What is Reactive Maintenance?

Reactive Maintenance: When "Fix It When It Breaks" Is Your Maintenance Strategy

Ever had your car make that weird noise for weeks, and you just turned up the radio instead? Then one day - BAM - you're stuck on the side of the highway calling a tow truck? Congratulations, you've experienced reactive maintenance in its purest form.

I spent my first three years in facilities management at a warehouse where our maintenance "strategy" was basically waiting for disaster to strike. Our motto might as well have been: "If it ain't broke yet, ignore it till it is!"

What Exactly IS Reactive Maintenance?

Reactive maintenance is exactly what it sounds like - you REACT to problems instead of preventing them. Something breaks, then you fix it. No inspections. No scheduled replacements. No planning ahead.

It's the maintenance equivalent of only going to the doctor when you're already sick instead of getting regular checkups.

Some people call it "run-to-failure" maintenance, which is a fancy way of saying "use it till it dies." Others call it "breakdown maintenance" or "fix-when-fail" maintenance.

Whatever name you give it, the approach is the same: wait for equipment to stop working, then scramble to get it running again.

When Reactive Actually Makes Sense

Here's the thing most maintenance gurus won't tell you: sometimes reactive maintenance IS the right approach. Crazy, right?

For non-critical equipment with low replacement costs, it can be perfectly reasonable. Take the office microwave. Nobody's doing preventive maintenance on that thing. When it dies, you just buy another one because:

• It's cheaper to replace than maintain

• Its failure doesn't stop operations

• There's usually a backup (the other microwave)

I remember arguing with our financial controller about replacing some basic conveyor rollers before they failed. He showed me the math - the inspection costs plus early replacement actually exceeded just waiting for them to fail and swapping them out. For those specific components, he was right.

The Real Cost of Reactive Maintenance

But for critical systems? Reactive maintenance is like playing Russian roulette with your operations.

The REAL costs go way beyond just the emergency repair:

• Downtime (production losses)

• Rush charges from vendors

• Overtime for maintenance staff

• Collateral damage to connected systems

• Stress on everyone involved

• Customer disappointment from missed deadlines

Back in 2019, we had a critical motor fail on our main production line. The part itself? $3,200. But the emergency shipping was another $1,100. The technician's overtime added $860. And the 18 hours of lost production? Nearly $42,000. All because we skipped a $450 bearing replacement that had been flagged months earlier.

The "Fighting Fires" Lifestyle

The worst part of reactive maintenance isn't even the cost - it's the constant state of emergency it creates.

Your maintenance team becomes firefighters instead of mechanics. Nobody gets to plan their day. Everything is URGENT. Vacations get canceled. Nights and weekends disappear. Maintenance staff burnout skyrockets.

We used to joke that you could tell who worked in maintenance by the permanent zombie look and the phone permanently attached to their ear.

Technology Hasn't Eliminated the Reactive Approach

Amazingly, even with all our modern tools, reactive maintenance is still the dominant strategy in many organizations. Recent industry surveys suggest somewhere between 40-55% of companies primarily use reactive maintenance methods.

Even places with computerized maintenance systems often use them just to track reactive work. That's just like using a Ferrari to drive to the mailbox.

Breaking the Reactive Cycle

Getting out of the reactive maintenance trap isn't easy, but it IS possible. We did it by:

1. Starting with critical equipment only - identify what absolutely cannot fail

2. Creating basic inspection checklists

3. Logging EVERYTHING that breaks

4. Finding patterns in the failures

5. Gradually building preventive tasks based on those patterns

The hardest part? Getting through the transition period where you're still fixing emergency breakdowns WHILE trying to implement preventive measures. It feels like you're doing double the work - because you are!

The Mixed Approach That Actually Works

Look, I'm not saying eliminate reactive maintenance entirely. That's unrealistic. Even the best-run facilities still have unexpected failures.

What works best is a strategic mix:

• Preventive approach for critical systems

• Predictive technologies where economically justified

• Reactive approach for non-critical, low-cost items

Our maintenance manager Tom called this the "Don't sweat the small stuff, but don't ignore the big stuff" approach. Not fancy, but effective.

Bottom Line: Choose Your Pain

At the end of the day, maintenance is going to cost you one way or another. Reactive maintenance lets you choose: less pain now (lower upfront costs) but massive pain later (catastrophic failures).

Like most things in life, a little discomfort today prevents a world of hurt tomorrow.

Just my two cents from someone who's been stuck at the plant at 3 AM waiting for emergency parts to arrive...