时代总是在变。一个世纪以前,福特T型轿车的问世,使得汽车这个东西不再是少数富豪的专宠,1500万辆T型轿车走进了美国的千家万户,它让人们从此可以跟上时代的脚步,更加自由地探索这个不断变化的世界,这反过来也点燃了更多人的“美国梦”。1936年,当T型轿车即将停产时,美国作家怀特(代表作《夏洛特的网)》这样评论道:“作为一种交通工具,它勤劳、亲民、勇敢。如果你想出门的话,你只需用右手的第三个手指勾住档位杆,用力向下一拉,左脚用力一踩离合踏板。这些动作简单而有力,车子就会轰鸣着向前冲。”
别管这台汽车有多原始,总之它就是能跑起来。在上世纪80年代,美国音乐人特蕾西·查普曼凭借一首《快车》(Fast Car)一夜成名。其歌词充分反映了当时的人们希望通过努力工作过上美好生活的向往。
随着汽车走进千家万户,无数的流行歌曲中都有了它的影子。比如唱失恋不能光唱失恋,要唱“我应该在车底,不应该在车里”。唱奋斗不能光唱奋斗,要唱“握住命运的方向盘”。美国作家迈克尔·康纳利写过一本畅销书《第五个证人》,主角米基·豪勒又称“林肯律师”,“林肯”指的就是他的林肯车。他的办公地点就是在公路上,在他的车里。他的办公室既无定所,又无处不在——总之,人们总是开着车奔向生计和希望的所在。
对我来说,我的通勤工具也一直是汽车。在上世纪70年代,那时我还生活在伦敦北部的卡姆登,我经常会透过窗子看着马路上川流不息的汽车。当时我的同龄人大都在上大学,而我已经开着车子去工作了。在我21岁生日的时候,我的表姐送了我一辆银色的丰田花冠,我经常开着它在伦敦四处转。当时我在伦敦国王大道的企鹅图书公司找到了一份工作,后来又去了相距不算太远的英国广播公司(BBC)工作。当时我对职场的归属感还不如我对这台车子的归属感强。在这两家公司,我做的都是坐办公室的工作,办公室是一个相对静止的空间,有文件柜、有线电话和成堆的纸张。但是汽车却是动态的,它以一种激动人心的方式,将我带进了属于成年人的工作世界。
时代总是在变,我工作过的所有地方也在变。BBC的总部伦敦白城过去又被称为“电视中心”,它现在已经变成了一座巨大的SOHO大楼。企鹅图书公司的旧址也变成了一幢幢公寓楼。人们开车去上班的习惯也一定程度上发生了改变。现在,开私家车上班就像吸烟一样,已经成了一个政治性问题,一方面是因为气候变化原因,加上伦敦的政策鼓励人们骑自行车,一方面是因为公交系统的发展,还有一方面则是疫情对人们通勤习惯的影响。
现在,汽车本身已经成了一个过时的符号,同时它也在不断升级换代。现在的汽车跟以前也有了显著变化,从燃油车到电动车,再到无人驾驶汽车。汽车、通勤与城市,这三者彼此联系,而且都在持续变化。通勤所依赖的传统力量,是人们朝九晚五地在城市的某一栋办公楼里上班。近一个世纪以来,这是无数人早已习惯的生活方式,所有人都这么做,没有人会对此提出任何质疑。直到这种肉体的、机械的运动被另一种运动所颠覆——即对个人移动化的渴望。
自从手机和互联网被发明出来,一切都变得不同了。随着外包和全球化的到来,通勤正在由外在移动向内在移动转变。现在有100万美国人已经从北方搬到了南方。而据全球最大的自由职业者网站Upwork预测,随着远程办公革命的兴起,将来最终需要“肉身移动”去工作的岗位,可能最多只占全部劳动力的10%。灵活性与流动性是相辅相成的,以Uber为代表的网约车行业就是一个很好的例子。有了网约车,现在的城市可以运行得很好,但是如果没有网约车,似乎就没有那么好了。网约车的例子说明了城市需要一定的时间来适应新的系统,尤其是在科技与人们的工作模式发生冲突的情况下。而Uber也是花了一段时间才醒悟过来,意识到他们需要正确对待工人,给予他们一定的权利和保护。另外在伦敦,Uber极大地冲击了伦敦非常有代表性的黑色出租车行业。现在这些出租车司机也必须接受刷卡和非现金交易了。出租车司机们对此怨声载道,但是服务效果确实更好了。
通勤噩梦
很多时候,可能我们更清楚自己不想要什么,而不是想要什么。有一件事我们是确信无疑的,那就是通勤是一件所有人都讨厌的事,它消耗时间、消耗生命。通勤时间也与一些城市的办公楼入住率下降有直接关系,因为有些地方光是进城或者出城一趟,就得花费一个多小时。
我们还知道,通勤不仅不受欢迎,而且对人很不健康。虽然在英国,人们开车出行更多是为了购物和休闲,而不是通勤,但在世界其他地方却并非如此,比如有四分之三的美国人仍喜欢开车上班。最近的一项研究表明,远程办公可使碳排放量减少58%。当然,气候变化也会影响人们对生活和工作地点的选择。比如在美国,与气候风险相关的房地产保险虽然有所缩水,但整体规模仍相当于全美GDP的17%。
通勤问题的关键,就在于人们如何进入和穿过城市,也就是如何从家移动到单位。不过自从2020年3月,全球进入“居家模式”以来,多数上班族朝九晚五的日子自此告一段落。城市、办公室和家构成了一组“新通勤三角”,只要技术条件允许,这三者都可以成为打工人的办公地点。
说一千道一万,人们对工作场所一般并不挑剔,而更强调以人为本,但是人们对自己的工作和生活质量还是有要求的。人们现在想要的有三点:第一是更好地实现工作与生活的平衡,第二是工作收入能比较轻松地满足生活成本,第三是有好的技术手段来方便随时随地工作。而通勤城镇将在那些住房和育儿成本合理、供给充足、不受气候变化影响的地方发展起来,当然它们离企业总部的距离也不能太远。
就目前来说,我们有的问题要比答案多。我对工作和职场的看法,一定程度上受到了我在伦敦的所见所闻的影响。伦敦是我生活的地方,而纽约则是我的另一个家,我每年都要在那里工作几次。在理解通勤问题的总体趋势上,有一个人给了我很大帮助,他叫彼得·米斯科维奇,是一个纽约人,也是全球领先的商业地产咨询机构JLL的全球未来工作项目的咨询负责人。
彼得已经在房地产和工作转型领域摸爬滚打了20多年,他具有出色的商业天赋,同时也对他的研究领域了如指掌(全球不少知名品牌都是他的客户),而且他是个非常坦诚的人。他非常实事求是,他是最早证实我的猜测的人之一——即商业地产格局将被新冠疫情永远改变,而当时很多人并不认可这个观点。
他对我说:“我倾向于用30年到50年的眼光来看待商业地产乃至整个房地产业,现在我们已经经历了三四十年的转型期,而且它现在还在加速,带来了更多的颠覆性和复杂性。随着而来的是围绕供求关系的一个有趣的悖论,人们既关注成本管理,也注重提升人的体验;既关注整合新的颠覆性技术以实现新的工作方式,也关注大规模的劳动力人口结构变化。所有这些影响因素都在同时深刻影响着今天的商业地产行业。”
“因此,在过去5年里,商业地产板块的复杂性在急剧增加。我们现在正与几家全球性客户合作,研究制定2030战略。而且我们计划分成两个4年战略来实现,第一阶段是2024年到2027年,第二阶段是2027年到2030年。”
远程工作革命
变化的不仅仅是时间——比如通勤时间变长或变短,还有人们的语言。这几年有不少新词被造了出来。你听说过“城市末日循环”吗?经济学家阿尔皮特·古普塔还发明了“城市启示录”这个词。阿普塔提醒我说,城市是围绕现有技术(包括技术的局限性)不断发展的,比如纽约的剧院区就是围绕它旁边的服装区发展起来的。他还提醒我,现在有一个简单的成本公式,但是现在对许多写字楼的租户来说,这个公式并不划算。
古普塔教授指出,美国的商业地产租赁成本折合到每名白领员工身上,大约是15000美元。如果你是一家大公司,坐拥上亿甚至几十亿资产,那么这点成本对你可能不算什么。但是美国私营企业将近一半的工作岗位由300多万家小企业创造的。对他们来说,租金的高低就决定了他们能租多大的面积来完成工作。
那么这些因素加起来意味着什么呢?答案是:移动。人们离开城市,迁往郊区或更小的城市。而办公室和办公空间的使用模式也在发生变化。我们不应害怕变化,而应当顺应变化。通勤和“末日循环”的丧钟已经敲响,但它同时也会催生一些新的东西。斯坦福大学的尼古拉斯·布鲁姆教授曾预言,远程办公和混合办公将成为未来的主流。2023年8月,他在《经济学人》上撰文称,“远程工作的趋势就像Nike的那个小钩子标志一样,疫情以后,起初会有一定下降,随后会趋于稳定,最后将来会出现长期的大幅增长"。
说起城市商业地产的动荡,Wework是一个很好的例子。WeWork在2023年底的破产,标志着一个时代的终结——在那个时代,人们以为传统的办公室生活会永远持续下去,事实证明这是一个代价昂贵的错误。WeWork的兴衰,象征着办公室时代的结束——当然实际上,这也只是WeWork的结束(WeWork的创始人亚当·纽曼是一个很有魅力但也很有争议的人,我个人总是分不清他和知名演员杰瑞德·莱托。纽曼现在正在试图把Wework买回来。但是我认为,人不能走回头路,只能向前看。所以我们可以说,WeWork已经停止工作了。)
在2020年以后,全球商业地产市场下跌了20%左右,而且应该永远也回不到原来的样子了。2024年1月,美国谘商会发布的一份颇具影响力的报告显示,全球的CEO们已经开始将吸引人才作为“高关注度”的目标,而将让员工回到办公室办公视为“低关注度”的目标。这一切都表明,对企业来说,在让员工回办公室上班的问题,明智的做法是要考虑社会基础,不强制全时坐班,搞差异化的安排,而不是像以前那样搞一刀切。
尽管以WeWork为代表的共享办公空间模式曾被宣传为最适合自由职业者的工作模式,而且它也备受那些办公空间不足,或者想显得时髦一些的企业青睐,WeWork也一度赚得盆满钵满,但是等到它关闭时,它在全球40多个国家的近800个地点的上百万个工作站已经空空如也。
对于投资者和开发商来说,商业地产已经成了一个“百慕大黑洞”,一些明智的投资者和开发商可能会试水那些工作与生活一体的项目,并且聘请像彼得·米斯科维奇这样的人才来帮他们设计路径。但是,现在一个新的“通勤三角”已经出现了,它更强调的是人、家庭与工作的协调共生。它不是一个会让你迷失的地方,但它也有一系列需要解决的动态问题。现在,一个工作者可能同时坐在家庭生活的中心和工作生活的中心。如果有企业能明白这一点,并认真围绕他们的职业特点、工作内容和工作空间进行设计,就有可能打动他们、激励他们,并且帮助他们走得更远。
摘编自《Working Assumptions: What We Thought We Knew About Work Before Covid and Generative AI—And What We Know Now》一书。作者:Julia Hobsbawm。(财富中文网)
译者:朴成奎
《工作假设》。作者:茱莉亚·霍布斯鲍姆。THE BROWN STUDIO
时代总是在变。一个世纪以前,福特T型轿车的问世,使得汽车这个东西不再是少数富豪的专宠,1500万辆T型轿车走进了美国的千家万户,它让人们从此可以跟上时代的脚步,更加自由地探索这个不断变化的世界,这反过来也点燃了更多人的“美国梦”。1936年,当T型轿车即将停产时,美国作家怀特(代表作《夏洛特的网)》这样评论道:“作为一种交通工具,它勤劳、亲民、勇敢。如果你想出门的话,你只需用右手的第三个手指勾住档位杆,用力向下一拉,左脚用力一踩离合踏板。这些动作简单而有力,车子就会轰鸣着向前冲。”
别管这台汽车有多原始,总之它就是能跑起来。在上世纪80年代,美国音乐人特蕾西·查普曼凭借一首《快车》(Fast Car)一夜成名。其歌词充分反映了当时的人们希望通过努力工作过上美好生活的向往。
随着汽车走进千家万户,无数的流行歌曲中都有了它的影子。比如唱失恋不能光唱失恋,要唱“我应该在车底,不应该在车里”。唱奋斗不能光唱奋斗,要唱“握住命运的方向盘”。美国作家迈克尔·康纳利写过一本畅销书《第五个证人》,主角米基·豪勒又称“林肯律师”,“林肯”指的就是他的林肯车。他的办公地点就是在公路上,在他的车里。他的办公室既无定所,又无处不在——总之,人们总是开着车奔向生计和希望的所在。
对我来说,我的通勤工具也一直是汽车。在上世纪70年代,那时我还生活在伦敦北部的卡姆登,我经常会透过窗子看着马路上川流不息的汽车。当时我的同龄人大都在上大学,而我已经开着车子去工作了。在我21岁生日的时候,我的表姐送了我一辆银色的丰田花冠,我经常开着它在伦敦四处转。当时我在伦敦国王大道的企鹅图书公司找到了一份工作,后来又去了相距不算太远的英国广播公司(BBC)工作。当时我对职场的归属感还不如我对这台车子的归属感强。在这两家公司,我做的都是坐办公室的工作,办公室是一个相对静止的空间,有文件柜、有线电话和成堆的纸张。但是汽车却是动态的,它以一种激动人心的方式,将我带进了属于成年人的工作世界。
时代总是在变,我工作过的所有地方也在变。BBC的总部伦敦白城过去又被称为“电视中心”,它现在已经变成了一座巨大的SOHO大楼。企鹅图书公司的旧址也变成了一幢幢公寓楼。人们开车去上班的习惯也一定程度上发生了改变。现在,开私家车上班就像吸烟一样,已经成了一个政治性问题,一方面是因为气候变化原因,加上伦敦的政策鼓励人们骑自行车,一方面是因为公交系统的发展,还有一方面则是疫情对人们通勤习惯的影响。
现在,汽车本身已经成了一个过时的符号,同时它也在不断升级换代。现在的汽车跟以前也有了显著变化,从燃油车到电动车,再到无人驾驶汽车。汽车、通勤与城市,这三者彼此联系,而且都在持续变化。通勤所依赖的传统力量,是人们朝九晚五地在城市的某一栋办公楼里上班。近一个世纪以来,这是无数人早已习惯的生活方式,所有人都这么做,没有人会对此提出任何质疑。直到这种肉体的、机械的运动被另一种运动所颠覆——即对个人移动化的渴望。
自从手机和互联网被发明出来,一切都变得不同了。随着外包和全球化的到来,通勤正在由外在移动向内在移动转变。现在有100万美国人已经从北方搬到了南方。而据全球最大的自由职业者网站Upwork预测,随着远程办公革命的兴起,将来最终需要“肉身移动”去工作的岗位,可能最多只占全部劳动力的10%。灵活性与流动性是相辅相成的,以Uber为代表的网约车行业就是一个很好的例子。有了网约车,现在的城市可以运行得很好,但是如果没有网约车,似乎就没有那么好了。网约车的例子说明了城市需要一定的时间来适应新的系统,尤其是在科技与人们的工作模式发生冲突的情况下。而Uber也是花了一段时间才醒悟过来,意识到他们需要正确对待工人,给予他们一定的权利和保护。另外在伦敦,Uber极大地冲击了伦敦非常有代表性的黑色出租车行业。现在这些出租车司机也必须接受刷卡和非现金交易了。出租车司机们对此怨声载道,但是服务效果确实更好了。
通勤噩梦
很多时候,可能我们更清楚自己不想要什么,而不是想要什么。有一件事我们是确信无疑的,那就是通勤是一件所有人都讨厌的事,它消耗时间、消耗生命。通勤时间也与一些城市的办公楼入住率下降有直接关系,因为有些地方光是进城或者出城一趟,就得花费一个多小时。
我们还知道,通勤不仅不受欢迎,而且对人很不健康。虽然在英国,人们开车出行更多是为了购物和休闲,而不是通勤,但在世界其他地方却并非如此,比如有四分之三的美国人仍喜欢开车上班。最近的一项研究表明,远程办公可使碳排放量减少58%。当然,气候变化也会影响人们对生活和工作地点的选择。比如在美国,与气候风险相关的房地产保险虽然有所缩水,但整体规模仍相当于全美GDP的17%。
通勤问题的关键,就在于人们如何进入和穿过城市,也就是如何从家移动到单位。不过自从2020年3月,全球进入“居家模式”以来,多数上班族朝九晚五的日子自此告一段落。城市、办公室和家构成了一组“新通勤三角”,只要技术条件允许,这三者都可以成为打工人的办公地点。
说一千道一万,人们对工作场所一般并不挑剔,而更强调以人为本,但是人们对自己的工作和生活质量还是有要求的。人们现在想要的有三点:第一是更好地实现工作与生活的平衡,第二是工作收入能比较轻松地满足生活成本,第三是有好的技术手段来方便随时随地工作。而通勤城镇将在那些住房和育儿成本合理、供给充足、不受气候变化影响的地方发展起来,当然它们离企业总部的距离也不能太远。
就目前来说,我们有的问题要比答案多。我对工作和职场的看法,一定程度上受到了我在伦敦的所见所闻的影响。伦敦是我生活的地方,而纽约则是我的另一个家,我每年都要在那里工作几次。在理解通勤问题的总体趋势上,有一个人给了我很大帮助,他叫彼得·米斯科维奇,是一个纽约人,也是全球领先的商业地产咨询机构JLL的全球未来工作项目的咨询负责人。
彼得已经在房地产和工作转型领域摸爬滚打了20多年,他具有出色的商业天赋,同时也对他的研究领域了如指掌(全球不少知名品牌都是他的客户),而且他是个非常坦诚的人。他非常实事求是,他是最早证实我的猜测的人之一——即商业地产格局将被新冠疫情永远改变,而当时很多人并不认可这个观点。
他对我说:“我倾向于用30年到50年的眼光来看待商业地产乃至整个房地产业,现在我们已经经历了三四十年的转型期,而且它现在还在加速,带来了更多的颠覆性和复杂性。随着而来的是围绕供求关系的一个有趣的悖论,人们既关注成本管理,也注重提升人的体验;既关注整合新的颠覆性技术以实现新的工作方式,也关注大规模的劳动力人口结构变化。所有这些影响因素都在同时深刻影响着今天的商业地产行业。”
“因此,在过去5年里,商业地产板块的复杂性在急剧增加。我们现在正与几家全球性客户合作,研究制定2030战略。而且我们计划分成两个4年战略来实现,第一阶段是2024年到2027年,第二阶段是2027年到2030年。”
远程工作革命
变化的不仅仅是时间——比如通勤时间变长或变短,还有人们的语言。这几年有不少新词被造了出来。你听说过“城市末日循环”吗?经济学家阿尔皮特·古普塔还发明了“城市启示录”这个词。阿普塔提醒我说,城市是围绕现有技术(包括技术的局限性)不断发展的,比如纽约的剧院区就是围绕它旁边的服装区发展起来的。他还提醒我,现在有一个简单的成本公式,但是现在对许多写字楼的租户来说,这个公式并不划算。
古普塔教授指出,美国的商业地产租赁成本折合到每名白领员工身上,大约是15000美元。如果你是一家大公司,坐拥上亿甚至几十亿资产,那么这点成本对你可能不算什么。但是美国私营企业将近一半的工作岗位由300多万家小企业创造的。对他们来说,租金的高低就决定了他们能租多大的面积来完成工作。
那么这些因素加起来意味着什么呢?答案是:移动。人们离开城市,迁往郊区或更小的城市。而办公室和办公空间的使用模式也在发生变化。我们不应害怕变化,而应当顺应变化。通勤和“末日循环”的丧钟已经敲响,但它同时也会催生一些新的东西。斯坦福大学的尼古拉斯·布鲁姆教授曾预言,远程办公和混合办公将成为未来的主流。2023年8月,他在《经济学人》上撰文称,“远程工作的趋势就像Nike的那个小钩子标志一样,疫情以后,起初会有一定下降,随后会趋于稳定,最后将来会出现长期的大幅增长"。
说起城市商业地产的动荡,Wework是一个很好的例子。WeWork在2023年底的破产,标志着一个时代的终结——在那个时代,人们以为传统的办公室生活会永远持续下去,事实证明这是一个代价昂贵的错误。WeWork的兴衰,象征着办公室时代的结束——当然实际上,这也只是WeWork的结束(WeWork的创始人亚当·纽曼是一个很有魅力但也很有争议的人,我个人总是分不清他和知名演员杰瑞德·莱托。纽曼现在正在试图把Wework买回来。但是我认为,人不能走回头路,只能向前看。所以我们可以说,WeWork已经停止工作了。)
在2020年以后,全球商业地产市场下跌了20%左右,而且应该永远也回不到原来的样子了。2024年1月,美国谘商会发布的一份颇具影响力的报告显示,全球的CEO们已经开始将吸引人才作为“高关注度”的目标,而将让员工回到办公室办公视为“低关注度”的目标。这一切都表明,对企业来说,在让员工回办公室上班的问题,明智的做法是要考虑社会基础,不强制全时坐班,搞差异化的安排,而不是像以前那样搞一刀切。
尽管以WeWork为代表的共享办公空间模式曾被宣传为最适合自由职业者的工作模式,而且它也备受那些办公空间不足,或者想显得时髦一些的企业青睐,WeWork也一度赚得盆满钵满,但是等到它关闭时,它在全球40多个国家的近800个地点的上百万个工作站已经空空如也。
对于投资者和开发商来说,商业地产已经成了一个“百慕大黑洞”,一些明智的投资者和开发商可能会试水那些工作与生活一体的项目,并且聘请像彼得·米斯科维奇这样的人才来帮他们设计路径。但是,现在一个新的“通勤三角”已经出现了,它更强调的是人、家庭与工作的协调共生。它不是一个会让你迷失的地方,但它也有一系列需要解决的动态问题。现在,一个工作者可能同时坐在家庭生活的中心和工作生活的中心。如果有企业能明白这一点,并认真围绕他们的职业特点、工作内容和工作空间进行设计,就有可能打动他们、激励他们,并且帮助他们走得更远。
摘编自《Working Assumptions: What We Thought We Knew About Work Before Covid and Generative AI—And What We Know Now》一书。作者:Julia Hobsbawm。(财富中文网)
译者:朴成奎
Times change. A century ago 15 million Model-T Ford cars released consumers and workers alike to a freedom which in turn released the American Dream: to be mobile in a changing world and to move with the times. Writing about it in the New Yorker in 1936 as it was about to cease production, E.B. White (who later wrote Charlotte’s Webb) commented that, “As a vehicle, it was hardworking, commonplace, heroic; to get under way you simply hooked the third finger of the right hand around a lever on the steering column, pulled down hard and shoved your left food down forcibly against the low speed pedal. These were simple, positive motions; the car responded by lunging forward with a roar.”
Never mind that it was clunky: It moved. The singer-songwriter Tracy Chapman became an overnight sensation in the late 1980s with her song “Fast Car.” The lyrics are a pure distillation of the desire and hope to get a better life through work.
Henry Ford’s affordable motor car spawned a million pop songs. To work in a city and belong. To be at the wheel of your own destiny. Mickey Haller, the bestselling creation of writer Michael Connelly, is “the Lincoln Lawyer”—the Lincoln being his car. His workplace? The freeways. The office has been everywhere and nowhere for some time—but people go and move to where work and fulfillment lie.
In my own way, the car has always been my commute. In Camden, North London, in the 1970s I used to gaze longingly out of the plate glass window during assembly at the cars and lorries trundling up the trunk road. Most of my peers went to university but I went to work—in my car. For my twenty-first the birthday my elderly cousin Gretl gave me a silver Toyota Corolla which I used to drive around London in—to my first big office job at Penguin Books in the King’s Road, then to the BBC not so far away. I belonged less in my workplace, which changed, than in the car itself. I worked from a desk in both places, but the connecting tissue was what got me there and what happened in between. The office was a static place, with its filing cabinets, corded telephones and piles of paper. But the car? That was the exciting way I knew I was entering the grown-up world of work.
Times change. All of the offices I have ever worked in have. The BBC White City HQ, which used to be called “Television Centre”, has become a vast Soho House. Penguin Books became, I think, a block of apartments, what the British call “flats.” The idea of driving a car to an office in a city has changed too, and is as politically off limits as smoking now, partly because of climate change and pro-cycling city politics, partly because public transportation systems have grown, and partly because of Covid’s impact on the commute.
The car is a symbol of what gets outdated—and updated. Cars are changing massively, from petrol to electric to driverless. The car, the commute, the city—it’s all connected, and it’s all changing. The traditional forces upon which a commute was based—a daily journey to a nine to five job in a single central building in a city or town center, which millions upon millions of people did, no questions asked, for nearly a century—are being upended by a different kind of motion: the desire for personal mobility.
The game was up as soon as mobile phones and the internet arrived. When outsourcing and globalization arrived, migration for work became internal: A million Americans have moved from north to south already, and an Upwork study predicted up to 10 percent of the entire workforce will ultimately move physically as the remote work revolution gains traction. Flexibility is here. Mobility goes hand in hand with it. The Uber driver has come to represent this too: Cities work well now with Ubers, and they simply work less well without. Uber is, however, a good example of how it takes time to settle in to new systems, especially where technology collides with work practices. It’s not only that it took Uber a while to wake up and smell the coffee that they needed to treat workers properly, with certain rights and protections. In London it mightily disrupted the famous black cab taxi drivers, who now have to handle card and cashless transactions as a matter of law. This was expensive, and my goodness, they grumbled. But it works better now.
The dreaded commute
Perhaps we know what we don’t want rather than what we do at the moment. One thing we do know is that the commute has come to represent everything people hate, namely a time-suck on someone else’s rules. And we know that there is a direct correlation between the drop in office occupancy of the cities, where getting in and out takes over an hour.
We also know that the commute isn’t just unpopular but unhealthy. And although in the UK car trips account more for shopping and leisure than commuting, not so elsewhere in the world: three quarters of Americans still prefer to use their cars to travel between home and work. A recent study shows that switching to remote work can minimize carbon emissions by 58 percent. Climate change of course is affecting where people live and work from anyway: Shrinking property insurance associated with climate risks accounts for a staggering 17 percent of GDP in the US.
The central story around the commute hinges on how people move into and across the city, from where they live to where they work. Ever since global “stay at home” notices were issued around the world in March 2020, the working assumption that the majority of people must commute to work daily ended. The city, the office, the home: This is the new trio of locations battling to be the workplace for anywhere the technology allows.
People are ultimately place-agnostic and person-centered about the workplace, but not about how they live and work. They want three things now: 1) better work–life balance; 2) for work to comfortably cover the cost of living; and 3) good tech which works wherever and whenever they work. Commuter towns will grow in locations in which housing and childcare is affordable and plentiful, which are safe from climate change, and increasingly, within a reachable radius of HQ.
This moment has many more questions than answers. My working assumptions are influenced by what I see happening in London, where I live, and New York, which is something of a home from home, from where I work several times a year. Someone who helps me make sense of the overall trends is a New Yorker, Peter Miscovich, who is the Global Future of Work Lead for Consulting at JLL, one of the world’s leading commercial real estate advisory firms.
Peter, who has been in the real estate and work transformation space one way or another for well over a quarter of a century, has the rare gift of being deeply commercially savvy, corporate to his fingertips (some of the biggest brand names in the world are current or former clients of his), and yet wonderfully candid. Peter is a realist who sees things in the round. He was one of the first people to confirm my suspicion that the world of corporate real estate was being changed forever by the pandemic at a time when plenty were flatly denying it.
He told me:“I tend to look at corporate real estate and the real estate industry sector with a thirty- to fifty-year-lens, and there was really almost thirty to forty years of transformation that is now accelerating even faster with more disruption and with more complexity. And with this comes an interesting emergent paradox around supply and demand, with a new focus upon cost management in parallel with enhanced human experience, integration of new disruptive technologies enabling new ways of working in parallel to massive workforce demographic shifts—all these influencing factors are impacting the corporate real estate simultaneously at scale today.
“So, the paradoxical complexity of the corporate real estate landscape has really increased dramatically over the last five years. We’re now working with several global clients and looking at 2030 strategies, and we’re looking at those strategies in four-year tranches—from 2024 to 2027, and then from 2027 to 2030.”
The remote work ‘swoosh’
It isn’t just the time frame which is changing—shortening and also lengthening—but the language is shifting. Heard of the “urban doom loop”? This and “urban apocalypse” were predicted by the economist Arpit Gupta, who reminded me not only that cities have evolved continuously around the available technology (or lack of it)—e.g. New York’s theater district evolved around the nearby garment district—but that there is a simple cost equation now which just isn’t adding up for many office tenants.
According to Professor Gupta, real estate rental costs the average white collar firm around $15,000 per employee. Fine if you’re a huge business, underwritten by millions or billions of dollars, but nearly half of private sector jobs in business in America are generated by the 3 million or so small businesses. For them that amount is the deciding factor in how much property to rent—if any—in order to get the work done.
What does this all add up to? Movement. Movement of people out of cities and into suburbs or smaller cities, and movement of patterns of office and workspace usage. We need to not fear change but go with it. The death knell for the commute and the doom loop gives rise to something else: the Nike swoosh. Professor Nicholas Bloom of Stanford University, a high-profile academic predicting remote and hybrid working, wrote a guest piece in The Economist in August 2023 predicting that “Remote work is set to undergo a Nike swoosh, with an initial postpandemic drop, followed by its current stabilization and a future long-run surge.”
Perhaps the enduring symbol of the turbulence in city real estate is WeWork. When WeWork went bankrupt at the end of 2023 it marked the end of an era in which the working assumption office life would last forever proved to be an expensive mistake. WeWork’s rise and fall serves as a metaphor for the end of the office, even though it was only actually the end of WeWork (Adam Neumann, its charismatic and controversial founder, who I personally always confuse with his dramatic alter ego actor Jared Leto, is in the process of trying to buy WeWork back but really: You can’t go back, only forwards. I think we can say WeWork stopped working).
The global market in office space dropped by a good twenty percent after 2020, and it’s not coming back, not as before anyway. The influential Conference Board report of January 2024 showed that global CEOs have come to regard attracting talent as “high focus” but getting them back to the office as “low focus.” All proof that the smart money is on making offices attractive for a return on a social basis, a part-time basis, and different basis—but not the same basis as before.
Although the WeWork model and its imitators was marketed as a drop-in-freelance-worker model, it made its bread and butter from sub-letting to larger companies who either ran out of space or wanted to look hip. Until they didn’t. By the time it closed, WeWork’s million or so workstations were empty in nearly 800 locations in forty-odd countries around the world.
Commercial real estate may have become a Bermuda Triangle for investors and developers, with the smart ones pivoting to live-to-work space and hiring people like Peter Miscovich to help them through. But a new “commuter triangle”—a space for people, their home and their work life which isn’t a sinkhole but symbiotic—has emerged. It isn’t a place you get lost in, but a real set of dynamics to grapple with: A working person now sits at the center of their home life and their work life. The company which gets that and dedicates the design of jobs, work and workspace to it will move them, motivate them, and get them to go the distance.
Excerpted and adapted from the book Working Assumptions: What We Thought We Knew About Work Before Covid and Generative AI—And What We Know Now. Copyright © 2024 by Julia Hobsbawm.