June 2019

Can you perform?

Let’s say you’re getting ready to put your house on the market, and your real estate agent reminds you’ll get the best price if the house is spotlessly clean and orderly.  Sure – make’s sense.

When you bring in the cleaning company, how do you want to define the work effort?

• Option 1:  You tell them to have one person work for a ½ hour in each bathroom, 2 hours in the kitchen, 45 minutes in each bedroom, 1-½ hours in the living room, and maybe a little effort in the basement.  For this, you want a price.

• Option 2:  You make it clear that the house has to be ready for resale – no dust, shiny floors, clean carpets, no smudges on the walls, and all surfaces gleaming.  You don’t know how long this will take.  But, just like before, you want a price.

• Option 1 – Task-based – sets the work effort as the basis for price.

• Option 2 – Performance-based – sets results as the basis for price.

As a facilities management consultant, I will rarely recommend to clients that they solicit services or set internal work procedures with timing and frequency as the sole basis for definition.  Results should govern.

Results-driven, Performance-Based, Criteria

The organization formerly known as the Association of Physical Plant Administrators now goes by the simple acronym APPA.  Long ago, they figured this out, and developed a hierarchy of “levels” for buildings & grounds maintenance and building cleanliness.

For example, here’s what APPA requires for Level 1 Cleanliness:

Level 1 – Orderly Spotlessness

• Floors and base moldings shine and/or are bright and clean; colors are fresh.  There is no buildup in corners or along walls.

• All vertical and horizontal surfaces have a freshly cleaned or polished appearance and have no accumulation of dust, dirt, marks, streaks, smudges, or fingerprints.  Lights all work and fixtures are clean.

• Washrooms and shower fixtures and tile gleam and are odor free.  Supplies are adequate.

• Trash containers and pencil sharpeners hold only daily waste, are clean and odor-free.

While it’s been some time since I have seen pencil sharpeners in a classroom, the rest seems pretty understandable.  All of the other criteria for the various levels are equally comprehensible. 

For in-house operators, these guidelines establish expectations.  However, APPA Levels alone still need some tweaking, since some activities may need frequencies established.
For example:

• Regulations require annual elevator, fire, and life safety inspections.

• Executive suite waste receptacles may have to be emptied daily regardless of how much trash is there.

• Exterior windows on a high-rise may be cleaned every two years (or not).

• Decorative flowers may be planted quarterly. 

Buyers’ Advantage
For property owners and organizations that buy their facilities maintenance services from service providers, performance-based procurement has many advantages.

• Many operational decisions are transferred to the service provider, including
  • Staffing levels
  • Frequencies of routine activities
  • Tool and equipment choices
  • Cleaning methods
  • Consumable choices
  • Training requirements

• With performance-based contracts and lump sum pricing, annual budgets are largely pre-set and predictable.

• With periodic inspections and reporting, compliance with results can be monitored.

For owners, there’s a contractual advantage compared to task-based agreements, when satisfaction is lacking.  For example, it’s not uncommon for service providers that are meeting task criteria to seek compensation for increased frequencies or additional activities when owners are displeased with the quality of completed work.  That option is unavailable when performance in the service providers responsibility.

For service providers, work with performance-based contracts represents a transformative experience from any prior involvement with task-based contracts.  Some say that delivery of task-based services is akin to selling commodities.  That is admittedly not exactly true, since competence must be maintained.

On the other hand, a seller of performance-based services clearly has the opportunity to market and showcase the professionalism of the organization.

The delivery of performance-based services undoubtedly requires more knowledge, planning, and acceptance of risk.  However, there is much more opportunity for creativity and experimentation – even for improvements to the bottom line of service provider profit margins.

It’s not just about cleaning

Back to APPA.  As mentioned, the organization has criteria for three categories of work:

• Cleanliness – for custodial and housekeeping services
• Maintenance – for building components and system maintenance
• Grounds – for outdoor landscape and hardscape maintenance

While I may take issue with the Grounds Maintenance requirements tending toward a task-based approach, there is no doubt the overall trend is away from that criteria.

It’s all measurable

Contract documents for performance-based services can mandate periodic reporting of results.  Additionally, there are many consultants and inspectors capable of measuring and reporting service provider outcomes.  Sometimes discussions are required to reach agreement on methodology.  But, no doubt, performance is measurable.

Bottom Line

When you can, tell people what you need.  Avoid telling them how to do their job.

Missed earlier newsletters? Find them here:

February 2019  “Today's Word”
October 2018  “The Case for DIversity-Architect's Version”
June 2018  “A Capital Idea”
March 2018  “Me Too?”
January 2018  “R U Trending?”
October 2017  “Do You Measure Up?”
August 2017  “I'm an Architect and I'm Here to Help”
January 2017  “The Future of Higher Education”
November 2016  “The Owner as CM?”
August 2016  “Don't you just hate...”
June 2016  “Duck Testing”
April 2016  “Once Upon a Time...”
January 2016  “I want to take you higher”
November 2015  “Moderating in all Things?”
July 2015  “Alphabet City”
May 2015  “Acey Trey Trey Trey?”
January 2015  “Nature or Nurture?”
August 2014  “Acey Trey Trey?”
June 2014  “The Seven Deadly Sins”
March 2014  “Thar She Blows!”
November 2013  “Giving Thanks”
September 2013  “Back to School?”
June 2013  “What Time is It?”
March 2013  “Acey Deucey?”
January 2013  “A Swamp Full of Alligators”
October 2012  “Plan to Live Forever, Part Deux”
July 2012  “A Midsummer Dream”
May 2012  “Are you Virtually Working?”
March 2012  “Your Huddled Masses”
January 2012  “Observing Observations”
October 2011  “I Want What I Want”
August 2011  “A Beach Read”
May 2011  “NeoLuddite or Technophile?”
March 2011  “Do Your Silos Leak?”
January 2011  “Plan to Live Forever!”
November 2010  “May I Have A Plan, Master?”
September 2010  “How do we choose?”
July 2010  “Good People Behaving Badly”
May 2010  “LEED: LEADing or Dead Weight?”
March 2010  “Why does it cost so much?”
January 2010 “Design/Builders show us your softer side.”
November 2009 “What the Facilities?”
September 2009 “Why Do Architects Make Good Owner’s Reps?”