Most facilities leaders invest in a Computerized Maintenance Management System (CMMS) to gain transparency into maintenance spend and asset performance. Yet many organizations still struggle to explain what is actually driving their Total Cost of Ownership (TCO).
The problem is not a lack of data. It is how that data is connected and used.
Industry research shows that nearly 80% of CMMS users never fully adopt the platform’s capabilities. As a result, CMMS often becomes a system of record, not a system of insight. Work orders are logged, invoices are stored, and assets are tracked, but the underlying cost drivers remain hidden.
CMMS platforms are effective at capturing activity. They can tell you what happened, where it happened, and how much was billed. What they typically cannot do is explain why costs are increasing or which behaviors are driving long-term spend.
Facilities leaders frequently see rising costs despite having a CMMS in place because the system was not designed to interpret outcomes. It tracks transactions, not performance. Without deeper analysis, leaders are left reacting to invoices instead of managing cost drivers.
True TCO visibility requires understanding patterns across providers, assets, labor, and locations, not just reviewing work order totals.
TCO is driven by relationships between data sets that most CMMS platforms manage independently. When these elements remain siloed, cost drivers are easy to miss.
To understand TCO, facilities leaders need to connect:
• Provider behavior and performance trends
• Invoice data at the line-item level
• Labor patterns by trade and region
• Asset history and frequency of failure
• Cost benchmarks for context
• Repeat issues and callbacks
Without these connections, leaders may know what they spent, but not what they should change.
This gap explains why many organizations with mature CMMS deployments still struggle to control maintenance spend.
A CMMS can show that two locations spent the same amount last quarter. It cannot explain that one location required repeat service calls, longer labor durations, or higher parts markups. Those insights live between the data points.
Without linking provider behavior to invoice accuracy, or asset history to repeat repairs, facilities leaders lack the context needed to intervene. Cost-cutting decisions often default to hourly rates or vendor consolidation, which can increase long-term costs when quality and root cause resolution suffer.
Vixxo’s facilities management solution is designed to sit above the CMMS layer, not replace it. The platform and service model connect operational data with financial outcomes, turning maintenance activity into actionable insight.
By combining technology, active invoice auditing, provider performance management, and asset-level analytics, Vixxo enables facilities leaders to see which behaviors drive cost, where inefficiencies exist, and how to correct them in real time.
This is the difference between tracking maintenance and managing total cost of ownership.
With operating costs continuing to rise, facilities leaders are under pressure to justify spend, protect asset uptime, and reduce avoidable maintenance. CMMS alone cannot deliver this visibility.
TCO insight comes from connecting data, applying expertise, and acting on patterns before costs escalate.
Is CMMS still necessary in a TCO-focused model?
Yes. CMMS is essential for tracking work orders and assets. TCO visibility comes from layering analytics, governance, and expertise on top of CMMS data.
Why is invoice data alone not enough?
Invoices show what was billed, not whether the work was efficient, accurate, or repeatable. TCO requires understanding behavior and outcomes over time.
How can facilities leaders close the TCO visibility gap?
By pairing CMMS with a facilities management solution that actively analyzes provider performance, validates costs, and connects asset history to spend.
Want to talk facilities?
Leave a comment or question below and we'll reach out!