Increasing Apathy From Senior Executives to Talking About “Deferred Maintenance” – What to do About it

Last week we talked about the increasing apathy among senior leaders when it comes to Deferred Capital Renewal and Maintenance (DCRM). This week I want to focus on what that apathy means—and what facilities leaders can do to break through it.

Across every conference this fall, institutions shared the same warning signs:

• More emergency repairs 
• More systems operating past end of life 
• More budget surprises 
• More downtime and service disruptions 
• More staff burnout 

None of this is due to a lack of effort. Facilities teams have done heroic work for decades. But the infrastructure is aging faster than institutions are reinvesting. New equipment doesn’t last as long as it used to. Regulations are getting stricter. And the risk curve is steepening.

Ways to Re-Engage Senior Executives

Here are the approaches I heard that are gaining traction: 

• Shift from numbers to consequences.
  • Executives respond more to:
    • Impact on students and residence life 
    • Research competitiveness 
    • Accreditation risk 
    • Energy and sustainability goals 

Dollar figures alone don’t move the needle. 

• Use shorter time horizons.
  • A 20-year capital plan feels abstract. A 3–5 year risk forecast feels real. 
• Connect operations and capital planning.
  • When leaders understand that better renewal planning reduces operating volatility, the conversation becomes more strategic. 
• Highlight avoided failures.
  • Executives need to see that “nothing bad has happened yet” is the result of proactive work, not an indicator that everything is fine. 
• Tie the message directly to institutional priorities.
  • DCRM is not separate from core strategy—it affects recruitment, retention, research, safety, and reputation. 

The Opportunity Ahead

Apathy isn’t permanent. But it won’t shift unless we tell the story in a new way. The facilities teams I spoke with are leading that shift—focusing on clarity, relevance, and practical solutions instead of doom and gloom.  

At the start of last week’s post I mentioned our disdain for the term Deferred Maintenance and how we are trying to change it to DRCM.  One of the main reasons that we have been pushing for the change is to fight the apathy towards hearing about DM.  We need a new narrative.  In addition to the approaches above, we believe that changing the term will change the conversation, and we can start focusing on the “capital renewal” part and less on the “maintenance” part of the equation.   

Next week we’ll explore another conference-season theme: Doing more (or the same) with less. See you then.