are directed toward carrying out the depth of the educational mission. Their model might be less expensive, and it might deliver some aspects of education effectively, but it will never match the depth and breadth of service that the school can provide.
If you are faced with adding staff, don't be lured into the path of least resistance: "if we can hire someone who is really good at X, it will solve our problems". More of the same will eventually get you more of the same. There is a legitimate reason for your lack of confidence in this approach: the mission of your organization is not to be THE model of facility management and maintenance. Ours is. And because of that, we deliver confidence and effective results that our clients stopped trying to match. AND, they don't ever want to try to "in-house" those services again. Ask them. They will tell you.
The soft costs of in-housing non-mission critical services are VERY real and they are significant.
The SFM model was designed by an In-House facility manager who understands the the benefits and disadvantages of the In-House model. He also saw distinct advantages and disadvantages of outsourcing facility services. This understanding evolved into a unique blend of the two models, providing owner control and transparency of costs, into what we like to call the “In-Source” model.
CONSIDER THE HARD COSTS
Even the hard costs of the in-house model, those that are seemingly easy to measure, are often under estimated. Download this easy to use spreadsheet that will help you discover the hard cost of employment.
CONSIDER THE SOFT COSTS
When comparing different models of delivering facility services, an institution often looks too narrowly at the costs. They ignore the soft costs...and mistakenly believe that just because costs cannot be easily measured, they are not real and significant. This would be like a parent believing that the only "real" cost of educating their child is the teacher's salary, benefits and some supplies. The parent might conclude that they could save money, and be just as effective, by in-housing (home schooling). While there might be legitimate reasons to home-school a child, it would be a mistake to conclude that it would be cheaper and just as effective. Those parents would be ignoring the enormity of resources that