What is wrong with Construction, Facilities, and Lifecycle Asset Managment?

A great deal has been written about "What is wrong with Construction, Facilities, and Lifecycle Asset Managment".

Below is a list of things that may or may not be atypical.

One certainty, however, is that there is a distinct lack of leadership and will to achieve sustainable management of physical assets.

#1. Exploitation of those doing the work. Despite Demmings conclusion that "Eighty-five percent of the reasons for failure are deficiencies in the systems and process rather than the employee. The role of management is to change the process rather than badgering individuals to do better.", poor process have not be replaced with robust solutions.

#2 Lack of leadership. Real property owners pay the bills and are ultimately responsible for all aspects of the built environment. The failure to support and proliferate lifecycle total cost of ownership asset management rests solely is a significant, if not impenetrable, barrier.

#3 Focus upon efficiency. Many so called "LEAN experts" focus upon scheduling and reducing waste. They all fail to address the well-being of those doing the work. People are not machines to be run to failure.

#4 Disconnection between Planning, Procurement, and Project Delivery. It is impossible to separate planning from procurement and project delivery, yet it is the norm. Each group, whether internal to an owner organization or external designer and builders, is in their own swim lane. Information sharing and an early and ongoing basis is limited at best.

#5 Focus upon individuals or organizations versus the group. The result of the above leads to the inability to manage the outcome in a holistic manner. In short, if you don't consider the whole and all the associated dynamics, you can't expect to consistently manage the outcome.

#6. Wrong assumptions. Outcomes can only be managed if the scope of work (SOW) is fully understood by everyone and communicated in a granular manner. Social implications must also be considered and managed. Social interactions must be positive to all parties and outcomes must be mutually beneficial.

What is the solution?

Integrating internal and external planning, procurement, and project teams within a collaborative framework with a common data environment is critical.

Owner, designer, and builder teams must share information on an early and ongoing basis. This includes a granular locally researched and current database organized using CSI Masterformat. Multiparty, long-term contracts and execution guides must clearly define behaviors as well as define workflows. The collective understanding is that risk and reward are integral and shared. Teams are expected to work collaboratively, innovatively, and strive to continuously improve.

Unnecessary administrative burden, repetitive work, and unplanned cost must be mitigated through standardized process, automation, and advanced tools, as well as team efforts. This approach enables both owners and service providers to build and retain knowledge.

As noted, the solution requires leadership, commitment, and resources – but can we wait?

Let's talk>>>