Facilities management procurement is too often treated as a narrow purchasing exercise: a specification is drawn up, bids are compared on price and service levels, and a contract is awarded until the whole process begins again a few years later. That approach may satisfy short-term budget pressures, but it rarely gives providers the stability needed to invest in better technology, smarter maintenance or wider business outcomes.
A growing number of industry voices say that model...
Continue Reading This Article
Enjoy this article as well as all of our content, including reports, news, tips and more.
By registering or signing into your SRM Today account, you agree to SRM Today's Terms of Use and consent to the processing of your personal information as described in our Privacy Policy.
is no longer fit for purpose. In a recent roundtable hosted by Under the Coat, FM leaders pointed to short contract lengths, excessive reliance on KPIs and SLAs, and reactive, just-in-time service models as obstacles to collaboration and innovation. Their argument is gaining traction at a time when clients are asking more of their estates: stronger ESG performance, better workplace experience and greater operational resilience.
The JLL Global State of Facilities Management Report found that 78 per cent of organisations place a provider’s deep understanding of their business above more traditional procurement considerations. That shift matters. It suggests many clients are beginning to recognise that the cheapest bid is not always the best long-term choice, particularly when buildings, people and technology are expected to work together more intelligently.
Research from RICS backs up that view. Its procurement guidance says longer contract terms can deliver better value where the aim is a strategic relationship rather than a simple service transaction. The professional body has also introduced global standards intended to improve consistency and transparency in FM procurement, while encouraging more collaborative, longer-term approaches.
For providers, the problem is straightforward. Investment in areas such as asset intelligence, predictive maintenance, decarbonisation and artificial intelligence usually takes time to pay back. Yet many contracts are too short to allow those benefits to be fully realised. The result is a familiar cycle of tender, mobilisation, stabilisation and retendering, rather than a model built around improvement and transformation.
That structure also shapes behaviour. When procurement success is judged mainly on price, compliance and risk control, service providers are pushed to focus on immediate performance measures rather than broader value creation. Response times, help desk activity and maintenance completion may be tightly monitored, but outcomes such as asset life, carbon reduction, staff experience and resilience can be pushed to the margins.
The direction of travel, however, is clear. JLL’s report says FM is increasingly seen as a strategic function influencing continuity, experience and resilience, while RICS argues that better procurement processes should help property professionals realise the value of FM expertise. Together, they point to a sector in transition.
If businesses want more from their estates, procurement will have to change with them. The challenge is no longer simply to buy a service. It is to choose a partner that can help deliver measurable business results over time.
Source: Noah Wire Services
