From the request that arrives at midnight to the closed work order with evidence — SLA timers running the whole way.
Reactive maintenance is where the difference between a managed operation and a firefighting operation becomes most visible. In a firefighting operation, a fault is reported, someone calls around to find a technician, the technician shows up when they can, the work gets done eventually, and the record — if it exists at all — is a brief note in a CMMS that does not connect to the asset, the cost, or the SLA commitment. The problem is not the work itself; it is the process around the work. Without a structured intake, faults arrive through multiple channels and some get lost. Without SLA timers, there is no objective measurement of response time — only a subjective sense that things take too long. Without skill-based assignment, the available technician gets the job, not the right technician. Without cost posting, the work order closes without the financial record being updated. Coreziyo's reactive maintenance flow treats every fault as a managed event from the moment it is reported. The SLA timer starts on intake, regardless of how the request arrived. Triage and assignment are rule-driven. The technician receives the job on mobile, works through the checklist, and closes with evidence. The cost posts to the asset record. The SLA outcome is recorded. Nothing in this chain requires coordinator intervention unless an exception occurs. For the work order object lifecycle in detail — from intake to financial close — see [Work Orders](/features/cafm/work-orders/).
Reactive maintenance is unavoidable in every FM operation. Assets fail, tenants report issues, and emergencies occur at inconvenient times. The question is not whether reactive work will happen, but whether it will be managed or merely responded to. The distinction is visible in the SLA data, the cost per reactive job, and the proportion of faults that become recurring problems because the root cause was never properly documented.
Coreziyo’s reactive maintenance flow is designed to make every fault a managed event rather than an improvised response. The structure that applies at 9 am applies equally at 2 am: intake, SLA timer, triage, assignment, execution, closure, cost posting. The system does not sleep, does not forget to start the timer, and does not route the job to whoever picks up the phone first.
The result is a reactive maintenance programme that is measurable, improvable, and auditable — not a collection of responses that happen to have worked out. With 150,000+ work orders processed monthly on the platform, this is what reactive maintenance management at scale looks like.
What you actually get
Multi-channel intake with immediate SLA start
Faults arrive from mobile app, web portal, QR scan, or auto-generated sensor alert. Every intake source starts the SLA timer at the moment of receipt — no channel gets a slower response by default.
Priority classification and SLA assignment
Configurable triage rules classify each incoming request by priority and assign the appropriate SLA target: critical plant failures get a two-hour clock, routine repairs get forty-eight hours. Priority is set by rule, not by the coordinator's judgment.
Pre-breach escalation alerts
SLA breach alerts fire before the deadline, not after. When a critical job has thirty minutes remaining and is still open, the system escalates to the supervisor automatically. Breaches are prevented, not just recorded.
Skill-based technician routing
Reactive jobs route to the technician whose trade certification matches the fault category and whose current workload allows them to respond within the SLA window. The right person gets the job, not the nearest available person.
MTTR and breach rate reporting
Mean time to repair, SLA adherence rate, breach rate by category and by building, and response time distribution are live on the operations dashboard. Managers see the performance picture in real time — no end-of-week report required.
How it shows up in real operations
A GCC FM operator handling reactive maintenance across 1,000+ buildings receives thousands of reactive requests per week. The most critical — HVAC failures in occupied spaces during summer, elevator faults, fire system alerts — carry SLA commitments to the client as short as two hours. At that volume and those response expectations, manual dispatch is not viable. In Coreziyo, a critical fault reported via the mobile app at 2 am triggers an SLA timer, routes to the certified on-call technician, and sends a push notification to their phone. If the technician has not accepted the job within fifteen minutes, the system escalates to the supervisor. By 8 am, the operations manager can see every reactive job from the night — resolved, in progress, or escalated — and exactly where each one stands against its SLA commitment.