As building managers we tend to think inside our buildings, making sure they operate effectively.  But, in doing so, we are missing a bigger picture, because the office-place of the future extends well beyond the walls of the buildings that we manage.

The new workers coming into our spaces do not fit into offices or even cubicles.  They are mobile and unconstrained by the old work structures.  Where and when work happens has less and less to do with “normal” business hours or workspaces.  These new employees are expecting more virtuality and expect work environments based on flexibility and work-life balance.  They expect office buildings to fit this new approach with different services, amenities and basic design features.

Building managers need to be thinking about how building occupants commute (or tele-commute), and how to support them.  We need to provide services that are outside of normal business hours.  We need to be sure the technology of the building supports the technology needs of the people that are employed by our tenants.

Take a look around.  The world out there is changing pretty fast.  And successful buildings will be the ones that bring that outside world inside.

From our own recent activity in the UK renewable energy space, we are witnessing certain family offices and institutional investors actively considering first investments in the sector, and envisage that traditional property investors will start to take a closer look. The UK government is clearly serious through the new Energy Bill, and its measures and funding, for the reformed energy market to work, but ‘considerations’ and ‘closer looks’ by investors, however, will only develop further if the practicalities of the proposed measures are understood exactly and the opportunities are deemed to be ‘investment grade’.

The Bill has delivered a broad degree of clarity and has generally been welcomed by the industry, and should have investors hovering over the ‘on’ button. However, there are still policy uncertainties around what is or what is not going to be have state involvement or backing, particularly with regards to contracts. Without the government underwriting agreements, investors will probably see more risk and view the building of new capacity as more expensive. While we have found that there is significant investor appetite for renewables projects in the UK that are due to become operational even up to the close of the Renewables Obligation (RO) support scheme in 2017, those development portfolios with longer lead times and more uncertain grid connection dates are receiving less interest and are often commanding higher risk premiums.

For the moment we expect this outlook to hold sway until the finer points of the Energy Bill are settled, and most critically, the ‘strike prices’ for CfDs are known (next year) which will ultimately define their value and determine whether investors, on the whole, are ‘in’ or ‘out’.

The future looks bright but….

In 2009, KeyBank engaged Jones Lang LaSalle to help optimize its 1,200 U.S. office and retail locations.   KeyBank is one of the largest banks in the U.S., providing deposit, lending, cash management and investment services to individuals and businesses, as well as a range of corporate and investment banking products throughout the United States.

At JLL we have observed that strong enterprise-level sustainability programs require the collaboration of leaders from different functions across their companies.  We are proud to work with KeyBank’s leaders, supporting their vision for serving communities, reducing the environmental impact of operations, and financing the clean economy.

This new video of KeyBank’s CEO Beth Mooney talking about how JLL is helping KeyBank is a very cool example of how leaders can assemble and execute a broad vision. 

The video thanks JLL for our help.  Whether we’re helping with lease transactions or with energy conservation or anything in between, we want to say “you’re welcome!” and that we love what we do every day for our clients.

In the 15 years I’ve been working to reduce energy consumption and costs, the idea of a green building has evolved from being considered something exotic to being a key focus for virtually every owner. One of the single biggest forces driving that evolution may be the development and refinement of U.S. Green Building Council’s (USGBC) LEED rating system. Owners need a comprehensive, consistent way to measure and rate the level of energy and sustainability they can claim for their buildings, and LEED is the best ways to do that.

LEED’s continued success is based on USGBC’s ability to adapt the system, using an open, consensus based process. Weaknesses identified in earlier versions have been addressed in recent years, and the criteria for certification have become tougher as owners vie to make their buildings greener than their neighbors.

USGBC success has come with criticism from many quarters, including its own practitioners. For example, some critics claimed that energy played too big a part in the early LEED NC (new construction) scoring system, while others said energy’s role was too small. And so on.

I believe in the USGBC mission, particularly when it comes to my primary area of expertise: energy efficiency and carbon emission reductions. Having spent the last 5 years as a USGBC chapter leader, one of them as board chair for the USGBC Charlotte Region Chapter, I have had an opportunity to help address some of the criticism, as well as shape green building and sustainability efforts within our region.  I am now running for a USGBC national Board of Director’s seat to expand my influence and to provide valuable input on real market issues that impact key energy components of the LEED rating system.  LEED is much better today than it was six years ago, and my goal is to ensure it is better six years from now. 

HOW CAN YOU HELP?

If you work for a USGBC member company, I encourage you to vote for me prior to October 2^nd.  Click here to be taken directly to the ballot page. 

Thank you in advance for your support!

P.S.  Spread the word and share my nomination profile with your local USGBC chapter, clients, and associates who are involved with USGBC!

Thanks everyone for participating and congratulations to our winners!!

Since I am speaking at CoreNet Global SNAP session tomorrow at 2pm on corporate branding through sustainability, I want to make the distinction between branding, which relies on a real commitment to sustainability, and greenwashing, which attempts to put a green face on business-as-usual practices.

Business people first heard the terms “sustainability” and “greenwashing” almost simultaneously, because some companies used the trend to falsely promote their products as green, or to make carbon-reduction promises they couldn’t keep. By the time companies recognized the deeper benefits of sustainability, many of their customers had become hardened to skin-deep green claims.

Recent studies indicate that customers and investors are able to differentiate between companies that truly embrace sustainability and those that merely pretend. That’s where the branding opportunity comes in.

Branding uses consistent perceptual cues to create positive associates of a company. The built environment offers many opportunities to reinforce a corporate image. Solar power installations, green roofs and natural vegetative landscaping provide visual reminders to people visiting or passing by a property. It’s also important to engage employees, the group in the best position to confirm or reject a company’s green image.

Check out my session to see how companies leading the sustainability charge are using real estate strategies to reinforce positive images.

When I think of our Corporate Social Responsibility report, I’m usually thinking about the content—our initiatives in diversity and inclusion, community support, and of course the advances we’ve made in energy and sustainability. As someone who oversees the collection and analysis of some of the information in the CSR report, I tend to think of it in terms of outcomes.

Now our latest Global Sustainability Perspective makes me think about CSR reporting itself as an evolving art. Some consumer-facing companies now include social media vehicles in their CSR messages, so that people can discuss their policies and practices on sustainability and other social issues. And a few companies are starting to combine their financial and CSR information into one integrated report.

We’ve taken some small steps in the direction of these trends. This blog accepts comments, and a Facebook page for our employees keeps up an internal conversation on sustainability in the workplace. Our CSR report isn’t integrated with financial reporting, but it does discuss progress on our internal sustainability initiatives alongside the work we do for clients. Most important, we recognize that sustainability and responsibility are key drivers of our long-term financial success.

In our work in developing sustainability strategies for international corporations that have large portfolios of leased spaces, we’re finding some interesting behavioral links between three key areas: employee comfort and wellbeing,  corporate social responsibility; and operational savings.

We know, of course, that improving the health and comfort of employees can help to boost productivity – which, in turn, tends to be good for the bottom line. Corporate social responsibility can also have a direct positive impact on the bottom line – for example, when employees are keen to conserve energy in their workplace and make thoughtful use of resources. Service to the community also reflects well on the organization’s reputation in the marketplace. But in addition to the marketing benefits, working together to “do good” is a catalyst for internal team-building, which is a great morale booster. This is good for productivity – and indirectly – the bottom line. 

The flip side is that there can be negative feedback loops as well. For example, cutting costs by saving energy on heating, cooling and lighting or cramming employees into smaller spaces can have a negative impact on comfort and wellbeing – and hence on productivity. It can also erode morale and de-motivate employees so they don’t feel so much like engaging in corporate social responsibility activities.

The point to be made is that if a company introduces energy savings under the pretext of “being more sustainable”, and if employees are going to suffer for it, then they’ll see right through the so called “sustainability agenda”. But if they see that there are also efforts to support their wellbeing and the wellbeing of their community, then they will be willing to “do their bit” by putting up with a little less air conditioning or sharing an office with a colleague.

At the recent NACUBO conference, one of the hot topics was the shortage of capital and endowment funds and the limited potential to increase tuition fees. Nevertheless a number of successful universities are guided by a vision of sustainability. Their success was captured by the key note speaker Jim Collins, who urged universities to “reject the idea-well intentioned, but dead wrong-that the primary path to greatness in the social sector is to become “more like a business”. He argued that most businesses fall somewhere between mediocre and good. Few are “great”. Greatness requires among other attributes discipline and focus. That type of discipline and focus can often come from sustainability plans which not only set up a roadmap for achieving the vision but also warn of the pitfalls along the way such as  financial, reputational risks.

Fortunately universities with successful sustainability plans, such as Arizona State, University of Washington, Middlebury, to mention a few, realize the importance having a positive sustainability feedback loop that includes a measure of financial success. It is through this process that they have managed to harness sufficient resources for continual improvement.

Sustainability in Canada lost some of its shine this year thanks to receiving a “Fossil of the Day“ award” at the UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen. Notwithstanding the terrible reputation of Canada’s tar-sands operations, greening of the real estate industry is still going strong. This is being largely driven by the growing demand by tenants for green buildings as well as rising energy prices. The most widely used commercial real estate industry program for assessment of existing buildings in Canada, BOMA BESt (known in the USA as Green Globes) has now certified approximately 1,400 buildings. The program is currently undergoing a major content update to be unveiled at this year BOMEX conference.

Many buildings, certified 3 years ago are undergoing re-certification. Because the philosophy behind BOMA BESt is “continuous improvement, the benchmarking it provides  helps managers solidify targets, evaluate options, implement them, and benchmark again. These elements of the BOMA BESt program are helping to drive measurable performance improvements in Canada’s building stock.  With quantitative data showing that BOMA BESt certified buildings tend to perform better in terms of energy intensity than the national average.

There is also a healthy competition from other rating systems. The LEED EBOM has now achieved 18 certifications in Canada.