Leading Change in Your Fleet

Brian Johnson was an incoming senior industrial and systems engineering student at Auburn University when he started a summer internship at Alabama Power, a Southern Company. At the time, he wasn’t looking for a career in fleet. But as for many in the industry, fleet found him.

Nearly two decades later, Johnson is the fleet engineering and technical services manager at Alabama Power, overseeing approximately 6,000 pieces of equipment and leading a team of 10 employees who support nine area shops across the company. A member of the Electric Utility Fleet Managers Conference (EUFMC) board of directors, Johnson also served as the southern region fleet services manager at Georgia Power – managing six garages and 47 mechanics from August 2019 to December 2021 – before returning to Alabama Power.

While many fleet leaders rise through the ranks as mechanics, Johnson brings a different perspective: an engineer’s eye for process improvements and systems thinking. It’s an approach that has helped him modernize Alabama Power’s fleet operations, including a shift from a calendar-based maintenance program to a usage-based program that began two years ago.

UFP recently sat down with Johnson to learn more about his story, his approach to leading change initiatives and his advice for other fleet managers. Here’s an edited version of our conversation.

UFP: How have you applied your engineering training and discipline to fleet management?

Brian Johnson: From an industrial engineering standpoint, it’s all about process improvement and continuous improvement. The key is looking at a process and asking, “How can we improve the output and efficiency?” This approach is unique in fleet, where change typically happens slowly.

A recent example is our maintenance strategy transformation. Until a few years ago, we were over-maintaining our equipment because we didn’t know how much it was actually being used. It was all calendar-based. Two years ago, we shifted to using telematics to track actual [power takeoff] time. Working with manufacturers, we determined appropriate maintenance intervals based on usage.

What we discovered was eye-opening. We had entire maintenance intervals that were unnecessary. We were pulling equipment away from operators when we didn’t need to, reducing productivity. By using actual usage data, we could maintain equipment more efficiently.

UFP: What was the impact of moving from calendar-based to usage-based maintenance across thousands of pieces of equipment?

Johnson: We’re talking hundreds of thousands of dollars. But the real impact goes beyond labor-hour savings; it’s about downtime, which is harder to quantify. For example, a crew could put a line back up in half the time if they had two buckets and a derrick instead of just one because the other is in the shop.

We’re now making data-driven decisions. With our fleet management system and telematics, we can predict when components might fail based on usage hours. Instead of being reactionary and having equipment fail during a job, we can proactively replace parts at, say, 1,400 hours if we know something typically fails at 1,500 hours. Our goal is to fix things on our timeline, not the truck’s timeline.

UFP: How did you gain support for the new program within the company?

Johnson: The feedback we encountered was people saying, “We haven’t had any catastrophic failures with our current program, so why change it?”

We approached this challenge in several ways. First, we let the data lead the conversation. We showed comparisons between manufacturer recommendations and our practices, which revealed we were over-maintaining our equipment.

When our garage teams expressed concern about reducing preventive maintenance intervals, we emphasized the importance of operator-required pre-trip inspections, which help us safely extend the time between maintenance checks. When operators find issues during those inspections, they report them back to fleet for immediate repair. Then, at 500 PTO hours, or a time-based backstop, we perform thorough inspections according to manufacturer recommendations.

I’ve learned that explaining the “why” behind changes is essential. Even if someone is resistant to change, they’re more likely to support it if they understand the reasoning. We spent a lot of time talking with our garages before implementing the shift, showing them the data and explaining the benefits. We weren’t making changes for change’s sake – we had solid reasons backing every decision.

UFP: How did you address concerns that reducing maintenance intervals might lead to cutting labor hours and jobs?

Johnson: That was a critical concern. People immediately asked, “If we’re cutting back maintenance, does that mean we’re going to cut people?” The answer was no. Instead, we saw this as an opportunity to bring previously outsourced work back in-house.

For example, we had been sending some oil changes to third parties because we didn’t have the labor capacity. With the new program, we could bring some of that work back in-house. We could also potentially handle dielectric test inspections internally as more time becomes available. It wasn’t about cutting mechanic jobs. It was about enabling our experts to do more work in-house.

UFP: How did you ensure stakeholders didn’t feel this change was being forced on them?

Johnson: Since fleet cost is always a concern, we focused on showing how our telematics investment supported a more efficient maintenance program. When we presented the financial benefits – both the cost savings and the ability to bring outsourced work back in-house – leadership was very receptive. The business case helped us gain their support.

UFP: Would those leaders then bring your message to their teams?

Johnson: Yes, and I’m personally very proud of the partnership we’ve built with our internal customers. They’ve given us a seat at the table, which isn’t always the case at other companies. We’ve earned that position by demonstrating our commitment to their success – we’re here to support them. We’re true partners in the mission, not just a necessary service they have to use.

UFP: Large-scale change initiatives require effective communication. Did leadership communication come naturally to you, or did you learn it through mentors?

Johnson: For me, good mentors helped me understand the value of listening.

Coming into fleet without being a “car guy” – I hadn’t rebuilt engines or turned wrenches – actually worked in my favor. I came in with eyes wide open and was very intentional about listening to learn. Sure, when mechanics see a hotshot engineer walking out there, they may bow up initially. But those walls come down when you say, “Show me what you’re doing there. How does that work?”

My first supervisor encouraged me to spend time in the field and ride along with linemen. They’d give me a hard time and nicknames, but they took pride in teaching someone who genuinely wanted to learn. That helped me earn credibility over the years.

The biggest lesson? Take time to listen to people who know what they’re talking about. Going into a situation with a know-it-all attitude can backfire quickly.

UFP: What advice would you give to others in the industry?

Johnson: First, prioritize safety in every decision. I know it sounds cliché, but when people see you make decisions with their safety in mind – even if it costs more – you earn their trust. Whether it’s the garage technician, equipment operator or public safety, this focus builds credibility because people see you’re thinking about the bigger picture.

For those new to the industry, get involved. Join organizations like the Southeastern Electric Exchange, or attend events like EUFMC, The Utility Expo and Work Truck Week. Network and see how others operate. One thing I’ve learned is that most peer utilities face similar challenges but may solve them differently. Getting to know other fleet leaders and manufacturers helps you learn from their experiences.

Finally, don’t be afraid to innovate. Yes, fleet tends to move slowly because it’s viewed as a necessary part of the business, but that doesn’t mean you can’t push boundaries and leverage new technology. Do your research, start with pilot programs and be willing to adjust as needed. Just because something has worked for years doesn’t mean there aren’t better solutions out there.