Ingenieur Vol. 74 Ingenieur Vol 72, April-June 2018 - Page 57

By Malaysian Government Asset and Facilities Management Practices Ir. Dr Ahmad Firdauz Bin Abdul Mutalib Senior Civil Engineer Integrated Asset Planning Branch JKR Malaysia I n 2006, the Government’s asset maintenance management in Malaysia was based on reactive maintenance via ad hoc planning without a systematic and regular maintenance approach. Reactive maintenance has many disadvantages, such as no asset maintenance management plan, it reduces the life expectancy of assets, it creates uneconomical long term costs, it slows down the repair process and it increases the agency’s burden. In combating this, the Government has undertaken initiatives which are not solely responsible for maintenance management but also include Total Asset Management (TAM) as a whole. BACKGROUND The first Malaysia Plan started in 1966. Currently, we are in the 11 th Malaysia Plan. On average, the development budget has allocated about RM 50 billion annually to cover development expenditure in the Economic, Social and Security Sectors. Since the 1990s, there has been a significant increase in the development budget to cope with the demands of a rapidly expanding economy. On average, the allocation for physical development for each Malaysia Plan is around 60% to 70%. The 11 th Malaysia Plan 2016-2020 is a five-year development plan with a mission to achieve Vision 2020. The plan reinforces the Government's commitment to achieving the aim of growth and prosperity of the people's welfare. However, the physical development pace has now been reduced in proportion, and more funds are required to manage and maintain existing assets. Most of these assets are already in their middle life expectancy period, although there are some heritage buildings more than100 years old. Some of the old ones now need to be rehabilitated or reinstated to their former life. Bigger funds are required when the old buildings need to be rehabilitated or replaced with new ones. Currently, the objectives for maintenance tend to be related to minimising costs in the short term rather than assessing and enhancing the added value of an asset to the organisation. So, it is a very common phenomenon that agencies tend to focus on breakdown maintenance. Typically, maintenance or repair is only carried out after the damage has occurred or a failure has been reported. These run to failure, ad-hoc fire-fighting actions are reactive in nature and are not cost effective, especially when they involve assets of high value and affect service delivery. The Annual Audit reports have over the years, contained unpleasant stories about how inefficient or ineffective the way in which public assets are acquired, managed, maintained and disposed of. The reports also implied that so much money has been wasted. The public image of the Government suffers every time a disaster happens, as these are widely publicised in the media. As a result, the public perception of public governance is negative. The real challenge in implementing a good asset management system depends on several factors. There are no standards and guidelines in existence for asset management that can be used to measure quality and performance levels. Another drawback is a lack of local expertise to 55