Why Technology Alone Is Not Reducing Total Facilities Spend

Facilities leaders have invested heavily in maintenance technology to gain control over rising costs. Work order platforms promise better visibility, standardized workflows, and improved service provider performance. Yet for many multi-site organizations, total facilities spend continues to climb year over year.

The issue is not technology adoption. It is the assumption that technology alone can reduce total cost of ownership (TCO).

The following national retail case study illustrates this clearly.

Case Study: When Technology Delivers Data but Costs Still Rise

A national retailer with more than 500 locations across the U.S. implemented a leading maintenance platform to improve oversight and control facilities spend. The system successfully centralized work orders, standardized processes, and delivered robust reporting.

Despite these improvements, facilities costs increased by approximately 24% year over year. The platform made activity visible. It did not change outcomes.

Portfolio analysis revealed several persistent issues:

• Facilities spend averaged approximately $37,000 per store annually, well above industry benchmarks near $27,000
• A high volume of reactive repairs continued despite detailed reporting
• Nearly one quarter of repairs were repeat calls within a 30-day period
• Invoicing lacked sufficient detail to validate labor duration and materials pricing
• Provider performance issues were visible but not corrected at scale

The organization had access to data across every location. What it lacked was the ability to consistently act on that data across a large, distributed portfolio.

Why Technology Alone Falls Short

Maintenance platforms excel at capturing and organizing information. They are not designed to manage behavior.

Technology can show:

• Which providers are being dispatched
• How many work orders are opened
• How long repairs take
• Where spend is increasing

What it cannot do on its own is:

• Prevent unnecessary dispatches
• Enforce repair standards across vendors
• Validate time on site versus labor billed
• Identify and eliminate repeat failures
• Hold providers accountable for outcomes, not just responsiveness

In this case, the retailer could clearly see inefficiencies across the portfolio. Internal teams did not have the capacity, specialized expertise, or governance model required to correct them consistently.

Vendor Consolidation Did Not Solve the Problem

To simplify operations, the retailer relied heavily on large regional and national service providers recommended through the platform’s marketplace. While this reduced vendor complexity, it introduced new cost challenges.

Without active oversight:

• Labor hours frequently exceeded actual time on site
• Materials were bundled without transparency
• Travel and trip charges varied significantly by market
• Repeat repairs persisted without consequence

The perception of control created by the technology platform did not align with actual control over cost and quality.

Visibility Is Not the Same as Control

This case highlights a critical distinction for facilities leaders: visibility does not equal cost control.

True TCO reduction requires:

• Clear standards for how work is performed and billed
• Active review and intervention when issues arise
• Root cause analysis to prevent recurring failures
• Ongoing provider performance management

These elements sit outside the scope of most work order platforms.

Moving From Technology to TCO Outcomes

Facilities costs continue to outpace overall direct store operating expense growth, putting pressure on already thin margins. Leaders looking to control TCO must rethink the role technology plays in their facilities strategy.

Technology should be viewed as an enabler, not a solution. When paired with human expertise and structured oversight, it becomes a powerful tool for driving outcomes. When used alone, it is simply a reporting layer.

For a deeper look at how organizations can move beyond technology and systematically reduce facilities and equipment TCO, Vixxo outlines proven approaches and benchmarks here: https://www.vixxo.com/resources/containing-facility-and-equipment-costs

FAQs

Why doesn’t maintenance technology automatically reduce facilities costs?

Technology improves visibility and reporting, but it does not manage provider behavior, enforce standards, or eliminate repeat repairs without additional oversight.

What role should technology play in facilities cost control?

Technology should enable transparency and data access while people and processes drive accountability, execution, and continuous improvement.

Can TCO be reduced without changing platforms?

Yes. Many organizations see meaningful TCO reductions by improving governance, provider management, and execution on top of existing technology.

Want to talk facilities?

Leave a comment or question below and we'll reach out!