Posts

Embracing Technology in the FM Sector

Technology is all around us and continues to encroach into our lives. Whether through the applications on various office appliances, voice-controlled tech at home, or the sensors used to measure and improve the space we live in. We have an enthused world where anything is possible with the use of technology. The role of technology and its disruptive influence is one of the three key themes that was identified in the RICS Responsible Business Forum. This article explores some of the challenges ahead with the impact of technology on the built environment. Is your business fully embracing technology?

Setting the Expectations

Data-enabled systems have become the standard operating approach for many.  The potential opportunities to save costs and improve the workplace are widespread. But, cutting through the sales talk and communicating the benefits to your clients or your business is tougher.

The challenge with communicating the benefits is the balance between perception and what can be delivered today – which is very much about setting expectations. There is often a need to oversell the opportunities that can be achieved or underplay the integration costs. In part, this is led by misunderstandings by leaders on the role that technology can take, and a lack of experience on the ability to deliver and achieve results from data.

Simplifying what the technology is, how it is being used and the resulting data that can be utilised is fundamental for communicating the expectations. There are also lessons that older business leaders can learn from the younger generation in technology.

Getting Technology to do what we want it to do

So, what do we want the technology to do and how will it help us? We are all still the same people, but adding layers onto needs. Technology can help this and the interface is still important. In the built environment, we use technology to:

  • optimise or reduce plant run times through AI,
  • ensure space is optimised for user comfort,
  • help teams to optimise condition-based maintenance programmes; and
  • extend asset lifetimes.

Together this has significant benefits to the energy performance of the building, employee wellbeing and cost savings.

However, over-reliance on technology can mean we lose the ability to communicate with each other. People skills are vital in the FM sector, but with technology becoming the interface instead of the person, it promotes small changes in behaviour. For example, leaving a message instruction to another to close off an issue rather than seeing a problem through to the end. This encourages a loss of accountability for activities along with the loss of team working.

Rise of the Data Analyst in the Responsible Business

Technology can enable FM to be more customer-focused, but its advance requires new skills. For example, the ability to analyse the data that is being generated. Whilst AI tools are available, the dynamic approach of most organisations will require individuals who understand the data to translate it to a people/ business perspective.

Not only are employee skills sets changing, but the requirements on business is changing too. The level of data captured increasingly infringes on personal information. Therefore, disclosure and openness about what data is held is critical. Gaining confidence from workers on this subject will require communicating the reasons why data is held, and the benefits of holding the data. There will be kickback to this, and the use of opt-outs will help to provide a mechanism to act on this.

We are moving into a sphere where organisations are challenged about what they stand for. It is no longer about money, but increasingly about purpose, transparency and values. Those entering the workforce want to work for organisations that share their beliefs, which are becoming more altruistic. Commercials are good and an absolute necessity, but so too are the ethics – how do we get this mindset through to the FM sector?

Integrating Technology into FM

This provides a very different role for FM moving forwards. A role where technology is integrated into the service, and key skills revolve around customer service and data analytics. But being mindful of the disruptive influences that could be lurking on the horizon. Improvements in technology could easily lead to the ‘uberisation‘ of standard services – particularly maintenance and hospitality functions. Has the industry considered this though?

With new technology part and parcel of modern life, it is illogical for the FM sector not to embrace it. However, the integration of technology through the lens of a responsible business is necessary. Weighing the balance of environmental improvements with social and Governance costs is fundamental. Look out for the release of the RICS Responsible Business Leaders Forum Report at the end of the Summer 2019. We delve into these challenges further as we seek solutions for the sector.

For more information on the RICS Responsible Business Forum please visit the RICS website
Sunil Shah, Chair RICS Responsible Business Forum and Managing Director, Acclaro Advisory.

The National Audit Office report on packaging recycling, (published 23rd July 2018) highlights real concerns involving UK waste that is exported overseas for recycling: there is little visibility on what happens with it, and a suspicion that much of it ends up dumped in landfill.

Such exports increased six-fold between 2002 and 2017, as a result of insufficient domestic recycling capacity to meet demand. The majority was exported to China – but as of January 2018, Beijing has banned almost all plastic waste imports. That creates a new challenge: who should we send our waste to now, and can they prove they will recycle it?

The report also reveals that the government does not account for undetected fraud and error in its recycling records. Although official data indicates that 64% of packaging was recycled last year, the figures rely on estimates that are not sufficiently robust, despite the financial incentive for packaging producers to fail to report the volumes of material that enter the market, and for recyclers to overstate the quantities they handle.

The government will have the opportunity to address these concerns when it develops its new strategy for waste and resources, which it expects to do later this year. However consumers should be aware that sending harmful waste to be recycled isn’t always an effective way of eliminating it, and instead look for long-term solutions to cut back on their waste.

As the scandal of the UK’s plastic rubbish being dumped overseas deepens, businesses need to check if their data systems record reliable waste data, and if they store proof that waste contractors verify proper disposal. Smart businesses are saving costs and proving credibility by retaining the value of their materials with circular economy principles.

Acclaro Advisory can provide the expertise to help your organisation achieve this, so please get in touch if you would like to explore your options.

I often find myself advising clients and friends about the benefits of electric vehicles (EVs). With drastically reduced emissions compared with any other car, they are miles ahead in sustainability terms, and have recently become a genuinely viable personal transport option with improved range and expanding charging infrastructure nationwide. I strongly believe in these technological advancements to improve our sustainability as a society, and today I get the keys to my own EV.

Almost everyone I have shared my news with has sung the praises of EVs with me, but they haven’t joined the family yet. There is only one other EV in my reasonably sized social circle, and that is a company-sponsored car rather than a personal investment (not that companies shouldn’t be investing in EVs for their fleets!).

I understand why – they still seem very new, not quite as capable as their fossil-fuel counterparts in mileage, and the idea of ‘charging’ a car does take some getting used to. It is strange to sit in their silence as you drive, and there are so many questions and misunderstandings about them. Our society is not used to this technology, so it makes many people uncomfortable. I guess carbon reduction starts at home.

For my personal circumstances it was a no-brainer. I unfortunately live just too far away to make public transport viable, and although I have used lift-sharing websites to try and reduce my personal impact these websites, much like EVs, are a bit niche so I usually end up commuting alone. Although not as prolific as fuel stations, public EV charging points are increasingly common. There is one outside my local gym, a 2-minute drive from my house, and another at Wokingham Council offices near my workplace – as well as multiple other charge points in between, so it is no less convenient for me to use these as to fill up at a pump.

In hard numbers, commuting in an EV will cut my daily transport emissions by more than half (table 1) which is a huge personal win for me. Although not as carbon-efficient as public transport, EVs come very close, and traveling by car rather than bus & train saves me two hours a day in transit, so for my personal circumstances the trade-off is worthwhile.

TOTAL kg CO2e for:

Diesel: 16.97297

EV: 7.242231

Public Transport: 6.463946

Table 1 kg CO2e emitted per day from commuting: (based on km and Defra 2017 carbon conversion factors) 79 km driven per day or 88 km on public transport

Ultimately, however well EVs do commercially it is the carbon intensity of our electricity production that matters. Right now, that is made up of only 30% renewables, and while that has been increasing it’s a way off being legitimately sustainable. I hope that by using my consumer power to show demand for electric vehicles I will be contributing to a UK in which EVs and future sustainable technology is embraced, and its disruptive power used to reduce our environmental impact.

Connections with both public and private clients would bridge the gap between addressing the lack of infrastructure, a long-term solution and short-term fixes.

Despite significant environmental progress in 2017, this year has started with a significant threat: the waste import ban in China. The ban, which came into effect on the first of January, restricts the imports into China of 24 kinds of recyclable and solid waste and thus has a wide variety of potential consequences. These restrictions have been put in place to protect the Chinese market for recycled plastic by allowing China to use its own recyclable waste.

For two decades the UK waste industry has relied on sending plastics abroad for recycling with up to 500,000 tonnes of plastic shipped to China each year, thus the impact of this ban on UK capacity for managing plastic recyclables, in particular, will be strong.

In the face of this new ban, plastics are already beginning to pile up. Despite this concern, the Environment Secretary Michael Gove has admitted he has “not given it sufficient thought”. With mounting waste and inadequate preparation there are certainly risks. But adaptation could lead to opportunities for organisations from both long-term infrastructure improvements across the UK, but also short-to-medium-term in waste management design.

Despite having warning of this ban from China since summer 2017, short-term solutions have not been considered by the UK government. A fundamental change in the behaviour from government, manufacturing companies and consumers will be necessary in order to assist in the reduction of plastic waste and to create a sustainable long-term solution for waste management. Mary Creagh MP, chair of the Environmental Audit Committee, has warned the ban could mean “a double whammy for council tax payers” if the price of exported waste falls and the cost of UK disposal rises. She has also called on the government to deliver investment to provide more reprocessing facilities “to reuse these valuable materials, create green jobs and prevent plastic and paper pollution.”

Organisations generating significant amounts of plastics, including shopping centres and manufacturing facilities have been able to generate a revenue stream from the segregation and selling of the materials to reprocessors. The ban has placed a stop on this practice and will impact upon the revenue being generated. Virgin plastics, those made from non-recycled plastic, fetch over £1000 per tonne, and items made from previously recycled plastic can still turn a profit at up to
£400 per tonne, so the potential financial loss is significant.

The appetite for action on this is clear, and any organisation acting on this puts themselves ahead of the field both commercially and in promoting their successes.

Building on existing momentum, ranging from the tagline for the 2017 BEIS Industrial Strategy “Building a Britain fit for the future” to the outcry after Blue Planet II aired footage of marine pollution – by which Michael Gove was “haunted”. The appetite for action on this is clear, and any organisation acting on this puts themselves ahead of the field both commercially and in promoting their successes.

Facilities management companies may look vulnerable to this issue; however, they are also uniquely positioned to find a circular economy solution. As a pivotal point between their clients – creators of waste – and final waste management points, FM has an opportunity to meaningfully inform the adaptation direction for this and lead on the best practice to build sustainable solutions. The industry possesses revealing data on nuances of waste management from a consumer perspective.

Connections with both public and private clients would bridge the gap between the government addressing the lack of infrastructure in this area, a long-term solution, and those finding the short-term fixes.

The 25 Year Environment Plan, published last week, committed to “zero avoidable plastic waste by 2042” by tackling the production and waste management phases of the plastics lifecycle. Some, including Green Party MP Caroline Lucas and EIA Executive Director Matthew Farrow, have pointed out that the plans are ambitious but vague, and for the moment this document is not legislation and so is largely unprotected. It will be up to the Government to prove it can walk as well as it talks. Inaction in the face of mounting plastic waste will bring innumerate potential risks – many of them we are likely not aware of yet.

Quantifying the unquantifiable in sustainability

Sustainability measurement is important because it enables us to understand the environmental burdens of our actions, set targets to reduce this and monitor our progress in these endeavours. We use a variety of measures: fuel consumption, diversity metrics, waste to landfill, etc. Yet there are markers of sustainability that are not so easily quantified, and for these our measurement, and the subsequent benefits, are significantly limited.

These ‘unquantifiables’ occur across the triple bottom line so impact our understanding of every sustainability theme. Examples include the measurement of collaborations – how do you quantify the benefit of knowledge sharing, cooperation and countless other impacts of collaborative working? Or diversity – the value of having a breadth of experience and perspective on a project?

Where we are now?

The current state of affairs is varied. Certain characteristics, particularly those more closely aligned with the strategic success and profitability of a company, are often clearly measured across sectors with depth of understanding to back up the numbers. However, those areas with less obvious links to traditional ideas of business success have often had less invested in their measurement. This is likely due to the perceptions of those involved: perceived unimportance and lack of understanding in how the metrics fit into the classic corporate landscape, or perceived difficulty of the task leading to deferment.

Benchmarking organisations such as the CDP, DJSI and FTSE4Good rely on quantifications of sustainability. Quite often there are internal processes, such as supplier surveys, which require evidence for ‘scoring’ purposes, but the processes by which a policy or conversation is converted into a ‘score’ on which an organisation is then judged is largely unclear. Neither the processes or evidence are shared with others in their industry or field, so there are silos of potentially good measurements and metrics however no way to access or learn from the best practice.

What are we trying?

Ernst & Young have developed a technique that quantifies sustainability across ESG themes called Sustainable Value Added. This model calculates the CSR benefits of a given action in the ESG and economic outlays of that action and the overall opportunity costs of all actions in the context of general economic landscape in a numerate method of adding gain and subtracting loss/harm. The direct link between sustainability and financials in this method holds potential from which FM sustainability measurement could draw to illustrate the business case of sustainability initiatives. This method would help develop a culture in which the financial benefits of SFM are quantitively represented therefore more recognised and acted on.

The problem with tying ESG ‘unquantifiables’ to their financial metrics is that the true benefits of them may not be as intrinsically linked to their financial benefits as this method assumes. For example, increasing the apprenticeship offering, or gearing it specifically towards disadvantaged groups, not only provides workforce but social mobility within that community. This social mobility, and the other benefits unmentioned, would be unmeasured in the EY method, yet is a key societal gain from the apprenticeship and an important metric for the sustainability offering of that company.

What next?

In order to fully understand our progress when improving sustainability, we must be confident in our measurement of it. There is a clear appetite for quantitative measurement of sustainability in corporations – especially when these metrics are tied to financials. Companies are already judged on their performance and quantified in their brand, so the knowledge must exist; but barriers also exist that create silos of this knowledge. Making quantifiable sense of qualitative data is inherently difficult, but knowledge sharing and a commitment to improvement can make a vast difference in improving our measurement capabilities.

Portfolio Items