David Nollet on ISO 14224 for Master Data
/
read
When it comes to structuring industrial master data, few voices are as respected as David Nollet’s, a Mechanical Engineer and Reliability Consultant at Laurentide Controls with years of field experience.
Nollet has worked extensively with standards and frameworks that shape how organizations manage equipment information for multiple years. Among these, ISO 14224 stands out, and Nollet has clear views on its value, its limitations, and why reliability professionals should pay attention.
Why ISO 14224 Matters
Because reliability is non-negotiable in these industries, they have historically been at the forefront of maintenance and reliability practices. David Nollet points out that this context is critical: if a standard can help these industries manage risk, it naturally provides a strong foundation for others.
Broader Relevance Across Industries
While ISO 14224’s roots are in oil and gas, David Nollet emphasizes that its insights are far-reaching. Manufacturers, utilities, and other asset-intensive sectors can benefit from the standard’s approach to data collection, taxonomy, and reliability definitions. The challenges of equipment failure, data inconsistency, and unclear terminology exist everywhere, not just offshore rigs or refineries.
What ISO 14224 Provides
Data Requirements and Formats
At its core, ISO 14224 does two things.
- First, it specifies which data organizations should record for maintenance, reliability, and regulatory purposes.
- Second, it defines the formats in which that data should be captured.
This standardization is what makes information easier to compare, analyze, and apply across different assets and operations.
A Common Language for Maintenance & Reliability
For Nollet, an aspects of ISO 14224 is its role as a dictionary for the field. It defines fundamental terms (failure, failure mode, failure cause, component, risk matrix, etc.) and standardizes their use.
This shared language reduces ambiguity and ensures that everyone, from engineers to managers, speaks about reliability in the same way.
Practical Tools and Guides
The richness of ISO 14224 lies in its annexes, which make up a large portion of the document. These are not just appendices, they are practical resources that reliability professionals can use directly in their work. They include:
- Templates for data collection that show exactly how information should be structured.
- Taxonomies and classification lists that help categorize equipment consistently, from common assets like pumps to more specialized components.
- Failure mode libraries that associate likely failure mechanisms with different classes of equipment, saving organizations from reinventing the wheel.
- Examples and case structures that demonstrate how to apply definitions in practice.
- Suggested asset hierarchies that give organizations a starting point for structuring their data.
Nollet emphasizes that these resources are particularly valuable for those new to maintenance and reliability. Instead of struggling with vague concepts, professionals can reference ready-made examples that show how to put theory into action.
David Nollet’s Perspective on ISO 14224
A Solid Foundation, But Not Absolute
Nollet stresses that ISO 14224 is one of the most useful resources available for structuring master data. It helps improve data quality, brings order to asset information, and creates a common ground for decision-making across teams. In his view, it can make the difference between an organization struggling with scattered, inconsistent data and one that uses information as a strategic asset.
Yet Nollet add a word of caution: the standard should not be treated as the only source of truth. Blindly applying ISO 14224 without considering the specific realities of an organization can backfire. Every company has unique processes, constraints, and operational contexts.
On Equipment Boundaries and Classifications
One of the strengths of ISO 14224 is its guidance on how to define equipment boundaries. By clearly stating what is included in a piece of equipment, and what is not, organizations can avoid confusion when recording failures, assigning maintenance tasks, or analyzing performance data.
Nollet highlights that this clarity is especially useful in complex plants, where misunderstandings about “where the pump ends and the motor begins” can easily lead to inconsistent data.
In addition, the standard offers a detailed list of equipment classes and characteristics, covering a wide range of common industrial assets. For widely used equipment such as pumps, compressors, and valves, these classifications give organizations a ready-made structure to record information in a consistent way.
Yet Nollet points out that the guidance does not always go far enough. In real operations, equipment often exists in configurations that are more complex than the examples presented in the standard. Boundaries may overlap and site-specific modifications may blur the lines.
Flexibility in Asset Taxonomy
ISO 14224 gives guidance on asset taxonomy particularly with a suggested pyramid hierarchy for organizing equipment. This structure lays out levels that move from systems down to components, offering a logical way to break down complex plants into manageable units. For many organizations, especially those starting from scratch, it provides a clear framework for building an equipment hierarchy without guesswork.
Every organization has its own context, from how assets are maintained, to the way operations are structured, to the constraints of their CMMS. Applying the pyramid without adjustment can lead to friction, unnecessary complexity, or data structures that do not reflect how work is actually done.
Limits in CMMS Integration
While ISO 14224 offers robust guidance on data and taxonomy, it was never designed with specific Computerized Maintenance Management Systems (CMMS) in mind. This creates a natural tension: organizations may find that some of the standard’s recommendations do not map neatly onto the fields, structures, or workflows available in their chosen system.
Nollet notes that this mismatch can cause frustration. For example, a CMMS may not support the same depth of equipment classifications, or it may use terminology that differs from ISO definitions. Similarly, the way the system structures locations, systems, and components may not perfectly align with the hierarchy suggested by the standard.
This does not mean that ISO 14224 should be set aside. On the contrary, Nollet sees the gap as a reminder that standards and tools must be reconciled thoughtfully, not forced together.
Why Reliability Professionals Should Care
A Learning Tool for Beginners
For those just entering the world of maintenance and reliability, Nollet strongly recommends ISO 14224 as a starting point. It provides a comprehensive overview of how data should be managed and what reliability really means in practice.
A Data Quality Enabler
For more seasoned professionals, its biggest value lies in data quality. By standardizing definitions and formats, ISO 14224 makes master data more reliable, more comparable, and ultimately more actionable.
Final Thoughts from David Nollet
For David Nollet, ISO 14224 is far more than a technical document, it is a cornerstone for anyone serious about building reliable, high-quality master data. Its definitions, taxonomies, and practical tools give professionals a common framework to collect, structure, and interpret information in a consistent way. Yet Nollet is equally clear: no standard should ever replace professional judgment.
The strength of ISO 14224 lies in how it equips organizations to think more clearly about reliability and data quality. But its true value emerges only when professionals adapt its recommendations to their own context, balancing structure with flexibility.
For reliability professionals at every level, from beginners seeking clarity to experts striving for consistency, Nollet’s message is simple: ISO 14224 is a foundation worth building on, but the blueprint is yours to complete.
Raphael Tremblay,
Spartakus Technologies
[email protected]
