Editorial

Citation

Finch, E. (2010), "Editorial", Facilities, Vol. 28 No. 9/10. https://doi.org/10.1108/f.2010.06928iaa.001

Editorial

Article Type: Editorial From: Facilities, Volume 28, Issue 9/10

In the first of the papers in this issue of Facilities, Lindkvist and Elmualim consider the subject of innovation. To make things clearer, the term innovation is defined in the paper as any continuous process of bringing new ideas into practical use and in adding value to the organisation. Fundamental to the analysis is the concept of innovation trajectories. These trajectories explain the direction or pathway of a particular innovation emanating from a particular group of actors. The trajectories considered in the study include entrepreneurship, service professional, technology and strategic. The findings of the study suggest that facilities management cannot be innovative in isolation and must consider several trajectories. The results suggested that we need to understand the “discourse of ownership” as each of the “actors” involved in an FM innovation felt they had a claim over the project.

There is an abundance of anecdotal evidence regarding the positive impact of plants on productivity in the workplace. However, the availability of evidence-based information on the subject is scant. Even where such evidence exists, the evidence in relation to research context, starting-points and test methods is varied. In the paper by Bakker and van der Voordt, the authors present a critique of current knowledge on the subject. The review presents some useful insights relating to the vitality of different plants and also legitimises expenditure on specific “plantscapes” in offices. This fascinating area is likely to persist as an area of academic research given the complex cost-benefit analysis involved in analysing the direct and indirect costs such as environmental control and plant care.

The paper by Lavy, Garcia and Dixit attempts to address the problem of ambiguity that is commonplace in facilities management performance metrics. This insightful review identifies a list of key performance indicators (KPIs), presenting them in standardized categories to furnish facilities managers with a more practical tool. Perhaps pertinent to the problem identified by the author is the saying ”the great thing about standards is that there are so many to choose from.”

Kajalo and Lindblom consider in their paper, the issue of store safety. They contend that providing a safe and secure environment for customers and employees has become a major factor in store management and design. The study itself focuses on how grocery store retail entrepreneurs invest in formal and informal surveillance, and how these investments affect consumers’ and employees’ sense of security. The findings of the research suggest that retailers wishing to create a safe retail space for employees and customers should invest in informal surveillance. Investments in comfortable, clean and well-lit premises “make both consumers and employees feel safe in the store environment.” The emphasis on the psychology of safety and perception set this paper apart from many other publications in this area. Other related facilities management research invariably focus on issues of hardware and physical prevention.

The final paper by Lai attempts to map the higher education requirements of operation and maintenance professionals in Hong Kong. The results are somewhat surprising, suggesting that no education programmes currently exist that meet the needs of operation and maintenance professionals. Indeed, there remains a considerable unmet demand for these professionals. The author suggests that the skills mapping process used to elucidate requirements could equally be applied in other developing countries.

Edward Finch