CATEGORY

IFM Service Models in Facilities Management

Report covers aspects such as the best in class engagement models, pricing strategies, peer practices etc.

Beroe LiVE.Ai™

AI-powered self-service platform for all your sourcing decision needs across 1,600+ categories llike IFM Service Models in Facilities Management.

Market Data, Sourcing & Supplier Intelligence, and Price & Cost Benchmarking.

Schedule a Demo
Meet Abi

The World’s first Digital Market Analyst

    Schedule a Demo
    Meet Abi

    The World’s first Digital Market Analyst

    Abi, the AI-powered digital assistant brings together data, insights, and intelligence for faster answers to sourcing questions

    IFM Service Models in Facilities Management Suppliers


    IFM Service Models in Facilities Management Supplier

    Find the right-fit ifm service models in facilities management supplier for your specific business needs and filter by location, industry, category, revenue, certifications, and more on Beroe LiVE.Ai™.

    Sample Supplier
    Company
    CBRE GROUP INC.
    Location
    Jackson, Mississipi
    Duns number
    3862211

    D&B SER Rating

    dnb logo

    Up to 3 months

    1 9
    4
    Low Risk High Risk

    The Supplier Evaluation Risk (SER) Rating is Dun & Bradstreet’s proprietary scoring system used to assess the probability that a business will seek relief from creditors or cease operations within the next 12 months. SER ratings range from 1 to 9, with 9 indicating the highest risk of failure. We’ve prepared an infographic to help business owners better understand what influences their SER Rating.

    Moody`s ESG Solution
    ESG Profile

    Company and Sector Performance
    42

    100
    Limited (1)
    ESG Perfomance (/100)
    Environment
    41
    Social
    37
    Governance
    52
    6 Domains Performance (/100)
    Business behaviour
    44
    Human rights
    43
    Community Environment
    22
    Corporate governance
    57
    Human resources
    38
    Security Scorecard
    62

    Threat indicators
    C
    70
    Network Security
    Detecting insecure network settings
    A
    100
    Hacker Chatter
    Monitoring hacker sites for chatter about your company
    F
    37
    DNS Health
    Detecting DNS insecure configuration and vulnerabilities
    D
    68
    Application Security
    Detecting common website application vulnerbilities
    F
    48
    Endpoint Security
    Detecting unprotected enpoints or entry points of user tools, such as desktops, laptops mobile devices, and virtual desktops
    A
    100
    Cubic Score
    Proprietary algorithms checking for implementation of common security best practices
    B
    82
    Patching Cadence
    Out of date company assets which may contain vulnerabilities of risk
    A
    100
    Social Engineering
    Measuring company awareness to a social engineering or phising attack
    A
    93
    IP Reputation
    Detecting suspecious activity, such as malware or spam, within your company network
    A
    100
    Information Leak
    Potentially confidential company information which may have been inadvertently leaked

    Industry Comparison
    cbre.us
    Industry average
    Adverse Media Appearances
    Environmental Issues
    0
    Workforce Health Safety Issues
    0
    Product Service Issues
    6
    Human Rights Issues
    0
    Production Supply Chain Issues
    1
    Environmental Non Compliance Flags
    7
    Corruption Issues
    0
    Regulatory Non Compliance Flags
    2
    Fraud Issues
    2
    Labor Health Safety Flags
    2
    Regulatory Issues
    0
    Workforce Disputes
    0
    Sanctions
    0
    esg energy transition
    30
    Discrimination Workforce Rights Issues
    2
    esg controversies critical severity
    No

    IFM Service Models in Facilities Management market report transcript


    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