ISO 55001 – A Strategic Tool for the Circular Economy – Diagnosis of the Organization’s State

Abstract

Circular economy arises at a time when the needs for the reduction, reuse, recovery and recycling of materials and energy need to consolidate. Today’s economy is unsustainable in the short run. The standard ISO 55001 defines a set of requirements that, when implemented and maintained, guarantee the good performance of an organization’s asset management, responding to stakeholder needs and expectations and ensuring the value creation and maintenance as well as a global vision of assets in a circular economy.

The organizations where physical asset management is of major importance include all those that involve: facilities, machinery, buildings, roads and bridges, utilities, transportation industries; oil and gas extraction and processing; mining and mining processing; chemicals, manufacturing, distribution, aviation and defence.

However, since ISO 55001 is a new standard in the global market, because it is intrinsically difficult to implement, a diagnostic model on the state of organizations can greatly help on the implementation.

Before beginning to implement the ISO 55001 standard, it is necessary to verify whether the organization is ready to begin this task. It is usually necessary to fine-tune many aspects before starting a great task like this. But where to start? What aspects do I need to correct before starting the default implementation?

This paper proposes a diagnostic model to evaluate the state of the organizations in relation to their potential to implement the ISO 55001. The diagnosis allows to identify the aspects of the organization that are ready to receive the new standard, as well of the critical, the fragile and the weak points of the company that must be corrected.

The diagnostic model is based on surveys, with several questions and with five possible answers. Each possibility of response has a quantification and a critical classification.

The final result is a global positioning of the company with the identification of the various aspects to be corrected in order to be possible to implement the ISO 55001. A radar chart provides a global “radiography” of the company diagnosis.

The diagnostic template has been validated and the results are presented in the paper.

Keywords
Circular Economy
ISO 5500X
Sustainability
Industry 4.0

Full text

ISO 55001 – A StrategicTool
for the Circular Economy – Diagnosis
of the Organization’s State
E. Pais1,3, H. Raposo1,2,3, A. Meireles1,3and J. T. Farinha1,2,3
1ISEC, Portugal
2CEMMPRE, Portugal
3COIMBRA, Portugal
E-mail: edmundopais@gmail.com; hugrap@gmail.com;
ana.p.meireles@gmail.com; torres.farinha@dem.uc.pt
Received 27 September 2018; Accepted 04 October 2018;
Publication 21 January 2019
Abstract
Circular economy arises at a time when the needs for the reduction, reuse,
recovery and recycling of materials and energy need to consolidate. Today’s
economy is unsustainable in the short run. The standard ISO 55001 defines
a set of requirements that, when implemented and maintained, guarantee
the good performance of an organization’s asset management, responding
to stakeholder needs and expectations and ensuring the value creation and
maintenance as well as a global vision of assets in a circular economy.
The organizations where physical asset management is of major impor-
tance include all those that involve: facilities, machinery, buildings, roads and
bridges, utilities, transportation industries; oil and gas extraction and process-
ing; mining and mining processing; chemicals, manufacturing, distribution,
aviation and defence.
However, since ISO 55001 is a new standard in the global market, because
it is intrinsically difficult to implement, a diagnostic model on the state of
organizations can greatly help on the implementation.
Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management Science, Vol. 1, 89–108.
doi: 10.13052/jiems2446-1822.2018.005
This is an Open Access publication. c
2019 the Author(s). All rights reserved.

90 E. Pais et al.
Before beginning to implement the ISO 55001 standard, it is necessary
to verify whether the organization is ready to begin this task. It is usually
necessary to fine-tune many aspects before starting a great task like this. But
where to start? What aspects do I need to correct before starting the default
implementation?
This paper proposes a diagnostic model to evaluate the state of the
organizations in relation to their potential to implement the ISO 55001. The
diagnosis allows to identify the aspects of the organization that are ready to
receive the new standard, as well of the critical, the fragile and the weak points
of the company that must be corrected.
The diagnostic model is based on surveys, with several questions and with
five possible answers. Each possibility of response has a quantification and a
critical classification.
The final result is a global positioning of the company with the identifica-
tion of the various aspects to be corrected in order to be possible to implement
the ISO 55001. Aradar chart provides a global “radiography” of the company
diagnosis.
The diagnostic template has been validated and the results are presented
in the paper.
Keywords: Circular Economy, ISO 5500X, Sustainability, Industry 4.0.
1 Introduction
The linear economy model that emerged from the industrial revolution has
been applied up to the present day, based on the concepts of raw material
extraction,processing,andtheendoflifeofproductswheretheyarediscarded
(Figure1). Thismodeluses exhausted materialsand energy thatmake it clearly
unsustainable in the long run - basically everything in this model becomes
garbage, which will cause environmental and also social problems as well as
an impact in the lives of others who are completely foreign to the process of
which resulted this garbage.
Figure 1 Linear Economy [1].

ISO 55001 – A Strategic tool for the Circular Economy 91
In the current context, where increased consumerism and resource deple-
tion introduces a new concept of circular economy, inspired by the natural
ecosystems themselves, where everyone depends on products or by-products
of others, and where resources regenerate and the cycle closes, the disposal of
waste is small and all products and by-products are valued during the process,
entering the chains again within the same process or others, where nothing is
lost and everything is transformed.
The preceding subjects are discussed in this paper, including the proposal
of a diagnostic model to evaluate the state of the organizations in relation to
their potential to implement the ISO 55001, in the ambit of circular economy.
This paper is structured by the following way:
•The next section makes a short resume of the state of the art;
•The section three presents a Diagnostic Model for the ISO 55001;
•The section four presents a model application to show how to use it in
any company that wants to implement this standard;
•Finally,the conclusions are presented about the model and the case study.
2 State of the Art
Circular economy is restorative and regenerative by-project and aims to keep
products, components, and materials with the greatest utility and value at
all times. As a concept that distinguishes between technical and biological
cycles, circular economy is a continuous and positive development cycle
(Figure 2). It preserves and enhances natural capital, optimizes resource
yields, and minimizes system risks through the management of limited
stocks and renewable flows. A circular economy works effectively at all
scales [2].
Circular economy offers multiple value creation mechanisms that are
separatefrom theconsumption oflimited resources. Ina truecircular economy,
consumption only occurs in effective biorhythms and, on the other hand,
replacesconsumption. The resources areregeneratedin the bio-cycle or recov-
ered and restored in the technical cycle. In the biological cycle, life processes
regenerate disordered materials, with or without human intervention. In the
technical cycle, with enough energy available, human intervention recovers
materials and recreates order. Maintaining or increasing capital has different
characteristics in the two cycles.

92 E. Pais et al.
Figure 2 Circular Economy [1].
The circular economy is based on three principles, each addressing the
challenges of the resources and systems facing industrial economies:
1. Preserving and improving natural capital, controlling limited stocks, and
balancing flows of renewable resources. This starts by demystifying the
utility by delivering them virtually, whenever possible.When resources
areneeded, the circular system selectsthem wisely and chooses technolo-
gies and processes that use renewable, or better-performing resources
whenever possible. Acircular economy also increases natural capital by
encouraging nutrient flows within the system and creating conditions for
regeneration, such as soil;
2. Optimizing the yield of resources, circulating products, components and
materials with the highest utility in all technical and biological cycles.
Thatmeans designing for remanufacturing, remodelling, and recycling to
keepcomponentsandmaterialsflowingandcontributing to the economy.
Circular systems use tighter internal cycles as long as they preserve more
energy and other values, such as work done. These systems also keep
the product cycle down, extending product life and optimizing reuse.
Sharing, in turn, increases the use of the product. Circular systems also
maximize the use of end-use materials based on biological products,
extracting valuable biochemical feedstock and using them in different,
lower and lower applications;

ISO 55001 – A Strategic tool for the Circular Economy 93
3. Promoting the effectiveness of the system, revealing and removing
negative externalities. This includes reducing the harm of human use,
such as food, mobility, shelter, education, health and entertainment, and
managing externalities such as land use, air, water and noise pollution,
release of toxic substances and climate change.
While the principles of a circular economy act as principles of
action, the following fundamental characteristics describe a pure circular
economy:
•Waste does not exist when the biological and technical components (or
“materials”)ofa product are designed to fit within a cycle of biological or
technical materials. Biological materials are non-toxic and may simply
undergo a composting process. Technical materials such as polymers,
alloys, and other artificial compounds are designed to be used again with
minimal energy and high retention (while recycling, as often understood,
results in a reduction of quality and becomes feedback into the process
as matter – raw gross);
•Modularity, versatility, and adaptability are valued features that need to
be prioritized in a rapidly evolving world. Several systems with many
connections and scales are more resilient in the face of external shocks
than systems built simply for efficiency, by maximizing production
directed to extreme results in fragility;
•The ability to understand how the parties influence each other within
a whole and the relationship of the whole to the parts is crucial. The
elementsareconsideredin relation to their environmental and social con-
texts.Whilea machineis alsoasystem,itis strictlylimited andassumed to
be deterministic. Thinking systems generally refer to the overwhelming
majority of real-world systems: they are non-linear, high-interference,
and interdependent. In such systems, inaccurate start conditions com-
binedwithinterferenceleadtooftensurprisingconsequencesandresults,
which are often not proportional to the input. Such systems cannot be
managed in the conventional, “linear” sense, requiring more flexibility
and more frequent adaptation to the changing circumstances;
•For biological materials, the essence of value creation lies in the oppor-
tunity to extract additional value from products and materials by linking
them through other applications. In biological decomposition, whether
natural or in controlled fermentation processes, the material is divided
into stages by microorganisms, such as bacteria and fungi, that extract
energy and nutrients from the carbohydrates, fats, and proteins found in

94 E. Pais et al.
the material. For example, going from a tree to the furnace causes a loss
in value that could be availed through state decomposition by successive
uses such as wood and wood products before deterioration and eventual
incineration.
According to Douwe Jan Joustra (2017) there are ten key points in the
implementation of a circular economy, one of which is asset management [3].
Assets are physical, but they can also involve people, information, or data.
Assets are required to perform the services that are the basis of the contract
with your customers. Although information and people are fundamental, in
this context we talk primarily about physical assets, which can be of all kinds
on the scale: a drill is one example of physical assets and oil rig as well. Asset
management is critical for creating good performance. Asset management and
maintenance are often considered the same. From a circular perspective, asset
management goes a step further. The challenge is to use the best possible
performance of the assets within acceptable risks and at controlled costs over
their useful life to deliver the services within the customers’expectations. The
assets are the company’s capital and will be part of the resources that can be
used for quality production.
What is asset management? What are assets? ISO 55000 defines asset
management as “coordinated activity of an organization to realize value of
assets”andassets,such as:“An assetis anitem, thingorentitythathas potential
or real value to an organization”.Asset management involves balancing costs,
opportunities, and risks against the desired performance of assets in order
to achieve organizational goals. This balance may have to be considered
in different time frames. Asset management also enables an organization to
examine the need and performance of assets and asset systems at different
levels.In addition, it allowsthe application of analytical approachesto manage
an asset at different stages of its life cycle (which can start from the design of
theasset’sneeduntil its withdrawal, and includes the management of anypost-
withdrawal obligation). Asset management is the art and science of making
the right decisions and optimizing the delivery of value. Acommon goal is to
minimize the cost of living of assets. But there may be other critical factors,
such as risk or continuity of the business, to be considered objectively in this
decision making [4].
According to Jones et al. (2014) in the United Kingdom, the oil and gas
sector identified the need for an asset management approach to physical asset
management in the late 1980’s. The main drivers of change were the safety
management (risk) and the achievement of financial efficiency [5].

ISO 55001 – A Strategic tool for the Circular Economy 95
In 1988, a fire at the Piper Alpha oil rig in the North Sea, linked to the
subsequent Cullen Report for maintenance problems at a pump and safety
valve, killed 167 workers. This accident, combined with the dramatic drop in
oil prices in 1986, focused on the oil and gas industry and on the need to adopt
aholistic asset management based on a life cycle approach. This focus on asset
life cycle management has resulted in improvements in efficiency, safety, and
productivity in the oil and gas industry. UK water and electricity also adopted
an asset management approach when they were privatized a few years later.
Privatized water companies in England and Wales have also developed asset
management in response to pressure regulation to minimize rate increases,
whilesimultaneously improving thelevel of serviceprovided to customersand
addressing the problem of aging infrastructures. The Office of Water Services
(OFWAT), the economic regulator of the water and wastewater industry in
England and Wales, was created in 1989. OFWAT was initially focused
on improving data quality, setting service level objectives, and monitoring
compliance with service levels.
The Australian Government, which identified the need to address infras-
tructure management early, promoted the development of asset management
during the 1980’s. The Institute of Public Works Engineering of Australia
developed and issued the Australian NationalAsset Management Manual in
1994 which introduced asset management concepts and provided guidance
on their implementation. In New Zealand, the National Asset Management
Steering Group (NAMS) was established in 1995 to develop and promote
asset management practices in infrastructure. In 1996, NAMS issued the
New Zealand Infrastructure Asset Management Manual, which was used by
municipalities and water services to develop asset management plans. The
Institute of Public Works Engineering of Australia and NAMS then worked
together to develop the International Infrastructure Management Manual,
whichwasfirstpublished in the year 2000.Thiswasbuilton previous manuals
and case studies were included.
Asset management did not develop as fast in the United States compared
to the UK, Australia, and New Zealand, mainly due to the different structure
of the industry. The US water industry has many organizations and a mix of
municipal entities. However, some US water utilities have implemented asset
management programs since the early 2000’s, such as Seattle Public Utilities
(SPU) in Washington and Oregon’s City of Portland Water Bureau, making
them two good examples. On the wastewater side, the US Environmental
Protection Agency (USEPA) recognized the benefits of an asset management
approachwith the introductionofthe Competencies, Management, Operations

96 E. Pais et al.
andMaintenance program in 2001.This program wasoneof the first initiatives
to require a form of asset management planning in the United States.
In 2004, the British Standards Institute (BSI), together with the Institute
of Asset Management (IAM), published the PubliclyAvailable Specification
55 (PAS 55). These specifications have been very successful, with wide use
in the areas of energy, transportation, mining, process, and manufacturing
industries. In 2008, 50 organizations from 15 industry sectors in 10 countries
workedtogether tolaunchthe latestupdateof PAS55,known asPAS 55:2008.
These were made up of two parts: 1. PAS 55-1: Specification for Optimized
Management of Physical Assets; 2. PAS 55-2: Guidelines for theApplication
of PAS 55-1. The new update provided clear definitions and a set of 28
specific requirements points to establish and verify alignment, optimization
and the entire system of life management for all types of physical assets.
At the end of July 2009, BSI, supported by IAM, submitted a proposal to
form a “Project Committee” to develop an international standard. This ISO
standard would be based on the good work already done at PAS 55 and
which included knowledge of other industries and scientific societies located
around the world. Thus, in January 2014, under the cover of the International
Organization for Standardization (ISO), the ISO 55000 family of standards
for asset management was published, [7–9]. Figure 3 presents the evolution
of Asset management.
3 Diagnostic Model for ISO 55001
The method of diagnosing the state of the organization for the implementation
ofISO55001used correspondsto aset ofsurveys inwhich theevaluationof the
responses indicates the position of the company in relation to the application
that can be called standard. This audit method is designed to be used by
members of the organization even if they have little or no knowledge about
ISO 55001. Thus, it is a simple tool and easy to apply without great human
resource requirements.
3.1 The Surveys
The present methodology consists of 25 surveys, which are individual and can
befilled either bycompanystaff orexternalconsultants. For thispurpose,there
is a fact sheet for each requirement of the standard, which must be answered
by company managers or consultants outside of the company.

ISO 55001 – A Strategic tool for the Circular Economy 97
1988: Piper Alpha disaster (UK)
1989: Privatization of water industry in England
and Wales; State Owned Corporations
Act, New South Wales, Australia
2000: International Infrastructure Management
Manual; Water Services Association of
Australia benchmarking
2001: US Environmental Protection Agency’s
Capacity Management, Operation, and
Maintenance Guide
2002: Common Framework Approach to Capital
Maintenance Planning
2004: UK’s Publically Available Specification
55
2006: Water Environment Research
Foundation’s Sustainable Infrastructure
Management Program Learning
Environment
2008: US Environmental Protection Agency’s
Asset Management: A Best Practices
Guide; Publically Available
Specification 55 updated
2014: International Organization for
Standardization 55001
Figure 3 Evolution of Asset Management, adapted from [5].
If there are doubts, each questionnaire is accompanied by a document
explaining what is expected in each statement. The following table (Table 1)
presents the 25 stages that make up the several questionnaires on which the
diagnosticmodel is based, with the respectivemaximumand minimum scores.
Those scores are related with the minimum score to implement the ISO 55001
onthe corresponding stage, and the maximum score corresponds tothehighest
score that can be achieved.
For each of the items referred to, a diagnostic form, type survey, with
several questions and five possibilities of response is elaborated, which are
the following:
1. “Always” - always verified in the company;
2. “Mostly” - not always verified in the company;
3. “Generally” - sometimes verified in the company;
4. “Hardly” - rarely occurs in the company;
5. “Never” - never verified in the company.

98 E. Pais et al.
Table 1 The 25 stages of the diagnostic model, with their respective maximum and minimum
scores Maximum Minimum
Stage Surveys Score Score
1 A. Understanding the organization and its context 3 2,4
2 B. Understanding the needs and expectations of
stakeholders 43
3 C. Determining the scope of the asset
management system 32
4 D. Asset management system 2 1,6
5 E. Leadership and commitment 17 13,6
6 F. Policy 12 9,6
7 G. Organizational roles, responsibilities and
authorities 6 4,8
8 H. Actions to address risks and opportunities for
the AMS 54
9 I. Asset management objectives 9 7,2
10 J. Planning to achieve asset management
objectives 13 10,4
11 K. Resources 2 1,6
12 L. Competence 4 3,2
13 M. Awareness 4 3,2
14 N. Communication 4 3,2
15 O. Information requirements 12 9,6
16 P. Documented information 8 6,4
17 Q. Operational planning and control 4 3,2
18 R. Management of change 3 2,4
19 S. Outsourcing 3 2,4
20 T. Monitoring, measurement, analysis and
evaluation 4 3,2
21 U. Internal audit 9 7,2
22 V. Management review 9 7,2
23 W. Nonconformity and corrective action 11 8,8
24 X. Preventive action 2 1,6
25 Y. Continual improvement 3 2,4
Figure 4 presents an example of a Diagnostic survey 9 “I – Asset
management objectives”.
3.2 The Explanatory Sheets
In order to minimize doubts about the content and comprehension of the
questions formulated in the diagnostic sheets, these are accompanied by an
explanatory sheet (Figure 5), individualized by questionnaire that allows,

ISO 55001 – A Strategic tool for the Circular Economy 99
Figure 4 Diagnostic survey.

100 E. Pais et al.
Figure 5 Explanatory sheet.

ISO 55001 – A Strategic tool for the Circular Economy 101
question by question, interpretation of the questions and knowledge as to
which answer option to indicate.
Diagnostic data sheets are identified at the top, by the number of the
correspondingstage (1 to 25).The name “Diagnostic survey”,isalso identified
by a heading designating the corresponding stage.
There follows an intermediate zone where the grid with the questions and
columns reserved for the respective answer is located. Each line begins by
indicating a number associated to each statement consisting of three or four
digits. The first one(s) represent(s) the number of the inquiry sheet and the
other two identify the order of the statement. It is based on this numbering that
you can search for help in “Explanatory sheets”. The following five possible
response possibilities appear in the following columns – “Always”, “Mostly”,
“Generally”, “Hardly” and “Never” – as already mentioned. One and only one
option must be answered. If it is impossible to respond, then no option should
be filled.
Finally, the lower part is reserved for determination:
•The score obtained;
•The consequent classification by categories;
•Elimination criteria achieved.
3.3 Organization and Analysis of Information Collected
Depending on the answers obtained in the surveys, interpretive of the current
state of the organization in relation to the implementation of ISO 55001,
each diagnostic record will have a certain score, which is divided into five
categories: Category 1; Category 2; Category 3; Category 4; and Category 5.
Within the positive situations we have category 1, synonymous with the
very good positioning of the company, and category 2 that translates a good
positioning. Next, a central or intermediate situation between positive and
negativesituations thattranslates a reasonablepositioning. Withinthenegative
situations, category 3 indicates that there are still aspects to be improved in the
organization, while category 4 translates a bad positioning for the application
of the norm, indicating that it will be necessary to carry out a broad and deep
intervention of reorganization of this stage.
Thus, for each stage, category 1 is the one associated to the highest
scores, synonymous of the good positioning of the company, while category
5 corresponds to the lowest scores, associated with poor performance.
Each stage must achieve a minimum score in order to sustain the posi-
tioning of the next stage, viz, the company will not be able to adequately

102 E. Pais et al.
Table 2 Criteria of importance of the responses in the positioning of the maintenance state [6]
Green Adequate answer
This answer is always desirable.
Yellow Inadequate answer
Only some answers should be of this category and the company
should improve them.
Orange Exceptional answer
Fewanswers shouldbe of this type, although these responses are not
eliminatory, the company should improve them as soon as possible.
Red Critical answer
The company should never have this type of answer, being the first
to be reviewed.
guarantee the implementation of the questions of a given stage without
the previous stage having reached a position that is considered favourable.
In practice, it is established that the company must reach the threshold
of the third category as a guarantee of sustainability application of the
next stage.
3.4 Elimination Criteria
Each possibility of answering the several questions is assigned a degree of
importance,functioning as a criterion of elimination, accordingto four colours
(green; yellow; orange; and red) with the interpretation given in Table 2.
A withdrawal criterion is considered to have been achieved if the company
has responded to a critically important question or exceeded the maximum
number of allowable responses on matters of exceptional and inappropriate
importance.
The evaluation of the questionnaires allows to determine the state of
the company in the scope of the management of the physical assets of the
organization.
It can be seen from the several questionnaires that the columns for
“Always” or “Mostly” answers are the most desirable response possibili-
ties and therefore the “green” colour of the elimination criterion is always
attributed to them.
For each question answered with a negative or central form, viz, “Gener-
ally”, “Hardly” or “Never”, the template automatically produces a report of
fragile points (responses obtained in orange zones) or critical point reports
(responses obtained in red areas).

ISO 55001 – A Strategic tool for the Circular Economy 103
3.5 Elimination Grid
The elimination grids are no more than coloured cells in red, orange, yellow,
and green that are part of the questionnaire grid of each diagnostic sheet.
When a critical, exceptional, inadequate or adequate response has been given,
respectively,itallowstoidentify whether the company,in this matter, has been
eliminated or not, according to the process previously described, “Always”
and sometimes “Mostly” gives the maximum score, on the other end “Never”
and sometimes “Hardly” give the minimum scores.
The process of colour assignment in the criteria of elimination results
from the importance that each question contributes to the asset’s man-
agement process and, consequently, its implications to the organization’s
reorganization.
Thescore (A)obtainedby thecompanyresults fromthefollowing formula:
A=AA+AM+AG+AH
Where,
•AA– Answer “Always”
•AM– Answer “Mostly”
•AG– Answer “Generally”
•AH– Answer “Hardly”
The score obtained gives origin to the category that the company achieved in
each stage or questionnaire.
4 Model Application
According to Table 3 it can be seen that the score achieved by the company
clearly demonstrates that many changes will be necessary for the application
of ISO 55001.
This result was spectacle since it is a public institute where few man-
agement, quality, and maintenance tools are used and where the interaction
between the several areas is non-existent.
In this way, the implementation of ISO 55001 will be easier where other
management tools have already been implemented and consolidated in the
organization.

104 E. Pais et al.
Table 3 Scoreboard reached
Stage Surveys Company Score
1 A. Understanding the organization and its context 1,8
2 B. Understanding the needs and expectations of
stakeholders 2,2
3 C. Determining the scope of the asset
management system 1,7
4 D. Asset management system 0,0
5 E. Leadership and commitment 0,0
6 F. Policy 0,0
7 G. Organizational roles, responsibilities and
authorities 0,0
8 H. Actions to address risks and opportunities for
the AMS 0,0
9 I. Asset management objectives 0,0
10 J. Planning to achieve asset management
objectives 0,0
11 K. Resources 0,0
12 L. Competence 0,0
13 M. Awareness 0,0
14 N. Communication 0,0
15 O. Information requirements 0,0
16 P. Documented information 0,0
17 Q. Operational planning and control 0,0
18 R. Management of change 0,0
19 S. Outsourcing 0,0
20 T. Monitoring, measurement, analysis and
evaluation 0,0
21 U. Internal audit 0,0
22 V. Management review 0,0
23 W. Nonconformity and corrective action 0,0
24 X. Preventive action 0,0
25 Y. Continual improvement 0,0
Figure 6 illustrates the company’s positioning radar map.
It can be said that the entity must improve its management culture in
order to implement ISO 55001 and, at this stage, its application is completely
inadequate.

ISO 55001 – A Strategic tool for the Circular Economy 105
Figure 6 Radar Map.

106 E. Pais et al.
5 Conclusions
The diagnostic model developed to support the implementation of the ISO
55001 standard is easy to use and provides concrete results to support organi-
zationsby identifyingtheir strengths andweaknesses for theirimplementation,
and also provides help to improve though a PDCA (Plan. Do, Check, andAct)
cycle.
The final result of the diagnostic model allows an “X-ray” of the entity
through a radar map, as well as several supporting reports where results are
made visible what it is already, according the standard and what must be
implemented or improved to comply with standard.
The model was validated in a public institute and resulted in a diagnosis
that coincides with what was predicted empirically in relation to the primary
state of the management culture in which it is found, and because the public
institute directing board didn’t authorize the results to be made public, we
needed to hide its identity.
The model, in addition to the initial diagnosis, corresponds to a tool to
support the implementation of ISO 55001 and to help the organization make
corrections and improvements after its certification.
References
[1] http://h2ad.org.uk/energy-generation/. Accessed on 2018.06.15
[2] https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/.Accessed on 2018.6.08
[3] Joustra, D. J. (2017): Circular Essentials, Circular economy is boom-
ing, though not yet too much as a booming business. https://www.
circulairondernemen.nl/bibliotheek/the-10-circular-essentials. Accessed
on 2018.06.08
[4] https://theiam.org/. Accessed on 2018.06.08
[5] Jones et al., (2014): The evolution of asset management in the water
industry. Journal AWWA: 106:8, American Water Works Association.
[6] Raposo, Hugo D. N; Farinha, J. T. (2012): Diagnosis of the state of
maintenance– Aholistic approach.Magazine MANUTENÇÃO, number
120, 1st Trimester of 2014, pages 4–5.
[7] ISO 55000 (2014): Asset management – Overview, principles and
terminology.
[8] ISO 55001 (2014): Asset management – Management systems –
Requirements.

ISO 55001 – A Strategic tool for the Circular Economy 107
[9] Hastings, N. A. J., 2014: Physical Asset Management – With
an Introduction to ISO55000, Springer, ISBN 978-3-319-14776-5,
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-14777-2.
Biographies
E. Pais is a M.Sc. student at ISEC – Coimbra Institute of Engineering at
Portugal since spring 2015. He attended the ISEC – Coimbra Institute of
Engineering,Portugal where he receivedhis B.Sc. in MechanicalEngineering.
He, as a Facility Manager expert and professional, has acquired a solid
experience in building and equipment maintenance management. Edmundo
is currently completing a M.Sc. at ISEC – Coimbra Institute of Engineering.
His M.Sc. work centers on Asset Management model to help diagnosing the
state of the organization for the implementation of ISO 55001.
H. Raposo is PhD in Mechanical Engineering (Management and Industrial
Robotics) from University of Coimbra (UC). He is MSc in Mechanical
Engineering from ISEC – Coimbra Institute of Engineering. He is MSc in
Equipment and Mechanical Systems from ISEC. He is BSc in Mechanical
Engineering from ISEC. He won, in 2015, the “Engineer Monteiro Leite”
award, from the Portuguese Association of Industrial Maintenance (APMI).
He won, in 2014, a prize from the EFMMS – European Federation of National

108 E. Pais et al.
Maintenance Societies – in recognition as the Best Nominated Master Thesis
ofPortugal. Heis memberof theCentrefor MechanicalEngineering, Materials
and Processes – CEMMPRE (Research Unit Nº 285 of the Portuguese
Foundation for Science and Technology).
A. Meireles, is MSc in Industrial Engineering and Management from ISEC –
Coimbra Institute of Engineering, Portugal. She has an expertise in technical
asset management and a professional background in provision of services for
the Oil & Gas industry, specifically the certification and inspection of fixed
and transportable pressure vessels.
J. T. Farinha has Habilitation in Electrical Engineering and Computers,
is PhD in Mechanical Engineering and BSc in Electrical Engineering. He
is currently Full Professor at ISEC – Coimbra Institute of Engineering at
Portugal.His main scientific interest isAsset Managementandrelated matters,
such as Industrial Maintenance. He has three books published and almost
two hundred papers and communications. He is member of the Centre for
Mechanical Engineering, Materials and Processes – CEMMPRE (Research
Unit Nº 285 of the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology).