I recently chatted to a Project Manager on a large scale housing project and he was outlining the number of documents and ‘Gigs’ of data that had been collected so far as part of the preparation of their Handover File. It was eye opening to see the web of folders containing documents and documents and photos and more documents. Lots and lots of data….but was it just for data’s sake?!
Leaders in organisations like to think we are driven by evidence. We talk about being data led, insight driven, evidence based. But too often what we really mean is that we have lots of data - often scattered, inconsistently captured, hard to compare, and even harder to act on.
This is not a criticism. It’s a reflection of reality.
Data collection takes effort. Building and maintenance teams are already stretched. Systems are imperfect. And the temptation is always there to say: something is better than nothing. In many cases, that’s true. But not all data is created equal, and not all effort delivers the same return. In building projects, "The Handover File" is ultimately seen as the ‘bible’ in which the story of the building's creation is written. But is there a parable in that Bible that can be instantly and easily interpreted and acted on as the building thrives and evolves through the ages?
The real question for organisations today is not whether to collect loads and loads of data, but what kind of data is worth collecting, how it is collected and how it is being handed over? Are we collecting loads of data for data’s sake - to have more than enough - or would we all be better off collecting less but collecting what matters most.
The Structured VS Unstructured Dilemma
At one end of the spectrum, we collect no data at all. Decisions are made on experience, instinct, and anecdote. This can work - until it doesn’t. Without evidence, learning is slow and accountability is weak. I think we're gone beyond this edge of the spectrum at this point.
At the other end, we collect data in an unstructured way. Data for data’s sake! Free-text notes, bespoke templates, datasheets, ancillary certificates all bundled together in large digital folders. This often feels efficient in the moment. It respects local nuance. It avoids “forcing” reality into predefined boxes.
But unstructured data carries a hidden cost. It is expensive to analyse, difficult to compare, and almost impossible to scale. The more of it you collect and store in folders, the more sharply you encounter the Law of Diminishing Returns. Each additional data point requires disproportionate effort to find, interpret, clean and contextualise.
Then there is structured data: consistent fields, shared definitions, standardised templates. It can feel restrictive at first. It requires agreement, discipline, and upfront design for forward interpretation. But when done well, it unlocks something far more powerful than any individual dataset: collective insight at scale.
Scale Changes Everything
Just a few weeks ago, a Kerry County Council employee completed the 10,000th survey recorded on +AddJust. That milestone matters - not because of the number itself, but because of what it represents.
Twenty eight of the thirty one Local Authorities have now each completed dozens, hundreds and thousands of surveys on the platform. Next year, we expect a further 30,000 surveys to be carried out on the digital Asset Information Model which makes up the new structure for collecting data on the existing social housing stock in the Republic of Ireland.
Now, imagine an alternative reality.
Imagine those 10,000 surveys had been captured across 28 different structures and templates. Different questions. Different formats. Different interpretations of the same terms. How useful would that data be today? How much effort would it take to compare trends, identify risks, or inform national policy?
The honest answer is: very little of it would be usable without significant rework, if at all.
Consistency is not about control. It is about making data meaningful beyond the moment it is collected. With consistency in assessment across all areas, making sense of the data and the condition of the housing stock is instant.
The Reward for Doing the Hard Thing
Structured data does not eliminate professional judgement. It amplifies it. It allows organisations to see patterns that individuals cannot. It enables leaders to move from reactive decision making to proactive planning. Reporting and interpretation of that collected data is available in seconds.
Most importantly, it respects the effort of the people collecting the data in the first place. When frontline staff input information into a well thought out system, that work should contribute to something bigger than a single report or case file. It should feed learning, improvement, and better outcomes across the sector.
Yes, collecting structured data requires thought and a focus on the end goal - right from the start. Yes, it involves trade offs. But the reward is clarity, comparability and confidence in decision making at a scale that unstructured data simply cannot support.
Data with Purpose
At +AddJust, we believe data should earn its keep. If the effort required to collect it outweighs the value it delivers, then something is wrong with the approach – not the people.
The challenge for leaders is to design and improve systems where every data point has a purpose, every structure is intentional, and every insight can travel beyond organisational boundaries.
Because in the end, data is not about numbers. It’s about insights and leadership. And when structured well, data at scale doesn’t just describe the past – it helps shape a better future.
