Before replacing a disappointing CMMS, determine whether you're replacing the software or replacing your unfinished implementation.

Poor operational results do not by themselves establish that the software lacks the necessary capability. The shortfall may involve the product, but it may also involve configuration, integration, information quality, process design, adoption, training, governance or incomplete utilization.

Evidence breadth

Single-Case + Diagnostic Synthesis

Where this applies

Existing CMMS or EAM environments where operational results are disappointing and replacement is being considered.

Last evidence review

September 22, 2026

What happened

The Ohio Department of Transportation had invested several million dollars in its maintenance-management system but was only partially utilizing it. An Ohio Auditor of State performance review documented gaps in maintenance cost and performance information while ODOT was considering replacing the system. Rather than proceeding directly to replacement, ODOT examined opportunities to make better use of its existing environment. A cross-functional review and gap analysis ultimately led to a decision to upgrade the incumbent EIMS rather than replace it.

Why it matters

A disappointing CMMS can reflect a product capability problem, an implementation or utilization problem, or some combination of them. Those problems can look similar operationally but may require very different remedies.

What a buyer should do

Before opening a replacement procurement, diagnose where the capability gap actually resides. Examine the product, configuration, integrations, data, processes, adoption, training and governance. Then compare a realistically remediated incumbent with a realistically implemented replacement, including migration and transition cost and risk.

Diagnose before selecting the remedy. Determine why intended capability has not been realized before deciding whether to remediate the incumbent or replace it.

What this evidence does and does not establish

This case demonstrates that disappointing realized capability does not necessarily require software replacement. It does not establish that remediation is generally preferable to replacement or that every underused CMMS can be economically repaired. ODOT's decision followed diagnosis of its particular environment.

Documented evidence

Ohio Auditor of State

Ohio Department of Transportation Performance Audit — Phase II

ODOT Phase II — 2021 · February 25, 2021

Primary post-implementation diagnostic evidence

View source →View document →

Ohio Auditor of State

Ohio Performance Team Annual Report 2023

2023 OPT Annual Report

Remediation decision and follow-up evidence

View source →

Ohio Controlling Board / Ohio Department of Transportation

Ohio Controlling Board Request DOT0105362 — AgileAssets EIMS Maintenance and Support

DOT0105362

Continuing incumbent support evidence

View source →