Case Study - Developing and Implementing an Asset Management Program Aligned to the Business Needs of One Seaport at its Centennial

Sideline conversations indicate ports are awakening to the fact that, to survive and compete with vintage assets that are approaching, their design lives deserve management attention and resources - today, and from now on. "Run hard and put away wet," it is generally agreed, is no way to operate a going concern; yet, it is a tome that reads all too familiar to ports across the country as we marshal scarce resources to adopt Asset Management programs to inventory, assess, maintain, restore and improve our dock, building and yard infrastructure. We fear what we might find. Yet the business case for deferred maintenance, if there ever was one, is over. "Learn to walk before you run." Peer ports suggest that Asset Management is not a "one-size-fits-all", orthodox initiative. Yet, it would be a mistake to forego learning the core tenets of Asset Management, which can help in framing a program suited to the capacity and needs of your particular port. Then, with a planned program tailored to your needs, start small and build from there. Successful implementation of an Asset Management program is a marathon, not a sprint. Titrating a formal roll-out will enable the organization to adapt in parallel. "Be arbitrary and capricious." Following nearly a year of discussion, in November 2010 the Seaport was charged with establishing an Asset Management Program by mandate: "You have 2 years and $2 million. Get the program up and running." Without such a bold charge, we would likely still be talking. With such a daunting task ahead, our first reaction was equally bold: "That's it?" We had a budget that the institution could afford, and a schedule to further exact accountability. Neither mandate squared with the preconceived scope, so we needed to sort the wheat from the chaff and agree on a program. "What is mission-critical?" To develop our Asset Management Scope, staff grouped assets into three "buckets:" Dock, Yard, and Building Systems. To complete Condition Assessments on all three would dwarf $2 million, so we trimmed scope to reach a mission-based solution. We recommended the entire $2 million be spent for Condition Assessments of our Dock Systems. After all, a Port cannot exist without Dock Systems. Following approval, and just as we breathed a sigh of relief, we were then asked, "How will you complete condition assessments on the yard and building systems?" With no budget remaining, we had to get creative at a whole new level. Summary. This paper presents the challenges, discoveries and successes experienced by the Port of Seattle's Seaport from November 2010 through 2012 as it initiated an Asset Management Program. It presents findings as a topical case study and serves as a clarion call to other ports that Asset Management, properly administered, is a cornerstone to reducing a port's total cost of ownership. "Run hard and put away wet," it is generally agreed, is no way to operate agoing concern; yet it is a tome that reads all too familiar to ports across the country as we marshal scarce resources to adopt Asset Management programs to inventory, assess, maintain, restore and improve our dock, building and yard infrastructure. We fear what we might find. Yet the business case for deferred maintenance,if there ever was one, is over.