Property portfolio and cost analytics system
The asset manager compares the cost of objects, energy consumption and service performance. The differences can be verified by object purpose and accounting data.
Object costs are combined from different periods or allocated according to unclear rules. The manager has to adjust the result in separate tables, and the amounts given may not match the financial team's data.
How the solution works
- For objects, comparable limits on cost, period and service are established.
- Financial, labor and energy sources are checked against wealth and actual use.
- Totals are allocated according to an approved analytical rule, marking the remaining gap.
- Deviation is assessed with purpose, load and other significant conditions.
- Reasonable reasons or data still needed are given for the responsible review; the result of the subsequent change is checked separately.
Key challenges
- The basis for allocation of the cost of objects is difficult to explain
- Objects have different indicators
Solution capabilities
Uniform Accounting Boundaries
Object costs are broken down by the same period and meaning, separating current work and other incomparable elements.
Explanation of allocation
The total has a source, allocation basis, and balance so that the analytical result is reconciled with the confirmed financial fact.
Conditions of use and energy consumption of the building
The cost comparison measures the purpose of the building, working hours, employment, weather, and which premises have measurement data.
Service result check
The costs are associated with the work accepted and the agreed level of service, so a smaller amount does not hide the services that have not been performed.
Repair or investment review
The technical condition, repetitive work and cost prepare a specific question for the specialist and manager; the proposed option has clear assumptions.
Business context
- The basis for allocation of the cost of objects is difficult to explain
- Object costs are combined from different periods or allocated according to unclear rules. The manager has to adjust the result in separate tables, and the amounts given may not match the financial team's data.
- Objects have different indicators
- Objects are compared against different limits on cost, area, energy and usage without explaining their purpose and load. A higher reasonable cost can be considered inefficiency, and a real deviation to hide in the overall mean.
- Management costs explained by building-specific data
- It is important for the owner to understand why the cost of the object varies and what benefits a repair or investment would bring. Comparison under terms of use helps avoid misleading conclusions. The manager has reason to discuss the scope of services and proposed changes with the client.
Core features
- Uniform Accounting Boundaries
- Explanation of allocation
- Conditions of use and energy consumption of the building
- Service result check
- Repair or investment review
Key integrations
- Property and Services Register
- Purpose of the object, basis of size, conditions of use and valid scope of service.
- Financial data
- Validated costs, period and basis for formal assignment.
- History of the operation
- The result adopted, the cause of the failure and the meanings of the contractual time.
- Meters and Sources of Use
- Energy period, measurement limit and working mode required for comparison.
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.
Work on reconciliation and allocation of costs for objects
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 analyst's active preparation time is compared for the same number of objects and cost groups.
Time to explain significant operating difference
6–25%Decreasing
This illustrative scenario assumes that 20-50% of waiting caused by missing information or unclear responsibility can be addressed. That share is assumed to fall by 30-50%. Company data is needed to verify both the addressable share and the resulting change.
The length from recording a significant difference to establishing a valid cause or a validated data gap is measured by comparing cases of similar complexity. The amount of difference is not considered a savings achieved.
Conditional calculation scenarios. The assumptions have not been validated against client measurements.
When this solution is relevant
- Two objects are compared by area cost, although one operates around the clock and receives a wider maintenance service.
- The total cost amount is distributed to the objects, but it is impossible to recreate what period rule and scope has been used for this.
Implementation requirements
The finance team combines cost comparison periods, area data used, and the distribution of total costs. The energy assessment takes into account the weather, working time, and purpose of the building to make a reasonable comparison between different objects.
Further development options
- Comparison of upgrade options based on technical assumptions approved by specialists
- Addition of additional object groups by creating a comparison of usage and cost appropriate for them