Over the past five years or so, in-house facilities managers, consultants and service providers have identified the need for service level agreements (SLAs). But external services providers must ensure they understand the needs of the client.

Businesses are going to require increasing flexibility to remain competitive. Meanwhile, services infrastructure will need to be more responsive to change and be established within a framework that provides more choice. Service provision models will need to establish certainty of cost for the recipient while service provision will have to be established from an absolute minimum number of staff.

Before developing a service level model, the service provider must understand the strategy of the customer’s business. Clarity about the benefit of the service contribution to the success of the business will ensure that only those services that are really of value are procured and provided. It is also important that services should not be taken at face value – services providers have for too long ‘sold’ standard packages of single services that do not utilise multiskilling or resource sharing. Specialists are essential, but the way that their activities are packaged often means that the benefits that can be achieved by a change in process can be lost.

Jobs need to be made more multi-skilled and satisfying to entice recruits into the facilities and property services industries. And the development of solutions to fit particular business needs requires the whole area of service delivery to be challenged and alternative working methods established. Leading edge service providers will have to build solutions to keep ahead of service demand from business. That needs to be the key component of services strategy and the service level framework for the future.

Service definitions can no longer be drafted as single lengthy statements about single activities. They must be created in a framework where a range of choices is available for the business. These choices are not just in terms of scale and timeliness of the service provision but also to allow for the variations that will occur across property, country and cultural boundaries.

Alternative strategies for the deployment of resources, the skill sets required, the frequency, quality or cost of the services being envisaged will have to be integral elements of the model. In summary, there are a number of key steps through which service strategy and the development of service levels need to progress if they are to be successful. They are:

  • Establish the need of the business. This will be necessary at a number of layers and will mean greater dialogue and information sharing between business and providers.

  • Consider the activities that might be required to deliver the service and review the processes involved.

  • Consider the levels of service required to enable the business to make choices that fit the needs of its location, activities, culture, etc.

  • Look at the resources and skills that will be necessary for the delivery of the services. Look at how the roles of the people can be built to create interest and commitment and determine how the use of the resources can be maximised.

  • Consider the incentives and performance parameters that will be necessary to engender a quality approach to delivery and how both parties to the service level agreement can gain from the partnership.

Service levels and the service strategy they contain are but a single step along the path to establishing what might be provided in support of a particular component of business need. Business response times will become faster than ever. Flexible models for service support with choice, focused resource and process innovation, will be key.

Growth of SLAs

Like the evolution of all management tools, the evolution of service level agreements has been interesting to watch. In its first stage the SLA was compiled in incredible detail. Pages of text described every last component to capture the expectation of the recipient and the provider. We then moved to a more broad-brush approach, still with much of the detail but with simpler forms and frameworks within which the information and descriptions were contained. The emphasis now is on strategically focused service levels. The process has been a little like the evolution of the management tools of the 1940s, 1950s and 1960s (zero-based budgeting and the work and method study) that recorded in detail processes and resources necessary to undertake activities. The exponents of these management tools became so caught up with recording information in incredible detail that they failed to review the way things were done and develop new and better processes.