CMMS vs Spreadsheets: Why South African Maintenance Teams Are Making the Switch

Many South African maintenance teams still run their operations from Excel. A maintenance spreadsheet template feels familiar, free, and flexible. But as assets grow, compliance tightens, and inspectors ask for proof of work, spreadsheets start to crack. The question is no longer whether CMMS vs spreadsheets is a real choice — it is how long you can afford to stay on the wrong side of it.

This article explains why spreadsheets remain the default for so many teams, where they fail for maintenance, and what a side-by-side comparison looks like. It also covers the real cost of staying on spreadsheets, South African reasons to switch (from the OHS Act to load-shedding and B-BBEE), and how to migrate to a CMMS that fits your operation.

Why Spreadsheets Are Still the Default

Before weighing CMMS benefits against Excel, it helps to understand why so many teams stick with spreadsheets.

Familiar and Low Friction

Everyone knows Excel. Maintenance managers have used it for years; technicians may have seen job lists in a shared workbook. There is no new software to learn, no login, and no formal rollout. A maintenance spreadsheet template gets passed around, someone adds columns for “Due Date” and “Status,” and work gets tracked in a way that feels immediate and under your control.

Perceived Cost

Spreadsheets look free. If you already have Microsoft 365 or Google Sheets, there is no extra line item for “maintenance software.” For small teams or tight budgets, that can feel like the only option. The real cost — missed PMs, compliance risk, and hours spent reconciling versions — often stays hidden until an audit or a major failure.

Flexibility

You can design your sheet however you like. Add a column for “Asset ID,” another for “B-BBEE supplier,” and format it to match your site. That flexibility is seductive. The downside is that the same freedom leads to inconsistent data, broken formulas, and no single source of truth once multiple people edit the file.

Where Spreadsheets Fail for Maintenance

Excel maintenance management works only up to a point. Once you have more than a handful of assets, several people updating the sheet, or a regulator asking for evidence, these limitations become critical.

No Real-Time Visibility

When one person has the spreadsheet open, others may be looking at an old copy or waiting for a “latest version” email. There is no live view of who is working on what, which jobs are overdue, or what the backlog looks like right now. Planning daily or weekly work becomes a guessing game, and priorities get lost in rows and tabs.

No Mobile Access in the Field

Technicians are on the floor, in the plant, or at a remote site. They need to see their work orders, tick off tasks, and log time and parts where the work happens. A spreadsheet lives on a laptop or a shared drive; it does not go into the field in a usable way. Printing job cards creates duplicate data and manual re-entry. The result is delays, errors, and incomplete records.

No Proper Audit Trail

Maintenance under the OHS Act and MHSA requires you to prove what was done, when, and by whom. In a spreadsheet, anyone can change a cell. There is no reliable history of who updated “Status” from “Open” to “Done” or when. Auditors and inspectors need a traceable record; a single Excel file cannot provide that without complex versioning and discipline that most teams never achieve.

Compliance Risk

If you cannot show a clear, tamper-resistant record of inspections and maintenance, you are exposed. The OHS Act maintenance requirements and mining regulations demand systematic records. Spreadsheets do not enforce completion, do not lock historical data, and do not generate compliance reports that inspectors expect. Relying on them for statutory compliance is a risk that many operations only recognise after a visit from the inspectorate.

Version Control Nightmares

“Which file is current?” is the classic spreadsheet question. Someone saves a copy as “Maintenance_2026_FINAL.xlsx,” someone else edits “Maintenance_Jan_updated.xlsx,” and the real state of maintenance is split across two files. Merging is error-prone; deciding which version is correct wastes time. In a multi-user, multi-site environment, version control in Excel is unmanageable.

No Automated Scheduling

Preventive maintenance only works if tasks are generated when they are due. In a spreadsheet, someone has to remember to create rows for each PM, or to run a formula that flags “due” items. There is no automatic work order generation, no reminder that “Lubricate bearing every 500 hours” is due, and no link between the schedule and the actual work done. PMs get missed, and the spreadsheet cannot prevent it.

CMMS vs Spreadsheets: Side-by-Side Comparison

The table below summarises how CMMS software and spreadsheets compare across the areas that matter most for maintenance in South Africa.

Capability	CMMS	Spreadsheets
Work orders	Centralised creation, assignment, status updates, and history per job	Manual rows; no standard workflow or status; easy to duplicate or lose track
PM scheduling	Automatic generation of work orders by time or meter; nothing falls through the cracks	Manual entry or formulas; no automatic generation; relies on someone checking the sheet
Asset tracking	Single asset register with full history of work, parts, and costs per asset	Separate tabs or columns; history is fragmented and hard to query
Compliance	Built-in audit trail; completed work orders and inspections are timestamped and attributable	No built-in audit trail; cells can be edited; difficult to prove who did what and when
Reporting	Dashboards and reports (backlog, PM compliance, MTBF, cost per asset) from live data	Manual pivots and formulas; reports go stale; no single source of truth
Mobile access	Native mobile or web app; technicians update work on a phone or tablet in the field	Not designed for mobile; printing or copying data is the only option
Offline use	Offline-capable CMMS lets technicians capture work without connectivity; sync when back online	Spreadsheets require connectivity or risky local copies; no structured sync
Multi-user	Role-based access; concurrent users; one live dataset; no version conflicts	File locking or multiple copies; version confusion; no true multi-user collaboration

For teams asking “why switch to CMMS,” this comparison captures the core answer: a CMMS is built for maintenance; a spreadsheet is a general-purpose tool that bends under the weight of work orders, compliance, and field use.

The Cost of Staying on Spreadsheets

The cost of Excel maintenance management is rarely just the licence you do not pay. It shows up in three ways.

Missed preventive maintenance. When PMs are not generated automatically and visibility is poor, tasks get skipped. Equipment runs longer without service, small faults turn into failures, and unplanned downtime increases. The cost of one avoided breakdown often exceeds a year of CMMS subscription fees.

Compliance penalties. If you cannot produce clear, auditable records, you risk fines, improvement notices, or worse under the OHS Act or MHSA. Spreadsheets do not give you the systematic, tamper-evident trail that regulators expect. The cost of non-compliance can dwarf any savings from staying on Excel.

Downtime and inefficiency. Time spent reconciling versions, chasing “the latest file,” and re-entering data from paper or memory is time not spent on maintenance. Delays in assigning work and poor visibility of backlog stretch job completion times and frustrate both planners and technicians.

South African Reasons to Switch to a CMMS

Beyond the generic CMMS benefits, several factors are specific to the South African context.

OHS Act and audit trails. The OHS Act requires employers to maintain plant and equipment and to keep records. Inspectors want to see what was maintained, when, and by whom. A CMMS provides a single, traceable record; a spreadsheet does not. Switching to a CMMS is one of the most effective steps to reduce compliance risk.

MHSA and systematic records. In mining, the Mine Health and Safety Act demands systematic maintenance and record-keeping. Ad hoc spreadsheets and handwritten job cards do not meet the standard that mine managers and inspectors expect. A CMMS built with MHSA in mind helps you align work orders and PM schedules with statutory requirements.

Load-shedding and offline access. When power or connectivity drops, technicians still need to capture work. A CMMS with offline mode lets them complete and update work orders in the field and sync when the grid or network is back. With spreadsheets, you are left with paper and double entry, or gaps in your records.

B-BBEE tracking. Many organisations must report on procurement and supplier development. Tracking which maintenance work or parts were sourced from B-BBEE-aligned suppliers is difficult in a loose collection of spreadsheets. A CMMS that supports B-BBEE-related fields and reporting makes it possible to demonstrate compliance and improve your scorecard.

How to Migrate from Spreadsheets to a CMMS

Moving from Excel to a CMMS does not have to be a big-bang project. A practical approach:

List your assets. Export or transcribe your asset list (equipment, locations, criticality) into the CMMS asset register. This becomes the foundation for work orders and history.
Define your key PMs. Identify the preventive tasks that matter most for safety and reliability. Enter them as PM schedules in the CMMS so work orders generate automatically.
Run in parallel for a short period. Keep the spreadsheet for a few weeks while you use the CMMS for new work orders and PMs. Compare outputs and fix any gaps in data or process.
Train the team. Show planners how to create and assign work orders, and technicians how to receive, complete, and log work (including on mobile or offline if available).
Turn off the spreadsheet. Once the CMMS is the single source of truth, stop maintaining the old sheet. Archive it for reference only.

Migration is also a good time to clean data: remove duplicate assets, standardise naming, and drop obsolete columns so the CMMS starts with a clear baseline.

What to Look for in a CMMS

When you evaluate CMMS software, prioritise the following for South African operations:

Work orders and PM scheduling that are central to the product, not an afterthought.
Asset register and history so every job and part use is linked to the right asset.
Compliance and audit trail so completed work is timestamped and attributable for OHS Act and MHSA.
Reporting and dashboards for backlog, PM compliance, costs, and compliance status.
Mobile and offline capability so technicians can work in the plant or on site during load-shedding or poor connectivity.
South African focus where relevant: templates or guidance aligned with OHS Act and MHSA, B-BBEE-friendly reporting, and pricing in ZAR.

For a deeper grounding in what a CMMS is and how it works in the local context, see our guide on what is CMMS in South Africa. For the strategic choice between planned and run-to-failure approaches, read preventive vs reactive maintenance.

CMMS vs spreadsheets is not a theoretical debate. For South African maintenance teams, the switch to a dedicated system is driven by compliance, reliability, and the need to work through load-shedding and poor connectivity. If you are ready to move beyond Excel, Lungisa is built for South African mining, manufacturing, and facilities: work orders, preventive maintenance, asset and spare-parts management, OHS Act and MHSA-oriented compliance, offline mode, and B-BBEE-related reporting. Explore Lungisa or contact the Skynode team to see how a CMMS designed for SA operations can support your maintenance and compliance.