Challenges in asset management - a case study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Asset managers are faced with many challenges in the management of public infrastructure. This paper discusses three of the most common challenges in the design, construction, and operation and maintenance of public infrastructure. These are: building design quality, funding, and the use of asset management tools. The Construction Engineering and Management Group at the University of New Brunswick has conducted a research project on the impact of these challenges. The study examined buildings on selected military bases in Eastern Canada. In total, 215 buildings, ranging from two to fifty years in age formed the database for the research. Five categories of facilities from eight bases were selected to form the basis of the study. These were residential buildings (barracks for single personnel); administration buildings; operations facilities, which comprised vehicle storage or maintenance garages; tank and aircraft hangars; and lecture/training (institutional) facilities. The Department of National Defence is presented as a case study to illustrate how user and facility manager perspectives of quality in building design often differ from the early stages of a building's life cycle. Secondly, the challenge of securing maintenance and rehabilitation funding for asset management is quantified. Finally, the importance of collecting cost data to assist in asset management decision-making is discussed. Difficulties include the need for an improved computerised system to manage assets and the challenges in getting everyone to use the same system effectively in a large public organisation. While well-managed organizations have been able to fund maintenance and rehabilitation at minimum levels in the past due to inherent quality in design and construction, the research showed that quality in design has declined. Thus, more time and funding need to be allocated to asset management if newer constructed buildings are to reach their design service lives without major rehabilitation expenditures. Many public and private sector organisations face similar challenges; hence, the research findings have a wider application than the Department of National Defence.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".