When organizations implement new asset management systems, the focus is on defining their strategic initiatives, providing resource planning and implementation, and aligning these initiatives with their business objectives. The focus often lands on timelines, technology, budget, and delivery. But success often depends on how well people, processes, and data come together.
As asset management consultants, we see a disconnect between the business teams responsible for using and maintaining the system and the IT teams leading implementation, resulting in inefficiencies and missed opportunities.
In many organizations, IT is tasked with leading all system implementations, with the expectation that IT will own the data. Under normal circumstances, leadership has already met with their superiors and provided a timetable for the projects. Often, the project timeline is defined before conducting a comprehensive benchmark assessment of the state of the organization, so the timeline is built on unrealistic assumptions.
But what’s the problem? These priorities don’t always align or are diametrically opposed.
IT may leverage technical fixes such as automation, integration, and scripts, while business teams need clarity around processes, data structure and usability.
Without alignment of priorities, the dichotomy creates a power struggle between IT and business operations, where neither side fully owns the outcome.
Technology alone won’t solve operational challenges. Strong asset management begins with four fundamentals: data, design, technology, and process.
These elements must be owned by the business unit, not just configured by IT, because the business is closest to how work gets done.
When that ownership is missing, organizations often underutilize their enterprise asset management (EAM) systems. Without proper training and documentation, the end users (operations and maintenance (O&M) as well as production) learn what is passed down from previous users. At any given time, less than fifteen percent (15%) of the functionality of the EAM is being utilized.
Tight timelines can lead to shortcuts, especially around data readiness.
To meet predefined deadlines, IT, as the implementation owner, may bypass quality assurance/quality control checks and move forward with uploading data that has not been cleansed by the business unit.
This raises difficult questions. Are IT project managers placed in a position where they must choose between meeting deadlines tied to incentives or delivering the best possible solution for the business? Are executive and IT performance measures tied to project timelines at the expense of a complete and effective implementation?
Are leadership expectations reasonable and attainable? Is critical information being filtered to maintain high-level communication while underlying challenges remain unaddressed? Is leadership fully aware of these challenges and choosing to move forward to satisfy stakeholders?
There is also a question of readiness. Are corporate executives confident that their teams fully understand the business well enough to guide implementation? If the subject matter experts who use the system daily do not fully understand it, how can they provide accurate and meaningful input to leadership?
At its core, the issue is not technical. Data cannot be properly cleansed or structured until there is a clear understanding of how the business will operate in the future.
That understanding only comes through a comprehensive change management process that involves the entire organization, from senior leadership to front-line personnel. Change management is a structured approach to guiding individuals, teams, and organizations from their current state to a desired future state. Change management focuses on the human side—minimizing resistance and maximizing employee adoption. Change management is a compassionate method to alleviate fear of employees feeling incompetent, devalued, or being replaced. In an effective change management program, changes may be initiated either from the executive level or at the operations level but should be based on the needs of the business. The IT team then collaborates with the stakeholders and operations to develop a solution to help the business use the platforms to understand the data and make data-driven decisions based upon results of the data analysis. Once the business leaders understand the process, how it aligns with their strategic plan and goals, and embrace the concept by giving their buy-in, stakeholders should disseminate the technical know-how to the broader organization with special attention given to the front-line workers and those most impacted by the change.
The most effective implementations take a more balanced, people-first approach that include:
Ultimately, success comes from collaboration, not just execution.
That’s why the most important step isn’t technical – it’s operational.
Before designing and implementing the system, organizations need to define how the business should function. Only then can technology be configured to support it.
Closing the gap between IT and the business isn’t about choosing one over the other. It’s about bringing both together with a shared purpose.
When organizations align strategy, processes, and technology and empower people at every level, they don’t just implement systems more successfully; they also build stronger, more resilient operations.
CHA’s Asset Management team works alongside organizations to align people, processes, and technology, helping turn complex implementations into long-term success.