Free tool · 12 questions · About 2 minutes

Is your asset operation ready to use AI responsibly?

Score evidence—not ambition—across four practical foundations to assess before an asset-management AI proof.

Discussion bands
<40%

Foundation first

40–70%

Prove one governed use case

>70%

Stronger foundations—validate the next step

How to answer

Use the strongest evidence you could show a sceptical reviewer.

Choose 0 for no or unknown, 1 for partial or inconsistent, and 2 only when the condition is defined, evidenced and used.

Allow about two minutes to enter answers once the evidence is available; gathering and reviewing evidence can take longer. The equal-weight scores and bands are indicative discussion prompts, not validated readiness thresholds.

The interactive scorecard needs JavaScript to load. You can use the printable EAM readiness checklist or contact Hastha for help.

0 of 12 answered
01

Hierarchy integrity

0/3 answered · 0/6 points

1Do assets use stable identifiers consistently across EAM, GIS, content and field systems?
2Are hierarchy relationships governed by named owners and repeatable validation rules?
3Does new-asset and project-handover data pass defined quality controls before operational acceptance?
02

Criticality coverage

0/3 answered · 0/6 points

4Is there an approved, current criticality method for maintainable assets?
5Is criticality recorded consistently across the asset population in scope?
6Do maintenance priorities, inspections and planning rules use that criticality in practice?
03

Failure-history quality

0/3 answered · 0/6 points

7Are failure modes, causes and consequences captured consistently at work close-out?
8Are descriptions, measurements and supporting evidence complete enough to interpret the event?
9Is the available history representative enough to test a proposed decision without hiding major gaps?
04

Decision ownership

0/3 answered · 0/6 points

10Is a named operational role accountable for the decision the AI-supported workflow would influence?
11Are review, override, abstention and escalation paths defined for uncertain or high-consequence cases?
12Are success, stop and ongoing-monitoring criteria agreed before a proof begins?

Your readiness signal

—

Complete all 12 questions

Your answers remain in this browser until you leave or refresh the page.

Important: This self-assessment is general guidance, not an audit, assurance opinion or production-readiness decision.

This screening tool is general guidance. It is not a validated performance measure, audit, certification, legal advice, assurance opinion or a guarantee that an AI use case will succeed. Review individual risks and evidence regardless of the total score.