The value of incorporating a coworking environment into the real estate portfolios of office-based organization

IF 2.6 Q3 MANAGEMENT Journal of Corporate Real Estate Pub Date : 2023-11-17 DOI:10.1108/jcre-01-2023-0001
Julia Gracheva, Brenda H. Groen
{"title":"The value of incorporating a coworking environment into the real estate portfolios of office-based organization","authors":"Julia Gracheva, Brenda H. Groen","doi":"10.1108/jcre-01-2023-0001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Purpose</h3>\n<p>This paper aims to determine the advantages and disadvantages associated with integrating a coworking environment into the real estate portfolios of large office-based organizations. The study discusses both external and internal coworking solutions.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\n<p>This paper is a literature review and qualitative research based on 12 semistructured interviews with high-level real estate practitioners, including users, suppliers and consultants.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Findings</h3>\n<p>The authors examined the advantages and disadvantages of incorporating coworking environments into the real estate portfolios of large organizations from the four perspectives of Krumm <em>et al.</em> (2000). These perspectives were operationalized through the 12 real estate added value parameters of Jensen and Van der Voordt (2017). The findings show that improved adaptability is the greatest advantage of external coworking solutions (facility management perspective). The most significant advantage of internal coworking is related to stimulation of innovation, creativity and knowledge sharing (general management perspective). The disadvantages of external and internal coworking partly overlap and are mainly the negative effect on the corporate culture (general management perspective).</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\n<p>The findings contribute to the understanding of the advantages and disadvantages of incorporating both external and internal coworking solutions from multiple perspectives and allow to compare them. The authors developed and tested an operationalization of the four perspectives of Krumm (2000) through the 12 added values of Jensen and Van der Voordt (2017). Opinions and perceptions of professionals regarding internal and external coworking models are presented in a framework and related to earlier findings.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->","PeriodicalId":45969,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Corporate Real Estate","volume":"42 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Corporate Real Estate","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jcre-01-2023-0001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

This paper aims to determine the advantages and disadvantages associated with integrating a coworking environment into the real estate portfolios of large office-based organizations. The study discusses both external and internal coworking solutions.

Design/methodology/approach

This paper is a literature review and qualitative research based on 12 semistructured interviews with high-level real estate practitioners, including users, suppliers and consultants.

Findings

The authors examined the advantages and disadvantages of incorporating coworking environments into the real estate portfolios of large organizations from the four perspectives of Krumm et al. (2000). These perspectives were operationalized through the 12 real estate added value parameters of Jensen and Van der Voordt (2017). The findings show that improved adaptability is the greatest advantage of external coworking solutions (facility management perspective). The most significant advantage of internal coworking is related to stimulation of innovation, creativity and knowledge sharing (general management perspective). The disadvantages of external and internal coworking partly overlap and are mainly the negative effect on the corporate culture (general management perspective).

Originality/value

The findings contribute to the understanding of the advantages and disadvantages of incorporating both external and internal coworking solutions from multiple perspectives and allow to compare them. The authors developed and tested an operationalization of the four perspectives of Krumm (2000) through the 12 added values of Jensen and Van der Voordt (2017). Opinions and perceptions of professionals regarding internal and external coworking models are presented in a framework and related to earlier findings.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
将共同工作环境纳入办公室型组织的房地产投资组合的价值
本文旨在确定将联合办公环境整合到大型办公室组织的房地产投资组合中的利弊。该研究讨论了外部和内部的联合办公解决方案。设计/方法/方法本文是基于对12位高层房地产从业者(包括用户、供应商和顾问)的半结构化访谈的文献综述和定性研究。研究结果作者从Krumm et al.(2000)的四个角度研究了将联合办公环境纳入大型组织房地产投资组合的利弊。这些观点是通过Jensen和Van der Voordt(2017)的12个房地产附加值参数来实现的。研究结果表明,提高适应性是外部联合办公解决方案的最大优势(从设施管理的角度来看)。内部联合办公最显著的优势与激励创新、创造力和知识共享有关(一般管理角度)。外部和内部联合办公的缺点部分重叠,主要是对企业文化的负面影响(一般管理角度)。原创性/价值这些发现有助于从多个角度了解合并外部和内部联合办公解决方案的优缺点,并允许对它们进行比较。作者通过Jensen和Van der Voordt(2017)的12个附加值,开发并测试了Krumm(2000)的四个视角的可操作性。专业人士对内部和外部共同工作模式的意见和看法在一个框架中提出,并与早期的发现相关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
8.70%
发文量
12
期刊最新文献
Choosing where to work: an empirical study of collaborative activities’ impact on workspace choice behavior Open-plan office employees’ perceived mental and social well-being A comprehensive analysis of the implications of artificial intelligence adoption on employee social well-being in South African facility management organizations Knowledge work productivity in an activity-based workplace: a comparative analysis COVID-19 outcomes: exploring the footprints of the pandemic on the office sector in Johannesburg, South Africa
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1