These days, many owners corporations are serviced by strata management companies using some form of computer software. Committee members as well as all lot owners know there is an online portal where they can view documents, check their own levy balance or read meeting minutes. Behind the scenes, however, these systems do far more than simply store files.
Good software has obvious advantages. It keeps records together, makes it easier to find old documents, produces financial reports and perhaps also prepares some BAS statements. This helps strata managers keep track of hundreds of buildings at once. I have read that thanks in part to AI software, a single strata manager is expected to handle as many as 600 to 800 apartments (with help from a lot of support staff such as accountants, senior managers and data specialists).
But there is one thing software cannot do. It cannot tell whether the information being keyed into the platform is accurate. Like the old cliché about earlier computer systems: garbage in, garbage out.
If an expense is allocated to the wrong account, every financial report that includes that expense will faithfully repeat that mistake. The software hasn’t made an error. It has simply recorded what someone told it.
One one occasion I asked for copies of our BAS statements. They came as summaries and mixed in with them was one BAS summary from a different strata building with a similar name. Human error exists and we have all been guilty of it at some time but it can have an impact on total costings.
That is why committee members should never assume that a neat report is automatically a complete or accurate one. Modern software can produce impressive graphs and summaries, but they are only as reliable as the information entered into the system in the first place.
Pundits will fairly argue that there are many crosschecks in today generations of software that will pick up any human errors or glitches. That may be true, but I have seen one or two serious errors in software-generated financial statements that seem to have slipped through its inbuilt checks and balances.
There is another issue that committees should keep in mind. Software is very good at recording events. It is not so good at explaining them.
This is where committees still have an important role. Rather than simply accepting reports at face value, members should feel comfortable asking questions such as: “Why is the budget allocation for building insurance so much more expensive this year than last year?”.
Technology is a useful tool, and most committees these days are so used to it, they would struggle without it. But it is still only a tool.
One thing to keep in mind is the speed at which AI programs are rapidly evolving. If there are any limitations to AI strata management applications, the developers may have already dealt with it by the time you read this.
This blog is fully independent and self-funded. It doesn’t offer legal or financial advice. When such advice is needed, always consult a professional in those disciplines. Use the links provided here as a starting point. The author resided in Victoria and is most familiar with Victoria’s strata legislation. Always check and use the current legislation governing your own state. State legislations vary and are state-specific. Links to each state’s own strata-title Act are provided on the “Introduction” page.