Spreadsheets vs CMMS vs Systems of Record: Choosing the Right Tool for Asset Management

When organizations decide to track physical assets more systematically, they typically consider three approaches:

1. Spreadsheets (Excel, Google Sheets)
2. CMMS (Computerized Maintenance Management Systems)
3. Physical Asset Systems of Record

Each serves a purpose. Each has limitations. Choosing the wrong category creates problems that compound over time.

This guide explains the differences, when each approach makes sense, and the risks of mismatched expectations.

Spreadsheets: The Default Choice

What Spreadsheets Are Good At

Spreadsheets are flexible, familiar, and ubiquitous. For small teams with simple needs, they work well enough:

• Quick to start. No setup, no training, no cost.
• Familiar interface. Everyone knows how to use them.
• Flexible structure. Add columns, change formats, customize freely.
• Good for initial exploration. Test ideas before committing to systems.

Where Spreadsheets Break Down

Spreadsheets fail as asset management solutions when organizations grow or requirements become more complex:

No audit trail or history. When someone overwrites a cell, the previous value disappears. For assets that change hands, locations, or status frequently, this is a critical flaw. You cannot reconstruct what happened or when.

No enforcement or validation. Different people enter data differently. Unit costs might be in one column for some assets, another column for others. Location formats vary. Inconsistency compounds.

No accountability. Who made this change? When? Why? Spreadsheets rarely know. When something goes wrong, tracing responsibility is difficult or impossible.

Version control problems. Multiple people working in separate copies create conflicting versions. "Which file is the current one?" becomes a recurring question.

Limited scalability. As asset counts grow, spreadsheets become slow, unwieldy, and error-prone. Filtering, sorting, and reporting become painful.

No integration. Finance tracks depreciation in one file. Operations tracks maintenance in another. IT tracks assignments in a third. Reconciling these sources is manual and error-prone.

When Spreadsheets Make Sense

Use spreadsheets if:

• You have fewer than 50 assets and no compliance requirements.
• Asset turnover is low and changes are infrequent.
• Only one person manages the data.
• You're exploring asset tracking for the first time and want a low-commitment test.

But recognize the limitations. Spreadsheets are disposable tools, not systems of record. When incidents occur or audits arrive, spreadsheets rarely hold up.

CMMS: Built for Maintenance Departments

What CMMS Is Good At

CMMS tools are designed for organizations with dedicated maintenance departments and complex maintenance workflows:

• Work order routing. Create, assign, and track maintenance tasks.
• Technician dispatch. Schedule and manage workforce assignments.
• Preventive maintenance programs. Automate recurring maintenance schedules.
• Service level agreements (SLAs). Track response times and compliance.
• Spare parts inventory. Manage stock levels for replacement parts.

If your organization has a facilities team, a maintenance department, or technicians who respond to work orders, CMMS is purpose-built for you.

Where CMMS Falls Short

For organizations that don't fit the CMMS profile, the tool becomes a burden:

Complexity overhead. CMMS assumes you need workforce scheduling, service routing, and multi-level approval workflows. If you don't, these features add cost and complexity without value.

Narrow focus. CMMS is built for maintenance teams, not for operations, finance, or leadership. It tracks work orders well but often lacks visibility into total cost of ownership, depreciation, or organization-wide asset accountability.

Adoption challenges. CMMS tools are powerful but not intuitive. Training is required. If your team doesn't route work orders daily, the learning curve exceeds the benefit.

Cost. Enterprise CMMS pricing reflects its feature set. For organizations that don't need those features, it's expensive compared to simpler alternatives.

Wrong audience. CMMS speaks to technicians and facilities managers. It doesn't naturally serve finance teams tracking depreciation or executives needing asset intelligence.

When CMMS Makes Sense

Use CMMS if:

• You have a dedicated maintenance department or facilities team.
• You route work orders and dispatch technicians regularly.
• Preventive maintenance is central to your operations (e.g., manufacturing plants, large facilities).
• You need workforce scheduling and SLA tracking.

But recognize the fit. If your organization doesn't match this profile, CMMS is overkill.

Physical Asset Systems of Record: The Middle Ground

A Physical Asset System of Record sits intentionally between spreadsheets and CMMS. It's purpose-built for organizations that need:

• Durable asset intelligence (not disposable spreadsheets)
• Organization-wide visibility (not maintenance-team-only tools)
• Audit-ready accountability (not informal tracking)
• Cost and lifecycle clarity (not just work orders)

What Systems of Record Provide

Complete asset history. Every change is logged. You know who made changes, when, and why. Audit trails are built-in, not bolted on.

Cost intelligence. Track purchase price, depreciation, maintenance costs, and total cost of ownership. Answer questions like "Should we replace or repair?" with data.

Organization-wide design. Serve operations, finance, and leadership—not just maintenance teams. Asset visibility is a cross-functional need.

Accountability without complexity. Know what you own, where it is, and who's responsible—without work order routing or technician dispatch.

Scalability. Handle 50 assets or 5,000 without breaking down. Structure and validation ensure data quality as you grow.

When Systems of Record Make Sense

Use a Physical Asset System of Record if:

• You need more than spreadsheets but don't need CMMS.
• Asset visibility matters to operations, finance, and leadership—not just maintenance.
• You need audit-ready accountability and compliance documentation.
• You want to track total cost of ownership, depreciation, and lifecycle expenses.
• Your organization is asset-heavy but not maintenance-department-heavy.

This describes most SMBs and mid-market organizations. They need structure and durability but not complexity.

How to Choose

Ask yourself these questions:

1. Do you have a dedicated maintenance department?

• Yes, with technicians and work orders: Consider CMMS.
• No, or maintenance is ad hoc: Skip CMMS.

2. Do you need audit-ready records and accountability?

• Yes: Spreadsheets won't suffice. Consider a system of record.
• No, just informal tracking: Spreadsheets might work for now.

3. Do finance and leadership need asset visibility?

• Yes: A system of record serves cross-functional needs.
• No, only maintenance cares: CMMS might fit.

4. Do you track total cost of ownership and lifecycle expenses?

• Yes: A system of record provides cost intelligence.
• No, just tracking location: Spreadsheets or simple tools work.

5. How many assets do you manage, and how often do they change?

• Fewer than 50, low turnover: Spreadsheets can work.
• Hundreds or thousands, frequent changes: You need structure (system of record or CMMS).

The Risk of Choosing Wrong

Choosing the wrong category creates predictable problems:

Spreadsheets when you need systems: Audit failures, accountability gaps, compliance risks, and operational blind spots.

CMMS when you don't need it: Low adoption, wasted cost, complexity overhead, and frustrated teams.

No system when you need one: Institutional knowledge evaporates when people leave. Incidents expose the lack of records. Audits become scrambles.

The Bottom Line

Spreadsheets, CMMS, and systems of record are not competing solutions. They serve different needs:

• Spreadsheets: Simple, disposable, informal.
• CMMS: Complex, maintenance-focused, work-order-driven.
• Systems of Record: Durable, organization-wide, audit-ready.

Most organizations fall in the middle—too complex for spreadsheets, too simple for CMMS. That's where Physical Asset Systems of Record (like UniAsset) fit.

The right tool depends on your organization's needs—not industry conventions or what competitors use. Choose based on who needs visibility, what questions you need to answer, and how much accountability you require.

If you're unsure which category fits, start by asking: Do we need asset tracking, or do we need asset truth? The answer clarifies everything.