What’s Best Handled by an FMC, and What’s Better Done Directly?

Fleet management companies (FMCs) remain essential partners for many commercial fleets. But fleet managers are increasingly asking whether every service needs to be handled through the same provider.

Across three rotations of fleet managers, participants discussed the strengths of their FMC partnerships, the services they sometimes prefer to manage directly, and the trade-offs involved in working with specialized providers.

Where FMCs Deliver the Most Value

Participants generally agreed that FMCs continue to provide significant value in access to capital and financing, factory ordering, and fuel management.

These services benefit from the FMC’s scale, established processes, and buying power. Participants expressed little interest in moving them elsewhere. Other services generated more debate.

Stock vehicle acquisition was one example. Fleet managers with established dealership relationships said they could sometimes locate vehicles faster by working directly with dealers rather than going through their FMC.

Title and registration services were another frequent source of frustration. Participants described delays and paperwork challenges, although some acknowledged that their own drivers and internal processes contributed to the problem.

Toll management also came under scrutiny, particularly when administrative fees appeared disproportionate to the underlying toll. One example raised during the discussion involved a $5 fee on a $1.50 toll.

Remarketing and accident management were additional areas where participants saw potential advantages in working with specialized providers.

Maintenance management was less clear-cut. Some fleets preferred handling it themselves, while others believed their FMC provided better service than they could achieve independently.

Speed and Specialization Drive Decisions

Across the discussion, speed emerged as a recurring reason for reconsidering bundled services.

But Holland’s notes highlighted another important consideration: The right sourcing decision depends heavily on the experience and resources of the person managing the fleet.

A fleet manager with strong dealer relationships and vehicle acquisition experience may be well positioned to handle stock purchases directly. Someone without that network may be better served by an FMC.

Participants also discussed the importance of measuring supplier performance. Vendor scorecards and regular meetings can help fleet managers identify service problems, resolve outstanding issues, and hold providers accountable.

One participant described using weekly meetings and a tracking system to manage outstanding issues with his FMC.

Unbundling Comes with Its Own Costs

Moving services outside an FMC doesn’t automatically make fleet operations more efficient.

Additional providers mean more contracts, invoices, integrations, and relationships to manage. Fleet managers also become responsible for coordinating services that previously operated within a single organization.

Participants noted that independent providers may offer shorter contracts and greater flexibility than traditional bundled agreements.

The discussion also touched on how artificial intelligence could eventually make it easier to work across multiple supplier platforms. Rather than relying on a single system, AI agents might retrieve information and coordinate tasks across different providers.

For now, that remains an emerging possibility rather than an established operating model.

The larger takeaway from the roundtable wasn’t that fleets should move away from their FMCs. It was that the partnership can be strengthened by periodically reassessing which services are best delivered through an FMC and which may benefit from a more specialized approach.

For fleet managers, the question is how to leverage an FMC’s scale and expertise while maintaining the flexibility to meet their organization’s specific operational needs.