I've seen more CMMS failures than successes.

In 18 years of operations work—10 of them designing and implementing maintenance systems at Thales and Hitachi Rail—I've witnessed dozens of CMMS implementations. The failure rate is sobering: approximately 60% of CMMS projects are abandoned, significantly scaled back, or limp along with minimal adoption.

This isn't because the software is technically broken. Modern CMMS platforms are more capable than ever. The failures happen because of fundamental misalignment between what vendors sell, what buyers think they're getting, and what actually works in real operational environments.

After spending the last three years building AssetOS specifically to address these problems, I want to share the uncomfortable truths about why CMMS implementations fail—and how to choose software that won't.

The Three Types of CMMS Failure

Type 1: The Feature Graveyard

The promise: "This system can do everything you'll ever need and more." The reality: Teams use less than 20% of available features, and those they do use are overly complex for daily tasks.

A facilities manager recently told me about their $150,000 CMMS implementation: "It can generate 47 different types of reports, but creating a simple work order takes 12 clicks and requires training. My technicians still text me when equipment breaks because it's faster than using the system."

Type 2: The Customization Trap

The promise: "We'll customize the system to match your exact workflows." The reality: Customization creates fragile, expensive-to-maintain systems that break during software updates.

A manufacturing plant spent $80,000 customizing their CMMS to match existing paper-based processes. Two years later, they couldn't upgrade to newer versions without losing their customizations. They eventually scrapped the system and started over.

Type 3: The Implementation Death March

The promise: "Full deployment in 90 days with our proven methodology." The reality: Implementations stretch to 12+ months, require extensive training, and still don't work the way teams expected.

One transport company spent 18 months implementing an enterprise CMMS. By launch, half the original team had moved to other roles, business processes had evolved, and the system was already outdated. It was abandoned within six months.

Why Smart People Make Bad CMMS Decisions

The Demo Deception

CMMS vendors excel at impressive demonstrations. They show polished interfaces, comprehensive features, and seamless workflows—all using carefully prepared sample data and scenarios that highlight their system's strengths.

But demos rarely reflect operational reality:

Demo scenario: "Let's create a work order for routine maintenance." Real scenario: Equipment fails unexpectedly at 2 AM, the regular technician is unavailable, parts may or may not be in stock, and the temporary repair needs to be documented for warranty purposes while coordinating with three different contractors.

Demo scenario: "Here's how you generate compliance reports." Real scenario: An auditor arrives unannounced and needs specific maintenance records from 18 months ago, cross-referenced with parts purchases and technician certifications, formatted according to regulatory requirements that weren't contemplated when the system was set up.

The Feature Trap

Operations managers often choose CMMS platforms by comparing feature lists. This seems logical but creates several problems:

More features ≠ Better outcomes: Systems with exhaustive feature lists often suffer from poor usability. Features compete for interface space and user attention, making common tasks unnecessarily complex.

Feature creep during selection: Buyers get excited about capabilities they'll never use. "This system can manage contractor compliance, track environmental metrics, AND integrate with our accounting system!" Meanwhile, basic work order management remains clunky.

Vendor feature inflation: CMMS companies compete by adding features rather than improving core functionality. The result is systems that can theoretically do everything but practically do nothing well.

The "Best Practices" Myth

CMMS vendors often insist their system embodies "industry best practices" and organizations should adapt their workflows to match. This sounds reasonable until you realize:

Best practices don't exist in a vacuum: What works for a food processing plant doesn't work for a transport company or healthcare facility. Operations vary dramatically based on industry, company size, regulatory environment, and organizational culture.

Your "non-standard" processes exist for good reasons: That unusual approval workflow that seems inefficient to software vendors might be required for regulatory compliance. That "redundant" inspection checklist might prevent safety incidents based on hard-learned experience.

Change management is harder than software configuration: It's easier to adapt software to your organization than to change your entire organization to match software assumptions.

The Hidden Costs of CMMS Failure

Direct Financial Impact

Implementation costs: Failed CMMS projects often consume 2-3x their original budgets. Consulting fees, customization costs, training expenses, and extended timelines compound quickly.

Opportunity costs: Time spent on failed implementations isn't available for productive activities. Operations managers and maintenance teams invest hundreds of hours in systems that ultimately don't work.

Switching costs: Abandoning a failed CMMS and starting over means writing off the entire investment plus additional costs for replacement systems.

Operational Consequences

Team morale: Nothing demotivates skilled technicians like being forced to use systems that make their jobs harder rather than easier. CMMS failure contributes to maintenance team turnover.

Process degradation: Failed implementations often leave organizations worse off than before. Teams lose confidence in digital solutions and revert to less efficient manual processes.

Vendor relationship damage: CMMS failures create skepticism about technology vendors and make future software selection more difficult.

Strategic Impact

Digital transformation delays: CMMS failure often represents an organization's first major software implementation disappointment. This creates resistance to future digital initiatives.

Competitive disadvantage: While you're struggling with inadequate systems, competitors with effective CMMS implementations are gaining operational advantages.

Management confidence: Failed CMMS projects damage leadership confidence in operations teams and their ability to evaluate and implement technology solutions.

What Actually Works: Lessons from Successful Implementations

Start with Problems, Not Features

Successful CMMS implementations begin with clear problem identification:

Instead of: "We need better asset management." Try: "We spend 3 hours per week searching for maintenance records, and 20% of our preventive maintenance tasks are completed late."

Instead of: "We want to improve maintenance efficiency."
Try: "Emergency repairs cost us 3x more than planned maintenance, and we have too many emergency situations."

Instead of: "We need compliance tracking." Try: "Preparing for regulatory audits requires 2 weeks of manual data compilation, and we've been cited twice for incomplete documentation."

Prioritize Adoption Over Capability

The best CMMS is the one your team actually uses consistently. This requires:

Intuitive design: Common tasks should be obvious and fast. If creating a work order requires consulting documentation, the system is too complex.

Mobile-first approach: Maintenance work happens in the field, not at desks. Systems optimized for desktop use create barriers to real-time data entry.

Progressive complexity: Advanced features should enhance basic functionality, not complicate it. Teams should be able to start simple and add complexity as they become comfortable.

Choose Implementation Partners, Not Just Vendors

Successful CMMS implementations require vendors who understand operations, not just software:

Look for: Vendors with operational experience who ask about your specific workflows, challenges, and constraints.

Avoid: Vendors who lead with feature demonstrations rather than problem-solving discussions.

Look for: Implementation teams that include former operations professionals, not just software trainers.

Avoid: Vendors who insist their "proven methodology" will work for everyone without understanding your unique situation.

The AssetOS Philosophy: Built by Operators for Operators

After seeing so many CMMS failures, I designed AssetOS around principles that actually work in real operational environments:

Simplicity First

Core philosophy: The system should make maintenance work easier, not more complex.

Implementation: Common tasks require minimal clicks, interfaces are self-explanatory, and advanced features don't interfere with basic functionality.

Real-world test: If new team members need more than 30 minutes to complete basic tasks, the system is too complex.

Operational Understanding

Core philosophy: Software should match how maintenance work actually happens, not how it looks on organizational charts.

Implementation: Workflows accommodate interruptions, emergency situations, and the messy reality of field work.

Real-world test: The system should handle unexpected scenarios gracefully rather than forcing workarounds.

Implementation Speed

Core philosophy: Teams should see value immediately, not after months of configuration.

Implementation: Pre-configured workflows for common operational scenarios, minimal setup requirements, and immediate usability.

Real-world test: Teams should be more productive within one week of starting to use the system.

How to Choose CMMS That Won't Fail

The Pre-Selection Phase

Before evaluating specific vendors:

Document your current state: How much time do you spend on maintenance administration? What specific tasks are most frustrating? What information is hardest to find?

Define success metrics: What would need to change for the CMMS to be considered successful after one year? Be specific and measurable.

Identify your constraints: Budget limits, technical capabilities, training capacity, and change tolerance. Don't pretend these don't exist.

Set realistic expectations: CMMS won't solve organizational problems or automatically make teams more disciplined. It should make existing good practices easier and more consistent.

The Evaluation Phase

Request proof-of-concept with your data: Good vendors will load your actual asset list and let you test real scenarios rather than demo scenarios.

Test with your team: Include actual technicians and supervisors in evaluations, not just decision-makers. The people who will use the system daily have the most relevant opinions.

Evaluate mobile experience: Test the mobile interface thoroughly. If it's clearly an afterthought, find a different vendor.

Ask about failures: How does the vendor handle situations when their system doesn't work as expected? What percentage of their implementations are considered successful by customers after two years?

Red Flags That Predict Failure

Feature-focused sales presentations: Vendors who lead with feature lists rather than problem-solving conversations.

Insistence on "best practices": Vendors who won't adapt their system to your workflows and insist you change to match their approach.

Complex pricing models: Per-user pricing for maintenance systems often indicates enterprise-focused vendors who don't understand operational realities.

Extensive customization requirements: If the system requires significant modification to be useful, it's not the right fit.

Long implementation timelines: Any CMMS that requires more than 60 days to provide basic value is probably too complex.

No operational experience: Vendor teams without former maintenance managers, technicians, or operations professionals.

Green Flags That Predict Success

Problem-first conversations: Vendors who spend more time understanding your challenges than demonstrating their features.

Operational experience: Implementation teams that include people with maintenance and operations backgrounds.

Simple, transparent pricing: Clear, predictable costs that align with your operational scale.

Fast implementation: Systems designed to provide immediate value with minimal setup.

Mobile-first design: Interfaces clearly designed for field use, not desktop demonstration.

Reference customers in similar situations: Success stories from organizations with comparable size, industry, and operational complexity.

The Implementation Reality Check

Even with the right CMMS choice, implementations can still fail if approached incorrectly:

Start Small and Expand

Phase 1: Implement basic work order management for one maintenance team or facility Phase 2: Add preventive maintenance scheduling after teams are comfortable with work orders
Phase 3: Expand to additional teams or locations Phase 4: Add advanced features like inventory management or compliance tracking

Plan for Human Factors

Training: Focus on "why" and "how this helps you" rather than just "which buttons to click" Change management: Acknowledge that new systems create temporary inefficiency during learning periods Feedback loops: Regular check-ins with users to identify problems and make adjustments Champions: Identify early adopters who can help train and support other team members

Measure What Matters

Track adoption rates: Are people actually using the system consistently? Monitor efficiency gains: Are common tasks faster than before? Assess data quality: Is the information in the system accurate and up-to-date? Evaluate outcomes: Are maintenance costs decreasing? Is equipment reliability improving?

The Bottom Line

CMMS failure isn't inevitable, but it's predictable when organizations choose systems based on feature lists rather than operational fit.

After 18 years in operations and three years building maintenance software, I'm convinced that the best CMMS is the one that disappears into your workflow. Teams shouldn't think about the software—they should think about the equipment they're maintaining and the problems they're solving.

If you're evaluating CMMS options, ask yourself this question: "Will this system make my team's daily work easier or more complex?"

If you can't answer definitively that it will make work easier, keep looking. Your team, your budget, and your operational effectiveness depend on getting this choice right.

The stakes are too high for another failed implementation.

Tired of complex CMMS that don't work? AssetOS is built by operations professionals who understand how maintenance work actually happens. Try it risk-free for 30 days and experience the difference operational understanding makes.

Need help evaluating your options? Our CMMS selection guide walks through the complete evaluation process based on real-world operational experience.

Why Most CMMS Tools Fail (And How to Pick One That Won't)