👇 Rather baffled why this is not made more of in CRE. Someone actually said to me ‘air quality will become less of a ‘thing’ now we have vaccines coming’. NO NO NO: Do not sign any lease without knowing what they are doing to ensure excellent IAQ. Top issue.
BTW that comment was from an investor. I think many have assets where the ability to have excellent IAQ is low or non existent. So hoping we all ignore it, like pre Covid. But must not happen. Sell these assets before the market clicks, or cough up and upgrade your building.
Also explains the paradox of building new offices even as demand falls away. Done well they can be dramatically better buildings. Done well - very many underperform their theoretical quality.
And either way, annual ratings are a waste of time. Our CRE needs to be monitored in real-time and in an ongoing way. AND this data needs to be available, and public. If public we’d see huge improvements very quickly. And best assets would increase value. Bad assets the opposite.
It’s a carrot/stick game. Mostly the industry hopes it goes away, because much value destruction will follow (but healthier ‘customers’) so Gov needs to use a big stick. But the best owners have big incentive to be more open.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Not a good article but this endlessly repeated line of ‘Covid is accelerating trends’ is, I think, completely wrong. It feels like that but most of these trends were happening so slowly and were niche, not mainstream.
Most prominently remote working is not a trend that has been simply accelerated. It was 5% or so in the U.K. before and largely based around working from home 1 day a week. An acceleration of that trend would not have got us where we are going.
More working from home 1 day a week is like a sustaining innovation. Just updating the world as it is. The underlying way we worked stays the same. Office centric, synchronous, hierarchical and digitally limited.
👇 Yes. All change, all change. Especially in U.K. Whatever the opposite of ‘levelling up’ is, is about to start. Big winners & losers. The digital economy set to thrive as analogue world grinds to a red tape induced standstill. Brexiters won, but will now lose.
Who wants to work from home (or remotely) and for how long. 64% 2 or more days a week.
But employers are not so keen. Correlates with earnings. The more you earn the more your employer will allow you to work remotely. / Does that suggest employers need to update their thinking?
The lack of innovation about innovation is disheartening. Just read yet another article mansplaining (these articles always seem to be written by men) that innovation only happens ....
.... in cities (of more than 1 million people), in the office, face to face. Innovation cannot happen digitally, humans cannot understand nuance online, we are incapable of managing our online activities to avoid ‘Zoom fatigue’, and bonding & mentoring is impossible remotely.
In other words, we humans are only capable of doing what we have done before. We need to accept that there is only one way of working, that that has been codified & determined by our elders and betters, and we should do what we are told.
Seems clear that most office workers will not be returning to the office five days a week.
Some (5-10%) might, and the same % might never return. But consensus developing that 1/2/3/4 days a week in the office is enough, probably with the average being 2/3 days.
Depends on job requirements - some consist of more collaborative work than others. @gensler last year had the average mix as 55/45% collaborative/individual focussed.
Very much still in the thinking stage re the move to remote working (who does how much etc) but increasingly wondering if contemplating how existing companies will act is missing the point. 1/n
As it stands now I think remote for existing companies will be classic bell curve. Maybe 5-10% always remote, 5-10% always in the office. Then a distribution of those 1/2/3/4 days a week remote. With average circa 2/3 days in the office or remote. But ...
... that is based on thinking very few companies are suited to being 100% remote. Due to how they work, hire, bond, mentor, learn and socialise. Remote requires different management to in-office and most won’t want to become that ‘different’. So few will go all in. But ....