With the increasing focus on measurable business value and the need for operational excellence, the use of supportive software solutions for real estate and facility management has become widely accepted and common practice. The business case for these software solutions is usually based on themes like portfolio transparency, control, processing efficiency, cost reduction, organizational agility, customer value and compliance.
However, many organizations have had problems choosing the right software solution shown by the fact that some software implementations do not deliver the planned results. Reasons for failure can be very diverse but typically include gaps between expectations and reality, underestimating the effort needed during implementation and change management, and unexpected complexity in IT technology and operations.
What makes the difference?
Unfortunately, the vendor landscape does not help either. Many local vendors offer a large number and wide range of software solutions labelled as IWMS, CAFM, CMMS, FMIS, Service Management software, Asset Management software or any other label that helps them to market their products successfully. However, what makes these software solutions really different? One significant differentiator between them is a solution’s typology: a point solution or an integrated solution. Let me briefly elaborate on this by explaining both their strengths and weaknesses.
Point Solution: strengths and weaknesses
Point Solutions are typically designed to solve one specific business problem. Due to this specialization and focus, Point Solutions are champions in their particular area of functionality. Examples of Point Solutions are room-booking software, helpdesk software, space management software or maintenance planning software. The strength of a Point Solution is also its weakness: the software only solves one business problem. To solve multiple problems, multiple Point Solutions must be selected and implemented. Common data needs to be shared between these Point Solutions, implying complexity, potential inconsistency and risk.