##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

Overtime buildings and its components would become obsolete. If the rate of building deterioration is not checked and managed, these buildings and its components will get to their ultimate functional life quicker while we contend with increasing user population. Maintenance management is an essential aspect of any university that must be given adequate attention if the university must achieve its academic goals. Policy guidance for maintenance activities and management control over maintenance program are the key provision of Maintenance management. This study develops a maintenance management supportive framework in selected Universities: Rivers State University, Imo State University and University of Uyo in Nigeria and how it serves as effective measures for maintenance management practices. The data used for the study was gotten from interview conducted on the directors of works and maintenance managers of the three selected university using structured interview method. 3 Directors of Works and 45maintenance managers in accordance with the 15 maintenance units found in each of the universities was used for the study. These university officials are responsible for the management and maintenance of tertiary institution’s buildings.For this study, the Content and thematic approaches were used in analyzing the data gathered from all interviews. The study revealed that there were intentionally designed existing plans and procedures for carrying out maintenance works, but found to be ineffective and inefficient, affecting the current condition of the tertiary institutions’ buildings. The study developed a maintenance management supportive framework to assist maintenance managers surmount complex maintenance task. Therefore, adopting this framework will give government directions on adequate funding based on needs, plan maintenance management strategy and building condition assessment to improve maintenance management practices in Nigerian Universities.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. Burnard, P. (1991). A Method of Analysing Interview Transcripts in Qualitative Research.
     Google Scholar
  2. Hassanain, M.A., Froese, T.M. and Vainer, D.D.J. (2001) Development of Maintenance Management Model Based on IAI Standards. Artificial Intelligence in Engineering, 15: 177–93.
     Google Scholar
  3. Hassanain, Mohammad A., SadiAssaf, Khalaf Al-Ofi, & Abdullah Al-Abdullah. (2013). Factors Affecting Maintenance Cost of Hospital Facilities in Saudi Arabia. Property Management, 31 (4): 297-310.
     Google Scholar
  4. Hesham, A. (2015). Development of a Maintenance Management Framework to Facilitate the Delivery of Healthcare Provisions in The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. PhD. Thesis; School of Science and Technology, of Nottingham Trent University Saudi Arabia.
     Google Scholar
  5. Hesham, A. & Lai, E. (2015).Recommendation for Improving Maintenance Procedures in a Hospital by Implementing Total Productive Maintenance (TPM).Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management. Dubai, UAE.
     Google Scholar
  6. Hesham, A., Lai, E. &McCollin, C. (2014).Development of Framework for Maintenance Management in Healthcare Industry in Saudi Arabia, 20th ISSAT International Conference on Reliability and Quality in Design (RQD 2014).
     Google Scholar
  7. Hesham, A.,McCollin, C. and Lai, E. (2013). Maintenance Planning in a Saudi Arabian Hospital.Advances in Risk and Reliability Technology Symposium (20th AR2 TS) Loughborough. UK.
     Google Scholar
  8. Ikediashi, D. I. (2014). A framework for outsourcing facilities management services in Nigeria's public hospitals (Unpublished Doctoral dissertation) Heriot-Watt University.
     Google Scholar
  9. Julien, H. (2008). The SAGE Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods.SAGE Publishers.
     Google Scholar
  10. Lee, J. (2003). E-manufacturing: Fundamental, Tools, and Transformation, Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, 19 (6), 501-7.
     Google Scholar
  11. Marks, D. F., and Yardley, L. (2004). Research Methods for Clinical and Health Psychology.
     Google Scholar
  12. Marquez, C. A. (2007). The Maintenance Management Framework: Models and Methods for Complex Systems Maintenance; London: Springer.
     Google Scholar
  13. Marquez, C. A. and Gupta, J. N. D. (2006). Contemporary Maintenance Management: Process, Framework and Supporting Pillars. Omega, 34(3), 313–326. doi: 10.1016/j.omega.2004.11.003.
     Google Scholar
  14. Marquez, C. A., Moreu de León, P., Gómez Fernández, J.F. Parra Márquez, C. and López Campos, M. (2009). The Maintenance Management Framework: A practical View to Maintenance Management, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, 15 (2),167-178.
     Google Scholar
  15. Mojela, T. W. (2012). Assessment of the Effectiveness of Public Schools Infrastructure Maintenance System in the Gauteng Province (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Johannesburg, South Africa.
     Google Scholar
  16. Naughton, M. D., andTiernan, P. (2012).Individualising Maintenance Management: A Proposed Framework and Case Study.Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, 18(3), 267–281. doi:10.1108/13552511211265802.
     Google Scholar
  17. Prasad Mishra, R., Anand, D. and Kodali, R. (2006), “Development of a Framework for World-Class Maintenance Systems”, Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Systems, 5 (2), 141-65.
     Google Scholar
  18. Takata, S., Kimura, F., Van Houten, F. J. A. M., Westkamper, E., Shopitalni, M., Ceglarek, D. and Lee, J. (2004). Maintenance: Changing Role in Life Cycle Management. CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology, 53 (2), 643–655; 53(2), 643–655.Retrievedfrom: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S000785060760033X.
     Google Scholar
  19. Tsang, A.H.C., Jardine, A.K.S. and Kolodny, H. (2002). Measuring Maintenance Performance: A Holistic Approach, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, 19 (7), 691-715.
     Google Scholar
  20. Waeyenbergh, G. andPintelon, L. (2002). A Framework for Maintenance Concept Development,International Journal of Production Economics, 77 (3), 299-313.
     Google Scholar