The performance measurement of corporate real estate portfolio management

2002 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 117-130 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barry Varcoe
2015 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 46-62 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luke Langford ◽  
Barry Haynes

Purpose – The purpose of this study is to evaluate corporate real estate (CRE) performance measurement and how value can be added to the core business. Design/methodology/approach – An analysis is made of the appropriate literature and primary research conducted via interviews with 11 senior professionals from three globally renowned companies, one global financial organisation and two corporate advisory firms. Findings – The findings from this research provide evidence that CRE can be used to add value to the core business, both in the physical and behavioural environment. By aligning aims and objectives with the business, continually conducting portfolio analytics, encompassing size, cost, space, retention and productivity, value can be added, maximising shareholder worth. Research limitations/implications – The main conclusions drawn from this study are that CRE can add value to the business. The role of corporate real estate asset managers (CREAMs) needs to change from the physical environment to the behavioural environment, working to increase productivity, which can have greatest impact on shareholder value. Originality/value – This paper provides evidence to suggest that CRE ’s role is not only to manage property but should be broadened to add value to the organisation by aligning CRE strategy with the corporate strategy. Closer interactions with human resource and information technology are required to enhance productivity, via relationship management, perhaps outsourcing to provide best in industry expertise. CREAMs can shape the future of office space, by demanding carbon neutral properties. This paper recommends that further research should be conducted on the measurement of intangibles, like productivity and corporate social responsibility, and how they can be used to add value and sustainable saves.


2009 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 106-114 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Jordan ◽  
Thomas McCarty ◽  
Brian Velo

2018 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 177-195 ◽  
Author(s):  
Theo J.M. van der Voordt ◽  
Per Anker Jensen

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to present a process model of value-adding corporate real estate and facilities management and indicators that can be used to measure and benchmark workplace performance and the added value of workplace interventions for an organisation. Design/methodology/approach The paper compares the performance measurement and benchmarking theory with current practice and data from different work environments. The paper builds on two books on adding value through buildings, facilities and services, both edited and co-authored by the authors of this paper. The books were based on literature reviews, interviews with practitioners, cross-border studies of performance measurement and benchmarking and in-depth analyses of various value parameters by experts from different countries. In addition, theory and empirical examples of benchmarking have been included. Findings The paper presents 12 value parameters that are seen as relevant in measuring and benchmarking of workplace performance: four people-oriented, four business processes-related, two economic and two social parameters. Because not all values can be easily expressed in monetary units, various other ways of measuring are presented that can help to monitor and to benchmark workplace performance. The 12 values and ways to measure can be used to support a more integrated business case approach that goes beyond “dollar-metrics” and spreadsheet-based decision-making. Both quantitative and qualitative performance indicators, including hard and soft factors, are needed to define the trade-off between the costs and benefits of interventions in corporate real estate, facilities and services and to cope with the interests and needs of different stakeholders. Practical implications To add value to an organisation, workplaces have to provide value for money by a positive trade-off between the benefits, i.e. support of the organisational objectives and the primary processes and the costs, time and risks connected with achieving these benefits. Widely used indicators to measure the costs are the investment costs, running costs and total cost of occupancy. These metrics are primarily connected to efficiency, i.e. to optimal use of the resources of a firm, but much less to effectiveness and benefits such as user satisfaction, productivity, health and well-being. Originality/value The paper links performance measurement and benchmarking to value-adding corporate real estate and facilities management and presents new ways to measure and benchmark the performance of buildings, facilities and services in connection to organisational performance.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document