Abstract
The aim of this chapter is to introduce the main aspects and needs connected with information management within the facility management integrated services. The market of Facility Management (FM) in Europe has been significantly expanding in the last ten years with a general tendency to more and more integrated services, focusing on strategic initiatives within longer-term contracts. Within this scenario of market increase, the field of FM services has also been involved with rapid developments, related to various aspects connected with integration of services and strategic planning, such as: the enlargement of the areas of interest; the increasing complexity in the forms of contracting and in the organization models; the changing of the roles and the skills of the operators; the increasing expectations for the improvement of efficiency in the processes; the demand of improvements in the practices of planned maintenance; etc. In this situation of rapid evolutions, the information management is a subject that is becoming more and more important and strategic, highlighting several key factors, that have to be deeply investigated in order to pursue the improvement of the effectiveness and the integration of FM services. The main key factors may be summarized as: knowledge-bases for the strategic, tactical and operational levels of the integrated services; procedures and tools for selecting, collecting and managing information; procedures and criteria for orienting and checking the quality of information; requirements for the information systems.
This chapter is authored by Cinzia Talamo.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
ISS Group was founded in Copenaghen in 1901 and since then it has grown to become one of the world's leading Facility Services companies. ISS was originally the abbreviation for International Service System and from 2001 for Integrated Service Solutions, but today it is only used as the acronym.
- 2.
In a study proposed by Goyal and Pitt [5] about the role of innovation management in facilities management a questionnaire was prepared and distributed among various personnel belonging to the business industry and the FM field.
Considering the subject of innovation, eight innovation factors were considered: technical, product, process, business, commercial, production, managerial, organization. It was noticed that business and process innovation factors received most attention within the FM field. Approximately 37 % of respondents feel that business and process innovation gain most importance further enhances the fact that FM is first and foremost about organizational effectiveness. According to the authors, the result of the responses demonstrated the evolution of FM from an operational non‐core business support services function to a strategic FM position, which supports and enhances both the core and non‐core activities of the organization [5].
- 3.
According to the standard EN 15221-7:2012, “Facility Management. Guidelines for Performance Benchmarking” the benchmark is: a reference point or metric against which a strategy, process, performance and/or other entity can be measured. Benchmarks are necessary to the process of benchmarking, that according to the EN standard is part of a process, which aims at establishing the scope for, and benefits of, potential improvements in an organization through systematic comparison of its performance with that of one or more other organizations. The measure of benchmarking may be: quantitative, qualitative, or a combination of both measures.
Quantitative benchmarking may be used for various types of assessment, such as financial expenditure (i.e. operating costs or capital costs), floor space usage (i.e. space per FTE or linear meters storage), environmental impacts (i.e. energy consumption or waste production). It uses data captured by common processes through routine systems (i.e. data collection templates and management information systems). Instead qualitative benchmarking is connected with entities that can be distinguished as intangible and it uses data captured by specific processes (i.e. focus groups and employee surveys). Qualitative benchmarking may be used for various kinds of assessments, such as: service quality, satisfaction (i.e. end-user/customer satisfaction), productivity (i.e. repeat business or employee retention). Combination benchmarking may be used for assessments such as: satisfaction in relation to space usage, service quality in relation to financial expenditure, productivity in relation to environmental impacts.
- 4.
According to the standard EN 15341:2007, “Maintenance Key Performance Indicators”, indicator is: measured characteristic (or a set of characteristics) of a phenomenon, according to a given formula, which assesses the evolution. Indicators are related to objectives. The indicators can be used to: measure a status; compare (internal and external benchmarks); diagnose (analysis of strengths and weaknesses); identify objectives and define targets to be reached; plan improvement actions; continuously measure changes over time.
- 5.
See the standard EN 15221-4:2011, “Facility Management—Part 4: Taxonomy, Classification and Structures in Facility Management”.
- 6.
Major facility performance measurement practices are benchmarking, balanced scorecard approach, post occupancy evaluation and measurement through metrics of key performance indicators. Between the various effective performance models, according to a comparative study presented by Meng and Minogue [21], KPI is the most popular model for FM practitioners and organizations. The study, based on the empirical data collected from a questionnaire survey and a series of expert interviews, underlines that the ten most important performance indicators identified by the respondents are: client satisfaction, cost‐effectiveness, response time, service reliability, health, safety, environmental compliance, staff commitment, client‐service provider relationship, IT application.
- 7.
The Standard EN 15221-2:2006, “Facility Management—Part 2: Guidance on how to prepare Facility Management agreements” stresses the fact that both parties (Client and service provider) should ensure that the responsibilities for designing, updating and reporting of management information are fully understood and articulated in the Facility Management agreement. Procedures should be prescribed for the production of reports and performance indicators to any or all stakeholders, especially if financial penalties or inducements may be paid. If necessary, parties may consider an independent audit of such reports and performance indicators.
- 8.
Varcoe [22] also reports about the tasks of the Measurement Steering Group promoted by the BIFM Council since 1995, whose aim was the development of a facilities management performance measurement standard. The Protocol draft was based on a measurement framework structured according to the following items: standard units; the organization; the estate; the buildings; facilities management (operational services/cost centers, functional use of space; financial performance; other performance); comparisons.
- 9.
According to the standard EN 15221-7:2012, FTE (Full Time Equivalent) can be determined by dividing the total number of hours worked by the number of regular working hours in a working week (i.e. working 32 h when a regular working week consists of 40 h equals 0.8 FTE).
- 10.
According to the standard EN 15221-6:2011, NFA (Net Floor Area) is the calculated area of Internal Floor Area (IFA) excluding the Interior Construction Area (ICA) that is: IFA-ICA = NFA.
- 11.
The study presented by Lavy et al. [27] aims at expressing the categories of KPIs (Table 1.11) with fewer indicators. In particular, KPIs, such as building maintenance cost, grounds keeping costs, cleaning costs and maintenance expenditure, are summarized by the maintenance efficiency indicator (MEI). KPIs, like current replacement value and deferred maintenance possess, are expressed in the form of a condition index (CI). Buildings physical condition (quantitative and qualitative) and building performance index are indicated by a CI as well. The CI includes a widely used facility condition index (FCI), which is actually a collective indicator for a building maintenance and replacement program. The indicators related to capital expenditures, such as capital cost and renewals and replacement expenditure, are conveyed by a replacement efficiency index (REI), which includes comparing the actual replacement expenditure with the cost of expired systems in the facility [27, 28].
References
78th EUROCONSTRUCT Conference, Milan, 18–19 Nov 2014
Hodge G, Poglitsch R, Ankerstjerne P (2014) Perspectives on the FM market development. In: ISS white papers. Available via DIALOG. http://www.publications.issworld.com/ISS/External/issworld/White_papers/Perspectives_on_the_FM_market_development
ISS A/S (2014) ISS A/S prospectus. In: ISS prospectus. available via DIALOG. http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/ABEA-5ASMJV/440511910x0x730225/07165661-D99F-45B4-81D5-08E13FC5E719/English_Language_Offering_Circular_ISS
The Hackett Group (2013) Category insight report: facilities management v5.2
Goyal S, Pitt M (2007) Determining the role of innovation management in facilities management. Facilities 25(1/2):48–60
Irizarry J, Gheisari M, Williams G, Roper K (2014) Ambient intelligence environments for accessing building information: a healthcare facility management scenario. Facilities 32(3/4):120–138
Atkin B, Brooks A (2009) Total facilities management, 3rd edn. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford
Lee HL, Whang S (2000) Information sharing in a supply chain. Int J Technol Manage 20(3/4):373–387
Sezen B (2008) Relative effects of design, integration and information sharing on supply chain performance. Supply Chain Manage: Int J 13(3):233–240
Waheed Z, Fernie S (2009) Knowledge based facilities management. Facilities 27(7/8):258–266
Stewart T (2001) Wealth of knowledge. Doubleday, New York
Jylhä T (2013) Creating value or waste? Evaluating the production of real estate services with lean thinking. Dissertation, Aalto University
Franssila H (2012) Information waste: qualitative study in manufacturing enterprises. In: Moller C, Chaydhry S (eds) Advances in enterprise information systems II. CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, London
Hicks BJ, Culley SJ, McMahon CA (2006) A study of issues relating to information management across engineering SMEs. Int J Inf Manage 26(4):267–289
Jylhä T, Suvanto M (2015) Impacts of poor quality of information in the facility management field. Facilities 33(5/6):302–319
Grant RM (1996) Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strateg Manage J 17:109–122
Chen C (2004) The effects of knowledge attribute, alliance characteristics and absorptive capacity on knowledge transfer performance. R&D Management 34(3):311–321
Moorman C, Miner AS (1998) Organizational improvisation and organizational memory. Acad Manage Rev 23:698–723
Gao F, Li M, Nakamori Y (2002) Systems thinking on knowledge and its management: systems methodology for knowledge management. J Knowl Manage 6(1):7–17
Cotts DG, Roper KO, Payant RP (2010) The facility management handbook, 3rd edn. 667 American Management Association—AMACOM, New York
Meng X, Minogue M (2011) Performance measurement models in facility management: a comparative study. Facilities 29(11/12):472–484
Varcoe BJ (1996) Facilities performance measurement. Facilities 14(10/11):46–51
Cohen R, Standeven M, Bordass B, Leaman A (2001) Assessing building performance in use 1: the Probe process. Build Res Inf 29(2):85–102
Gumbus A (2005) Introducing the balanced scorecard: creating metrics to measure performance. J Manage Educ 29(4):617–630
Ho DCH, Chan EHW, Wong NY, Chan M (2000) Significant metrics for facilities management benchmarking in the Asia Pacific region. Facilities 18(13/14):545–555
Tucker M, Pitt M (2009) Customer performance measurement in facilities management. A strategic approach. Int J Prod Perf Manage 58(5):407–422
Lavy S, Garcia JA, Dixit MK (2014) KPIs for facility’s performance assessment, Part I: identification and categorization of core indicators. Facilities 32(5/6):256–274
Lavy S, Garcia JA, Dixit MK (2014) KPIs for facility’s performance assessment, Part II: identification of variables and deriving expressions for core indicators. Facilities 32(5/6):275–294
Lavy S, Garcia JA, Dixit MK (2010) Establishment of KPIs for facility performance measurement: review of literature. Facilities 28(9/10):440–464
Amaratunga D, Baldry D (2003) A conceptual framework to measure facilities management performance. Prop Manag 21(2):171–189
Hinks J, McNay P (1999) The creation of a management-by-variance tool for facilities management performance assessment. Facilities 17(1/2):31–53
Augenbroe G, Park CS (2005) Quantification methods of technical building performance. Build Res Info 33(2):159–172
Massheder K, Finch E (1998) Benchmarking metrics used in UK facilities management. Facilities 16(5/6):123–127
Standards and Laws
EN 15221-1:2007, “Facility management—part 1: terms and definitions”
EN 15221-2:2006, “Facility management—part 2: guidance on how to prepare Facility Management agreements”
EN 15221-3:2011, “Facility management—part 3: guidance on quality in facility management”
EN 115221-4: 2011, “Facility management—part 4: taxonomy, classification and structures in facility management”
EN 15221-7: 2012, “Facility management—part 7: guidelines for performance benchmarking”
ISO 10014:2006, “Quality management—guidelines for realizing financial and economic benefits”
EN ISO 9000:2005, “Quality management systems—fundamentals and vocabulary”
EN 15341:2007, “Maintenance key performance indicators”
Websites
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Talamo, C. (2016). Knowledge Management for Facility Management (FM) Services: a Rising Demand Within a Growing Market. In: Knowledge Management and Information Tools for Building Maintenance and Facility Management. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-23959-0_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-23959-0_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-23957-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-23959-0
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)