Due diligence is all about reducing risk with actions that you can justify and defend if challenged. Put simply, before making a decision we need to first determine all the facts, be transparent, thorough and assess all the possibilities and consequences before selecting the best option.

One example from a previous role within the industry that comes to mind is when an area plant engineer called with a query about a grease being used in one of the conveyer systems. The Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) indicated the grease must not contain extreme pressure (EP) additives. The component prevented an inclined conveyor from accidentally running backward with a heavy load of material. It would be a serious safety concern if it did. The backstop is a mechanism that relies on friction to engage and prevent the conveyor from running backward. Since the primary function of EP additives is to reduce friction between matting surfaces, it made sense that the OEM recommended using a lubricant without these additives.

The wrong grease had been used, meaning that we had to take a number of steps to resolve it and we could take the short or long way to doing so. In these cases, the short way is almost always the wrong way. While taking due diligence can take longer initially, it’s the best way to ensure an operation is running as efficiently as possible.

Even though it wasn’t a quick process, we did our due diligence and made sure that the steps we took were thorough. We cordoned off the area, solicited the help of our product supplier’s R&D team to come up with a test protocol and after a fairly extensive testing regime we satisfied ourselves that, under the normal operating conditions of the backstop, any residual EP film would be quickly eliminated and have no effect on the operation of the backstop once we removed the old grease, cleaned the components and reintroduced the correct grease.

I have used this story many times when teaching lubrication seminars specifically when discussing the concerns with compatibility and mixing different products. But I also use it as an example in trying to promote my belief in taking every reasonable step possible when making a decision. You can’t always guarantee that every action is going to be successful, but you do have the responsibility to take reasonable and defendable decisions and actions along the way.

One final word on due diligence—my experience, as reiterated in this article, cannot be used as a basis for making a similar decision on a similar event today. Why? Very simply, that would not be an act of due diligence on your part.

Paul W. Hetherington, president of the Society of Tribologists and Lubrication Engineers (STLE) and manager, technical services Canada at Petro-Canada Lubricants.

Paul began his one-year term as president of the STLE in May 2020. He has been an active member of the STLE for over 30 years and has held positions on the Board of Directors and the Society’s Executive Committee as treasurer, secretary and vice-president.

Paul has been a Certified Lubrication Specialist (CLS) since 1994 and has extensive experience within the lubricants industry with previous roles at Syncrude Canada Limited, where he was Lubricant & Fuel Specialist, and The Fluid Life Corporation, where he developed and managed the Training & Consulting division.

He is currently manager, technical services Canada at Petro-Canada Lubricants where he leads a team of 15 senior technical advisors primarily responsible for commercial and industrial markets across Canada. In his current role, Paul works closely with customers to ensure that they are maximizing the efficiency and reliability of their equipment and operations.