This article is for plant managers, production managers, continuous improvement leads and maintenance managers who have to set, or defend, an OEE target for the coming year. It answers a question that looks simple: which number should go into the performance plan so that it is ambitious, achievable and useful to the teams who carry it every day.
- The 85% benchmark is a reference point, not a target for every machine.
- A credible target starts from a reliable baseline, machine by machine.
- The type of production changes each machine’s potential.
- Progress comes in steps, expressed in OEE points and tracked weekly.
Why the 85% benchmark is misleading
The 85% figure appears in almost every presentation on OEE. It is usually described as world class, built from 90% availability, 95% performance and 99.9% quality. As a general reference point, it is useful. As an operational target, it creates three problems.
- It ignores the type of production. A high-volume line running one product and a cell that changes part numbers several times per shift do not have the same potential. The second one loses time to changeovers by design, even when they are well run.
- It depends on how OEE is calculated. Planned production time, whether planned stops are excluded, which reference rate is used: two plants can show the same figure with very different realities. A target borrowed from elsewhere has no comparable basis.
- It demotivates when the gap is too wide. Asking a machine measured far below to reach 85% within the year sets a target the team knows is out of reach. The target then stops being a management tool.
The right reflex is to keep 85% as a discussion horizon, not as a target. A useful target is built from what each machine actually does today.
Start from the baseline, not from a headline number
An improvement target only makes sense against a reliable starting point. In many plants, the starting OEE comes from manual entries: shift sheets, Excel files, end-of-shift reports. These records miss most short stops and underestimate slow running. Reported OEE is therefore often more flattering than actual OEE, and any target built on it is wrong from day one.
Before setting a number, measure over a representative period: several weeks, covering every shift, the usual products and a normal maintenance cycle. This baseline must separate the three OEE components:
- availability, with stops classified by cause (breakdowns, changeovers, material waits, operator waits);
- performance, meaning the gap between the actual rate and the reference rate, including micro-stops and slow running;
- quality, with scrap and rework linked to the time they were produced.
This breakdown shows where the potential lies. Two machines with the same OEE can call for very different targets and action plans if one loses mainly on availability and the other on speed.
One target per machine and per type of production
A single plant-wide target hides the differences between machines. It is better to set a target per machine, or at least per family of comparable machines, taking the type of production into account. The table below offers a qualitative reading grid, to be adapted to each site.
| Type of production | Main structural losses | What the target must account for |
|---|---|---|
| High volume, few part numbers | Breakdowns, micro-stops, slow running | High potential: the effort is on reliability and speed |
| Medium volume, frequent changeovers | Changeovers, ramp-up after changeover | The target depends on the production plan and the number of planned changeovers |
| Small batches or prototypes | Setups, first parts, waiting | Aim first for stable measurement and fewer waits |
| Bottleneck machine | Every loss hits plant output | Priority target, tracked per shift, gains directly visible in volume |
Two precautions apply. First, freeze the calculation rules before setting targets: same planned time, same treatment of planned stops, same reference rate for all machines being compared. Second, review the target when the product mix changes significantly: a machine that moves from two to eight part numbers a week cannot keep the same target without discussion.
Improve in steps, expressed in OEE points
A target is expressed in OEE points, not as a percentage improvement. Going from 50% to 55% is a gain of 5 points. Talking about a 10% improvement creates confusion and makes comparisons between machines impossible. Points are read directly, split by component and easily converted into hours or parts.
The method that works best on the shop floor has five steps:
- Measure the baseline over several weeks, machine by machine, with the three components separated.
- Identify the top two or three losses in hours: stop Pareto, speed gap, scrap.
- Estimate the achievable gain if these losses are reduced, in OEE points, with cautious assumptions.
- Set a first step a few months out, then the next step once the first one has held over time.
- Track weekly the gap to the step, component by component, and adjust the action plan rather than the target.
For example (fictitious figures, for illustration only), a packaging line measured at 48% over six weeks loses mainly on format changes and micro-stops on the labeller. The team sets a first step at 53% in three months by targeting these two losses, then a second at 58% in nine months, once the new changeover standards are stable. Nobody talks about 85%: each step rests on an identified loss and a concrete action plan, and every point gained translates into recovered production hours.
As an order of magnitude, plants equipped with TEEPTRAK gain on average 10 to 15 OEE points. That is a reference for calibrating overall ambition, not a target to copy machine by machine.
The role of automatic measurement
A stepwise target requires measurement that is reliable, continuous and identical across machines. That is what TEEPTRAK provides: a module wired into the electrical cabinet and a sensor at the line, about one hour of installation per machine, with no connection to the PLC. OEE is available within 48 hours, broken down into availability, performance and quality, with time-stamped stops. The baseline rests on measured data, and the steps are tracked on the same basis, without re-entry. TEEPTRAK is deployed in more than 700 plants in over 30 countries.
Further reading
- Performance tracking: 5 measurement pitfalls that distort decisions
- Bottleneck Analysis with OEE
- Calculating OEE: Key Elements to Consider and Exceptions
FAQ
Should the 85% benchmark be dropped? No. It remains a reference point to position a plant and open the discussion. It simply should not be used as a uniform target for every machine, regardless of the starting point and the type of production.
How long should you measure before setting a target? Long enough to cover normal shop floor situations: every shift, the usual products, one maintenance cycle. A few weeks is usually enough; a single week risks capturing an atypical period.
What if a step is not reached? First look at which component is falling short. If the action plan was not carried out, restart it; if an assumption was wrong, adjust the step and document why. A target adjusted on facts stays credible, an ignored target does not.
0 Comments