PSA has been banging the recurring monthly revenue (RMR) drum since long before I joined the company almost ten years ago. Over the past five years, the industry has gotten on board, building some version of RMR into nearly every business model.

What hasn't kept pace is the operational side. In my role working closely with both vendors and integrators, I've watched the complexity behind RMR quietly grow right alongside its adoption. This lack of standardization is creating unnecessary friction and consuming a disproportionate amount of time to manage RMR profitably.

The majority of RMR is built for resellers to manage and end-users to consume. The transactions and renewals fall on the shoulders of the procurement teams within integration companies. Every vendor offering RMR has its own billing structure, contract terms, renewal cadence, and pricing model. Some bill monthly, others annually. Some auto-renew with little visibility, while others require manual intervention. What should be a predictable, scalable revenue stream instead becomes a patchwork of processes that are difficult to track, reconcile, and forecast.

This inconsistency creates a cascading effect across organizations. Procurement teams are forced to act as billing analysts, tracking dozens or even hundreds of vendor-specific contracts. Accounting teams must reconcile mismatched invoices and revenue recognition timelines. Sales teams struggle to confidently position bundled offerings without clear visibility into margin impacts. Conversations that should be focused on strategy and growth often become conversations about renewals, invoice discrepancies, and contract management. Leadership is left with an incomplete picture of the true health and profitability of its RMR portfolio.

The irony is that RMR is meant to simplify and stabilize business operations. It should provide predictable cash flow, increase company valuation, and strengthen long-term customer relationships. But without a standardized framework, integrators are absorbing hidden operational costs that erode those very benefits. Time spent managing exceptions, chasing renewals, or correcting billing errors is time not spent growing the business.

There is also a broader industry implication. As more vendors enter the RMR space, each introducing its own structure, the burden compounds. Integrators are forced to normalize these offerings internally, building custom workflows and workarounds to create consistency where none exists externally. Workarounds like these don't scale. They create dependence on institutional knowledge and increase risk when key team members leave or processes break down. It's a challenge I hear about regularly from members trying to create consistency across an increasingly complex vendor ecosystem.

Standardization means establishing a baseline set of expectations: clear billing intervals, transparent renewal terms, consistent data formatting, and accessible reporting. It doesn't require limiting innovation or forcing a one-size-fits-all model. These are not complex asks, but they require intentional alignment between vendors and the integrator community.

The opportunity here is significant. Vendors that prioritize operational simplicity alongside product innovation will stand out. Integrators will naturally gravitate toward partners who reduce friction, not add to it. Collectively, the industry can unlock RMR's full value as a sustainable, scalable business model, not merely a revenue stream.

The RMR boom is real, and it's here to stay. But if we want to fully realize its promise, we have to address the operational gaps that come with it. Standardization is the next phase of maturity for our industry. If we want RMR to continue delivering on its promise, vendors and integrators must work together to make RMR as easy to manage as it is to sell. Until we solve for it, we're leaving efficiency, profitability, and growth on the table.