Power and Control

I took a class in college called “Power in American Society” which was taught by a real old-guard lefty. The subject of the class was how power is retained and how it is transferred, either legitimately or illegitimately.

This particular professor would get so worked up about the subject of the powerlessness of some oppressed group (in those days Central America was a big sore spot) he would turn red and literally get spitting mad. He died of a heart attack about a year after I took the class. No big surprise.

Real estate transactions are all about the transfer of power and control and any real estate transaction can come to seem like a power struggle where both parties fear being abused and some people react by getting spitting mad.  In a tenant’s market, as it was for a few years after 2008 tenants were the scarce commodity and had all the power. Today the pendulum has swung back hard the other way and landlords are asking more and offering less.

This isn’t such a bad thing because it means the economic pulse of the city has quickened.

But it also doesn’t mean tenants have lost all control, it just means that the control lies in giving yourself options.  Here are some suggestions:

First, start early, be flexible and ready to devote resources to the problem.  If you find a space that’s perfect, but you have to take it earlier than you might like, negotiate hard for enough free rent to cover any overlap, but be ready to pay double rent if the space is worth it.

Second, keep looking, even when you think a deal is done.

Third, have a back up plan in mind.  This may be extending your current lease or being prepared to take an alternate choice.

Fourth, be realistic about how much things cost. In a landlord’s market, they may ask unrealistic rents, but they have the expectation that in a market this crowded, somebody might be willing to pay it.

Flexibility and options are the best way to end up with a good outcome at the end of the day.

OPEN vs CLOSED / PUBLIC vs PRIVATE #2

A workplace must support the business activity. It doesn’t matter if the workplace is primarily open or closed as long as productivity remains high. How do we measure lost productivity in the knowledge market though?  With a factory it’s easier.  A recent article in the New York Times about a Harley Davidson factory in Pennsylvania described how the extra 1.2 seconds it took to attach a poorly designed part led to lost productivity equivalent to 2,200 motorcycles annually.  An open environment where most workers don’t have private space can seem appealing on the theory that interaction equals spontaneous collaboration equals innovation equals productivity.  But when employees are distracted from their primary activity, the longer term goal of innovation may become a moot point because the company isn’t keeping up with its current work.  A recent survey of workplace satisfaction by the architectural firm Gensler, suggests as much. 

“When focus is compromised in pursuit of collaboration, neither works well.”  

It also makes the not-startling assertion that “Employees who can focus are more effective, higher-performing overall.”

A survey of the attitudes of employees is a loose measure of actual productivity, but it does provide some insight.  The survey reports, “Those who can focus are more satisfied, higher performing, and see their companies as more innovative.” So perhaps that is the key to all workplace design: creating an environment that promotes the ability to focus, be it primarily open or primarily closed. Neither one is a panacea.   In the tech industry, putting a programmer in the desk next to a sales person isn’t going to improve the programmer’s ability to focus on writing new code. 

Once a company reaches past the start up phase where every day seems like a struggle for survival and good design seems like a luxury, it needs to consider the various work processes it requires and creatively promote focus as the key to a satisfying work environment, rather than just reflexively following the trend toward openness.  As I said in my last post, I think open is overall better than closed, but the reasons for it need to be thoughtfully examined or simple chaos can ensue.