bootstrapping Work?

24 Months of Historical Demand Data.

Bootstrap Scenarios for a 3-month Lead Time.

Bootstrapping Hits the Service Level Target with nearly 100% Accuracy!

• National Warehousing Operation.

Task: Forecast inventory stocking levels for 12,000 intermittently demanded SKUs at 95% & 99% service levels

Results:

At 95% service level, 95.23% did not stock out.

At 99% service level, 98.66% did not stock out.

This means you can rely on output to set expectations and confidently make targeted stock adjustments that lower inventory and increase service.

Set Target Service Levels According to Order Frequency & Size

Recalibrate Reorder Points Frequently

• Static ROPs cause excess and shortages.
• As lead time increases, so should the ROP and vice versa.
• As usage decreases, so should the ROP and vice versa.
• Longer you wait to recalibrate, the greater the imbalance.
• Mountains of parts ordered too soon or too late.
• Wastes buyers’ time placing the wrong orders.
• Breeds distrust in systems and forces data silos.

Do Plan Rotables (Repair Parts) Differently

Summary

1.Inventory Management is Risk Management.

2.Can’t manage risk well or at scale with subjective planning – Need to know service vs. cost.

3.It’s not supply & demand variability that are the problem – it’s how you handle it.

4.Spare parts have intermittent demand so traditional methods don’t work.

5.Rule of thumb approaches don’t account demand variability and misallocate stock.

6.Use Service Level Driven Planning  (service vs. cost tradeoffs) to drive stock decisions.

7.Probabilistic approaches such as bootstrapping yield accurate estimates of reorder points.

8.Classify parts and assign service level targets by class.

9.Recalibrate often – thousands of parts have old, stale reorder points.

10.Repairable parts require special treatment.

Did you know that it was Benjamin Franklin who invented the lightning rod to protect buildings from lightning strikes? Now, it’s not every day that we must worry about lightning strikes, but in today’s unpredictable business climate, we do have to worry about supply chain disruptions, long lead times, rising interest rates, and volatile demand. With all these challenges, it’s never been more vital for organizations to accurately forecast parts usage, stocking levels, and to optimize replenishment policies such as reorder points, safety stocks, and order quantities.  In this blog, we’ll explore how companies can leverage innovative solutions like inventory optimization and parts forecasting software that utilize machine learning algorithms, probabilistic forecasting, and analytics to stay ahead of the curve and protect their supply chains from unexpected shocks.

Spare Parts Planning Solutions
Spare parts optimization is a key aspect of supply chain management for many industries. It involves managing the inventory of spare parts to ensure they are available when needed without having excess inventory that can tie up capital and space. Optimizing spare parts inventory is a complex process that requires a deep understanding of usage patterns, supplier lead times, and the criticality of each part for the business.

In this blog, our primary emphasis will be on the crucial aspect of inventory optimization and demand forecasting. However, other approaches highlighted below for spare parts optimization, such as predictive maintenance and 3D printing, Master Data Management, and collaborative planning should be investigated and deployed as appropriate.

1. Predictive Maintenance: Using predictive analytics to anticipate when a part is likely to fail and proactively replace it, rather than waiting for it to break down. This approach can help companies reduce downtime and maintenance costs, as well as improve overall equipment effectiveness.
2. 3D printing: Advancements in 3D printing technology are enabling companies to produce spare parts on demand, reducing the need for excess inventory. This not only saves space and reduces costs but also ensures that parts are available when needed.
3. Master Data Management: Data Management platforms ensure that part data is properly identified, cataloged, cleansed, and organized. All too often, MRO organizations hold the same part number under different SKUs. These duplicate parts serve the same purpose but require different SKU numbers to ensure regulatory compliance or security.  For example, a part used to support a government contract may be required be sourced from a US manufacturer to stay in compliance with “Buy America” regulations.  It’s critical that these part numbers be identified and consolidated into one SKU, when possible, to keep inventory investments in check.
4. Collaborative Planning: Collaborating with suppliers and customers to share data, forecasts, and plan demand can help companies reduce lead times, improve accuracy, and reduce inventory levels. Forecasting plays an essential role in collaboration as sharing insights on purchases, demand, and buying behavior ensures suppliers have the information they need to ensure stock availability for customers.

Inventory Optimization
Abraham Lincoln was once quoted as saying, “Give me six hours to chop down a tree, and I will spend the first four sharpening the axe”? Lincoln knew that preparation and optimization were key to success, just like organizations need to have the right tools, such as inventory optimization software, to optimize their supply chain and stay ahead in the market. With inventory optimization software, organizations can improve their forecasting accuracy, lower inventory costs, improve service levels, and reduce lead times. Lincoln knew that sharpening the axe was necessary to accomplish the job effectively without overexerting.  Inventory Optimization ensures that inventory dollars are allocated effectively across thousands of parts helping ensure service levels while minimizing excess stock.

Spare parts play a decisive role in maintaining operational efficiency, and the lack of critical parts can lead to downtime and reduced productivity. The sporadic nature of spare parts demand makes it difficult to predict when a specific part will be required, resulting in the risk of overstocking or understocking, both of which can incur costs for the organization.  Additionally, managing lead times for spare parts poses its own set of challenges. Some parts may have lengthy delivery times, necessitating the maintenance of adequate inventory levels to avoid shortages. However, carrying excess inventory can be costly, tying up capital and storage space.

Given the myriad of challenges facing materials management departments and spare parts planners, planning demand, stocking levels, and replenishment of spare parts without an effective inventory optimization solution is akin to attempting to chop down a tree with a very blunt axe! The sharper the axe, the better your organization will be able to contend with these challenges.

Smart Software’s Axe is the Sharpest
Smart Inventory Optimization and Demand Planning Software uses a unique empirical probabilistic forecasting approach that results in accurate forecasts of inventory requirements, even where demand is intermittent. Since nearly 90% of spare and service parts are intermittent, an accurate solution to handle this type of demand is required.   Smart’s solution was patented in 2001 and additional innovations were recently patented in May of 2023 (announcements coming soon!).  The solution was awarded as a finalist in the APICS Technological Innovation Category for its role in helping transform the resource management industry.

The Role of Intermittent Demand
Intermittent demand does not conform to a simple normal or bell-shaped distribution that makes it impossible to forecast accurately with traditional, smoothing-based forecasting methods.  Parts and items with intermittent demand – also known as lumpy, volatile, variable or unpredictable demand – have many zero or low-volume values interspersed with random spikes of demand that are often many times larger than the average. This problem is especially prevalent in companies that manage large inventories of service and spare parts in industries such as aviation, aerospace, power and water supply and utilities, automotive, heavy asset management, high tech, as well as in MRO (Maintenance, Repair, and Overhaul).

Scenario Analysis
Smart’s patented and award-winning technology rapidly generates tens of thousands of possible scenarios of future demand sequences and cumulative demand values over an item’s lead time. These scenarios are statistically similar to the item’s observed data, and they capture the relevant details of intermittent demand without relying on the assumptions commonly made about the nature of demand distributions by traditional forecasting methods. The result is a highly accurate forecast of the entire distribution of cumulative demand over an item’s lead time. The bottom line is that with the information these demand distributions provide, companies can easily plan safety stock and service level inventory requirements for thousands of intermittently demanded items with nearly 100% accuracy.

Benefits
Implementing innovative solutions from Smart Software such as SmartForecasts for statistical forecasting, Demand Planner for consensus parts planning, and Inventory Optimization for developing accurate replenishment drivers such as min/max and safety stock levels will provide forward-thinking executives and planners with better control over their organization’s operations.  It will result in the following benefits:

1. Improved Forecasting Accuracy: Accurate demand forecasting is fundamental for any organization that deals with spare parts inventory management. Inventory optimization software uses sophisticated algorithms to analyze historical usage patterns, identify trends and forecast future demand with a high degree of accuracy. With this level of precision in forecasting, organizations can avoid the risk of overstocking or understocking their spare parts inventory.
2. Lower Inventory Costs: One major challenge that supply chain leaders face when dealing with spare parts inventory management is the cost associated with maintaining an optimal stock of spares at all times. By optimizing inventory levels using modern technology systems like artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning (ML), and predictive analytics, organizations can reduce carrying costs while ensuring they have adequate stocks available when needed.
3. Improved Service Levels: When it comes to repair and maintenance services, time is money! Downtime due to the unavailability of critical spare parts can result in lost productivity and revenue for businesses across industries such as manufacturing plants, power generation facilities, or data centers managing IT infrastructure equipment. Optimizing your spare parts inventory ensures that you always have the right amount on hand, reducing downtime caused by waiting for deliveries from suppliers.
4. Reduced Lead Times: Another benefit that accrues from accurate demand forecasting through modern warehouse technologies is reduced lead time in delivery which leads to better customer satisfaction since customers will receive their orders faster than before thus improving brand loyalty. Therefore, the adoption of new strategies driven by AI/ML tools creates value within supply chain operations leading to increased efficiency gains not only limited reductionism cost but also streamlining processes related to production scheduling, logistics transportation planning among others

Conclusion
Through the utilization of inventory optimization and demand planning software, organizations can overcome various challenges such as supply chain disruptions, rising interest rates, and volatile demand. This enables them to reduce costs associated with excess storage space and obsolete inventory items. By leveraging sophisticated algorithms, inventory optimization software enhances forecasting accuracy, ensuring organizations can avoid overstocking or under-stocking their spare parts inventory. Additionally, it helps lower inventory costs by optimizing levels and leveraging technologies like artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning (ML), and predictive analytics. Improved service levels are achieved as organizations have the right quantity of spare parts readily available, reducing downtime caused by waiting for deliveries. Furthermore, accurate demand forecasting leads to reduced lead times, enhancing customer satisfaction and fostering brand loyalty. Adopting such strategies driven by AI/ML tools not only reduces costs but also streamlines processes, including production scheduling and logistics transportation planning, ultimately increasing efficiency gains within the supply chain.