Key Takeaways
- Workplace projects should be judged on the business outcomes they deliver, not solely on cost, programme and quality.
- Practical Completion should mark the beginning of measuring workplace performance rather than the end of the project.
- A structured post-occupancy review provides evidence that can strengthen future business cases, workplace briefs and investment decisions.
- Organisations should distinguish between assumptions made during briefing and evidence gathered after occupation.
- Setting aside a modest budget for “Day 2 Works” enables evidence-based improvements once real patterns of occupation emerge.
Why evidence-based workplace investment should continue long after occupation
The development of a workplace business case is based on a series of assumptions.
- How many people will use the office?
- How will they work?
- How much collaboration space is required?
- What is the appropriate balance between focused work, meetings and social space?
- How much technology will be needed to support hybrid working?
These assumptions are necessary because, at the outset of a project, they are often the best information available.
However, assumptions should not become permanent truths.
One of the most overlooked stages of a workplace project is testing whether those assumptions proved to be correct once the workplace has been occupied.
From assumptions to evidence
During the design process, project teams invest significant time validating the brief, benchmarking costs, testing options and managing project risk. This provides the confidence needed to commit significant capital expenditure.
Once the workplace is occupied, an even more valuable source of information becomes available.
Evidence.
Rather than relying on forecasts or stakeholder opinion, organisations can observe how the workplace actually performs under normal operating conditions.
Patterns of utilisation become established.
Teams develop working practices.
Operational constraints emerge.
The workplace begins to demonstrate which design decisions have delivered value and which may require refinement.
This information should not be regarded simply as operational feedback. It is evidence that can improve future investment decisions.
Measuring outcomes rather than outputs
The construction industry has well-established measures of project success.
Projects are expected to be delivered safely, on programme, within budget and to the required quality standards.
These remain fundamental objectives.
However, they measure the delivery of the project rather than the performance of the completed workplace.
For occupiers, the success of a workplace investment extends beyond Practical Completion.
Questions such as the following are equally important.
- Has the workplace improved collaboration?
- Does it support the different work settings originally identified within the business case?
- Have utilisation patterns aligned with the design assumptions?
- Which areas are consistently underused or over-subscribed?
- Have operational changes been required since occupation?
These questions can only be answered once the workplace has been occupied for a sufficient period.
Establishing an evidence base
In my experience, a formal post-occupancy review six months to a year after occupation provides the greatest value.
By this stage, initial behaviours have settled and genuine utilisation patterns have emerged.
The review should be undertaken by a multidisciplinary team including Workplace, Facilities Management, HR, IT, the project manager, design consultants and cost consultant.
The objective is not to identify defects or apportion responsibility.
It is to establish an evidence base for future decision making.
Typical areas of review might include:
- utilisation of different workplace settings;
- operational issues affecting productivity;
- changes implemented since occupation;
- additional capital expenditure incurred after handover;
- lessons learned that should influence future workplace investments.
It is also prudent to establish a modest allowance within the original project budget for what is often described as Day 2 Works.
No workplace performs exactly as anticipated from the first day of occupation. Allowing for measured adjustments based on observed evidence is generally a more effective approach than attempting to eliminate every uncertainty during design.
Improving the next investment
Many organisations undertake major workplace projects only every five to ten years.
Each project therefore represents a significant opportunity to improve the next.
Unfortunately, once Practical Completion has been achieved, project teams are disbanded and attention moves elsewhere. Valuable operational evidence is often lost before it has been captured and evaluated.
A structured post-occupancy review provides an opportunity to convert operational experience into organisational knowledge.
This strengthens future business cases, improves briefing, informs benchmarking and reduces reliance on assumptions in subsequent projects.
A different measure of project success
One question I have reflected on recently is whether our industry measures success at the right point.
Project teams are rightly accountable for delivering projects safely, on programme and within budget. However, what if success was also measured against the operational benefits achieved twelve months after occupation?
Would project teams spend more time understanding how people use the workplace?
Would post-occupancy evaluation become a standard stage of every project?
Would future workplace investments become better informed?
I suspect the answer to each of these questions is yes.
For organisations investing significant capital in their workplaces, Practical Completion should not represent the end of the project.
It should represent the point at which assumptions begin to be replaced by evidence.
What does this mean for future projects?
The primary purpose of a post-occupancy review is not to critique the completed project. It is to improve the next one.
The insights gained can strengthen many of the activities that take place during the early stages of a future workplace project, including:
- Developing a more robust business case based on evidence rather than assumptions.
- Improving workplace briefs by understanding which design decisions delivered value in practice.
- Refining space planning assumptions using actual utilisation and operational experience.
- Enhancing benchmarking by comparing proposed workplace strategies with the performance of previous projects.
- Producing more informed cost plans that reflect proven operational requirements rather than theoretical ones.
- Identifying where a modest allowance for Day 2 Works should be incorporated within future project budgets.
For organisations with multiple offices or regular workplace change programmes, this creates a continuous improvement cycle. Each completed project provides evidence that can improve the quality of future investment decisions, reducing uncertainty and increasing confidence that capital expenditure is being directed where it delivers the greatest operational value.
Further Reading
- Guide to specification – BCO – British Council for Offices
- Guide To Fit Out – BCO – British Council for Offices
- BCO Guide to Post Occupancy Evaluation – BCO – British Council for Offices
- Lifecycle Cost of Meeting Rooms: Traditional vs Modular | Fit Out Insights
- Building Services Research and Information Association (BSRIA) – Soft Landings Framework
- Leesman Index – Workplace Effectiveness Research
- RICS – Whole Life Carbon Assessment for the Built Environment (where relevant to future investment decisions)
