Author
Abstract
COVID-19 has forced companies to introduce remote working practices at a wholescale level, a trend that had slowly been increasing over the last decade. Both positives and negatives have emerged as we all wrestle with the implications of removing the office from our daily routine. For the majority of the workforce, the lack of a long commute has been a huge benefit to the employee from a cost and time perspective, but is that reason enough to envisage a radically altered office experience? As companies look at new workplace strategies that allow them to retain the best staff, we anticipate a period of test, measure, learn and adapt from the majority of progressive corporate real estate (CRE) teams. They have to balance the need to retain their corporate culture and identity, imbue a sense direction and a positive sense of collaboration while hybrid working experiments are carried out. One solution that many clients and contacts have referred to within their testing strategy is the dispersed portfolio model, or ‘Hub and Spoke’. The Instant Group and its partners in the project, Hickey & Associates, explored the impact of a people-focused, agile disaggregated portfolio. The aim was to understand what benefits could exist to both the employee and employer by adopting such a strategy and what factors should be considered by a company looking to test such a model. The findings showed the types of location that appear highly suited to satellite offices, alongside the benefits from a cost perspective the employer could expect to see. Surprisingly, large time savings can also be achieved by employees on an annual basis; it is not uncommon for those used to commuting an hour and a half a day to save over 35 standard working days a year. While these outcomes are positive, difficulties do exist — not only from a business perspective in ensuring senior stakeholders are spread across the portfolio, but also from a purely real estate perspective. In many of the locations highlighted, supply of quality office stock is limited, and future developments are far less prevalent than in major cities. This suggests that while the methodology stacks up on paper, there will be practical challenges for businesses that are slower to react, unless we see a major change in commercial real estate investment and development.
Suggested Citation
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to
for a different version of it.
More about this item
Keywords
;
;
;
JEL classification:
- R3 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Real Estate Markets, Spatial Production Analysis, and Firm Location
Statistics
Access and download statistics
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aza:crej00:y:2021:v:10:i:4:p:296-306. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Henry Stewart Talks (email available below). General contact details of provider: .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.