Better asset management starts with giving your people the information they need to make the next decision.
That matters because not every asset in your operation needs the same level of tracking. Some machines justify automatic location data, hour readings, fault codes, idle time, fuel use, and other telematics information, while other assets may only need a current location, job assignment, status, or maintenance note.
The goal is to match the level of tracking to the asset, your company’s needs, and the decision being made.
ONE SYSTEM FOR ALL KINDS OF TRACKING
A practical asset tracking strategy starts with the asset’s role in the operation. High-value machines might need telematics, maintenance history, inspections, utilization data, and cost information. Other assets may only need location, availability, status, and notes.
Putting a tracker on every smaller item rarely makes financial or operational sense, although tracking those assets manually can still give the team the visibility it needs. The strongest approach usually combines both methods: telematics for assets that justify the data, and manual tracking for assets that need clean location and assignment visibility.
Before making a major tracking investment, you should ask how the system will handle everything that falls outside your connected fleet. If the answer is another spreadsheet, another whiteboard, or another informal process, your team may still be left with an incomplete view of its assets.
PRACTICAL LIMITS OF TELEMATICS DATA
Telematics makes sense when machine data directly supports equipment decisions. Automatic hour readings can help drive preventive maintenance, fault codes can help mechanics respond sooner, idle-time data can show where fuel and machine hours are being wasted, and location data can confirm where high-value equipment is working.
Those are real advantages, especially when someone is responsible for reviewing the information and acting on it. Data that supports service planning, equipment moves, billing, fleet reviews, or utilization decisions earns its place in the process. Data that sits unused becomes one more thing to manage.
The investment also goes beyond buying the devices. Installing trackers across an entire fleet can become a project of its own, especially when equipment is spread across jobs, yards, shops, and seasonal work. You also need to account for the time required to install, maintain, troubleshoot, and manage those devices, which can turn a technology purchase into an ongoing operational commitment.
Even then, you have to be realistic about what can actually be tracked automatically. Many items that affect production will never justify the cost or hassle of a device, yet they still need to be found, assigned, moved, maintained, and returned.
A better question is not how much data you can collect, but what level of tracking each asset actually needs.
A TRUSTED BOARD BEATS A NOISY, DATA-FILLED SYSTEM
Many daily equipment decisions require clear information more than a constant data feed. A dispatcher may need to view what is assigned across several jobs, a shop manager may need to know whether something came back to the yard, and a foreman may need to know whether the right attachment is available before a crew starts work.
Seth Zimmerman, VP of Operations at Terra Engineering & Construction, described this balance when discussing why the Wisconsin-based contractor does not rely heavily on telematics data to manage equipment across its day-to-day operations.
“We have older equipment, and it would be a huge investment to get telematics installed in every piece of equipment we have,” Zimmerman says.
For Terra, the immediate need was equipment location, movement, and maintenance visibility. The team uses IVO Systems as its online equipment board, giving the office, shop, and field a shared place to see where equipment is, where it is headed, and what needs attention.
“We’re moving equipment around efficiently,” Zimmerman says. “We very seldom have to look for attachments, buckets, or a piece of equipment.”
That is the practical side of asset tracking. The technology has to fit the operation. If a team can keep location, assignment, notes, and maintenance status current through a clear process, that process may deliver the information needed to run the day without forcing the company into a larger technology investment.
For Terra, scheduled moves help keep the equipment board current as machines and attachments move from one job to the next. Manual updates fill in the gaps when something comes back to the yard unexpectedly, gets shifted between jobs, or changes status outside the schedule.
Together, those processes give Terra a practical way to trust its online equipment board without needing every asset to send live data automatically.
“We can count almost on one hand the number of times we’ve needed to try and find a missing attachment or even a machine because of IVO Systems,” Zimmerman said. “That alone probably saves us around $5,000 to $10,000 a year in wasted time, not to mention being more efficient with the work.”
TREAT ATTACHMENTS LIKE ASSETS
Asset tracking conversations tend to focus on the largest machines in the fleet, even though production often depends on the supporting items around them. An excavator still needs the correct bucket, hoepac, or hammer. A pump still needs the hose or fitting required to put it to work.
Some of these items are used every day, while others sit for long periods and become critical when a specific task comes up. When a crew needs one, the purchase price matters less than whether the team can find it and put it to work.
Leaving those assets outside the tracking process creates blind spots. The large machine may be visible, while the item that makes the work possible is managed through a text thread, spreadsheet, or someone’s memory.
NEW STANDARD FOR ASSET TRACKING
The standard for asset tracking should be practical visibility across your full operation. Some machines need telematics. Other assets need a shared record of location, assignment, condition, availability, and upcoming maintenance. The important thing is that you can manage both in the same place, with the level of tracking matched to the asset.
Pricing and system structure play a role in how complete that picture becomes. When every tracked item adds cost, you may end up limiting what gets included. Large machines get added first, while smaller items and low-use equipment stay outside the system because each additional record creates another charge. Over time, that can push teams back toward spreadsheets, whiteboards, or informal tracking for assets that still affect production.
As you evaluate operations software, ask practical questions about what you actually need to track, which assets justify automatic data, which assets only need a current location or assignment, and how the system will handle the full range of equipment and supporting assets that keep work moving.
The strongest asset tracking systems give your team a reliable picture of the operation, with enough detail to find, assign, maintain, and use the assets that affect production without burying people in data they do not need.
about the author
Eric Christensen is the founder and CEO of IVO Systems. Before starting the company, he spent more than 15 years in heavy civil construction as a senior estimator, project manager, and engineer, eventually leaving his role at a large Wisconsin contractor to build the operations software he wished he had in the field. For more, visit www.ivosystems.com.
