I joined BOMA San Diego a while back because I felt a kinship with the organization’s mission statement “to promote the interests of a changing commercial real estate industry by encouraging partnerships in professional development, networking and advocacy.” I’m not one for goose bumps, but I truly believed that I had found a group that at least acknowledged there are changes taking place in the commercial real estate business and that collectively, the Building Owners and Managers Association seemed equipped and inclined to help its members deal with them.

Later, it didn’t seem that much of a leap of faith to commit my company to sponsor the organization’s annual signature event — “The Office Building of the Year” or TOBY competition. Again, I was impressed by the event’s stated goal: “Awarding Excellence in Office Building Management.” I’ve been a staunch observer of so much mediocrity in building management over the years that I seized upon the TOBY awards as an opportunity to be positive and support excellence. My company associates and I represent tenants who lease space in many buildings; we have no favorites or nests to feather. And so we signed on as the sponsor of this year’s competition totally free of any pre-conceived notions as to what buildings should be honored.

Being open minded, however, didn’t shield me later from the soul-shuddering results of the competition and the fuzzy criteria the clueless judges used to select at least one of the winning buildings.

I’m sure many, if not most, of the tenants at One America Plaza, along with myself, were aghast to learn that the building had won the TOBY for buildings 500,000 to 1 million square feet for “excellence in office building management.” It is readily apparent to anyone who’s familiar with that building that there was no way management excellence could have been among the major criteria for its selection. In fact, most of the write-ups for this award, as well as those for other buildings honored, deal with aspects of the buildings that have little or nothing to do with building management. The criteria seem more appropriate for the “Orchids and Onions” architectural competition sponsored by the San Diego chapter of the American Institute of Architects than for a competition that supposedly focuses on building management.

Let me be specific. In an article on the One America Plaza’s award, the competition’s two judges fawned over the building manager, citing the “… secrets of running and marketing a signature property.”

The first “secret” was the old realtor’s adage: location, location, location. Sure, One America Plaza is well placed on the western rim of downtown San Diego with water view space aplenty. I ask: What does that have to do with building management?

Reputation was listed as another special secret. It is indeed a handsome structure, which is more the result of inspired and excellent architecture than property management. The article also cited the building as leading downtown in achieved rental rates. One would presume such, considering the building was the most expensive structure of its kind to build downtown. If it costs more to build, it follows it’s gotta cost more to lease.

Yet another supposed attribute of One America Plaza listed was attracting and retaining tenants. In a submarket in which there’s been nothing built in a decade, it’s no wonder this building enjoys high occupancy — along with all downtown Class A structures. What choices do tenants who need several thousand square feet of space in the downtown area have?

Whether One America Plaza’s tenants are happy campers is another issue. It’s clear the TOBY judges never talked to any of the building’s major tenants — a strange omission in today’s consumer-driven economic climate. I hear weekly from tenants who occupy several hundred thousand square feet in that building and their comments would not be appropriate to inscribe on any award trophy. And judging by the considerable square footage now occupied by tenants who plan to flee that building when new inventory comes on line, I wouldn’t brag about attracting and retaining tenants in that building in the coming months.

Building management is a function of establishing and maintaining positive and responsive inter-personal relations between a manager and tenants, not the “Absolute black granite waterfall surrounded by Facciata Carrara white marble and Moncervetto Buadiglio gray marble accented by insets of blue pearl granite,” or the fact that the building has technology and telecommunications amenities. Even the elevator cars paneled in “exotic Karelian Burl wood inlayed with stainless steel trim” that “speed you to your destination at up to 1,200 feet per minute” cannot substitute for what the TOBY judges should have been looking for — examples of building management practices that are responsive to the needs of a building’s tenants.

For example, if BOMA truly deals with building management issues, the TOBY Awards competition should have taken into account the extent to which a building manager not only runs the building’s electrical, parking, and janitorial services efficiently, among numerous other things, but whether he or she behaves in a way that acknowledges that the tenants indeed pay the manager’s salary. Does the manager treat tenants as if he or she counts it a privilege to have them in the building? Other businesses call it “customer satisfaction.” The awards would have offered the building management industry a unique opportunity to recognize managers who respond to all the tenants’ needs — whether it’s replacing burned-out light bulbs or repairing the air conditioning system in a prompt and civil manner.

One can only wonder what building would have won the TOBY awards, given those criteria, rather than all the gush over the building’s location, pretty tile and fast elevators.

I, for one, feel as if I was taken on a high-speed elevator ride — downward — as the sponsor of this year’s TOBY awards competition. Believe me when I say it won’t happen again.