It seems for the past 30 years, companies have struggled with justifying equipment analysis, a program that seems intuitively correct. The reason the industry has struggled is the inability to find hard numbers. Management has stressed the need for these hard numbers to justify both starting a well as maintaining an existing program. Most companies are using cost cutting as a key strategy for improvement, so before management spends any additional dollars, it wants real and not projected costs and savings to assure the success of the program. Unfortunately, even when there are hard numbers, people question their validity or argue the most minuscule details. What are the keys to justifying an equipment analysis program? If a program has been established, how can a company document or measure its success? How can justification also improve the quality of an existing program? Where does equipment analysis fit in most companies maintenance philosophies? This paper will address these four questions and also point out obstacles every company will face in justifying an equipment analyst program.