The Draft Infrastructure Assets Code: what action are you taking?

As the final documents are released, what will you be doing to implement and over what timescale?

As the final documents are released, what will you be doing to implement and over what timescale?

I was reviewing the CIPFA draft code again this weekend and wondered what those in Local Government are doing and/or expecting.  For my part, being somewhat involved with Confirm software, I am interested to know what might be going through the minds of Highways, Lighting, Structures and PMS Engineers as the first “Final documents” come out in the early months of 2010.

HM Treasury has set a timetable for a gradual transition to reporting on this basis, started with limited, unaudited data submissions for 2009/10, building up to a full audited dry run in 2011/12 and the withdrawal of historic cost based reporting from 2012/13.  Is that a timetable you are working to or, with such pressure on spending levels over the next 18 months, is it realistic to assume that you will be able to comply?

If you have a view, if you have a plan, what are the next steps … will you be attending any conferences or the next round of HAMFIG presentations announced last week?

It all makes for interesting times, but for some it may be extra workload with decreasing staff numbers.  The idea from one speaker at the 6th Highways Annual Conference in London last week seems to resonate with me: “…hold back on Capital projects as there is no point building new infrastructure if you do not have the resources and time to maintain what we have…” to paraphrase what was said.

 All materials to support implementation of the Code will be available at  www.cipfa.org.uk/pt/infrastructure

A look to the year and decade ahead: time to re-plan to keep our infrastructure available in the face if “unforeseen events”?

SnowyRoad Jan 20102010 and the second decade is getting underway, as the worst snow since 1963 melts away leaving damaged roads and faulty roadside assets, particularly the electrical type!  The snow and ice has enabled the misbehavour of cars, many of which have defied the driver’s instructions to turn and continued in a not-at-all-majestic straight line into kerbs, lamp columns and ditches.  Many unfortunate drivers ended up in hospital and even more with bills for car repairs that might be followed by claims for repairs to roadside assets.  Our refuse and recycling has not been collected and many of us could not get to our offices.

However, there is one very bright shining star that I saw radiating from the snow-storms: our ability to work from home. 

Many of us could not get to work…yet worked quite normally from home.  Many of our software systems are specifically “access from anywhere, work from anywhere” (aka Hosted, SAAS, on-demand).  Whilst 1963 saw a great deal of hardship from the long snow spell, 2010 has sent less for a number of reasons, one of them being our ability to work from home.  Not only could we access our key operational systems, but we could also hold teleconferences so that our regular important meetings.  We continued with the management of Government infrastructure and key services that keep our country ticking over. 

And what’s more, those who had the vision to introduce “Broadband Britain” should be congratulated.  We could find out “on-line” about changes to the refuse collection as well as transport changes, planes, trains and blocked roads.

Hole in roadWill this decade see us reflect on the tragedy in Haiti and link the (minor by comparison) experiences of the past fortnight, seeing the possibility of re-planning our “major event” and “disaster” plans?  We could easily decide to do so and create new plans if the Broadband service was available, and others if it was not.  Some key workers may have satellite Internet access by the end of the decade, possibly just as a standby.  We may plan for floods, earthquakes and civil disasters the light bulb now on that that key workers do not have to attend an office and we can make a step change to our ability to respond. 

There are many phases to responding to unusual circumstances and this Monday we will get to work repairing all the potholes and damaged roadside assets from this past fortnight.

Meanwhile, if behoves Senior Managers to reflect.  As every journey starts with the first step, no journey starts without that first step.  Will this be one of the changes of the “tens”?  Will Government senior managers be taking a step onto the tube this Monday, or will they be taking that first big on a long journey that will become part of a societal step-change?

Your place or mine?

The topic of where software resides is creating a new choice: “your place or mine”.

Software has mainly been installed on a Customer’s own IT Infrastructure and I will refer to this as “on-premise”.  A new choice is emerging where software is available to use from a Supplier’s IT infrastructure and I will refer to this as “on-demand”, a term covering many options including “SaaS” (Software as a Service), “Hosted” and “over-the-net-in-a-browser”.
A question worth addressing at any time or just when your system is up for replacement?

A question worth addressing at any time or just when your system is up for replacement?

With the on-demand option, vendors might use phrases such as “there is no software, it is a service” and “you need to think differently, because there is no software any more”.  I think that there is, indeed, software; it is just provided in a more cost efficient model and licenced to you via a different style of contract.

Technicalities aside, what are the key issues that potential purchasers should think about if SaaS or on-demand is offered?  There are four groups of questions that must be considered and a few that might be considered:

  1. Suitability
  2. Absolute cost
  3. Availability
  4. Security

SUITABILITY

  • Don’t be distracted by the choice of on-demnd or on-premise UNTIL you have established that the software meets your business needs

ABSOLUTE COST

  • Compare all costs over a number of years
  • Look at the internal costs you might now NOT have to pay, which might include costs of IT support staff, hardware; IT departmental charges; third party software; version upgrade costs (can be up to £30k+ per year in many organisations using FM suppliers instead of in-house IT staff); reduced System administrator costs (as you no longer have 100 PCs to upgrade) and many more
  • Look at any hidden costs, such as a Departmental charge NOT reducing because of internal “rules” and extra interfacing costs
  • Include the commissioning costs if this is relevant (possibly low if an existing supplier is swapping the delivery method from on-premise to on-demand)

AVAILABILITY

  • How resilient is the proposition in terms of speed of access (e.g. when all staff are looking at the weather at 1pm on-line)
  • How is the data backed up, how often and where are backup stored?
  • How are local Maps, Local Printing and Local Corporate system interface dealt with?
  • Can people work from home, with their own variety of access bandwidths?
  • Does the Infrastructure supplier have one or many sites, where are they and how are significant incidents (floods, bombs etc) going to affect your system?
  • Will the Infrastructure supplier go bust (if this happens, you will not expect it, so best ask) and what happens that day to your system
  • How do Home workers access the system from home PCs – or is it best that this is a big NO
  • How would Field Workers upload and download data to mobile devices and what about the ones who need to do so wirelessly
  • and so on…

SECURITY

  • Where is the data stored?
  • Can ex-employees with a grudge trash the data?
  • It may matter to your organisation where the data is stored.  Find out.
  • What are the points at which the data is in the public domain, if any?
If you choose "On-Demand", choose it.

If you choose "On-Demand", choose it.

Naturally, the list of questions could go on a long time.  If I was a purchaser, being offered on-demand and on-premise, here is how I might think:

> Let’s make sure that I have evaluated this software as my best option BEFORE addressing my attention to this question (an old sales trick when getting no commitment to buy is to offer an alternative question that is a version of “so, if you did choose to buy it…which I know you have not yet done…, would you choose red or green?”)

> If this is my chosen software, then, is it cheaper to have on-demand over 1, 5 and 10 years for ME taking MY organisation’s way of counting costs to ME in MY role in MY department (if not stop right now)

> Now I am considering on-demand, how available is it compared to on-premise and what is the evidence to support that (or ask for I will insist on a trial of sorts)

> Now that I am considering on-demand and I know it is as available as on-premise (or better than on-premise), how will it interface to the systems and devices that are part of my requirement

> Now that I am OK with it technically, what data security rules should I consider and what evidence do I need (this one is pretty straightforward)

> How will the supplier develop the software’s capabilities for my vertical solution compared to how best of breed on-premise solutions are developed and what is the evidence? (I need proof that this makes financial sense to my supplier or they will either fail to develop the system as my needs change over time or go out of business)

With so many people offering on-demand as an alternative to on-premise, the need for a mutually beneficial relationship remains as does the need for me to be offered the choice: your place or mine!

PUI: the way ahead?

Pun Pui starfish

Pun Pui starfish

…and then my son came home at the weekend, enjoying his first job and the immense adult-like feeling one gets talking across to one’s father for the first time.

“So Dad”, he says, “I read your Blog and you seem very keen on these “Programmer-User Interfaces”…you call them SIGs (Special Interest Groups) and CAPs (Customer Advisory Panels), but really, are they all forms of PUI?  We thought we’d made up a new TLA, using the “Interface” word to mean a dialogue or meeting between people.

24 years old, going on 3, a son’s words can bring you down to earth…but we laughed all the way home at our childish and yet inventive humour.  Well, if a GUI is valid, why not a PUI?

It is the season of good cheer, but a more serious reflection does actually sense the logic in the many and various PUIs that might be constructed:

CAP: where a group of programmers need to talk to a group of users in order to write really good software

SIG: where a group of users need to work through a business problem with members of a company to persuade them that doing X might be mutually beneficial.  (A CAP might well ensue)

User Groups (a Street Lighting User Group is…yes…a SLUG – please email other suggestions to me at dominic.mcneillis@pb.com ) where users and software companies mix employees for updates and brainstorming.  (A SIG and possibly a CAP might ensue)

I am PUI

I am PUI

Community of Practice (CoP): usually a virtual community (website to normal folk) where any member can post thoughts, ideas and comments at any time.

PUIs make the best software based on really helpful “stuff” built on insight from the everyday users with their experience of the realities of their role.

So, SLUGs, CoPs, SIGs and CAPs are all forms of PUI.  Like many family moments, the lovely joke we thought we shared was a “bubble burst” when we looked up acronymfinder.com only to find that PUI is, indeed, a valid TLA standing for Progammer-User Interface. 

 

What will be the focus in 2010?

Is the Holy Grail for 2010 "Reducing cost whilst increasing efficiency"?

Is the Holy Grail for 2010 "Reducing cost whilst increasing efficiency"?

As we approach the end of 2009, what is or should be our fresh perspective for 2010?

We have changed the focus from Y2K to e-Gov, T-Gov and different numbers of “allowed definitions”, but I seem to sense that the real perspective in 2010 will be some form of “Saving money whilst simultaneously improving efficiency”.

This is the gauntlet being thrown down by Political leaders and not just in the UK.  We might be witnessing harnessed impatience driving a sharp focus where Political leaders, many of whom have no interest in understanding IT, just want to see a step change, a leap forward and a major improvement in the results from the equation “Efficiencies gained” ÷ “Cost” = “ROI” ….. and one that tangibly changes the lives of citizens.

How?  Where does one look?  Where can one even start?

A software company cannot know what the users of its software know.  Confirm sells to 10 distinguishable professions within the Government landscape whose members devote their working lives to improving operational techniques, Codes of Practice and sometimes Legislation to improve the lives of citizens they serve. 

We can learn how to grow great ideas

We can learn how to grow great ideas

Confirm users are often innovative and unseen in creating new and more efficient ways of using our software.  They often notice areas of the software where repetitive procedures could be streamlined or even automated.  This is a fact that has applied to all software systems in the past and will persist through time.

I believe that the real key to finding those innovative ideas lies in a close and unfiltered mind-share between people who do the job and people who write the software

So the step-change may come from concentrated dialogue between experts in software design and everyday users rather than elaborate and hopeful rhetoric.  The real value in a multitude of exchanges of ideas between operational staff conducting the everyday roles and software code-writers: between the people at one coal-face and the people at another coal-face.

We might all ask ourselves if our new year’s resolution could be our new year’s revolution. 

Within the “Confirm lot” at PBBI many of us will be continuing the work started this year with the our users in enhancing the many dialogue  and idea exchange forums (is this fora, for those who speak Latin?) we have and introducing some new ideas.

Save money AND increase efficiency?  I think that is the whole point of software and I think I see it becoming a bluntly defined battle cry in 2010.

8 types of maintenance: a comparison

 

Condition / Inspection

Citizen Enquiry

Job/Maintenance

Comments

1. “Run to Failure” or “Reactive”: often where budgets are far outweighed by the available resources, both staff and money. 

Only done in response to an event, i.e. a report from other staff or citizen

Often the only way the Custodian will get to know of an asset “failure” or “suspected failure”

Sometimes Citizen reports initiate jobs, other times it initiates a technical  inspection

Common where the Custodian makes a judgement in the environment of limited funds e.g. Tree Maintenance.  In such cases, Insurance cover represents a “hidden cost”

2. “Event driven” maintenance: where an event drives the need for action.  

Can be performed by generic staff using a pre-defined “list of observations” or a locally generated framework.

Often categorised by the Asset Custodian as a “Service request”

The likelihood of the job going ahead sometimes depends on budget and sometimes on Legislation or local service levels

Here, the asset may not have intrinsically failed but the job will “provide a service”, e.g. the service of providing clean streets

3. “Calendar based”, “Pre-planned” or “Routine” maintenance

Not required in relation to the regular maintenance.  May be performed on an ad-hoc basis in response to an “unusual event”.

Usually comments on the condition of the asset or an event requiring an ad-hoc maintenance action

Pre-planned pattern of jobs based on the domain science and studies made by experts in relevant circumstances.

Examples are Grounds Maintenance, Street Sweeping and Refuse collection.  Sometimes dependent on local budgets and political considerations.

4. “Statistical based”: a preventative maintenance technique common with machine and possibly vehicle maintenance. 

Not required in relation to the regular maintenance.  May be performed on an ad-hoc basis in response to an “unusual event”.

Reports an unusual event as the principle is to maintain 100% availability.

Similar to no 3 the pre-planned pattern of maintenance is based on previous studies by domain or asset experts.

Often used for vehicles, plant and production machinery

5. “Condition based”: often where a human inspection results in maintenance actions being collated and then issued as funds allow.

Is the basis for this maintenance type.  Sometimes the inspection will be prescribed by Code of Practice or Legislation.

Where received usually initiate a technical inspection.

Jobs collected from Inspections cannot always be executed, due to budget limitations, building up a “Work-bank” or backlog

Roads, Bridges, Play Equipment are all examples of where this is used in the “Municipal” context

6. “Predictive Maintenance” based on science or condition readings: visual or sensor-based

An inspection or sensor will take condition readings and, based on readings, jobs are proposed

No usually relevant

Jobs aim to prevent failure and minimise asset “down-time”

Common where maintenance is costly (e.g. Street Lights) and for some types of machinery.

7. “Reliability Centred Maintenance”.  It is generally used to achieve improvements in fields such as the establishment of safe minimum levels of maintenance, changes to operating procedures and strategies and the establishment of capital maintenance regimes and plans. Successful implementation of RCM will lead to increase in cost effectiveness, machine uptime, and a greater understanding of the level of risk that the organization is presently managing.  Common for very high cost assets where reliability has a high consequence, e.g. production line machines, airline engines and so on.

Inspections may be made “on the bench” in the case of “Rotable Assets” or done when machinery is taken out of use on a production line (line switched off or rotable assets within the production line)

Not usually involved, although staff operating these assets will report unusual performance and will usually be trained to act as “non-expert eyes”

Carrying out jobs on assets “on the bench or closed down results in better reliability with high capital cost items.

RCM starts with 7 questions:

What is the item supposed to do and its associated performance standards?

In what ways can it fail to provide the required functions?

What are the events that cause each failure?

What happens when each failure occurs?

In what way does each failure matter?

What systematic task can be performed proactively to prevent, or to diminish to a satisfactory degree, the consequences of the failure?

What must be done if a suitable preventive task cannot be found? 

8. “Financially Optimised Maintenance”: Carry out Maintenance to fit the available funds.  In Public life in the UK and other countries, we might notice PMS and Bridges moving in this direction. 

Can be any mix of machine based, visual or sensor.

Citizens report in non-expert mode so expert inspections usually ensue

Jobs depend on budgets as other options are available: e.g. close a road, restrict bridge width available to vehicles.

Pavement Management is typical and Bridge Maintenance in the UK is heading in that direction with the Bridge Condition Index (BCI).

Any clues for reducing costs whilst simultaneously increasing efficiency?

What if you could predict when your assets will fail?

Being able to predict failure patterns of street assets may significantly reduce the cost of maintenance

Being able to predict failure patterns of street assets may significantly reduce the cost of maintenance

If you manage public assets, some feel that you are fundamentally responsible for providing a service to citizens around the street scene, which itself partially defines the society in which they live. Your professional life may revolve around the maintenance of a sub set of street scene assets and belonging to a professional organisation may be an important part of how you acquire the knowledge that helps you to optimise effective maintenance within the available funds.

Someone in your team is publicly accountable and will have to provide feedback to stakeholders in the “Value Chain” and best practice may indicate a change in maintenance practice. Have we already seen one or two examples of such changes and are we about to witness others?

In the pursuit of providing a principle road network, Inspectors walked along the road and pavements noting down road defects. Where a road was defective over a wide area, treatments were recommended and, if the budget was available, work carried out. Then came the high speed survey machines and a new approach to the science of Pavement Management based on more data, much more data. Instead of acting mainly reactively, Highways Managers started to try to predict when a road would fail, having noticed that sums needed to bring roads back to their design standard suddenly increased (below a certain level of deterioration) with time.

The sequence of activities associated with this style of maintenance is judged by the industry to be lower cost and might be applicable in other Street Scene situations. The sequence is:

1. Inventory Definition

2. Pavement Inspection

3. Condition Assessment

4. Condition Prediction

5. Condition Analysis

6. Work Planning

UKPMS is kept up to date by the industry for the industry

UKPMS is kept up to date by the industry for the industry

Agreed algorithms to predict deterioration of roads are used by all Government Agencies in the UK that are the Custodians of Public Roads and the practice is common throughout the world with tailored algorithms to suits the political and physical climate in each region.

Can this principle be applied to other street scene assets or services? Would it provide a better return on our long term public spend or provide better services at a lower cost (the battle cry of UK Government today). Did it, indeed, provide an improvement over the previous position before UKPMS and, if so, how and why?

High speed machines travel at 60mph along pre-defined routes Roads (1) and collect data (2) which is processed and fed into software (3) which records Condition Assessments as set out in the UKPMS “code of practice” and time/date stamps them. Software is then used with the agreed algorithms to predict how the condition of the road will change over time (4) so that an analysis (5) of the overall road network condition can be made in preparation to be tested against available funds in order to proposed optimised treatments ahead of work planning (6).

The pre-requisites of 1-6 are that there is a standard way of doing each step and that enough reliable data has been collected over the years to enable robust predictions to be made, whilst data about the cost of treatment options is kept current for stages 5 and 6 particularly. It is also likely that the optimised treatment dependent upon available funds will show a shortfall, indicating the need for a further condition prediction cycle where the eventual deterioration of the road will render is unusable….leading in turn to a cycle of seeking additional funds to eventually minimise the spend on maintenance over the long term. This may be incompatible with short term Political aims, of course.

So, if we are happy that this method might be transferable to other public assets/public services, we need to ask the question “has the underlying science been done and enough data been collected?” An example is Street Lighting, where the cost of Lamp replacement to a 30m high column on a busy road junction is very high and to smaller ones is still relatively high. To this date, most Custodians of this invaluable public asset have used “Bulk Lamp change” as the most cost effective way of ensuring that our streets are lit to an appropriate level. The 2009 Street Lighting Engineer’s annual conference had quite a few papers presented on topics around “remote sensors”, some proposing that a revolution in cost reduction might be available through their use. Street Lighting Engineers also have to accurately report the energy usage to the energy supplier in the UK, according to an industry standard and these devices might be able to remotely control and vary the level of light, thus reducing the energy usage and provide a realistic “Return On Investment” (ROI) based on this characteristic alone. If they can also predict when a light is about to fail, does this mean that the cost of Lamp replacement will reduce? Bulk Lamp change was introduced for a reason and maybe there is not enough data around today to make that judgement.

I guess it might be appropriate to go through the 6 stage that defines PMS to see if one is happy with the ROI figures provided by the purveyors of the devices and software surrounding this science – and that it for Lighting Engineers to measure and “report back”. Time will tell.

What about Bridges? That is being done and we expect an update from the scientists collecting and examining the data via the County Surveyor Society (CSS) in April 2010.

Theatrical Street Scene at night in Belgium - saving taxpayers money?

Theatrical Street Scene at night in Belgium - saving taxpayers money?

How about our Parks, Green assets and sports areas? What about the Public Trees? And what about the Bins our refuse and recyclables are collected from?

Looking at the 8 types of Maintenance from last week’s post, I wonder what outsourced companies might agree with the Municipal Organisations of tomorrow and how the cost of public services will change with time. Will we create revolutions to reduce public spending or will we provide better and safer streets, where, perhaps, criminals are caught as they walk by Street Lamp Columns with retina scanners mounted at a vandal-proof height?

Will the street lights be dimmed at 9pm and raised at 11pm to signal that it is time to go home, as in a theatre – it is already happening in Belgium!

Eight types of Maintenance

An interesting window into your world?

An interesting window into your world?

Universities, Professional Organisations and Institutes participate in the never ending march towards more efficient operational maintenance by contributing to the “body of knowledge” openly shared between the ten or so domains that constitute “Public Infrastructure Maintenance”.   In this week’s post, I offer a categorisation of eight types of maintenance that could apply to “assets” and write a few words about the relevance of each to the Maintenance of Public Infrastructure Assets.  If this is an area you feel passionately about, which not click the “comments” word at the top of the article and send me your comments – have I missed something, do you have a contra-opinion or does this simply not work in your geography?

1. “Run to Failure” or “Reactive”: often where budgets are far outweighed by the available resources, both staff and money.  Examples might be Tree Management, Maintenance of Street Furniture, replacement of kerbstones and gulley tops (drain covers).

2. “Event driven” maintenance: where an event drives the need for action, such as Graffitti removal and many types of property repair, as well as road based events, such as road traffic collisions requiring repairs to the road surface or street asset.

3. “Calendar based”, “Pre-planned” or “Routine” maintenance: often applicable to areas such as Grass cutting, horticultural activities such as rose of flower bed maintenance and the longer term cycles, such as Tree Pruning and even long-term cycles such as building wiring replacement (every 25 years) and roof tile replacement (every 40 years for concrete interlocking tiles).

4. “Statistical based”: a preventative maintenance technique common with machine and possibly vehicle maintenance.  There is usually a loop back into the prediction cycle by taking sensor readings from running machines and this category is common in manufacturing.

5. “Condition based”: often where a human inspection results in maintenance actions being collated and then issued as funds allow.  This can also include where sensors relay a signal and software interprets each type of signal so that an inspection event or a maintenance event is triggered.

6. “Predictive Maintenance”: In the context of Public assets, this may seem similar to Statistical based maintenance.  Bridges and PMS have inspections based on a predictive cycle but the replacement of Street Light Lamps could be said to be predicitive as no ongoing revision it taking place as with Statistical maintenance.  Predictive Maintenance may prevail over statistical techniques in Public life as Infrastructure Assets have a high consequence of failure and thus public liability is ameliorated.  Think of a Tree falling on a car or even a Bridge collapse…we have heard of such catastrophes.

7. “Reliability Centred Maintenace”: Not so common with Public Infrastructure Assets as Inspection based maintenance is often swapped out.  An example might be the replacement of bearings on a bridge…it might not be acceptable to have a target of 98% non-failure whereas a baked bean production machine might suit this approach.

8. “Financially Optimised Maintenance”: Carry out Maintenance to fit the available funds.  In Public life in the UK and other countries, we might notice PMS and Bridges moving in this direction.  Certainly we notice many algorithms in PMS seeking to optimise proposed treatments based on a available funds rather than maximising safety through surface to tyre friction.

Framework

Framework

Naturally, one could write  book or even a series of books on this subject and the continuous improvement of the eights types of maintenance within the context of many asset types.  

One article is but a drop in the ocean and offers a framework for discussion.  As the context for Maintenance changes in the post recession world we find ourselves in, we are all looking for more cost effective ways to maintain the public street vista that is what most citizens take for granted.  Never ending rounds of cost cuts are coming (did they ever not stop) and, in the inter-connected 24 hours world of today, citizens are demanding higher quality services. 

Do the eight categories offer a new window to look through?  This article does not offer content on the other side of the glass, which is for the many vocational professionals to decide, but well framed windows can stimulate comment!

Do you manage assets or provide services?

Millau Bridge, Tarn Valley, Southern France

Millau Bridge, Tarn Valley, Southern France

Employees in Local, Regional and Central Government Agencies, their partners and a plethora of stakeholders turn up for work each day and do their part in the “Value Chain” of Public Infrastructure Maintenance.  Some inspect assets, others make difficult decisions about expenditure based on limited funds and resources.  Yet others are skilled tradespeople and craftspeople who actually do the jobs that repair, install or decommission assets.

Are these people experts in Maintenance Management?  Are the assets themselves actually important?  Or is the Service the thing of importance?

Looking at Refuse collection services, the publicly owned refuse bin is not that which one normally focuses on as an employee in a Municipal Cleansing and Waste work group; the service is what draws delivery staff attention – is it timely, effective, cost effective?

When we look at other assets, we might be drawn to other conclusions.  A Bridge Engineer will definitely focus their working efforts on the Condition of components of a Bridge in the context of failure of the whole Asset.  With catastrophic consequences, Bridge failure is the correct focus yet one may ask if all it does is provides a service, as part of a Highway…whose function is to facilitate the efficient movement of citizens between various buildings.  Some Bridges are destinations, with intrinsic beauty and statuesque appeal such as the Millau Bridge in Southern France or the Fehman Belt Bridge in the Baltic Sea.

Even beautiful assets have function, the ambition of the designer or commissioning body had the vision to make something with intrinsic beauty, adding a secondary function of making a statement about that part of the world, turning “it” into a destination or, more likely, providing function within the context of a beautiful area. 

...you affect the lives of citizens in a profound way

...you affect the lives of citizens in a profound way

Back to the people…Assets are key to providing services?  Perhaps.  If so, consider the process of maintaining the road.  It needs to be available in perpetuity, in the best condition that supports the transport requirements of the day and unavailable for the least amount of time.  People have developed science to predict the best time to do the least amount of work to keep the road available and this science can be flexed for differing budgets and differing desired road conditions (Pavement Management).  The people who carry out this “science” are called Pavement Engineers and they care about the asset; their managers and policy makers care about the service.  In consultation with “Government” about Public funds and sometimes with citizens (in a democracy) about desired quality, they set out the rules and parameters for the Engineers to conduct their Asset Maintenance Science.

Now to the staff involved in “event driven maintenance”.  There are many aspects of Street Based Asset Maintenance in which Events drive most of the remedial actions.  Examples include Graffiti removal, many types of property repair, Street Lamp replacements, clearing fly tipping, providing a Bulky Household collection, clearing a fallen tree…none of which would ever happen without their event…amusing thought, perhaps, clearing a fallen tree that isn’t there yet?  “Event Driven Maintenance” could be a topic in a University course and, indeed, tomes have been written about this aspect of Infrastructure Maintenance, but it is really all about providing a service to citizens so that they enjoy a great built environment.

Manage assets or provide services?  The TEAM has a profound effect on the lives of its citizens.

Manage assets or provide services? The TEAM has a profound effect on the lives of its citizens.

I went to one of the big Business Analyst firms the other day and the Director of Public Infrastructure and I mused about how most citizens hardly notice the well maintained Public assets that ARE Britain, or New Zealand, or Melbourne and so on.  Citizens visit other parts of the world and notice that Refuse in (perhaps) The Gambia is collected every month, when a large truck goes along the main streets and most refuse on the street is collected and thrown into the back of large trucks by intimidating crews; children are kept away and cars are parked off of the route whilst domestic refuse and unwanted items are put out into the now empty street.  You would not be asking for the Bin to be a different shape, which colour should be used for recyclables or whether it had an ID chip but you might be asking for weekly collections as a start point! 

So we are focused back on the service. 

My conclusions is that TEAMS provide services to citizens.  Within the team, Engineers and Scientists practise aspects of the appropriate Asset Maintenance Management techniques. Others within the team make decisions levels of service to balance public funds with citizen demands.

On a purely personal note, I observe that those involved in all aspects of Managing public assets and providing public services affect our lives much more than we usually think about…until we are confronted with very different levels of service or public assets that are clearly in a very different condition.  Oh, and by the way, the public would like to hardly notice your 24/7/365 efforts, but want to feel really good about where they live.

To answer my own question “Do you manage assets or provide services?”, I choose an answer with an added observation: Your team does both and, in so doing, you have a profound effect on all of the citizens you serve.

Will there be a case for IT Investment in the short term?

Data from the ONCWith Public Sector borrowing soaring, is it nevertheless still true that IT investment that actually saves money in total Return On Investment (ROI) will be in vogue during the next 18 months?  Have we been so used to the common sense approach of actually providing the same services for less (or better services for the same money) that the strong signals by both major Political parties that they are about to reduce public spending are being heard but not listened to?

Here are the stats from the Office for National Statistics (ONC).  The public sector showed a deficit on current budget of £11.3 billion in September 2009, compared with a deficit of £7.6 billion in September 2008.

More generally, the public sector recorded deficits between 1991/92 and 1997/98 before moving into surplus in 1998/99. Deficits have been recorded since 2002/03.

An alternative measure of the public sector fiscal position is public sector net borrowing. This additionally takes account of capital investment. In September 2009, there was net borrowing of £14.8 billion, which compares with borrowing of £8.7 billion in September 2008. The Budget forecast for 2009/10 is net borrowing of £175 billion.

Public sector net debt, expressed as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), was 59 per cent at the end of September 2009 compared with 48.4 per cent at end of September 2008. Net debt was £824.8 billion at the end of September compared with £695.2 billion a year earlier.

Sobering numbers but will the focus on building services around the citizen prevail, as long as a provable ROI case can be documented ahead of major purchasing decisions…and then, of course, monitored?