![Asset management framework proposed by Crespo (2007) [4]](https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Carlos-Parra-19/publication/352670814/figure/fig1/AS:1045514715922432@1626281541897/Asset-management-framework-proposed-by-Crespo-2007-4_Q320.jpg)
![Skills survey results of criticality and availability of skills [5]](https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Carlos-Parra-19/publication/352670814/figure/fig4/AS:1045514720129025@1626281542149/Skills-survey-results-of-criticality-and-availability-of-skills-5_Q320.jpg)
![Methodology for prioritisation of key skills and competences for the EDTIB [5].](https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Carlos-Parra-19/publication/352670814/figure/fig3/AS:1045514720129024@1626281542125/Methodology-for-prioritisation-of-key-skills-and-competences-for-the-EDTIB-5_Q320.jpg)
Content uploaded by Carlos Parra
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Carlos Parra on Jul 14, 2021
Content may be subject to copyright.
An Intangible Asset Management Proposal based on
ISO 55001 and ISO 30401 for Knowledge Management
Vicente González-Prida1, Antonio Guillén2, Carlos Parra3, Eduardo Candón4
and Pablo Martínez-Galán5
Abstract This contribution is intended to provide a view on the standards ISO
55001 (requirements for an asset management system) and the ISO 30401 (require-
ments for a knowledge management system), in order to consider knowledge and
human asset management, as a relevant dimension for all engineering and industrial
sectors. An intangible asset management framework is proposed in this paper, con-
sidering the principles and requirements of the above-mentioned standards, together
with methodologies already developed for physical asset management, in order to
coordinate and realize value (in this case) from the industrial knowledge. This pro-
posal is intended to be a helpful decision support tool in order to align the different
knowledge areas to the industry strategy and, in particular, to the business drivers
of the company. Such a proposal will require first the identification of the key com-
pany knowledge areas, which are needed to sustain and grow the business, support-
ing strategic decision-making. After that priorization, a gap analysis shall be per-
formed in order to reckon if the core knowledge and the key industrial capabilities
match with the current company resources and where they lie (people expertise,
document repositories, etc.). This analysis will help not only to detect core capabil-
ities to be developed and/or acquired by the organization, but also to reassign effi-
ciently the current company resources to more critical activities with more added
1 Vicente González-Prida ()
University of Seville, 41092 Seville, Spain
UNED, 28040 Madrid, Spain
e-mail: vgonzalezprida@us.es
2 University of Seville, 41092 Seville, Spain
e-mail: ajguillen@us.es
3 University of Seville, 41092 Seville, Spain
e-mail: parrac@ingecon.net.in
4 University of Seville, 41092 Seville, Spain
e-mail: eduardocandon@gmail.com
5 University of Seville, 41092 Seville, Spain
e-mail: pablomgf93@gmail.com
WCEAM2021, 040, v2 (major): ’An Intangible Asset Management Proposal based on ISO . . . 1
2
value. Finally, connections to risk and uncertainty references, the digitalization in-
dustry process, as well as to possible future research lines are commented as a con-
clusion.
1 Introduction
According to ISO 55000 [1], an asset is something that has potential or actual
value to an organization. That means in other words, an item that has the capability
to impact in the company throughout its full lifecycle. Every company will decide
what an asset is and will set priorities accordingly. This is important to start men-
tioning since, according to this definition, an asset may be a tangible element (like
manufacturing equipment, testing tools, etc.), but it may be as well an intangible
element (like knowledge, human resources, competences, etc.). Together with the
concept of asset, it is commonly define the term of asset management. This term
will refer to all those coordinated activities of an organization with the aim of real-
izing value from its assets. According to the kind of asset (tangible or intangible),
the corresponding management will not be necessary the same. However, there will
be main lines that can be similar.
Nowadays, there are standards that help organizations to manage their different
systems. In particular, the ISO 55001 [1] helps to manage assets. That standard does
not specify if such assets have to be tangible (physical) elements or not. Neverthe-
less, organizations usually apply this standard to manage their physical assets. On
the other hand, It has been recently published the ISO 30401 [2] that refers to the
establishment of a knowledge management system. As any other management sys-
tem defined by the ISO, it follows too the well-known PDCA (Plan-Do-Check-Act)
cycle, also named Deming Cycle. In general, terms, Asset Management based on
ISO 55000 [1] helps to respond to specific questions and supports the decision-
making according to gathered data. In this sense, these questions are like the fol-
lowing ones:
What is the Asset portfolio?
How important are these assets for the company?
Are the resources efficiently assigned for each asset?
How much will the assets cost during their whole life cycle?
How are the assets linked to the business goals?
In order to respond to these questions, organizations apply a set of methodologies
like Criticality Analysis (CA); Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM); Reliabil-
ity, Availability, Maintainability and Safety Analysis (RAMS), Life Cycle Cost
Analysis (LCCA), among many others. As commented, organizations usually apply
these methodologies in a cyclical way following a kind of PDCA or Deming cycle,
in order to manage their physical assets with a continuous improvement back-
ground. In others words, asset management demand the accurate definition of asset
2 WCEAM2021, 040, v2 (major): ’An Intangible Asset Management Proposal based on ISO . . .
3
concept and the use of analysis tools in order to extract information. Such infor-
mation is that one required for the decision making and for the provision of support
to the management function. In terms of decision making model, an asset is a para-
metric representation of an element that provides value to a system or organization.
This kind of management can be applied for intangible asset in a similar way as
physical asset. In this sense, considering intangible asset as knowledge, through the
definition of management system, it will respond to questions like:
What knowledge is required? Why?
How can knowledge be measured and parameterized? How can a
knowledge asset portfolio be define?
Who has / where is this knowledge available?
How important is that knowledge?
How efficiently is the organization using its knowledge?
How is this knowledge protected and developed?
What is the added value of this knowledge to the business strategy?
According to the ISO 30401 [2], knowledge management will refer to the com-
bination of processes, actions methodologies and solutions that enable the creation,
maintenance, distribution and access to organizational knowledge. Consequently,
the corresponding management system will be that set of interrelated or interacting
elements of an organization that establish, embed and enable the knowledge man-
agement policies and objectives, as well as the processes to achieve those objec-
tives.
In addition to this, that standard compiles a set of other definitions. Among them,
there is the concept of Competence, which is defined as the ability to apply
knowledge and skills in order to achieve intended results for the organization. Of
course, such intended result has to be aligned with the organization’s strategy. Other
definition to competence can be found in the DoD Instruction 1400.25 [3], where it
is depicted as an observable, measurable pattern of knowledge, skills, abilities, be-
haviors, and other characteristics needed to perform work roles or occupational
functions successfully. In any case, added to this concept, the standard specifies
which may be the core competences, as well as the model and framework where
these competences have to be described and structured. As a remark to the standard,
the ISO 30401 [2] is probably quite focused on competences related to human re-
sources, where it is supposed that the company knowledge stays. However, it is
important to underline as well that knowledge may rely in documental repositories
too, and must be taken into account that in the next generation (or even today), much
of these competences will belong to AI .Knowledge and competence definition, to-
gether with management are experimenting a revolution as a consequence of digital
transformation, especially, the AI development.
WCEAM2021, 040, v2 (major): ’An Intangible Asset Management Proposal based on ISO . . . 3
4
2 Intangible AM (IAM) from a Physical AM (PAM) Model
Back to the general asset management system, any asset management framework
will have to consider the business context. That refers to those company’s strategy,
policies, objectives, plans, but also the activities to do.
Fig. 1. Business context and asset management
Regarding such activities, it is important to identify what the company should
do, and what the company really does. In other words, for the definition of the busi-
ness context, it will be needed:
Business processes and their respective tasks
Assets suitable for performing such tasks
Tasks and processes in which each asset is applied
Since asset may be tangible (machines) or intangible (knowledge), the frame-
work should follow and consider both possibilities. Together with the framework,
it is important to take into account the possible already existing procedures in the
company. In this sense and regarding the business context, the company probably
has already established different manuals related to its goals, risk & opportunities,
strategic planning, audits etc. Regarding the tangible context, procedures that may
exist already in the company may refer to manufacturing, non-conformity manage-
ment system, investments procedures, etc. On the other hand, regarding intangible
context, the organization probably has already HR plans, control of documented
information, public affairs or talent management system among other procedures.
Considering physical asset management, there are many publications dealing with
that topic, as for example the 8-phase management framework defined by Crespo
(2007) [4].
4 WCEAM2021, 040, v2 (major): ’An Intangible Asset Management Proposal based on ISO . . .
5
This paper on the contrary, is interested to focus on intangible asset management,
considering knowledge as such an intangible asset. Consequently, adapting the
above-mentioned 8-phase management framework (which is devoted to physical
assets) to a knowledge management framework (which is devoted to intangible as-
sets), the phases can be for instance the following ones:
Phase 1: Definition of competences / knowledge areas according to
business strategy
Phase 2: Competences / knowledge areas priority setting
Phase 3: Intervention on high impact competence-resources problems
Phase 4: Design of competence plans and resources requirements
Phase 5: Competence plan, schedule and resources optimization
Phase 6: Resources assessment and control
Phase 7: Competences and resources life cycle analysis
Phase 8: Continuous improvement and new techniques utilization
Fig. 2. Asset management framework proposed by Crespo (2007) [4]
Similarly to the physical asset management, in this case it will be needed to de-
termine a specific intervention level. That means that the organization should have
to consider as much as possible the following aspects before defining a knowledge
management framework:
Business processes and their respective tasks
Knowledge suitable for performing such tasks
Importance of each knowledge item
Knowledge available in the company (documents)
WCEAM2021, 040, v2 (major): ’An Intangible Asset Management Proposal based on ISO . . . 5
6
Knowledge nature: tacit or explicit
Task and processes in which each knowledge item is used
3 An example of IAM: An Asset Knowledge Management
Framework
According to the ISO 30401:2018 [2], knowledge is defined as the human or
organizational asset enabling effective decisions and action in context. On the other
hand, the knowhow is defined by the Merriam Webster dictionary as the knowledge
of how to get things done, or the knowledge gained by actually doing or living
through something. Knowhow is usually described with characteristics like a per-
sonal and reusable asset that may promote knowledge. In the introductory section,
some questions were stablished in regard to physical asset management, In agree-
ment to such questions, one of the first steps to stablish a knowledge management
framework will be to identify the critical knowledge or how to prioritize it. In that
sense and with that purpose, it is possible to consider questions like:
Is the knowledge aligned to the business mission/vision?
Is it specific or general? Is it secret or open?
Does it provide any competitive advantage?
Is it clearly linked to competences and experts?
…?
3.1 Phase 1: Definition of knowledge according to business
strategy
According to the above-mentioned questions, it will be crucial to identify com-
petences in order to determine role characteristics.
Figure 1: Identification of what the company should have, and what the company
really has
6 WCEAM2021, 040, v2 (major): ’An Intangible Asset Management Proposal based on ISO . . .
7
In addition to this, it is important to identify functions and structure in the organ-
ization, in order to determine HR as well as document characteristics. With all this,
it will be obtained as a result a competence matrix, together with a kind of repository
where the different experts and documents are identified for each specific compe-
tence.
3.2 Phase 2: Knowledge priority setting
Before the contrast between desired competences with existing resources, it is
important first to prioritize such competences or required knowledge areas. Since
the matter under study is intangible, this activity will be performed by using a qual-
itative assessment extracted from experts’ judgement, evaluating how align is each
competence with the business strategy. With this, the result should be the identifi-
cation of core competences for the business. As an example, Figure 4 illustrates the
methodology followed by the European Defence Technological and Industrial Base
(EDTIB), exploring key skills and competences for defence in order to be sustained
into the future [5].
Figure 4: Methodology for prioritisation of key skills and competences for the
EDTIB [5].
WCEAM2021, 040, v2 (major): ’An Intangible Asset Management Proposal based on ISO . . . 7
8
3.3 Phase 3: Intervention on high impact competence-resources
problems
Once identified the core competences for the business, and the existing re-
sources, not only in the company, but also in the labor market. In that sense, Figure
5 presents a detailed map of skill’s criticality and availability as identified by the
Defence Growth Partnership (DGP) Skills Survey [5]. As depicted in such refer-
ence, the bubbles represent the scale of the ‘critical skills issue’ as a proportion of
the overall response. In that survey, criticality is understood in terms of the ability
of companies’ to meet their business needs within the labor market.
Figure 2: Skills survey results of criticality and availability of skills [5]
In addition to this, it is important to determine if the company resources are well
assigned to the core competences, and if there are gaps. These gaps can be in terms
of competences without any resources assigned to them, or, on the other hand, gaps
in terms of existing resources that are not devoted to defined competences (if there
are people devoted to these competences or not, and vice versa). With this, it is
important to study the severity of the deficiencies as well as the risk of knowledge
loss.
8 WCEAM2021, 040, v2 (major): ’An Intangible Asset Management Proposal based on ISO . . .
9
3.4 Phase 4: Design of competence plans and resources
requirements
Phase 5: Competence plan, schedule and resources optimization
The above analysis will be useful in order to align competences and resources.
Such alignment will be obtained applying a kind of action plan where competences
and resources requirements have to be depicted. In other words, the company will
find core competences with a gap in resources, and existing resources that do not
match with the desired competences. The matching between competence plan and
resource requirements will need the application in the Human Resources (HR) area
of change management technics, in terms of training and/or rotating the staff, or
acquiring the knowledge from the labor market. It will suppose to the employees
(technicians, managers, etc.) an incremental and transformational change. A possi-
ble process for non-core competences is suggested in figure 6
Figure 6: Possible process for non-core competences
3.5 Phase 6: Resources assessment and Knowledge control
Phase 7: Competencies and resources life cycle analysis
In order to control and assess company resources linked to specific core
knowledge, there are today many software and applications that helps the manage-
ment of such success factors. The usual process for that control and assessment can
be described in the following steps:
WCEAM2021, 040, v2 (major): ’An Intangible Asset Management Proposal based on ISO . . . 9
10
Manager sets goals
Manager guides employee through the goals
Employee works towards goals
Manager reviews employee performance
In order to review the performance, it is important to define properly specific
measures and indicators. The variation of such indicators with the course of the time
will help to observe the progress degree, mainly when specific measures have been
applied. These aspects will help the company to detect necessities so, it will require
the implementation of a change plan that must be communicated to the organization.
Such a change plan will need of course an implementation process and, after that,
and assessment. At the end of the day, the needed changes are expected to be ab-
sorbed by the business culture.
3.6 Phase 8: Continuous improvement and new techniques
utilization
The above-mentioned phases will require of course to be repeated continuously fol-
lowing a Deming cycle as a usual continuous improvement process.
Figure 3: Proposed Knowledge Management Process
Figure 7 is intended to summarize the knowledge management framework,
showing a cyclical process where the above-mentioned phases are represented, to-
gether with the initial questions stablished for an appropriate intangible asset man-
10 WCEAM2021, 040, v2 (major): ’An Intangible Asset Management Proposal based on ISO . . .
11
agement system. Therefore, this is just an example of the process related to the pro-
posed knowledge management framework. Nevertheless, there are of course others
found in the literature (for example: [6], [7]), together with interesting analysis and
study cases that link asset management (in the traditional way) with aspects related
to knowledge and other intangible elements ([8], [9], [10] or [11] among others).
All the commented phases will require to gather data and to analyze them in order
to get conclusions that helps to improvement de knowledge management system
itself. Nowadays, there are many easy-to-use tools that can aim and support all this
process, since new business intelligence platforms may provide significant and dis-
ruptive tools helpful to the proposed framework.
4 Summary and conclusion
“Knowledge is power” has become a common but true cliché in all areas of industry.
In the knowledge economy, there is a consensus that this intangible asset is one of
the main resources for wealth creation in companies. Therefore, it seems to be cru-
cial that companies have to manage their knowledge in order to obtain the maximum
possible added value. Of course, all organizations manage their knowledge, alt-
hough not all of them always managed it optimally. Due to that reason, this docu-
ment has presented a management framework based in already well-known stand-
ards like the ISO 55001 for asset management and the ISO 30401 for knowledge
management. In addition to that, this contribution has adapted the methodology de-
picted for physical assets, in order to be useful to prioritize competences, check if
they are aligned with the existing resources and to fulfil the gaps by training, relo-
cating or acquiring new resources. Basically, those companies that are aware on
how to manage efficiently their knowledge are in a better competitive situation.
References
[1] ISO 55001:2015. Asset management — Management systems — Require-
ments. International Organization for Standardization
[2] ISO 30401:2018. Knowledge management systems — Requirements. Interna-
tional Organization for Standardization
[3] DoD Instruction 1400.25, Volume 250, Civilian Strategic Human Capital
Planning, November 18, 2008
[4] Crespo A. (2007). The maintenance management framework: models and
methods for complex systems maintenance. Springer Science & Business Me-
dia. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-84628-821-0. ISBN 9781846288210
[5] Retter L., Taggart L. and Freeman J. (2015). Executive Summary. Key Skills
and Competences for Defence. EDA contract reference: 14.CPS.OP.030.
RAND Europe RR-1226-EDA
WCEAM2021, 040, v2 (major): ’An Intangible Asset Management Proposal based on ISO . . . 11
12
[6] Kriege L.K., Jooste J.L. & Vlok P.J. (2016). A framework for establishing a
human asset register for the improved management of people in physical asset
management. South African Journal of Industrial Engineering. Vol 27(4), pp
77-89. DOI: 10.7166/27-4-1549
[7] Colakoglu, S., Hong, Y. & Lepak, D.P. (2010). Models of strategic human
resource management. In: Wilkinson, A., Bacon, N., Redman, T. & Snell, S.
(Eds.) The SAGE handbook of human resource management. SAGE Publica-
tions.
[8] Kriege, L. & Vlok, P.J. 2015. Human resources within ISO 55000 — The hid-
den backbone to the asset management system. In: Amadi-Echendu, J.,
Hoohlo, C. & Mathew, J. (Eds.) 9th WCEAM Research Papers. Springer, pp.
435–446
[9] Blair, M.M. (2011). An economic perspective on the notion of human capital.
In: Burton-Jones, A. & Spender, J.-C. (Eds.) The Oxford handbook of human
capital. Oxford University Press, pp. 49-70.
[10] Amadi-Echendu, J. (2010). Behavioural preferences for engineering asset
management. Definitions, Concepts and Scope of Engineering Asset Manage-
ment, 1(1), pp. 347–355.
[11] Maheshwarkar M. and Sohani N. (2016). Evaluation of Knowledge Manage-
ment Levels Based on Multi Criteria Analysis. Management Science and En-
gineering. Vol. 10, No. 2, 2016, pp. 5-23. DOI:10.3968/8561. Canadian Re-
search & Development Center of Sciences and Cultures. ISSN 1913-0341
12 WCEAM2021, 040, v2 (major): ’An Intangible Asset Management Proposal based on ISO . . .
