Question: You operate 30 sites across India. Which strategy MOST reduces FM cost variability and operational risk?
A. Awarding a single national FM contract
B. Multi-vendor model with regional bidding
C. Hybrid: national SOPs + regional vendors
D. Fully in-house FM teams
Comment with the right option with your explantion.
.... Read MoreQuestion: You operate 30 sites across India. Which strategy MOST reduces FM cost variability and operational risk?
A. Awarding a single national FM contract
B. Multi-vendor model with regional bidding
C. Hybrid: national SOPs + regional vendors
D. Fully in-house FM teams
Comment with the right option with your explantion.
There are many variations of passages of Lorem Ipsum available, but the majority have suffered alteration in some form, by injected humour.
Add my business arrow_forward
Suppliers
Jobs 
News & Magazines 
Events 
Blogs 
Members Lounge
Podcasts 
Support
18 November, 2025 at 13:31 favorite_border 0
Will go with Option C. Hybrid: national SOPs + regional vendors ✅ Explanation A hybrid model gives you the best balance of cost control and operational reliability across 30 sites in India: National SOPs ensure standardization, predictable service levels, consistent safety/compliance, and easier performance auditing. Regional vendors reduce cost variability because pricing reflects local labour markets, and you avoid the premium and rigidity of a single national vendor. Operational risk reduces because if one regional vendor underperforms, it doesn’t impact all 30 sites (unlike a single national vendor). Better redundancy: Easy to replace or split vendors region-wise without a full transition burden. More flexibility to adapt to local regulations, union labour requirements, and skill availability — especially important in India. Why the other options are weaker: A. Single national FM contract ✔ Standardization ❌ Higher cost premium ❌ High operational risk — one vendor failure affects all sites B. Multi-vendor regional bidding ✔ Low cost ❌ High variability, inconsistent SOPs ❌ More governance burden D. Fully in-house ✔ High control ❌ Extremely high cost and HR risk ❌ Not scalable for 30 sites
18 November, 2025 at 12:48 favorite_border 1
I will opt for C – Hybrid. It is essential to maintain an oligopolistic approach in service provider selection to curb monopoly, ensure competitive performance, and uphold best practices across all vendors, while also enabling continuous learning from each individual service partner.
18 November, 2025 at 11:31 favorite_border 1
The answer is A. A single national FM contract ensures: Standardized pricing across all sites, reducing variability. Consistent service levels and accountability under one vendor. Lower operational risk since governance, escalation, and compliance are centralized.
17 November, 2025 at 12:37 favorite_border 1
Option A. Reason behind choosing the same. 1) Cost stabilisation. 2) Standardised SOP with Compliance. 3) Operational risk will go down and 4) Budget as per requirement for any operational integration plan. Thanks.
17 November, 2025 at 12:10 favorite_border 1
Awarding a single national FM contract with site level SLA and common SOP, brings benefits like single vendor management, higher resources available for bench and subject matter experts. The option of flexibility in dynamic market conditions of scalability and reduction is available. Standardized process create more operational efficiency.