Two offices can have the exact same square footage and accommodate completely different operations. In corporate real estate, efficiency can matter as much as price per square meter
"Indhira, I need 500 square meters." It's a phrase I hear constantly when I start an office search. My next question is usually: 500 square meters for what? How many people? How many shifts? Closed offices? Meeting rooms? Collaborative areas? What kind of growth should we be considering?
Because two 500 m² offices can have exactly the same square footage and function completely differently. Square meters don't work in isolation. The floor plan's geometry, columns, elevator and stair core, natural light, and circulation directly affect how the space is used.
A flexible floor plan can be considerably more efficient than one with irregular shapes or hard-to-use areas. That's why it's not enough to simply ask how big an office is. You have to understand how much of that space is actually functional. Rentable area doesn't always mean usable area
Depending on the building, we can talk about gross area, saleable area, rentable area, or net usable area. These are not necessarily the same thing. A company may pay rent on a certain number of square meters, but the area where it can actually place workstations, meeting rooms, and operational areas will be smaller.
Before comparing two rents per square meter, we must ensure we are comparing equivalent square footage. How many people can actually fit? Here another factor comes into play: the maximum permitted density.
Some buildings are designed for specific occupancy loads. Depending on the project, we might find parameters such as one person per 7, 9, or 10 square meters, among others. It's not simply a matter of how many desks physically fit.
Occupancy may be affected by evacuation and security measures, elevators, climate control, parking, and infrastructure. This is especially important in high-density operations such as BPO and call centers.
And how many shifts will the operation have?
A traditional company that operates from 8:00 am to 6:00 pm is not the same as an operation with two or three shifts. If the company operates 24/7, new questions arise. Does the building allow for continuous operation? How does access work outside of regular hours? What about security? Elevators? Air conditioning? Parking? Can employees arrive in the early morning or leave late at night?
An excellent office may not be the right building if its operation is not compatible with the user's schedules.
Wasted space also comes at a price
Imagine a company that needs 500 m² in an inefficient facility and finds another where it can perform the same operation in 430 m². Although the second facility has a higher rent per square meter, the total cost may be lower. This difference is paid every month and also impacts maintenance, climate control, renovations, and furniture.
Parking also comes into the equation
Reducing square footage doesn't necessarily mean reducing staff. A company can go from 700 to 500 square meters while maintaining virtually the same equipment and parking requirements. Therefore, density, parking, shifts, and building capacity must be analyzed together.
First, I understand the operation. Then I look at the square footage. For me, a corporate search begins before I even open a property listing. How many people work here? How many will be here simultaneously? One, two, or three shifts? What are the hours? How much growth are we expecting? How many parking spaces? What's non-negotiable?
Once we have those answers, then we determine the square footage. Not the other way around. Because a company doesn't really need 500 square meters. It needs an office capable of properly supporting its operations. And when we understand that difference, we stop looking for square meters. We start looking for efficiency.
You may be interested in:
