Success and Failure of Network Level Road Asset Management Systems RAMS

1
Success and Failure of Network Level Road Asset
Management Systems (RAMS)
NZTA and NZIHT 9th Annual Conference
NABIN PRADHAN October 2008 NZTA Conference
2
Component of RAMSWhat may go wrong ?How to
make difference ?Conclusions
3
COMPONENTS of RAMS
COMPONENTS
Data Collection
Reporting
Database
Basic Level Information Management System
Analytical Modules
Standard or Advanced Level Asset Management
System
Pavement Mngt System Bridge Mngt System Routine
Maint. Mngt System Contract Mngt. System
4
COMPONENTS of RAMS

• LEVEL OF RAMS IMPLEMENTATION

Pragmatic approach, with gradual increment of
complexity/modules more successful
5
COMPONENTS of RAMS

• STAKEHOLDERS FOR IMPLEMENTATION

RAMS Developer/ provider
Operator/ Modeller
Software provider
End User
Each stakeholder plays important role in success
of RAMS
6
COMPONENTS of RAMS

• ASSET MANAGEMENT vs. ASSET MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

ROAD ASSET MANAGEMENT
ROAD ASSET MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
It is fine to have asset management principles,
but if you do not have an asset management
mindset incorporated into your agency procedures
and into service contract, and data to determine
what you actually doing, you are kidding
yourself Source FHWA
7
Component of RAMSWhat may go wrong ?How to
make difference ?Conclusions
8
WHAT MAY GO WRONG !
9
WHAT MAY GO WRONG

• LEVEL OF IMPLEMENTATION FAILURE
• Level 1- Partial Successful RAMS fully
  implemented and working well, but not used to its
  full potential
• Level 2 Partial Failure RAMS fully
  implemented but not providing the expected
  outcome
• Level 3 Total Failure Full implementation of
  RAMS never completed

10
WHAT MAY GO WRONG
11
WHAT MAY GO WRONG

• LEADERSHIP
• Lack of Leadership No Leadership in agency
  level and/or national level
• Leadership - without vision
• Influenced by Interest Groups External service
  providerInternal units
• (Eg. BMS Unit wants to incorporate advanced BMS ,
  when actually more beneficial to improve PMS)

12
WHAT MAY GO WRONG

• LACK OF OWNERSHIP
• Reducing
• Policy maker hearing about benefits may take
  ownership but generally found to fade away with
  time
• Reduced because of staff change or organisational
  change
• Never Taken
• No appreciation of importance fulfilling
  requirement of legislation or agreement
• No dedicated team

13
WHAT MAY GO WRONG

• NOT FIT FOR PURPOSE
• Inappropriate process/system Issue with process
  design
• Wrong selection of software Software platform
  not appropriate
• System not customised to local condition used
  the default setup
• Procedure/System out-of-date May have been
  appropriate number of years ago

14
WHAT MAY GO WRONG

• LACK OF FUNDING FOR
• Ongoing operation
• System, maintenance and upgrade
• Staff incentives and encouragements
• Research and system refinements
• More focus on one activity and less focus on
  others could be detrimental

15
WHAT MAY GO WRONG

• SOFTWARE PLATFORM ISSUES (Especially in
  developing countries)
• Not flexible enough to develop(if a lot of buy
  in not much problem)
• Lack of good interface(difficulty in generating
  reports and customising systems)
• Unaffordable(High maintenance and subscription
  cost)

16
WHAT MAY GO WRONG

• LACK OF SKILLED MANPOWER
• High skilled staff required Higher skill level
  required with more complex models
• Skill of diverse field For example to customise
  system to local condition Need some knowledge on
  asset management principles, maintenance
  practice, deterioration modelling, software
  programming
• Not enough job Many consultants and limited
  work means not much exposure for modeller -gt
  accreditation requirement would help

17
WHAT MAY GO WRONG

• POOR IMPLEMENTATION
• Issue with implementation team
• Unbalanced focus
• Lacked necessary support of stakeholders
• Poor communication strategy
• Poor quality assurance

18
Component of RAMSWhat may go wrong ?How to
make difference ?Conclusions
19
HOW TO MAKE DIFFERENCE
20
HOW TO MAKE DIFFERENCE

• BUSINESS PLAN RAMS IMPLEMENTATION

Should be well integrated with plan for
improvement in asset management practices
21
HOW TO MAKE DIFFERENCE

• WHAT USER NEED ?
• Users are looking for solution rather than system
  
• System design, user interface should consider
  customer needs

22
HOW TO MAKE DIFFERENCE

• SYSTEM DESIGN FIT FOR PURPOSE
• Information for decision making process that can
  be cost effectively generated
• Level of complexity(simple vs. advanced)
• Potential capability of the team (in-house or
  external service provider) implementing RAMS
  system
• Potential funding availability

23
HOW TO MAKE DIFFERENCE

• DATA FIT FOR PURPOSE
• Data collection is critical to successful asset
  management, but too much inaccurate, unfriendly
  data is worse than having not at all FWHA(2005)
• Only data required for decision making collected
  and maintained
• Sustainable
• Quality assured
• Refined periodically based on new
  developments(data collection methodology and
  modelling)

24
HOW TO MAKE DIFFERENCE

• PROPER REPORTING FIT FOR PURPOSE

• Log of changes in models/algorithm see the
  impact

Advanced User

• Information helping in customising the system
• Detailed outputs to compare the options

• Structured self-explanatory user interface
• Reports targeted to help decision making

25
HOW TO MAKE DIFFERENCE

• SELECTION OF APPROPRIATE SOFTWARE

26
HOW TO MAKE DIFFERENCE

• ADEQUATE FUNDING ALLOCATION
• Long-term funding Inadequate and dis-continual
  funding detrimental to progress
• Prioritised Right priority to different
  components and modules
• Data required accuracy level and frequency
• Models improve customisation to local
  conditions
• Process design based on experience and feedback
• User Interface based on user feedback
• Reports customised to decision making process

27
HOW TO MAKE DIFFERENCE

• SKILL DEVELOPMENT
• Theory without experience is the foundation
  without the superstructure. Experience without
  theory is the superstructure without foundation.
  The former is useless, the later dangerous John
  Kernot
• Unskilled modeller causes loss in fate in
  system
• Training on Asset Mngt and software use Both
  on optimal decision making process used in road
  asset management as well as software system
• Training course in right level Regularly
  updated training course based on level and type
  of users practical

28
HOW TO MAKE DIFFERENCE

• DEDICATED TEAM(s) - MUST
• Could be in-house or outside Depending on
  where which component sits best. Ext service
  provider more appropriate for small RCAS
• Changing staffs/service provider detrimental
• Asset Manager from RCA Owner should take
  full responsibility for implementation
• In house RAMS Champion
• Need to have in house RAMS champion on each RAMS
  modules

29
HOW TO MAKE DIFFERENCE

• ONGOING REFINEMENTS
• Gap analysis - periodically Between existing
  system, needs and potential capability
• Prioritised refinement Funding not unlimited,
  most appropriate refinement first
• Accumulation of funding More potential if a
  number of agencies use same system

30
HOW TO MAKE DIFFERENCE

• PROMOTION OF INFORMATION USAGE
• Periodical publication of statistical/ comparison
  reports, at-the-glance etc.
• Reporter with well structured and self
  explanatory user interface and required reports
  available to decision makers
• Ongoing user training and refresher courses
  (both in AM and AMS)

It is easier to get required resources for
ongoing implementation of RAMS when the system is
used by a large number of users.
31
Component of RAMSWhat may go wrong ?How to
make difference ?Conclusions
32
CONCLUSIONS

• TO MAKE THINGS HAPPEN
• Long-term Commitment of Road agency on
  improvement of asset management practices and
  supporting systems
• Ownership Road asset manager takes full
  responsibility to implement RAMS system and use
  it as a tool to help with decision making
• Pragmatic approach Ongoing improvement based
  on the experience and needs, but keep with
  overall objectives and vision

33
Thank You