business

3 tips for designing workplaces that support culture, brand, and community

An authentic culture cannot be forced but can be encouraged and supported.

By Hakee Chang, Denise Darrin and Lisa Weeks, Building Design & Construction, 2/2/2017

View the original article here.

workplace culture sustainabilityThe workplace has evolved exponentially over the past decade, from large, uniform workstations and offices to efficient open plans and auxiliary areas. Technology has advanced from desktop computers and landlines, to laptops, and mobile apps. Innovation in technology has driven an increase in employees’ productivity and efficiency, and innovation in design has strategically followed.

However, effective and engaging workplace design doesn’t stop with a response to technological and real estate needs. It must go further, supporting the creation and integration of a company’s culture, brand identity, and overall community.

CURATED CULTURE

The most integrated cultures are co-created by leaders and teams. They are shared, organic, and capable of evolving. An authentic culture cannot be forced, but can be encouraged and supported. Without direct participation and buy-in from those involved, a company’s culture can end up a “mission statement on business card” or a “tagline on a wall” – noticed upon move-in, but quickly forgotten thereafter.

We have been fortunate to see these principles in action with a number of our key clients. In particular, technology companies are dealing with cultural change on almost a daily basis as a result of rapid growth. For example, one financial technology client has an ever-adapting nature and willingness to learn. Their leadership embodies an approach that has allowed exceptionally talented people of various backgrounds to come together with a unified and understood purpose.

The ethos of any company is the driving force. People connect over shared stories and experiences. Our job as workplace designers is to clearly understand the experiences of each and every client. What are their company’s particular drivers and values? How we can create a space that reflects and enhances those values and support the natural curation of their culture?

 BUILDING BRAND AWARENESS

Understanding a client’s brand in the context of external perception and internal practices are two crucial elements to designing a meaningful workplace. Through visioning and programming interviews, we find that office staff often seeks their work environment to “walk the talk.” It has to be authentic and reflect the reasons why they joined the company, and offer opportunities to highlight how their contributions matter.

As a first step, we typically will create overlapping layers of an “experience map” to begin building a workplace design that contributes to the client’s ethos. We map out various use scenarios through points of view, such as anticipating the tour our client may give to a candidate or business partners, an all-hands meeting, or an event for external community engagement. These maps overlap with curated moments where people can connect to individual stories or testimonials that are both inspirational and aspirational.

We recently worked with a technology company whose focus is on physical activity and health, and we incorporated design elements to encourage movement. For example, we designed meeting spaces with treadmills, social and collaboration spaces along popular walking routes, and adaptable spaces with natural light, comfortable temperatures, and views. Since the company offices are spread between buildings within a dense urban location, we leveraged the city as a vital active conduit to tie both the company’s brand and connect staff with their customer base. Allowing workflow through the neighborhood created a first-hand brand awareness that extends beyond the interior office environment.

COMMUNITY GUIDELINES

Technology has allowed the traditional office to transform into a dynamic working environment. The workplace is no longer built on “my” office or “my” desk, but has developed into “our” space: a place for community.

Technology has provided flexibility, choice, and options to employees – giving everyone the ability to decide where, how, and when they work. Yet, the reduction of individual workspace has created a need for smaller neighborhoods within the larger community. To help alleviate the possibility of feeling “crowded” it is essential to effectively distribute varied opportunities for different work styles, while providing adequate support and shared spaces.

All of these factors have prescribed that companies establish community guidelines, the rules of engagement for the workplace. These guidelines address issues from etiquette to functionality.

Our Minneapolis office recently relocated and moved to an activity-based “free address” work environment with no assigned seats to untether talent from desks and empower employees with choice. Etiquette guidelines were created to assist in this new environment, including:

  1. Individuals are expected to clear their workspace of all materials if out of the office for more than four hours, and when they leave at the end of the day, so the location can host another user.
  2. Meeting rooms have different behaviors and etiquette associated with them. For instance, huddle rooms are non-reservable and dedicated to more informal, spontaneous meetings or calls.
  3. Project storage, personal storage, and office supplies have centralized home bases outside of the immediate workstations to prevent duplication and waste.

As an overall goal, the new workspace recognizes the value of a variety of workstyles: from large group meetings to spontaneous interactions to individual heads-down work. The studio supports this spectrum of work with project rooms, huddle rooms, pin-up spaces, and focus rooms.

Community guidelines present the parameters for employees to respect each other and their work places and to follow the “Platinum Rule”: treat others the way they want to be treated.

Monetizing Sustainability Investments for Business Decision Making

Tod Christenson, John Platko, Antea Group, 5/27/2014

View the original article here

Today’s sustainability investment options are extensive and broad ranging, including relatively straightforward efforts (e.g., energy conservation projects) to multi-year/multi-stakeholder initiatives (like those that target social and environmental improvements deep within an organization’s supply-chain). While doing any or all of these could yield significant benefits, it is often unclear which will generate the greatest, most enduring value. Faced with this dilemma, leaders often struggle to understand which choices are best and how they should evaluate the many alternatives to ensure the most effective, efficient and sustainable decisions are made.

One way to improve would be to encourage better, more quantitative analyses that examine the full costs and benefits associated each investment in sustainability, combined with an analysis of which could make the greatest contribution for the business, the environment and society simultaneously.

While most understand that “when the economics work, the social and environmental benefits last,” many barriers remain for those wishing to accelerate the pace and effectiveness at which sustainability initiatives are funded and implemented, including:

  • the lack of a demonstrated link between sustainability and business value;
  • failure to communicate the strategic potential of such efforts in a way investment decision-makers can understand and appreciate; and
  • not leveraging proven, familiar processes (that other company functions have applied) to accelerate decision-making and scale solution implementation.

Accenture’s 2013 CEO survey (UN-Global Compact – Accenture CEO Study 2013: Sustainable business and the pace of change) seems to agree, reporting that 37% of 1,000 top executives feel that the lack of a clear link to business value is a critical factor in deterring them from taking faster action on sustainability. It should be noted that this percentage is increasing: in 2007, just 18% reported a failure to trace such a link and in 2010, this figure rose to 30%.

Our experience confirms this trend, as we regularly note good projects that do not receive sufficient (or any) investment as these initiatives are perceived as failing to deliver competitive business value.

From our vantage point, there are two principal challenges that need to be overcome for sustainability to be viewed as a more critical contributor:

First, the “equations” for presenting business cases do not sufficiently include all the benefits of investing in sustainability – specifically, these efforts should include an accounting of potential contributions such investments could make in terms of:

  • Offsetting of risk (brand risk, reputation risk, supply/commodity risk, regulatory risk, etc.);
  • Delivering efficiency gains; and/or
  • Adding revenue/market share (via innovation and/or building brand/reputational equity).

Without accounting for and quantifying all these dimensions, sustainability investments risk appearing less important than other business investments and hence are perceived as not carrying as much “strategic weight.”

Second, sustainability departments are generally not equipped to build and pitch multi-dimensional business cases – this requires a combination of strategic, financial and political skills rarely found among these practitioners. Challenging questions are being posed, and few confident answers are being provided:

  • Are we realizing value expected from existing, funded sustainability initiatives?
  • We have many sustainability investment choices, but which ones are the best for our business?
  • How confident are we that our actions will yield the tangible and intangible benefits promised by the business case?
  • Do we understand the true business impact and cost of doing nothing?
  • How do we increase the reliability and credibility of our business case analyses, and therein, how can we increase the confidence of our sustainability investment decision-making?

Value Creation: Business & Sustainability

Linking sustainability to value creation is becoming a new imperative for business leaders. As such, investments in sustainability must be more connected to both business and societal benefits, improving management of risks/costs and stimulating growth and/or innovation, while simultaneously helping companies better meet societal and environmental expectations and obligations. When building the case, leading organizations are increasingly articulating associated sustainability benefits within a clear and simple framework, one that illustrates how these investments can better protect, strengthen, and/or advance the business.

Frequently, benefits of this sort are intangible, uncertain and generally difficult to quantify in ways that are credible and agreeable to all decision-makers. Determining the appropriate level of analysis, who must be engaged, what input is required, etc., is often a challenge requiring innovative, clever leadership, clear process and strong cross functional engagement to ensure success. Commonly, those that pursue such efforts ensure they always ask:

  • Am I using the right vernacular, do I understand, and more importantly, use terminology and methods familiar to financial and other decision-makers, or am I only talking in “sustainability speak?”
  • Have I considered all relevant costs or benefits (tangible or intangible) in my analysis?
  • Have I engaged the appropriate internal domain or functional experts to gather data, experience and methods needed to build a credible, monetized investment analysis?
  • Have I accommodated and considered future variability and other possibilities that could impact decisions or outcomes?

Innovators Are Creating the Case for Sustainability Today

Ultimately, value-adding sustainability investments protect, strengthen and/or advance business endeavors while simultaneously improving the environment and society’s well-being. Clearer demonstration of such value creation capability is becoming more common as innovative organizations repurpose standard management and strategic tools to deliver a more compelling case for sustainable investment and action.

As a consultant to private industry for more than 30 years, Tod Christenson partners with clients to develop and implement fit-for-purpose and innovative solutions to drive sustainability across the entire value chain. He has unique skills and expertise in the areas of strategic thinking and planning methods, sustainability, corporate social responsibility, organizational diagnosis and coaching, and benchmarking.

John Platko has nearly 30 years of business, sustainability, environmental, health and safety leadership experience. His client engagements involve the development and implementation of strategies, plans and programs that emphasize simultaneous creation of business, environmental and social value for private sector clients operating domestically and internationally. John has led projects in more than 40 countries in North America, Latin America, Europe and the Pacific Rim. He is a founding member of the company’s sustainability practice; a leader in Antea Group’s Accounting For Sustainability – AA4S decision-support service; and the primary architect of iEHS, the company’s web-based environmental, health, safety and sustainability information management platform.