Building operations and maintenance management system

The manager assigns maintenance work to the building and tracks the contractor's response. Notices, works performed and their reception are saved at the facility.

The link between the object, its facility and the maintenance contract applied does not retain the relevant responsible participant and the necessary technical documentation. Upon receipt of the notification, the manager must re-explain who is supervising the property and under what conditions it is necessary to operate.

How the solution works

  1. The property is set on a technical basis, a valid service and the participant responsible for it.
  2. A planned need or message is assessed and linked to one suitable job.
  3. The executor accepts the task with the required access, priority and contractual reaction condition.
  4. The workflow records the actual performance, the reason for the wait and the result required.
  5. An authorized manager employee accepts the service performed, informs the user and transfers the data to assign costs.

Key challenges

  • Property register missing important data
  • Contractors' work and SLA's hard to control
  • Maintenance is driven by breakdowns

Solution capabilities

Structure of Property and Service

Property, equipment and maintenance records are linked to the current contract and assigned responsibilities.

Planned and reported need

A check, failure, or other reasonable event is required to create the work, distinguishing the addition of an already ongoing case.

Designation and preparation of the contractor

The task receives an executor's reception, required access and job-known limitations.

Contract service time

Reaction, arrival, performance and acceptance have separate meanings. Allowed time suspension keeps the basis and validation.

Acceptance of the outcome

The performance submitted is checked against the service criterion, and insufficient proof is returned to supplement.

Linking the selected signal

Building automation messages are grouped according to the same incident and its meaning; each repeating signal does not become a new job.

Business context

Property register missing important data
The link between the object, its facility and the maintenance contract applied does not retain the relevant responsible participant and the necessary technical documentation. Upon receipt of the notification, the manager must re-explain who is supervising the property and under what conditions it is necessary to operate.
Contractors' work and SLA's hard to control
Contractor acceptance, reaction, performance and controller verification have different timestamps without marking the applicable contractual suspension conditions. The term of service is calculated unevenly, and the act submitted may be adopted without verification of the actual result.
Maintenance is driven by breakdowns
A known need for maintenance or a significant technical signal does not reach the accepted task of working with prepared resources. The work is delayed or the problem is noticeable from users' complaints, although previous information has allowed a timely response.
Building user gets more reliable service
It is important to the resident or tenant that the reported fault is repaired and the work done is verified. The history of the property and contractors helps to assign the right task and track the result. The manager can specifically explain the actions and justify the quality of his service.

Core features

  • Structure of Property and Service
  • Planned and reported need
  • Designation and preparation of the contractor
  • Contract service time
  • Acceptance of the outcome
  • Linking the selected signal

Key integrations

Sources of property and service contracts
The code of the specific device, the team responsible, the technical documentation and the service conditions in force.
User Service Channels
The location of the message, the previous case, and the confirmed service status are returned.
Contractor's or existing supervision system
Work acceptance, proof of performance and correction response.
Building Automation Sources
The fact and relevance of only selected significant signals when such a connection is required.
Cost and Accounting Process
Basis for accepted work and approved financial costs.

Potential impact (%)

The ranges indicate an illustrative relative change in the metric under the stated assumptions. Results depend on the starting position and actual use of the solution. Percentages for different metrics must not be added together.

Contractor's work on reconciliation of work and acceptance

16–42%Decreasing

This illustrative scenario assumes that 40-70% of information searches and repeated cross-checks can be addressed. That share is assumed to fall by 40-60%. Company data is needed to verify both the addressable workload and the resulting change.

The type of work compares the manager's time for reminders, search and verification of execution documents.

Number of uncompleted works without responsible action

5–25%Decreasing

This illustrative scenario assumes that 20-50% of missed actions can be identified through task and deadline tracking. That share is assumed to fall by 25-50%. Company data is needed to verify both the addressable share and the resulting change.

The agreed review counts the works without a further action or reasonable wait decision being taken. The same work is counted once in a single review.

Part of negative feedback on solving building maintenance problems

4–15%Decreasing

Indicative assumption: 15-30% of negative reviews relate to an uncertain solution to a building maintenance task. The solution could reduce this proportion by 25-50%. This is a scenario of potential; the assumptions need to be verified by feedback collected by the company.

When a company starts collecting reviews, negative reviews about the solution of building maintenance problems are counted from all assessments received on the topic. The same method of evaluation is applied before and after installation and similar customer groups are compared. Without initial data, the actual change is not determined.

Conditional calculation scenarios. The assumptions have not been validated against client measurements.

When this solution is relevant

  • The administrator has a failure message but does not know which valid contractor's contract covers that device.
  • In the contractor's act, the work is marked as performed, although it is unclear if the manager received the agreed proof of the result.

Implementation requirements

Building facilities, service contracts and contractor obligations are agreed. Access conditions and post-work checks must be visible to the task. Automation alerts are included where they can be assigned a specific action.

Further development options

  • Connecting additional technical signals after their reaction rule check
  • Reviewing the scope of scheduled work against reasonable causes and conditions of use

Frequently asked questions

Adapting the solution to your business