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

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.