What Good Facilities Management Really Looks Like in 2026
A definitive guide to why FM is no longer a cost centre, but a strategic infrastructure for safety, performance, energy, and sustainability
Introduction
The Evolution of Facilities Management: From Maintenance to Multi-Disciplinary Infrastructure Management
Redefining ‘Good’ Facilities Management in 2026
The Cost Centre Myth Revisited: Why FM, Energy and Sustainability Are Misunderstood Together
What Best-in-Class Facilities Management Looks Like in Practice
What This Means for Senior Leaders in 2026
The Consequences of Getting FM, Energy and Sustainability Wrong
Introduction: Why Facilities Management Now Carries More Responsibility Than Ever
Facilities Management has always mattered. What has changed is how much it now carries.
In 2026, FM is no longer responsible solely for keeping buildings operational, safe and compliant. It now sits at the intersection of:
- Safety and statutory compliance
- Operational performance and resilience
- Energy efficiency and carbon reduction
- Sustainability reporting and accountability
- Cost control in an unstable economic environment
This expansion of responsibility has happened gradually, often without formal recognition. Energy management, carbon reduction and sustainability targets have increasingly landed within FM’s remit – sometimes by design, sometimes by default.
As a result, facilities management has quietly become one of the most strategically exposed functions in any organisation.
Good facilities management in 2026 is no longer about “keeping the lights on”, but deciding when the lights should be on, how efficiently they operate, what they cost over their lifetime, and what impact they have on people, budgets and the planet.
This guide sets out what good really looks like, and why organisations that still treat FM as a background cost are increasingly vulnerable.
The Evolution of Facilities Management: From Maintenance to Multi-Disciplinary Infrastructure Management
Facilities management did not suddenly become strategic. It evolved into it, often without the governance structures keeping pace.
FM as Maintenance and Support
Originally, FM focused on:
- Reactive repairs
- Basic planned maintenance
- Day-to-day building functionality
Energy was largely treated as a fixed overhead. Sustainability was rarely discussed. Buildings consumed what they consumed, and FM’s job was to keep systems running.
The Compliance Expansion
As legislation expanded, FM absorbed responsibility for:
- Fire safety systems
- Electrical and gas safety
- Water hygiene
- Asbestos and building safety
This significantly raised FM’s risk exposure, but the function was still largely seen as operational rather than strategic.
The Energy and Sustainability Shift
Over the last decade, a further layer has been added:
- Rising energy costs
- Carbon reduction targets
- ESG reporting requirements
- Public and stakeholder scrutiny
Energy and sustainability did not arrive as standalone functions in most organisations. They landed within facilities management.
In 2026, FM is often responsible for:
- Energy procurement and monitoring
- Building energy performance
- Carbon reduction initiatives
- Plant efficiency and optimisation
- Supporting sustainability reporting with credible data
Yet many organisations still manage FM as if its role has not changed. This mismatch is where risk begins to accumulate.
Redefining “Good” Facilities Management in 2026
In 2026, good facilities management can no longer be defined narrowly. It must be assessed across five interconnected dimensions, each of which now includes energy and sustainability responsibility.
1. Strategic Alignment: FM as an Enabler of Organisational Outcomes
Good FM aligns the built environment with what the organisation is trying to achieve.
This now includes:
- Safety and wellbeing
- Operational performance
- Financial stability
- Environmental responsibility
In education, estates decisions influence:
- Attendance and engagement
- Thermal comfort and air quality
- Energy consumption across large, ageing estates
In healthcare, FM decisions affect:
- Infection control
- Energy-intensive clinical environments
- Resilience of critical infrastructure
In commercial settings, FM shapes:
- Productivity and staff retention
- Energy efficiency and cost control
- Brand credibility around sustainability
Good FM leaders understand that energy performance and sustainability outcomes are not separate from operational performance. They are part of it.
2. Safety, Compliance and Sustainability Are Now Interdependent
In 2026, safety, compliance and sustainability can no longer be managed in silos.
Examples include:
- Poorly maintained plant consuming excessive energy
- Outdated systems increasing both safety risk and carbon output
- Emergency repairs generating higher environmental impact than planned upgrades
Good facilities management recognises these interdependencies.
Compliance is no longer just about meeting statutory minimums. It is about:
- Ensuring systems operate safely and efficiently
- Reducing waste through better asset performance
- Managing risk in a way that supports long-term sustainability
Facilities management underpins safety and compliance because it controls the systems where both risk and energy consumption physically exist.
3. Maintenance Strategy Now Directly Impacts Energy and Carbon Performance
Maintenance is no longer neutral in environmental terms.
A poorly maintained building:
- Uses more energy
- Fails more often
- Has a shorter asset lifespan
- Generates higher embodied carbon through replacement
Good FM in 2026 understands that maintenance strategy is also an energy strategy.
Reactive Maintenance: The Worst Outcome for Cost and Carbon
Reactive maintenance leads to:
- Inefficient emergency repairs
- Increased energy waste
- Premature asset replacement
- Higher embodied carbon impact
Planned and Predictive Maintenance: Efficiency by Design
Well-maintained systems:
- Operate closer to design efficiency
- Consume less energy
- Last longer
- Reduce whole-life carbon impact
Predictive maintenance, in particular, allows FM teams to intervene before efficiency drops, not just before failure occurs.
This is why maintenance maturity is now inseparable from sustainability performance.
4. Technology, Automation and AI: Enabling Better Decisions, Not Replacing People
Technology is no longer optional in facilities management, but its role is often misunderstood.
In 2026, the purpose of technology in FM is not to remove people from the equation, but to enable them to work more intelligently, with better information and fewer manual constraints.
Facilities management has historically been burdened by fragmented data, manual processes and reactive decision-making. Engineers, managers and compliance teams have spent disproportionate time chasing information, updating records and responding to issues after they occur. This limits the ability of FM teams to focus on risk, performance and improvement.
Good FM in 2026 uses technology to remove friction, not responsibility.
This includes:
- Process automation to reduce manual administration and repetitive tasks
- Centralised, accurate asset and compliance data that can be trusted
- AI-assisted analysis to identify patterns, predict risk and highlight inefficiency
- Real-time visibility of building performance, rather than retrospective reporting
AI and automation do not replace engineering expertise or professional judgement. Instead, they augment it. They allow FM teams to:
- Identify emerging issues before they become failures
- Prioritise maintenance based on risk, performance and energy impact
- Focus time and resource on decision-making rather than data handling
- Support compliance and sustainability with reliable, auditable information
In mature organisations, technology acts as an enabler of better governance. It supports consistency, accountability and transparency across estates, while allowing skilled people to apply their expertise where it matters most.
The organisations that struggle are often not those without technology, but those using it poorly; treating systems as reporting tools rather than operational infrastructure. In contrast, best-in-class FM functions use digital platforms, automation and AI to strengthen control, improve foresight and support smarter, more proactive management of buildings.
Working smarter, not harder, is no longer a productivity slogan. In facilities management, it is now a prerequisite for managing safety, compliance, energy and sustainability at scale.
5. Energy Management Is Not Optional. It Is Core FM Business
In 2026, energy is no longer a background utility cost. It is a strategic risk.
Facilities management is increasingly responsible for:
- Monitoring and reducing energy consumption
- Identifying inefficiencies in building systems
- Supporting decarbonisation initiatives
- Managing the operational impact of energy volatility
Good FM teams understand:
- Where energy is being consumed
- Which assets are driving inefficiency
- How operational behaviour affects energy use
Crucially, they can translate this into action, not just reporting.
Energy management within FM now directly affects:
- Operating budgets
- Carbon targets
- Organisational credibility
6. Sustainability Is Delivered Through FM, Not Aspirations
Sustainability strategies often fail at the point of delivery.
Targets may be set at board level, but delivery depends on:
- Building performance
- Asset condition
- Operational behaviour
- Maintenance regimes
Facilities management is where sustainability ambitions either succeed or quietly unravel.
Good FM in 2026:
- Integrates sustainability into everyday decisions
- Prioritises interventions that reduce energy and waste
- Balances capital investment with operational efficiency
- Understands whole-life cost and carbon
Sustainability is no longer a separate initiative. It is a lens through which FM decisions are made.
The Cost Centre Myth Revisited: Why FM, Energy and Sustainability Are Misunderstood Together
Facilities management, energy management and sustainability are often grouped together for one reason: they are all perceived as unavoidable costs rather than strategic value drivers. This perception is deeply ingrained and, by 2026, increasingly misaligned with operational reality.
The myth persists largely because success in these areas is quiet. When facilities management is effective, buildings function safely and reliably. When energy is managed well, consumption reduces gradually rather than dramatically. When sustainability initiatives are embedded properly, carbon reduction is incremental and continuous, not headline-grabbing.
In each case, the absence of problems is the outcome, and absence is easy to overlook.
By contrast, failure is immediate and visible. A critical plant breakdown, an unexpected surge in energy costs, or a compliance issue that attracts regulatory scrutiny quickly draws attention at senior level. These moments are often treated as isolated incidents, rather than as indicators of deeper structural issues within estate management, energy strategy or governance.
As a result, organisations frequently undervalue preventative investment while accepting reactive expenditure as inevitable.
There are three reasons this misunderstanding has proved so persistent:
- Energy savings are largely invisible when they are delivered successfully, becoming part of the baseline rather than a celebrated outcome
- Carbon reduction is cumulative and long-term, which makes it harder to attribute success to specific decisions or investments
- Preventative facilities work avoids disruption, meaning it rarely generates the attention that reactive intervention does
This creates a distorted view of value, where crisis response is seen as tangible and necessary, while prevention is viewed as discretionary.
The reality in 2026 is that good facilities management is one of the most effective tools organisations have for controlling both cost and risk, particularly in relation to energy and sustainability.
Well-governed FM directly contributes to value by:
- Reducing energy waste through properly maintained and optimised building systems
- Stabilising operating costs and reducing exposure to energy price volatility
- Extending asset life and improving return on capital investment
- Supporting credible delivery against carbon and sustainability commitments
- Avoiding the financial and environmental cost of emergency, reactive interventions
Equally important is what poor facilities management creates; often slowly and unnoticed at first.
Weak FM practice tends to:
- Lock organisations into inefficient, energy-hungry buildings
- Increase reliance on ageing plant that performs below design efficiency
- Force reactive, short-notice repairs that are both costly and carbon-intensive
- Undermine confidence in sustainability reporting due to poor-quality data
- Transfer operational risk upwards until it becomes a leadership issue
Over time, this leads to a cycle of volatility: unpredictable spend, rising energy use, increasing carbon exposure and escalating risk to safety, compliance and reputation.
This is why facilities management, energy and sustainability should not be treated as separate budget lines or competing priorities. They are different expressions of the same underlying question: how effectively does the organisation understand, operate and invest in its built environment?
In 2026, ignoring this interdependence is no longer defensible. Energy volatility, carbon accountability and public scrutiny have made inefficiency both expensive and visible. Boards are increasingly expected not just to set sustainability ambition, but to demonstrate credible delivery, and that delivery happens, or fails, through facilities management.
Reframing FM as strategic infrastructure is not about increasing spend indiscriminately. It is about recognising that informed, preventative investment reduces long-term cost, mitigates risk and strengthens organisational resilience. The true cost centre is not facilities management itself, but the absence of a strategic, energy-aware and sustainability-led approach to it.
What Best-in-Class Facilities Management Looks Like in Practice
Organisations delivering genuinely good facilities management in 2026 tend to look very different from those still operating tactically. The difference is not usually budget size or organisational scale, but how deliberately the built environment is understood, governed and invested in.
At the heart of best-in-class FM is integration. Asset management, maintenance planning and energy performance are no longer treated as separate workstreams, owned by different teams with competing priorities. Instead, decisions about how a building is maintained, upgraded or replaced are made together, informed by a clear understanding of risk, performance and long-term value. A failing boiler, for example, is not viewed simply as a maintenance problem, but as an opportunity to address energy efficiency, resilience and carbon impact at the same time.
This integrated approach gives FM leaders far greater visibility of risk, particularly in relation to energy and carbon. Best-in-class organisations can clearly identify which assets are energy-intensive, which systems are operating below their intended efficiency, and where the most meaningful opportunities for improvement sit. This visibility is not theoretical; it is grounded in real operational data and a practical understanding of how buildings are actually used. As a result, energy and carbon risk become manageable, rather than abstract or overwhelming.
Investment decisions in high-performing FM functions are also notably more proactive. Capital spend is not driven solely by asset failure or budget cycles, but by a considered assessment of where investment will deliver the greatest reduction in risk and the strongest long-term return. Energy performance, asset criticality and whole-life cost are weighed together, allowing organisations to avoid the false economy of short-term fixes that simply defer larger problems. Over time, this approach stabilises operating costs and reduces exposure to both energy volatility and emergency intervention.
People play a critical role in this maturity. Best-in-class facilities management relies on teams who understand not just buildings, but how those buildings perform as systems. They are comfortable interpreting energy data, confident in managing compliance and risk, and able to translate technical information into insight that senior leaders can act on. Crucially, they understand the operational context of the organisation, whether that is education, healthcare or commercial delivery, and can align FM decisions accordingly.
Technology supports all of this, but it does not replace competence or governance. Digital platforms, monitoring tools and reporting systems are valuable enablers, yet they only deliver benefit when they are underpinned by clear processes, skilled people and strong oversight. In organisations where FM performs at a high level, technology is used to enhance judgement, not substitute for it.
What distinguishes best-in-class facilities management in 2026 is not complexity, but coherence. Assets, energy, maintenance, compliance and investment are treated as parts of a single system, managed with intent rather than habit. This coherence is what allows FM to move beyond day-to-day survival and become a stable, strategic contributor to organisational resilience and performance.
What This Means for Senior Leaders in 2026
Facilities management is no longer just an estates issue. It is a leadership issue.
Boards should be asking:
- How energy-efficient is our estate today?
- Which buildings present the highest carbon and cost risk?
- How resilient are we to energy volatility?
- How confident are we in the data underpinning our sustainability reporting?
If FM cannot answer these questions clearly, risk is accumulating unseen.
The Consequences of Getting FM, Energy and Sustainability Wrong
In 2026, failure in facilities management no longer remains contained within the estates or operations function. When FM, energy management and sustainability are poorly governed, the consequences escalate quickly and visibly across the organisation.
The most immediate impact is financial. Inefficient buildings consume more energy than necessary, exposing organisations to ongoing cost increases and volatility in energy markets. Deferred maintenance leads to asset failure, and asset failure leads to emergency repairs – almost always at a higher cost, with greater disruption and a larger environmental footprint than planned intervention. Over time, these pressures erode budgets and undermine financial predictability.
Alongside rising costs sit missed sustainability commitments. Carbon reduction targets, energy efficiency goals and wider ESG obligations are now commonplace at board level, yet delivery depends almost entirely on how buildings are operated, maintained and invested in. When FM lacks the data, authority or strategic alignment to act effectively, sustainability targets slip. The result is not a lack of ambition, but a credibility gap between what the organisation says it will achieve and what its estate can realistically deliver.
Reputational risk has also increased significantly. In sectors such as education, healthcare and the public realm, the condition and performance of buildings are highly visible. Safety incidents, inefficient or uncomfortable environments, and failure to demonstrate responsible energy use can quickly undermine trust. Stakeholders increasingly interpret poor estate performance as a sign of weak leadership, not just technical failure.
Regulatory scrutiny has intensified in parallel. Safety legislation, building performance standards and environmental reporting requirements now demand clearer evidence of control and accountability. Where FM systems are fragmented or reactive, organisations struggle to demonstrate assurance. Audits become high-risk events rather than routine processes, and the likelihood of enforcement action or external intervention increases.
Perhaps most critically, weak facilities management reduces organisational resilience. Buildings that are inefficient, unreliable or non-compliant limit an organisation’s ability to respond to change, absorb disruption or plan confidently for the future. Energy volatility, extreme weather events and growing operational demands all place additional strain on estates that are already under pressure.
At an organisational level, these failures manifest as:
- Increased operating costs driven by inefficiency, emergency works and unplanned spend
- Missed sustainability and carbon targets, undermining ESG credibility
- Reputational damage linked to visible estate failure or perceived irresponsibility
- Heightened regulatory scrutiny, with greater exposure to enforcement and sanction
- Reduced organisational resilience, limiting the ability to adapt or invest strategically
Conclusion: Facilities Management as the Engine Room of Sustainable Performance
Good facilities management in 2026 is not about buildings alone.
It is about:
- Protecting people
- Enabling performance
- Controlling cost
- Reducing environmental impact
- Delivering long-term resilience
Facilities management is now the engine room where safety, compliance, energy and sustainability are delivered in practice.
Organisations that continue to treat FM as a background cost will absorb risks they can no longer afford.
Those that recognise it as strategic infrastructure will be safer, more efficient and more sustainable.
That is what good really looks like in 2026.
Facilities Management now underpins far more than building upkeep. It influences safety, energy efficiency, sustainability delivery and organisational resilience.
The next step is not necessarily to do more, but to do things differently.
Consider whether your maintenance strategy, energy oversight and governance structures are genuinely supporting your organisation’s priorities in 2026, or whether they are still rooted in assumptions from the past.
Let’s talk!
