Many school facility professionals have strong, opposing views about outsourcing. They either feel it is all good or all bad. There are not many in-between. Many see it as a way to increase quality, decrease cost and service problems, while others see it as a loss of jobs, poor quality and higher costs. Both views are filled with myths.

The goal of this article is not to argue about whether outsourcing facility functions is a good or bad idea, but to recognize first that it’s a reality. According to a 2001 survey on privatization/contract services, 79 percent of schools contract out at least one service, and four percent use outside companies to handle five or more services.

It is useful at this point to define the terms that surround outsourcing and its history. Before the 1990s, we used the term“contracted out,” which represented a clear and defined explanation. The term meant,“A business practice of transferring selected functions or services to a party outside your realm of school business.”

The term “outsourcing” generated a considerably broader definition for services provided by external vendors. It also became the taboo word for any service within the school structure that was threatened. In the early days, transportation departments were the biggest targets for outsourcing and continue to be a major target.

The new century brought forth the term “out-tasking,” which implies the hiring of a specialized vendor to provide one or more services within an existing department, such as custodial cleaning and landscaping, within the confines of an existing maintenance department.

No matter what phrase you choose, the industry and strategy of outsourcing is not going away. It is a billion-dollar business and growing every day.

The Outsourcing Institute of New York lists a number of reasons for public schools to outsource various tasks to third party vendors. According to this institute, outsourcing improves the focus of the institution on educational issues related to student achievement. In other words, public schools’ primary mission should be student success while others focus on supporting that endeavor.

Another reason is the advantage of specialized capabilities and knowledge, which normally a public institution could not afford in-house. Every organization, especially public schools, is limited in the resources it can devote to any given task. Therefore, when you are able to outsource or out-task some of the peripheral tasks, the district can redirect staff and budget to the core mission and vision of the institution.

Of course, a reduction in operating cost is an advantage. Most facility managers threatened by this usually argue the point, “How can a profit-making company save you money by doing what we already do?” The answer is complicated. Redirection of staff and budget allocations can have a direct impact on administering your school, which in most cases, does save money. Another cost savings comes with the valuable expertise provided to redefine how we do business based on real-world experience.

Although outsourcing seems to be an attractive process for budget-strapped public schools, there are a number of drawbacks. All of them should be considered both individually and collectively before a school board or upper administration seeks a “Request For Proposal” (RFP) to third-party vendors. Those include:

Outsourcing or out-tasking is an enormous consideration for any school system. A long analysis should be approached with honest and realistic outcomes that can be justified through a measurable business plan. v

An outsourcing relationship doesn’t just happen over night; it takes a lot of work, especially in the beginning before you write the RFP. If these measures are not tested and documented prior to initiating an out-tasking effort, the end result will be difficult to overcome. If a school district is not successful, then new terms enter into the field like: “re-sourcing” or “in-sourcing.” These terms mean bringing back in-house those services that were outsourced previously. This will be a costly endeavor.

So what is the plan to “get it right the first time?” There isn’t a “one plan fits all” that you can go on a Website and download, but there are proven processes that can be followed that will provide the documentation to build a business plan for outsourcing. It will also help to identify any cautionary areas or roadblocks that can limit success.

The experiences of outsourcing efforts are as varied as the vendors providing the services, and no single factor accounts for the discrepancies in outsourcing relationships. One ingredient that often is overlooked in selecting the right outsourcing mix is corporate culture vs. school district culture. Culture is the values shared by the people of an organization that tend to persist through time, even when the leadership changes. Culture defines the way people get things done in all organizations. Culture is the very essence of their DNA.

Corporate culture many times is expressed in a written document expressing the very nature of their existence. In school culture it is defined in their genes, personality, norms and values that are usually not captured in a formal document or process. It is what it is.

For public school district executives to secure the proper fit between cultures, they should do extensive homework at the beginning of the solicitation and selection process while preparing the internal population for the change that is about to occur. Creating the match between an external service provider and the district constituents is about relationship building and change management.

Once an outsourcing contract is secured, the melding of values begins. Let’s say it is a contract for out-tasking a part of an existing department, such as maintenance management. Most out-tasking contracts include the hiring of some existing school district employees by the third party vendor, in order to secure the historical knowledge and cultural experience needed for them to maintain a relationship with department employees of the district, as well as with principals and other administrators. This provides the opportunity for in-house management staff to elevate themselves to a level that their previous positions would never allow them to go. These staff positions have now moved from overhead expense to a revenue generator.

A good contract services vendor will immediately train those employees about the corporate initiatives and increase any other craft knowledge they may need to be better managers. At a district where I previously worked, one of my best maintenance managers moved to the contract service world when the vendor took over the maintenance management. In reality, he was as far as he was going to go in the district, but with that move, he has a greater opportunity to advance in his profession.

This transition process of in-house employees is also good for the district, which retains a wealth of on-site experience, as well as a buffer between the “new leaders” and the “old workers.” Successful outsourcing isn’t always about money or quality or need, as much as it is about relationship on a human level.

Outsourcing is not the end to all the problems. Some of the redirection of staff will be to maintain the contract of the third party vendor. Conflicts will arise which someone in the district will have to facilitate on almost a daily bases. Morale issues will have to be dealt with, as well as loss of daily control. It is a time-consuming job that is critical to the success of the transition.

The reality of outsourcing is if the school district does not have the expert staff and operating funds to do an efficient and effective job in-house, then it needs to consider the use of an outside vendor to achieve the success they need in order to concentrate their focus on the education of children.