In recent years, there have been enormous changes in the way people work and occupy property, with the likes of wireless networking, flexible office hours and hot desking just a few of the trends that are changing the way our offices function. Then there are the issues of environmental design and sustainability considerations, and the importance of how our buildings work, and how well people work within them. The flipside of this is that we now know beyond any doubt that buildings that do not meet the needs of today’s workforce will hinder productivity, affect morale and ultimately, have a negative impact on a company’s profitability.
In short, today’s occupiers will no longer put up with a less-than-ideal property situation: instead, they, quite rightly, demand a real estate solution that makes a positive contribution to their business.
And yet, despite the millions of pounds spent every year by business in building and refurbishing their offices, it is only now, as the ‘science’ of creating the optimum working environment has risen up the agenda, that businesses are starting to evaluate whether their money was well spent, whether their property is really assisting in the business operations, and if not, what improvements could be made.
Tried and tested
The post-occupancy evaluation (POE) is nothing new in itself: it was first introduced over 40 years ago. What is new, however, is the way in which the POE is beginning to be viewed as a business management tool by today’s occupiers, and a vital building appraisal system for property owners, managers and designers. With these changing attitudes, it seems likely that it will not be long before the POE becomes de rigueur in all buildings and building projects — an issue which prompted the BCO to publish its Guide to post-occupancy evaluation (November 2007).
For those involved in creating, acquiring or occupying an office building, the advantages of conducting a POE are undeniable. The feedback it provides will show clearly whether the building’s design and operation are actively supporting the occupier’s business. It will also help to determine whether the anticipated benefits of the building improvements were actually achieved, thus providing guidance for future projects.
For the occupier, the ultimate objective, in establishing the building’s contribution to the business, is established beyond doubt. For the owner, the return on capital invested will be demonstrable, as this will translate into strong rental flows and long-term commitments by its tenants. For the management and design teams, lessons will be learnt and continuous improvements made.
Responsibility
The key question, therefore, when there appear to be so many reasons for the POE’s widespread introduction, is why has it taken so long?
Interestingly, one of the main reasons cited for not conducting a POE in the past came down to ‘ownership’ (or, more precisely, the lack of ownership). No individual group was prepared to commission the POE, and there was concern over who would be responsible for diverting resources in order to carry it out. Neither the client, the designer nor the facilities manager were willing to take on the inherent costs, since they all regarded their counterparts as gaining greater benefit from the study than they would. Furthermore, designers indicated some concern over the exposure of the project team and the potential liability regarding any problems identified through the evaluation. In addition, developers and facilities managers indicated that managing expectations could prove to be a major issue for them in undertaking POEs, along with disruption to the business and, often, sensitivity surrounding the questions asked. But, as the BCO argues, these are all issues that are either unfounded, or can be easily overcome, with the potential benefits far outweighing any minor obstacles.
Keep it up
But as with any appraisal system, there is relatively little value in doing it only once. In an ideal world, therefore, a programme of regular, ongoing POEs should be put in place to help fine tune a building, and to flag up potential problems at an early stage, thus limiting expenditure over the longer term. Taking this to the next level, a POE might also be used before major building works take place, when its results can be used to influence the brief and design, as well as afterwards — to check that all the objectives were met.
For many projects, such as a refurbishment or relocation, or, perhaps, a project such as introducing a new process or initiative, the post-project questionnaire should be conducted approximately six to 12 months after the project completes. The information, then, from repeat surveys can be captured to create a database that allows benchmarking of the questionnaire results.
Ultimately, if taken at regular intervals (say, annually) throughout a building’s occupational life, a POE will offer up a host of information, including:
- Measurement of a project’s success
- Feedback from the people that work there
- Benchmark data
- Input into the design process
- Input into the change management and communications process
The key here is in standardising the evaluation system — so that as POE usage grows, so the information it produces creates a workable benchmarking system, with like-for-like measurements and criteria being applied to buildings across a portfolio as well as across numerous clients and building types. The wording and type of questions asked are crucial, therefore, to ensure reliability and validity, as well as consistency. With businesses everywhere seeking to maximise the effectiveness of every part of their operations, and the desire of property owners, designers and managers to keep improving the product, the importance of the POE will become greater and greater, as the advantages of regular monitoring are clear for all parties involved.
Equally, as we all come to expect more from property in its contribution to an organisation, it must surely follow that it will need to be the focus of a similar level of care and attention as an organisation’s people. Few organisations would dare to drop the appraisal of staff. By the same token, who would want to ignore a POE system for their buildings?
