Why just 'asset management and reliability', where's everybody else?
Updated: Oct 9, 2019
I'm not sure who first said "asset management is a discipline of integration" but I think they were dead right; - The first steps on the journey to good asset management are often the integration of existing elements; finance, operations, maintenance, engineering etc. Once this groundwork is done and the channels are open then great things can easily follow. If this is not done, then asset management is often seen as 'happening' in one team or area and not an organisation-wide opportunity and responsibility.
So the current 'asset management and reliability' trend in roles, articles and seminars is very welcome, but I'm wondering...where is everybody else?
Where are all the 'asset and risk management' events, articles, courses and certifications or the 'HR for asset management' materials? There are a few yes, but we need way more.
So, what can we learn from the experience of reliability? Is the incentive and/or the path from maintenance to reliability to asset management stronger, wider or more inviting than that from strategy, finance and/or risk? To get down to basics - is the salary slope running with this direction of travel and against the others? Do asset managers need to move into finance more to make the connections as opposed to expecting the reverse to be possible?
Considering that quite a few of us came in from the 'shop floor' then I guess we also may be somewhat guilty of failing to look outside of our own backgrounds.
The major risk here is that both Asset Management and Reliability lose their hard-won seat at the C-level table.
What do we need to do?