Andrew Reed:

"So, the transition period after COVID where people were hesitant to get back into a team environment, I think was quite a challenge for a lot of businesses.

A lot of team members must be on site, like the engineers on the M&E side of FM but it is about applying what is necessary and most effective. You may only want half the team in one place and the other half working remotely because it makes sense to do that. Whereas before everything was facilitated to being in one space.

The obstacle is just really getting peoples’ heads around those significant differences and still working collectively and cohesively. In order to achieve this, it is important that all parties can communicate well.

Quite a few senior management I have met, have wanted to revert back to the way it was and they are not really open to hybrid working due to many reasons but mainly out of fear of change. For me, they are missing a trick. They're not getting the best from people by forcing them into spaces they do not have to be in to do their work well".

Holly Lochinger (myfm):

"There's so many dynamics within a team when everyone gets together, in a boardroom let’s say, with different personalities, styles and approaches to doing things.

So, in your case with people being remote, does it become even more challenging to find that sweet spot, where everyone's creative and contributes but where you're evoking the best out of them too?"

Andrew Reed:

"It depends on the service you are delivering or the team you're in. I have worked with continuous improvement teams that don't do the day-to-day work - they analyse it and then build something better out of the information given by the people doing the job. It is really about having the ability to get the best performance from any given programme of work or provided service.

I think that is the hardest thing to do because even in the boardroom where you might think “Well, everybody's round the table and we can all communicate on the same level” - people don't. Often people fear how they will be viewed around that table and cannot open up freely to explore potential new ways as this may cause friction or conflict with alliances within the group. I think some people really succeed well remote working because they're sitting in a comfortable space and therefore more likely to suggest new methods.

Without a doubt the best teams who’ve really developed are the ones who have the ability to share information and remove the power play aspect - they’re the ones who grow properly".

Holly Lochinger (myfm):

"At one point you said the word holistic, and I think that is a really nice summary when you compare what you're describing to the cutthroat egotistical approach to business you still get in some places".

Andrew Reed:

"I do not discourage competitiveness - quite the opposite. I like people who want to succeed and better their position, but there is a wonderful way of doing it holistically, where everybody gains something from the interactions. It is much better to have a collective win where everybody is looking for mutual advancements.

A lot of people do not get it and ego does come into play in a lot of businesses. Sensible people ask, “How big can the business grow with us all contributing 100%, to the best of our ability?” It’s my duty to really help that flourish.

That could be applied to anything I think especially in FM due to the heavy reliance on a strong supply chain".

Holly Lochinger (myfm):

"So Andrew, would you mind describing to us how you've managed to achieve that at Uppingham when there's so many parties and components in place? How do you streamline team building in a way that is still creative and expansive"?

Andrew Reed:

"What I have concentrated on is building relationships with the suppliers that we have. I have tried to do 1-1’s where I can and invite the company to meetings either on site or via Teams to explain how I would like to see the future partnerships develop.

I ask them what their business does for the school and what it would like to do for the school. I have found it is opened quite a lot of people up. I ask them what additional services they have and how they deliver them to other businesses. I do not think they had had that kind of engagement consistently before.

A lot of the contractors I meet regularly, it is now more about fine tuning what we have till we get to the point where there is a balance with the budget and a good supply of the actual service we need.

It has only been a year, so I can only really go on what sort of small improvements I have seen so far, but I am hoping they will actually expand and be bringing much more to the table of how it can be done and keeping us on top of the market as well.

I have also had Engineers and Operational personnel sitting in contract meetings, to see how the contracted service interacts with their daily work, Most of them have been really encouraged and happy they have a voice in the meetings".

Holly Lochinger (myfm):

"It's interesting Andrew, what you said about asking Engineers to be a part of contract meetings because it relates back to everyone being completely open about stuff. Which ultimately helps you make sure everything being done is in alignment with the school's values and everything wanting to be achieved"?

Andrew Reed:

"Definitely when you are engaging with the contractor, if you keep them at arm's length, they are only going to be as good as that allows them to be. If you take them as part of the team, you look at how you divide the work up in the most effective way of getting that work delivered. You may give more to the contractor and less to the in-house staff because it is the most efficient way to do it.

That does not mean the in-house staff have to fear their position because to be honest, there is plenty of work to do. It is about organising the work so if it is more effective for the contractor to do it that is where you should align your budget then the in-house team can then concentrate on the most efficient functions of their roles so the end result is of greater value. On the hard FM side that has been a real factor with dividing up the work sensibly.

You have got to involve people though. You cannot just tell them that they are going do this every day because you have worked it out to be the most efficient cause, they need to be part of that decision process. The best person to ask about how the job is done is the person doing the job".

Holly Lochinger (myfm):

"So for an organisation who is overwhelmed and debating whether to outsource or not due to costs, what would you advise? How would you personally find that focus and clarity to get priorities in order"?

Andrew Reed:

"Although it seems a little negative, you've got to start with the failings and gaps. If you're not achieving your compliance on the basics (fire, asbestos, water) all your life support and life-threatening stuff, you have to look at how you're going to get on top of that. It might be that a full outsource is the only way you're going to achieve it.

By the time you’ve got a self-built team, you could be several years out of compliance and then you're really running at a high safety and business risk. So you need to look at that gap. If the gap isn't too big, you can then look at how you want to deliver it most cost effectively.

Something else that hasn't got a real financial value on it and is incredibly difficult to measure is how the organisation feels about it too. Everything could be easily outsourced and a company could have “big player” logos but it wouldn’t be necessarily authentic"

Holly Lochinger (myfm):

"And brand value is not something you can put a price on really is it because it’s completely intangible in terms of the reputation. As you said, the history and authenticity is unique and you can't really quantify that, can you"?

Andrew Reed:

"I've not come across anybody that has actually said what we need is a single supplier to come and deliver and use all their own branding. I've met with the exact opposite. Brand identity is massive so everything else needs to fall in line with that but being efficient and as budget savvy as possible needs to play a part too.

At various organisations I’ve met staff who’ve been there 25-30 years, and what they know is really important, and it's not necessarily something which will come out on day one. it won't come out when you're talking about their job or potentially outsourcing. It comes out when you actually get to know how they operate, what they like, who they know, what their network is how they move around their day.

Again that’s another thing you can't put a price on at all but it's so much valuable intelligence, so much on the ground Intel which should never be overlooked, and I feel often it is.

Somebody won't be happy somewhere, and you're never going to get everybody happy all the time in any place. But if you can get through your day and get the majority fairly happy in their day and it advances the business within their core work, then you're doing your job in FM, I think. If you're missing the human angle, you're actually destroying 75% of the potential that can be achieved".