Organisations running IBM Maximo or Maximo Application Suite (MAS) often rely on these platforms as mission‑critical systems for asset management, maintenance, and operational delivery. However, over time, even well‑implemented solutions can drift away from best practice, suffer performance degradation, or fail to evolve in line with changing business needs.
‍

A System Assurance Review (SAR) provides a structured, independent health check of a Maximo or MAS environment, helping organisations understand how their system is really being used, where risks or inefficiencies exist, and how to move forward with confidence.

What is a System Assurance Review?

A System Assurance Review is a comprehensive assessment of an enterprise system and its supporting infrastructure to confirm that it is:

• Fit for purpose

• Performing effectively

• Aligned with industry and Maximo/MAS best practice
  ‍

In the context of Maximo and MAS, a SAR typically spans process, functional, technical, and data dimensions, with optional roadmap and readiness components. Reviews are particularly valuable during upgrades, client onboarding, or whenever independent assurance is required to establish clearer standards and deliverables.
‍

The Core Pillars of a System Assurance Review

Naviam’s approach to System Assurance Reviews is built around four core assessment areas, each designed to uncover specific risks and improvement opportunities.

Process Review

A process review focuses on how business processes are configured and executed within the current Maximo or MAS solution.
‍

Key areas include:

• Reviewing implemented processes in the existing system

• Identifying gaps against industry and Maximo best practice

• Highlighting business and system process pain points

• Assessing processes that are not yet systemised and their suitability for MAS
  ‍

Outputs typically include:

• BPMN‑standard current‑state and target‑state process maps

• Conversion of Maximo workflow canvases into Visio process maps

• Clear, practical recommendations for process improvement and best‑practice alignment
  ‍

This gives organisations a clear understanding of where inefficiencies exist and how processes can be rationalised before taking on additional change.  

Functional Review

The functional review assesses whether Maximo or MAS is being used effectively and configured to support both current operations and future capability adoption.
‍

Areas reviewed include:

• Security model, roles, and segregation of duties

• Modules and features in use, such as preventive maintenance, meters, condition monitoring, mobility, and asset specifications

• Levels of customisation versus configuration, and the implications for upgrades and support

• Whether the current setup supports wider MAS tooling beyond Manage
  ‍

Deliverables include documented findings and a prioritised set of functional improvement recommendations, helping organisations unlock value from functionality that already exists.

Technical Review

The technical review examines platform health, architecture, and performance to ensure the solution is stable, resilient, and future‑ready.
‍

Typical focus areas are:

• Server and database performance

• Integration architecture and opportunities for modernisation

• Identification of long‑running or inefficient background processes

• Suitability of non‑production environments
  ‍

The outcome is a set of targeted, risk‑based recommendations to address performance bottlenecks, technical debt, and architectural concerns before they become operational issues.  

Data Review

Data is often one of the hidden contributors to poor system performance and usability. A data review assesses how information is structured, maintained, and used within Maximo or MAS.
‍

This includes:

• Evaluation of transactional and reference data structures

• Identification of custom data where out‑of‑the‑box capability exists

• Review of record lifecycles, closure, and archiving practices

• Assessment of asset hierarchies, PMs, job plans, and update mechanisms
  ‍

Outputs highlight quick wins, best‑practice alignment opportunities, and structural improvements that can significantly enhance system usability and performance.  

Beyond the Review: Readiness and Roadmaps

For organisations at different stages of their Maximo or MAS journey, SARs can be extended to cover:

• MAS suitability assessments for new adopters

• Readiness reviews for adopting tooling beyond Manage

• Business Capability Modelling  

• High‑level or multi‑year roadmaps to support informed investment decisions
  ‍

These extensions help clients not just understand where they are today but define a clear and achievable path forward.

When is a System Assurance Review Most Valuable?

System Assurance Reviews deliver the most value when:

• Preparing for a Maximo or MAS upgrade

• Onboarding to a new support provider

• Experiencing performance, usability, or delivery challenges

• Seeking independent assurance on system health and future suitability
  ‍

In many cases, a SAR also helps build early trust between delivery teams and clients by creating a shared, evidence‑based understanding of the system landscape.  

‍

A System Assurance Review is not about producing a report for the sake of it. Done properly, it provides clarity, structure, and actionable insight - enabling organisations to make confident decisions about their Maximo or MAS platforms. Whether the goal is stabilisation, optimisation, or strategic transformation, a SAR establishes the foundation for sustainable improvement.

‍

‍