Eighteen questions across six dimensions of capital efficiency. Your score on screen in about four minutes, plus the specific places capital is sitting still instead of working.
Scored against the same criticality, demand and network-pooling logic the nine MRO360 agents apply against live ERP data.
Three questions each. None of them ask how much you spend. They ask whether the money you have already spent is doing anything.
Whether a planner can find a part that exists. Parts that cannot be found get bought again, so the same capital is committed twice and counted once.
The leak: duplicate purchasing against stock you already own, at another site or under another description.
Whether stocking levels follow criticality or follow habit. Most operations hold too much of the cheap and predictable, and too little of the part that stops a line.
The leak: capital allocated evenly across a catalogue where risk is distributed very unevenly.
Whether forecasts see the maintenance calendar or only the past. An inaccurate forecast is paid for twice, once in buffer stock and again in expediting when the buffer was in the wrong place.
The leak: safety stock sized against uncertainty that better information would remove.
Whether non-moving and discontinued stock is identified early with a disposition path, or discovered at audit when the only remaining option is a write-off.
The leak: carrying cost on inventory with no future consumption, plus the write-down when it is finally acknowledged.
Whether shortages are anticipated or discovered. Every emergency order pays a premium for information you already had somewhere in your systems.
The leak: premium pricing and expedited freight on orders that a few days of warning would have made routine.
Whether the plant network operates as one balance sheet or several. Plant A raising an emergency order for a part sitting unused at Plant B is the purest form of this leak.
The leak: the same part stocked independently at every site, so total holding scales with plant count rather than with risk.
Each dimension scores out of 9. The index is the total, normalised to 100.
Start the assessmentAnswer for how the operation runs on an ordinary Tuesday, not how the process document describes it.
The fastest way to test this against reality is your own data. A POC runs criticality and dead-stock analysis on one plant, so the numbers are yours rather than a range.
Talk to the MRO teamFour tiers. The distance between them is not how much you spend on inventory. It is whether the decision to hold it gets revisited.
Capital decisions follow the consequence.
To move up: make existing stock findable and score parts at part level. Those two together usually account for the largest share of the first-tier gain.
Controls exist, but run on periodic effort.
To move up: replace the refresh cycle with continuous recalculation. The work is not more analysis, it is removing the dependency on someone doing the analysis again.
Leakage is visible before it becomes a write-off.
To move up: close the continuity gaps. Capability here often depends on specific individuals, and the score falls when they change roles.
Decisions recalculate without being asked to.
The remaining constraint: breadth. Capability at one plant is not capability across a network, and the two rarely score the same.
One caution on self-scoring. Most people score their own operation about one tier higher than their planners would. If your result looks flattering, hand the same eighteen questions to whoever actually raises the purchase requisitions and compare.
Every dimension in this index describes an information failure with a price attached. MRO360 runs nine AI-native agents as a layer above your existing ERP, CMMS and EAM. Nothing gets replaced, and every write-back needs human approval.
Parts you cannot find get bought again.
Zoek-AI takes a plain description, the way you would ask a colleague, and returns ranked matches, cross-references and substitutes without a material code. Multi-site stock, bin locations and surplus elsewhere in the network appear in the same result.
Capital spread evenly across uneven risk.
Belangrijkheid van apparatuur en Spare Parts Criticality score assets and parts separately, so a part is not assumed critical simply because the machine above it is. The same part can score differently at different sites, because local redundancy and lead time differ. Engineer overrides are captured, so accuracy improves rather than decays.
Buffer stock absorbing avoidable uncertainty.
AI-prognoses met meerdere varianten reads the maintenance calendar alongside consumption history, and forecasts planned, corrective and shutdown demand separately instead of averaging them together. Herbestelpunt then recalculates min, max and safety stock against actual supplier lead-time variability and each part's criticality tier, rather than holding a level set once at configuration.
Capital with no future consumption.
Voorraadomloopsnelheid classifies every part as fast, slow or non-moving per plant, continuously. Obso Check AI flags manufacturer discontinuation, and Spare Seek AI returns qualified substitutes with vendor names and landed cost. The output is a disposition path, not a flag someone has to research.
Premium pricing for information you already held.
Planning van werkorders checks on-hand stock and incoming purchase orders against planned demand before release, and surfaces only the orders genuinely at risk. Leveranciersinformatie scores supplier reliability from actual goods receipt history, so delivery risk is visible before the order is committed rather than after it slips.
Holding that scales with plant count.
Interplant Transfer Intelligence matches one site's need against another's surplus before an external purchase order is raised, ranking options by transfer distance, logistics cost, criticality urgency and lead time. The decision stays with your team. The network behaves as one pool of capital rather than several.
Software cannot decide what your critical assets are, and it cannot make a stocking policy your reliability team disagrees with stick. What it can do is remove the dependency on someone finding time to redo the analysis. If your score is low because nobody owns the decision, that is not a technology gap, and a POC will tell you so.
What MRO, reliability and supply chain leads usually ask before a first conversation.
Carnegie Center, Suite 300,
Princeton, NJ 08540, Tel.: +1 (866) 987-4463
Times Square, 3e verdieping, vleugel „B“, Andheri Kurla Road,
Andheri East, Mumbai – 400059
Copyright © 2026. Alle rechten voorbehouden.
