The Way We Do Things Around Here

In the search to find FM's value-add elements, Facilities Managers are often keen to talk about the extent to which FM can support the culture of an organisation. One frequently overlooked part of that discussion is the way that a skilled Facilities Manager can actually use the reach and influence of FM to drive cultural change.

For the uninitiated, the thing we refer to as “organisational culture” is a shared set of values and principles which tend to guide or influence the way in which the people within a particular organisation behave. You can think of it as being “the way we do things around here” and it varies a lot from one organisation to the next. 

 

 

Organisational culture is neither positive or negative though most organisations will have a culture that has some traits that they consider desirable and some that they do not. Some of these will be driven by the leadership style of the senior management (dynamic, hierarchical, by-the-book), others by the age, size and type of organisation (entrepreneurial, bureaucratic, risk-averse) and others still by the people within it (diverse, sociable, creative). There are numerous influencing factors and numerous possible combinations.

Aspiring to succeed

So why does everyone bang on about getting the right culture anyway? Quite simply; it's an economical way of getting more out of a finite resource. Or to put it another way; in tough economic times, it's far better to have a culture where people feel like work is a place they feel happy, a place they want to come to and something they want to do, rather than something they don't enjoy, somewhere they have to go and something they have to do.

But culture is more than just instilling a desire to work more productively: many organisations are switching on to the fact that they can achieve far greater success, by trying to develop their culture to contain more of the traits that make a positive contribution to their success and fewer of the ones with negative impact. For example, senior management might decide that the organisation might be more successful if staff felt more empowered in their work, or more connected to the success of the organisation; they might feel it is important that the organisation's customers see it as socially responsible or that potential new employees think of it as being cool. These are what we refer to as “cultural aspirations”.

The people who do things

Understanding that there is a difference between culture and cultural ambitions is key to understanding the way in which FM can influence cultural development. You see; the former is the way things are done around here, the latter is the way senior management would like things to be done. This is a really important distinction because “the way things get done around here” can be heavily influenced by the people that do those things and quite simply, FM generally does a lot of 'things'. The remit and influence of FM spans the entire organisation and it's activities touch on the working lives of every single person in the organisation: this gives a savvy Facilities Manager the opportunity to directly influence the way the culture develops through their choices and their team. Let me qualify that a little more: I'm not saying that the Facilities Manager has the power to make the organisation less bureaucratic, or more creative, but they do get to make simple choices such as shall I make more recycling facilities available, should we ask the catering team to hold some theme days or even, should I paint that wall orange instead of grey? These are little changes: they won't change the world overnight, but they will sow the seeds of an idea which has the potential to grow into a collectively shared principle or set of values. In other words: the culture.

 

 

At the heart of the matter

I’ve often argued that FM is the cultural heart of on organisation: and far more so than any other part. Organisational culture is something that develops around the water cooler. It develops in the tea-point, the break-out areas, around the reception desk and in the staff restaurant. These are the areas where the influence of FM is at its strongest.

In the organisational-family, it is the facilities people who are the matriarchs and patriarchs: they know everyone and everyone knows them. If there’s some kind of social or charitable event, you can bet they will be heavily involved.

Smart senior management, do understand the influence of FM and will try to gain the support of the Facilities Manger in propagating their cultural aspirations. Smart Facilities Managers, can use the influence of FM to gain credibility with senior management by supporting those cultural aspirations. Really smart Facilities Managers, can use the considerable influence of FM to align the direction of cultural development with their own values and vision: for example, increased sustainability, being socially responsible or providing a more service based approach.

The best things in life are free

It’s a commonly held assumption that changing an organisation’s culture is extremely difficult. In fact the reverse is true. Cultural changes are changes in attitudes, beliefs and behaviours. It costs nothing to change your beliefs, so in theory at least, cultural change is free. That's some very powerful added value.

Peeking Over Fences

Once upon-a-time Facilities Management was largely an in-house function, but the growth of the outsourcing market has led to an increasing number of facilities professionals following career paths that never lead them to acquire client-side experience.  As someone who has always worked client-side, when I meet a peer who has only ever worked on the supplier-side, I find they quite often want to ask me the same thing – what’s it like over on my side of the fence?  This blog is the result of one such request for information and gives my thoughts about what you might see if you were to peek over that fence.

I’m part of a minority in FM networking circles: I started off ‘in-house’ and despite making a number of career moves, somehow I’ve managed to stay there.  It’s been more by chance than by conscious design, though I have tended to express a preference towards in-house opportunities because I think they suit me fairly well.  In fact, I’d even go so far as to say that I’m something of an advocate for in-house FM.  But this blog is not about whether it is better on to be client-side or the supplier-side: this blog is about the differences that matter to an FM professional. And it started with an email. 

The email was from a respected industry peer. In contrast to me, their background is supplier-side, but they had an opportunity to interview for an exciting client-side role.  It was one of those too-good-to-resist opportunities with a very well known brand name and as they didn’t know much about how in-house FM worked, they thought it would be a good idea to reach out to their network and ask? They wanted to understand how things get done.  Things like; how in-house FMs deal with budgets, KPIs, planning, etc?  Who the stake-holders are and what interactions are expected, who ensures compliance, do we get audited, how do we support culture, how is success measured, etc?  These are all excellent and fundamental questions I replied and you should definitely ask them at the interview because I really can’t answer how they might do it.  I can tell you how my organisation does it, or how any of my previous organisations do it, but each of them do it differently.  You see the thing about in-house FM is that it can vary significantly.
At its core of course, in-house FM is interested in all the same things that outsourced FM is: the basic need to provide safe and comfortable work environments and the amenities that support the work activities taking place. Things like budgets, SLAs, risk management, legal-compliance, etc, all derive from this. But what is really different is the way in which business needs are determined, defined and met.  The outsourced FM industry is well established and as a result of learned best practices, good procurement principles and supplier convenience the basic framework of most outsourced contract arrangements are broadly similar.  Now that is not to say that there isn’t a great deal of variation in the way that outsourced FM is delivered, but just to say that a supplier-side FM moving from one contract or employer to another will generally feel like they are on familiar ground, because the framework behind the service set-up is broadly similar.

In-house FM is different.  It has more flavours than a well-stocked ice cream parlour.  An in-house FM moving to a new employer could well find themselves feeling like they’ve tumbled down the rabbit hole and ended up in wonderland: the basic needs are the same but there are no hard and fast rules about how they are met.

It all goes back to the basic agreement between client and supplier for the provision of services.  In an outsourced arrangement we refer to this as a contract, in an in-house provision we might generously call it a strategy, although it could just as easily be based upon the attitude of key players (including the FM), policies, financial organisation, organisational hierarchy, culture, history, attitude to risk or a multitude of other factors.   It’s an important difference: at the heart of the client/outsourced-supplier relationship, there is a (legally) binding agreement that defines the client’s needs, the required services, expected quality standards, the principles of measuring success, etc.  If these needs change, they get re-negotiated.  In an in-house arrangement, the agreement for the provision of services between client and the FM function is much less tangible. It might be documented, though partially documented or undocumented are equally, if not more likely.  But regardless of how well defined the agreement might be, the chances of it being binding are slim to none. This can be something of a double-edged sword: the existence of a contract can shield an outsourced-FM from the worst excesses of whimsicality and prevent goalposts from unexpectedly getting up and moving around the pitch, but absence of that very same binding agreement gives a canny in-house FM an inherent flexibility. An In-house FM can re-write policy, define new standards and bend, flex or even change the rules completely if they can exert sufficient influence on those that define needs, set standards or determine budgets. 

So what does this mean in practice?  Well take KPIs and SLAs as an example.  In an outsourced arrangement, performance measures and success criteria are usually defined by the contract.  The outsourced FM at least knows and understands the rules of the game and the rules cannot be changed without their agreement. The downside being that sometimes this can lead to slightly farcical situations, such continuing to report SLAs which have ceased to have relevance or carrying out unnecessary actions simply to serve the needs of an SLA or even being able to demonstrate success despite it being evidentially obvious that a service is failing.

Most In-house Facilities functions will also have an interest in SLAs and KPIs and may report on both internal and external ones.  However in-house FM is a lot more “personality-driven” and the rules around performance measures and success criteria (particularly the internal ones) may be much less clear.  They will often be based on what a senior executive deems to be of importance or interest and they can change as quickly as the weather during Wimbledon.  Half a dozen complaints could be enough to see a new KPI established and a change of personnel might completely change the landscape overnight.  In a personality-driven landscape, requirements can vary depending on the role of those further up the hierarchy: whilst it would be grossly over-generalising to say that a Finance director would only be interested in cost saving and a HR director in colour-schemes, it is obvious that the FM function would be influenced by the objectives and priorities of the role to which it reports.  Of course the great thing for an in-house FM is that personal influence cuts both ways:  An FM who is able to exert sufficient influence can make quite sweeping changes. 

Now although I’ve focussed my explanation on performance indicators and success criteria, the situation is very similar for most of the other areas my peer was asking about: budgets, interactions, standards, etc.  In general the big difference between in-house and outsource is that: the outsourced arrangement is inherently stable and is great for delivering a standard (which in many cases can be very high) and ensuring compliance.  Whilst in-house FM is inherently flexible, which provides potential opportunities for FMs to take a more direct role in needs definition, specification and method of delivery.  FM’s working in the outsource-sector usually have access to a level of support, resources, expertise and knowledge from within their own organisations that in-house FMs in all but the largest organisations would give their right arms for and are protected to a certain degree from flights of fancy and sudden changes of direction. But on the other an in-house FM is playing without binding rules (legal compliance aside) and the only real barriers to increasing funding, services or changing the culture are the extent to which the FM can exert their influence.  And FMs are excellent influencers. 

Future FMs: Are the signs already there?

One of the most hotly debated topics in the Facilities industry at the moment is the question of how we get young people to choose a career in FM. Well we could try answering that question about the future, by taking a closer look at the past. Specifically: our own pasts.

Here's another interesting question: what sort of young person would choose to work in FM?  It sounds tongue-in-cheek, but it’s a serious question. Whilst most FMs will freely admit they fell into the industry, as result of chance, luck, bad-karma, etc, at some point or another they all made the choice to stay. The first question: Why?  The second: With the benefit of hindsight, could we have predicted that they would? Were the signs there all along?

Should I stay or should I go (now)

I am an FM who chose to stay. In this blog I'm going to take you on a jouney into my deepest, darkest, past. Think of this as either as a journey of self-discovery, or if you prefer, an accident investigation.  Cue the wobbly screen effects.........

I'm turning back the clock to the early 1990’s.  Thatcher is still running the country, Rave music is on the rise and we are all about to discover that Robin Hood was actually an American.  Oh, and a scrawny fellow called Jason is starting his teens: the beard (and glasses) are a decade away. Ever safety conscious (even then), he uses enough hair product to make his head  impact-resistant.

As a kid I think I was (relatively) normal.  Well, I wasn’t (exceptionally) weird. I mean, I wasn't still hanging out with my imaginary friends at secondary school and I didn't sit around quietly pulling the wings off of butterflies. Outwardly at least, there seemed no sign that I was destined for a career in FM.  Actually, there was no real sign that I was heading in any particular direction at all.....  Maybe that was the first sign.

Lacks direction.......

If you’d asked the pre-beard Jason what he wants to do when he’s older, he’ll confidently tell you that he wants to work in an office.  He’s going to spend the rest of the decade figuring out that an office is a location, not a career. 

Looking back, I don’t think I wanted to work in an office, I just didn’t want to do manual work, education, healthcare, the forces, or any of the other options that seemed available.  Mind you, none of the traditional office careers appealed either. I didn’t mind accounting, sales, marketing, etc, I just don’t think I wanted to commit to one thing the rest of my life.  I guess somehow, I just had the feeling that, in the meritocracy of the commercial world, I’d figure it out somehow.  In a sense I did.

When he sets his mind to it........

Lack of direction probably wasn’t the only sign. I do know some people who describe me using the words “academic” and “intellectual” but scoot forward a handful of years to my GCSEs and I have the exam results to prove that I'm neither.

I took my GCSEs in 94 and my grades were straight across the middle of the spectrum (predominantly B's).  For years, my school reports had read “could try harder” and my exam results were no exception. But still, they were probably better than I deserved and many teachers expressed surprise at just how well I’d done, considering the effort I’d been putting in. These days I think of it as an early example of my possessing one of the most useful skills in an FM’s toolkit: the ability to pull a rabbit from a hat when it really matters. 

You see, when it came to exam time, I figured out that the things I would be tested on were actually all in the syllabus. I took the view that I wouldn’t worry too much about  the stuff I knew reasonably well, I’d focus on my areas of weakness and I’d pretty much disregard all non-syllabus stuff, so that it didn’t take up valuable short-term memory space.  I might not have worked hard in the run up to the exams, but my revision plan was actually pretty tightly focussed for rapid up-skilling in a short space of time.  It meant that, although I didn’t get the top results, in most cases I got at least one grade higher than predicted. Knowing how to prioritise limited resources in order to achieve a result is essential for an FM. 

Asks a lot of questions.....

Those who’ve only ever known me as an adult, where I’m renowned as a voracious seeker of knowledge, skills and qualifications, are often amazed to learn that I mostly found school boring.

At school, I couldn’t see how the things I learned would be of use to me. With hindsight, I think some of my teachers struggled to convey those practical uses to me.  It wasn’t because they didn’t understand it, it was just that they had never actually used their skills in anger, and lacking practical experience to fall back on, their teaching just seemed to lack depth. So when my teachers tried to impart their knowledge, I tended to probe and challenge it, to see how much they really knew.  I’m sure it was very irritating for some of them, although those who really knew their onions, never seemed to mind. 

This willingness to challenge an expert about their subject matter and put their knowledge to the test can be irritating in a teenager, but it can make adults extremely effective and I think schools should do more to encourage it.  As FMs we deal with experts all the time and we need to level the field, making sure that what they say actually makes sense and is not just an attempt to blind us with science is incredibly important.

Should focus on academic subjects.......

Another reason I found school a little boring, was the pressure applied on me to take academic subjects:  yes I could do them, but I would have probably found practical subjects far more engaging. 

As a boy growing up at a time when there were only three TV channels, I spent a great deal of time playing with Lego, putting together Airfix kits,  making tree-houses and generally doing practical things.  But a few years later, all my teachers saw was a child capable of achieving academic results. It was implied to me that if I could achieve academic results, practical subjects were in some way inferior.  It’s not a view I subscribe to at all.  I think my life might have turned out very differently indeed with a couple of decent results in Design & Technology related subjects.

That said, I never lost was my ability to use tools and generally do things of a practical nature as the staff at my local DIY store will attest.  I can safely say that, a willingness to get one’s hands dirty and an ability to handle a screwdriver the right way round, are also very useful FM skills to have.

What’s the story?

So what has this trip down memory lane taught me? It’s taught me that if we want to attract young people into FM, we could do worse than starting with those young people who might end up getting into it later in life anyway: Good all-rounders who know how to work smarter, rather than harder. The kind of young people who aren’t sure what they want to do, but who enjoy doing practical things and have the cionfidence to challenge their experts. Some of these young people, might well be the FMs of the future.

So........  Having given my story; my challenge to my FM colleagues out there, is to share theirs.  There’s a comment section below, please use it to tell me your story and let’s see if between us we can identify some of the FMs of tomorrow.

BIFM: Being In Facilities Management

Being responsible for managing facilities, is not the same as being a Facilities Management professional.   Most of us stumble into FM by accident: we display a little practical capability at a time when something practical needs doing.  And then we discover that actually, FM offers variation, challenge and lots of opportunities for job satisfaction.  Some of us think that these things would make a good basis for a career and we choose to develop our knowledge, skills and experience and become Facilities Management professionals. The BIFM (British Institute of Facilities Management) is here to help.

Recently, I've been extremely proud to have been invited to join the BIFM Home Counties Region Committee.  It's prompted me to write this blog about my experiences with the BIFM and why I jumped at the chance to get formally involved.

British Institute of Facilities Management

For those who don't know, the BIFM is the professional body for the Facilities Management Industry in the UK. It’s run by industry members, for the benefit of fellow professionals.
Whilst professional bodies are commonplace in many industries, there are few which I believe, can benefit their members as much as the BIFM. In this blog, I explain some of the thinking for this rather bold statement.

One is such a lonely number

FM can be a lonely business: often under-resourced and usually over-stretched.

As a general rule, FM teams are small, at least at the management level. In fact, many FMs work alone. Sometimes they'll have reporting staff, but when it comes to management, they stand by themselves. Organisationally, they report to Operations Managers, HR Managers, Finance Managers, etc, but it can be quite rare event to come across an FM who reports to someone who has served their time in the trenches too and intimately understands the challenges.

For FMs this can be a source of great frustration. We all need someone to "sound off" to once in a while: someone who understands that you can't make machines work by shouting at them and that you can’t buy a new AHU off-the-shelf at your local Argos store. This is where the BIFM comes in.

The BIFM holds regular events where you can meet other professionals, swap anecdotes, nod-knowingly at the tales of others and get a fresh perspective. Sometimes we need to know that it's not just us - that others are in the same boat.

Together we are greater than the sum of our parts

"FM offers such wonderful variation", I once told a colleague. That was the day I spent half the day talking about building a new office and the other half sniffing my way around the building to try and locate the source of a mysterious odour .  An extreme example perhaps (and no, I never did find it), but the point stands.  Facilities Management is a catch-all job, but what it entails can vary considerably from one organisation to the next. FMs constantly find themselves facing new situations and unforeseen challenges. In many jobs, if you don't know the answer or come across something new, the first person you ask is the boss, but if your boss is the Operations Director, it's probably no good asking them what the requirements for Legionella risk assessments are, or how frequently the AHU filters should be changed - you just have to find out. Again, the BIFM can help.

The Institute was set up to facilitate the sharing of knowledge. Members are actively encouraged to network and share information, knowledge and experiences with one another. As well as its own user forums, the BIFM has very active communities on Twitter (search #BIFM) and LinkedIn. These communities can help you answer questions, find suppliers and resources and give you advice or techniques on how to deal with challenges.

The BIFM also publishes lots of information on its web-site including news, articles and Good Practice Guides, and will keep you well informed with all that is happening in the world of FM with magazine and newsletter subscriptions.

Monkey see - Monkey do

The main way we learn is by seeing others doing. I'm a great believer that FM Professionals can learn all sorts of useful skills and techniques from others in their organisations, but ultimately the question is this: if your organisation doesn't have many (or any) other Facilities Managers, who does it have who can teach you what you need to know?  Facilities Mangers need role models and mentors outside of their organisation more than most people.  Whilst you can learn many useful communications and management skills in-house, you may have to look further afield to learn about space planning or lifecycle management.

One of the greatest benefits of the BIFM, is the regular CPD (Continued Professional Development) events. These events are usually local and take place during the week, after work. They are an opportunity not only to meet other professionals, but also to learn more about a particular topic. 

Over the past year I have attended events featuring presentations and workshops on a whole range of topics; from catering to alternative power generation, from interactive building systems to facilities strategy planning.  These events have expanded my personal network, taught me new skills and techniques and increased my industry knowledge. In many ways I would say they have quite literally, changed my life.
Get involved

So my advice to anyone looking to make the transition from managing facilities, to Facilities Management is to join the BIFM and get involved.

It may seem a daunting experience to go to your first event. You may imagine a room full of seasoned professionals with encyclopaedic knowledge and decades of experience.  Well some of those people will be there, but the vast majority of delegates will be people like you; people with a passion for FM, who want to share, learn, understand and teach.