The emergent understanding of asset management across all industry sectors has triggered a subsequent need for a standardised approach. The Institute of Asset Management (IAM) in collaboration with the British Standards Institute (BSI) and other industry groups first developed PAS 55 - Part1: Specification for the optimized management of physical assets in 2004. This was developed in response to industry demand for a standard for asset management and was recently revised in 2008 following international collaboration from industry and asset management associate groups.
With growing recognition as the worldwide specification for any organization seeking to demonstrate a high level of professionalism in managing its physical assets, PAS 55 is based on implementing the robust ‘Plan-Do-Check-Act’ (PDCA) continuous improvement methodology. The framework specifies key elements of the asset management process including asset management policy, strategy, risk management, enablers and controls, implementation, performance assessment, continuous improvement and management review.
UGL Services has identified that PAS 55 is an appropriate asset management framework to provide the required level of asset management sustainability to its Facility Management (FM) clients during and beyond the contract term. As such, the PAS 55 framework and guidelines have been successfully applied across recent UGL Services FM contracts.
Could PAS 55 be the most appropriate asset management framework to provide the required level of asset management continuity and sustainability to FM clients?
This paper explains the benefits of implementing elements of the PAS 55 system, with reference to recent UGL Services FM contract case studies.
Asset Management related to physical assets
A web search of the term ‘asset management definition’ resulted in over 5 million sites to choose from for our answer, with the predominant category focusing on financial asset management. One web site began with the statement, “Many of you have probably heard the term ‘asset management’ before, but you may not have an idea of what it really is .......” The good news is, however, that due to the endeavors of prominent organizations such as the Institute of Asset Management (IAM) in the UK and The Asset Management Council in Australia, the term ‘asset management’, in relation to physical assets, has now been articulated to a level where most practitioners and stakeholders now have a clear understanding of a standard definition.
Definitions of asset management (in relation to physical assets) include,
- “Systematic and coordinated activities and practices which an organization optimally manages its assets, and their associated performance, risks and expenditures over their life cycles for the purpose of achieving its organizational strategic plan”. (Institute of Asset Management / British Standards Institute PAS 55: 2008)
- “The life cycle management of physical assets to achieve the stated outputs of the enterprise” (The Asset Management Council, Australia) Both definitions from these prominent asset management organizations agree on key words within their definitions with the emphasis on asset life cycle management to deliver the organizational strategic plan.
Life cycle management basics
In Facility Management, with the exception of Public Private Partnerships (PPP), the facility management provider (FMP) is typically not involved in the asset owner roles related to the concept or design phases of asset management. The FMP is more involved during the life cycle operational phase with the expectation that they adopt an ‘asset owner’ approach in the management of their client’s assets.
Before we begin to discuss the operational phase of asset life cycle management, we may want to ask, and hopefully answer, these basic questions,
- do we have a register of assets down to a significant level? The degree of significance can depend on required level of life cycle management as specified in the service level agreement (SLA) and also the asset risk profile.
- do we know the physical location of these assets?
- do we know how many?
- do we know what condition?
- do we know, or are we able to report in the future, the life cycle costs?
Assuming we have the above information, we should now ask the next basic question,
- have we assessed and determined a risk profile for these assets? The determination of a risk profile will assist in providing key decisions on the applied life cycle strategy and will also consider the potential consequences of not maintaining a particular asset.
The relevance of answers to the above questions will depend on the specific service level agreement but without this basic information and data it will be extremely difficult to produce comprehensive “decision making” reports which can potentially influence the organizations strategic plan.
Applying the guidelines of BSI PAS 55 to Facility Management
Origin of PAS 55
The development of the initial PAS 55 documents was led by the IAM in collaboration with the BSI. The specifications and guidelines were first developed in 2004 in response to industry need for a common standard for asset management. The documents were reviewed and updated in 2008 following further international interest. This review involved 49 organizations from 15 industry sectors in 10 countries.
The PAS 55 specifications and guidelines provide an understandable and standard approach to physical asset management. This in turn gives asset management practitioners the system tools to be able to explain their organization’s asset management strategy to all levels and also provides asset owners and managers with an understandable framework for asset management.
The scope of PAS 55 is primarily concerned with the management of physical assets and also takes into account the interdependency of other asset categories such as human assets, information assets, financial assets and intangible assets (for example, reputation).
The scope of PAS 55-1:2008 states that it is,
“Applicable to all sizes of business, from small to medium enterprises through to multinationals, and to any organization that wishes to:
a) Establish an asset management system to optimally and sustainably manage its physical assets over their life cycles or over a defined long-term period;
b) Implement, maintain and improve an asset management system;
c) Assure itself of its compliance with its stated asset management policy and strategy;
d) Demonstrate such compliance to others;
e) See certification/registration of its asset management system by an external organization;
f) Make self-determination and self declaration of compliance with this PAS.”
Significantly, PAS 55 also suggests that it can provide guidelines and recommendations on what to do although it does not prescribe mandatory solutions on how to do it. This approach is a thankful reminder that developing asset management plans can amount to a sizable body of work requiring substantial resource investment from the organizations team specialists. The culmination of this effort will be sustainable, unique and hopefully rewarding for those involved.
Benefits of implementing PAS 55
PAS 55 provides the following benefits:
- a standard and consistent approach which also delivers a level of continuity to asset management service delivery over the life cycle of the project
- less susceptible to be affected by system administration personnel changes during the term of the project due to the robust framework
- a clear definition of asset management which can be understood at all levels and by all staff disciplines
- a robust PDCA framework which promotes a continuous improvement business culture
- widely accepted as a world-wide specification for organizations seeking to demonstrate a high level of professionalism in managing their physical assets
- high expectation of progressing to an ISO international standard
- the asset management plan is based on a reputable and sustainable reference source which can be used as a base reference to maintain asset management system continuity and sustainability
- can lead to accreditation
- the asset management framework can compliment and be integrated with existing organization strategic plans and support management systems, e.g. safety, quality,environmental
- flexible to changing strategic plans over and beyond the term of the contract
PAS 55 structure - Plan>Do>Check>Act
A continuous cycle of improvement in service delivery to the client is driven through contract
KPIs and supported as an integral organizational culture. This approach is proven and robust
and is straightforward to articulate to all levels of FM personnel.
The PDCA cycle, also referred to as the Deming or Shewhart Cycle (Refer to Edwards Deming
or Walter Shewhart for more details), can be summarized as,
- Plan - establish the objectives and processes necessary to deliver results in accordance with the specifications
- Do - implement the processes
- Check - monitor and evaluate the processes and results against objectives and specifications and report the outcome
- Act - apply actions to the outcome for necessary improvement. This means reviewing all previous steps and modifying the process to improve it before its next implementation
Figure 1 below further explains the PDCA framework as applied from the PAS guidelines.
Organization Strategic Plan considerations
Consideration must be taken of the broader Organization Strategic Plan (OSP) requirements of the organization. Refer to the previously stated definitions of asset management, specifically the phrase, ”....... for the purpose of achieving its organizational strategic plan”.
The FMP should be aware that in developing the Asset Management Plan (AMP), the monthly and annual reports should be focused to provide the client, as well as the FMP’s own organization, with all relevant data and information which can be used to potentially affect and contribute towards the development of the organizational strategic plans.
The development of the asset management service delivery model ‘to achieve the organizational strategic plan’ should include a risk based assessment and analysis to determine asset criticality and priority. This supports compliance by the FMP with the specifics of the service contract.
Figure 2 below, further explains the relationship between the OSP, planning and implementation of asset management elements in PAS 55.
The above diagram depicts how asset systems, activities and planning are ultimately a consequence of the organization’s strategic objectives and a reflection of its organizational values.
PAS 55 framework alignments with other standards
The PAS 55 framework can demonstrate a similar and corresponding system element framework approach with other key management systems. To demonstrate this framework compatibility, PAS 55 has listed comparisons with the other key management systems, specifically:
• Health and Safety - OHSAS 18001:2007
• Environmental - ISO 14001:2004
• Quality - ISO 9001:2008
Other comparable national and international standards related to safety, environmental and quality can also be quoted as applicable to the user organization to demonstrate alignment with the PAS 55 framework elements.
Figure 3 below shows an extract from PAS 55-1:2008 indicating alignment with other Standards and comparable management system elements.
Figure 3 - PAS 55 alignment with other standards
Assessment, compliance and certification
The Office of Gas and Electricity Markets (Ofgem) regulator in the UK has recently stated that all associated UK utility organizations should attain compliance to PAS 55.
We should expect that this compliance requirement will begin with the critical asset owners, such as electrical, water and gas providers, followed by rail and road and then gradually be adopted down the asset critical line. Certain facility categories, including hospitals, airports and data centers are already well progressed in this area.
PAS 55 practitioners and user organizations have the option of self assessing the maturity and levels of competence of their system through utilizing and answering the sets of questions in the IAM Assessment Methodology model. They can also decide to go a step further by being assessed and certified to PAS 55. This service is usually offered by a third party, IAM endorsed training and assessment company who will assess their level of asset management system competency.
Figure 4 below further explains part of the IAM’s Assessment Maturity Model.
UGL Services case studies
The following case studies are examples of recent Public Private Partnerships (PPP) involving UGL Services. PAS 55 system elements were implemented for these projects.
Under PPP structures the private sector develops, finances and maintains an asset which is used in the delivery of public services. In return, the public sector pays a monthly or quarterly charge which covers both the repayment of the capital investment and the ongoing service costs (Refer to BDO Stoy Heyward for more details).
The PPP encourages both the public and private sector partners to take a whole of life approach to design, build and management of the assets. It is also in the interests of both parties to ensure that the design and construction takes into account the best life cycle value relating to operational refurbishments, replacements and maintenance costs during the forecast life cycle term.
Financial risk mitigation is a significant area that requires a high level of priority in the way we operate PPPs. We are therefore required to develop and implement bedrock processes and systems to mitigate the operational and associated financial abatement risks to ensure consistency and sustainability during the life cycle term of the facility.
The PAS 55 framework has also been implemented at other recent non-PPP UGL Services projects and this has proven to be adaptable not only across different facility types, for example hospital, schools, office buildings but also to comply with different contract service specifications.
Royal Women’s Hospital, Melbourne
The Royal Women’s Hospital (RWH) in Melbourne is a 160 bed hospital with 60 neonatal cots, 17 birthing suites and 5 operating theatres. The hospital has a floor area in excess of 40,000 m2 and provides comprehensive care to the women of Victoria in a single central location. UGL Services manages the operations and maintenance of the hospital including Hard FM (electrical, HVAC, plumbing, hydraulics, building maintenance), Security guards, Electronic security, Cleaning services, Hotel services, Grounds maintenance, Life cycle replacements, Fire protection and safety management maintenance. The nine storey hospital opened in June 2008.
UGL Services first identified and consequently adopted PAS 55 in 2006 as the preferred asset management framework for the RWH PPP. This framework also provided an acceptable continuous improvement methodology to comply with the contract performance requirements.
Partnerships Victoria in Schools Project
The project is a multi-million dollar initiative of the Victorian State Government to design, build, finance and maintain eleven new schools in some of Melbourne’s main growth areas. Five schools opened in January 2010 and a further six schools due to open in 2011.
The Asset Management Plan (AMP) related to all 11 schools was also developed using the PAS 55 framework guidelines to provide a consistent and sustainable approach over and beyond the term of the contract. The AMP will manage compliance to the FM contract services specifications.
UGL Services has been contracted as the FMP to operate and maintain both PPPs, on behalf of the State of Victoria, for 25 years.
FMP influence in design
If we were building our own house, or contracting an architect and builder to do so on our behalf, it would be unthinkable for us not to be involved during the design stages. The potential impact we can make to the operational life cycle in relation to best value quality and maintainability is substantial. Similarly, the FMP’s influence during the design phases of a PPP will pay significant life cycle dividends in the long term.
Drawing on identified opportunities for improvement gained from similar projects, UGL Services was able to optimize and influence the selection and specification of equipment and quality of materials to ensure long term asset maintainability, reliability and project continuity.
UGL Services was actively involved in the design, construction and commissioning of the projects, providing an operational focus as part of the interaction with the design team and the builder. This collaboration led to notable design initiatives.
Hospital specific design initiatives included:
• ‘Design-out maintenance’, where some previous maintenance tasks were eliminated altogether due to improved design
• Maintainability initiatives including, improved access, reduced maintenance times, reduced mean time to repair times
• Development of the maintenance management system to fully integrate the functions of the building management system (BMS) with the customer service centre (helpdesk) and interface to service technician’s PDA technology
• Improved design of the BMS to provide three-staged pre-alarm interface to notify site staff prior to a system fault status
• Development of an integrated control room for both hard and soft services that forms the hub for communication and coordinates all services. This centralized service delivery approach improves coordinated cost effective delivery of services and asset management.
School specific design initiatives included:
• Cross ventilation using fans introducing air at low level and discharging at high level. Buildings were orientated to minimize sun load which increased material life cycle, reduced maintenance and optimized HVAC energy management
• Rainwater tanks capturing roof water for use in toilets & plant watering - monitored and displayed in school reception which increased environmental awareness of staff and students
• Low energy use electric heating panels in classrooms which also reduced life cycle costs
• Swales to manage run off water which was pumped back to water tanks
• Lighting control management
• Access control to provide safe monitoring of after hours occupation and additional security for occupants
• Energy use displayed at reception via the BMS which controlled operating hours as required and also increased environmental awareness of staff and students
• Use of low maintenance outdoor materials which reduced life cycle maintenance
• Use of long life colourbond cladding which increased life cycle and reduced maintenance
Asset Management Plan development
The service specifications of FM contracts in past years have generally followed a maintenance focused format with limited reference to asset management and specifically life cycle management. This of course is now changing where contract service specifications have a greater emphasis on holistic asset management. FMPs are now developing sustainable asset management processes and procedures to provide continuity and consistency not only to the client but also in their own service delivery models.
The AMP is developed to primarily comply with the asset management specifications of the client’s contract. The AMP is so aligned with client’s OSP and will be affected by their OSP during the term of the contract.
The AMP includes all applicable documents, processes and procedures which will be referred to during and beyond the term of the contract. Each element of the AMP will be subjected to regular review and to identify opportunities for continuous improvement.
Table 1 below provides to a summary of the AMPs developed for the RWH and Partnerships Victoria in Schools PPP projects. Each element has the potential to include multiple documents appendices, for example, risk management plans, life cycle plans, maintenance plans, standard operating procedures, performance monitoring program and process diagrams.
The comparison of both plans reflects the different asset management profiles and also the different service delivery complexities related to hospitals and schools.
These UGL Services FM contract case studies have demonstrated how the implementation of the PAS 55 asset management system elements follow a logical framework to allow potential linking with the client organizational strategic plan.
Specific elements of the AMP, i.e. risk management, training and competency, life cycle management, checking and corrective action and continuous improvement are referred to in more detail below.
In identifying, assessing and controlling the risk exposure, UGL Services utilized the AS4360 Risk Management “likelihood and “consequence” risk calculator matrix to provide the initial high level and subsequent lower level assessments. The application of the risk matrix scorecard as set out in AS4360 provided the additional benefit of an accessible and common standard reference source for all stakeholders in understanding the determination, and rating of a risk score.
To determine the operational risk exposure associated with the ongoing maintenance and operation for both case studies we also considered the performance parameters, which are set out by the State against each specific contract service specification. The parameters are linked into monthly key performance indicators, which report the actual service delivery performance and ensure continuous performance capability and compliance during the full term of the PPP contract.
In addition to the overall risk management plan developed for both projects we identified the requirement for three supplementary risk asset management control methodologies, based on our initial risk assessment, these are as follows,
1. Business Continuity Plans (BCP) and Pre-Agreed Action Plans (PAPS) were developed to improve business continuity and minimal disruption to operations and functionality. Pre-Agreed Action Plans provide guidance to all UGL Services site staff, contractors and facility personnel on the agreed steps that will be implemented in the event of failure or outage of any of the assets (such as plant, equipment or infrastructure) on the property.
The use of PAPs will provide individual Sites with a coordinated approach to asset failure. They will focus attention on those assets identified as critical, and ensure that solutions for potential problems are anticipated and can be efficiently implemented if required. In this way, PAPs can improve business continuity and minimize disruption to site operations and functionality.
2. The BMS risk management matrix was developed by UGL Services to manage and respond to alarms at a lower priority level, this provided a pre-warning and consequently less disruption to critical facility functions and also reduced the risk of abatement penalties.
3. Equipment Risk Management, where the “equipment” referred to in this category was hospital or school specific equipment groups and where the ongoing maintenance and life cycle management was the responsibility of UGL Services. These equipment types included, for example, autoclave sterilizers, medical refrigerators, batch washers and electric patient beds. A similar AS4360 approach was adopted to identify, assess and control the risk, where the main control method was the PAP.
Training and competency of service delivery personnel
UGL Services have established procedures to ensure that employees or any relevant third parties including contractors working at each significant service level are aware of and can demonstrate an understanding of:
a) the importance of compliance with the asset management policy and procedures, and to the requirements of the asset management plan
b) their roles and responsibilities
c) the potential consequences of departing from specified operating procedures
An asset management awareness and training program has been established and is relevant to the following areas:
• induction and ongoing training for employees in systems and procedures and individuals’ specific roles and responsibilities relating to those elements
• asset management fundamentals with an overview specific to PAS 55
• identified in-house or external training required for employees with specific asset management roles; e.g. building management systems, maintenance management systems, risk management, life cycle costing, maintenance, condition monitoring, root cause analysis
• training and awareness programs for contractors and temporary workers engaged in asset management activities
The effectiveness of training and the resulting level of competency will be evaluated to establish whether the appropriate level of competency has been attained.
Developing and sustaining the life cycle plan
The initial life cycle forecasting by the FMP commences at the bid estimate phase of the project. The State sets out a scope of particular standards relating to fit out, systems, equipment types, quantities, etc. and the expected associated life cycle years either to replace or refurbish.
A subsequent forecast life cycle program is prepared based on the information from the procurement phase and updated to include final asset quantities, purchase costs and life cycle replacement / refurbishment forecasts. The life cycle program considered the role that building assets have in the delivery of services, the associated life cycle costs, the expected life of each asset, the maintenance / operation of each asset and the risks of not achieving reliable performance for the duration of an asset’s life expectancy.
The first step in developing the life cycle program was to review the maintenance plan and life expectancy of each asset using an ‘as new’ condition base from the date of commissioning. The life cycle program budget was prepared with provisions for the works program components including major plant and equipment replacement. Life cycle management also includes scheduled planned condition-based maintenance, preventive service maintenance, statutory maintenance and forecast unplanned reactive maintenance.
Asset performance and condition assessments
Structured condition assessment of assets is part of the condition-based maintenance strategy and is undertaken as part of the continuous life cycle assessment process. Annual assessments input regular updates of asset life cycle condition data to either confirm the forecast replacement date or influence review of life cycle replacement or refurbishment dates.
The development and implementation of consistent standards for asset condition, maintenance and performance forms a core part of the strategic approach to asset management. Contract specific asset management strategies, asset registers, asset management plans and periodic condition assessments implemented by UGL Services are all underpinned by established integrated management systems (e.g. quality, safety, risk, environment, business administration).
Facility inspections of rooms, offices, reception areas, etc, are managed in the asset information management system with inputs from the UGL Services Facility Inspection Checklist. The Facility Inspection Checklist assesses the condition of the asset and prompts life cycle decisions based on replacing or restoring an asset to ensure fit for task functionality. The checklist also incorporates relevant Australian Standards and compliance to statutory requirements during maintenance, replacement or restoration of assets. A structured program of condition assessments is undertaken to enable adequate information to be gathered to assist management decisions and capital budget planning.
The Facility Inspection Checklist includes generic elements relating to most facilities including, exterior, interior, amenities, services, access and cleaning. This checklist can be customized to apply to particular facility elements as required.
Robust asset maintenance analysis facilitates the optimization of availability, reliability and maintainability of the assets. Reports are prepared from available data in the asset information management system.
Analysis effort will focus on data which can have a significant effect on the operational functionality and life cycle of assets. The collection of data and historic service information with no significant life cycle analysis value is not promoted as part of the asset analysis. The process of continuous analysis and improvement follows a set procedure of prescribed routine checks to provide a sustainable approach. This procedure is detailed as part of the asset performance assessment process to provide a level of continuity and to ensure the analysis process is ongoing and is not affected in the event of a personnel change.
The routine analysis checklist depends primarily on data and information in the asset information management system. Examples include:
• life cycle costing (LCC) - analysis of asset LCC including scheduled and reactive maintenance, capital works, energy usage, spares usage
• PM tasks completed to schedule
• reactive tasks completed within response and rectification times
• repeat failures
• uneconomic assets - discard or restore
• condition assessment report analysis
• significant mean time between failures
• significant mean time to repair
• predicted failure trends
• forecast life cycle confirmation or adjustment
• review of adherence to subcontractor maintenance service contract specifications
Checking and corrective action
The analysis and monitoring activities undertaken includes monitoring the performance and/or condition of the assets and/or asset systems utilizing the maintenance asset information management system and other methods of communication such as customer surveys and contract governance meetings.
Asset management monitoring and measurement provides for:
• monitoring the extent to which the asset management policy, strategy and targets are met
• proactive measures of performance that monitor compliance with the AMPs, applicable legislation, regulatory, statutory and other requirements
• reactive measures of performance that monitor asset-related deteriorations, failures, incidents, non-conformances and other historical evidence of sub-standard asset or asset systems performance
• recording of data and results of monitoring and measurement sufficient to facilitate subsequent preventative and corrective action
Performance monitoring and assessment is carried out to determine whether:
• the asset management system is being operated as intended
• assets and/or asset systems are functioning as required, e.g. output, reliability, availability, condition, etc.
• asset management plans, and applicable legislation, regulatory, statutory, and other asset management requirements are being complied with
As part of this process, we also identify areas of possible improvement and implement corresponding action plans.
Ongoing review and improvement of the asset management plans
Drawing on the Plan>Do>Check>Act methodology and established improvement processes, will assist in continuously improving the delivery of asset management services.
Ongoing review and improvement of UGL Services’ AMPs for each contract ensures that they:
• reflect any changes in the client’s business needs or strategies
• benefit from applicable technological advancements
• maintain business competitiveness
Each AMP will be formally reviewed on an annual or more frequent basis at the contract leadership level. The management review process addresses any potential need for changes to policy, strategy and/or other elements of the AMP, drawing on performance assessment/analysis results, knowledge of any changing circumstances, appropriately redefined benchmarks and commitment to continuous improvement.
Comments from the international asset management community have included criticisms that PAS 55 is too broad and not detailed or prescriptive enough in its requirements. This however was considered an advantage in reference to the above case studies where the PAS 55 framework guidelines provided an “out of the box” solution. This consequently helped to expedite the business decision to implement. The development of initial asset management plans based on the PAS 55 framework can be set up in the standard framework and the more prescriptive contract specification elements can then be included while still adhering to the guidelines.
The framework also allowed future scope and flexibility to modify and continuously improve the AMP while again staying consistent with the original guidelines.
At a meeting hosted by Standards Australia on 17 November 2009, participants from leading Australian stakeholders in asset management voted to participate in the development of international standards based on PAS 55:2008.
The proposal recommends the development of a family of standards in Asset Management. The standards will be based on the BSI’s Publicly Available Specification for Asset Management, PAS 55-1 and PAS 55-2. The BSI has advised that they are planning to host the inaugural meeting of the ISO Committee in late April 2010 in London. Consequently from 2010 onwards - the development of a group of International Standards for asset management will commence under ISO and Standards Australia protocols with expected completion and roll-out in 2013.
The subsequent benefits of the development of these international asset management standards will ensure that they are subjected to regular reviews and continuous improvement - inherently, also the core principles of the PAS 55 PDCA asset management model.
The future implications of an accepted international standard for asset management would seem obvious. I believe that it is only a matter of time until a standard accreditation for asset management is also applied to Facility Management for on-going asset management compliance and potentially as a prerequisite for tender application.
• The Institute of Asset Management (IAM) UK
• BSI PAS 55, Parts 1 & 2:2008
• UGL Services Royal Women’s Hospital Asset Management Plan
• UGL Services Partnerships Victoria in Schools Asset Management Plan
• ‘Developing and Implementing a Sustainable Asset Management Plan for a Public Private partnership’ - Ken Robertson, paper presented at ICOMS, Sydney in 2009
• ‘The Provider’s Guide to the Private Finance Initiative’, BDO Stoy Hayward, sourced on web search
• ‘PDCA’, Edwards Deming & Walter Shewhart, sourced on Wikipedia web search
• Facility Management Association of Australia (www.fma.com.au)
• The Institute of Asset Management (www.theiam.org)
• Asset Management Council (www.amcouncil.org.au)
• Asset Management Professionals (www.maintenance.org)
• Plant Maintenance Resource Center (www.plant-maintenance.com)
• Center for Intelligent Maintenance Systems (www.imscenter.net)
• Reliability Web (www.reliabilityweb.com)
• FM Link (www.fmlink.com)
• International Facility Management Association (www.ifma.org)
Ken Robertson has over 30 years experience in asset and maintenance management across a wide range of manufacturing and facility management sectors. In his current role as UGL Services’ Asset Manager, Ken is responsible for the assessment, configuration and deployment of asset management strategies during tender, transition and operational phases and provides support to UGL Services’ service delivery teams.
Prior to joining UGL Services in 2006, Ken held asset and maintenance management roles with organizations such as Monsanto Australia Ltd; Goodman Fielder, Johnson & Johnson (Edinburgh) and as a Marine Engineer Officer in the British Merchant Navy.
Ken was Melbourne Chapter Chair of the Maintenance Engineering Society of Australia (MESA) and the Asset Management Council (AMC) for six years and is a judge of the annual AMC Asset Management Excellence Awards.
About UGL Services
UGL Services provides outsourced services to property users worldwide. The business has an end-to-end model that includes corporate real-estate advisory, integrated facilities management and project management services, along with specialist environmental and procurement services and workplace management. The business includes UGL Premas in Asia and UGL Equis and UGL Unicco in North America. www.ugllimited.com or email: email@example.com.