Maintenance and engineering managers tend to have a narrow view of deferred maintenance, and that’s understandable. After all, they are the people in their organizations who deal with the issue’s immediate impact on facility conditions and operations.
But this narrow view of the deferred maintenance crisis might be undermining their efforts, says John Edwards, chief executive officer of FEA, a facilities management consulting firm. In a recent conversation about the issue, Edwards suggested an alternative strategy that might help managers more effectively address the problem.
He suggests a broader approach that addresses repairs of individual building components but also — and more importantly — strategic investments in large and complex systems.
“We’re talking about the major systems that make up the shell and the internal functions of a building,” Edwards says. “They usually have long lifespans and over time need to be addressed, either at the end of their useful lives or incrementally in between. A lot of these systems have major components that might have to be repaired more frequently than the overall system. You have to plan for all those things.”
This broader, multi-part approach to deferred maintenance is more likely to resonate with building owners, whose eyes tend to glaze over in discussions about relatively minor building repairs.
“That is where managers can really earn their keep because they’re showing the total picture of costs that come from different pots of money,” Edward says. “The facility manager is trying to relate to the building owner and the organization about how all these pieces fit together. Deferred maintenance is important, but it’s a piece of a larger puzzle that facility managers should always be thinking about.”
Managers who help owners see the entire deferred maintenance puzzle, not just its pieces, are more likely to help their organizations address the issue effectively.
