Do WorkPlaces Work?
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

Do WorkPlaces Work?

  • 429 views
Uploaded on

Presentation by Tim Oldman, Leesman Index, to the WorkPlace Trends Conference 2013 in London ...

Presentation by Tim Oldman, Leesman Index, to the WorkPlace Trends Conference 2013 in London

What role does the workplace play in the post-recessional economy and who exactly are those places really working for: the employer, the employee or the landlord and his institutional investors? With barely more than half of the 40,000 employees we've talked to able to report that the design of their workplace enables them to work productively, clearly the world of workplace is a mess.

More in: Business , Career
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
429
On Slideshare
424
From Embeds
5
Number of Embeds
1

Actions

Shares
Downloads
19
Comments
0
Likes
1

Embeds 5

http://storify.com 5

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Workplace isn’t working… Workplace Trends 24.10.13 Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   @Leesman_index leesmanindex.com  
  • 2. Workplace performance measures Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 3. Workplace performance measures Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   sqm £$€ leesmanindex.com  
  • 4. Workplace performance Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   value? leesmanindex.com  
  • 5. 11th Workplace trend? All talk (listening) no action… Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 6. Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 7. Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 8. value? Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 9. 2010: Leesman Office One standardised measure of workplace effectiveness An x-ray of workplace performance Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 10. Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 11. “Lies, damned lies and statistics.” @Leesman_index Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 12. +13% / person 11.8 sqm / p British Council for Offices “guide to specification”. 10.9 sqm / p * Financial services offloading people faster than they can off-load surplus space. * financial services sector downsizing Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 13. Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 14. 1986 – DNA profiling first used as evidence in a criminal proceeding. Colin Pitchfork convicted 5.8 x 108 Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 15. Evidence Based Design Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 16. “the law of large numbers” Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 17. 42,677 How much do you agree or disagree with the following statement about the design of your organisation’s office? Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 18. 42,677 “It enables me to work productively” Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 19. The design of my workplace enables me to work productively* 53% * % agreement across whole database Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 20. The design of my workplace enables me to work productively 83% * % agreement to high performing project Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 21. The design of my workplace enables me to work productively 15% * % agreement to low performing project Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 22. The design of my workplace enables me to work productively 73% * % disagreement to low performing project Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 23. It’s a place I’m proud to bring visitors to 5% * % agreement to low performing project Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 24. Workplace isn’t working… Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 25. Group profit before tax £m 3.2 2 1.8 1.4 1.1 2007 2008 1.1 2009 2010 2011 2012 * From low performing client annual report and accounts 2012 Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 26. The design of my workplace enables me to work productively ?% * % agreement to low performing project post occupancy study Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 27. Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 28. Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 29. Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 30. Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 31. Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 32. 1724 thermometer invented 1727 evidence of weather records 1914 “official records” began 1919 Meteorological Society founded @Leesman_index @Wtrends13 Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 33. 2,000,000 3   2   1   0   Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 34. Government Soft Landings Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 35. “Which activities are important to you in your work, and how well are they supported?” Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   ?% leesmanindex.com  
  • 36. 42,114 respondents: workplace activities ranked by importance “Which activities are important to you in your work, and how well are they supported?” Individual focused work, desk based Planned meetings Telephone conversations Informal, un-planned meetings Collaborating on focused work Reading Relaxing / taking a break Thinking / creative thinking Individual routine tasks Learning from others Informal social interaction Business confidential discussions Hosting visitors, clients or customers Spreading out paper or materials Audio conferences Collaborating on creative work Larger group meetings or audiences Individual focused work away from your desk Private conversations Video conferences Using technical / specialist equipment or materials 0   5000   Not  supported  at  all   Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   10000   Very  under-­‐supported   15000   20000   Under-­‐supported   25000   Supported   30000   Well  supported   35000   40000   Very  well  supported   leesmanindex.com  
  • 37. 42,114 respondents: workplace activities ranked by importance “Which activities are important to you in your work, and how well are they supported?” Individual focused work, desk based Planned meetings Telephone conversations Informal, un-planned meetings Collaborating on focused work Reading Relaxing / taking a break Thinking / creative thinking Individual routine tasks Learning from others Informal social interaction Business confidential discussions Hosting visitors, clients or customers Spreading out paper or materials Audio conferences Collaborating on creative work Larger group meetings or audiences Individual focused work away from your desk Private conversations Video conferences Using technical / specialist equipment or materials 0   5000   Not  supported  at  all   Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   10000   Very  under-­‐supported   15000   20000   Under-­‐supported   25000   Supported   30000   Well  supported   35000   40000   Very  well  supported   leesmanindex.com  
  • 38. 42,114 respondents: workplace activities ranked by satisfaction “Which activities are important to you in your work, and how well are they supported?” Individual routine tasks Individual focused work, desk based Learning from others Planned meetings Informal social interaction Collaborating on focused work Telephone conversations Collaborating on creative work Informal, un-planned meetings Individual focused work away from your desk Audio conferences Using technical / specialist equipment or materials Relaxing / taking a break Larger group meetings or audiences Hosting visitors, clients or customers Reading Spreading out paper or materials Thinking / creative thinking Business confidential discussions Video conferences Private conversations 0   5000   Not  supported  at  all   Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   10000   Very  under-­‐supported   15000   20000   Under-­‐supported   25000   Supported   30000   Well  supported   35000   40000   Very  well  supported   leesmanindex.com  
  • 39. 42,114 respondents: workplace activities ranked by satisfaction “Which activities are important to you in your work, and how well are they supported?” Individual routine tasks Individual focused work, desk based Learning from others Planned meetings Informal social interaction Collaborating on focused work Telephone conversations Collaborating on creative work Informal, un-planned meetings Individual focused work away from your desk Audio conferences Using technical / specialist equipment or materials Relaxing / taking a break Larger group meetings or audiences Hosting visitors, clients or customers Reading Spreading out paper or materials Thinking / creative thinking Business confidential discussions Video conferences Private conversations 0%   10%   Not  supported  at  all   Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   20%   30%   Very  under-­‐supported   40%   50%   Under-­‐supported   60%   Supported   70%   80%   Well  supported   90%   100%   Very  well  supported   leesmanindex.com  
  • 40. Thinking & creative thinking Bus’ confidential discussions Video conferencing Private conversations Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   50% leesmanindex.com  
  • 41. Low performing workplace: workplace activities ranked by satisfaction “Which activities are important to you in your work, and how well are they supported?” Individual routine tasks Learning from others Telephone conversations Individual focused work, desk based Informal social interaction Individual focused work away from your desk Spreading out paper or materials Using technical / specialist equipment or materials Reading Collaborating on creative work Collaborating on focused work Thinking / creative thinking Planned meetings Informal, un-planned meetings Relaxing / taking a break Audio conferences Business confidential discussions Private conversations Larger group meetings or audiences Hosting visitors, clients or customers Video conferences 0   Not  supported  at  all   Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   10   20   Very  under-­‐supported   30   Under-­‐supported   40   Supported   50   Well  supported   60   70   Very  well  supported   leesmanindex.com  
  • 42. High performing workplace: workplace activities ranked by satisfaction “Which activities are important to you in your work, and how well are they supported?” Using technical / specialist equipment or materials Learning from others Reading Audio conferences Telephone conversations Individual routine tasks Hosting visitors, clients or customers Individual focused work away from your desk Planned meetings Informal social interaction Individual focused work, desk based Informal, un-planned meetings Larger group meetings or audiences Business confidential discussions Relaxing / taking a break Thinking / creative thinking Collaborating on creative work Collaborating on focused work Private conversations Spreading out paper or materials Video conferences 0   Not  supported  at  all   Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   10   Very  under-­‐supported   20   Under-­‐supported   30   Supported   40   Well  supported   50   60   Very  well  supported   leesmanindex.com  
  • 43. The standardised measure of workplace effectiveness. How well the space, supports the work. Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   Lmi leesmanindex.com  
  • 44. The fitness for purpose of corporate workplaces Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 45. Poorly supporting Highly supporting 100 0 Lmi 84.6 Lmi 33.3 51.4 Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 46. 115 Bottom 15% Top 15% 98 37 27 17 6 0-9 10-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80-89 90-100 Leesman Lmi banding – 300 properties as at May 2013 Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 47. Activities Activities Features Features Facilities Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 48. -­‐15%   Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   Spreading out paper or materials Individual focused work, desk based Audio conferences Larger group meetings or audiences Planned meetings Informal, un-planned meetings Individual routine tasks Reading Telephone conversations Collaborating on focused work Business confidential discussions Hosting visitors, clients or customers Individual focused work away from your desk Video conferences Using technical / specialist equipment or materials Collaborating on creative work Thinking / creative thinking Learning from others Private conversations Relaxing / taking a break Informal social interaction 15%   % Importance - Sorted by Diff between Top & Bottom 10%   5%   0%   -­‐5%   -­‐10%   leesmanindex.com  
  • 49. -­‐15%   10%   5%   0%   -­‐5%   -­‐10%   •  •  •  •  •  •  Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   Thinking / creative thinking Spreading out paper or materials Individual focused work, desk based Audio conferences Larger group meetings or audiences Planned meetings Informal, un-planned meetings Individual routine tasks Reading Telephone conversations Collaborating on focused work Business confidential discussions Hosting visitors, clients or customers Individual focused work away from your desk Video conferences Using technical / specialist equipment or materials Collaborating on creative work Informal social interaction by Diff between Top & Bottom % Importance - Sorted Relaxing / taking a break Private conversations Learning from others Thinking / creative thinking Collaborating on creative work Learning from others Private conversations Relaxing / taking a break Informal social interaction 15%   leesmanindex.com  
  • 50. -­‐15%   10%   5%   0%   -­‐5%   -­‐10%   •  •  •  •  •  •  Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   Thinking / creative thinking Spreading out paper or materials Individual focused work, desk based Audio conferences Larger group meetings or audiences Planned meetings Informal, un-planned meetings Individual routine tasks Reading Telephone conversations Collaborating on focused work Business confidential discussions Hosting visitors, clients or customers Individual focused work away from your desk Video conferences Using technical / specialist equipment or materials Collaborating on creative work Spreading out paper / -materials between Top & Bottom % Importance Sorted by Diff Individual focused work, desk based Audio conferences Larger group meetings / audiences Planned meetings Informal un-planned meetings Learning from others Private conversations Relaxing / taking a break Informal social interaction 15%   leesmanindex.com  
  • 51. 0% Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   Individual routine tasks TOP   Individual focused work, desk based 20% Telephone conversations Learning from others Audio conferences Collaborating on focused work Planned meetings Reading 10% Thinking / creative thinking 60% Informal social interaction 70% •  •  •  Business confidential discussions 80% Informal, un-planned meetings 90% Hosting visitors, clients or customers Relaxing / taking a break 100% Telephone conversations Individual focused work, desk based Individual routine tasks 50% 40% 30% BOTTOM   % Supported - Sorted by Diff between Top & Bottom leesmanindex.com  
  • 52. 0% Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   Individual routine tasks TOP   Individual focused work, desk based 20% Telephone conversations 10% Learning from others 40% Audio conferences 50% Collaborating on focused work 60% Planned meetings 70% •  •  •  •  •  Reading 80% Thinking / creative thinking 90% Informal social interaction Business confidential discussions Informal, un-planned meetings Hosting visitors, clients or customers Relaxing / taking a break 100% Relaxing / taking a break Hosting clients / visitors Informal unplanned mtgs Business confidential discussions Informal social interaction 30% BOTTOM   % Supported - Sorted by Diff between Top & Bottom leesmanindex.com  
  • 53. 0% Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   Ability to personalise my workstation Telephone equipment TOP Desk Informal work areas / breakout zones Greenery & Planting General décor Meeting rooms (small) Meeting rooms (large) Quiet rooms for working alone or in pairs Chair Computing equipment Dividers (between desks / areas) Accessibility of colleagues Remote access to work files or network Temperature control Desk / room booking systems Office lighting Noise levels Space between work-settings 10% In-office network connectivity 20% Printing / copying / scanning equipment 30% People walking past your desk 40% Natural light 50% Air quality 60% Personal storage 70% •  •  •  •  •  •  Quiet rooms for working alone or in pairs 80% Meeting rooms (large) Meeting rooms (small) General décor Greenery Informal work areas / break-out zones 100% 90% BOTTOM % Satisfied - Sorted by Diff between Top & Bottom leesmanindex.com  
  • 54. 0% Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   Ability to personalise my workstation Telephone equipment Desk TOP Chair Computing equipment Dividers between desks / areas Computer equipment Chair Desk Telephone equipment Ability to personalise my workstation Dividers (between desks / areas) Accessibility of colleagues Remote access to work files or network Temperature control Desk / room booking systems Office lighting Noise levels Space between work-settings 10% In-office network connectivity 20% Printing / copying / scanning equipment 30% People walking past your desk 40% Natural light 50% Air quality 60% Personal storage 70% •  •  •  •  •  •  Quiet rooms for working alone or in pairs 80% Meeting rooms (large) Meeting rooms (small) General décor Greenery Informal work areas / break-out zones 100% 90% BOTTOM % Satisfied - Sorted by Diff between Top & Bottom leesmanindex.com  
  • 55. Social cohesion…? Or just emotionally intelligent organisations? Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 56. Location Respondents Leesman Lmi Productivity agreement Pride agreement Tech Soft / Hardware UK 77 83.9 83% 92% B Corporate Real Estate France 127 80.4 78% 96% 3 C Tech Soft / Hardware USA 125 80.1 83% 93% 4 C Tech Soft / Hardware USA 140 75.4 73% 86% 5 C Tech Soft / Hardware Ireland 256 75.2 77% 86% 6 D Financial Services UK 453 73.3 72% 89% 7 E Tech Soft / Hardware Poland 142 72.4 68% 71% 8 F Tech Soft / Hardware UK 180 71.8 70% 90% 9 G Infrastructure UK 1342 71.7 63% 87% 10 G Infrastructure UK 168 70.4 60% 84% Position Client 1 A 2 Sector Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 57. Location Respondents Leesman Lmi Productivity agreement Pride agreement Manufacturing UK 112 48.9 41% 16% I Financial Services UK 244 48.9 32% 19% 3 G Infrastructure UK 66 48.3 31% 15% 4 H Manufacturing UK 116 47.8 44% 28% 5 H Manufacturing UK 546 47.6 46% 32% 6 H Manufacturing UK 92 47.2 39% 22% 7 I Retail UK 784 45.9 30% 33% 8 H Manufacturing UK 360 45.7 38% 23% 9 J Financial Services UK 66 33.3 15% 5% 10 C Tech Soft / Hardware USA 50 33.2 24% 4% Position Client 1 H 2 Sector Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 58. Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 59. Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 60. Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 61. Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 62. Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 63. Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 64. Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 65. Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 66. For lots of employees… workplace isn’t working Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 67. Is the Campus working..? Workplace Trends 2014? Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com  
  • 68. Lmi 17-33 = 3 Lmi 34-49 = 35 Lmi 50-66 = 206 Lmi 67-83 = 77 Lmi 84-100 = 9 The Lmi is Europe’s central workplace effectiveness benchmark, reporting on a scale of 0-100 on the ability of a workplace to support important workplace activities. 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Data reported at 30.09.2013 Copycat competitors exist in all areas of business. But with higher education, like commerce, now under pressure to innovate, what role do mimics play in the adoption of new thinking? It is said imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. For the agile organisations whose cutting-edge ideas carve new territories, it might seem a hollow compliment. But in commerce and now in higher education, these mimics bring benefit, because for trailblazing thought leaders, this is merely the next inevitable stage in innovation chronology. It is rarely a case of ‘if’ innovation will be copied, more a case of ‘who’ and ‘when’. For those involved in delivering higher education there is huge pressure to innovate. As fees become the focus, ‘student experience’ becomes the measure by which universities battle for market share; academic standing alone is no ‘unique selling proposition’. In commerce, innovative products often only develop market recognition when competitors arrive with their mimic solution. It can be hard to justify the benefits of new thinking when you are alone proposing it. So having a competitor reassures customers that the thinking is credible, worth competing over, and gives them a choice. In one US academic study by Daniel Mochon of Tulane University on ‘the power of choice’, subjects were shown two virtually identical electrical products and asked which they would buy. Thirty-four per cent chose one product and 32 per cent the other. But when choice was removed for a second group and just one product offered, 10 per cent said they would buy it. So competition is good. It gives customers the chance to compare and control. In 2010, when Leesman laid out its proposal for a wholly independent workplace effectiveness measure, we set out to change the way workplace performance is measured. The proposal emerged from extensive consultation with our potential customers, embedding their voice in our solution. Two weeks before, Apple’s first generation iPad went on sale in London with media scepticism matching Apple bravado. They laid out a promise to change the way we used computers. Safe to say they succeeded? Within two years the market was flooded with me-too offerings that helped establish phenomenal tablet adoption. Three years later, tablet computer sales for the fourth quarter of 2013 are expected to top personal computers for the first time as consumers continue to switch to tablets, confounding sceptics by carrying more than one device (iPad for web and mail, Kindle for reading). According to data published by US researchers IDC, from a relative trickle of two million annual sales in 2009, global tablet sales for the last quarter of 2013 will top 84.1 million units, compared with 83.1 million for PCs. Now UK supermarket giant Tesco has decided tablets should be part of its stall. In September it unveiled its seven-inch Hudl which retails at just £120. But these are crowded waters. Google’s Nexus 7 and Amazon’s Kindle Fire both sit sub-£200 and arguably come with greater tech brand credibility. Critics questioned how this can possibly be a profitable proposition for Tesco when Amazon’s Jeff Bezos publicly reported that his £159 Kindle Fire HD ‘made not a penny in profit’ for his company. Is Apple concerned? I doubt it. As copyists work to squeeze a market at the bottom of the food chain, they are simply helping accelerate the pace of PC to tablet migration, creating new tablet adopters who will doubtless quickly become accustomed to the results of the brutal ‘value engineering’ needed to pitch a product at £120. These are consumers who will learn that for £120, there is little left for a premium customer experience. So will the same be true of higher education and the ‘student experience’? In the new customerdriven economy, those who place a stronger emphasis on enhancing the customer experience across the sum total of all client interactions will gain competitive advantage because they are partnering with their clients and embedding the voice of the customer directly into their processes and organisational DNA. This is where the best universities are trailblazing now. For organisations who simply attach copyist bolt-ons to their service or product portfolio, in vain attempts to keep abreast with contemporary thinking, customer pressure increases to reverse innovations back through their historic service offerings – or risk them being seen as clunky and out of touch. What the copyists will come to learn is that customers know that price is rarely totally unrelated to quality of experience. tim.oldman@leesmanindex.com The design of my workplace is important to me Agree 84.6% Neutral 12.1% Disagree 3.3% The design of my workplace enables me to work productively Agree 53.3% Neutral 16.8% Disagree 29.9% a place I am proud to bring visitors to Agree 47.9% Neutral 21.4% Disagree 30.7% INSIDE Jane Bristow Jack Pringle As higher education now comes with a seriously high price tag, how does this Page 4 Nigel Bunclark battle to attract top students. We need a new solution for a new age. Page 8 How Network Rail is creating dynamic workplace environments by embarking on a journey towards agile working. Page 10 Social activities Within the group of highest-performing buildings, occupants consistently rated such features as ‘Informal social interaction’, ‘Relaxing and taking a break’, ‘Learning from others’, ‘Thinking/ creative thinking’ and ‘Collaborating on creative work’ as significantly more important than those in the lowest-performing group. When we then examined how well these activities were supported within the working environment, this high-performing group were again delivering significantly greater satisfaction levels than the bottom group. The routine In contrast, our topperforming building occupants attached less importance to routine activities like ‘Spreading out paper and materials’, ‘Individual focused work’, ‘Individual routine tasks’ and ‘Planned meetings’. And here we found that while satisfaction levels were still moderately higher for those activities among our top-performing space occupiers, the results were considerably closer. So across high- and lowperforming spaces, similar importance and satisfaction is attached to routine tasks. In other words, the routine is not where high performance creates difference. Social infrastructure When we turned to examining the physical features that differentiate our two groups, we were interested to see that it is satisfaction with ‘Informal work areas and breakout zones’, ‘Greenery and planting’, ‘General décor’, ‘Meeting rooms’ and ‘Quiet rooms for working alone or in pairs’ where the difference in satisfaction was at its greatest. The basics Once again, the routine features ‘Computer equipment’, ‘Desk’, ‘Chair’ and ‘Telephone equipment’ saw significantly less clear water between the groups. So it appears that these basic essentials are rarely performance-enhancing measures and just basic provisions that almost all workplace providers are getting right. This is not where the highperformance group are making the difference. Leesman Education Applying the same measurement protocol to university estates could provide similarly powerful insights. And these insights could then be used to both fine-tune the student (customer) experience and improve the educational outcome. The Leesman Education tools are being designed to provide university estates directors with line of sight to where their collections of buildings and facilities are supporting the academic programme. From there we can understand the role of university buildings in supporting their student experience in an increasingly competitive world. University of Plymouth c rsi ive Buckingham University How a student at Buckingham can save £11,080 by doing a two-year course 31,530 Buckingham University Years Tuition Year one £11,960 Year two £11,960 Total 31,070 31,045 30,390 University of Northumbria 29,300 Teesside University 28,040 Leeds Metropolitan University 27,985 Nottingham Trent University Living Costs £8,000 £8,000 £39,920 Other UK universities Year one £9,000 Year two £9,000 Year three £9,000 Total 31,105 University of Birmingham Coventry University £8,000 £8,000 £8,000 £51,000 27,930 University of Edinburgh 27,675 27,440 26,445 University of Glasgow 26,395 Kingston University HE SA Total student population 26,180 25,595 Liverpool John Moores University : 26,570 University of Greenwich ce University of Ulster 24,455 University of Southampton University of Portsmouth Top three student city populations 24,135 23,830 Bangor University 23,540 London Metropolitan University 1 Greater London – 595,580 23,545 Middlesex University 23,485 Birmingham City University 23,350 University of East London 23,225 Queen's University Belfast 2 Birmingham – 134,470 23,440 London South Bank University 22,990 University of the Arts London 3 Manchester – 105,855 22,315 University of Bedfordshire 22,275 University of Brighton 22,075 University of Liverpool SA 21,875 University of Salford 21,755 Anglia Ruskin University 21,605 University of Westminster 21,500 University of Newcastle 21,055 University of Kent 20,310 University of Cambridge Overseas students Top three universities with highest proportion of overseas students University of St Andrews 41.63% 19,945 University of Strathclyde 19,870 Swansea University 19,790 Bournemouth University Imperial College London 37.57% University College London 36.75% 19,750 City University 19,340 University of Bristol 19,220 Canterbury Christ Church University 19,105 University of Exeter 18,720 University of Derby 18,495 Oxford Brookes University 18,425 University of East Anglia 17,610 University of York 17,405 University of Sunderland 17,380 University of Leicester 17,055 University of Dundee University of Durham fo ai r rF Ac ss) ce 16,585 16,570 Loughborough University 16,195 Glasgow Caledonian University 16,120 Imperial College London 16,000 Brunel University 15,885 Aberystwyth University 15,605 University of Aberdeen University of Essex 15,515 15,215 University of Bath 15,135 University of the West of Scotland University tuition fees Almost 75% of English universities plan to charge £9,000 for at least some courses in 2014-15. The average fee level for 2014-15 will rise by around £150 to about £8,650 14,845 Southampton Solent University 28 November. For more information contact tim.oldman@leesmanindex.com Bu of University of Central Lancashire University of Oxford study in isolation are often found to be those struggling – especially among ’ m ur ‘As technologies allow students to work anywhere any time, university spaces need to work harder to attract and bind students together in a socially cohesive ha ty 32,510 So often found to be those struggling – especially among first years. What is most interesting, perhaps, is that our Leesman Office data offers clear evidence that this is the factor that differentiates leading commercial organisations’ workplaces from the poor performance ones. Yahoo’s CEO Marissa Mayer may have been on to something when she said she preferred staff to work in the office rather than at home. With our database now passing 40,000 individual respondents across 340 individual buildings, analysis of what characteristics separate the highest from the lowest achievers becomes significantly more and more robust. And the nature of those activities and physical features is starting to point firmly to social cohesion factors delivering significantly enhanced workplace effectiveness. When we analysed the top and bottom 15 per cent of buildings in our database, we identified a series of key areas where high-performance spaces consistently differ the most from those at the bottom of the league table. ng Un University of Leeds c e: 33,500 S our 34,595 University of South Wales E Lmi 0-16 = 1 The UK university market is changing. The market for students is now a highly competitive one where institutions are having to think clearly and carefully about the positioning and posturing that will best draw student attention to select them as their place of study. Because universities also have to justify the very comparable and public price tag that they are attaching to that higher education. Universities hate the idea of students as customers, but students see themselves as paying. In our research, students are adopting a different relationship with and attitude towards the institution delivering the education they are paying for. For many universities this is new ground. As students become customers and faculties the profit centres, university estate directors are under increasing pressure to understand the role of the campus in supporting the delivery of an educational programme that comes with a £9,000 fee. A key factor in this estate performance evaluation and a recurrent topic of discussion at this year’s Design and Management of Learning Environments conference in London (theme: the user experience) was ‘stickiness’. How can the campus attract and keep students there, learning, collaborating, exchanging? As technologies allow students to work anywhere any time, university spaces need to work harder to attract and bind students together in a socially cohesive way. That’s what keeps them engaged and bound in a collective journey through their education. Students who drift off campus to study in isolation are ki :H T 5.0esc 7 oH in u x 7 dl .5 9in Pa d ie w A 5.3 pp le in iP x 7 ad .8 m 7in in i 86 in V 7in iew x 1 son 0in ic V 3G A 4.2 rch 08 os in 7 x7 .9 No of properties by Lmi band 35,630 Manchester Metropolitan University University of Warwick 63% av response rate 11 min av response time 40,680 ce 331 properties A 4.8 ma in zon x7 K .5 ind in le T 7.1 osh 2in iba x 1 Fo 1.0 lio 54 in S 4.6 on 7 7 y PR in Sx 6 65 .6 To 14 u in ch Sa 4.7 m 41 sun in g G x7 a .4 lax 82 y in Tab A 7.4 pp 7inle iP x 9 ad .5 6in J 7.8ooJ in oo x 1 Ta 2.8 ble in t D 3.1 ell in Str x 6 ea in k B –2 4.9 arn 00 in es 9 x7 &N .7 o in ble -2 N 0 0 oo 9 k 91 surveys University of Nottingham University of the West of England With ‘social cohesion’ appearing to be a key indicator of high-performance workplaces, what can universities learn from commerce? 132,325 ur 40,734 respondents Student Numbers So - 0.5 | hi 84.6 | lo 32.9 University of Manchester ce Tablet global market 2009 – 2 million units | Tablet global market 2013 – 227 million units (predicted) Source: IDC University of London* FF A( Offi Learning from leaders Lmi 59.4 University :O This issue: Higher Education special – market competition, cohesion, consumerism and choice Education by osmosis r ce Europe's largest measure of workplace satisfaction and effectiveness Top 75 UK universities ranked by full-time student numbers S ou Issue 11 leesmanindex.com 14,750 Source: HESA * The University of London is a federal public university in London. It comprises 18 constituent colleges, 10 research institutes and a number of central bodies. 2 Workplace  Isn’t  Working  24.10.13  ©  Leesman   leesmanindex.com