Total business and facilities management: implementing a holistic and dynamic self-re-enforcing framework for business certainty, continuity and growth

Citation

Pitt, M. (2005), "Total business and facilities management: implementing a holistic and dynamic self-re-enforcing framework for business certainty, continuity and growth", Property Management, Vol. 23 No. 1. https://doi.org/10.1108/pm.2005.11323aaa.001

Total business and facilities management: implementing a holistic and dynamic self-re-enforcing framework for business certainty, continuity and growth

Introducing total business and facilities management

This ongoing work breaks new ground as it seeks to merge the facilities management (FM) role with central business strategy, not through a blurring of the edges or through some common linkage, but through innovative procedural design and an intention to put the redefined FM role alongside physical space as one of the necessary factors of production. A dynamic theory of total FM strategy which involves FM in much of the business that was previously seen as separate and core is suggested. The theory merges the core and non-core, soft and hard operations and processes. It defines an exciting new direction for FM, making it an inclusive business enabling discipline. It re-aligns FM as a tool of business management in a holistic sense, moving away from the traditional building focus towards a theory of total business and facilities management (TBFM).

A framework for business

Although knowledge management has long been a discipline in its own right, its linkage to business continuity planning and its centrality to the FM role is only just being recognised. Similarly, continuity planning is often focused upon information technology (IT) or hard FM service operations such as critical maintenance functions, with the number of firms having simple continuity plans having remained fairly stable for the last few years (Pitt and Goyal, 2004). Building principally on existing work in the fields of knowledge management, business management and facilities management this editorial introduces a new self re-enforcing framework for total business operation.

The framework moves the agenda forward by taking a holistic view of organisational, operational and continuity planning, encompassing both strategic FM and strategic business management. It takes the FM role to the core of business operations, enabling the FM role to take the lead in enabling the business process whilst remaining essentially subservient to the core business through the adaptive and responsive nature of its design. More importantly, the system is not merely responsive to the needs of the business but will lead the business forward through the greater efficiencies which will occur both naturally through evolution and pro-actively through innovation.

The new theory and framework do not just move FM into peripheral areas that have long been taken into consideration. They move it forwards into the core business, questioning whether supply chain management (for example) and other operations and procedures cannot simply be handled as part of the TBFM role. Providing that the framework has been properly delivered its flexibility will ensure that the dynamics necessary for a business to respond to change in a competitive environment are present. Change management after all is a core FM skill.

Empowering innovation: the new FM role

The limits to business innovation have been found to be set by not just the level of research and development (R&D), but also such things as R&D productivity and policy choices such as IP protection and the condition of the knowledge stock within a country (Furman et al., 2002). The framework therefore allows for R&D as a separate function enabling the system to continually check itself and evolve and innovate. This innovation is the new core FM role.

TBFM

FM has long supported the organisational core role. The framework moves the FM agenda forward by creating a dynamic framework for all business operations. The FM role becomes a “carrier” of the core business rather than simply a supporting factor. The FM role can be seen as the framework in which business operations occur which together with the physical space of the business process creates the “vessel” in which the business can operate in a reduced risk environment. Bespoke system design enables the application of this innovative approach to many different industries and the dynamic design of the processes within the framework enables the natural business evolution to be managed effectively.

It is helpful to look at the majority of the soft FM operations as being represented by a “knowledge engine” functioning within the buildings (Siemieniuch and Sinclair, 2004). It is in moving this concept forward and linking it with existing knowledge within what is regarded as the traditional FM role that the holistic approach to TBFM begins to emerge. To some extent the work could be viewed as taking the private finance initiative (PFI) in its provision of the total physical, essentially hard, facilities to its logical next stage. By identifying generic traits within organisational behaviour, the application of soft FM services to the broad PFI process probably best describes the work in simple terms. The framework does not require any of the component parts needed for a successful PFI in order to be viable. It would be just as successful in a PFI project or in a totally private initiative. In essence this framework refocuses the traditional approach of grafting space and FM services onto the core business and suggests that rather the core business can be provided with an (albeit possibly bespoke) almost “off the shelf” business environment in which to function. It simplifies the business process through relieving many of the burdens on entrepreneurs.

Design function efficiencies

In the design and build process under PFI the long term costs of running the premises (the FM role) is driven down as it is given a greater priority by the contractor. By expanding the FM role to include some areas that are traditionally excluded from even the most recent PFI bids, greater savings are available to the service provider/contractor/building operator and would be attributable to the new TBFM approach. Where a TBFM approach is adopted in an existing working environment certain organisational procedures and behaviours may need to be modified. The expectation is that these changes would themselves result in increased efficiency. The creation or maintenance of pressures that drive efficiency forward are the key to the success of the framework when implemented.

Providing continuity

The framework will produce management that will both protect the FM role and the core business that it supports. The framework is self-reinforcing and independent of potential internal and external impacts on the FM role or the core business. It must therefore be dynamic in its flexibility both to prevent core business damage at time of impact and to enable FM role and core growth during normal business operations. It must not in any way act as a barrier to the continued or potential success of the core business. It must be strategically enabling and not operationally or strategically disabling.

Specific focus within the framework

The following are some of the areas which are being given particular focus within the ongoing study:

1. 1.

   Knowledge management. As knowledge is not synonymous with information, IT alone cannot deliver knowledge management (Chinying Lang, 2001). The type and nature of knowledge owned or held will be the main driving factor in its management with the lifecycle of knowledge and its nature will also be of significant importance to the way in which it is managed. Contrary to Birkinshaw and Sheehan (2002), it is evident that companies can remain active in all of the knowledge lifecycle stages where appropriate management tools are used. In fact many of the world’s largest organisations use differing strategies to ensure their success in this area. Knowledge can be of a sensitive or non-sensitive nature and therefore strategic knowledge management needs to be separated from common knowledge, staff knowledge, copyright issues and departmental/corporate knowledge management. The focus must remain on protecting technological, organisational and network knowledge that the organisation requires to secure its future (Siemieniuch and Sinclair, 2004).

   The knowledge management area is closely linked to human resources management and it is possible for an organisation to fully exploit the synergetic properties of its non-tangible assets. Confidentiality is critical. This enabling, that must be promoted within a protective framework itself, means that physical office space may become less of a critical factor. The organisation must begin to function in autonomy, in isolation of the individuals that currently “control” it. In order to do this it must systematically manage the innovation chain through transference of information, data and knowledge (Perez-Bustamante, 1999).

2. 2.

   Human resource management. Human resource management is one of the keys to the success of TBFM. TBFM does not abolish human resource management but simply brings it into the framework and makes it another function within the revised role. The inter-relationship of human resources, knowledge management and the generic and core business processes were the focus of the initial investigation. The framework resolves the issues of knowledge as they impinge on the problem of natural staff turnover and losses of key staff. It necessarily looks at the functions performed and the knowledge applicable to that position in order to ascertain the protection required for any critical function. It raises the question of the role of the individual and of the team.

3. 3.

   Innovation in management structure. Within most business organisations the management structure controls the business and oversees knowledge and information processing. These roles are often seen as critical but separate, which can create management problems. Responsibility for other perceived non-critical roles may be taken on but treated and managed independently of the core business operations. TBFM suggests that this situation can be changed under restricted and controlled conditions set down within the operational framework. Each function and process and its inter-related nature is mapped and planned and backed up within the framework for management.

   When a group of staff or an influential or senior staff member leaves, the management structure often collapses. Under TBFM each function is considered individually and has multiple backups and redundancies that enable the business to continue to function normally. Moreover, the system will systematically review such non-emergency changes to enquire as to efficiencies that might be obtained through some following course of action other than a like for like replacement. This is part of the dynamic nature of TBFM. The new management structure must therefore be essentially independent of the negative impacts of human resources if business continuity is to be assured. The structure must permit for continuity of the TBFM role and the core business process in non-emergency situations such as the staff loss situation. Individual staff always remain subservient to the system which itself serves only the core business. The core business has, however, been redefined within TBFM. It is self regulating and self perpetuating.

   TBFM itself will be self-innovating, creating incentives for change and creating the environment for change management to occur as an ongoing process. The framework also takes account of information processing, organisational structural issues, sharing, alliances, new products and new and innovative ways of working where these occur within or external to the subject business.

TBFM is a new management tool being researched and tested at Heriot-Watt University with industrial partners. Its main significances are that it puts innovation at the core of FM operations and raises the level of FM operations generally through influence in the core business operations.

Michael PittHeriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, UK