A framework for strategic infrastructure asset management

The concept of asset management is not a new but an evolving idea that has been attracting attention of many organisations operating and/or owning some kind of infrastructure assets. The term asset management have been used widely with fundamental differences in interpretation and usage. Regardless of the context of the usage of the term, asset management implies the process of optimising return by scrutinising performance and making key strategic decisions throughout all phases of an assets lifecycle (Sarfi and Tao, 2004). Hence, asset management is a philosophy and discipline through which organisations are enabled to more effectively deploy their resources to provide higher levels of customer service and reliability while balancing financial objectives. In Australia, asset management made its way into the public works in 1993 when the Australian Accounting Standard Board issued the Australian Accounting Standard 27 – AAS27. Standard AAS27 required government agencies to capitalise and depreciate assets rather than expense them against earnings. This development has indirectly forced organisations managing infrastructure assets to consider the useful life and cost effectiveness of asset investments. The Australian State Treasuries and the Australian National Audit Office was the first organisation to formalise the concepts and principles of asset management in Australia in which they defined asset management as “ a systematic, structured process covering the whole life of an asset”(Australian National Audit Office, 1996). This initiative led other Government bodies and industry sectors to develop, refine and apply the concept of asset management in the management of their respective infrastructure assets. Hence, it can be argued that the concept of asset management has emerged as a separate and recognised field of management during the late 1990s. In comparison to other disciplines such as construction, facilities, maintenance, project management, economics, finance, to name a few, asset management is a relatively new discipline and is clearly a contemporary topic. The primary contributors to the literature in asset management are largely government organisations and industry practitioners. These contributions take the form of guidelines and reports on the best practice of asset management. More recently, some of these best practices have been made to become a standard such as the PAS 55 (IAM, 2004, IAM, 2008b) in UK. As such, current literature in this field tends to lack well-grounded theories. To-date, while receiving relatively more interest and attention from empirical researchers, the advancement of this field, particularly in terms of the volume of academic and theoretical development is at best moderate. A plausible reason for the lack of advancement is that many researchers and practitioners are still unaware of, or unimpressed by, the contribution that asset management can make to the performance of infrastructure asset. This paper seeks to explore the practices of organisations that manage infrastructure assets to develop a framework of strategic infrastructure asset management processes. It will begin by examining the development of asset management. This is followed by the discussion on the method to be adopted for this paper. Next, is the discussion of the result form case studies. It first describes the goals of infrastructure asset management and how they can support the broader business goals. Following this, a set of core processes that can support the achievement of business goals are provided. These core processes are synthesised based on the practices of asset managers in the case study organisations.

Strategic infrastructure asset management: the way forward

Organisations owning and managing infrastructure asset are constantly striving to obtain the greatest lifetime value from their infrastructure assets. Many such organisations have adopted the concept of “asset management” with the aim of improving the performance of their infrastructure assets. This paper evaluates the adoption of asset management to improve performance in the context of organisations managing infrastructure assets. Relevant previous research studies on main barriers to the adoption of asset management are reviewed. Analysis of these findings, together with deductive reasoning, leads to the development of the proposed improvement strategies. Three issues were identified as barrier to the advancement of the concept of asset management. They are (1) lack of recognition, (2) fragmentation; and (3) growing complexity. To overcome these issues, this paper suggests that the organisations manage infrastructure assets must (1) adopt a more strategic approach in the management of infrastructure assets, (2) develop a framework of strategic infrastructure asset management processes, and (3) identify the core capabilities needed in the management of infrastructure assets. This paper presents the direction for further research to advance the concept of asset management in the management of infrastructure asset.

“Entrepreneurial management” as a strategic choice in firm behavior : linking it with performance

Establishing the core principals of “entrepreneurial management” within an organization describes a certain strategic choice that affects a company in six dimensions, according to Stevenson (1983). Our aim is to empirically measure entrepreneurial management (it’s existence and degree) and to link this measured strategic choice (for or against) entrepreneurial management with firm performance. Our argument here is that companies that follow core principals of entrepreneurial management should outperform other more administrative firms in certain measures of strategic performance. This paper builds on an empirical investigation published by Brown, Davidson & Wiklund (2001), who have developed and tested a reliable measurement instrument for Stevenson’s definition of “entrepreneurial management” (Stevenson 1983, Stevenson & Jarillo 1990). In the first part of our paper we aim to replicate and to some extent improve this study. In the second part we link the measured degree of “entrepreneurial management” with firm performance. To our knowledge, even so Stevenson’s definition of entrepreneurial management is commonly acknowledged and Brown et al. (2001) developed a reliable instrument to empirically capture this behavioral approach to management, the construct of entrepreneurial management never before has been linked to firm performance in an empirical study. Since most papers on corporate entrepreneurship and firm performance are based on Covin & Slevin’s (1991) or Miller’s (1983) concept of entrepreneurial orientation, we contribute to the literature on corporate entrepreneurship in a novel way, given the fact that the entrepreneurial management dimensions measured in our study can theoretically and empirically be clearly distinguished from the construct of entrepreneurial orientation as defined by Covin & Selvin (1991).

Board members’ contribution to strategic decision-making in small firms

This article explores how the boards of small firms actually undertake to perform strategic tasks. Board strategic involvement has seldom been investigated in the context of small firms. We seek to make a contribution by investigating antecedents of board strategic involvement. The antecedents are “board working style” and “board quality attributes”, which go beyond the board composition features of board size, CEO duality, the ratio of non-executive to executive directors and ownership. Hypotheses were tested on a sample of 497 Norwegian firms (from 5 to 30 employees). Our results show that board working style and board quality attributes rather than board composition features enhance board strategic involvement. Moreover, board quality attributes outperform board working style in fostering board strategic involvement

Strategic entrepreneurship in New Zealand's state-owned enterprises : underlying elements and financial implications

The concept of strategic entrepreneurship has received increased attention over the past ten yeras. Viewed as the intersection of entrepreneurship and strategy this field of research is populated by conceptual studies which focus mainly on the nature and perceived benefits of strategic entrepreneurship. Similarly the study of entrepreneurship in a public sector context has gained increasing support in recent years but also remains underexplored. To address these gaps this thesis considers : what are the underlying elements and financial implications of strategic entrepreneurship in New Zealand's state-owned enterprises, New Zealand's SOE sector comprising 17 government-owned,commercially focused organisations, is considered to be a prime subject for this research. Well known for their implementation of new public management, many New Zealand SOEs have also been publicly recognised as both innovative and entrepreneurial. The research question is addressed by first developing a preliminary framework of strategic entrepreneurship from literature on entrepreneurhsip and strategy. The framework is then examined in the context of case studies on activity.