Running Head: COMMUNICATING PRINCIPLES OF ASSET MANAGEMENT

Evaluating Effective Techniques for Communicating Technical Principles of Asset Management

Dane C. Hurst
Utah State University

COMMUNICATING PRINCIPLES OF ASSET MANAGEMENT

Introduction
Infrastructure systems (e.g. roads and drinking water) are costly investments that are critical
to the functionality of modern society, but are susceptible to the effects of aging. Experts report
that Americas infrastructure as a whole is near failing, due to poor management practices over
extended periods of time (American Society of Civil Engineers, 2013). The same report also
shows the benefits of smart investing to reverse the trend of deterioration.
The practice of asset management applies technical engineering and economic principles to
manage infrastructure at an optimal level with minimal life-cycle expense (Koechling, 2004).
Though asset management relies on technical principles, the people who make decisions to fund
asset management (i.e. local government officials) commonly do not have a technical
background. Often, proponents of asset management see this lapse in understanding as a major
detriment to effective practice (Yarnell, 2004). For the best decisions to be made, engineers must
be able to clearly articulate sufficient technical understanding to decision-makers; however, the
inability of engineers to communicate effectively in general has been called a significant
challenge in the modern era (Davis, 2010). Furthermore, there seems to be a significant
shortage of formal research on best practices for technical communication in this specific context
of asset management.
Research is therefore needed to establish standards for engineers to effectively
communicate technical information to non-technical decision-makers to empower them to make
wise use of taxpayer dollars. The beginning point to establish best practices in this area is to
analyze the current state of communication between the two parties. This can be defined by
understanding the communication techniques employed by engineers and the perceived value of
such for decision-makers.

COMMUNICATING PRINCIPLES OF ASSET MANAGEMENT

The purpose of this study is to explore strategies employed by engineers familiar with
asset management to communicate with non-technical decision-makers. Additionally, the
perceptions of decision-makers concerning this subject will be considered to evaluate the
effectiveness of the communication. A common technique to accomplish similar tasks in other
technical contexts is the use of mental modeling and this will be the approach undertaken in the
present study. Specific questions to be addressed include:
1. What specific principles do engineers and decision-makers consider necessary to
make informed decisions for asset management?
2. For each party, what strategies are considered to be most effective for
communication between engineers and decision-makers?
3. What gaps in the communication between engineers and decision-makers
preclude desired outcomes for asset management projects?

Literature Review

Review Objectives
In order for asset management practices to be most effective, there must be strong
communication ties between engineers (as technical experts) and government leaders (as
decision-makers). While technical communication has been studied extensively and there is
ample anecdotal opinions concerning this subject, there is little formal research to substantiate
best practices for communication in this context.
This review will synthesize current literature on technical communication in diverse
frameworks, especially concerning risk management subjects. This will be done with the goal of

COMMUNICATING PRINCIPLES OF ASSET MANAGEMENT

extending principles from the literature to civil engineering and asset management frameworks.
Specific objectives are as follows:
1. Describe research on technical communication related to risk assessment and nontechnical decision-makers in various contexts, especially related to civil engineering.
2. Discuss issues surrounding technical communication and asset management highlighted
in the literature.
3. Draw conclusions from this information to determine guiding principles for technical
communication surrounding asset management.
Review Procedures
The database PsycINFO, hosted by EBSCOhost, was primarily used to search for articles
pertaining to technical communication in engineering and asset management. A number of
searches were performed with various combinations of 2-3 of the following words and phrases:
engineering, civil engineering, communication, technical communication, asset management,
decision making, risk management, expert opinion, mental modeling. All search results were
filtered to include only peer-reviewed articles.
Due to a shortage of results on technical communication in civil engineering found in
PsycINFO, an additional search was made in the online library of the American Society of Civil
Engineers (ASCE) and on TRID, which is housed by the Transportation Review Board. Both of
these databases are rich with peer-reviewed journal articles related to civil engineering and
transportation. Search terms used in these databases include: asset management AND
communication, asset management AND decision making and communication AND decision
making.

COMMUNICATING PRINCIPLES OF ASSET MANAGEMENT

Given the scarcity of research on this topic, articles will be included in the review if they
provide relevant understanding related to communicating risk management (or a similar subject)
in technical contexts. Articles related to any applicable aspect of communication in engineering
will also be given consideration. Articles must be peer reviewed articles. Because
communication is rooted in culture, articles based on western cultures will be given preference,
as will articles which describe communication in professional (i.e. non-academic) settings.

Review Discussion

Of the many articles discovered during the search, only those that provided the most
applicable information were included in the review. Based on the established criteria, seven
articles were included in the review. The criteria for inclusion were divided into three broad
categories: Sample Characteristics, Research Design Characteristics and Research Outcomes.
Discussion on each of these sections is given below:

Sample Characteristics

Setting. The setting of the study was an important factor because this research will be set
in professional practice. Six of the seven studies were conducted in diverse fields of professional
practice. Of these, three explicitly dealt with the interface of public policy and technical expertise
in government (flooding, wild land fire and nuclear waste). Given their relevance, these studies
were of particular interest. The seventh study was based in academia, specifically an engineering
school at a small private university.

Discipline. One of the seven studies was based in a civil engineering discipline. It
addressed flood management practices of the Army Corps of Engineers. Two other articles

COMMUNICATING PRINCIPLES OF ASSET MANAGEMENT

addressed other engineering disciplines. One was focused on the management of nuclear waste
and one was directed towards engineering subjects in general. For the literature to be complete
there needs to be more similar research in engineering contexts. The four remaining articles
represented an array of technical subjects, including environmental management, mental health
and the judiciary, wild fire management, and general transportation safety.

Topics. Two articles addressed the topic of technical communication. One studied it in a
general way as a means of building strength of a universitys engineering program and the other
approached technical communication from the aspect of specific strategies to communicate to
enable desired outcomes (in the judicial system). Six articles addressed the topic of risk
management in their respective contexts. These studies involved participants receiving
information on some technical subject, being presented with an issue to be resolved and then
being asked to evaluate the risks and trade-offs associated with each plan of action.

Sample size. Sample size was not a criteria for inclusion, but the number and category of
participants was recorded to help determine study strength. Sample size varied greatly with a
range of 1 (a case study) to 1,888 total participants. The average total sample size was 380
participants. To enumerate, one study had 67 expert participants and 374 general public
participants for a total of 411, one used 253 expert participants, one used 26 lay persons and 6
experts (total of 32), one used 22 experts, one used 20 public participants and 5 experts (total of
25) and the last one used 1,716 public participants, 146 politicians and 26 experts (total of
1,888). This distribution of participants provided good diversity in perspectives to be studied and
the pattern should be emulated in future research.

COMMUNICATING PRINCIPLES OF ASSET MANAGEMENT

Research Design Characteristics

Type. One of the articles reported on a case study and six used traditional qualitative
techniques. The case study described one universitys efforts to integrate technical
communication in its engineering curriculum. The qualitative studies used surveys and
interviews to gather data and many of them used mental modeling to analyze the data; these are
discussed in more detail in later sections.
Outcome measures. One of the studies (the case study) used direct observation to conduct
the research. Three of the studies used surveys, one administered by mail, one using a web-based
platform and one using an undisclosed method. Two of the studies used interviews, both
apparently using in-person formats. The last study used a mixed-methods approach, primarily
recorded interviews together with an extensive literature review.
Threats to quality. Since the studies were all qualitative, their quality was judged on the
threats of interpretation, contextual completeness, data richness and selection. An overall 1-10
rating was assigned to each study. Two studies were found to have selection threats with ratings
of 8 and 7. In one case (the case study), the threat came because the author used her own
university as a subject, providing the feel of promotion rather than research. In the other case, the
study used respondents who were frequently paid for completing online surveys, which may
create bias. Three studies had threats from data richness (ratings of 7, 9 & 7) because of their
limited time frame of data collection. Three studies (one repeated) had threats from
interpretation, because the researchers did not use triangulation. These studies had validity
ratings of 7, 7 & 8.

COMMUNICATING PRINCIPLES OF ASSET MANAGEMENT

Research Outcomes
Data analysis. The case study had no formal data to analyze. Three studies relied heavily
on statistical analysis to analyze and present the data. Four studies (one repeated) used mental
modeling to synthesize the data. Mental modeling is a form of structural analysis to symbolically
show relationships surrounding thought processes; in this case to show how people think about
risk management concepts.
Author conclusions. Since the studies were primarily qualitative and they were diverse,
there was no standard format for the authors to state their conclusions. Furthermore, there was
little overlap in the conclusions made by the authors, because they all had such different
approaches. Though there is not strength in mutually supportive conclusions, there is strength in
the multi-faceted framework the studies create. Author conclusions include: Integrating technical
communication into engineering education builds more capable engineers. Experts understand
numeric risks but lay people better understand categorical risks. Numerical explanation of risk
and high experience levels correlate to desired outcomes from judges. Experts and non-experts
have both technical understanding and some lapses in understanding related to wild fire. Lay
stakeholders often have low understanding of flood risk planning though their interests are a
primary concern. Clear communication of risk to the public builds institutional trust. Experts are
more optimistic about safety issues and less concerned about reducing risks than politicians or
the general public.
In general, these studies do an excellent job of setting up a frame work for risk
communication between technical experts and non-technical decision-makers. Each study
provides a unique insight into some aspect of the process. The most unique study, the case study,
addresses an entirely different subject, namely highlighting the importance of engineers being

COMMUNICATING PRINCIPLES OF ASSET MANAGEMENT

able to communicate effectively. The major drawback, though, is the lack of any understanding
of communicating risk management related to civil engineering and specifically asset
management. The proposed study will take the techniques and general theories from these
reviewed studies and apply them to specific given context.
Research Methods
The study will be qualitative in nature. There will be two phases including a brief
anonymous email survey and then extended phone interviews. The email survey asking only the
most basic of questions will be made widely available to the target population in order to gain a
maximum sample size. From the respondents of the survey, a smaller sample will be randomly
selected to have the opportunity to provide more detailed responses in telephone interview.
There will be two separate target populations: one of engineers and one of government
leaders. The target population for engineers is civil engineers in the state of Utah who have, in
the past year, directly worked with at least one local government entity to advise on the longterm management of an existing infrastructure system (i.e. roads, drinking water, etc.). Staff
engineers employed by a government agency will be included in this population. For the
purposes of this study, an engineer will be considered someone who has at least a 4-year degree
in civil engineering or a closely related field, and either has or is actively pursuing professional
engineering licensure. This population will be sampled using an email survey to members of
local chapters of professional societies including the American Society of Civil Engineers,
Institute of Transportation Engineers, American Water Works Association and Utah City
Engineers Association.
The target population for government leaders is members of city or county government in
Utah who have responsibilities directly related to infrastructure systems. Examples include: city

COMMUNICATING PRINCIPLES OF ASSET MANAGEMENT

10

council members, mayors, city managers and county commissioners. Participants will be
excluded from this population if they have formal training in or professional experience with
civil engineering. This population will also be sampled through an email survey administered
through professional associations, such as: Utah League of Cities and Towns, American Public
Works Association and Utah Association of Counties.
The independent variables (sample characteristics) for this study will be similar for both
target populations. Years of experience in the field, percentage of work time devoted to asset
management, age, educational background and technical competence (for engineers) will be of
particular interest as independent variables. Dependent measures will also be similar. The focus
will be on favored communication strategies, and personal beliefs and understanding concerning
asset management. For engineers, personal confidence in communicating will also be addressed.
For decision-makers, the perceived effectiveness of communication from engineers will also be
addressed.
The email survey will have an estimated completion time of 3 minutes. It will ask generic
questions about the individuals attitudes concerning asset management, technical
communication, expert opinions and risk management. This responses will be recorded on 5point Likert Scale. Additionally, questions about the individuals background concerning asset
management will be included. At the conclusion of the survey, the participant will be able to optin to an extended phone interview by providing his phone number. The purpose of the survey
will be to answer the first two research questions, related to the content and delivery of
communication related to asset management.
The phone interviews will be conducted with a random sample of volunteer respondents.
The purpose of the interviews will be to get extended answers to the same kinds of questions as

COMMUNICATING PRINCIPLES OF ASSET MANAGEMENT

11

in the survey. The interview will be constructed in a semi-rigid format. This will provide some
structure for comparison of responses, but also allow the interviewer to probe for deeper
responses, as necessary. The phone interviews will have a time limit of 15 minutes. The purpose
of the interviews will be to gather more detailed data to build a mental model to address the
research question related to gaps in understanding.
The email interviews will be distributed by using networking contacts within the
appropriate professional organizations for them to accept sending the survey to their members.
An established platform such as Qualtrics will be used to conduct the survey. The interview
questions will be written as a standard set and will be administered by one or more individuals
trained to provide brief, insightful and courteous interviews.
The survey data will be presented using simple statistics and MANOVA techniques to
find relationships between the independent and dependent variables described previously. Mental
modeling will be used to analyze the interview data. The model will be used to identify gaps in
the understanding of decision-makers, compared to experts.

Bibliography
American Society of Civil Engineers. (2013). Overview: Executive Summary. Retrieved from
2013 Report Card for America's Infrastructure.
Davis, M. T. (2010). Assessing Technial Communication within Engineering Contexts. IEEE
Transactions on Professional Communication, 33-45.
Dolores, J. C. (2009). The Effects of Different Forms of Risk Communication on Judicial
Decision Making. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 142-146.

COMMUNICATING PRINCIPLES OF ASSET MANAGEMENT

12

Gregory, R., Dieckmann, N., Peters, E., Failing, L., Long, G., & Tusler, M. (2012). Deliberative
Disjunction: Expert and Public Understanding. Risk Analysis: An International Journal,
2071-2083.
Rundmo, T., & Moen, B. (2006). Risk Perception and Demand for Risk Mitigation in Transport:
A Comparison of Lay People, Politicians and Experts. Journal of Risk Research, 623640.
Skarlatidou, T., Cheng, T., & Haklay, M. (2012). What Do Lay PeopleWant to Know About the
Disposal of Nuclear Waste? A Mental Model Approach to the Design and Development
of an Online Risk Communication. Risk Analysis: An International Journal, 1496-1511.
Wood, M., Kovacs, D., Bostrom, A., Bridges, T., & Linkov, I. (2012). Flood Risk Management:
US Army Corps of Engineers and Layperson Perceptions. Risk Analysis: An International
Journal, 1349-1368.
Zaksek, M., & Arvai, J.L. (2004). Toward Improved Communication about Wildland Fire:
Mental Models Research to Identify Information Needs for Natural Resource
Management. Risk Analysis: An International Journal, 1503-1514.

COMMUNICATING PRINCIPLES OF ASSET MANAGEMENT

13

APPENDIX A: Coding Sheet

Evaluating the ability of engineers to explain the principles of asset management to those
with a non-technical background
Reference ID__________ Short Title_______________________________________________
Reference_____________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________

A: Research Design
I: Type
___a: Qualitative
___i: Case study
___ii: Other
___b: Quantitative
___i: Experimental
___ii: Quasi-experimental
___iii: Non-experimental
___c: Mixed Designs
II: Outcome measures
___a: Test
___b: Self-report
___i: Survey
___ii: Interview
___c: Observation
___d: Mixed methods
___e: Other
III: Threats to quality
___a: Interpretation
___b: Contextual completeness
___c: Data richness
___d: Selection
___e: Other threat______________
___f: Overall Rating______
(1-10, low-high)
___g: N/A

B: Sample Characteristics
I: Setting
___a: Academic
___b: Professional practice
II: Discipline
___a: Civil engineering
___b: Other/general engineering
___c: Other technical
III: Topics
___a: Technical communication
___b: Asset management
___c: Risk management
___d: Other
IV: Sample size
___a: n=________ type_________
C: Data Analysis
I: Method
___a: Mental Models
___b: Statistical Analysis
D: Outcomes
I: Author conclusions
______________________________
______________________________
______________________________

Running Head: COMMUNICATING PRINCIPLES OF ASSET MANAGEMENT

14

APPENDIX B: Coding Table

Short
Reference
(Davis,2010)

ResearchDesign
Type
Casestudy

Outcome
Measures
Observation

SampleCharacteristics
Setting

Discipline

Topics

SampleSize

Data
Analysis
Method

Threatsto
Quality(rating)
Selection(8)

Academic

General
Engineering

Technical
Communication

N/A

(Dolores,
2009)

Qualitative Survey

Interpretation
(7)

Professional
practice

Other
technical

Technical
communication,
Riskmanagement

253expert

Statistical
analysis

(Gregoryet.
al.,2012)

Qualitative Survey

Selection(7)

Professional
practice

Other
technical

Riskmanagement

374public,
67expert

Statistical
analysis

(Rudmo&
Moen,2006)

Qualitative Survey

Interpretation
(8)

Professional
practice

Other
technical

Riskmanagement

1716public,
146
politicians,
26expert

Mental
modeling,
Statistical
analysis

(Skarlatidou
et.al.,2012)

Qualitative Interview

Datarichness,
Interpretation
(7)

Professional
practice

Other
engineering

Riskmanagement

20public,5
expert

Mental
modeling

(Woodet.
al.,2012)

Qualitative Mixed
Methods

Datarichness
(9)

Professional
Practice

Civil
Engineering

Riskmanagement

22expert

Mental
modeling

(Zaksek&
Arvai,2004)

Qualitative Interview

Datarichness
(7)

Professional
practice

Other
technical

Riskmanagement

26public,6
expert

Mental
modeling

Outcomes
AuthorConclusions
Integratingtechnical
communicationinto
engineeringcurriculum
buildsastrongerprogram.
Judgesgenerallydidnot
preferonemethodover
another,butnumerical
explanationofriskandhigh
levelsofrelatedexperience
werebothcorrelatedto
favorableoutcomes.
Expertsunderstand
numbersbetterthanlabels;
thereverseistrueforlay
people
Politiciansandlaypersons
aremoreconcernedabout
reducingrisksandaremore
pessimisticthanexpertson
transportationsafetyissues.
Clearlycommunicatingrisks
tothepublicisameansof
reestablishinginstitutional
trust.
Laystakeholderinterests
oftenhavelargeinfluence
onfloodriskplanning,but
theyareoftenunawareof
theplanningprocess.
Expertsandnonexperts
hadbothcommon
understandingandlapsesin
understandingofimportant
wildlandfireissues.