Reuters

How shared work centers could reshape how and where we work.

Changes in technology and peoples' preferences are transforming how and where we work. As a new white paper [PDF] suggests, shifts in usage and physical locations of offices are going to dramatically affect the shape of cities in the near future.

Published by the business communications provider Mitel, the paper argues that technologies enabling people to work without relying on a physical space will shake up the traditional office real estate market. Instead of businesses owning or occupying large office buildings, more companies wile likely to shift towards shared work centers available as needed for tasks best achieved when people are actually in the same place.

The paper suggests that offices will become more broadly distributed instead of being concentrated in downtowns or business centers.

This will drive a lasting change in the landscape of cities as we now know them, which could become weighted towards residential and retail buildings, while we look to less concentrated, easy to access areas on the outskirts to house other commercial buildings. Suburban borders will blur and there will be a positive impact on transport networks, as congestion bottlenecks are eased and widespread uptake of homeworking or working in satellite offices dramatically reduces fuel consumption and carbon emissions.

This is not a very surprising conclusion to hear from a company that specializes in business communication software and services, and the idea that changing work preferences will radically reform urbanity seems a bit exaggerated. But it does raise an interesting question about how the location of work spaces could impact the location of other physical elements of cities, such as residences, parks, shopping areas and even transportation systems.

The dichotomy of a downtown business center and a suburban office park is surely an oversimplification. And though technology will likely enable more of a diversification of work environments between these two extremes, it's not likely that either will disappear. Some companies will still benefit from huge complexes out in the burbs, while others will still rely on the locational advantages of having fixed office space downtown and near other related actors in the economic ecosystem. But for those companies in between, there may be value in creating office environments that don't make it a deal-breaker for employees to live where they want – be it in the far-out exurbs or in a bustling urban center.

As I reported recently, a new report from The Brookings Institution has found that only about 25 percent of the workforce in the largest metropolitan areas in the U.S. can access jobs on transit within 90 minutes. Creating better connections between people and jobs will likely be an attractive feature in the near future. Better distributed job sites for occasional in-office work may be part of that solution.

Photo credit: Aly Song / Reuters

About the Author

Most Popular

  1. photo: a couple tries out a mattress in a store.
    Equity

    What’s the Future of the ‘Sleep Economy’?

    As bed-in-a-box startup Casper files for an IPO, the buzzy mattress seller is betting that the next big thing in sleep is brick-and-mortar retail outlets.

  2. Environment

    Housing Discrimination Made Summers Even Hotter

    The practice of redlining in the 1930s helps explain why poorer U.S. neighborhoods experience more extreme heat.

  3. photo: subway in NYC
    Transportation

    Inside Bloomberg's $1 Trillion Infrastructure Plan

    Drawing on his time as New York City mayor, Michael Bloomberg proposes handing power and money to urban leaders as part of his Democratic presidential bid.

  4. Transportation

    In Paris, a Very Progressive Agenda Is Going Mainstream

    Boosted by big sustainability wins, Mayor Anne Hidalgo is pitching bold plans to make the city center “100 percent bicycle” and turn office space into housing.

  5. photo: San Diego's Trolley
    Transportation

    Out of Darkness, Light Rail!

    In an era of austere federal funding for urban public transportation, light rail seemed to make sense. Did the little trains of the 1980s pull their own weight?

×