top of page

The IAMS's asset management taxonomy with 39 subjects in 6 categories. JD Solomon served as the project manager for the integrate Maintenance and Operations subject specific guideline.
The IAM's Asset Managment Taxonomy is powerful yet can be overwhelming for many organizations to implement.

Are you drowning in the many activities related to what to do in your asset management program? Are you spending valuable resources and little very few short-term results? Are you tired of paying large sums of money to consultants and software vendors?


History Driven by Finance and Accounting

Organizations have used and managed their assets to deliver value and achieve their goals for hundreds of years. Every organization determines what it considers value to be and chooses how to derive the best total value.


The formal practice of asset management has become more explicit over the past 40 years. Globally, in the 1980s, an oil and gas crisis in the United Kingdom and service failures in the public sector drove an outcry for more accountability. In the 1990s, asset management gained traction through government accounting standards.


Modern asset management is foundationally concerned with accountability and compliance.


Lifecycle Means Engineering, Operations, and Maintenance

The conundrum in asset management is that lifecycle value is predominately in the hands of engineering, maintenance, and operations. The voice of the customer, including reliability, quality, and safety, take first priority. Accountability and compliance are part of the equation but only part of it.


Said another way, engineering is responsible for making sure we have the right tool (asset) for the job (producing value for the organization). Maintenance is responsible for keeping the tool functioning the way engineering designed it. Operations is responsible for using the tool in a manner to produce the desired value without pre-maturely running it into the ground.


The accountability and compliance functions do little to produce value, except for the tracking and feedback that those functions provide.


Operationalizing Asset Management is Challenging

The Institute of Asset Management (IAM) Anatomy demonstrates how challenging asset management can be. In the IAM Anatomy, there are 39 “landscape” subjects and six subject categories. These cover the entire spectrum of organizational management with the intent of creating an asset management culture.


IAM has gone a step further in developing Subject Specific Guidelines for each subject within the anatomy, including integrating the Maintenance and Operations Guidelines.


Few entities have the organizational capacity to re-tool their processes from the top down to match the desired language and methodology of formal asset management.


On the other hand, organizations like Reliabilityweb.com have developed their own anatomies for delivering value from assets, albeit with a more bottom-up approach. The Uptime Elements (the Uptime Elements for Reliability and Asset Management) include 36 elements in five categories.


Picture of the Uptime Elements framework
The Uptime Elements provides a powerful framework for improving asset management and reliability practices

So, is it 39 elements in 6 categories or 36 elements in 5 categories?


The short answer is neither. Both anatomies are forms of multidimensional performance models (MDPMs). MDPMs are based on expert opinion and what leading organizations do to drive performance. MDPMs tend to borrow from each other and change over time.


The fact that frameworks evolve over time means that no one system has determined a singular, best path. In turn, that means following any one model does not guarantee success.


A Straightforward Solution

Mount Pleasant Waterworks (MPW) in South Carolina has an asset management program that dates back 20 years. There have been at least four major issues and revisions to their approach. Like many organizations, MPW has often struggled with the depth and breadth of asset management when aligning with its total staff of 150 people.


Operationalizing asset management has been the key. Several key aspects include:

  • Trusting their overall management system and fitting asset management into it.

  • Building implementation schedules focused on organizational capacity rather than timelines to advance the collective asset management program in 3 or 5 years.

  • Identifying aspects in operations, maintenance, engineering, finance, technology, and human resources, and then exploring how asset management could help improve those processes (rather than having the asset management “book” attempt to drive change).

  • Fewer asset management committees and creating more time for staff to get the real improvements done.

Monthly active involvement by all department managers related to what improvements they needed to get done for the organization, not just for an asset management system.


Asset management continues to provide high value to MPW because it addresses the operational needs of the organization instead of the organization chasing the theoretical needs of asset management.


Moving Forward

Every management system takes years to implement, with peaks and valleys along the way.

And that is the larger point. There are many management systems that an organization can follow. Any and all must fit into a regularly evolving organizational context.


Operationalizing asset management is all about determining what you need first and then determining how asset management can help rather than fitting the organization into an asset management template. Ask not what you can do for asset management but what asset management can do for you.


 

JD Solomon Inc provides asset management, facilitation, and program development services at the nexus of facilities, infrastructure, and the natural environment. JD served as the international project manager for the IAM's Maintenance Delivery and Asset Operations SSG. Contact us for more information on right-sizing your approach to asset management. Improve the communication of the value of asset management by visiting Communicating with FINESSE.





STEM (Science Technology Engineering Math) professionals usually are not natural communicators. However, STEM professionals work in a world where big decisions with high levels of uncertainty are the norm. Effective communication is imperative.


JD Solomon, Inc provides three different formats for organizations to train their STEM professionals to effectively communicate with senior management and decision makers.


Eight-hour workshops

Eight-hour workshops apply the FINESSE fishbone diagrams to actual business problems that participants are facing in their work. The learning experience can be further enhanced by special training and consulting in conjunction with the workshop. The most popular eight-hour workshop format is a four-hour afternoon session followed by a next-day, four-hour morning session.


Four-hour workshops

Four-hour workshops apply the FINESSE fishbone diagram to previous case examples for the organization's market sector. These sessions can be particularly effective when an organization wishes to accomplish all of the training in one day and participants are local. Four-hour workshops can be performed in morning or afternoon sessions; however, the most popular session in this format is 9 AM to 2 PM or 10 AM to 3 PM.


Two-hour virtual workshops

The two-hour virtual format is most popular for organizations that actively support distance learning or whose employees are globally located. Five modules are used to cover the eight-hour course material.


Pricing

Several pricing options are available, depending on the preferred format and the number of attendees. Pricing is normally in the range of $250 to $500 per participant.


Contact Communicating with FINESSE for detailed information on pricing and scheduling.

 



Facilitator looking at speaker at podium providing comments at a public meeting.
Public workshops and comment sessions have fewer requirements than public hearings. For facilitators, with that flexibility also comes more sources of peril.

Facilitating public workshops and comment sessions are typically conducted by public-sector organizations. These sessions are intended to share information and receive comments.


Public workshops and comment sessions differ from public hearings in two distinct ways. First, public workshops and comment sessions are usually optional, whereas public hearings are statutorily required. This opens the door for more flexibility with workshops and comment sessions.


The second difference is that public workshops and comment sessions do not require formal responses, whereas public hearings require responses by legislation. The lack of formal responses often leads to misunderstandings and hard feelings among those participating in workshops and comment sessions.


1. Public Notice

The sponsoring organization provides public notice. Because there are usually fewer statutory or policy requirements, there is flexibility in how to advertise the event and for what period of time. Facilitators should participate in the process to minimize fallout in the sessions from stakeholders not promptly getting the correct information.


The best course of action to minimize session disruption is for facilitators to insist on seven days’ notice, both written and virtual, and for interested stakeholder groups to be notified specifically with either phone calls or emails.


2. Venue and Format

Format was not much of an issue pre-COVID, but today the choice (or combination) of in-person, hybrid, or virtual is an ordinary decision. However, it must be coupled with the ease of connectivity with the venue for the public event. Format can limit venue, and venue can limit format.


The best course of action to minimize disruption is to do the sessions in-person or at least take comments only from those in attendance. Written comments should be taken instead of hybrid or virtual sessions.


3. Security

Public workshops and comments sessions can be just as unruly as public workshops so facilitators should not let their guard down. Work through normal security protocols, which should minimally include on-site personnel, emergency contacts, and after-event safeguards. All attendees should be required to sign in.


Facilitators should review security protocols in advance and immediately before the event with the sponsoring organization.


4. Ground Rules

Ground rules should be written as a script before the session by the facilitator. Having the ground rules in writing allows for formal review by the host organization and assures that what is placed in the public record is complete.


Facilitators should include in the ground rules:

  1. Total time of session

  2. Facilitation process

  3. Decorum and language

  4. Cell phone and other potential distractions

  5. Time allocation for each speaker

  6. Facilitator flexibilities and discretions


6. Introductory Comments

Introductory comments are necessary for everyone to understand why they are there. The public notice usually provides a brief description of the topic or issue. The introductory comments are a reiteration and possibly an expansion of those previously provided. Sponsoring organizations typically do the introductory comments following the "Welcome" and “Facilitator Comments.”


The sponsoring organization normally provides introductory comments on the topic or issue to build trust and establish rapport with the public. Facilitators should review the introductory comments in advance to ensure they are concise. In some cases, the facilitator also provides introductory comments.


7. Record of Comments

Much information is exchanged in either a workshop or a public comment session. The sponsoring organization and the facilitator should be clear up-front with how they intend to develop a record of the event. In most cases, this is in a summary report that contains specific public comments (in workshops, specific comments are not requested but workshop materials are included.


The facilitator and the sponsoring organization should develop a recording secretary for the event. The facilitator normally provides a two- to four-page event summary but does not serve as the recording secretary. The facilitator should do a cursory review of the event's record of comments if requested.


8. What Happens Next

The facilitator should provide a formal description of what happens next at the end of the event. The sponsoring organization should summarize this information in the “Thank You” part of the agenda.


Facilitators should develop the remarks in writing to ensure that the information in the record is correct. This important step is often overlooked or taken too casually.


How Does This Help You

Public workshops and comment sessions have fewer statutory requirements than public hearings. With that flexibility also comes more sources of peril. Follow these eight tips as a facilitator to improve the quality of your next sessions.

 

JD Solomon Inc provides program development, asset management, and facilitation at the nexus of facilities, infrastructure, and the environment. Contact us for more information on facilitating ranging from strategic planning and board retreats to more technical topics such as root cause analysis and risk management plans.


This article also appears on www.communicatingwithfinese.com



Experts
bottom of page