5 Reasons Why Run-to-Fail Policies Cost More

Preventative maintenance might feel more expensive, but it often saves money in the long term. On the other hand, emergency equipment replacement drains budgets, jeopardizes customer comfort, and negatively impacts your bottom line—especially when it happens during peak heating or cooling season. 

Still, run-to-failure is a popular strategy used by businesses hoping to squeeze every bit of life out of HVAC systems and other equipment. But sometimes, this tactic is actually more costly. Here are five reasons why.

1. Replacement occurs during a peak season

Running to failure is risky and unpredictable. Equipment almost always fails during peak times of the year and when it’s most inconvenient. This is because equipment stress during extremely cold or hot weather leads to more failures. 

During these busy times of the year, repairs are also more expensive, and negative impacts on customer comfort are inevitable. The end result? Beaucoup bucks spent on repair and/or replacement costs that could have been avoided with preventative maintenance.

2. Not enough time for competitive bids

When equipment fails, you don’t have time to shop around. Instead, you’re left scrambling to find a maintenance professional who can be there now. That puts your business at risk because there’s no time to get competitive bids for equipment and installation. As a result, you might not only pay more but also receive less-than-satisfactory service. A smarter alternative is to leverage reliable data with a connected facility and place high standards on your vendors.

3. Energy-efficient options are out of stock

Energy-efficient units aren’t always readily available. That means you might have to choose a less-than-ideal option when equipment needs to be replaced as fast as possible. Unfortunately, this can lead to higher lifetime energy costs.

4. The job is rushed

When you let your equipment run to failure, the replacement job becomes a race. This kind of pressure can lead to a whole host of problems, including human error, little or no time to seek out utility incentives, using a vendor you don’t trust, and more.

5. No room to analyze

Analyzing whether a system is properly sized for an application is extremely important. When the clock is ticking, there isn’t always time for this crucial step. This can lead to higher operating costs and poor performance over the life of the equipment.

While run-to-failure is an acceptable approach for some types of equipment, it can cause negative issues, especially when used during peak seasons. It’s best to base maintenance decisions on data analysis and strategic objectives—not a lack of planning.

Ask a member of our team how a connected facility can help your business with its preventative maintenance goals.

Leave a Reply

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