Occupiers just want an easy life

This is an article about paradox, defined in my dictionary as "a seemingly absurd, though perhaps really well-founded statement". The paradox in this case is that the more an industry fights to improve its levels of service, the more difficult it can be for customers to make use of them. And, of course, I'm talking about the facilities management business – or, to be more precise, the whole vast range of businesses encompassing property and occupancy.

First, let's go back in time. When I was a kid, my dad bought me a bike, a Triumph Palm Beach. I was offered two options: have it with or without gears. The gear mechanism was a Sturmey Archer three-speed. That was it. End of choices.

A while ago, I popped into the local cycle shop with the intention of buying another bike. An enthusiastic young man with a shaven head and a nose stud introduced me to the options. And there were hundreds of them, involving different styles, gears, alloys, suspension systems, saddles and... well, I lost count. This splendidly helpful salesman wanted to know where I was going to use my bike, when and how often. He needed to know that to help me make a choice. Eventually, I fled, unable to answer his questions. I just wanted a bike. I really didn't want to have to think about it that hard.

Something similar may be happening in property and occupancy. Fifteen years ago, a company looking for 15,000ft2 within the M25 ring would have been offered a choice of a handful of new buildings built speculatively, some second-hand buildings and one leasing system – 25 years, with upward-only reviews every five years. End of choices.

These days, occupiers have more options to choose from. Owners offer a variety of lease lengths, a range of pre-let and off-the-shelf buildings, new and old, and, increasingly, a range of different service packages. For start-ups and smaller companies, and the pioneering units of multinationals, there are virtual offices and serviced offices. And, for those anxious to duck out of property altogether, there is the clumsily named corporate PFI or PPP (or, more accurately, occupancy outsourcing). And all of the providers are struggling to differentiate themselves from the competition, which only adds to the complexity.

This is not a criticism, just an observation. Bikes are a whole lot better these days – more comfortable, more efficient and altogether better designed than my push-and-shove Triumph. The offer to those who use office space is better, too – better designed, often more effective, with a much wider range of choices. The only thing missing, in fact, is any mechanism for making the decision easier.

Increasingly, it's like choosing a mobile phone. Faced with a vast array of different options and pricing mechanisms, the decision-making process can exhaust our skills, patience and interest. And the status quo begins to look very attractive.

This may be heresy to the 15,000 or more people who attended the world's biggest property bash in Cannes last week, MIPIM. Collectively, they represent the supply side of the industry, and for them that vast body of 'occupiers' is the yin to their yang. And, anyway, they will argue you can't compare property occupancy with bikes and mobile phones.

I wonder, though. MIPIM is breathtakingly successful, but it is nevertheless a supply-side event. Relatively few of the 2.7 million businesses in the UK are represented there. Why? Perhaps it's because they don't see themselves as 'occupiers' at all; they see themselves as banks, media companies, engineers, caterers and so on. Indeed, anything but occupiers, which is a supply-side notion.

For many of these organisations, property is still a hassle. Even the best, most innovative service providers may be able to shave no more than two or three per cent off their property costs. What's that worth when you've just had 25 per cent of the value of your company thrown away in the dot.com slump? The point is that property is not their business; their interests and priorities lie elsewhere.

Choice is a good thing. Of course it is. But choice introduces complexity, and in the burgeoning occupancy business there is no common standard against which to measure the likely performance of a building or a 30-year facilities management service contract. It's left to the hapless consumer and his growing army of consultants (more choices).

Look at the history of corporate PFI and one might conclude that the lack of tools with which to measure the vast range of offers is actually forcing occupiers back to the status quo – metaphorically fleeing the industry's bike shop.

This isn't the customers' problem. It's ridiculous to assume that manufacturing and service companies are going to stop what they're doing to draw up universally agreed occupier benchmarks – it's the industry's problem. Time, then, that the industry threw its weight behind independent attempts, such as that by the Occupiers Property Databank, to define proper performance measurements.

For those keen to promote occupancy outsourcing, this is the real marketing: the creation and retention of tomorrow's customers by introducing transparency into the decision-making process. It's a worthy goal. It may even be vital for the future of the sector.