CORE COMPETENCIES FOR FEDERAL FACILITIES ASSET MANAGEMENT THROUGH 2020

Transformational Strategies

Committee on Core Competencies for Federal Facilities Asset Management, 2005-2020

Board on Infrastructure and the Constructed Environment

Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences

NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS

Washington, D.C.
www.nap.edu



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page R1
Committee on Core Competencies for Federal Facilities Asset Management, 2005-2020 Board on Infrastructure and the Constructed Environment Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences

OCR for page R1
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20001 NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance. This study was supported by a series of contracts and grants between the National Academy of Sciences and the sponsor agencies of the Federal Facilities Council. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project. International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-11400-4 International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-11400-4 Additional copies of this report are available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, N.W., Lockbox 285, Washington, DC 20055; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area); Internet, http://www.nap.edu. Copyright 2008 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

OCR for page R1
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Charles M. Vest is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibil- ity given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scien- tific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. Charles M. Vest are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. www.national-academies.org

OCR for page R1

OCR for page R1
COMMITTEE ON CORE COMPETENCIES FOR FEDERAL FACILITIES ASSET MANAgEMENT, 2005-2020 DAVID J. NASH, Chair, Dave Nash and Associates, Birmingham, Alabama WILLIAM W. BADGER, Arizona State University, Tempe JENNIFER J. COMPAGNI, Compagni Associates, Highlands, New Jersey DENNIS D. DUNNE, dddunne & associates, Scottsdale, Arizona MARTIN A. FISCHER, Stanford University, Stanford, California MICHAEL J. GARVIN, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg ALEx K. LAM, CoreNet Global, Atlanta, Georgia KARLENE H. ROBERTS, University of California, Berkeley DAVID H. ROSENBLOOM, American University, Washington, D.C. RICHARD L. TUCKER, University of Texas, Austin JAMES P. WHITTAKER, Facility Engineering Associates, P.C., Fairfax, Virginia NORBERT W. YOUNG, JR., The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., New York, New York Staff LYNDA STANLEY, Director KEVIN LEWIS, Senior Program Officer DANA CAINES, Financial Associate JENNIFER BUTLER, Financial Assistant 

OCR for page R1
BOARD ON INFRASTRUCTURE AND THE CONSTRUCTED ENVIRONMENT HENRY J. HATCH, Chair, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (retired), Oakton, Virginia MASSOUD AMIN, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis REGINALD DesROCHES, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta DENNIS D. DUNNE, dddunne & associates, Scottsdale, Arizona PAUL FISETTE, University of Massachusetts, Amherst LUCIA GARSYS, Hillsborough County, Florida THEODORE C. KENNEDY, BE&K, Inc., Birmingham, Alabama SUE McNEIL, University of Delaware, Wilmington DEREK PARKER, Anshen+Allen Architects, San Francisco, California WILLIAM WALLACE, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, New York CRAIG ZIMRING, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Staff LYNDA STANLEY, Director KEVIN LEWIS, Senior Program Officer DANA CAINES, Financial Associate JENNIFER BUTLER, Financial Assistant i

OCR for page R1
Preface The U.S. government is faced with the ever-increasing challenge of managing the facilities and infrastructure required to support the accomplishment of its missions. Shrinking budgets, the increasing cost of operations and maintenance, changing government priorities, a workforce quickly approaching retirement with- out equally qualified replacements, and the increasing world focus on sustainable development demand new approaches to federal facilities management. The Federal Facilities Council of the National Research Council has spon- sored several studies looking for insight into possible, plausible solutions to cope with the varied dimensions of the facilities management challenge. Three previous studies focused on, respectively, stewardship of the federal physical infrastructure, outsourcing of management functions, and best practices for investment. Now this fourth study focuses on the people and the skills the federal workforce will need to manage facilities in the next decade and beyond. This committee’s task was to help ensure effective federal facilities manage- ment in the next 15 years. Additionally, it was asked to identify effective strategies and processes to ensure that the required core competencies—the essential areas of expertise and the skills base—for facilities management are developed and sustained. The committee first examined the current situation and the various policies and trends affecting facilities management in the federal government. It reviewed government-wide initiatives and private sector efforts to identify the best ways to proceed in transforming federal facilities management. The committee also reviewed the forces affecting the recruiting, retention, and training of facilities professionals in the public sector. Internal forces include budget reductions, changing government paradigms, the impending loss of many more senior staff ii

OCR for page R1
iii PREFACE through retirements, and the difficulty of attracting new professionals to the federal sector. External forces include the increasing worldwide focus on sustain- ability and life-cycle facilities management and the impacts of technology. Once it understood the breadth of the challenge in facilities management, the committee embarked on a review of what various national and international entities and academics are saying about the evolution of facilities management as a profession. This review emphasized the competencies—knowledge, skills, and abilities—required of both organizations and individuals. Many of the skills identified as critical for facilities asset management are significantly different from those identified as critical just 10 years ago. The committee concluded that developing the skills to deliver a life-cycle facilities management approach is indeed a complex assignment and must be a priority for senior government leaders and their organizations. Based on its understanding of the current environment, the forces affecting the future of facilities management, and its review of what experts are saying and doing, the committee developed recommendations for moving forward. These rec- ommendations address the assessment of core competencies, barriers to recruiting people with the requisite skills, strategies to develop the workforce of the future, creation of an operating environment that supports professional development, and the sustainment of core competencies. Finally, the committee recommended ways to measure progress toward developing and sustaining the skilled workforce that is needed. In summation, the committee has identified the core competencies it believes are needed for effective federal facilities management and has made recommenda- tions for consideration by decision makers at all levels of government. It trusts that this study has met the objectives set forth by the Federal Facilities Council and, as such, will further the debate and transformation of facilities asset management within the federal government. David J. Nash, Chair Committee on Core Competencies for Federal Facilities Asset Management, 2005-2020

OCR for page R1
Acknowledgments This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the National Research Council’s (NRC’s) Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manu- script remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following individuals for their review of this report: Doug Christensen, Brigham Young University, Steve Condrey, University of Georgia, G. Edward DeSeve, University of Maryland, Paul H. Gilbert, Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade, and Douglas, Inc., Vald Heiberg, III, Heiberg Associates, Sue McNeil, University of Delaware, David Skiven, General Motors Worldwide Facilities Group, E. Sarah Slaughter, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Hans A. Van Winkle, Hill International, Inc. Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive com- ments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recom- mendations, nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Richard N. Wright, National Institute of Standards and Technology (retired). Appointed by the NRC, he was responsible ix

OCR for page R1
x ACKNOWLEDGMENTS for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution. The committee also acknowledges and appreciates the contribution of the members of the NRC Board on Infrastructure and the Constructed Environment (BICE). BICE was established in 1946 as the Building Research Advisory Board. It brings together experts from a wide range of scientific, engineering, and social science disciplines to discuss potential studies of interest, develop and frame study tasks, ensure proper project planning, suggest possible reviewers for reports produced by fully independent ad hoc study committees, and convene meetings to examine strategic issues. Dennis Dunne of BICE was a member of the Committee on Core Competencies for Federal Facilities Asset Management, 2005-2020, and Sue McNeil was a report reviewer. None of the other board members listed on page vi were asked to endorse the committee’s conclusions or recommendations or to review the final draft of the report before its release.

OCR for page R1
Contents SUMMARY 1 1 CONTExT 13 The Evolution of Facilities Management, 14 Facilities Asset Management, 16 Government-wide Initiatives for Management Reform, 18 Defining the Problem, 20 Statement of Task, 21 The Committee’s Approach, 21 Previous Studies of the National Research Council, 22 Organization of the Report,23 References, 23 2 FORCES AFFECTING THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT: 25 IMPLICATIONS FOR FACILITIES ASSET MANAGEMENT IN 2020 Geopolitical and Socioeconomic Trends, 25 Changing Government Paradigms, 26 Budgetary Pressures, 28 Advances in Technologies, 30 Sustainable Development, 31 Aging Federal Workforce, 32 Attracting a New Generation of Workers to the Federal Government, 33 A New Paradigm Is Essential, 34 References, 35 xi

OCR for page R1
xii CONTENTS 3 CORE COMPETENCIES FOR FEDERAL FACILITIES 37 ASSET MANAGEMENT Facilities Management Competencies Literature, 38 Facilities Management Competencies Identified by Professional Associations, 40 Review of Educational and Professional Development Programs, 42 Ideas of Federal Agencies on Competencies Required for Facilities Management, 42 Leadership Skills, 45 Summary, 51 Required Core Competencies, 51 Identifying Core Competencies for Facilities Asset Management Divisions, 53 References, 55 4 A COMPREHENSIVE STRATEGY FOR WORKFORCE 57 DEVELOPMENT Creating an Environment for Promoting and Sustaining Core Competencies, 57 Elements of a Comprehensive Workforce Development Strategy, 59 Strategies for Professional Development, 62 Performance Measurement, 67 References, 71 5 CORE COMPETENCIES FOR FEDERAL FACILITIES ASSET 72 MANAGEMENT: FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Findings, 72 Required Core Competencies, 77 Recommendations, 78 References, 79 APPENDIxES A Biographies of Committee Members 83 B Committee Interviews and Briefings 88 C Executive Summary from Stewardship of Federal Facilities 89 D Executive Summary from Outsourcing Management Functions 99 E Executive Summary from Inestments in Federal Facilities 110