Recently I wrote a short article based on a 1993 Architects’ Journal interview with IBM’s then design manager of property, Peter Wingrave. It reminded me how discussions about new ways of working – now including that neologism hybrid working – have been a constant throughout my career. In that interview, Wingrave is quoted as saying: “I think there are interesting times ahead for offices. We are already seeing the slow breakdown of the traditional office which people come to in the morning and leave at night…We would like our offices to catch the social spirit of an old gentleman’s club; you just pop in when you need to. You get more out of people that way… we’re lucky if our marketing areas are ever 40 per cent occupied … It’s crazy to build, run, heat, light and decorate a building as if people were there when 60 per cent of the time you know they are not”.
Now, that last one’s a gem. In the 90s I undertook space utilization rate studies. A slow process; almost all the results were dire. These studies served as a ‘mirror’ for estate directors to show profligate occupiers the unsustainability of their space use. However, the approach was blunt and required substantial ‘business case’ persuasion to complement it. There was always that nagging question: If they weren’t where they were planned to be, where were they? Few studies went that far.
Meanwhile, the estate planning industry continued its operations based on a mix of lease break profiling, cost centre ownership, employee headcount projections, and hierarchically driven space standards – an approach systematically biased towards over-provision.
Fast forward 30 years, and we find utilization studies automated and near real-time. Combined with occupier demand information, this allows for highly predictive occupancy management, creating significant saving opportunities for facilities managers.
Today’s portfolio management challenge lies in understanding the workstyle demands of an evolving workforce. Rather than assuming management knows best, all parties should collaboratively create an ecosystem and embark on an ‘always in beta’ journey to discover what makes teams and individuals effective.
It’s worth noting that hybrid working and near-remote working models were not uncommon even in the 90s. As a London based building surveyor, I observed two primary office types: spaces for self-actualizing groups of professionals focused on achieving results in their preferred manner, and ‘factories’ where employees were managed by line of sight (but you had your own desk).
So, when I read about the likes of Amazon and others mandating a ‘back to the office, 5 days a week’, I conclude that they are signalling to those impacted employees that they are really working in a factory. And then I start to recognise a cycle: It’s probably a headcount cull, synchronised with the lease break on that excess space, so improving overall space cost metrics, itself partly enabled by a tacit reintroduction of hybrid working patterns (for equally misguided reasons).
Gosh, have I become so cynical?
Marcus Bowen is the co-founder of Work&Place Journal. His mission is to make the Corporate Real Estate function more efficient and effective, at scale, at speed.
November 8, 2024
That conversation about hybrid working? Same as it ever was
by Marcus Bowen • Comment, Facilities management, Flexible working, Property
Now, that last one’s a gem. In the 90s I undertook space utilization rate studies. A slow process; almost all the results were dire. These studies served as a ‘mirror’ for estate directors to show profligate occupiers the unsustainability of their space use. However, the approach was blunt and required substantial ‘business case’ persuasion to complement it. There was always that nagging question: If they weren’t where they were planned to be, where were they? Few studies went that far.
Meanwhile, the estate planning industry continued its operations based on a mix of lease break profiling, cost centre ownership, employee headcount projections, and hierarchically driven space standards – an approach systematically biased towards over-provision.
Fast forward 30 years, and we find utilization studies automated and near real-time. Combined with occupier demand information, this allows for highly predictive occupancy management, creating significant saving opportunities for facilities managers.
Today’s portfolio management challenge lies in understanding the workstyle demands of an evolving workforce. Rather than assuming management knows best, all parties should collaboratively create an ecosystem and embark on an ‘always in beta’ journey to discover what makes teams and individuals effective.
It’s worth noting that hybrid working and near-remote working models were not uncommon even in the 90s. As a London based building surveyor, I observed two primary office types: spaces for self-actualizing groups of professionals focused on achieving results in their preferred manner, and ‘factories’ where employees were managed by line of sight (but you had your own desk).
So, when I read about the likes of Amazon and others mandating a ‘back to the office, 5 days a week’, I conclude that they are signalling to those impacted employees that they are really working in a factory. And then I start to recognise a cycle: It’s probably a headcount cull, synchronised with the lease break on that excess space, so improving overall space cost metrics, itself partly enabled by a tacit reintroduction of hybrid working patterns (for equally misguided reasons).
Gosh, have I become so cynical?
Marcus Bowen is the co-founder of Work&Place Journal. His mission is to make the Corporate Real Estate function more efficient and effective, at scale, at speed.