IFM Service Models in Facilities Management Market Intelligence

Download Sample Report

2,800+

Viewed by

4.5

Ratings

50+

Countries Tracked

200+

Suppliers Covered

50

Clients Served

USD 100 Mn

Savings Generated

IFM Service Models in Facilities Management Category Intelligence

Report Coverage

Supply Landscape – Global IFM Suppliers Service Delivery Model
Self Delivery IFM Pros and Cons

Market Size

Market Size North America

$206.7 Bn

Market Size Europe

$225.72 Bn

Market Size Asia Pacific

$189.81 Bn

Market Size Middle East - Asia

$39.3 Bn

IFM Service Models in Facilities Management Market Trends

Category Intelligence on IFM Service Models in Facilities Management covers the following

Information relating to market, supply, cost, and pricing analysis
Hard to find data on cost and TCO models, supplier details, and performance benchmarks
Macroeconomic and regional trends impacting cost, supply, and other market dynamics
Category-specific negotiation and sourcing advice

Table of contents

IFM Service Models Executive Summary
Executive Summary

IFM Service Models IFM Delivery Models
Integrated Facilities Management (IFM)
Subcontracted IFM
Self-delivery IFM
Global Suppliers Service Delivery

Want a more detailed personalised report?

Industry Outlook & Drivers

Global Market Outlook On IFM Service Models

Integrated services outsourcing (all hard and soft services) can be carried out in a particular geography so that client can induct itself with managing large contracts with a single supplier before implementing a global IFM model
Less number of supplier contacts and less overhead in administration of service providers compared to bundled sourcing
More mature IFM markets (like UK or USA) can be chosen to implement this model initially and then replicated across other regions with comparatively less maturity
Separate contracts should be signed with different/same IFM service providers for each region
In case a service provider is not located in a country of client's presence, the service provider would sub-contract services to a local player, whose credibility should be examined

Sub-contracted IFM

The IFM service provider outsources the operational service delivery to multiple service providers but is responsible for the integrated service delivery of these service providers
IFM service provider fully focusses on the tactically/strategically management of the sub-contractors and empowers them to deliver these operational services
The IFM service provider is independent of the FM service supply chain and as such consult and engage with the client organization to ensure the best in class service provider mix

Pros

IFM service provider is integrally responsible for the performance/delivery by individual service providers
The client has some influence on choice of individual service providers
Potential to contract a single IFM service provider globally, for all sites and for all services
Independence in the supply chain for the IFM supplier, which helps the supplier to extract better performance on the operational side
More strategic focus from IFM service provider is possible
Only a limited strategic FM capability required in-house (lower overhead cost) for the buyer

Cons

Subcontractors charge a margin to the service provider, which is eventually passed onto the buyer
Cross over on management and administration between IFM and sub-contractors
Integration of service delivery at risk for the buyer, due to multiple single service providers being contracted individually
Less operational focus of IFM service provider
Specific arrangements to be considered in relation to transfer of staff between client, IFM and individual service providers

Self-delivery IFM

Self-delivery IFM differentiates from the subcontracted IFM model by delivering the operational services themselves
The IFM provider is thus less dependent from individual service providers and can directly manage operational processes and delivery
Integration of service delivery should be easier and improved by the creation of multifunctional teams and empowering to manage multiple processes and service areas
This model is similar to the IFM subcontracting model as far as the tactically/strategically management focus goes
Main risk of this sourcing model is the so called “vendor lock in”: it's difficult to transfer the IFM service contractor as all operational services have to be transferred to another IFM contractor

Complimentary 12-month access to Beroe LiVE

Any more questions?

Get in touch with us quickly and easily.

x

COVID-19: Assess impact on your suppliers and ensure business continuity with Beroe’s WIRE
(World Instant Risk Exposure)

© Copyright © 2021 Beroe. All rights reserved.

Privacy Policy|