If you use the scheduling tools in a computerized maintenance management system (CMMS) as a mere replacement for legacy scheduling practices, you are losing serious advantages. Those tools can allow you to capture labor per job. For example, you can use the history features of the scheduling tools to see that the PM on Asset 71B18 takes an average of 1.3 hr to perform. Or that once it took nearly 2 hr (viewing the notes on that PM will show you why).
You can also look at the labor per worker. You can see that Jim averaged 11.5 hr each week of PM work last quarter while Sandy averaged 26.8 hr of PM work. This can, for example, highlight where a better allocation of PM work is probably needed.
What if you combine the two? Now you can see that Rob consistently takes 25% longer to complete a particular PM than any of the other four people who perform it. Does this mean Rob is not good at this PM, or does it mean he is the only one taking the time to do it correctly? Without this combination, you would not even know to ask this question, and the answer is very important.