The Science of Comparison - Gordian · Making fair comparisons depends upon two factors:...

The Science of Comparison:How to Build and Use Accurate Benchmarking for Better Performance Tracking

The Science of Comparison | 3

Traditionally, a request for funding might

start with a facility assessment that reads

like a list of broken components or failing

systems, a jargon-heavy ultimatum

warranting a glance from financial

decision-makers who set these requests

too quickly aside. But to effectively

compete, facilities directors must change

their methods. Many are turning to data

to tell a story that puts their needs into

context across other campus projects,

with a focus on the institution’s

overarching mission and competitive

standing.

Gaining context for data through

benchmarking can add new value to

higher education campuses. It can enliven

traditional decision-making with fresh

insight that takes into account a wide

range of factors impacting institutions.

Effective comparisons and analyses of the

Facilities Department’s actions can lead to

greater confidence in operating

processes, and can make for more

impactful resource allocation. Through

benchmarking, facility management

leaders and campus decision-makers can

better understand how they compare

relative to peers, and drive action to

become a best practice institution.

In this guide, we will help Facilities

Departments harness the data already at

their fingertips, and create context for this

information. You’ll learn how to

standardize data to ensure you’re getting

the most accurate insight into your true

needs, and how to present this data to

secure needed funding. You’ll find that

once you better understand the data

you’re already using, you can help campus

stakeholders to see the value that the

Facilities Department brings to the

institution, and strengthen your

department for the future.

Facility management is changing, with greater reliance on data and digital

systems than ever before. In the higher education arena, it’s a necessity for

departments that want to effectively compete for funding with financial aid and

faculty salaries, as these generate more clearly visible benefits from funding

than “behind the scenes” facility management.


CHAPTER 1

Data has become a foundational part of nearly all areas of higher education

management. Performance indicators are used to help improve student outcomes,

and data-based benchmarking has become critical as institutions seek to differentiate

themselves in an environment where colleges and universities are competing against

not just one another but also online and trade schools. Administrators see data as a

necessary building block for creating a successful institution, and data has become a

language through which all stakeholders can communicate their varying strategic and

operational needs.

The Facility Management department is no exception. Data has become one of the most

important tools not only for ensuring the proper performance of buildings across the

campus, but keeping campuses competitive among similar institutions. But data can do

much more for this department. Strong data can help professionals within the Facilities

Department clearly lay out the value of campus improvements. It can also serve as the

base for a common vocabulary with institution trustees, a step that can help secure

needed funding. Today, data is very much the foundation of a successful Facilities

Department.

Building with consistency and accuracy

Facilities professionals know better than anyone that you can’t build a building on an

unstable foundation. If you are turning to data to strengthen high-level decision-making,

Building a Benchmarking Foundation on Consistent, Accurate Data


it’s necessary to use data that is accurate and consistent. Facilities managers need the

best data available to build a reliable foundation for useful benchmarking.

The best data is not just accurate, but also consistent data. You would never employ

different methods of collecting data across the buildings on your campus, because you

know that the benchmarking would be essentially meaningless. Similarly, you need to

use consistent methodology when making comparisons between campuses. But while

you can potentially put metrics in place that ensure that the same data is collected

across all of your facilities, this clearly isn’t possible when looking to compare your

campus to other campuses.

The truth is, to get consistent and accurate information for benchmarking across

campuses, you can’t rely on each college or university reporting their own data. There

are simply too many variables, as every institution accounts for finances and resources

differently.

By working with a third-party company for data analysis and benchmarking, facility

managers gain reliable insight into the strategic and operational performance of their

own campus, and their peers’ performance. It’s for this reason that consistency and

accuracy is the basis of Sightlines’ data collection processes. We collect data ourselves

rather than relying on reporting based on each institution’s varied best practices.

Because of this, we’re able to establish an accurate baseline that is consistent across

all types of higher education institutions.

When all of the collected data is tested for accuracy, reviewed longitudinally, and

compared to other data pieces, we’re able to demonstrate uniformity, qualify the

information on-hand and establish confidence in our comparisons.

Creating context for your data

Once you gather your data, the next step is to put it to use. You need to be able to use

that data by putting metrics into place upon which you build and communicate your

planning. These metrics need to be constructed in a way that’s technical, so that this


information can be used to pinpoint improvements upon which the Facilities

Department can act. But this information also must be used strategically. When

it comes to data, context is critical.

If data is the foundation upon which you’re looking to secure funding for campus

improvements, then context is your structural support. You can’t simply use your data

to create a list of “need to dos.” You don’t want to go to trustees talking about chillers,

boilers and roofs. You want to frame discussions around strategy, investment

and commitment.

So how do you make this shift from data to knowledge to action? Consider the following

four steps:

• Talk to stakeholders to get an understanding of their priorities, and an

overall picture of the overall institutional mission. This will help you to

understand where facilities needs fit into future planning, and better

prioritize improvements.

• Use your data for prioritization. Not every campus need is equal. Some

projects will have greater urgency than others, or push the campus closer

to its ultimate goal more quickly.

• Create a list that is framed, targeted and clear. To do this, it helps to have

your end goal in mind. Focus on the data that supports your specific goals.

• Support your data with an argument that the layperson can understand.

By limiting the jargon on your list, and clearly articulating your plans for

improvement, you’ll more rapidly win over your audience to your cause.

For example, your discussions with stakeholders might reveal a common theme toward

expanding the campus while reducing its carbon footprint to make the institution more


competitive with nearby universities that are using sustainability as a marketing theme.

Here you can turn to data to demonstrate how installation of a combined heat and

power system will not only help meet the Facilities Departments’ goal of modernizing

a quickly failing power system, but also help drive the institution forward in its

sustainability mission and generate savings for future investments. With data that

supports this goal, everyone wins.


Once you have data that is confirmed for accuracy, the next step is to put metrics in

place that give your data context. But while analysis of your educational facilities’ data

can present valuable insight—for example, revealing performance trends over time—

this should only be a starting place. The next step is to apply your data to making fair

comparisons.

Benchmarking against like institutions can provide powerful insight as to how other

colleges or universities are performing in the areas that are of most concern to your

institution’s stakeholders, your potential student base, faculty and staff. Whether your

institution is promising a leading dining experience or modern classrooms, or seeking

to gain an edge in sustainability, it’s important to understand how your performance

measures up to your peers.

Making fair comparisons depends upon two factors: normalization of the data and

selection of a comparable peer group.

The Normalization Process

Normalization is the process of determining the common denominator that makes the

most sense for performing an effective comparison. Square footage is a denominator

frequently used for comparisons. However, other data might be more relevant,

CHAPTER 2

The Two Steps for Using Data to Make Fair Comparisons


depending on the argument you’re seeking to make. For instance, normalization might

be better based on the number of students, full time equivalents, or Btu and other

energy data, among other criteria. Grouping data in various ways creates tangible,

manageable figures that can be used for effective benchmarking.

You may also find that normalization changes your perception of your campus’

performance, and tells a new story about where improvements are needed. For

example, your total energy expenditures might indicate that your campus’ spending

is roughly equivalent to what other local institutions are spending. However, normalizing

that data to show energy expenditure per gross square foot gives you a standard of

comparison that may indicate your spending is actually higher than your peers. This

more accurate comparison would present a powerful argument that it’s time to

identify areas for energy improvements that have the potential to generate

significant cost savings.

Use the Right Peer Group

Effective benchmarking also depends on making comparisons to similar institutions.

By comparing your information to educational facilities that are like yours, you’ll gain

the most accurate insight into how your campus is performing.

Similar campuses are best for benchmarking purposes, as they demonstrate the most

useful and informative benchmarks. But don’t get caught in the trap of thinking you’ll

consistently compare your performance to the same group across every metric. There

may be a different peer group for every comparison.

You might compare your campus to others that share common physical characteristics,

are located in the same region, have a similar financial standing, or have like enrollment

targets. The criteria you select will depend upon the information you’re seeking to gain.

For example, if you’re looking to gain insight on the effectiveness of your space

utilization and technical complexity, look to schools that are programmatically more

like your institution. When making comparisons of energy consumption, carbon


emissions or utility expenditures, it would be better to use a local peer group rather

than admissions peers that are not local, given that most energy use is driven by

climatic conditions.

The bottom line is that you should not take a one-size-fits-all approach when selecting

the group of educational facilities against which you compare your institution’s

performance. Consider, too, that this group may change over time as your institution

meets its goals and evolves future targets.

Put Your Benchmarking to Work

Benchmarking puts your valuable data to work by creating a fuller picture of your

institution’s competitive standing in the marketplace. Effective peer benchmarking

also supports communication among all stakeholders, as it clearly demonstrates

areas where resources can best be allocated to meet campus goals.

Data is a powerful ally in decision-making, but with the context and standardization of

benchmarking, you’ll find the Facilities Department can become a much more strategic

player in campus planning.


CHAPTER 3

Knowing how to use your data to convey value, and secure the support your

department deserves, is the final step in putting your data to work for strategic facility

planning and improvements. To get the full value from your data, it’s important to make

sure you’re using all of the relevant pieces to create a compelling story.

Consider: you wouldn’t dream of creating a ten-year campus plan without consulting all

relevant campus stakeholders. After all, you know only your department’s goals. You

wouldn’t be able to effectively factor in the overall campus mission without the full

picture presented by faculty, athletic department leadership, alumni relations,

administrators, boards of trustees, and so on.

Just as major campus planning shouldn’t be done in a vacuum, relying on a single

benchmark means seeing only one piece of the overall puzzle. Analyzing a range of

benchmarks together as a group allows you to see how specific campus actions affect

the entire physical portfolio, not just individual campus facilities or departments.

Rather than pushing a decision based on a single benchmark, use a variety of metrics to

tell a story that supports a strategic shift. For example, benchmarking may reveal that

maintenance staffing is high when considered in relation to comparable institutions.

However, additional benchmarking may indicate that an aging campus, with a significant

backlog of deferred maintenance, has placed heavy demands on maintenance staff. With

How to Use Your Data to Tell the Facilities Department’s Story


this full picture, it’s now possible to make well-informed long-term decisions about

maintenance needs.

So once you’ve effectively performed your benchmarking, how do you know what

story to tell?

Let Your Benchmarks Demonstrate Your Department’s True Value

This powerful information can be used in a variety of ways, to support a number of

goals. Consider the following three examples of how your benchmarking information

can be used.

• Build relationships across campus. By demonstrating that you are effectively

using the school’s assets, facilities directors can build trust and partnerships in the

C-suite and with the community. For example, use your metrics on planned

maintenance and annual stewardship to show that you are supporting the campus

to the best of your ability. Or publish data on energy improvements to show how

the department has shifted from cost center to value-adder.

• Demonstrate that you are an effective campus steward. By highlighting

the impacts of campus improvements, you can demonstrate how the Facilities

Department is moving the campus in the direction of the campus’ overarching

mission. Whether it’s investments in staff or energy-efficient upgrades, make it

clear how your department’s activities means improvements for all.

• Secure additional funding for ongoing maintenance or capital investments.

By demonstrating how peer institutions are using funds, you can highlight areas

where campus improvements will provide a competitive edge. For example, if the

institution’s goal is to attract more on-campus residents to fill new student housing,

make it clear that dining hall improvements need to be made to support the increase

in applicants for student housing, with an eye toward making the institution

competitive with other institutions. By presenting the full picture—with a high level

perspective that takes into account activities across your campus and others—you’re

more likely to secure funding needed to meet your goals.


Take Credit for Success

Too often the Facilities Department’s actions are overlooked when all is running well.

Data can help change this, as it clearly demonstrates how the department is pushing the

institution to succeed in its overarching mission. Through demonstration of this value,

the facilities director can secure the ear of the C-suite, and leverage relationships to

better support their staff and positon their department to meet the campus’ next goals.


Data is a powerful tool, but only as useful as the context in which it is presented.

Through benchmarking, Facilities Departments can present a clear picture of how

their facilities are performing across the campus, and in comparison to other like

institutions across the country.

Benchmarking, however, is most effective when it harnesses the following five

key components:

• Consistency

• Accuracy

• Normalization

• Peer groups

• Context

When benchmarking is performed correctly, and this information is clearly conveyed

to all institution stakeholders, the Facilities Department can secure the funding and

support it needs to better perform its work.

Your department’s trustworthiness is strengthened when it takes actions grounded

in accurate data, with transparently measured progress. By relying on data and

benchmarking, facilities leaders can make a stronger case for affecting change

on campus.

Conclusion

About GordianGordian is the world’s leading provider of facility and construction cost data, software

and services for all phases of the building lifecycle. From planning to design,

procurement, construction and operations, Gordian delivers groundbreaking solutions

to contractors, architects, engineers, business and financial officers and facility

owners in local, state and federal governments, education, healthcare and other

industries. A pioneer of Job Order Contracting (JOC), Gordian’s offerings also include

our proprietary RSMeans data and Sightlines Facility Intelligence solutions. We

develop and maintain the largest collection of labor, material and equipment data and

associated costs for all areas of construction. Gordian’s solutions are accessed through

our innovative software platforms and supported by a team of industry experts

proven to help clients maximize efficiency, optimize cost savings and increase building

quality.

405 Church Street, Ste #2 Guilford, CT 06437P: 203.682.4950F: 877.231-0562gordian.com

The Science of Comparison - Gordian · Making fair comparisons depends upon two factors:...

Documents

Transcript of The Science of Comparison - Gordian · Making fair comparisons depends upon two factors:...