Revised conceptual framework against the real problem
| Revised framework | Real-issue situation |
|---|---|
| The chief executives should make resources (funds for materials and technicians) available to address not just corrective work but preventive work in line with the designed facilities’ manual | HEIB maintenance is left in the hands of individual because most of the times the department is handicapped (no resources) |
| The maintenance department needs to be overhauled and ensure competent staff are engaged and supported with working tools | There are cases staff uses their personal money to buy materials for maintenance purpose |
| Public HEIB maintenance institutional framework should be all-inclusive and supported by chief executive to sustain new projects and revamp obsolete ones in the 21st-century friendly academic building. The old ones should be revamped and tailored towards smart buildings for novelty and innovation | Director/Head of maintenance unit/department finds it difficult action on staff request because of many factors. This includes inadequate staff and insufficient maintenance budget |
| Maintenance budget should be feasible and based on the maintenance manual | Majority do not allow for maintenance budget even with Executive Order 11. Where there is provision in few cases, it is inadequate, leading to abandoned maintenance works |
| The proposed CMMS will bridge the gap between maintenance backlog and the actual execution of the work | Gaps between maintenance backlog and actual execution of the work (Olowoake, 2015) |
| Proffer measures via CMMS to tackle maintenance strategy and technical issues such as situational and routine maintenance plans for each component/element of the building. This approach enhances the preventive maintenance mechanism as the best global practice for physical infrastructure such as higher education institutions | Majority of the higher education institutions do not have building maintenance plan. Where it exists, there was evidence of lax implementation due to many factors such as chief executive maintenance attitude, delay in releasing cash, absence of maintenance control toolkit, etc. Majority focused on corrective maintenance |
| Revised framework | Real-issue situation |
|---|---|
| The chief executives should make resources (funds for materials and technicians) available to address not just corrective work but preventive work in line with the designed facilities’ manual | HEIB maintenance is left in the hands of individual because most of the times the department is handicapped (no resources) |
| The maintenance department needs to be overhauled and ensure competent staff are engaged and supported with working tools | There are cases staff uses their personal money to buy materials for maintenance purpose |
| Public HEIB maintenance institutional framework should be all-inclusive and supported by chief executive to sustain new projects and revamp obsolete ones in the 21st-century friendly academic building. The old ones should be revamped and tailored towards smart buildings for novelty and innovation | Director/Head of maintenance unit/department finds it difficult action on staff request because of many factors. This includes inadequate staff and insufficient maintenance budget |
| Maintenance budget should be feasible and based on the maintenance manual | Majority do not allow for maintenance budget even with Executive Order 11. Where there is provision in few cases, it is inadequate, leading to abandoned maintenance works |
| The proposed CMMS will bridge the gap between maintenance backlog and the actual execution of the work | Gaps between maintenance backlog and actual execution of the work ( |
| Proffer measures via CMMS to tackle maintenance strategy and technical issues such as situational and routine maintenance plans for each component/element of the building. This approach enhances the preventive maintenance mechanism as the best global practice for physical infrastructure such as higher education institutions | Majority of the higher education institutions do not have building maintenance plan. Where it exists, there was evidence of lax implementation due to many factors such as chief executive maintenance attitude, delay in releasing cash, absence of maintenance control toolkit, etc. Majority focused on corrective maintenance |
Source(s): Authors’ work