MaxIron IBM Maximo services: implementation, hosting and support

Services

Start from the situation you are in.

Seven situations cover almost every conversation we have. Each one names the engagement that fits it, and the move that most often costs money.

Where to start

Seven situations, and the engagement that fits each

Clients move between these as the estate matures. The third column is the one worth reading.

A first implementation of IBM Maximo

IBM Maximo implementation →

You are on it if

Work is planned on spreadsheets, and no two areas write it down the same way.

The wrong move here

Configuring before hierarchy, criticality and job plans exist. The first design review then argues about data instead of process.

The move off Maximo 7.6

Maximo to MAS upgrade →

You are on it if

You are on 7.6, and support position, security posture or access to the suite is now the pressure.

The wrong move here

Pricing the work off the version number. The customisation and integration inventory sets the cost, so we quote a fixed price against it.

Someone else hosts it and operates it

Managed Maximo hosting →

You are on it if

You want a monthly cost, environments in hours, and an on-call rota that is not one person.

The wrong move here

Assuming the operating model transfers with the platform. What a work order means here, and who closes it, stays with your asset function.

The estate is live and needs an application partner

Maximo and MAS application support →

You are on it if

Maximo or MAS is in production. Tickets land on a thin internal team, and nobody owns severity targets, a service report or the after-hours rota.

The wrong move here

Treating support as ad-hoc time and materials. Without a named service manager and a change route, every ticket becomes a mini-programme.

A programme that is slipping

Health Check and Heal →

You are on it if

An implementation has stalled, an upgrade has slipped twice, or nobody can state what is in production.

The wrong move here

Replanning before the facts are in. Change control, environments and failing integrations come back under control first.

One capability, not a programme

Specialist augmentation →

You are on it if

Mobile, integrations, data migration, configuration or licensing is the gap. The rest holds.

The wrong move here

Buying a programme to close one gap. Each capability below is separately scoped and separately priced.

What comes after Manage

The wider MAS suite →

You are on it if

Manage is stable, and Monitor, Predict, Health or Visual Inspection are on the table.

The wrong move here

Sequencing by appetite rather than by data. A failure-probability model is worth what its condition history is worth.

Upgrade versus re-implementation

What an upgrade carries forward, and what a re-implementation rebuilds

Both are legitimate programmes, bought differently and carrying different risk. Deciding which one is funded is the most useful hour a steering group spends.

Upgrade

Carry the estate forward: the same configuration, data and processes, on a supported platform with the suite available.

Re-implementation

Rebuild the operating model, using the platform change as the moment to do it.

What the business is asked to do

Regression test what it already knows, and accept a new interface for some roles.

Re-learn how work is planned, assigned, recorded and closed, area by area.

Where the risk sits

Technical: customisations, integrations, the database, and cutover timings inside a fixed window.

Organisational: adoption, training, process ownership, and whether the data is ready to be trusted.

How long it takes

Months, set by the size of the customisation inventory and the number of integrations.

Quarters, set by how many operating areas have to change how they work.

The mistake we see most

Scope drift: an upgrade quietly becomes a rebuild because the wish list was never closed.

Under-funding the change: configuration lands, the process work does not, and old habits return within a year.

Before you commit

How an engagement gets scoped

Five steps from a first call to a scope you can defend in procurement. Each one produces an artefact you keep.

  1. 01

    First call

    Forty minutes on version, environments, integrations, volumes and the date that is already fixed. A senior engineer, no slides.

  2. 02

    Evidence pass

    Customisation inventory, integration list, environment state and data readiness, written for your board.

  3. 03

    Named scope and price

    What is in, what is out, and the assumptions that would move the number. For an upgrade, fixed against that inventory.

  4. 04

    A deliberately small first phase

    One area, one site or one asset class, so the operating model is tested while change is still cheap.

  5. 05

    Review gate

    Continue, adjust or stop, with the first phase in front of you. Written into the engagement at the start.

For an upgrade, start with the free upgrade quote. For an estate already in service, start with a 30-minute review.

What moves off your plate

We take the operating burden. You keep the operating decisions.

Write this split down before signature, and treat anything unwritten as staying where it is.

Still yours

Accountabilities that stay with you

  • Deciding what an asset is worth keeping, and at what criticality. We structure the decision and bring the evidence.
  • Getting supervisors and planners to work differently: a management task before it is a training task.
  • Writing down the job plans, hierarchy and classifications that currently exist only in experienced heads.
  • Owning the regulatory position. We produce the evidence; your accountable people sign it.

Off your plate, from the first phase

Work that stops being your problem

  • Environment provisioning, patching and platform upgrades
  • Reconstructing what is in production every time an audit asks
  • Manual regression testing before every release
  • The out-of-hours call landing on the one person who knows

Platform and release work moves to us inside the first phase. Process ownership, data stewardship and adoption stay with you for the life of the estate.

Engagements that disappoint are almost always ones where the first column was assumed to move too.

Specialist capabilities

Specialist capabilities, each separately scoped and priced

Boundaries

Four boundaries that hold on every engagement

These apply whichever situation you arrived in, and they are in the contract.

Data ownership stays a governance decision

We can show you where the same asset, cost centre or person exists in three systems, and build the interface for whichever answer you choose. Choosing which system is master sits with your organisation, and no scope transfers it.

A fixed date is met with a smaller first phase

Where a date can be met only by cutting process design, data readiness or training, we propose a reduced first phase against the same date instead. Compressing those three produces a go-live that satisfies the plan and not the operation.

The product owner stays inside your organisation

Someone of yours holds priorities, arbitrates between areas and accepts the platform. Where nobody has that time, delivery stalls waiting for decisions, so the role is agreed at the start.

A service commitment requires monitoring and a change route

An SLA covers environments we can see and change. Where monitoring, access or a change route is withheld, support is best-effort and the contract says so.

Questions buyers ask about these engagements

How quickly can we get a price for a Maximo 7.6 to MAS upgrade?
The analysis is free. Once we have your customisation and integration inventory, a fixed-price quote follows within 24 hours, and a trial upgrade can run in a test environment inside a week. Start on the free upgrade quote.
Do you only work on estates you host yourselves?
No. The same engagements run on estates in your own tenancy, your data centre, IBM-hosted MAS, or MaxIron Cloud. We do require monitoring and a change route, because a service commitment is only meaningful where the estate is visible. Standing application support is documented on Maximo and MAS application support.
What does a health check produce?
A findings document across seven areas, written for a board: what is deployed, what is unsupported, where risk is concentrated, what to fix first and what to defer. Paid work, and the output is yours whether or not the remediation comes to us. See Health Check and Heal.
Can you embed people in our team instead of running a programme?
Yes. Consultants, developers, data specialists and architects inside your governance and change control, with knowledge transfer written into the brief. See specialist augmentation.

Start with the customisation inventory.

An inventory records what the estate is holding today, which is what sets cost and risk. Forty minutes, a senior engineer, and a direct answer on which situation you are in.

Useful to have on the call

  • Your Maximo or MAS version, and how many environments you keep
  • The customisation and integration list, however rough
  • Work order volume per month, plus users and sites
  • The date that is already fixed: an audit, a support expiry, or a season you cannot touch