My Own Private Institute
Issue 31 - June 07

Whether for purposes of training or community the prospect of a region wide end-user only network has raised its head again. RFP has surveyed its viability and opened a can of worms in the process. Claire Saeki reports.

In the four years RFP has been putting together the magazine we have spoken to some pretty frustrated people. Whether they are waiting for a furniture shipment to Chennai or trying to implement an energy saving plan in a Beijing hotel, their problems seem to boil down to issues related to communication and information, or the lack of it.

During discussions with end-users, one idea that keeps cropping up is the establishment of an enduser- only network that could then be divided into industry specialities. Intrigued as to whether the people suggesting this type of new pan-Asia club were in the majority or minority, RFP decided to do its own survey of end-users from a range of backgrounds. We asked “do you think there is a place for an ‘end-user only’ RE/FM/ PM institute or training college in Asia?”

The results have been overwhelming both in numbers and range of responses. Combined with other interesting perspectives from existing institutes themselves, we’ve compiled the answers (in entirely scientific way of course) and arranged them into some broad categories (what, you thought it was a yes/no question?).

everything’s dandy
A common theme in responses was that there are already ‘too many’ institutes and not enough training courses. One of the main objections was that we already have institutes and we don’t have enough time to participate or even patronise their events.

The second type of objection was a bit of a surprise, and came primarily from a group representing the majority of respondents, international financial institutions. Responses ranged from the absent-minded “oh, probably not” to the mildly insulted, “No, thank you, existing organisations are doing a fine job”.

Peter Shaw, Senior Manager CRE Operations, HSBC, was kind enough to let us publish his response, which was a well put statement typical of those in this category:

“I would have thought that the IFMA and CoreNet organisations are perfectly capable of providing such support/training/information. I do not see any issues with mixing client side representatives with external service providers. The universities and professional organisations such as RICS, CIBSE, HKIE (HK Institute of Engineers) and HKIS (HK Institute of Surveyors) also all provide working forums or opportunities for people to get together and share problems and experiences. I cannot see any viable place for what would be a narrow-focussed institute serving only the interests of client side corporate real estate services people.”

A common theme in responses was that there are already ‘too many’ institutes and not enough training courses.

The other group who were content with the status quo were the few Australian, US and European end-users we included on the list. Peter Scott, Manager Office Facilities, Woodside Energy Ltd says there are “academic courses for FM people and also short courses, conferences and seminars. There are several associations in Australia that provide both the networking opportunities and training. The Facility Management Association of Australia (FMA) has quite an extensive programme and often partners with other groups to provide training around the country. The other groups that provide training and networking include the Property Council of Australia (PCA), The Tertiary Education Facilities Management Assocation (TEFMA), Instition of Engineers Australia, Chartered Institute of Building Services Engineers (CIBSE), FM Edge.”

don’t sell stuff to me, answer what I really want to know
Some corporate end-users attending the CoreNet Global Asia summit in Singapore commented on the preponderance of service providers at the event and welcomed the idea of an “end-user only” forum where they could discuss industry trends and share experiences in a non-commercial environment.

The survey received consistent feedback of a similar nature, particularly from new entrants to Asian markets. While they are grateful for being able to rely on their suppliers in new markets they are often unaware of the extent to which they don’t know what is going on. One recent entrant to the China market was astounded by how relationshipbased doing business was. Sitting in the U.S. she had few options for information of what it would take to set up the company’s first facility in southern China. “We can’t just pick up the telephone book and pick”, she lamented. She discovered through trial and error that hiring a
professional experienced both in the type of project and in the local area was crucial to the success of the project. Reluctant to outsource the knowledge and responsibility needed for the job a well placed professional institute with quality independent information would have been an ideal resource.

One last group of people that fall into this category are those who are new to the industry or in a new role and just want to learn what they need to know for their
job. They just want to meet people going through what they are going through and get answers to specific questions. In some ways they don’t want the "palaver” of membership but just to get what they need and go.

There are some sectors where this was a big exception, and hoteliers appear to be relatively interested in having ideas about technology, design and other services proposed to them. The more people the better, and hotel owners will often pay for the information.

Everyone agreed, however, that the danger arose when an association was led by the often commercial requirements of its service provider members or where
the association itself didn’t provide any independent information. A few people suggested that universities and other training courses should fill this gap.

no institute can provide me with what I need
Many respondents said the premise that there are problems common to all people working in organisations where real estate and facilities are not the core business was flawed. As one banking respondent said: “My vote goes with bespoke independent training.”

One media company agreed that independent training for their staff was a priority. Being a member of an institute might help, but managers were concerned that junior people needed to know how basic FM principles applied
to their facilities before being sent to “some luncheon or lecture series” on something that might not be relevant and could even confuse.

Some sectors preferred to discuss their real estate issues in the context of their own industry. Retailers, for example, choose the International Council of Shopping Centres, which they feel speaks to their requirements better than
any of the institutes that deal with the built environment.

It also seems that numerous informal organisations have also popped up around the region dealing with issues as specific as university FM in Malaysia to call centre FM in Bangalore.

existing institutes- step it up or set it up
The final category consisted of people with specific needs but who believed that they should be accommodated by the existing associations. Key sectors with large numbers of people working on managing facilities and real estate
needs are feeling forgotten.

Eric Chan, Senior Hospital Manager (FM), Hospital Authority, “Learning organisation is one of the hot topics nowadays, especially in a fast-paced profession like FM. All FM professionals should equip themselves with new
skills to contribute to the bottom line and add value to the organisation. I think HKIFM/IFMA, as non-profit-making organisations, should play a pivotal role in these aspects of delivering professional development opportunity, research,
learning and networking for her members, to strengthen members’ competence. In fact, they fail to perform in some areas leading to the performance and core competence of FM being relatively low.” His sentiments have been echoed
by those wanting the end-user only institute but in slightly stronger terms. Unfortunately we couldn’t print them.

Peter Scott, Manager Office Facilities, Woodside Energy Ltd, noticed that when he delivered a presentation at a conference in Kuala Lumpur, there was a lack of similar learning opportunities in Asia compared to Australia. He suggested “that perhaps a cooperative effort with Australian providers might be able to deliver some effective results”.

The solution to these problems would not be an ‘end-user only’ institute but to look to improving existing networks and communication platforms between associations that currently exist. One of our more thoughtful respondents
said “The answer is you need both - this is not a one-wayor- the-other situation.”

True knowledge sharing means you have to have people who know the business and people who know the business of buildings. As many have commented - it is an ongoing debate.

NOMINATE NOW

Subscribe Now

Sign Up for Ezine

Past Issues