Developing Asset Management
Contents:
2.1 Implementation Process
2.2 Towards an Asset Management Culture 2.3 Current State Analysis
2.4 Desired State Analysis 2.5 Gap Analysis
2.6 Implementation Plan
2.7 Relationships within Surrey’s Transport Asset Management Plan 2.8 Managing the Introduction of Asset Management in the Service
C h a p t e r 2 – D e v e l o p i n g A s s e t M a n a g e m e n t
2
Developing Asset Management
2.1 Implementation Process
This chapter addresses some of the important issues, which this authority will need to consider as part of the development of a formalised asset management approach for highways.
The following simple process model can be applied to our service in order to identify desired business improvements.
This approach has been used to identify key decision-making processes throughout the Transportation Service. Its primary objective is to improve the quality of our decision-making for the allocation of highway funds. At the same time, it has enabled us to identify and document our existing arrangements, to set these down as process maps, and to seek a more standardised approach, more structured decision-making, and less reliance on institutional knowledge. This work is set out in more detail below, and in Chapter 15 – Decision Making.
2.2 Towards an Asset Management Culture
It will now be necessary to apply the macro process, shown in Fig 2.1, in a systematic and more general way within our Service. Asset management is a process that will enable managers within our Service to make decisions in a more informed way. However, this more structured approach is likely to require a change of established practices. As part of our implementation of asset management it will be necessary for us to address issues, which include:
•
The organisation, cultural changes and engagement and development of staff•
Comprehensive review of existing processes/procedures and establishment of new desired procedures•
Arrangements for the collection, storage, and analysis of asset related data and systemsC h a p t e r 2 – D e v e l o p i n g A s s e t M a n a g e m e n t
2
Current State Analysis
Desired State Analysis
Gap Analysis
Implementation
Plan
Fig 2.1 Process for Implementing Asset Management2.3 Current State Analysis
As part of the development of asset management within our Service it will be necessary to consider each of these key areas, (staff, procedures and data), and identify and document our existing practices.
Staff
Decision makers – are our key decision makers (for example, those responsible for applying for funding and for the distribution of resources) the appropriate people for this task.
Organisational structure – it will be important to examine whether or not the present (and planned) organisational structure allows for the effective use of asset management. Does this structure, for example inhibit the proper flow of asset information to these key decision-makers
Staffing skills – do key asset personnel have the necessary skills to implement and develop asset management. It will be necessary to be able to analyse asset data to identify trends and exceptions, and to assess alternative options.
Institutional knowledge – it is important to share and record knowledge, which is not widely available within the service. This would include full details about our assets and where information on them is stored.
Processes/Procedures
It will be necessary to consider the way in which condition and performance data, economics and political influences are being used to supplement or influence engineering judgement. The areas we will need to address will include the following:
Annual budgets – how are these set, and what allowance is made for asset condition and performance data in establishing the need for resources and the distribution of these.
Alternative options – how are these evaluated using whole life costing to compare alternative solutions and treatments.
Levels of Service – do our budgets reflect these detailed levels of service (or service standards), and to what extent does our monitored performance against these service standards affect resource allocations.
Whole life options – are we identifying the best whole life options using economic evaluation techniques (eg calculation of net present value of alternative options).
Political influences – how are these catered for as part of our current decision-making. Our future asset management planning will need to reflect the political environment and the way this may influence priorities.
Improvement projects – are these identified using a structured process.
Project benefits – is the effectiveness of projects recorded after completion and are benefits noted in terms of their influence on relevant levels of service.
Project comparisons – how do we rationalise the competing demands of our various projects (for example, a street lighting improvement rather than a footway scheme).
Project programmes – how do we prioritise projects, develop forward programmes of work and over what period.
C h a p t e r 2 – D e v e l o p i n g A s s e t M a n a g e m e n t
2
Data and Systems
Data is fundamental to the development of asset management within our Service. A comprehensive review of all asset data, currently held by this Service, is being undertaken and full details of this appear in Chapter 4. This includes inventory, condition, as well as performance data. As part of this exercise it has been necessary to identify what data is used to make key policy and managerial decisions, and to support funding decisions. Also, in what way this various data is used.
It will be important to catalogue our existing software systems (eg CONFIRM, WiNGS, BridgeStation, WDM PMS and eventually UKPMS). In addition to this, it will be necessary to set down how each of these assists our Service in managing the asset, and in decision-making. As we develop our asset management approach, we are now identifying the important regular decisions, which affect the performance of our assets. It is also important to examine and improve existing processes and create new processes, which will help us to improve these decisions. Enhancing these existing, or providing new, software systems, may improve these decisions. A significant improvement in this decision-making can also be derived from introducing software systems that allow full data integration and wider access by our staff.
2.4 Desired State Analysis
A start has been made in identifying the desired practice, which is appropriate for this Service. It is intended to develop asset management within the generic framework set out in Chapter 1. The key consideration for us is to determine how we should manage our business in the future. This may well be a very long-term view and will require a number of issues to be addressed before achieving this desired state. It will be necessary for us to consider, in relation to the proper management and development of our asset, who will be best placed to make the key decisions, and the basis for allocating our resources. In addition to this, the data required to make decisions, the key processes we need to use, and information systems required to support our operations.
2.5 Gap Analysis
A gap analysis compares the current and desired situations and identifies the activities required to bring current practice to the desired state. As part of this process it will be necessary to consider a number of aspects:
•
The extent of the gaps between the current and desired states, (eg, staff structure, knowledge, processes, inventory and condition data etc)•
The cost of meeting these various changes•
Identification of the expected benefit to customers of each of these changes•
Prioritising those items, which are most crucial to improving our service deliver.•
Consider the extent to which our resources can be used to achieve these desired changesThis gap analysis will allow us to develop an implementation plan for this Service. As part of the
implementation plan, a comprehensive improvement schedule has been developed and has been included in Chapter 18. The scale and extent of the various improvement actions will mean that these are addressed over a three-year programme, commencing April 2004. The life of this Asset Management Plan is three years, but will be subject to annual review based on progress on these improvements.
C h a p t e r 2 – D e v e l o p i n g A s s e t M a n a g e m e n t
2
2.6 Implementation Plan
The national framework makes a number of recommendations in the way that highway authorities should approach the development of highway asset management. The Transportation Service has begun to address some of these. The main recommendations are:
Corporate commitment: ensure that this is highly visible and that there is senior management endorsement.
Surrey response – implementation workshop arising from Best Value improvement action, Steering Group established (see later), advisory letter to all staff from Transportation Head of Service. TMT involvement throughout development of the Plan.
Communication: provide ongoing communication of the commitment to change and the progress in delivering these changes. Set targets for the implementation of asset management and demonstrate progress by publishing and reporting on an implementation plan.
Surrey response – involving a range of key staff and producing an asset management plan and associated improvement action plan. Steering Group maintaining contact with TMT, District technical officers, Finance, IT, LTP and Risk Managers.
Asset Management Champion: the need to appoint an asset manager to drive forward the full adoption and general acceptance of the asset management concept within an authority.
Surrey response – Highway Asset Development Manager appointed to introduce and establish asset management within the Transportation Service. Revised staffing structure establishes an asset manager at group manager level together with the aforementioned post. Profile of this work raised within the Service generally.
Training: the need to provide ongoing training and briefing to those involved in new processes.
Surrey response – launch of this Asset Management Plan is scheduled for October 2004. Briefing sessions for individual groups will follow as required.
Pilot projects: introduce aspects of asset management where necessary through pilot projects for a particular activity or geographic area.
Surrey response – to be planned, as required, and likely to form part of the improvement action plan.
Timeframe: successful implementation of asset management means that this process becomes accepted practice and requires time and concerted effort to change the way people manage our business, more specifically changing processes, collection, analysis and interpretation of performance data and the use of improved software systems to make the whole process easier.
Surrey response – needs to be one of the principal messages to TMT and staff from the Asset Management Steering Group.
The above recommendations are concerned with the way in which the Service, and specifically our staff, address the challenges associated with the implementation of asset management. In addition, there are key improvements for this Service, which will include a thorough review of asset data collection. Linked with this, it will be necessary to implement effective data management and investment in integrating software systems, as defined by our users. It is likely to involve changes in the way we prioritise and manage our work, as well as some reorganisation of individual responsibilities and working practices. The full range of improvement actions, both generic and asset specific, and individually described, can be found in Chapter 18.
C h a p t e r 2 – D e v e l o p i n g A s s e t M a n a g e m e n t
2
Case Study
Review of Highway Funding Arrangements
A specific application of the implementation process described in the previous section.
The simple process set out in Fig 2.1 above has been applied to the allocation of highway funds within our Service using interviews and workshops to identify:
Current State
•
The range of key decision makers•
The key decisions for the management of the asset•
The documentation of information used to assist decision making•
The recording of existing processesThe output from this work has led to the development of a series of process maps in relation to our key asset management functions (e.g. structures, traffic systems, lighting etc). It has also identified the data requirements for each process step. This will lead to a more consistent and systematic approach to the allocation of funds and the programming and prioritisation of our highway works. It has also been possible to identify a generic process map, (following), as part of this work.
C h a p t e r 2 – D e v e l o p i n g A s s e t M a n a g e m e n t
2
Start
Condition Survey
External Inputs
Performance Monitoring Local
Input
Collation into a list of Tasks
Prioritisation
Cost Options Documented
Process Gap
Bid Budget
Unfunded Funded Annual
Programme Construct
Rolling Programme
Genric Process Map
2
C h a p t e r 2 – D e v e l o p i n g A s s e t M a n a g e m e n tDesired State
•
All our key decisions from an asset management point of view•
Which officers are the most appropriate ones to make these decisions•
How these decisions are to be made by these officers, in particular covering the process to be used, information required as an input and information required as an output•
How decisions are to be communicated to other stakeholdersGap Analysis
It is now necessary to compare our current practice with this desired state in order to identify:
•
Gaps in our processes•
Future data requirements and use•
Inefficiencies in the storage and use of asset dataFrom this work to develop an improvement plan which is based on the cost, benefits and practicality of closing the gaps. By way of example, the cost and practicality of providing particular asset data may be prohibitive when compared against its likely benefit.
STAMP Risk Analysis Improvement
Action Plan
Delivery Programmes
Risk items may affect some Performance Indicators Improvement Actions
may affect Delivery Programme
STAMP Performance
Indicators
Levels of Service Surrey
Performance Wheel
Will Influence Will Influence
Will Influence Will Influence
C h a p t e r 2 – D e v e l o p i n g A s s e t M a n a g e m e n t
2
2.7 Relationships within Surrey’s Transport Asset Management Plan
The diagram below sets out the linkages and relationships between the key aspects of our Transport Asset Management Plan. Many inter-dependencies exist, but in particular it can be seen that the Improvement Action Plan has the most significant impact.
STAMP Performance Indicators only map to parts of the Performance Wheel
STAMP Performance Indicators completely map to Levels of Service
Some Risk items have been migrated from the Corporate Risk Analysis to the STAMP Risk Analysis Process assessment covers all aspects
of Asset Management processes
Corporate Risk Analysis Process
Assessment
Will Influence
Relationships within Surrey’s STAMP
2.8 Managing the Introduction of Asset Management in the Service
The national framework has recommended that officers who are tasked with delivering the service should produce the Transport Asset Management Plan. This is intended to engender a sense of ownership and to ensure delivery of the various proposals. It also recognises that this team of officers may not have the necessary skills or sufficient time to produce the plan themselves, and that assistance from internal and external resources would be required.
The Transportation Management Team appointed a champion to introduce and establish asset management within our Service. Since then a Steering Group has been formed to provide full support in the preparation of the plan and identification of future improvements, which will lead to the successful integration of asset management into our business processes. The Steering Group includes a number of officers with key responsibilities for aspects of our highway asset. Our local service delivery and asset monitoring are also represented. External consultants support the Steering Group. During the early part of its work the Steering Group has maintained close contact with other relevant members of staff, (IT specialists, finance officers and highway information). In addition, the Surrey Chief Technical Officers Association (SCTOA) is represented on the Steering Group.
The Steering Group is supported by a Working Group, which has done much of the detailed work associated with elements of the asset management plan. Early work has included existing process review and production of process maps and the compilation and rationalisation of our asset data requirements.
This work will also lead to the production of a user specification for a data integrating asset management software system.
The work of both the Steering Group and its Working Group will continue following the production of this plan. Its work will concentrate on addressing the identified improvements over the three-year period starting from April 2004, which will go some way towards fully integrating the concept of asset management within our Service.
C h a p t e r 2 – D e v e l o p i n g A s s e t M a n a g e m e n t
