InspectAssets

An asset can appear healthy while the evidence behind that assessment is incomplete. A register or headline score needs context: what was inspected, what could not be checked, what remains uncertain and what should happen next.

The product challenge was to connect those questions across sites, assets and roles, keeping the evidence close to the operational decision.

Bring asset identity, condition, inspection history, documents and criticality into a connected asset record. Keep asset health, inspection coverage and evidence confidence visible as separate measures, so each tells a clear story.

Make uncertainty explicit. Inspection workflows record states such as Inaccessible, Unable to Test and Not Inspected, while coverage review highlights missing evidence before submission. Unresolved limitations retain ownership and a path to clarification or reinspection.

Connect findings to corrective actions, completion evidence and verification. Extend that chain into compliance obligations, scoped reports and evidence packs, with access shaped by the user's role and operational responsibility.

The implemented platform connects the asset register to inspection review, open limitations, remediation and supporting evidence. An issue can be followed through the workflow, with the reason for further investigation or action kept in view.

The central design lesson is that condition, coverage and confidence answer different questions. Showing them together makes a dashboard more useful: it helps someone understand the next decision and the evidence available to support it.