Preventative vs Reactive: Finding the Sweet Spot

Every maintenance manager knows the feeling: the phone rings, alarms go off, and suddenly a machine has gone down at the worst possible time. Teams scramble, production halts, and costs start stacking up by the minute. This is the reality of reactive maintenance—the “fix it when it breaks” approach.

On the other side of the spectrum lies preventative maintenance—planned, scheduled work designed to stop breakdowns before they happen. Preventative maintenance often feels like the gold standard, but let’s be honest: no site can ever be 100% preventative. Machines will still fail unexpectedly, and not every asset justifies the same level of attention.

So how do you, as a maintenance leader, find the right balance?
The Hidden Costs of Reactive Maintenance

Reactive maintenance can seem cheaper on paper. Why spend money on scheduled servicing if the equipment is still running fine? But anyone who’s been around plants long enough knows the reality:

• Downtime is expensive. Every minute of unplanned stoppage means lost production, late orders, and sometimes even penalties from customers.

• Repairs are costly. Emergency call-outs, expedited parts, and overtime wages quickly blow out budgets.

• Safety risks increase. When machinery fails unexpectedly, the risk of injuries rises—especially if staff are rushing to make quick fixes.

• Stress on the team. Constant firefighting burns out technicians and leaves no time for skill development or long-term improvements.

One study by Plant Engineering found that reactive maintenance can cost up to three to four times more than preventative approaches when you factor in downtime and labour.

The Power of Preventative Maintenance

Preventative maintenance, when done well, flips the equation. By planning tasks in advance—oil changes, inspections, part replacements—you reduce the likelihood of unplanned downtime. The benefits include:

• Improved reliability: Equipment lasts longer and performs more consistently.

• Budget control: Costs become more predictable and easier to justify to senior management.

• Safety improvements: Hazards are identified and addressed before they turn into incidents.

• Team stability: A more structured workload means less chaos and lower turnover.

In Queensland, preventative maintenance is especially critical given the state’s unique challenges—humidity, coastal corrosion, and extreme heat can accelerate wear and tear on assets faster than expected.

Why You Can’t Eliminate Reactive Work

That said, preventative maintenance isn’t free. Some assets don’t justify the investment of frequent servicing, especially if replacement parts are cheap and downtime has minimal impact. Plus, unexpected failures will always happen—no matter how much planning you put in place.

The trick isn’t choosing between reactive and preventative. It’s deciding how much of each your operation can sustain. Industry best practice often points to the 70/30 rule:

• 70% of your maintenance workload should be preventative.

• 30% will inevitably remain reactive.

Of course, the exact balance depends on your industry, budget, and team size.

How to Find Your Sweet Spot

Here are three steps you can take to get closer to the right balance:

Know Your Critical Assets

Not every machine is equal. Identify the assets that:

• Cost the most when they fail.

• Have the longest lead time for parts.

• Present the biggest safety or compliance risks.

These should be the focus of your preventative program. Less critical equipment can lean more on reactive strategies.

Use Data to Guide Decisions

Your CMMS (Computerised Maintenance Management System) is your best friend. Track failure history, repair times, and downtime costs. Data will show you patterns and help justify your preventative spend to leadership. If you don’t have a CMMS, even a simple spreadsheet is better than guesswork.

Build Team Buy-In

Technicians often resist preventative work if they see it as “busywork.” Show your team how preventative tasks reduce call-outs and after-hours stress. Involve them in planning schedules—they know which machines are most prone to issues.

Practical Example: Queensland Case

Take a packaging plant on the coast near Brisbane. For years, they relied heavily on reactive maintenance—waiting until conveyors broke down before replacing chains. The downtime costs were enormous, particularly during peak season.

By shifting to a preventative approach—monthly inspections and planned chain replacements—they cut breakdowns by 60% within a year. Yes, it meant more scheduled downtime, but overall productivity and staff morale improved significantly.

💡 Final Thoughts

At the end of the day, balancing preventative and reactive maintenance isn’t about eliminating one or the other—it’s about finding the sweet spot that keeps your assets reliable, your team focused, and your budget under control. The best managers don’t chase perfection; they chase what works for their people and their plant.