Information quality is critical for any business. It is particularly important for mission critical information systems that manage the lifecycle of an engineering asset. Quality of information or lack thereof in these systems can be traced to technical, organisation, as well as human sources. It is, therefore, extremely important to ascertain the causes that contribute to lack of information quality in asset lifecycle management systems. Depending upon the business area, organisations take proactive or reactive approach to establishing, maintaining, and enhancing their information quality. Among proactive approaches, the ability of the organisation to measure information quality dimensions forms the foundation of a solid information quality management initiative. Such a measurement, however, is an intricate task because these dimensions are subjective, can be context dependent as well as independent, and are interdependent, since each dimension impacts other dimensions. This research employs productive perspective to information and applies Six-Sigma methodology to assess its quality in information systems utilised to manage engineering asset lifecycle. It utilises analytical hierarchy process and quality function deployment to convert subjective information quality dimension into objective metrics, assesses the relationship between various information quality dimensions, and ascertains critical to quality factors. The results thus obtained form the basis for monitoring of information quality aimed at its continuous improvement. This study contributes to literature and practice by providing a method for assessing correlation of information quality dimensions, applying six sigma to information, and controlling quality of information.
TopAsset Management
The term Asset in engineering organisations is taken as the physical component of a manufacturing, production or service facility, which has value, enables services to be provided, and has an economic life greater than twelve months (Haider, 2011), such as manufacturing plants, roads, bridges, railway carriages, aircrafts, water pumps, and oil and gas rigs. The scope of Asset management activities extends from establishment of an Asset management policy and identification of service level targets according to the expectation of stakeholder and regulatory/legal requirements, to the daily operation of Assets aimed at meeting the defined levels of service. Asset managing organisations, therefore, are required to cope with the wide range of changes in the business environment; continuously reconfigure manufacturing resources so as to perform at accepted levels of service; and be able to adjust themselves to change with modest consequences on time, effort, cost, and performance.
Asset management can be classified into three levels, i.e. strategic, tactical, and operational (Figure 1). Strategic level is concerned with understanding the needs of stakeholders and market trends, and linking of the requirements thus generated to the optimum tactical and operational activities. Operational and tactical levels are underpinned by planning, decision support, monitoring, and review of each lifecycle stage to ensure availability, quality, and longevity of Asset’s service provision. The identification, assessment, and control of risk is a key focus at all levels of planning, with the results from this process providing inputs into the Asset management strategy, policies, objectives, processes, plans, controls, and resource management.
Figure 1. Scope of asset management (Haider, 2011)