If the management of assets is core to your business you need to consider how to reduce maintenance and replacement costs over the life of the assets. Managing asset lifecycle and related costs can be quite difficult, especially when complex facilities are involved with thousands of assets to consider and aging infrastructure to take into account. With today’s technology innovations it can be easy to think that the answer to your business’ asset management woes lies in getting a new technology solution in to help track the work and asset conditions. Technology solutions and new systems aren’t always the right choice and can be very costly to implement while still not giving you the benefits you were striving to achieve (ex. reduced overall asset lifecycle costs). Here are some things to consider when thinking about purchasing and implementing a new computerized asset management system:

1. Can your current problems be fixed through process improvements and minor system / tool development work?
   Depending on what your business is and the complexity of your asset maintenance program, sometimes it might make more sense to stick to the current state while making some process improvement changes and application enhancements. Since implementing a new system can be very costly both in capital dollars and in your employees’ time, the option to keep and improve your current set up needs to be considered in the overall business case. Sometimes it makes more sense to instigate process and minor system changes first, learn from the experience what your company really needs and then decide to go out to market for a more comprehensive system if you can still justify the expected benefits above and beyond the improvements made to current state.
   Example: One of our government client was responsible for facilities and asset management. Requests for maintenance services were coming in informally and the client wanted to have a better way to manage service requests and maintenance. Since the number of facilities and maintenance staff within the client’s realm of responsibility was fairly low (under 50 facilities and less than 50 staff) an in-house solution was enhanced. This tool allowed individuals to log service requests and for maintenance staff to keep records of work performed for each facility.
2. What do your employees think of the current tools/ processes and how eager are they to see improvement in the way they manage their asset-related work?
   You need to figure out what issues (if any) your employees have with the current way of managing maintenance and your assets. These issues can drive the requirements for a new system or internal initiatives to fix current processes and tools. Furthermore, employee buy-in for a major software implementation is very valuable in your journey towards benefit realization. Without your employees seeing how these new changes can make their work lives easier, it would be very hard to drive a successful implementation and improve on any of your target KPI’s.
   Example: One of our large utility clients did a survey of their maintenance workforce to better understand staff attitudes towards the current in-house asset management system. One of the resounding survey results was that staff wanted to see improvements made to their asset management tools so that they can better meet day to day business demands. This company was then able to use this feedback and engage champions from the business to document system requirements for a software RFP.
3. Is the regulatory environment in your industry becoming more stringent and increasing reporting rigour and frequency?
   Although the way you currently operate can work very well for you and your bottom line, one major consideration for improved asset management through a computerized system is regulatory pressure. If you find that it is becoming harder and harder to gather and compile all the data required by regulators in their reporting guidelines on a timely basis while the regulatory demands keep steadily increasing, a computerized solution could be exactly what you need. However, here again there are several things to consider including whether regulatory pressure is the only motivator for a system or if other business metrics can benefit as well. These considerations can greatly influence what kind of technology solution you would seek and what the scope of the implementation would be: full ERP system, CMMS system or compliance management module only.
   Example: One of our clients operates pipelines and was finding it difficult to keep up with increasing regulatory reporting pressure. Specifically, some reports would take weeks to prepare given that data would need to be sourced and compiled, often referring to paper records in the process. This regulatory pressure was a key component for a business case to get a new CMMS system implemented.
4. Are you able to find and commit funding for a multi-year project to execute a major software system implementation?
   Another thing to consider when evaluating the need for and benefits of a computerized maintenance management system is if your organization will be able to afford it over the long run (while also considering if you can afford not to do it over the long run). While the costs of the software licensing and installation can be quite large on their own, there are various other costs that you need to take into account. These can include additional technical costs for hardware, IT infrastructure, additional software packages that would support the new application being installed, maintenance costs for the software, and costs for new devices (such as laptops, tablets, signal boosters, etc.). On top of technology costs, the labour costs to maintain the new package post implementation are not trivial. While it is tempting to assume that any additional work will just assimilate into the regular day-to-day activities of your current staff, it is often the case that longer terms support for the application enhancement will need to be provided by a team of business and technical leads. Having proactive system support, user training, and enhancements enables you to continue to strive towards realizing system benefits after the application go-live but it usually requires a net increase in your organization’s staffing for as long as you intend to use the software.
   Example: One of our clients is a mid-sized organization with approximately 150 staff. During the implementation about 10% of the staff were involved in the project directly. Post implementation those individuals continued to act as subject matter experts on the software and provide support throughout the organization to their staff. Additional FTE’s were added to free up the SME’s and give them time for support and on-going improvement work. Some contract resources were also retained to lead additional improvement initiatives. Every year, there are additional post-implementation initiatives that the organization budgets to take on in order to continue to strive towards the originally envisioned benefits.
5. What is the quality of your current asset data?
   One thing that software implementation are really good at bringing to light is the quality of your organization’s data. If you heard the phrase “garbage in, garbage out” you can probably infer why this is an important consideration when thinking about implementing a new software package. For example, if you currently lack asset data and purely rely on technician knowledge then you will have a hard time setting up an asset management system. If this is indeed the case, what you may want to consider doing first is investing in internal or contracted data collection and clean up initiatives. Having the data on a spreadsheet or in a simple Access database can be a really great start for a system implementation and would set up the foundation for how useful a system would be if implemented. These initiatives can be very time and labour intensive on their own however and should not be underestimated.
   Example: One of our utility clients had to contract additional support services to go out to several of their older facilities and collect asset data, update drawings and compile the changes for use as part of the CMMS implementation. The quality of the asset data in the system was greatly improved before go-live, building up credibility with the end users at those facilities.

As you can see, the decision to implement an asset or maintenance management system is not trivial. Your organization needs to carefully consider the business case for it and various factors that can influence the outcome of the implementation. If you need support in making this decision, there are experts available to help. Our team at StraNexus can help guide you through an initial assessment of your needs and towards a customized solution for your business. Please feel free to give us a call today.