19 January 2012
Give me a spreadsheet and my eyes light up.
That’s just the way it is and I’m not apologising for it. However, I realise that my nerdery has to be counterbalanced by other aspects of my personality. The trouble is that the stereotypical numbers person is also the shy and retiring type. I can think of any number of cartoon caricatures in which the big businessman is portrayed as the large man with the cigar, while those working on the numbers are smaller, bespectacled people fawning at his side and armed with calculators and notebooks. So could the problem be that our natural propensity for numbers is working against us? Can FMs be reticent to push their arguments forcefully enough?
Let’s take a typical example. You’re tasked with specifying boilers for a building that you’ll be occupying once it’s built. “Thanks for asking” is your first thought before you scuttle off to research the kit. And guess what – you find a particularly cheap brand of boiler that will last five years between replacements and a more expensive boiler that will last 10. (Forget the actual service life of a typical boiler, I’m just using this example to illustrate the classic ‘cheap v not-so-cheap’ argument – work with me here.)
One option involves less capital expenditure up front, but more over a 10 year period, while the other would mean more cap-ex up front BUT: a reduced requirement for maintenance; less of a requirement for labour to install the units; a much stronger sustainability case for the business; reduced operational risk; an association of the business with better brand suppliers… I could go on.
So when it comes to signing off on the cost of the project, which option wins? All too frequently it’s option A – for absolutely no other reason than the cheaper cap-ex. In many cases this is, quite frankly, a ridiculous argument and one for which it should be easy to put the alternative case. Aside from a few exceptional situations, option B is so blindingly obvious in its virtue that the ‘cheaper’ alternative is something to be laughed at, derided even. And yet, well, we know what tends to happen.
FMs have a powerful asset management remit with access to a huge amount of data to support their arguments. Why isn’t this strong position recognised? Could it simply come down to a lack of confidence in the numbers involved? Are we too frequently worried about presenting our case and seeing the numbers fail to add up? Because honestly, they usually will.
I’m not suggesting that putting the argument for greater up-front cap-ex is an easy gig, particularly in the current economic environment. Nevertheless, it could actually be enjoyable because, frankly, it’s so compelling. Winning’s a nice feeling and it’s difficult not to win this argument. Even if you lose, you’ll have plenty of “I told you so” potential.
Martin Read is managing editor of FM World
Other news for Thursday, 19 January 2012
Emprise still on stage at the National
Mitie makes bid for prison management
JLL in driving seat for Volvo real estate
SFT issues food guidelines for pre-schoolers
Contracts round-up
FM World blog: Number crunch with confidence
Comment on this blog
website
website