When it comes to building and asset maintenance, there are many approaches to take, but two of the most widely used are planned preventative and reactive. Of course, this naturally fuels the ‘planned preventative vs reactive maintenance’ debate and it’s something businesses have to consider when establishing and implementing maintenance plans.
While both planned preventative maintenance (PPM) and reactive maintenance have a role to play, understanding when and where to use each approach is essential for controlling costs, reducing downtime and maintaining compliance. Effective technology integration, combined with the SFG20 standard, can turn maintenance from steps in compliance to a measurable ROI.
So, when discussing planned preventative, or PPM and reactive maintenance, which is considered to be the best? While there are varied opinions about this topic and companies who prefer one or the other, we’re going to take a look into both practices and discuss their pros and cons.
What is planned preventative maintenance?
Planned maintenance, or Planned Preventative Maintenance (PPM), is a term used to describe forms of maintenance designed to prolong the lifespan of assets, resources, equipment and a business’s infrastructure.
Also, it offers the means to prevent the breakdown and malfunction of equipment and the expenses and downtime it incurs. For some, planned maintenance can be simple tasks such as cleaning and monitoring asset conditions. Whereas for others, it can consist of more complex tasks such as replacing parts or repairs.
While planned maintenance has been practised for many years, it has advanced considerably with the evolution of technology. Today, businesses have a wealth of tools and services available to them to increase maintenance efficiency and productivity while reducing the costs involved.
Modern planned maintenance now relies heavily on Computer-Aided Facilities Management (CAFM) and other digital tools, including IoT-based asset monitoring systems to improve planning, scheduling and record keeping.
Pros of planned preventative maintenance
1) Minimise Downtime
Preventing downtime, delays and ensuring daily operations are running at all times is essential for any business. Doing so maximises profits, increases business growth, and maintains a good brand reputation. And it just so happens that reducing and preventing downtime is one of the critical benefits of planned maintenance.
Planned maintenance helps maximise the uptime of assets and prevents significant, unforeseen repairs and breakdowns. These types of incidents cost more and are a headache for facility managers, as they can take longer to remedy whilst spare parts are being ordered and unforeseen works are scheduled into contractors’ already-full diaries. During this time, your facility will either have to close or operate at sub-optimal capacity. Planned preventative maintenance schedules can be used to define the maintenance plan for a building or estate.
2) Increase Safety
Safety is a primary objective for all organisations, and maintenance is a vital aspect of establishing, maintaining and improving workplace safety. Planned maintenance schedules provide various benefits regarding safety, such as reducing malfunctions and deterioration of assets, protecting from health hazards, and avoiding liability lawsuits.
These risks - and more - can be avoided with planned maintenance, as you'll be able to implement a compliant, regular, reliable and effective maintenance regime. Meaning you'll be aware of safety or efficiency concerns more quickly and have the ability to act right away and prevent hazards.
Technology-enabled maintenance platforms can help organisations maintain accurate maintenance records, improve traceability and support audit processes. By providing a centralised record of maintenance activities, inspections and asset information, these systems can support organisations working towards recognised facilities management standards, such as ISO 41001, while improving governance, transparency and operational oversight.
3) Reduce costs energy consumption
Planned maintenance and its benefits can save businesses money. As you will always be aware of when maintenance will occur and needs to happen, you'll never use systems and equipment to the point of failure. Meaning you'll also avoid the significant expense it leads to, and organisations who invest in planned maintenance experience less breakdowns and fewer disruptions to their business. Of course, this saves money on large-scale repairs and maximises profits through minimal downtime.
Another critical factor to consider is energy consumption. Poorly maintained electrical assets or malfunctioning equipment consume more energy than those that operate as they should. Planned maintenance and proactive scheduling ensure facility managers identify issues early on and address them as soon as possible. By doing so, they avoid crippling energy bills and adopt more environmentally-friendly practices.
Cons of planned preventative maintenance
1) The need for effective planning
One area that may prove a challenge for some organisations is an increased need for planning (as the name suggests). Fortunately, planned maintenance software can support facility managers with effective scheduling.
Without digital tools, the complexity of coordinating multiple maintenance schedules can create inefficiencies. However, integrated CAFM systems simplify this process by automating planning and compliance tracking.
2) Initial costs:
Compared to reactive maintenance, planned maintenance does require more initial financial investment during the setup and implementation stages. This can put some people off. However, it's important to remember that you'll be spending more money now to ensure your assets operate efficiently and for their full lifespan, minimising costly replacement of equipment.
What is reactive maintenance?
As you can guess from the name, reactive maintenance is performed when an asset has broken down or is underperforming — maintenance as a ‘reaction’ to an issue. Reactive maintenance is important for restoring or replacing broken equipment and ensuring business operations are up and running without delay or additional problems.
However, reactive maintenance isn’t always the most efficient approach, as a great deal of the maintenance issues businesses face can be prevented with planned maintenance. This exact point is essentially the foundation of the planned preventative vs reactive maintenance debate. While reactive maintenance may be appropriate for low-risk, non-critical assets, relying on it as the primary maintenance strategy for critical building systems can lead to increased costs and operational disruption.
Organisations who rely heavily on reactive methods can often face increased downtime costs, higher insurance risks and weaker audit trails during compliance assessments.
| Factor | Planned Preventative Maintenance (PPM) | Reactive Maintenance |
| Maintenance Trigger | Scheduled in advance | Performed after a fault occurs |
| Downtime Risk | Lower | Higher |
| Cost Predictability | More predictable | Less predictable |
| Compliance Support | Stronger due to planned schedules and record keeping | Can be more difficult to evidence consistently |
| Asset Lifespan | Typically extended through regular maintenance | Can be shortened by repeated failures |
| Resource Planning | Easier to schedule labour and contractors | Requires rapid response to unexpected issues |
| Upfront Investment | Higher | Lower |
| Long-Term Cost | Often lower due to reduced failures and downtime | Can be higher due to emergency repairs and disruption |
| Best Suited For | Critical assets and compliance-driven maintenance | Low-risk or non-critical assets |
Which Maintenance Strategy is Best?
For most organisations, planned preventative maintenance offers the greatest long-term value because it helps reduce downtime, improve compliance and provide greater control over maintenance costs.
However, reactive maintenance still has an important role to play. Unexpected equipment failures can occur even within well-managed maintenance programmes, and a reactive approach may be appropriate for low-risk, non-critical assets where the cost of preventative maintenance outweighs the risk of failure.
The most effective maintenance strategies typically combine both approaches, using planned preventative maintenance as the foundation of the programme while reserving reactive maintenance for unforeseen issues and lower-priority assets.
Pros of Reactive Maintenance
1) Simple, Straightforward Implementation
A reactive approach doesn’t rely on advanced monitoring systems or predictive software, which can significantly cut down planning resources and implementation time.
For businesses with limited budgets or non-critical assets, reactive can reduce short-term expenses and administrative overhead.
Instead, businesses can allocate funds elsewhere, delaying excess maintenance spending until necessary.
2) Effectively uses Maintenance Resources
By addressing maintenance issues when they arise, reactive maintenance can help businesses to more effectively use their maintenance resources.
With a reactive strategy, businesses can prioritise pressing maintenance issues over low-priority maintenance tasks such as updating non-critical assets.
This can help to reduce team workload and prevent overmaintenance in areas where equipment usage is infrequent.
3) Reduces Upfront Costs
Reactive maintenance does not require the same level of initial investment as other types of planned maintenance.
While costs are likely to be higher if critical equipment fails, the initial upfront expenditure is significantly reduced.
For smaller businesses with fewer critical assets, a reactive approach can be seen as a more cost-effective maintenance strategy in the short term.
Cons of reactive maintenance
1)Unplanned Downtime
Reactive maintenance practices often lead to unexpected equipment failures. When critical assets fail, businesses can suffer from unplanned downtime that disrupts their operations. This could mean that businesses end up paying more to carry out emergency repairs to get back up and running- often at an elevated cost and at the expense of an asset’s lifespan. The overall cost may meet or exceed the initial investment needed for planned maintenance.
2)May Increase Safety and Compliance Risks
Waiting for equipment to fail can risk safety and compliance. When failures occur suddenly, they can expose teams to unsafe working conditions and put building occupants at risk. In regulated properties- like offices, schools or residential buildings- these equipment failures can also lead to non-compliance with operational standards. Failure to comply with these standards can result in significant fines, legal repercussions and reputational damage in the worst-case scenarios.
Planned vs Reactive Maintenance and Compliance
When properly implemented, both planned preventative maintenance and reactive maintenance can help organisations maintain compliance. By aligning maintenance strategies with SFG20 guidance, facility managers can ensure that assets are maintained at appropriate intervals and in accordance with current industry best practice.
For organisations seeking a structured approach to maintenance, SFG20 provides maintenance schedules that help ensure maintenance activities are carried out at appropriate intervals and in line with current industry guidance.
Supported by digital maintenance tools, organisations can track, document and verify maintenance activities across multiple sites, helping to improve consistency, strengthen audit trails and support compliance management.
Balancing PPM and Reactive Maintenance
For most organisations, the most effective maintenance strategy is not choosing between planned and reactive maintenance, but understanding how to balance both. Planned preventative maintenance should form the foundation of your maintenance programme, with reactive maintenance reserved for unexpected failures and lower-risk assets.
Balancing planned and reactive maintenance is key to achieving operational efficiency, cost control, and compliance.
An effective maintenance strategy blends both approaches, supported by technology such as CAFM or CMMS.
Explore more on SFG20’s reactive maintenance and planned preventative maintenance strategies and achieve compliance through digital maintenance management.
