Benchmarking misses the mark

The results of i-FM's straw poll on the value of benchmarking are overwhelmingly negative. Over 70% of our readers agreed with the statement 'benchmarking is over-rated'.

Comments on our Discussion page point to some of the reasons for this disenchantment. Generally, these comments were favourable, with readers offering views about where application has gone wrong. Benchmarking has been over-sold, notes one, and presented as the way to achieve 'best' performance. That over-simplifies the situation, however promising something that may be indefinable.

A related point focuses on a tendency to collect unmanageable amounts of data. The result is an inability to make sense of it and thus failure to adequately monitor performance or manage costs.

Summing up what may be helpful in restoring benchmarking to the category of useful FM tool is the advice to treat it as a means to understanding what is happening in an organisation, rather than as an end in itself.

Interestingly, the Centre for Facilities Management 1999 market study reports that among its supplier respondents benchmarking is uncommon. Performance measurement is a growing client concern, but this is most often tied directly to costs and service level agreements.

Elliott Chase