MyEListings' markets and economics editor and creates content about global macro events and their impact on US commercial real estate.
The aftermath of the global pandemic brought a seismic shift in workplace culture and its understanding. As restrictions lifted and the world navigated towards a "new normal," the concept of work and workplace underwent rapid transformation.
Companies that initially abandoned office spaces, looking at the rising demand for remote work, are now revisiting those decisions as they find the need to have certain employees return to the office. But is this trend here to stay, or is it merely a passing phase?
The initial downsizing of office spaces was a reaction to the immediate effects of the pandemic. But as time progresses, and businesses adapt, the thought process around office space is evolving.
Some companies, sensing a more acute need for in-person collaborations, training, or even to maintain corporate culture, are sometimes even re-investing in office spaces they once abandoned.
However, it is instructive to grasp the deeper reasons likely behind the larger shift. The benefits of remote work are multifold, and they do not only accrue to employees but corporations as well.
Remote work reduces the overhead associated with maintaining physical office spaces, which significantly impacts the bottom line for companies. However, corporations are still obligated for office space they own and lease.
There's no denying that in-office work offers certain benefits, especially from a corporate perspective. It's easier to maintain team synergy, organizational culture, and to monitor productivity.
However, these advantages mostly cater to the corporation's perspective. For employees, the daily grind of commuting and preparation takes away significant numbers of precious hours for which they are not expressly compensated and can impact their overall work-life balance.
Remote work, on the other hand, provides flexibility, reduces commute stress, and has been shown to boost productivity in more instances than otherwise. It is far less expensive to hold a video conference than a live meeting, but the increased cost of the live meeting is mostly borne by employees.
Companies save on square footage, utility costs, and often witness reduced attrition with remote work. But there's an underlying narrative that cannot be ignored: the gentle coercion to have employees utilize office spaces even when not entirely necessary.
This strategy, however, is bound to meet resistance and likely fail in most respects. This is because, in the absence of currently owning or having leased office space, many corporations would likely embrace remote work more thoroughly.
Instead, they find themselves with real estate obligations extending well into the future and appear to calculate on some level that forcing employees to utilize these corporate assets at their own expense offers an attractive reward-to-risk ratio but only for the corporation.
This force could, at best, encourage workers to seek more remote work; at worst, it could incentivize them to quit now, because managers have made big investments in non-performing assets they can't get out from under.
Due to structurally greater bargaining power, these workers aren't likely to accept being forced to the degree of the past.
Several factors highlight why remote work is likely more than just a temporary phase. For one, the sheer number of job vacancies that outweigh the number of applicants showcases that the current workforce has viable options.
The cost of replacing a remote worker, who often brings a higher skill set due to the necessity of self-management, acumen, and personal discipline required for the task, is another factor that tilts the scale in favor of remote work.
Furthermore, these shifts are taking place without significant union interventions. While unions have historically played pivotal roles in ensuring worker rights, the current work environment transformation is largely organic, influenced by external factors like the pandemic, demographics, and the innate advantages of remote work to the worker.
City centers, with their prime real estate, might feel the ripples of this shift more profoundly. As companies become more accepting of hybrid or completely remote work models, the demand for these prime spaces might wane.
Suburban Class B and C properties are more at risk. The likely future for these properties is repurposing or complete replacement, as they represent stranded assets to a large degree.
The office space conundrum is a reflection of a broader shift in work culture and the nature of work itself. While there might be temporary measures to reinvest in abandoned office spaces, the trend suggests a future where remote work holds equal, if not more, significance.
The workforce of the future, empowered by choice and flexibility, will play a decisive role in reshaping the very essence of "office" in our vocabulary.
MyEListing.com maintains one of the largest national databases of commercial agents and brokers in the country. Use it for free to find an agent or broker near you.