Asset owners and operators

An owner holds an asset for decades, far longer than any team that designs, builds or maintains it, and takes investment decisions about it every year. What the owner knows has to outlast all of those teams.

Start a conversation All audiences

Aerial view of an energy storage site with rooftop solar panels

Running an asset is a long series of investment decisions

An owner decides, year after year, where to spend on maintenance and renewal, what to replace and when, and which risks the operation can carry. Those decisions rest on how the asset is performing now and how it is likely to perform over the rest of its life.

Long-term performance: How the asset is performing, and how that is likely to change
Investment choices: What to renew, replace or defer, and in what order
Information quality: What is verified, what is assumed, and what is missing
Operational resilience: Which duties, dependencies and handovers the service relies on

Knowledge leaves with the teams that hold it

Most owners rarely build their own assets; they bring in teams to deliver them, and the reasoning behind each decision tends to leave with those teams.

The information needed to run the asset usually exists somewhere, spread across finance, schedules, contracts and documents. The difficulty is that it is rarely held in a form anyone can rely on for a decision. The gap shows most when something changes hands: a new programme starts, a contractor leaves, or a long contract comes to an end.

How we help

We start with the operating decisions an owner takes every year, and then help to keep what the owner knows about the asset in its own hands.

Renewal and maintenance priorityLink the asset's condition to the service it supports, so spend goes where it protects the most service rather than to the oldest element.

Investment across a portfolioModel several sites or schemes together, so the sequence and the shared supply chain are planned as one.

Resilience and regulated outcomesTest which changes protect the outcomes a regulator will measure before capital is committed.

See how this applies to water, energy networks and health estates

Keeping the knowledge with the owner

Who owns each dutyRoles, responsibilities and statutory duties mapped stage by stage, including duty-holders who carry personal accountability, such as the Building Safety Act Accountable Person and Principal Accountable Person.

What the asset isAsset records turned into a 3D model with condition history and quantities, each element tagged by how it is known, and gaps shown as gaps.

What the information saysExisting systems connected where they are, bringing in what a given decision needs.

For contracts nearing expiry, PFI handback readiness brings these together against the handback timetable. On live programmes, capital programme control maps each role, duty and gate so each sign-off has a named owner, and process and organisational improvement looks at how the work is actually carried out rather than only how it is written down.

Project:OS delivery register showing work items with owners, effort, state and phase — Delivery register, sample data

AvailableProject:OSHolds duties and duty-holders stage by stage, so what the owner needs to know stays with the owner.Optional: use it with our services, on its own, or not at all.

Worked examples and insights

PFI handbacks, de-riskedDeveloped in collaboration with A7Consult Limited: four contracts rebuilt from published records alone, to show what an owner can know before handback The Data You Already OwnInsight on starting from the information already held There Is No Such Thing as Good DataInsight on judging information against the decision it serves

Questions

We didn't build the asset and the records are incomplete. Where do we start?

With what is already published. Planning files, energy certificates, committee papers, released contracts and national LiDAR give a useful baseline before anyone is asked for anything. It will not answer every question, but it shows which to ask first and which answers to check. Each item carries an evidence level, from public baseline up to verified on site, so you can see what is tested and what is still assumed.

We hold Building Safety Act duties. Can Project:OS help?

It maps duties role by role, including the Building Safety Act Accountable Person and Principal Accountable Person, so each duty and sign-off has a named owner. It assembles the evidence each gate needs against set criteria, so you can see what is still missing. It supports your duty-holder arrangements. It is not an independent assurance review and does not replace one.

Does a 3D model replace a condition survey?

No. It makes the survey go further. We build the model from the records, with each element tagged by how it is known, so the survey can be scoped against a known component list. The survey then verifies condition on site, and its findings are recorded against the same components, so each item moves from assumed to verified.

Do we have to replace the systems we already run?

No. Process work can run in Project:OS or be deployed into your own systems, and either way we link each step to the evidence it should produce. Your information stays where it is.

Talk to us about an asset

The contract and the records you already hold are a good place to start.

Start a conversation