Aimée L Felton 2012

87 controlled programmes of work, although the care of selection of contractors was deemed as vital to ensure proper and relevant experience of the proposed work. UEA indicated that the majority of work undertaken was by in-house staff, this is likely be due to the scale and repetitive nature of the maintenance required, but also the contemporary nature of the building materials used in the construction of both Norfolk and Suffolk Terraces, minimising the specialist knowledge required regarding conservation materials and repair techniques. In this instance, the familiarity of the in-house staff with the buildings is unlikely to be rivalled by any external consultant, proving more economic and fundamentally successful to the organisation. In order to practice maintenance effectively and recognise the process and impacts of change upon the historic buildings, it was presumed that non- heritage focused organisations would rely heavily on standard business indicators such as risk assessment management and KPIs. Dann and Wood (2004:p142) relate the predominance of this thought throughout conservation literature with conservation professionals presuming that organisations see maintenance as non-negotiable. However, as evidenced by the case studies, the mitigating of risk and subsequently monitoring cost control is the primary objective of organisations within their maintenance programmes, rather than identifying and rectifying vulnerable fabric. The only anomaly was UEA, where as previously described, the organisations’ conservation policies and subsequent maintenance work are driven by fully researched, attributed and identified cultural significance. EIGHT Chapter Eight - Maintenance in practice Aimee Felton