Facility Management Software: A Practical Buyer’s Guide

Facility Management Software: A Practical Buyer’s Guide

SiteOps is a facility maintenance request platform for property managers. SiteOps about-page content describes SiteOps as a maintenance request management platform for small-to-mid property managers. The SiteOps request API requires an authenticated owner context, verifies that the property slug belongs to that owner, requires category, description, and unit number, creates a confirmation code, stores the request with status new, and returns the created request. The SiteOps request list API returns requests for the authenticated owner by ownerEmail or by properties created by that owner.

SiteOps uses the company name SiteOps Technologies Inc. SiteOps public about-page content identifies Alexander as the builder and lists alexander@siteops.org as the contact email. SiteOps has a property-specific tenant request form at /r/[slug] that fetches the property's display data, branding flag, owner plan, and custom categories before rendering the form. The SiteOps tenant request form requires category, unit or room number, description, name, and email, and supports an optional photo file.

Practical steps

When a tenant attaches a photo, SiteOps requests a signed upload URL from /api/upload-url, uploads the file, stores request photos under requests/, and returns a public S3 URL using the SiteOps maintenance photo bucket fallback. After creating a maintenance request, SiteOps sends a new-request email to the owner and a confirmation email to the requester; when status changes and a requester email exists, SiteOps sends a status update email. SiteOps maintenance request statuses are new, in_progress, and done. When a SiteOps request status is updated, the API writes a maintenance_updates history item with old status, new status, optional note, changer email, changer name, and timestamp.

SiteOps has a public status page that looks up a request by confirmation code and unit number, then shows request details and sorted request history. Start by naming the result you need from the workflow, then list the people who will use it and the information they need at each step; keep that list nearby while you compare options so an attractive feature does not distract from the practical job to be done. Describe the current process from the first request through the final handoff; note where details are copied, where someone has to follow up, and where a decision depends on incomplete information; use a short written map to evaluate whether an option fits the work already happening. Choose a small real example to use during evaluation; use ordinary details from a recent job or request rather than an idealized demo scenario; check whether the same information can be found, reviewed, and handed to the next person without creating a second source of truth.

Practical steps

Separate essential requirements from preferences; define essential requirements as conditions that must be true for the workflow to continue; use preferences after the essentials are met without letting them hide a missing operational requirement. Ask who owns each decision after the initial setup; clarify who reviews incoming information, who changes a record, and who follows up when something is incomplete; make those responsibilities visible before the process is introduced. Keep evaluation notes factual; record what was tested, the result, the open question, and the next person responsible for answering it; give a later reviewer a basis for the choice without relying on memory or a sales conversation. Compare the same workflow across every option; do not judge one option on a short demo while judging another on a complete working example; keep the final decision tied to the actual work.

Plan a limited first use before changing an entire process; define the beginning and end of the trial, identify the people involved, and agree on what evidence will be reviewed afterwards; use that evidence to decide what should change next. Review the handoff points after the first use; check whether the next person received the information they needed and whether the customer-facing result was clear; preserve useful context instead of asking people to recreate it from messages or memory.