think profit act property
| Type | Report |
|---|---|
| Author(s) | Evans,M. , Weatherhead,M. |
| Publication year | 1999 |
| URL (web address) | A pdf copy will be placed on the site when received |
| Notes | ID: EVANS1999; Issued by the RICS Corporate Occupiers Group the report was intended as a wake up call to senior executives. Two years on it is har to judge whether it succeeded. The heart of the matter is arfued as the balancing act between financing and operational property needs. Will a specialist property that becomes obsolescent prove a financial drain being unsutable as security for other debt, or will a lease back deal adversely impact operations. The jury is still out. The claim is made that the 'affordability ratio' (occupancy costs divided by revenues) provides a benchmark measure being reduced if either costs fall or revenues rise. So far so good, if only there was a completely comprehensive code against which to standardise 'operating cost' and even the second edition of the OPD cost code stops short of including costs of IT infrastructure. In practice the affordability ratio may be more useful as a year on year indicator within a business (assuming constant definitions over time) and the reports first case study, of Chase halving their affordability ratio over six years (9.6 to 4.8 % does illustrate the point). The second case, the DSS PRIME contract with Trillium describes a, on the face of it, good deal. Research on experience of this and other such deals as they mature would be useful and have not so far figured in the PFI debate. The summary is however a useful reference point. The London Borough of Bromley is highlighted for having created a single strategic body overviewing property decisions and bringing down the portfolio, Benefits in terms of services and the growth or otherwise of the Borough's social capital sre not considered. Finally the case of Clifford Chance developing 'team spaces' offers evidence that even the supposedly individual lawyers (a type example of 'Cell' working) can change and that an experiment with one group lead to others asking for the same treatment. A more sophisticated internal charging system apparently helps, especially as the cost of changing does not come out of individual partner accounts. Again it won't convince the sceptic and can be argued as lacking critical evidence, but here are useful examples of what can be achieved. |
| Start page | 1 |
| End page | 24 |
| Availability | Online shortly |
| Relevance to practice | High |
| Stage of application | Ongoing |
| Evidence base | Moderate to low |
| Readability | High |
Comments
No comments yet for this article.
Post a comment
You must be logged in to post comments. Login now.