December 17, 2018, 11:57 pm

Asset Management Plans – Less is More

Asset Management Plans Less is moreAsset management is increasingly being recognised as a critical contributor to value across a wide variety of industries. Too often, however, the benefits of asset management are sabotaged by plans that are out of date or not used. Common causes include excessive length, poor ownership, inappropriate structure and broken links to other planning documents.  These can be addressed by analysing the organisation’s context and developing a fit for purpose plan matched to it. Usually, this will result in shorter, simpler documents and this article discusses how to do it.

Introduction

Organisations across a broad range of industries are beginning to recognise the benefits of a formalised approach to asset management. Working with these organisations, we regularly come across asset management plans and other planning documents that are over 50 pages long and, almost without exception, out of date. Such plans do nothing to advance either the organisation for which they have been prepared or the discipline of asset management as a whole. If organisations are to realise the value of asset management, they must address these issues and create effective asset management plans that comply with the requirements of ISO 55000 and provide the information required to manage highly technical and critical equipment.

Observed Issues

We like to refer to plans that aren’t used as “shelfware” – documentation that looks good on the shelf but doesn’t add any value to the overall organisation. Where shelfware exists, any success in managing the assets is “despite” rather than “because of” it. When we look at our experience with such documents, we see some common themes:

  • Length – almost invariably, these documents are over 50 pages long, often including extensive descriptions of the asset or the management processes used for it
  • Ownership – these documents have usually been prepared by consultants or contractors and the relevant internal staff do not “own” (and frequently have not even read) the documents
  • Structure – the documents often follow a pre-defined template with little or no tailoring to the specific asset or even the organisation
  • Linkages – the documents have typically been prepared in isolation from the organisation’s strategic planning processes

It should be noted that these documents often contain excellent information regarding the asset, including design descriptions, maintenance requirements, upgrade plans and much more. Similarly, many of the template structures are generally good and based on reputable references such as the International Infrastructure Management Manual. The issue is not that this information does not have value, but that it is not being used in a way that harnesses that value.

Potential Solutions

In our opinion, the keys to resolving these issues are already contained within ISO 55000. At the top of the list is a clear understanding of the organisation’s context – with a strong link to the concept of asset management maturity. As ISO 55002:2014 puts it: [1]

An asset management plan should be documented at a level that is appropriate to the organisation and the degree of sophistication in its asset management approach.

In other words, it is not enough to prepare a good plan – it must be a plan that fits the organisation and the asset. For example, one of our consultants recently reviewed a 72 page asset management plan for a small council (less than 20 staff, including road workers, librarians and so on) that covered only the organisation’s footpaths. Given that the organisation had defined six other asset classes, all with plans of equal length, the ability of the organisation to maintain – or even read – these plans was effectively nil. Unsurprisingly, they were more than two years overdue for update and not used to affect the council’s business planning.

A further key is contained within the Communication and Information clauses of ISO 55001:2014 [2]. The thrust of these clauses is very clear – invest effort in identifying what information is required and the mechanism by which it will be communicated. Asset management plans are clearly a key element of this, but their role – communication of the actions required to achieve the objectives – is often compromised by a structure that has not been adequately thought through and which promotes inclusion of unwarranted “information”. In the case of the asset management plan previously discussed, this included an overview of the shire’s location, geography, industry, etc – information that was duplicated in every other document in the shire’s asset management system and which added no value to the content. It also included extensive process information (e.g. asset management planning processes and definitions) that were also duplicated in the other plans.

The overarching solution may therefore be summarised as “plan the plan”. An essential part of the process is to know what the asset management plan is meant to communicate, who to and why. This will allow a cohesive, clear story to emerge in the shortest possible space. In the case of our example council, a single plan for all asset classes – including the Strategic Asset Management Plan and a description of the framework – just 65 pages long and owned from cover to bibliography by the Deputy Chief Executive Officer.

Conclusions

Too often, the benefits of asset management are sabotaged by plans that are out of date or not used. Common causes include excessive length, poor ownership, inappropriate structure and broken links to other planning documents. These can be addressed by analysing the organisation’s context and developing a fit for purpose plan matched to it. Often, this will result in shorter, simpler documents that are easier to maintain as well as more effective in the management of assets. With that in mind, perhaps it is time to ask yourself “How long are my plans?” If you think you suffer from this problem, you may like to consult our longer article on What does a good asset management plan look like? Or just give us a call – we would be happy to help.

Scott Yates

Principal Consultant

References

[1] ISO 55002:2014 Asset management – Management Systems – Guidelines for the application of ISO 55001, Switzerland, 2014

[2] ISO 55001:2014 Asset management – Management Systems – Requirements, Switzerland, 2014

 

 

Related Articles

Using ISO 55000 and Integrated Information Systems to Drive Organisational Alignment
One of the central tenets underpinning ISO 55000, the international standard for Asset Management, is that organisations perform better when there the...
Asset Management Data and Decision Making – Implementing ISO 55000
A vital element of effective Asset Management is decision-making that is evidence-based and data-driven. In addition, sufficient, accurate data and...
Case Study - ISO 55001 Gap Assessment
Hydro Tasmania is Australia’s leading producer of renewable energy, with over 100 years of experience producing hydroelectric power.  Owned...
Asset Management Culture – Implementing ISO 55000
While it is tempting to focus on processes and systems as being at the core of good Asset Management, success is only achieved by ensuring that the...
Asset Management Competence – Implementing ISO 55000
So far in this series we have tackled the key requirements for successfully implementing ISO 55000 relating to documentation and management processes...
Sign up to our Mailing List

Receive useful Maintenance & Asset Management articles, tools and news

assetivity logo

Download Your FREE SAMP Template Now