As a facilities manager, it's a responsible job. But it can be rewarding at times. You're probably faced with making a number of decisions on any given day. Obviously, some of these decisions you make are more important than others.
Few would disagree surface problems within the facility would clearly rank among the more critical decisions for efficiency, liability, sanitary and safety reasons. When something is wrong with the surface coverings within your facilities, an inspection of the surface area in question is usually an advisable precaution. There may be a bit of controversy over the two approaches: on site inspection or remote inspection (aka: the virtual inspection). Do you have any preference? Perhaps you have given it some thought or no thought at all.
Opposing arguments naturally tend to surface with competitive services. Everyone's brand is always the best of course. Don't believe them? Ask them. They'll tell you and will do so with the kind of certainty that is hardly confidence inspiring. As a buyer, retrieving reliable information becomes tiresome when your primary sources of information are shamelessly biased.
Unfortunately, you don't have the time to research the matter properly and in the interest of saving time you're inclined to trust the sales representative; since you're not too eager to research the best method and brand of inspection services. It's not like planning a vacation is it? Nevertheless, this particular service could be critical to the organization's sustained operations.
As much as you may be inclined to delegate this task, attempt to avoid doing so. Given the gravity of the situation, uncovering the root cause of the surface damage is the priority. Otherwise, you may be replacing the flooring next year.
On site inspection advocates not so surprisingly are quick to point out that, regardless of the admittedly remarkable advancements in high resolution video technology, there are few if any credible substitutes for the trained eye.
Facilities managers leaning towards on-site inspections seem to feel that remote assessments aren't without limitations. Are they right to feel this way? Or are they simply uninformed about the latest technological developments?
They're firm believers that inspecting the damaged surface and identifying the possible hazards requires an on site visit. It has been the best approach. How else would one determine the root cause of the damage to the surfaces without performing a complete and thorough examination at the facilities? Clearly, it's a compelling question that makes sense when you think about it.
On site inspections allow assessors to conduct a thorough evaluation of the facilities and condition of its surface areas. Are remote inspections aka virtual inspections capable of thorougly examining the equipment on-site from a video feed? Is it possible to test the surface cleaning chemicals from a remote location and closely examine the processes in place? Further, is it possible to determine the impact the chemicals and cleaning processes had on the damaged surface areas? All of the above can be important steps during an investigation that might reveal why the surface areas are aging prematurely!
Experts usually begin with a number of theories about the cause of the problem and rule out the ones they can't prove. Perhaps using hot water is causing the finish to deteriorate. Or something else is happening; only an expert could detect. Deducing the cause of a problem is a process. It begins with defining the problem and moves on to gathering information. Once all of the information requested is gathered, the expert is in a much better position to provide reliable information. Without it, experts make an educated guess.
Facilities managers of all sizes with a preference for on site inspections, managing a single location or several locations across the country, might prefer an inspection service provider with a nationwide network of inspectors.
Remote inspection advocates may introduce a number of compelling counterpoints about choosing remote inspections. Recent travel limitations, stemming from safety concerns, may make remote inspections the more appealing approach. But does the pandemic make remote inspections the better alternative? Possibly. Though the required technology is sophisticated.
Not all facilities managers have access to equipment for remote inspections.
The high-resolution video must be able to compete with the human eye; connected to a brain that knows where to look for common and not so common flooring problems. The video feed must be capable of displaying the most minute details. What equipment is required for a remote inspection? Visit the floor detective and other credible service providers that are capable of getting to the bottom of what is causing your flooring to age prematurely.
Before deciding on the type of inspection that you prefer, it is important to have useful information about your facilities. How many people typically traverse your facility day-to-day? What types of equipment makes contact with flooring? Besides the building entryways, what particular areas within your facilities may commonly require additional cleaning and maintenance?
Once you have completed the list, consider contacting a number of inspection services before making your final decision. At the very least, try to reach out to one of each type of inspection service. Don't have time to make the calls? Delegate this portion of the task to a subordinate or even a colleague in a neighboring department with a firmly aligned interest in resolving this matter.
Floor Covering Media publishes
blog articles called Flooring Briefs.
Floor Covering Media is
a social media network.
Retrieve timely, objective news and
information at https://www.floorsearch.info.
