Measuring the Performance of a Strategic Asset Management Plan through a Balanced Scorecard

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to propose a tool to measure the performance of a Strategic Asset Management Plan (SAMP) based on a Balanced Scorecard (BSC). The SAMP converts organizational objectives into asset management objectives, as well as specifies the role of the asset management system, providing support to achieve asset management objectives. The SAMP becomes the heart of the organization and integrates the long-term, medium-term, and short-term plans. In the SAMP, the balance among performance, costs, and risks are taken into consideration in order to achieve the organization’s objectives. On the other hand, the SAMP is a guide to set the asset management objectives while describing the role of the Asset Management System (AMS) in meeting these objectives. Since the SAMP is the central figure of AMS, it is important to measure its performance and should be built and improved through an iterative process. This indicates that it is not just a document, it is “the document” that should be treated as a “living being”, which needs to adapt to internal and external changes quickly. The BSC is an excellent tool where, through the appropriate Key Performance Indicators (KPIs), the progress can be measured, and is supported by four perspectives: Financial, Customer, Internal Business Process, and Learning and Growth.

1. Introduction

1.1. Framework

Nowadays, sustainability is becoming a major issue mainly due to the growing demand. For example, in Portugal, from 1995 to 2015, the urban area increased by 40.2% [1]. This growth is the fruit of population demand for new infrastructures (housing, factories, roads, etc.) and this issue is replicated worldwide [2,3,4,5]. Essentially, this reflects the increase in needed resources.

On the other hand, some authors link economic sustainability with the management of physical assets [6], while other authors state that, in many industries, maintenance procedures can significantly contribute to the pursuit of sustainable development [7]. Therefore, the use of assets is linked with sustainability in order to develop sustainable economies. The benefits of these assets are reflected in terms of innovation and knowledge-based technologies, thus linking innovation, knowledge, and the environment [8].

Therefore, it is important to implement strategies that successfully increase the sustainability of the environment based on complementary assets [9]. It might be difficult for decision makers to maintain an asset’s performance in accordance with rational repair strategies because they may neglect to create suitable maintenance plans or fail to maintain the assets. Organizations face pressure from all over the world to guarantee the sustainability of their assets [10]. Concerns about sustainability and safety are raised over whether essential installation maintenance is being sufficiently funded to guarantee long-term viability [11].

Industry 4.0 technologies are being rapidly incorporated into Asset Life Cycle Management (ALCM). In the manufacturing sector, industries look for opportunities to meet sustainability objectives [12] using Industry 4.0 technologies [13]. Moreover, companies expect to achieve sustainable outcomes using these technologies [14]. By utilizing technologies like Neural Networks for modeling pavement performance in order to improve sustainability [15], companies basically expect to have the highest production while utilizing the fewest resources. For this to happen, it is important that assets have predictive maintenance policies to increase their availability [16,17,18,19].

On the other hand, one of the concerns about sustainability is related to global warming and rising sea levels [20], and these changes bring more vulnerability to climate disasters. In addition, the global water cycle is becoming more intense as a result of climate change, with dry areas becoming drier and wet areas becoming wetter. Nearly half of the world’s population, around 3.6 billion people, currently reside in places that may be water deficient for at least one month out of the year [21,22,23,24]. Other scenarios that widely acknowledge climate change as a reality are the occurrences that have taken place in 2021, including severe drought in Madagascar, a snowfall in Brazil, and summertime flooding in central Europe [25]. Previous studies have established a connection between climate change and the increase in temperature due to CO₂ emissions [25].

For example, Portugal had an extreme drought event from January 2022 to September 2022 [26], reaching over 60% of extreme drought in the territory; on the other hand, in December 2022, the region of Lisbon was hit by an intense precipitation event, reaching values of 17.1 mm/m² in 10 min and causing floods all over Lisbon [27].

Drought brings the need to find other resources of water for all purposes and that requires investment. However, when dealing with floods, the authors refer to a massive economic breakdown, enormous loss of life, destruction in housing and infrastructures, agriculture, and other similar events [28,29,30,31,32,33].

Since the earth’s natural resources are scarce and finite [34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45], there is a need to better manage these resources. Some authors claim that an efficient utilization of natural resources improves the economic advancement results [46,47,48], while other authors reinforce the need to reduce waste and reuse equipment at the end of their lives as well as whether to rebuild them [49,50]. At this point, it is important to emphasize the importance of reduce, reuse, recycle, recover, redesign, and remanufacture [51]. The basic goal is to maximize the life cycle, realize and produce value from the assets, and maintain the value and sustainability of the assets through appropriate management [25].

According to the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED), “Sustainable development is the development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” [52].

Nowadays, the circular economy is becoming very important regarding the need to achieve sustainable development [53]. As the need for reduction, reuse, recovery, and recycling of materials and energy has become a priority, the circular economy plays a major role in achieving these priorities [54,55], reinforcing the need for a transition from the linear economy that started in the industrial revolution to the priority needs of the circular economy. The biological processes in which nothing is wasted serve as an inspiration for the circular economy. Despite certain misconceptions about the circular economy concept, previous authors [56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63,64] have advocated the necessity of the circular economy to achieve sustainable development because it can be used as a tool to attain sustainability.

Nowadays, sustainable development can be achieved by relying on every development. In addition, we need to use energy in a sustainable way through reducing consumption and finding renewable energy sources [65,66,67,68,69,70] and low carbon energy sources, while developing low consumption equipment and energy efficient projects. As a result, we will feel more inclined to make investments [71] and bring about economic growth [72].

Energy sources have always been crucial to the advancement of human society. Energy has been the primary engine behind the advancement of modern civilization since the industrial revolution [39]. While the energy consumption growth rate is aligned with the economic growth rate, the population growth rate tends to decrease each year [73,74].

Some authors state that economic growth is improved by investing in physical assets and energy use, but at the expense of environmental sustainability [75]. Luciani [76] shows how the speed of the switch to renewable energy affects economic growth whether or not it will be maintained. On the other hand, investing in physical assets makes it easier to integrate cutting-edge technologies into the production process, which will facilitate the needed transition [77].

The transition to Asset Management (AM) leads to a great advantage because it makes it easier to train qualified workers, to improve knowledge transfers, to acquire leading alternative management platforms, etc. [75]. This improves not only the transition to renewable energy, but also the sustainable use of energy, which leads to economic growth [78,79]. When considering AM, there are some steps to build it and the SAMP is the main document that details the asset management objectives. Moreover, it explains their relationship to the organizational objectives and the framework required to achieve the asset management objectives [80]. In order to build a reliable SAMP, it is necessary to have accurate data [81]. As the SAMP is the main document, it is important to be able to measure its performance and quality—no studies to date have examined this issue. Furthermore, if we want to evaluate the SAMP’s performance, then we need to measure and improve it. With this objective, the authors present a new tool to fill this gap.

1.2. Methodology and Research Questions

The aim of this research is to contribute and provide support to measure the performance of a strategic asset management plan by offering a new approach. For this purpose, a five-step methodology was used [82]:

(a)

Framing questions for a review

(i)

While building an Asset Management System (AMS), is it a core element to measure its performance?

(ii)

How can we measure the SAMP performance?

(iii)

Since the SAMP is the central figure in the AMS, how can it be measured?

(b)

Identifying relevant work

(i)

Section 2 provides the literature review.

(c)

Assessing the quality of studies

(i)

Indexed papers from scientific libraries.

(d)

Summarizing the evidence

(i)

Using available data to demonstrate the robustness of the proposed model.

(e)

Interpreting the findings

(i)

The results obtained are discussed and the strongest and weakest aspects of the research are identified.

1.3. Paper Structure

This paper is structured as follows:

• Section 2 synthesizes the relevant literature on the performance measuring tool of a strategic asset management plan;
• Section 3 presents the scorecard;
• Section 4 presents the performance measuring tool of a strategic asset management plan through a balanced scorecard;
• Section 5 presents a discussion;
• Section 6 offers the conclusions.

2. Literature Review

When considering asset management, the value must be closely related to the organization’s objectives and the asset management objectives compatible with those objectives [83]. Pais et al. [84] considered asset management as an umbrella where good practices are brought together. On the other hand, Raposo et al. [85] stated that asset management suggests a way for managing assets in line with the strategic goals of the organization, enabling choices on their purchase, replacement, and/or disposal, which improves sustainability and the organization itself. All of these objectives and the results of the actions taken to achieve them should be measurable [86].

Roda and Garetti [87] presented a Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) evaluation methodology based on a cost and performance model in nine steps, with the first six steps being related to performance evaluation and the remaining three steps related to cost evaluation:

• Process understanding and the system’s components identification;
• Identification of failure modes or stop causes of each component;
• Reliability, maintainability, and operation data acquisition (Time between Failures (TBF) and Time to Repair (TTR));
• Modeling of the as-is system through Reliability Block Diagram (RBD) logic;
• Simulation (Monte Carlo);
• Technical performance calculation of the system;
• Cost model setting;
• Cost data acquisition;
• Calculation of TCO.

For the modeling and calculation steps from 4 to 6, the model uses software R-MES Project©.

Simões et al. [88] conducted an analysis of 345 various performance metrics for maintenance management. This study offered suggestions for creating performance metrics; however, it only examined a portion of the Asset Management (AM).

Wang et al. [89] developed performance measures for AM. They adapted the Balanced Scorecard (BSC) and stated that it is important to combine asset management with a BSC. The authors presented a framework for designing performance measures (Figure 1). Utilizing a BSC combined with AM, as well as establishing objectives and performance measures and descriptions, the authors presented a lack of numerical elements that can be quantified.

Arthur et al. [86] sought the need to create a “line of sight” using a Balanced Scorecard (BSC). To achieve this, the following phases were selected:

• Develop the AM strategy and identify AM objectives;
• Select performance indicators;
• Test for alignment or line of sight;
• Reflect on the process and outcomes.

The authors also selected performance indicators and the need to have a “line of sight” to the asset management objectives.

Utilizing the BSC approach, Arthur et al. [86] developed their own top-down strategy map for creating performance measures. However, this novel strategy failed to solve the engineering asset management system’s integrative complexity because performance measures should be designed from multiple perspectives.

Regarding performance measurement (PM), Abdul-Nour et al. [90] stated that PM in asset management systems is typically studied from a maintenance viewpoint rather than a global perspective, supporting their affirmation of Kumar et al. [91], Simões et al. [88], and Maletič et al. [92].

Regarding measuring asset performance, Wijnia [93] stated that “what gets measures gets done”; however, the author was concerned about the value to deliver and the validity of the indicators. In order to evaluate asset performance, the author considers a pragmatic solution but provides two questions:

• Is it really only about delivering an absolute amount, like the produced volume, the availability of an asset, or staying within budget limits?
• Or is it more about ensuring that the available resources are used in the most effective and efficient way, like driving towards the best value per unit of cost or the lowest cost per unit of production?

Wijnia [93] considered the second question to be more aligned with continual improvement, but his conclusion considered that while setting targets is a common practice, this is a difficult task, and the use of ratio indicators is an easier way. On the other hand, he considered that it could be applied across international boundaries, while under one’s control, these conditions contravene the standards for conducting reliable indications.

Pais [54] presented a model to diagnose the organization’s state using ISO 55001. This model is a tool to help implement and continuously improve the ISO 55001. It has 25 surveys and a total of 154 questions, with the results presented on a radar map (Figure 2).

In 2007, Crespo presented a maintenance management model (Figure 3) [94]. Based on this model, Parra et al. [95] presented an audit tool for Asset Management, Operational Reliability, and Maintenance Survey (AMORMS).

The AMORMS is an audit that aims at helping the management process of ISO 55001. It is based on eight phases:

• Definition of the maintenance objectives and KPIs;
• Asset priority and maintenance strategy definition;
• Immediate intervention on high impact weak point;
• Design of the preventive maintenance plans and resources;
• Preventive plan, schedule, and resources optimization;
• Maintenance execution assessment and control;
• Asset life cycle analysis and replacement optimization;
• Continuous improvement and new technologies.

From these eight phases, 150 survey questions are generated, with the result being a radar map. Moreover, this model provides supportive tools to help in process management.

Another model for audits presented by the same author is the Asset Management Survey ISO 55001 (AMS-ISO 55001), which is based on the asset management norm ISO 55001 [96]. It is focused on auditing the processes of the asset life cycle in managing according to ISO 55001 and is based on the ISO 55001 requirements:

• Context of the organization;
• Leadership;
• Planning;
• Support;
• Operation;
• Performance evaluation;
• Improvement.

In order to measure performance (PM), Folan and Browne [97] divided it into two core areas:

• Recommendations for performance measures;
• Recommendations and issues for PM framework and system design.

The first emphasizes good performance measures, whereas the second focuses on recommendations regarding the design and development of PM and suggests the use of BSC.

Regarding measuring the performance of a document, such as the Strategic Asset Management Plan (SAMP), there is no study to date that presented any report or research about it. Filling this gap is very important to help the organizations evaluate their SAMP as the central document in the AMS.

3. Balanced Scorecard

The first research question (While building an Asset Management System (AMS), is it a core element to measure its performance?) is answered by the SAMP itself, since it is the main document that details the asset management objectives. Its importance and central figure in the Asset Management System (AMS) are clear. Moreover, its purpose is to provide a precise framework for strategic asset decision making, which is aligned with the organizational performance targets. This is demonstrated in this section.

The Balanced Scorecard (BSC) has been introduced in 1992 by Robert S. Kaplan and David P. Norton [98]. As they presented the BSC, the authors started with a strong statement that is widely used today: “What you measure is what you get”. Recently, Robert S. Kaplan in his book with a chapter entitled “Conceptual Foundations of the Balanced Scorecard” [99], cited Lord Kelvin (1883): “I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind. If you cannot measure it, you cannot improve it”.

In the same book and chapter, the author explains why he and David P. Norton introduced the BSC, stating that they held the opinion that managers need measurement just as much as scientists did. Companies have to incorporate the measurement of intangible assets into their management systems if they want to improve the management of their intangible assets [99].

The BSC translates vision and strategy into four perspectives: Financial, Customer, Internal Business Process, and Learning and Growth. Each one of these perspectives has its own objectives, measures, targets, and initiatives [99]. This tool was inspired in a project developed in the 1950s by the corporate staff of General Electric (GE) to create performance metrics for the company’s decentralized business units [100].

The GE team developed one financial and seven nonfinancial metrics to measure performance:

• Profitability (measured by residual income);
• Market share;
• Productivity;
• Product leadership;
• Public responsibility (legal and ethical behavior and responsibility to stakeholders including shareholders, vendors, dealers, distributors, and communities);
• Personnel development;
• Employee attitudes;
• Balance between short-range and long-range objectives.

The roots of the BSC are found in these eight objectives. In the eighth objective, the balance between short-range and long-range objectives can be complex. An example of GE is their management asserting that business pressure for quick profits caused them to forsake long-term goals and their civic duties.

Other management tools, such as Peter with his classical book in 1954, “The Practice of Management”, introduce the management by objectives, where the employees should have personal performance goals that are closely aligned with the business plan [101]. In the mid-1960s, Robert Anthony built upon earlier researches [102,103] and offered a thorough framework for systems of planning and control. Anthony distinguished three types of systems: operational control, managerial control, and strategic planning.

In the 1970s and 1980s, other movements have arisen such as the Japanese Management Movement bringing advancements in Just-In-Time (JIT) production and quality [104]. In 2008, Punniyamoorthy and Murali [105] introduced the balanced scorecard, which is based on BSC and is used as a benchmarking tool.

According to Scopus [106], 5035 studies were published on the subject of the balanced scorecard. The BSC tool has been widely used in research and sparked intense interest worldwide [107]. The balanced scorecard has been used by 60% of Fortune 1000 organizations in the USA [108]. Anand et al. [109] claimed an inventive method of using the balanced scorecard to raise strategic awareness within the firm.

Yet, the BSC establishes a comprehensive framework that connects individual accomplishments and efforts to business unit goals, reinforcing a holistic model [110].

According to the BSC collaborative, there are four barriers to strategic implementation [105]:

• Vision barrier—No one in the organization understands the strategies of the organization;
• People barrier—Most people have objectives that are not linked to the strategy of the organization;
• Resource barrier—Time, energy, and money are not allocated to those things that are critical to the organization. For example, budgets are not linked to strategy, resulting in wasted resources;
• Management barrier—Management spends a small amount of time on strategy and a large amount of time on short-term tactical decision making.

Even if the BSC concept has been widely embraced and applied in the corporate sector [111,112,113] such as education, it did not occur with significance [114]. Despite their short use in education, there are some studies and implementations [114,115,116,117,118,119,120,121].

No researches exist to support the use of BSC in evaluating the performance of the SAMP. There are some studies and implementations of performance measures of the Asset Management System (AMS) that emphasize the results [122,123,124] to measure the system and, in particular, the SAMP and its performance to understand whether it complies with ISO 55001 requirements.

Based on the above-mentioned, the importance of measuring the SAMP performance is clear and it is a core element of the AMS. As a result, the AMS is being measured, and it can be improved and considered in the organizational objectives direction.

4. Balanced Scorecard in a Strategic Asset Management Plan

This section attempts to answer the second and third research questions. First, it starts with the second question: How can we measure the SAMP performance?

The Balanced Scorecard (BSC) is tailored to the organization for which it is established and enables the development of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for tracking maintenance management performance in line with the strategic goals of the business [125]. Contrary to traditional metrics, which are control oriented, the balanced scorecard prioritizes attaining performance goals while putting the overarching strategy and vision at the forefront [126].

The KPIs used were chosen by taking into consideration the pretended measurements concerning specific ISO 55001 requirements. The KPIs and groundings are presented in

Table 1. The key performance indicators and groundings.

KPI	Description	Groundings
ROI	Return On Investment	Measures the return on investment
EPS	Earnings per Share	Presents the profit increase
RG	Revenue Growth	Presents the revenue increase
NPS	Net Promoter Score	Measures customer experience
RPR	Repeat Purchase Rate	Measures the customers retention
RC	Revenue Concentration	Measures the revenue generated from the highest paying client
CSAT	Customer Satisfaction Score	Measures the happiness of the costumer with a product or service
QCR	Quality Control Rate	Measures the product/service quality
IQI	Inventory Quality Index	Measures the inventory quality
PLTF	Product Lead Time Forecast	Measures the time it takes to create a product and deliver it to a consumer
ESR	Employee Skills Rate	Measures the skills that employees have
ETR	Employee Training Rate	Measures the training that employees have
ERR	Employee Retention Rate	Measures the retention on employees
ESI	Employee Satisfaction Index	Measures the employees satisfaction

.

As stated by Kaplan and Norton [98], “What you measure is what you get”; therefore, the importance of measuring the SAMP is clear. As a result, a parallel between the ISO 55001 requirements and the BSC perspectives is required to be established. In

Table 2. Balanced scorecard in SAMP.

Perspectives	Questions	Measurements	Physical Assets Intervention	ISO 55001 Requirements	KPI
Financial Perspective	How to reduce costs?	Revenue, Expenses, ROI, Net Income	Maintenance policies; Availability vs. Production	6.2.1; 6.2.2	ROI, EPS, RG
	How to increase profitability?
	How to increase revenue?
Customer Perspective	What are the customer’s needs?	Customer Satisfaction, Customer Retention	Quality level related to Physical Assets performance	4.1; 4.3; 5.3	NPS, RPR, RC, CSAT
	What stakeholders expect?
	What the interested parties expect?
Internal Business Process Perspective	What are my assets?	Inventory, Quality Control, Product Lead Time	Physical Assets Life Cycle vs. SAMP	4.4; 5.3; 6.2.1; 6.2.2	IQI, QCR, PLTF
	What is the value of my assets?
	My assets are in line with the organization’s objectives?
	What assets will I focus on?
	How to extend the life cycle of the assets?
	What are the non-core assets for the organization?
	What new assets are needed?
	How to dispose of old assets?
	How to manage risk?
Innovation Learning and Growth Perspective	Increase availability	Employee Skills, Employee Training, Employee Retention, Employee Satisfaction	Maintenance policies vs. TPM	6.2.1; 6.2.2	ESR, ETR, ERR, ESI
	Improve reliability

, the BSC perspectives are indicated, and for each one, the authors introduced the related questions, pretended measurements, the related physical assets intervention, ISO 55001 requirements and, finally, the KPIs to measure performance.

The data needed to calculate the KPIs are presented in

Table 3. Data needed to calculate the KPIs.

KPI	Data
ROI	Current Value of Investment
	Cost of Investment
EPS	Net Income—Preferred Dividends
	End-of-Period Common Shares Outstanding
RG	Initial Revenue
	Final Revenue
NPS	Percentage of Promoters—Percentage of Detractors
RPR	Number of customers who made a repeat purchase
	Number of customers
RC	Amount of revenue that your business earned from the best customer
	Amount by your business’s total revenue
CSAT	Number of satisfied customers
	Total customers asked
QCR	Number of good products produced
	Total of product produced
IQI	Number of assets correctly inventoried
	Total of assets
PLTF	Estimated total time
	Real total time
ESR	Number of employees with skills to their work
	Total number of employees
ETR	Number of hours in training
	Number of hours planned for training
ERR	Total of new employees retained
	Total of new employees
ESI	(How satisfied are you with your job + How well does your job meet your expectations + How close is your workplace to your ideal job)/3

.

Based on the above-mentioned, it is demonstrated how the KPIs based on a BSC may help to measure the SAMP performance.

The last question to answer is: “Being the SAMP the central figure in the AMS, how can it be measured?”. Other ways and tools are available for use in order to measure the SAMP. The authors proposed a model based on the BSC and its perspectives, mainly because it is a document that sets the strategy to achieve asset goals focused on the organization’s objectives and measures the decision-making criteria.

The calculated KPIs are presented in

Table 4. Calculated KPIs.

KPI	Data	Value	KPI Value	Unit
ROI	Current Value of Investment	22.36	11.78	%
	Cost of Investment	20.00
EPS	Net Income—Preferred Dividends	106.05–0.43	7.04	€
	End-of-Period Common Shares Outstanding	15
RG	Initial Revenue	5.36	17.91	%
	Final Revenue	6.32
NPS	Percentage of Promoters—Percentage of Detractors	85–23	62.00	%
RPR	Number of customers who made a repeat purchase	86	68.25	%
	Number of customers	126
RC	Amount of revenue that your business earned from the best customer	2.35	72.31	%
	Amount by your business’s total revenue	3.25
CSAT	Number of satisfied customers	126	47.55	%
	Total customers asked	265
QCR	Number of good product produced	12.69	88.37	%
	Total of product produced	14.36
IQI	Number of assets correctly inventoried	64	77.11	%
	Total of assets	83
PLTF	Estimated total time	54.00	90.00	%
	Real total time	60.00
ESR	Number of employees with skills to their work	20	76.92	%
	Total number of employees	26
ETR	Number of hours in training	58.00	100.00	%
	Number of hours planned for training	50.00
ERR	Total of new employees retained	7	77.78	%
	Total of new employees	9
ESI	(How satisfied are you with your job + How well does your job meet your expectations + How close is your workplace to your ideal job)/3	9/8/9	86.7	%

. To obtain a value between 0 and 100, a coefficient was introduced in each KPI. In this way, the KPI was limited to 100, which is the maximum value expected. The KPIs, such as ROI, EPS, and RG, are unlikely to achieve the value of 100, as can be seen in Table 4. These KPIs are the ones with values under 100 but, at same time, they are the values expected for the respective KPI.

As previously mentioned, it is demonstrated how the KPI values of the BSC results permit the measurement of the SAMP performance. Clearly, it will be very important to have data during a time window of several years to evaluate the performance of SAMP over time. One of the ISO 55001 requirements is improvement, which induces the use of the Deming Cycle (Plan-Do-Check-Act, PDCA). This tool permits the identification of nonconformities to plan and make the corrections, as well as to continuously improve the processes and systems.

5. Discussion

For organizations, especially those that own or manage large physical assets, such as infrastructure, facilities, or equipment, the SAMP is an essential tool, as a document where the role of the assets is clarified as well as the objectives of asset management needed to achieve the organization’s objectives. The SAMP brings the necessary alignment in the organization. It brings together stakeholder requirements, organizational objectives and plans, as well as external and internal issues [80]. As the main goal for asset management is to bring value from the assets, the SAMP describes all the activities of each asset during its life cycle (asset creation/acquisition, utilization/maintenance, renewal/disposal, etc.) (ISO 55002) [80].

The use of a Balanced Scorecard (BSC) is brought to an upper level regarding the measurement of the SAMP performance and can easily quantify each perspective and each standard requirement, while helping to see which requirements need to be improved and what is necessary to be carried out to improve them.

When considering strengths and weaknesses while using BSC to measure the SAMP, the main weakness is the lack of information in the organizations and the need to change the organization’s culture in order to promote the gathering of good and reliable data. The strengths are related to the BSC because this is a well-known tool for most managers, which makes it easy for adoption.

The perspectives described on the BSC (Table 2) can be complemented with goals. The organizations, while checking where they are, can also set where they want to be. This can be made by setting goals and objectives for each perspective, with these goals being individually focused in each organization. While improving and reaching goals concerning their assets, the organization is maximizing the assets’ value, thus bringing about economic growth.

Asset Management (AM) can also be an excellent tool to help achieve some of the United Nations (UN) Sustainable Development Goals, such as the decent work and economic growth, industry, innovation and infrastructure and others related with risk, because while using AM, the organizations need to comply with ISO 31000 guidelines, which helps to mitigate environmental and social risks.

The results obtained in (Table 4) for a specific organization can vary across activities or countries, focusing on the organization used to test the model. The results show that their SAMP is on the right path.

The organization who’s data are used in this case study is from a water company that explores and manages water supply and wastewater sanitation systems for an area of about 100,000 inhabitants.

By analyzing the results, the obtained values are in the average of this specific activity; however, the KPIs, such as Net Promoter Score (NPS), Repeat Purchase Rate (RPR), Customer Satisfaction Score (CSAT), and Employee Skills Rate (ESR) can be improved when compared to the acceptable values for this indicator. This last indicator (RPR) demonstrates that the organization is not investing in the employee’s formation, which will commit the performance of this strategic resource; this indicator should be above 80%. As a consequence, this demonstrates that the SAMP has not yet been built correctly or is not known for the company; therefore, changes must be made to improve these KPI results. For example, the CSAT obtained the value of 47.55%, which is low for an organization. Results above 75% are accepted across most organizations, while values concerning the CSAT are defined by sectors and there is no standard that regulates them; a good result can be a value of above 85%. The result in this case study indicates that the customer, probably, is not taken into consideration when decisions are made, and customer satisfaction is not achieved, which can be related to poor product quality or bad service delivery.

The KPIs used are general indicators and their acceptable values are well defined in the industry, sectors, or areas. Moreover, when the model is used, the results should be aligned with what is expected in that sector.

Questions like the following ones must be placed: the customers’ complains are being addressed? Measures were taken to correct or lessen the nonconformities? There is a follow up with costumers concerning the nonconformities? Tools like the PDCA are well known and simple to use in order to make a continuous improvement that can be used to correct the nonconformities that led the costumer to give a bad review.

Principles such as Economic Rationality (ER), Strategic Management (SM), or Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are aligned with AM and within the SAMP.

These principles can be applied and are related with the KPI presented and discussed. The proposed SAMP measuring tool was validated using data from water companies and the results were validated by the stakeholders, recognizing the improvement in the described areas.

6. Conclusions

Nowadays, the Asset Management (AM) is a great tool to help address issues such as sustainability, circular economy, industrial symbiosis, business continuity, etc. The method presented in this paper can help and improve the use of AM. The Strategic Asset Management Plan (SAMP) plays a very important role using AM; therefore, it is important to have a robust SAMP that can only be achieved if we are able to measure the performance that it provides. The use of a Balanced Scorecard (BSC) allows for measuring the SAMP performance and can be easily evaluated.

After the evaluation, the tool presented helps to correct the nonconformities in order to have a SAMP aligned with the organization’s objectives. The use of tools such as PDCA cycle will help to systematically correct the nonconformities and achieve excellence in AM. The use of a Balanced Scorecard (BSC) to measure the performance of a Strategic Asset Management Plan (SAMP) improves the SAMP and allows for an overall improvement of the AMS. This results in improving sustainability and business continuity risk. On the other hand, principles such as economic rationality can be used with the aim to improve the employee’s behavior.

The limitations of the model are related to the data collected, which should be reliable in order to obtain credible results. This is a major problem most of the time, and has not yet been solved in the organization’s culture. In fact, to have good indicators, it is essential to have good data.

In future works, it is important to develop tools to help the organizations collect good and reliable data, which is a major problem in today’s organizations.

Finally, the main question for everyone’s consideration is this: What planet do we want to leave for posterity?