Skip navigation
EAB Logo Navigate to the EAB Homepage Navigate to EAB home
Research Report

The results are in: Higher ed is using these computerized maintenance management systems

December 10, 2018

The adoption of computerized maintenance management systems (CMMS) in higher education facilities management is nearly universal. While these systems have the same core functionality, variation in modules and cost mean campuses use different vendors.

In 2017 the Facilities Forum began recording CMMS vendor adoption and satisfaction. We continued that research with a poll conducted between July and August of 2018. We asked members which vendor they use and how satisfied they are. Read on to see the most popular vendors for different types of institutions.

More on this topic

This resource is part of the Improve Preventive Maintenance Performance Roadmap. Access the Roadmap for stepwise guidance with additional tools and research.

Breakdown of institutions by vendor

AiM Assetworks is the most commonly used vendor, followed by WebTMA, SchoolDude, IBM Maximo, and Accruent’s FAMIS. 22% of responses are grouped into the “other” category because they use one of 13 other options for their CMMS.

Percentage of institutions using CMMS


1) The “Other” category includes: Archibus, Home-Grown Systems, IBM TRIRIGA, Peoplesoft, MicroMain, Unifier, NetFacilities, Centerstone, SAP – Plant Maintenance, Plannon, Azzier, Track-It, and schools with multiple systems. Three or fewer institutions reported using each of these platforms.

Findings by institution type

Facilities units’ needs vary and their choice of CMMS vendor reflects this variance. To probe the differences among institutions, EAB broke CMMS responses into three categories: large vs. small-to-mid-size institutions, public vs. private institutions, and research vs. non-research-intensive institutions.

The data show that large (10,000 students or more) and small- to mid-sized campuses (fewer than 10,000 students) prefer different CMMS vendors. Large institutions most commonly use AiM Assetworks (37%), whereas small-to-mid-sized institutions most commonly use SchoolDude (26%). Interestingly, large and small-to-mid-sized universities use WebTMA second most and at similar rates (22% and 21% respectively).

For large universities, the two most popular vendors (AiM AssetWorks and WebTMA) have a 56% adoption rate. The next largest vendor, IBM Maximo, has only 9% of the large institution market share. By comparison, small- to mid-sized institutions exhibit more parity. Vendor adoption rates illustrate this parity: 26% of small- to mid-sized universities use SchoolDude, 21% use Accruent’s FAMIS and WebTMA, and 16% use AiM Assetworks.

Research and non-research-intensive universities vary in their choice of CMMS vendors. Research institutions most often choose AiM AssetWorks as their CMMS vendor (40%). Non-research-intensive institutions, on the other hand, report using SchoolDude most often at 30%.

The largest variation in CMMS adoption occurs among private and public universities. Public institutions most commonly choose AiM Assetworks (40%), whereas private institutions most commonly choose WebTMA (31%). Interestingly, the vendor with the largest market share for both public and private institutions has more than twice the adoption rate as vendor with the second largest market share.

CMMS vendor satisfaction

As with vendor adoption, vendor satisfaction varies wildly. SchoolDude and AiM Assetworks have the most satisfied customers with 77.8% and 57.7% of respondents respectively happy with their deployed systems or optimistic about deployment. In fact, no other CMMS vendors received majority “happy” or “optimistic” marks.

Campuses with other CMMS vendors largely feel neutral about their current CMMS vendor. WebTMA is the only CMMS vendor whose users reported that they were unhappy or pessimistic more often than happy or optimistic.

Satisfaction level by vendor


Inform smarter facilities decision-making

CMMS is only one of the reasons why data is becoming more valuable to facilities units. Effective customer satisfaction surveys are also part of a robust and data-driven division. See how you can maximize customer satisfaction data for better facilities decisions.