How to Use Ethics to Communicate with the FINESSE Fishbone Diagram

Ethics are the practical foundation for how we make decisions and communicate them to others.

Ethics is the second “E” in the FINESSE Fishbone Diagram®, and it is often the most underestimated. Technical professionals spend years mastering methods, models, and measurements, yet the factor that most influences whether senior management trusts their message is not technical at all. It is ethical clarity.

Ethics is not an abstract concept reserved for philosophers. It is the practical foundation for how we make decisions and communicate them to others. When uncertainty is high and consequences are real, ethics becomes a communication tool—one that separates trusted advisors from advocates, technicians, or performers.

Why Ethics Shapes Effective Communication

Ethics determines how we choose what to share, how we present it, and how we guide decision makers through complexity. Three ethical frameworks influence how people make decisions:

• Virtue ethics: grounded in right versus wrong, good versus bad.

• Consequential ethics: focused on outcomes; the end justifies the means.

• Duty‑based ethics: centered on motives, process, and full disclosure.

Most people blend these approaches, but technical professionals communicating to senior leaders benefit most from a duty‑based approach. Duty‑based ethics aligns with the expectations placed on licensed engineers, physicians, and public officials: present the facts, disclose the risks, and respect the decision maker’s role.

Ethical communication is not about being perfect. It is about being responsible.

The Ethical Trap: When Communication Becomes Advocacy

One of the most common pitfalls in technical communication is sliding, often unintentionally, from informing to advocating. Advocacy is rooted in consequential ethics: “If the outcome is good, the method is justified.”

That mindset leads to:

• Selective data

• Overly optimistic projections

• Minimizing uncertainty

• Visuals that simplify too much

• Recommendations that sound predetermined

Advocacy has its place in sales, politics, and persuasion. It does not belong in a trusted advisor's toolbox.

Ethical communication requires resisting the temptation to steer the decision maker. Instead, it focuses on equipping them.

Duty‑Based Ethics: The Trusted Advisor’s Default

Duty‑based ethics emphasizes process over outcome. It asks:

• Have I presented all relevant facts—positive and negative?

• Have I disclosed uncertainty honestly?

• Have I avoided manipulating the narrative?

• Have I respected the decision maker’s authority?

Technical professionals rarely own final decisions. Their responsibility is clarity, not control.

A trusted advisor does not hide the hard parts. They surface them.

Three Practical Ways to Communicate Ethically

1. Fact‑Check Relentlessly

Fact‑checking is not a bureaucratic step. It is an ethical obligation.

No process guarantees perfect accuracy, but diligence signals respect for the decision maker and the organization.

Ask yourself: 

• What assumptions am I relying on?

• What data sources have I not verified?

• What could be misunderstood if I don’t clarify it?

Ethical communication begins with intellectual honesty.

2. Present the Tradeoffs

Every decision has winners, losers, risks, and consequences.

Ethical communicators do not hide tradeoffs—they highlight them. Remember, senior leaders do not fear tradeoffs. They fear surprises.

3. Disclose Uncertainty

Uncertainty is not a weakness. Concealing it is.

Ethical communication explains: 

• What is known

• What is unknown

• What assumptions bridge the gap

Decision makers can handle uncertainty. What they cannot handle is being blindsided by it later.

Ethics Is the Backbone of FINESSE

The FINESSE Fishbone Diagram® is built on the idea that communication is a system. Ethics is the stabilizing force that keeps that system honest. When technical professionals communicate ethically, they strengthen trust and improve decision quality.

Ethics is not just the second “E” in FINESSE. It is the way we make decisions. And the way we help others make decisions, too.

---

The elements of the FINESSE Fishbone Diagram® are Frame, Illustrate, Noise reduction, Empathy, Structure, Synergy, and Ethics.

---

JD Solomon Inc. provides solutions for program development, asset management, and facilitation at the nexus of facilities, infrastructure, and the environment.

---

JD Solomon writes and consults on decision-making, reliability, risk, and communication for leaders and technical professionals. His work connects technical disciplines with human understanding to help people make better decisions and build stronger systems. Learn more at www.jdsolomonsolutions.com and www.communicatingwithfinesse.com

Why Replacement Asset Value Gets Misunderstood … and why it matters most

RAV works well when we need quick, comparable benchmarks, when evaluating maintenance effectiveness, and when aligning multiple facilities with different histories.

Replacement Asset Value (RAV) is one of the most commonly cited numbers in maintenance and reliability. It shows up in benchmarking, performance metrics, and budgeting. Yet for something so widely used, RAV is also one of the most inconsistently defined terms in asset management. The confusion isn’t because the concept is complicated. It’s because different disciplines use the same word—replacement—to answer very different questions.

If we want better decisions, we need to get the frame right.

RAV in the Real World

The chief operating officer of a Midwest utility with five facilities put the O&M budgets on the table. “How do we know if our maintenance budgets are correct across all five plants?” he said in frustration. “We seem to arm-wrestle every year, and I don’t think what we are doing is defensible.”

“The historical trends are a decent way to do it,” interjected one of the plant managers. “But Joe’s plant is getting old, and I think he needs more than what we are giving him. I don’t think we have a good standard to judge our performance.”

“We recommend replacement asset value,” I explained. “If Ramesh Gulati were here, he would tell us to start with 3 to 5 percent of RAV as an initial starting point.” (At the time, Ramesh and I worked together, albeit in different divisions of the same Fortune 500 company.)

The plant manager smiled. “I thought you would say that”, said the COO. “That’s what we used when we worked together a few years ago. But this place is different. As you know, we don’t have a good handle on any asset value for our system, much less understand or evaluate RAV.”

“It may take us one more cycle, but we will get there,” I replied.

Three Ways People Think About “Asset Value”

Before we get to RAV, it helps to understand the three dominant perspectives that determine how organizations think about asset value.

Book Value (Accounting)

Book value answers, “What is this asset worth on the financial statements?”

It shows historical cost minus depreciation. Book value is useful for audits and tax reporting, but it has almost nothing to do with what it would take to replace the asset or keep it running.

Replacement Value (Insurance)

Replacement value answers, “What would it cost to buy another one like it today?”

This is the insurer’s number. It’s based on market pricing for the equipment itself. Installation, engineering, and commissioning are usually excluded.

Replacement Asset Value (Maintenance & Reliability)

RAV answers a different question: “What would it cost to replace this asset in its operating context?”

This is the number used for maintenance benchmarking and reliability analysis—not capital project planning.

These three perspectives are all valid. The problem is assuming they are interchangeable.

What RAV Really Means in Practice

Here’s where the rub comes in: Most practitioners do NOT use a fully burdened capital replacement cost when calculating RAV.

In real‑world maintenance and reliability practice, RAV =

Equipment cost + removal/disposal + installation/commissioning.

That’s it. The things that are not included are:

• Engineering and design

• Permitting

• Procurement and bidding

• Construction management

• Owner’s overhead

• Controls redesign

• Project contingency

Those belong to a capital replacement estimate, not RAV.

This is why RAV often ends up being roughly 1.5× to 2× the equipment cost. It’s a practical number—simple, consistent, and repeatable across a portfolio.

Consistency, not precision, is the point.

Where Ramesh Gulati Fits In

Ramesh Gulati, who has probably done more than anyone to standardize maintenance and reliability practices, emphasizes that RAV should reflect the cost toreplace the asset in service, not the cost to run a full capital project.

In his books, presentations, and interviews, Gulati consistently uses RAV as a maintenance benchmarking tool, especially for metrics like:

• Maintenance cost as a percentage of RAV

• Maintenance effectiveness comparisons

• Portfolio‑level performance indicators

Gulati’s examples are consistent with industry practice: RAV =

equipment + installation + removal, not a fully burdened capital estimate.

If RAV were inflated with engineering, permitting, and project overhead, the benchmark would be meaningless. A bloated denominator makes everyone look like a maintenance superstar.

Ramesh knows that. Most practitioners know that. The confusion comes from people importing capital‑project thinking into a maintenance metric.

Why the Confusion Matters

When RAV is misunderstood, organizations:

• Misjudge maintenance performance

• Misallocate capital

• Misinterpret benchmarking results

• Inflate or deflate asset criticality scores.

• Talk past each other in planning meetings.

None of these are technical failures. They are framing failures.

Communicating RAV Effectively

This is where the first F, Frame, in the FINESSE Fishbone Diagram® becomes essential. Before debating costs or performance, teams must define the terms.

A well‑framed discussion clarifies:

• What definition of RAV is being used

• What costs are included

• What decision the number supports

Why RAV Matters Most

Replacement Asset Value is a maintenance and reliability metric, not a capital project estimate. Its power comes from consistency. RAV works well when we need quick, comparable benchmarks, when evaluating maintenance effectiveness, and when aligning multiple facilities with different histories. RAV is also a powerful measure when establishing O&M budgets. The most important thing is to develop RAV and avoid over-engineering a simple (and powerful) concept.

---

JD Solomon writes and consults on decision-making, reliability, risk, and communication for leaders and technical professionals. His work connects technical disciplines with human understanding to help people make better decisions and build stronger systems. Learn more at www.jdsolomonsolutions.com and www.communicatingwithfinesse.com.

The Top Ten Ways to Express Asset Value

 JD Solomon Inc. provides practical solutions to align asset value and strengthen your asset management program.

Understanding asset value is one of the most fundamental questions in facility, infrastructure, and asset management. Yet it’s also one of the most misunderstood because different disciplines approach value from different angles. “Asset value” is not a single number—it’s a collection of perspectives formed by accounting, insurance, engineering, and operations. Getting clear on those perspectives is the first step toward making better decisions.

The Big Three

Before covering the many ways to express asset value, it helps to define three basic concepts that support most of the others.

Book Value (Accounting)

Book value answers the question, “What is this asset worth on the financial statements?”

It represents historical cost minus accumulated depreciation. Book value is essential for audits and financial reporting, but it rarely matches operational or replacement realities.

Replacement Value (Insurance)

Replacement value answers, “What would it cost to replace this asset with a similar one today?”

This is the number insurers care about. It is based on current market pricing and is central to risk transfer and disaster recovery planning.

Replacement Asset Value (Operations & Maintenance)

Replacement asset value (RAV) answers, “What would it cost to replace this asset in its operating context?”

RAV includes installation, commissioning, engineering, permitting, and indirect costs required to make the asset functional. That is, for operations and maintenance (O&M) purposes. It is the backbone of maintenance budgeting and performance metrics.

Each of these concepts reflects a different way of thinking about value. Which one is “best” depends entirely on the decision being made.

10 Ways to Express Asset Value

Across engineering, finance, insurance, and operations, at least 10 commonly used expressions of asset value are used in practice. Understanding them reduces confusion and improves decision‑making.

1. Book Value

Historical cost minus depreciation. Useful for accounting, not for operational decisions.

2. Market Value

What could the asset be sold for today? Relevant for tradable assets like vehicles or real estate.

3. Replacement Value (Insurance)

The cost to replace the asset with a similar one under current market conditions.

4. Replacement Asset Value (Operations)

RAV is the cost to replace the asset in service, typically equipment, labor, and disposal of the old equipment.

5. Salvage (or Residual) Value

The estimated value at the end of the asset’s useful life. Salvage value is used in depreciation and lifecycle analysis.

6. Economic Value

The financial benefit the asset generates or enables, often expressed through avoided costs.

7. Service Value

The value of the service the asset provides—water delivered, passengers moved, data processed.

8. Strategic Value

Strategic value expresses how the asset supports long‑term organizational goals such as resilience, growth, or sustainability.

9. Operational Value

The value is derived from reliability, maintainability, and day‑to‑day performance. Operational value is function-based.

10. Lifecycle Value

Total value over the asset’s entire life, considering cost, performance, and risk.

Other types of asset value also exist. One is risk-adjusted value (the value modified by the probability and consequences of failure), and the other is social, or community, value (the contribution to quality of life, equity, environmental stewardship, or public expectations).

However, social value and risk-adjusted value, as they are very specialized and not common enough to be included in this list.

The Devil is in the Detail

The fine points matter. For example, operational value and RAV seem very similar. However, operational value is used to decide if an asset is doing its job. RAV is used to decide if it’s time to stop repairing it and how much it will cost to put another one in service. A common benchmark is that if annual maintenance costs exceed 2–3% of the RAV, the asset may be a candidate for replacement.

Context Matters

One of the most common issues in practice is mixing accounting value with operational or replacement value. For example:

• An asset may have little book value but enormous service value.

• Replacement value may be high, yet the asset may be nearing obsolescence.

• Replacement asset value may exceed insurance replacement value because of installation and commissioning costs.

The problem isn’t the terminology. In practice, the biggest issue is the assumption that everyone is answering the same question.

It’s Critical to Communicate Effectively

As an example, this is where framing becomes essential. In the FINESSE Fishbone Diagram®, the first F, Frame, establishes the boundary conditions (context) and definitions.

Without a shared frame, discussions about asset value quickly become misaligned.

A poorly framed asset valuation leads to unrealistic expectations and flawed decisions. A solid understanding of definitions produces a focus consistent with the decision at hand.

Asset Value Requires Systems Thinking

Determining asset value is ultimately a systems‑thinking exercise. No single definition stands on its own without context. No valuation is meaningful unless everyone involved answers the same question. Many parts must come together.

When organizations take the time to align terminology, assumptions, and decision needs, they reduce confusion and improve outcomes. Need help getting started? JD Solomon Inc. provides practical solutions to align asset value and strengthen your asset management program.

---

JD Solomon is the founder of JD Solomon, Inc., the creator of the FINESSE Fishbone Diagram®, and the co-creator of the SOAP criticality method^©. He is the author of Communicating Reliability, Risk & Resiliency to Decision Makers: How to Get Your Boss’s Boss to Understand and Facilitating with FINESSE: A Guide to Successful Business Solutions.