Author Archives: The Facility Leader

Building the Case for FM Leadership as Part of the Executive Team

What strategic value does your Facilities Management organization bring to your Institution?

While most universities and colleges will say that their employees are most valuable resource, real estate and facilities, in fact, make up the most significant portion of institutional costs – asset wise. Thus, for the Facilities Management organization, the key challenge is to build a functional bridge between the built and human environments that allow their institutions to operate at peak efficiency, garnering the best of both worlds without compromising the ability of institution to meet stakeholder objectives. In this way, Facilities Management can contribute to a new world of competition in higher education by providing the physical infrastructure necessary that will in part win students and faculty. Continue reading


Workplace Performance Management – Is is for you?

I’m taking a slightly different direction away for Higher Education this month into the corporate world, although you could argue that the philosophy behind Workplace Performance Management should be equally at home in the corridors of HE facilities management departments as in the offices of corporate real estate executives.

Workplace Performance Management (WPM) was termed coined by the NSW Government in 1996 (although there are those who would have you believe that that this term was coined by the IWMS industry or their paid consultants) as part of the Total Asset Management program developed by the Department of Public Works and Services. It defines personal and corporate accountability and sets in place those improvement processes for the physical infrastructure of an organization. Simply put, WPM exists to extract maximum shareholder value from that infrastructure through a goal setting process, establishing key performance metrics that are analyzed and reported on against these objectives.

Workplace Performance Management is a subset of Business Process Management (BPM), which has embedded itself into almost every facet of organizational operations, and has within the last few years begun to infiltrate its way into the real estate and facilities domain through Six Sigma process methodology and the like. BPM links business strategy with key performance objective to define accountability and set in place improvement processes [Mintzberg- 1988]. The development of a Workplace Performance Management process is, therefore, a substantial advancement in real estate and facilities management.

A recent survey by Business Week – often quoted by IWMS vendors and consultants –  found that 60% of organizations reported a misalignment between the workplace and business operations because there was no integration with overall business strategy. As elementary as this may seem to a first year MBA student, the “intended” business strategy rarely sees the workplace (an “emergent” strategy) as a strategy to be integrated with the whole but more of an outcome. The effect of emergent strategies on the intended strategy will always create misalignment. Unrealized strategies that minimize shareholder value and can seriously hamper corporate growth and direction.

Without this alignment of strategies, business leaders miss significant opportunities to increase shareholder value across the business spectrum but especially in its physical infrastructure where up to 75% of costs can be locked up. Profitability can by maximized through increasing spatial efficiencies, cost reductions and capital minimization.

Workplace Performance Management provides the system of measurement that creates a direct linkage between business goals and objectives and stakeholder interests. WPM also provides specific insights into those actions that increase the value of the workplace and reduces the cost of business operations. Firms that implement WPM systems in concert with BPM derive significant cost reductions – often hard currency savings of between 5 and 10 percent and cost avoidances exceeding 20 percent.

Workplace Performance Management also measures other areas of the business including Financial, Operational, Portfolio and Environmental Performance and Customer Satisfaction.

These five categories form a comprehensive workplace performance balanced scorecard for management of the organization. This balanced process ensures the organization retains an integrated and focused approach to infrastructure, operation and organizational activities that contribute directly to the firm’s financial success.

I’m taking a slightly different direction away for Higher Education this month into the corporate world, although you could argue that the philosophy behind Workplace Performance Management should be equally at home in the corridors of HE facilities management departments as in the offices of corporate real estate executives.

Workplace Performance Management (WPM) was termed coined by the NSW Government in 1996 as part of the Total Asset Management program developed by the Department of Public Works and Services. It defines accountability and sets in place those improvement processes for the physical infrastructure of an organization. Simply put, WPM exists to extract maximum shareholder value from that infrastructure through a goal setting process, establishing key performance metrics that are analyzed and reported on against these objectives.

Workplace Performance Management is a subset of Business Process Management (BPM), which has embedded itself into almost every facet of organizational operations, and has within the last few years begun to infiltrate its way into the real estate and facilities domain through Six Sigma process methodology and the like. BPM links business strategy with key performance objective to define accountability and set in place improvement processes [Mintzberg- 1988]. The development of a Workplace Performance Management process is, therefore, a substantial advancement in real estate and facilities management.

A recent survey by Business Week – often quoted by IWMS vendors and consultants –  found that 60% of organizations reported a misalignment between the workplace and business operations because there was no integration with overall business strategy. As elementary as this may seem to a first year MBA student, the “intended” business strategy rarely sees the workplace (an “emergent” strategy) as a strategy to be integrated with the whole but more of an outcome. The effect of emergent strategies on the intended strategy will always create misalignment. Unrealized strategies that minimize shareholder value and can seriously hamper corporate growth and direction.

Without this alignment of strategies, business leaders miss significant opportunities to increase shareholder value across the business spectrum but especially in its physical infrastructure where up to 75% of costs can be locked up. Profitability can by maximized through increasing spatial efficiencies, cost reductions and capital minimization.

Workplace Performance Management provides the system of measurement that creates a direct linkage between business goals and objectives and stakeholder interests. WPM also provides specific insights into those actions that increase the value of the workplace and reduces the cost of business operations. Firms that implement WPM systems in concert with BPM derive significant cost reductions – often hard currency savings of between 5 and 10 percent and cost avoidances exceeding 20 percent.

Workplace Performance Management also measures other areas of the business including Financial, Operational, Portfolio and Environmental Performance and Customer Satisfaction.

These five categories form a comprehensive workplace performance balanced scorecard for management of the organization. This balanced process ensures the organization retains an integrated and focused approach to infrastructure, operation and organizational activities that contribute directly to the firm’s financial success.

 

 

 

 

 

 


Did you get caught without your swimmers on?

The number one source of income for state and local governments was no longer sales tax, income tax, or property tax. It was the federal government’s $787 billion stimulus package!

Although most news reports emphasized that the stimulus was working, my reaction was more  of a, “Wow, that is simply NOT sustainable!”

The sudden nature, size, depth, and length of the recession of the past two years has hit the nation in such a way that virtually all of us have been profoundly affected. That is certainly true of higher education. Wage freezes and cuts, furloughs, buyouts, layoffs, reductions in retirement matching, curtailment of course offerings, and caps on student enrollment have become part of the higher education landscape.

US higher education is looking at one of the toughest periods in its history. There are challenges on every front. Public institutions are facing significant cuts in state support. The National Council of State Legislatures reported recently that 44 states expect a total shortfall of $120 billion in FY2010. And it was going to be higher in 2011. Private institutions have been ravaged by sharp and steep endowment losses. Community colleges are unable to enroll the increased demand of would-be students. For-profit institutions are multiplying and growing. Just look at University of Phoenix’s staggering record enrollment numbers that have surpassed 450,000.

This June (2010), the U.S. Department of Education (DOE) reported that 114 non-profit degree-granting institutions had failed the department’s financial responsibility test. Half of the institutions on the list now must post letters of credit to protect federal grant and loan funds. Failing the DOE test is a reasonable indicator of survival risk, and some sources place the endangered species list at perhaps 250 and growing. Another risk indicator is Moody’s estimate that colleges and universities lost $120 billion in endowment value between July 2008 and April 2009. Several bond-rating downgrades have been announced, and more are on the way.

Significant tuition increases at private institutions do not appear to be an option. In the past 25 years, tuition and fees have gone up 240 percent—about four times the rate of inflation. Over the past decade, the increase was 72 percent for public institutions and 98 percent for private institutions. The number of high school graduates will decline over the next decade. The practice of discounting also seems to be nearing its limits, with the national undergraduate average at 35 percent. Most believe discounting beyond one-third of your tuition income to be a serious financial mistake.

Warren Buffett once remarked, “When the tide goes out, you can see who has been swimming naked.” Well the tide IS out! And a sizable number of higher education institutions will need to invest in new swimsuits.

Did you get caught without your swimmers on?

 


Sustainability, The Triple Bottom Line & Higher Education – The Facilities Leaders Imperative

The term “sustainability” was coined by the Brundtland Commission of the United Nations in 1987  and has permeated every industry sector since, both private and public, to push and pursue various agendas. Higher Education, as an “industry sector,” was slower on the initial uptake compared to other industries. “Sustainability” was not exactly something that could be easily expressed in financial terms nor seen as an item of tradable value or exchange, hence, it did not garner the support needed at the Board of Regents’ level. Sustainability was therefore relegated to the world of academia for a decade or more before Campus Operations were forced to acknowledge its existence by other external forces. Continue reading


A Reshuffling of the IWMS Deck

With the announcement of the opening of Accruent’s new office in Austin, Texas tagged as an “expansion” by Accruent’s marketing team, and further articles on IWMSnew’s website blog by a contribitutor (ex employer and customer – D. Anderson) noting that Accruent’s talent base has been effectively routed by a recent round of retrenchments and layoffs by Vista, one has to wonder what the long term strategy for this firm and their product stream is.

As the blogger said “ having seen capital sources enter this arena without the understanding of the business and its customers,” he is not optimistic about the future of the company. Further evidence in recent weeks has demonstrated that this once strong and viable IWMS player is now a shadow of it former self with many former staff (personally known to the author) retrenched or left of their own accord due to the frustrations of not knowing what was happening within the company. And with many talented people in product development, product management and R&D no longer there to “steer the ship”, what does this say for the future and viability of the product line?

As this blogger said “clients are being asked to sign long term maintenance support/ U&E agreements”. If I was a customer of Accruent or FAMIS and asked to sign one of these agreements, I would be looking long and hard at the company’s long term viability and its commitment to me.

If those things didn’t add up, I’d be looking elsewhere for a more secure option.

Perhaps IWMSNews asked the right question “Has the endgame in the IWMS industry started?

Opinions are those of the author only

(c) 2010 Tony Stack Beyond FM



How to Justify the Cost of an IWMS System for your College

Facilities Budgets have always been limited to the actual operating costs of the department, which means that purchasing decision that require an ROI are based on the savings / benefits in direct proportion to the amount of money available in the budget. For certain acquisitions, this is the correct method. However, there are acquisitions made by Facilities that, although primarily for the use of facilities personnel, have a far greater economic value to the University as a whole. As such, its acquisition costs (and benefits derived) must be considered in relation to the whole. Continue reading


Interesting IWMS Poll

This is an interesting result taken from one of our surveys. It gives some statistical correlation to the purchase of an IWMS system and improved communication. Although this survey was conducted in a higher education environment, these results could be extrapolated across other market verticals. Note that while internal departmental improved (significantly) just over 30 percent, intra campus (or corporate) communications increased (significantly) a whopping 60%.
 

Percentage improvement in communication after purchase of FM Technology

 

(n=1050)

(c) BeyondFM


IWMS and Higher Education Facilities Survey Trends

Just completed some extensive research on IWMS usage patterns in higher education. Very interesting information………..

Did you know that

  • There IS a statistical correlation between Carnegie classifcation, student population and the type of system purchased that can be quantified;
  • Baccalaureate and Associates institutions will typically purchase Point Solutions (55%) and higher end institutions buy Integrated solutions or build their own (or a combination of the both);
  • Higher end institutions buy over 77% of IWMS solutions and related technology yet represent only 50% of the market;
  • Masters, Doctoral and Research universities typical purchase more of the strategic tool sets than the operation tool sets;
  • Despite claims to the contrary, most institutions do not perform a pre and post ROI analysis to determine the effectiveness of their purchase.
  • FM technology generally over-delivers on expectations in the areas of Maintenance and Operations, Business Process Improvement and Project Management and under-delivers in areas on expectation in the areas of energy and sustainability.
  • The majority of institutions purchased Enterprise licences as opposed to User Licences.
  • Institutions who purchased some sort of FM technology saw some immediate improvement in internal, external and  cross campus communications which saved them identifiable costs. Less than 10% of respondents did not see an improvement in communications.

The above information is offered as is, and is based on actual data collected from over 1,000 respondents. No opinion has been offered and none will be offered in the blog pertaining to product, module, company, service or solution. This data is copyrighted. Please contact me for permission to reuse .Thanks……….


A Green Building Doesn’t Mean Building Green

So your new building program has been approved. You are going to use that internationally recognized architect to design a LEED certified facility which you are certain will get you a Platinum rating. Ah! The accolades, the bragging rights, the energy savings. Right? Maybe. Continue reading


Facilities Leadership

At a recent event sponsored by APPA (formerly the Association of Physical Plant Administrators), members of the academic segment of the facilities management (FM) profession were asked to identify the major current and future challenges they face. The top six were:

  1. Improving accountability;
  2. Planning for workforce change;
  3. Integrating sustainability into total operations;
  4. Implementing total cost of ownership practices;
  5. Making facilities a strategic partner with leadership; and
  6. Leading change. Continue reading

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.