The economies of scope and increased flexibility that come with a global solution provide more space for experimentation, which is often necessary in order to develop changes and improvements:
"All the risk sits with one party… You're more likely to go ahead [with a new idea] if you manage all the risks. If the project is split into different parts [construction, hard and soft FM], there is more chance of conflict or blame-shifting if things go wrong, which makes you risk averse. It's much harder to try something new under those circumstances."
With a direct stake in a project, the service provider is in a position to encourage experimentation. There are not the same incentives for a bank or construction-led consortium to invest up front in cutting-edge design from which they will not reap operational benefits.