We help organisations design, optimise and benchmark their property function and service delivery model to better meet organisational needs, lower risk and reduce or better manage costs. We help organisations achieve better outcomes from their corporate real estate, asset management, facility management and capital works functions, including leveraging systems and data, and optimising outsourced delivery.
We design service delivery models to align with your organisational needs and strategy, and to maximise outcomes from your corporate real estate, asset management, facility management and capital works functions.
We design organisational structures to ensure clarity in roles and responsibilities and the right people are in the right roles to deliver on your required property outcomes.
We can compare your property function to better practice and industry trends, providing insight to how you compare to industry peers and leaders.
We can benchmark your property resources and costs against comparable organisations to assess if there are opportunities to optimise performance or costs.
Data can be used to drive informed decisions about future property footprint, leasing, capital works and optimising costs and performance. We can assist identify what data you need and a strategy for systems to support informed decision making.
“Peter Macfarlane ( Grosvenor ) came highly recommended with expertise in property benchmarking work.”
“You know your subject matter and give us straightforward advice.”
“This work will be the catalyst for better practice within our B&P function - it should have a noticeable effect on the stakeholders who interact with B&P.”
“The project will help improve all facets of the capital works team. As a result, the money will be spent more efficiently, and project managers will be more accountable.”
Peter has expertise in supporting organisations to optimise their property, facilities and built asset functions and management. He specialises in Property strategy and management and procurement and contracting.
"Quality thinking is all about understanding the client’s need first and foremost, leveraging Grosvenor’s knowledge base, applying true critical thinking to find the best solution and exceeding expectations."
With over 14 years since going to market for property management services, there was a need to ensure the scope, service specification, KPIs, contract governance and approach to property management services was still appropriate to deliver on organisational and government objectives. Is it time you reviewed your property service delivery model?
Grosvenor was engaged to conduct a review of the Property Services Function. The review provided the Client with an understanding of key cost drivers associated with the delivery of property and fleet services and provided a complete view of the portfolio for the first time, since the transition to the NDIS.
Grosvenor was engaged to carry out a review of the alternative models for managing the Client's property, facility assets and biomedical assets. Grosvenor reviewed all elements of the model for managing properties, facilities maintenance and assets, including biomedical assets and presented recommendations and an actionable roadmap.
Let’s face it, you’re currently reviewing your property services thanks to a recent pandemic. A review and reform of services within your corporate property portfolio is either underway, under review or rushed to completion.
Finance underpins the entire operations of a business. And of course, the property is fuelled by finance being the second largest overhead after staff costs and usually the largest fixed asset class.
The SDM is a key design element of any property function. It will impact all aspects of delivery including how data is managed and what internal resources are required.
The delivery of support and back office services under a shared service model is nothing new. However shared services for property and facilities management within the public sector is relatively new and subject to a different set of drivers for value creation.
Property functions and models describe how an organisation structures, governs, and delivers its property and facilities management capability. This includes defining the operating model, organisational structure, service delivery model, and allocation of responsibilities across strategic, transactional, and operational layers.
In leading consulting practice, property functions are typically segmented into three core layers:
Strategic (portfolio planning and demand management)
Transactional (leasing, acquisitions, project delivery)
Operational (facilities management and service delivery)
Property models define how these layers are delivered — whether internally, externally, or through a hybrid structure — and how they are supported by governance frameworks, data systems, and performance management structures.
The objective is to ensure property capability is aligned with organisational strategy, cost efficiency, and service delivery outcomes rather than operating as a standalone support function.
The design of a property function determines how effectively an organisation can align its property portfolio with business strategy, operational demand, and financial constraints.
Poorly designed functions typically result in fragmented accountability, inefficient service delivery, limited data visibility, and inconsistent decision-making across the portfolio.
In contrast, well-designed property functions enable clear role definition, structured governance, and integration between strategic planning, procurement, and operational delivery. This improves cost control, enhances service performance, and strengthens the organisation’s ability to respond to demand changes, workforce shifts, and portfolio complexity.
From a consulting perspective, function design is often the foundation for all downstream decisions including outsourcing, procurement strategy, and performance management frameworks.
Property functions are typically structured using one or a combination of three operating models:
Centralised model – Property decisions, contracts, and service delivery are managed centrally to maximise consistency, control, and economies of scale.
Decentralised model – Business units retain control of property decisions to improve responsiveness and local alignment.
Hybrid model – Strategic governance and portfolio management are centralised, while selected operational or transactional services are decentralised or outsourced.
Leading organisations often adopt hybrid models supported by clearly defined service towers, governance frameworks, and performance measurement systems to balance control with flexibility.
The choice of model depends on portfolio size, organisational complexity, risk appetite, and the maturity of internal property capability.
A service delivery model defines how property services are allocated between internal teams and external providers, and how those services are structured, governed, and measured.
This includes decisions about which services are retained in-house, which are outsourced, and how responsibilities are divided across operational processes such as maintenance, leasing support, project delivery, and help desk functions.
In mature organisations, service delivery models are supported by structured frameworks such as KPIs, SLAs, service towers, and vendor governance structures. These mechanisms ensure accountability, performance visibility, and alignment between service delivery and organisational outcomes.
Service delivery design is a core enabler of both outsourcing strategy and internal capability optimisation.
The decision between centralised, decentralised, or hybrid models is based on an assessment of organisational strategy, operational complexity, geographic distribution, and capability maturity.
Key decision factors include:
Level of portfolio standardisation required
Need for local responsiveness versus central control
Cost efficiency objectives
Risk and compliance requirements
Availability of internal property expertise
High-performing organisations typically move toward hybrid models, where strategic planning, procurement, and governance are centralised, while selected operational services are decentralised or outsourced to specialist providers.
This structure enables both consistency in decision-making and flexibility in service delivery.
An effective property function model improves organisational performance by aligning property decisions with business strategy, financial objectives, and operational demand.
Key benefits include improved cost visibility, better utilisation of assets, clearer accountability structures, and enhanced ability to manage risk across the property portfolio.
From a consulting perspective, strong models also enable better integration between procurement, asset management, and facilities operations, resulting in improved contract performance, stronger vendor accountability, and more efficient use of internal resources.
The outcome is a more strategic, data-driven property function that supports long-term organisational objectives.
Poorly designed property functions often lead to fragmented accountability, inconsistent service delivery, weak governance, and limited visibility over property performance.
Common risks include inefficient space utilisation, duplication of effort across business units, unclear decision rights, and poor integration between strategy and operations.
These issues typically result in increased costs, reduced service quality, and limited ability to respond to organisational change or portfolio optimisation opportunities.
In many organisations, these risks emerge gradually when operating models evolve without deliberate redesign or governance review.
Property functions typically evolve through maturity stages driven by organisational growth, outsourcing adoption, and increasing portfolio complexity.
Early-stage functions are often operationally focused, with limited strategic capability and fragmented service delivery. As maturity increases, organisations introduce structured governance, data-driven decision-making, and clearer separation between strategic, transactional, and operational functions.
More advanced models incorporate integrated service delivery models, performance-based outsourcing, and real-time portfolio analytics to support proactive decision-making.
This evolution reflects a shift from reactive property management to strategic portfolio optimisation and organisational enablement.
Outsourcing plays a key role in property function design by enabling organisations to access specialist capability, scalable service delivery, and performance-based operating models.
Operational services such as facilities management, maintenance, and help desk functions are commonly outsourced, while strategic functions such as portfolio planning, governance, and demand forecasting are typically retained internally.
In mature models, outsourcing is integrated through structured service towers, KPIs, SLAs, and contract governance frameworks to ensure performance accountability and alignment with organisational objectives.
The decision to outsource is closely linked to operating model design and capability assessment.
Organisations should approach property function redesign through a structured assessment of current operating models, capability gaps, service delivery structures, and governance effectiveness.
This typically involves analysing how property services are currently delivered, identifying inefficiencies, assessing internal versus external capability, and developing a target operating model aligned to organisational strategy.
The output is a redesigned property function that clearly defines roles, responsibilities, governance structures, service delivery models, and performance measurement frameworks.
This ensures the property function operates as a strategic enabler of organisational performance rather than a purely operational cost centre.
Whether you are looking to get more out of your projects, are interested in collaboration or would like to talk about joining the Grosvenor team, please get in touch.
