Many of the organizations I’ve come across that are committed to improving asset management practices have told me that one of the first hurdles is simply knowing what equipment they have. Without a reliable equipment inventory, barcoding system, and baseline data, it is impossible to effectively plan, budget, or manage the operations and maintenance of your facilities.
We see many organizations struggle with a key first question….Who should actually do the work of gathering your equipment inventory? In general, we see people looking at two main options, using in-house staff or bringing in an outside consultant to support the program. Each option has benefits and drawbacks, and the best answer often depends on your priorities, resources, and long-term goals.
Option 1: In-House Staff
Many organizations start by assigning equipment inventory to their own maintenance or facilities staff. On the surface, this makes sense: they know the buildings, they already interact with the equipment daily, and the work can be integrated into their routines.
Benefits
- Staff familiarity with facilities and equipment.
- Builds ownership of the dataset from the very beginning.
- Can be less expensive in terms of hard costs if you don’t need to backfill their time.
Drawbacks
- Competes with ongoing maintenance priorities, leading to delays or incomplete coverage.
- In-house teams may lack a consistent methodology, leading to data quality issues.
- Staff turnover can undermine continuity and dataset reliability.
In practice, this option often means the inventory gets delayed or done inconsistently, especially if your team is already stretched thin.
Option 2: Third-Party Professionals
Engaging a third-party firm like Roth IAMS can dramatically accelerate the process and give you confidence that the work is done consistently. With trained assessors, standardized methodologies, and technology-enabled workflows, an external team can deliver a complete, high-quality dataset in weeks or months, not years.
Benefits
- Rapid completion with minimal disruption to day-to-day maintenance.
- Consistency and accuracy in data collection, tagging, and documentation.
- Scalable—able to cover large campuses or portfolios efficiently.
Drawbacks
- Higher upfront cost compared to using in-house resources.
- In-house staff may feel less connected to or invested in the resulting dataset.
This approach works best for organizations that need a quick, reliable foundation for asset management planning and reporting.
Based on recent interactions with several clients, we have found a third option, which is essentially a hybrid of the typical two options that people consider. In our experience, the hybrid can take the best from both of the initial options, while offsetting some of the drawbacks of each as well.
Option 3: Hybrid Approach – Baseline by Third Party, Enhanced by In-House Staff
A growing number of institutions are adopting a third option: have a third-party firm perform the baseline equipment inventory and barcoding, then empower in-house staff to enrich the dataset over time by collecting equipment-specific information. For example, Roth IAMS may collect make, model, serial number, location, and tag number, while your maintenance team later adds belt sizes, motor horsepower, or part details as they complete their regular PMs.
Benefits
- Provides a quick, comprehensive baseline dataset.
- Leverages external expertise for accuracy and consistency.
- Lowers the third-party costs of the data collection compared to Option 2
- Builds in-house ownership and engagement with the data.
- Allows ongoing enrichment without slowing down the initial inventory effort.
Drawbacks
- Requires a clear process for staff to update the dataset.
- Collection of the additional equipment data is done over time as maintenance activities occur
- Depends on commitment from leadership to reinforce the culture of data ownership.
This option strikes a balance: you get the speed and consistency of a professional baseline, while giving your staff a stake in the ongoing value of the data.
Which Approach Is Right for You?
The right path depends on your organization’s goals, culture, and capacity. If you need a quick win, outsourcing to a third party is often the best option. If you are more focused on cultural change and long-term staff engagement, in-house or hybrid models may serve you better.
At Roth IAMS, we often recommend the hybrid approach. It ensures the dataset is both reliable and timely while also creating the buy-in and accountability that comes from giving your team ownership.
Ultimately, the goal is not just to tag equipment—it’s to create a living, accurate dataset that drives smarter decisions about your facilities and becomes the foundation of your ongoing asset management program.
