Skip to content

Part 4 of 7 · Asset register keeper series ~5 min read

How it gets verified without a full audit

The plan is always a full count once a year, and the outcome is always that it happens twice and then stops, at which point nobody knows how accurate the register is.

Key takeaways

  • A full annual count is planned every year and rarely completed.
  • Twenty assets a month gets done and covers a substantial register annually.
  • Weight the sample: high value, high mobility and never-verified first.
  • Publish the accuracy figure; it is the only measure of whether this works.
  • Not found is a state with a count, not an immediate write-off.

Why the full count fails

Assets verified under a full count and under continuous samplingA stacked bar chart with three bars. Two series: assets actually verified in green, and intended but not done in grey. Full count planned: none verified and four hundred and eleven intended. Actually counted: one hundred and thirty verified and two hundred and eighty-one not done. Sampling over a year: two hundred and forty verified and one hundred and seventy-one not reached. A note says the sampling approach verifies more and verifies the important ones first.0200400600800~411Full count planned~411Actually counted~411Sampling, per yearAssets actually verifiedIntended and not doneThe sampling approach verifies more, and it verifies the important ones first.
Fig 1. Three approaches to verification over a year. The full count starts well and stops; sampling continues and covers more.

The full count fails for the obvious reason: it is a day’s work for several people, it is nobody’s priority, and it is scheduled for a month that turns out to be busy. Two years running it slips and then it stops being scheduled.

Twenty assets a month is twenty minutes with a phone and it survives being busy, which is the property that matters.

Choosing the sample

How a monthly asset verification sample is chosenA vertical chain of five steps entered by a box labelled Twenty this month, asking which twenty. Step one takes never-verified assets, always first. Step two weights high value heavily. Step three includes mobile items such as laptops and tools, with a side box explaining that they move so they drift. Step four fills the rest with the oldest verifications. Step five produces a list on a phone with locations. A note says weighting beats randomness here, because the register is not uniformly likely to be wrong.AWS ACCOUNTTwenty this monthwhich twenty?Never verifiedalways firstHigh valueweighted heavilyMobilelaptops, toolsWhythey move, so they driftOldest verificationfill the restA list on a phonewith locationsWeighting beats randomness here; the register is not uniformly likely to be wrong.
Fig 2. How the monthly sample is chosen. Deliberate weighting finds more errors than a random sample of the same size.
  • Compute
  • Management
  • Analytics
  • Front-end & mobile

What the check involves

Go to the recorded location, find the label, scan it, and answer one question: is it here and does it look like what the record says? If yes, tap and move on. If it is somewhere else, scan it wherever it is and the location updates. If it cannot be found, record that.

The whole interaction is a scan and a tap, and if it involves anything more it will stop happening within two months.

The accuracy figure

Asset verification results over three quartersA stacked bar chart with three bars in per cent. Three series: found where recorded in green, found elsewhere in orange, and not found in red. Q1: seventy-one per cent found where recorded, eighteen elsewhere, eleven not found. Q2: seventy-nine, fifteen and six. Q3: eighty-six, eleven and three. A note says this number is the only honest answer to whether the register is any good.050100150200~100Q1~100Q2~100Q3Found where recorded, %Found elsewhereNot foundThis number is the only honest answer to 'is the register any good?'
Fig 3. Three quarters of sampling results. The trend is what matters, and the register’s credibility depends on this figure being published rather than assumed.

Publishing it does two things. It tells anybody relying on the register how much to rely on it, and it turns register maintenance from an act of faith into something with a measurable outcome that improves.

The improvement in that chart came from the label printing moving into purchasing and the replacement-purchase disposal question, both of which are small changes whose effect is only visible because the accuracy was being measured.

Not found is not gone

An asset that cannot be found on one attempt is usually somewhere else, being used by somebody, or out for repair. Marking it not found and re-sampling it the following month resolves most of them.

After a stated number of attempts — three is reasonable — it moves to presumed disposed, which requires a person to confirm and which produces the accounting event. That is a slow enough process to avoid writing off things that were merely on somebody’s desk.

Next: what a good register is good for.

All posts