FMLink Outsourcing Survey
January 7, 2002There has been a definite trend toward more outsourcing in recent
years. The facilities management functions being outsourced are not only increasing, but
the survey shows that they vary from company to company, as do the reasons for
outsourcing.
The survey uncovered that the amount of time spent to manage outsourced contracts was
not insignificant, and that this time varied quite a bit depending on the function being
outsourced. Realized cost savings also varied depending on the outsourced function.
The results presented below are based on a survey run in May and June of 2001 from the
FMLink Web site. Two hundred two FMLink subscribers responded. The survey was mostly
multiple choice; some questions asked for rank ordering, and others asked respondents to
provide a numeric response. All respondents were able to add comments to the questions.
Summary of Findings
There is a trend not only toward a higher number of FMs outsourcing, but also the
number of functions being outsourced. Eight different FM functions now are each being
outsourced by at least 45% of the respondents, and some by as many as 72%; the
leadersCustodial and Housekeeping, Design and Architecture, and Landscape
Maintenance. Just over one third of the respondents said that within two years, they
expect to be outsourcing even more, with the largest increase expected in the area of
Preventive Maintenance.
Most respondents are outsourcing either for Cost Savings or because of the need of a
special Skill, Service or Equipment that is not available in-house. The primary reason for
not outsourcing was the existence of In-House Staff for that function. One quarter of the
respondents have brought an outsourced function back in-house, usually either because of
Cost or Service Quality.
A fair amount of time was required to manage the outsourced contracts (at least 13
hours per month for each function, and as many as 44 hours for some functions). Most time
was required for Engineering, Preventive Maintenance, and Design and Architecture.
Cost savings were seen more for Custodial and Housekeeping than for other FM functions.
A distant second was Landscape Maintenance.
By far, the most difficult aspect of outsourcing was Contractor Selection.
FMLink also surveyed respondents to see if there were major differences in the findings
for those who managed mission critical facilities (facilities that must be fully
operational at all times). Most functions were outsourced slightly less for mission
critical facilities than for regular facilities; the relative order of the outsourced
functions remained the same, with the exceptions of Security (more outsourcing for mission
critical facilities) and Landscape Maintenance and Major Moves (both much less
outsourcing).
Most respondents did not perceive any major differences between managing mission
critical facilities and regular ones. The trend toward less outsourcing for mission
critical facilities appears to relate to the two largest problems cited by respondents in
outsourcing mission critical facilities: inadequate contractor response time and the
difficulty in training contractors to get up to speed with the clients procedures.
Respondent Profile
Company industries. No one group dominated the respondents. The largest groups
represented industrial/manufacturing (15%) and financial services (13%), followed by
education (9%), government (7%) and medical (7%). An additional 45% came from office
buildings whose companies represented a variety of industries not included above.
Square feet managed. Forty percent of the respondents managed between 100,000 and
one million square feet; sixteen percent managed between one and four million square feet;
and eight percent managed over four million square feet.
Operating budget. The total FM annual operating budget broke down as follows (all
numbers in US dollars):
| FM Annual Operating Budget |
|
|
19% |
|
|
24% |
|
|
19% |
- $4 million - <$10 million
|
17% |
|
|
21% |
At the present time, the average percentage of the annual FM operating budget spent on
outsourcing is 38%; two years ago, for the same respondents, it was 32%.
Types of facilities managed. Forty-two percent of the space managed was leased,
with the rest owned. There were an average number of 41 facilities managed by each
respondent. Slightly over half the respondents (56%) managed facilities in a single
metropolitan area.
Countries. Seventy-five percent of the respondents were from the USA, ten percent
from the UK, and six percent from Canada.
Functions Being Outsourced
There was very little difference between which functions were outsourced in owned
versus leased facilities. The results are combined here (the numbers will add up to be
greater than 100% since many companies outsource more than one function):
| Percent of respondents outsourcing FM functions: |
- Custodial and Housekeeping
|
72% |
|
|
65% |
|
|
63% |
|
|
54% |
|
|
51% |
|
|
50% |
|
|
46% |
|
|
45% |
- All others were less than 12% each
|
|
Expected changes to outsourced functions over next two years. Thirty-six (36%) percent
of the respondents said that within two years, they likely would be outsourcing at least
one additional function that they are not outsourcing at present. For this group, the most
mentioned function was Preventive Maintenance (40%), followed by several between 25% - 30%
each (Engineering, Design and Architecture, Utilities Maintenance, Landscape Maintenance,
and Major Moves).
Outsourced functions least likely to be brought back in-house. The three least
likely services to be brought back in-house are the same as the three most popular:
Custodial and Housekeeping, Design and Architecture, and Landscape Maintenance.
Outsourced functions most likely to be brought back in-house. Only 24% of the
respondents said they either have already brought back in-house a service that had been
outsourced, or would be doing so. None of the services stood out as one that was most
likely (none were greater than 7% of the total respondents). When asked why previously
outsourced services were brought back in-house, the two largest reasons by far were Cost
and Service Quality; other choices included Oversight and Control, Response Time,
and Time Savings.
Reasons for Outsourcing
The two most important reasons stated for outsourcing were Cost Savings and the Need
for Special Skills, Services or Tools/Equipment. Mentioned by significantly less
respondents was In-House Staff Reduction. None of the other reasons listed registered a
significant score: Customer Service, Legal Issues, Quality Improvement, Time Savings.
Contractor selection process. The most influential source for contractor selection
was Competitive Procurement. This was followed by Prior Experience with the
Contractor, and then Referrals. No other reasons were significant, including
advertisements, trade show exhibits, consultants and associations.
Reasons for not outsourcing. The only reason listed by a significant number of
respondents for not outsourcing a function was the presence of an in-house workforce. None
of the other choices (including "Other") were listed by more than 5% of the
respondents.
Once the Outsourced Contractor Is Onboard ...
Evaluating the contractors performance. The most important way to evaluate
the contractors performance was through direct oversight by the in-house FM staff.
Three other reasons were listed as secondary: regular meetings with the contractor, staff
surveys and/or customer complaint files, and performance-based measures.
Time spent managing the contract. The time taken by in-house staff to manage
outsourcing contracts is not insignificant, ranging from 13 to 44 hours per month,
depending on the type of function being outsourced:
| In-house staff hours spent managing
outsourced contracts (per month): |
|
|
44 hrs. |
|
|
43 hrs. |
|
|
42 hrs. |
|
|
31 hrs. |
- Custodial and Housekeeping
|
29 hrs. |
|
|
25 hrs. |
|
|
23 hrs. |
|
|
17 hrs. |
|
|
13 hrs. |
Cost savings from outsourcing. Most cost savings from outsourcing (when compared to
using in-house staff) were in the areas of Custodial and Housekeeping (52% of the
respondents) and Landscape Maintenance (34%).
| Percent of respondents claiming savings from
outsourcing FM functions: |
- Custodial and Housekeeping
|
52% |
|
|
34% |
|
|
27% |
|
|
25% |
|
|
24% |
|
|
18% |
|
|
16% |
|
|
14% |
Each respondent was asked to list up to three functions for most cost savings.
Most difficult aspect of outsourcing. Thirty-nine percent (39%) of the respondents
said that the most difficult aspect of outsourcing was selecting the right contractor.
This was followed by managing the contractor (17%) and writing the proposal to select the
contractor (13%). All other aspects were less than 8% each.
Outsourcing Mission Critical Facilities
FMLink was interested in seeing what was unique about mission critical facilities, in
terms of whether and how their FM functions are being outsourced. Several questions
focused on these types of facilities. "Mission critical" was defined to the
respondents as facilities that must be fully operational at all times.
Quantity of mission critical facilities. Respondents stated that 53% of their
facilities of their facilities were considered mission critical.
Types of mission critical facilities. Sixty-six percent of the respondents have
Communication Centers, followed by 62% with Data Centers. Next most prevalent were
Operations Centers (40%) and Call Centers (33%). No other single type was mentioned by
more than 8% of the respondents.
Types of mission critical facilities outsourced. Forty-eight percent of the
respondents outsource at least one of their mission critical facilities. Forty-three
percent of those with Call Centers outsourced at least one FM function; others were Data
Centers (39%), Operations Centers (32%), and Communications Centers (27%).
Functions outsourced in mission critical facilities. When asked which functions are
outsourced in mission critical facilities, respondents reported most frequently
outsourcing Custodial and Housekeeping (64%).
| Functions outsourced in mission critical
facilities: |
- Custodial and Housekeeping
|
64% |
|
|
54% |
|
|
51% |
|
|
46% |
|
|
44% |
|
|
42% |
|
|
41% |
|
|
35% |
Differences in outsourcing between mission critical and regular facilities. No
single difference stood out between managing the two types of facilities (from an
outsourcing perspective). Forty-one percent (41%) said that there were no differences at
all. The remainder were fairly evenly split, citing differences in either: the types of
functions outsourced; contractor selection criteria; and contract oversight. The two
largest problems cited by respondents in outsourcing mission critical facilities were
inadequate contractor response time and the difficulty in training contractors to get up
to speed with the clients procedures.
====================
The survey was co-sponsored by FMLink (www.fmlink.com) and Encompass Global
Technologies (www.encompass.com).