Satisfaction not guaranteed
What are the main criteria for assessing
the overall performance of a building
from the client’s viewpoint? Nigel Anderson
and Jo Harris outline key findings from
a study of customer needs
I
n the first issue of the CIBSE Journal, in February
2009, Bill Bordass of the Usable Buildings Trust
made an eloquent plea for engineers to adopt
a “new professionalism” that could improve
clients’ experience of their buildings throughout their
operating life. Too often clients feel let down once the
design and construction teams have disappeared, and
too many are disappointed by how their expensively-
built asset performs in reality.
At BSRIA, we feel that the key to this problem is
to establish a culture of performance measurement
and benchmarking across the industry, with the accent
heavily on real buildings, so that we have a method for
continuously and objectively seeking improvement to
pass on to facilities management (FM) teams.
However, we recognised all too clearly that applying
research techniques to real-world operations can
be challenging. Our solution was to establish the
Operation and Maintenance Benchmarking Network,
which comprises 50 firms committed to benchmarking
service provision, and to create a series of key
performance indicators (KPIs) that can measure client
satisfaction (see KPI box). or ‘excellent’ – the mean score was 6.6 out of 10.
The concept of the benchmarking network is to KPI credits were discussed in a recent special interest
provide a tangible source of information that helps the group meeting of the benchmarking members, and
Indicators
members of the network to evaluate their organisation one service provider asked: “Would it be possible to
against their peers. build up KPI credits for exceeding expectations, and
KPIs applied
The members depend on mutual co-operation, could these be offset against other KPIs, which are not
by BSRIA
confidentiality and a ‘give-to-receive’ approach. Five so good?”
Planned preventative
areas are covered in the data collection questionnaire: The clients’ response was unequivocal: “No.
maintenance quality
hard FM costs; operation tasks; maintenance tasks; Providers must perform.”
Reactive response utilities; and soft services. The benchmarking network has collected customer
Invoicing
-satisfaction KPIs for maintenance service providers
Customer satisfaction for four years, and it is clear that completion of work
Additional works
Ensuring customer satisfaction is a perennial to a high standard, and on time, is the key measure.
Managing health and
industry problem, and the latest feedback from Clients also consider response to breakdowns and the
safety
the benchmarking network is that mechanical and quality of planned maintenance as fundamental; above
Staff skills
electrical (M&E) service providers are performing all else, the management of the contract has a huge
Record keeping well in relation to legislative compliance, but they impact on customer satisfaction.
Control of environmental
need to improve their approach to communication As a result of our most recent results, we have
impact
and innovation. rewritten some of the KPI survey questions to make
Energy efficiency
The overall level of satisfaction has not changed in them clearer, specifically in relation to:
Overall satisfaction
the last year, with only 40 per cent of clients rating • Open and clear lines of communication between
their relationship with their service provider as ‘good’ contractor and customer;
44 CIBSE Journal May 2009 www.cibsejournal.com
CIBSEmay09 pp44-46 BSRIA.indd 44 4/30/09 5:44:30 PM
Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72