The optimization of asset management plans needs to happen at several levels, and there is an important sequence to build a transparently justified total programme that minimizes rework. Firstly, individual interventions should be optimized for cost, benefit, risk and timing - this will include decision-making, for example, about the cost/benefit and optimal timing for specific investment, inspection or maintenance tasks, modification project or renewal of a particular asset.
With such understanding (of different tasks that are individually worth doing, and when), the next level of optimization should consider the best mix of different activities on the same asset over its whole life cycle. This may involve a number of “what if?” scenarios, to explore different mixes of capital investment, operating strategies, maintenance and achievable economic life cycles. Note that the term ‘life cycle’ may be useful as a criterion only for the integrated asset management of discrete asset units. More complex systems may not have a total renewal or decommissioning horizon (they could be maintained, piecemeal, indefinitely). In such cases, the asset ‘life cycle’ optimization represents the best value mix of activities required to ensure effective, efficient and sustainable system performance.
Finally (and only at this stage) comes the optimization of delivery activities - the best work programming, task bundling, resourcing and efficient delivery of multiple tasks across multiple assets. Such refinements of asset management plan implementation should consider the cost/risk impact of, for example, doing some tasks prematurely or beyond their optimal timing in order to gain greater, shared benefits of system access/downtime, logistics or planning overheads and other resourcing efficiencies.
For more detail, case studies and other useful insights into the subject and how it is implemented in different environments, please go to the Knowledge Centre (some material is for IAM members only).
