BPK’s audit of Danantara’s financial statements, as reported by detikFinance, aims to assess the fairness of the statements and strengthen governance and accountability. The report does not discuss general rules for companies. However, its context serves as a reminder that companies need to assign responsibilities clearly so they can explain their records, including asset records.
Within a company, the issue can be as simple as a laptop still registered to a former employee even though their replacement is already using it. To prevent discrepancies like this from turning into a round of unanswered questions, you need to distinguish who manages the records, who holds the item, and who uses it.
When asset data differs, who needs to act?
Signs that responsibilities are unclear
A data discrepancy does not always mean an asset is missing or someone has been negligent. An incorrect location may result from a recording error, while a former user’s name may remain listed because no one is required to report the transfer.
Data issues require evidence-based corrections, while unclear roles require decisions about who performs each task. Changing a name in the asset register does not address the root cause if no one is responsible for reporting the next transfer.
One sign is a confirmation request passed from the finance team to human resources, then to a manager without a definite answer. Each party knows part of what happened, but no one is tasked with bringing the information together and ensuring the case is resolved.
The impact on follow-up
Unclear responsibilities delay simple tasks: a replacement device cannot yet be handed over, user records remain outdated, or a condition check has not been scheduled. Every discrepancy report therefore needs one person responsible for follow-up, even when the investigation involves several teams.
Separate recordkeeping, custody, and usage duties
Recordkeepers and approvers
The person responsible for administration maintains complete asset records and supporting documents; they are not the legal owner of the assets. Their duties may include updating the asset register, retaining handover evidence, and ensuring every change has a traceable basis.
Authority to record changes does not automatically include authority to approve them. For example, an administrator updates a location after receiving confirmation, while a manager approves transfers between units within the authority limits set by the company.
The finance team can handle financial recordkeeping without knowing the day-to-day whereabouts of every device. Companies therefore need to specify who must provide information about an item’s location, rather than assume that information will become available on its own.
Physical custodians and users
A physical custodian is the person who holds or stores an asset at a given time. A user is the person who uses the asset for work; they may be the same person, but not always.
For example, a meeting room attendant stores a projector used by several teams in turn. The attendant confirms the device’s whereabouts and handover, while users report any problems that occur during use.
A company can divide responsibilities, but each task needs a clearly designated person responsible. For shared assets, listing only a unit name is not enough if no individual or currently filled position has been designated as the responsible contact for company assets.
Define a process for handling discrepancies
The sequence of checks and approvals
A clear workflow specifies who reports, checks, decides, and records the outcome. One person may perform more than one task in simple cases, provided this aligns with company policies and control requirements.
- The reporter records the asset’s identifying details, the discrepancy found, its last known location, and the date of discovery.
- The reviewer compares the actual situation with the records and handover or loan documentation.
- The decision-maker determines the action to take, such as correcting user records, returning the item, or conducting further checks.
- The recordkeeper updates the data and retains evidence of the decision and the case’s resolution.
Distinguish verified facts from information that is still an assumption. If an item’s whereabouts have not been confirmed, mark its status as under investigation rather than immediately changing it to missing or resolved.
Match the checks to the level of risk. A confirmed room-name typo does not always require as many approvals as an asset that cannot be found or a transfer without supporting evidence.
Example: handling a laptop transfer
An employee moves to another division, but their laptop is still registered to the previous unit. The human resources team knows the transfer date, the new manager knows who is using the device, and the administrator holds the original records.
In a clear workflow, human resources reports the change in assignment, then a designated reviewer confirms the laptop’s identity and whereabouts. An authorized manager then approves the assigned user or unit in accordance with policy. The administrator updates the records once the evidence is complete, not merely on the basis of a message saying the employee has moved.
The person responsible closes the case after the records match the findings and the evidence has been retained. Simply sending a message to another team does not mean the case is resolved.
Maintain clarity without adding bureaucracy
A checklist for assigning duties
You do not need a lengthy procedure for every type of item. As a starting point, a single-page assignment of duties may be enough if it includes the following:
- The administrator, physical custodian, and user, with a specific designation for shared assets.
- Events that must be reported, such as loans, transfers, damage, or returns.
- The reporter, reviewer, decision-maker, and recordkeeper for each type of event.
- Response deadlines and a backup when the primary person responsible is unavailable.
- Who to contact when evidence conflicts or the relevant parties do not respond.
- Where evidence is stored and the conditions for declaring a case resolved.
Company asset managers also need to understand the basis for their actions, rather than simply follow established habits. A similar principle applies when determining maintenance based on criticality and usage: operational data helps explain why an action was chosen and who needs to follow up.
Mistakes to avoid
Do not automatically hold the physical custodian responsible for every discrepancy. First examine the sequence of events, authority, and evidence, because a recording error is different from misuse.
Also avoid adding multiple approvers without clarifying the decisions each one makes. If two managers merely confirm the same thing, the process may slow down without making responsibilities any clearer.
If the process reaches a dead end, refer the issue to the person responsible for asset management or an authorized official. Record the unanswered questions, who needs to make a decision, and what evidence is still required so the team does not repeat the discussion from the beginning.
Accountability starts with clear decisions
Clearly defined roles make discrepancies easier to trace without rushing to assign blame. Test the division of duties using a single transfer case: can the reporter, reviewer, decision-maker, and recordkeeper be named without debate?
Review one asset transfer process to identify tasks that have no designated person responsible.
Learn how Fisetra helps with asset control at fisetra.com.