The long-term impact of short-term decisions in FM
Some of the most important decisions in FM are not tested until much later. Mike Bentman, Chief Operating Officer, shares his perspective on how those early choices play out once services are in place.
Mike Bentman
Chief Operating Officer
In facilities management, cost is often the starting point for decision making. It is visible, measurable and under constant scrutiny, particularly during procurement.
But decisions made to reduce cost in the short-term do not stay in the short-term. They shape how services perform over the life of the contract, often in ways that are only felt once delivery is underway.
Cost in FM is shaped by how services are designed and delivered. It reflects decisions around engineering coverage, planned maintenance, use of technology and investment in people. These choices are not always fully visible at the point of procurement, but they have a direct impact on outcomes once delivery begins.
In practice, short-term cost decisions tend to show up in familiar ways. Planned maintenance is often reduced which increases reliance on reactive work. This has an unintended consequence of suppliers ‘resourcing up’ for a contract, which can stretch engineering resource, affecting response times and consistency, especially with increased reactive work order volumes, a common symptom with aging assets
Investment in training and development may also be limited (as there’s not enough margin in a contract to allow suppliers to invest to a sufficient level), despite a well-documented skills gap, and with less data available, it becomes harder to understand performance or identify issues early.
Individually, these may seem manageable, but over time they combine to create a model that is harder to control. Asset performance and reliability declines as planned maintenance is leaner; compliance tasks become the main focus – rather than the sustainability of the estate – and internal teams are pulled into managing issues rather than improving performance. Costs, while initially lower, become less predictable.
This is where a longer-term view of delivery becomes important. Many of these challenges are made harder when services are managed in isolation, with multiple providers, different standards and limited shared visibility.
An integrated FM model brings services together under a single approach, creating clearer accountability, reducing duplication and enabling a consistent, coordinated approach of responding to issues, as well as managing client asset risks appropriately.
Over time, that consistency also drives efficiency – issues are identified earlier, work is planned more effectively, and knowledge is shared across service lines. It becomes easier to manage performance across the whole estate, rather than viewing each service in isolation.
A longer-term approach also depends on people. It requires consistent engineering coverage, clear accountability for delivery and continued investment in people and skills. When teams are supported to build capability over-time, they develop a deeper understanding of the estate they are working on.
That familiarity matters, engineers who know a site, its assets and its history are better placed to identify patterns, prevent issues and respond more effectively when something does go wrong. It also creates stronger relationships, where there is a shared focus on maintaining standards and improving performance.
This matters more now than ever. Estates are becoming more complex, expectations around compliance and performance are increasing, and the demand for skilled engineers continues to outpace supply. In that environment, short-term models can struggle to keep up.
A longer-term, integrated approach provides greater control. It supports more consistent delivery, more predictable performance and a clearer view of what is happening across the estate.
The decision is not simply what a contract costs at the point of award. It is how short-term decisions will shape performance over the life of the contract.
