lmi 59 - leesman...merging techniques developed from an interest in lean six sigma process...

2

In 2010 Leesman set out with a singular objective –

to examine at a depth and consistency never before

attempted, exactly how corporate workplaces support

employee and organisational performance.

In the time since, we’ve done nothing else, offering no consultancy or advisory services whatsoever. This focused

approach has allowed us to collect data on how more than

1,200 workplaces in 49 countries support 140,000+ employees

in the work they are employed to do. This is now quite simply

the largest research project of its kind ever undertaken.

In summer 2015, when the respondent total reached the

100,000 employee milestone, we passed the database to

independent statisticians to review and this publication is a

summary of their initial findings. Our work with them is really only just beginning but their observations will act as the

catalyst to numerous research investigations.

Central to this project is our standardised e-questionnaire

and analytics tool. Together they provide a quick, inexpensive,

systematic approach to the collection, analysis and

benchmarking of workplace performance data and generate

a single, transferable key performance indicator of workplace

effectiveness – our Leesman ‘Lmi’ – the new global standard measure of workplace effectiveness.

This ‘Lmi’ gives clients and their consultants the unrivalled ability to compare their high level operating results against

hundreds of others, in the knowledge it has a foundation

in detailed granular data. That data then provides deep

insights that show employers how the physical and virtual

infrastructure provided for employees is supporting their

personal performance and wellbeing.

It also allows us to start playing with those results, examining

the data for trends, patterns and correlations and report not

just on what’s important to employees, but what impacts

them the most in delivering high performance business

environments. And in line with our policy of openness and

dissemination of knowledge, this document seeks to share

that data and make available the key findings.

On the last two pages of this report you will also see reference to our Leesman+ group. This is an elite collection

of workplaces that have delivered outstanding overall

workplace effectiveness scores of a Leesman Lmi 70.0 or above. As such they act as a rich research resource in their

own right but it is not possible to cover the analysis of those

locations as a singular group in this study.

If you would like to know more about the Leesman+ locations

and receive a copy of the report which specifically examines their performance and what has enabled them to stand above

the rest, do please contact us and let us know.

The new global standard

3

Foreword 4

Within the Leesman data is the opportunity to change

the way organisations look at workplace

The Leesman Index model 5

A brief overview of the methodology used to collect

employee workplace effectiveness data

Research 6

Summarising the research and highlighting the key

findings from each section

Data diversity 8

Looking at the depth and diversity of the data collected

since the deployment of the first survey in 2010

Impact of age 10

Reviewing the impact of employee age on workplace

experience and effectiveness

Impact of time 14

Reviewing the impact of employee length of service on

workplace experience and effectiveness

Impact of work setting 18

Reviewing the impact of employee work setting on

workplace experience and effectiveness

Impact of activities undertaken 22

Reviewing the impact of employee activity profile on workplace experience and effectiveness

Impact code 28

A review of the data across the entire database,

with importance, satisfaction and impact coding

Table of contents

4

Foreword

Perhaps it is first worth remembering the origins of the idea for the Leesman Index. Working as a strategy consultant I was

merging techniques developed from an interest in Lean Six

Sigma process diagnostics and personality profiling models like Myers Briggs, in an attempt to measure the ‘fit’ between organisation and space.

By ‘fit’ I don’t mean the sort of ‘test fit’ that a designer or space planner would conduct to see if a chosen building

would accommodate the head-count need of a prospective

organisation, but rather whether it was possible to profile an organisation’s workstyle and personality and so measure whether their existing work environments were aligned with

employee and organisational needs.

This project – to analytically measure an organisation’s needs

– was iteratively developing from around 2005, project by consultancy project. But late in 2009 I tested the idea again with a lawyer ex-client, fresh from receiving the results from

her first Myers Briggs test. Previously skeptical, she conceded at last that if a multiple-choice questionnaire could so

accurately profile her, the same could also be possible for an organisation’s workstyle.

I already knew this. It was the next thing she said that changed

my thinking – don’t hoard the technique for the privilege of my clients, make it accessible to all, because you’ll then amass the data and evidence necessary to prove the theory – that

workplace and workstyle decisions directly impact how

organisations perform.

That was the catalyst moment for six months of detailed design

and market consultation for what became the Leesman

Index. It was a far from smooth start. Some greeted us with

open arms, hungry for the proof of their intuition: others with

suspicion that we were somehow offering a paint-by-numbers, idiot’s guide to workplace design that would undermine their authority. One or two were even less polite.

But since then, we have stayed true to our manifesto: that we

would offer a globally accessible standardised technique that would evaluate the operational effectiveness of workplace. And that in time, if widely adopted, would be able to provide a

rich research resource that could be mined for the benefit of all.

It’s vitally important to state again, that we still do nothing else. We have proved that it is possible to build a business

that focuses simply on providing a standardised off-the-shelf technique, for less than the cost of a single workstation and

not have bolt-on other advisory or consultancy services.

And for the record again, you have our commitment that

we have no intention of offering consultancy or advisory services in the future.

That commitment has been central to our growth and the

adoption of the Leesman Index by consultants, service

providers and occupiers, as the preferred measure of workplace

effectiveness. So the data collected, a mere sampling of which is attached here, contains the seeds of change. Whether that

is one data point that changes a single executive director’s attitude to a workplace, or a collection of data points that are

pored over with academic scrutiny, statistically reveal the

vital ingredients to optimum workplace effectiveness.

We look at the database now, having passed 100,000 individual employee responses, as a toddler would a soft-play

barn – as a space whose boundaries should be explored and

tested. We need to climb ladders, push buttons, turn dials and

see where it leads. With the support of expert statisticians,

that exploration starts now.

But the investigation is not for us alone. Already within that

data we see stress points; for example that a dissatisfaction

with ‘noise levels’ is the strongest statistical indicator a respondent is likely to report their workplace inhibits them

working productively. Or that variety of work settings is the

vital ingredient of Activity Based work environments. But

the extent to which these findings are heeded lies not with us, but with those responsible for the design, delivery and

operational management of workplace. The evidence case

will continue to build, but whether they take action, we’ll have to wait and see.

Tim OldmanCEO and co-founder

In this data are the seeds of change:

Because the data offers an unrivalled opportunity to decipher the role of workplace in organisational performance and

show business leaders how workplace contributes to

competitive advantage.

We look at the database now as

a toddler would a soft-play barn

– as a space whose boundaries

should be explored and tested.

5

The Leesman Index model

The Leesman Index survey has been deployed now across

1,200+ workplaces in over 50 countries and 29 languages. The diversity of the data collected gets wider by the week

as we work with leading global organisations as part of

major capital projects, on estate-wide baseline evaluations,

or for ongoing healthchecks of property performance.

Central to that technique is a standardised e-questionnaire

that examines what employees are doing and how the

physical and virtual infrastructure supports them doing it.

The Leesman Lmi key performance indicator is calculated

from the Design Impact and the Activities Analysis questions

and should therefore be seen as a test of the ability of

a workplace to support the needs of employees – its

operational effectiveness or fitness for purpose.

Design Impact Analysis – how much do you agree or disagree

with the following statements about the overall design of

your organisation’s current workspace?

Activity Analysis – which activities are important to you in

your work and how well is each supported?

Physical Features Analysis – which physical features do you

consider to be an important part of an effective workspace and how satisfied are you with each?

Service Features Analysis – which service features do you

consider to be an important part of an effective workspace and how satisfied are you with each?

This publication aims to offer an initial examination of that data and provide key statistics and findings for your review.

Responses analysed

140,000+

Workplaces surveyed

1,200+

Physicalfeatures

Servicesfeatures

+ =

Work activities

LeesmanLmi

Designimpact

Mobility profile

Research

The analysis was undertaken by Stockholm-based

independent statisticians Formulate with a brief from us

to find areas within the data where statistically relevant differences were occurring. Our aim? To help identify the subjects or topics where those responsible for the design

and management of workplaces can have the greatest impact

on an employee’s ability to work effectively. In doing so we believe that we can dramatically increase the understanding

of the role of workplace environment in organisational

performance. Key areas of this initial investigation included;

• Gender

• Age

• Time with organisation

• Employee work setting

• Employee activity profile

Gender – Overwhelmingly, we find the overall effectiveness score (Leesman Lmi) of employee work environments for

male and female employees to be almost exactly equal.

Even within the work environments of industries or

businesses where one might more readily expect there to

be marked disparities – say in industrial manufacturing –

it is rare to find statistically relevant differences. This is counter to much popular-press hypothesis but points

increasingly to organisational culture as opposed to the

physical environment as the presenting the greater

influence on any gender inequality.

Age range – When it comes to age range, we do start to see

greater differences – not in terms of the overall effectiveness of their work environments, but in relation to the profile (including volume) of activities undertaken and the importance attached

to specific physical and service features used. However, it is important not to confuse or miss-label age related differences as generational differences. These variances are most often explained by accumulated responsibility, experience,

seniority or life stage of the individual, and not the generation

he or she is born into.

Time with organisation – As with Age, Time with organisation

shows greater differences. There is a consistent lowering of overall effectiveness score of employee work environments (Leesman Lmi) as length of services increases. However, the profile of activities undertaken and the importance attached to specific physical and service features used is less divergent than the differences seen related to age.

Employee work setting – When considering the impact

of work setting on employee effectiveness it is interesting to see how employee priorities change (the importance

attached to different activities and to individual physical / service features). But what is of greatest interest is if we

consider the impact of “variety” on those employees who are

not working at a designated work setting. The analysis shows

overwhelmingly the positive impact of providing employees

with a high variety of different work settings.

Employee activity profile – This is the area within the

database where we see the greatest statistical differences. As mentioned prior, Age Range does have a bearing here, with

the number of activities undertaken by an employee typically

increasing with age. But what is dramatically different, is the likelihood of selecting certain physical or service features

as important, based on an increase in the complexity of

activities undertaken.

These latter findings associated with “activity profile complexity” have major implications for any organisation

considering an “Activity Based Working” programme.

The data shows that 46% of employees select 11 or more activities (out of a possible 21) as important to them in their roles and as that number increases, so too dramatically

does their likelihood of selecting “variety of different types of workspace” as an important physical feature within

the workplace.

This reliance on variety increases dramatically for those with

the most complex work activity profiles (those selecting 16 or more activities as important in their work from a possible 21). This group represent 22% of the sample so forms a significant proportion of the working population.

It is worth stating, though perhaps more predictably, that

“meeting rooms” (large and small) and “accessibility of

colleagues” attract similar levels of increased importance

as activity profile complexity increases. But less obviously perhaps, worth considering how the importance attached

to workplace basics like a desk, chair, toilet facilities or

restaurant and canteen facilities are almost unaffected by activity complexity.

However, in a time when more and more organisations focus on the organisational performance value of collaboration,

it is also worth highlighting how space away from the desk

becomes mission critical in increasing employee interaction,

with “accessibility of colleagues”, “small meeting rooms”,

“informal work areas and breakout zones” and once again

“variety of different types of workspace” statistically prominent in their importance.

Findings in brief:

In the following pages you will see the first independent statistical analysis of the largest employee workplace effectiveness dataset of its kind, reviewing the experience of 100,000+ employees.

6

Lastly then it is important to highlight where employers

are routinely struggling to address consistent failings in

the basic workplace infrastructure. Across the whole sample,

“temperature control”, “noise levels”, “quiet rooms for

working alone or in pairs”, “plants and greenery”, “art and

photography” and “variety of different types of workspace” attain average satisfactions levels of less than 30%. Yet in the case of “temperature control” and “noise levels”, these

are important features for more than 75% of employees.

7

Importance of and satisfaction with top 5 features for collaboration/interaction, formal meetings and individual work

% importance

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

100 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

0

% s

atis

fact

ion

Informal work areas / breakout zones

Wired in-office network connectivity

Meeting rooms (small)

Chair

Noise levels

Variety of different types of workspace

Meeting rooms (large)

Desk / Room booking systems

People walking past your workstation

Audio-Visual equipment

Guest / visitor network access

Printing / copying / scanning equipment

Collaboration/interaction Formal meetings Individual work

100

Accessibility of colleagues

Desk

8

Data diversity

Below we show the diversity across our measures of gender,

age, time with organisation, geography, survey type (pre / post)

and industry. For each applicable table, the segment ‘Lmi’ is shown.

Distribution of respondents by Gender

56% Male

44% Female

0% Prefer not to say

Gender

Male

Female

Prefer not to say

Number of respondents

61,339

47,582

391

Lmi

59.4

60.8

51.1

Data growth

Re

sp

on

de

nts

2010 20122011 2013 2014 2015

20,000

100,000

80,000

60,000

40,000

120,000

0

Distribution of respondents by age range

13% 55 and over

27% 45 - 5430% 35 - 44

26% 25 - 34

4% Under 25

Age range

55 and over

45 - 54

35 - 44

25 - 34

Under 25


14,181

29,777

34,204

29,611

4,542

Lmi

60.2

59.6

59.0

60.9

66.0

Distribution of respondents by time with organisation

31% Over 12 years12% 8 - 12 years

26% 3 - 8 years

12% 18 months - 3 years

12% 6 - 18 months

7% 0 - 6 months

Time with organisation

Over 12 years

8 - 12 years

3 - 8 years

18m - 3 years

6 - 18 months

0 - 6 months


34,730

13,728

29,046

13,283

13,313

8,007

Lmi

59.5

58.9

59.2

60.0

61.7

65.0

9

Distribution of respondents by geography

42% United Kingdom

33% Nordics

18% Rest of Europe

5% Americas

1% Asia Pacific0% Rest of the World

Number of properties

535

188

238

82

45

20

Region

United Kingdom

Nordics

Rest of Europe

Americas

Asia Pacific

Rest of the World


46,679

36,235

19,497

5,361

1,409

697

Lmi

59.1

58.8

62.7

64.1

60.7

65.1

Distribution of respondents by industry segment

Industry type

1 Banking, Insurance & Financial Services

2 Transportation,Trucking & Railroad

3 Automotive & Industrial Engineering

4 Information Tech, Software & Internet

5 Retail

6 Telecommunications

7 Government Administration

8 Aviation, Aerospace & Defence

9 Utilities, Oil & Energy

10 Construction & Civil Engineering

11 Real Estate, Architecture & Planning

12 Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals

13 Legal Services

14 Accounting

15 Facilities Management & Outsourcing

Industry type

16 Gambling & Casinos

17 Packaging and Containers

18 Food & Beverages

19 Charitable, NGO’s & Non-Profit

20 Packaging, Freight & Delivery

21 Higher Education (University)

22 Management Consulting

23 Health, Wellness, Hospitals & Healthcare

24 Broadcast Media & Production

25 Marketing and Advertising

26 Publishing

27 Airlines

28 Civic & Social Organisation

29 Staffing & Recruiting

30 Combined others


18,743

12,191

11,228

7,176

7,102

5,425

5,073

4,880

4,273

3,469

3,196

2,834

2,680

2,173

2,145


103

151

49

198

37

53

34

39

32

31

67

11

37

9

29


18

5

12

76

8

18

16

5

12

10

5

2

5

1

35

Distribution of respondents by survey type

76% Pre15% Post

9% Other


714

108

288

Survey type

Pre

Post

Other


82,972

16,704

9,761

Lmi

58.2

66.4

63.3


2,055

2,047

1,577

1,556

1,303

1,160

1,100

1,081

1,060

1,036

874

619

613

338

1,788

10

The impact of age

Below we show the impact of employee age on their

workplace experience. The tables show the odds of an

employee selecting the respective activity / feature

in comparison to a base sample – those employees

below 25 years of age.

Audio conferences

Video conferences

Business confidential discussionsHosting visitors clients or customersThinking / creative thinking

Reading

Larger group meetings or audiences

Telephone conversations

Collaborating on creative work

Individual focused work, desk based

Planned meetings

Informal, un-planned meetings

Using technical, specialist equipment or materials

Private conversations

Spreading out paper or materials

Collaborating on focused work

Individual focused work away from your desk

Individual routine tasks

Informal social interaction

Learning from others

Relaxing / taking a break

2.852.742.642.552.252.161.981.981.941.831.821.781.731.561.481.381.331.241.11n.s.

0.92

2.922.562.512.101.791.791.811.641.831.592.042.071.241.43n.s.

1.521.360.871.080.820.77.

3.232.812.912.572.162.172.121.901.991.832.142.121.521.551.291.601.42n.s.

1.120.920.85

1.891.781.701.571.321.431.371.311.371.301.521.53n.s.

1.24n.s.

1.361.230.84n.s.

0.870.92

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00

Odds ratios – activities

The numbers indicate the odds of selecting a particular activity as important, compared to the baseline group.

Baseline group = Age group under 25n.s. = no statistical difference

55-64

Age group

35-44 45-5425-34

Under 25

11

Noise levels

Toilets / W.C.

Air quality

Office lightingInternal signage


Dividers (between desks areas)

Health and safety provisions Tea, coffee and other refreshment facilitiesArchive storage


Access (e.g. lifts, stairways, ramps etc.)

General cleanliness


Wired in-office network connectivityGeneral tidiness

Quiet rooms for working alone or in pairs

Parking (car, motorbike or bicycle)

Computing equipment, mobile (laptop, tablet etc.)

Space between work settings

Telephone equipment


Guest visitor network access


Desk

Personal storage

Plants & Greenery

Atriums and Communal Areas

Hospitality servicesSecurity

Art & Photography

General Décor

Natural light

Mail & post room services

Remote access to work files or networkTemperature control

Reception areas


Chair

Computing equipment (fixed desktop)Restaurant / canteen

Variety of different types of workspaceLeisure facilities onsite or nearby

Shower facilities

Shared storage

Desk Room / booking systems

WiFi network connectivity in the officeIT Service / Help deskAbility to personalise my workstation


2.422.212.202.102.001.981.771.741.731.671.671.581.551.501.501.461.431.411.391.371.361.351.291.271.261.261.251.251.221.201.191.181.181.161.161.151.141.11n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

0.830.76

1.531.451.431.171.281.261.41n.s.

1.29n.s.

n.s.

0.89n.s.

1.271.38n.s.

1.411.481.331.19n.s.

1.261.201.30n.s.

0.921.081.11n.s.

0.81n.s.

0.92n.s.

0.781.480.88n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

0.89n.s.

n.s.

1.09n.s.

0.931.10n.s.

n.s.

0.72n.s.

2.111.781.821.641.621.661.611.441.441.291.221.151.241.431.501.221.491.571.351.271.241.341.311.31n.s.

n.s.

1.141.221.10n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

1.13n.s.

1.37n.s.

1.121.16n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

1.15n.s.

n.s.

0.750.91

1.221.141.16n.s.

1.08n.s.

1.250.931.12n.s.

0.880.89n.s.

1.141.160.881.211.071.121.12n.s.

1.10n.s.

1.14n.s.

n.s.

1.08n.s.

n.s.

0.79n.s.

0.87n.s.

0.861.310.87n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

1.11n.s.

n.s.

1.08n.s.

n.s.

0.81n.s.

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00

Odds ratios – features

The numbers indicate the odds of selecting a particular feature as important, compared to the baseline group.

Baseline group = Age group under 25n.s. = no statistical difference

Age group

55-6435-44 45-5425-34

Under 25

12

The impact of age

Below we again show the impact of employee age on

their workplace experience. These charts report on the raw

‘agreement’ and ‘importance’ percentages and graphically illustrate the differences between the five demographic groups.

Importance of activities by age

Ind

ivid

ua

l fo

cu

se

d w

ork

,

de

sk b

ase

d

Ind

ivid

ua

l ro

uti

ne

ta

sk

s

Co

lla

bo

rati

ng

on

fo

cu

se

d w

ork

Busi

ness

con

fiden

tial

d

iscu

ssio

ns

Priv

ate

co

nv

ers

ati

on

s

Te

lep

ho

ne

co

nv

ers

ati

on

s

Le

arn

ing

fro

m o

the

rs

Re

lax

ing

/ t

ak

ing

a b

rea

k

Sp

rea

din

g o

ut p

ap

er o

r m

ate

ria

ls

Ind

ivid

ua

l fo

cu

se

d w

ork

aw

ay

fro

m y

ou

r d

esk

Pla

nn

ed

me

eti

ng

s

Info

rma

l so

cia

l in

tera

cti

on

Re

ad

ing

Hos

ting

vis

itor

s, c

lient

s o

r cu

sto

me

rs

La

rge

r g

rou

p m

ee

tin

gs

or a

ud

ien

ce

s

Info

rma

l, u

n-p

lan

ne

d m

ee

tin

gs

Au

dio

co

nfe

ren

ce

s

Th

ink

ing

/ c

rea

tiv

e t

hin

kin

g

Co

lla

bo

rati

ng

on

cre

ati

ve

wo

rk

Vid

eo

co

nfe

ren

ce

s

Usin

g t

ech

nic

al / s

pe

cia

list

eq

uip

me

nt o

r m

ate

ria

ls

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

Under 25 45-5425-34 55 or over35-44

% im

por

tanc

e

Design impact by age

The design of my workspace

is important to me

It creates an enjoyable

environment to work in

It enables me to

work productively

It contributes to a sense

of community at work

It’s a place I’m proud to bring visitors to

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

Under 25 45-5425-34 55 or over35-44

% a

gree

men

t

13

Importance of physical features by age

De

sk

Ch

air

Te

mp

era

ture

co

ntr

ol

Me

eti

ng

ro

om

s (sm

all

)

Pe

rso

na

l sto

rag

e

Na

tura

l li

gh

t

No

ise

le

ve

ls

Me

eti

ng

ro

om

s (la

rge

)

Air

qu

ali

ty

Offi

ce li

ghti

ng

Qu

iet ro

om

s f

or

wo

rkin

g a

lon

e

or in

pa

irs

Ge

ne

ral D

éco

r

Pe

op

le w

alk

ing

pa

st y

ou

r

wo

rksta

tio

n

Info

rma

l w

ork

are

as /

bre

ak-o

ut

zo

ne

s

Ab

ilit

y t

o p

ers

on

ali

se

my

wo

rksta

tio

n

De

sk /

Ro

om

bo

ok

ing

sy

ste

ms

Div

ide

rs (b

etw

ee

n d

esk

s /

are

as)

Sp

ace

be

tw

ee

n w

ork

se

tti

ng

s

Pla

nts

& G

ree

ne

ry

Acce

ssib

ilit

y o

f co

lle

ag

ue

s

Atr

ium

s a

nd

Co

mm

un

al A

rea

s

Art &

Ph

oto

gra

ph

y

Sh

are

d s

tora

ge

Arc

hiv

e s

tora

ge

Vari

ety

of d

iffer

ent t

ypes

o

f w

ork

sp

ace

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

Importance of service features by age

Tea,

coff

ee a

nd o

ther

re

fre

sh

me

nt fa

cil

itie

s

Ge

ne

ral cle

an

lin

ess

Co

mp

uti

ng

eq

uip

me

nt,

fixed

(des

ktop

)

To

ile

ts /

W.C

.

Prin

tin

g /

co

py

ing

/ s

ca

nn

ing

eq

uip

me

nt

Te

lep

ho

ne

eq

uip

me

nt

Re

sta

ura

nt / c

an

tee

n

IT S

ervi

ce /

Hel

p de

sk

WiF

i n

etw

ork

co

nn

ec

tiv

ity

in th

e offi

ce

Ge

ne

ral ti

din

ess

Wir

ed in

-offi

ce n

etw

ork

co

nn

ec

tiv

ity

Co

mp

uti

ng

eq

uip

me

nt,

mo

bil

e (la

pto

p, t

ab

let,

etc

.)

Pa

rkin

g (ca

r, m

oto

rbik

e o

r b

icy

cle

)

Rem

ote

acce

ss to

wor

k fil

es o

r n

etw

ork

Se

cu

rit

y

Acce

ss (e

.g. l

ifts

, sta

irw

ay

s,

ram

ps e

tc.)

Ma

il &

po

st-

roo

m s

erv

ice

s

Re

ce

pti

on

are

as

Hea

lth

and

safe

ty p

rovi

sion

s

Le

isu

re f

acil

itie

s o

nsit

e o

r n

ea

rby

Inte

rna

l sig

na

ge

Sh

ow

er fa

cil

itie

s

Hos

pita

lity

serv

ices

Au

dio

-Vis

ua

l e

qu

ipm

en

t

Gu

est / v

isit

or n

etw

ork

acce

ss

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

% im

por

tanc

e%

imp

orta

nce

Under 25 45-5425-34 55 or over35-44

Under 25 45-5425-34 55 or over35-44

14

The impact of time

Below we show the impact of employee length of service on

workplace experience. The tables show the odds of an employee

selecting the respective activity / feature in comparison to a base

sample – those of less than 6-months service.


Hosting visitors, clients or customersPrivate conversations

Business confidential discussionsIndividual focused work, desk based


Informal unplanned meetings

Audio conferences

Planned meetings


Video conferences



Thinking / creative thinking





Reading

Using technical / specialist equipment or materials


1.401.311.231.201.321.201.201.381.111.081.11n.s.

1.071.06n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

1.060.73

Over 12 years

1.451.411.271.271.261.251.251.241.231.181.101.081.081.06n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

0.71

8 - 12 years

1.251.361.241.151.241.211.241.211.201.091.19n.s.

n.s.

1.11n.s.

1.06n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

0.79

18 m –3 years

1.351.431.281.261.271.231.231.191.151.131.171.06n.s.

n.s.

1.05n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

1.070.75

3 - 8 years

1.181.171.151.061.231.141.161.181.14n.s.

1.14n.s.

n.s.

1.07n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

0.90n.s.

0.87

6-18 months

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00

0-6 months



Baseline group = Time with organisation 0-6 monthsn.s. = no statistical difference

Time with Organisation

15

Archive storage

Mail & post room services

Temperature control

Shower facilities

Shared storage


Air quality


Health and safety provisions Telephone equipment


Noise levels


WiFi network connectivity in the officeIT Service / Help deskSecurity


General cleanliness

Remote access to work files or networkPrinting / copying / scanning equipment

Computing equipment, mobile (laptop, tablet etc.)



Office lightingWired in-office network connectivityAccess (e.g. lifts, stairways, ramps etc.)

Chair

Computing equipment, fixed (desktop)Restaurant / canteen

Variety of different types of workspaceLeisure facilities onsite or nearby

Toilets / W.C.

Internal signage


Dividers (between desks / areas)

General tidiness



Desk

Personal storage

Plants & Greenery

Hospitality servicesGeneral Décor

Natural light

Ability to personalise my workstation

Informal work areas / break-out zones

Art & Photography

Reception areas


Tea, coffee and other refreshment facilities

Over 12 years

8 - 12 years

1.511.411.411.791.231.321.301.211.201.131.221.271.211.701.681.141.141.13n.s.

n.s.

1.541.191.09n.s.

n.s.

1.100.800.661.21n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

1.080.881.11n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

1.071.070.92n.s.

n.s.

0.850.940.770.890.73

1.511.431.421.321.311.261.241.241.191.191.191.181.181.181.181.161.151.141.141.101.091.091.081.081.071.07n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

0.930.900.880.82

18 m –3 years

1.261.201.16n.s.

1.111.071.131.16n.s.

n.s.

1.141.111.17n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

1.12n.s.

1.14n.s.

0.911.151.13n.s.

1.12n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

1.07n.s.

0.89n.s.

1.080.88n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

0.940.92n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

0.850.920.88

3 - 8 years

6-18 months

0-6 months

1.191.121.10n.s.

1.09n.s.

1.081.19n.s.

n.s.

1.121.111.17n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

1.10n.s.

1.16n.s.

n.s.

1.161.15n.s.

1.08n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

1.08n.s.

n.s.

0.91n.s.

1.070.91n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

0.93n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

0.92n.s.

n.s.

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00


1.381.311.381.141.261.121.231.161.091.081.161.161.18n.s.

n.s.

1.061.151.091.191.09n.s.

1.151.07n.s.

1.101.07n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

0.91n.s.

n.s.

0.92n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

0.910.890.81


Baseline group = Time with organisation 0-6 monthsn.s. = no statistical difference

Time with Organisation

16

The impact of time

Below we again show the impact of employee length of service

on workplace experience. These charts report on the raw

‘agreement’ and ‘importance’ percentages and graphically illustrate the differences between the six demographic groups.

Design impact by length of service

Importance of activities by length of service


is important to me



It enables me to

work productively




100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

% a

gree

men

t

Ind

ivid

ua

l fo

cu

se

d w

ork

,

de

sk b

ase

d

Ind

ivid

ua

l ro

uti

ne

ta

sk

s

Co

lla

bo

rati

ng

on

fo

cu

se

d w

ork

Busi

ness

con

fiden

tial

d

iscu

ssio

ns

Priv

ate

co

nv

ers

ati

on

s

Te

lep

ho

ne

co

nv

ers

ati

on

s

Le

arn

ing

fro

m o

the

rs

Re

lax

ing

/ t

ak

ing

a b

rea

k

Sp

rea

din

g o

ut p

ap

er o

r m

ate

ria

ls

Ind

ivid

ua

l fo

cu

se

d w

ork

aw

ay

fro

m y

ou

r d

esk

Pla

nn

ed

me

eti

ng

s

Info

rma

l so

cia

l in

tera

cti

on

Re

ad

ing

Hos

ting

vis

itor

s, c

lient

s o

r cu

sto

me

rs

La

rge

r g

rou

p m

ee

tin

gs

or a

ud

ien

ce

s

Info

rma

l, u

n-p

lan

ne

d m

ee

tin

gs

Au

dio

co

nfe

ren

ce

s

Th

ink

ing

/ c

rea

tiv

e t

hin

kin

g

Co

lla

bo

rati

ng

on

cre

ati

ve

wo

rk

Vid

eo

co

nfe

ren

ce

s

Usin

g t

ech

nic

al / s

pe

cia

list

eq

uip

me

nt o

r m

ate

ria

ls

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

% im

por

tanc

e

0-6 months 8-12 years3-8 years6-18 months Over 12 years18m – 3 years


17

Importance of physical features by time with organisation

Importance of service features by time with organisation

De

sk

Ch

air

Te

mp

era

ture

co

ntr

ol

Me

eti

ng

ro

om

s (sm

all

)

Pe

rso

na

l sto

rag

e

Na

tura

l li

gh

t

No

ise

le

ve

ls

Me

eti

ng

ro

om

s (la

rge

)

Air

qu

ali

ty

Offi

ce li

ghti

ng

Qu

iet ro

om

s f

or

wo

rkin

g a

lon

e

or in

pa

irs

Ge

ne

ral D

éco

r

Pe

op

le w

alk

ing

pa

st y

ou

r

wo

rksta

tio

n

Info

rma

l w

ork

are

as /

bre

ak-o

ut

zo

ne

s

Ab

ilit

y t

o p

ers

on

ali

se

my

wo

rksta

tio

n

De

sk /

Ro

om

bo

ok

ing

sy

ste

ms

Div

ide

rs (b

etw

ee

n d

esk

s /

are

as)

Sp

ace

be

tw

ee

n w

ork

se

tti

ng

s

Pla

nts

& G

ree

ne

ry

Acce

ssib

ilit

y o

f co

lle

ag

ue

s

Atr

ium

s a

nd

Co

mm

un

al A

rea

s

Art &

Ph

oto

gra

ph

y

Sh

are

d s

tora

ge

Arc

hiv

e s

tora

ge

Vari

ety

of d

iffer

ent t

ypes

o

f w

ork

sp

ace

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

Tea,

coff

ee a

nd o

ther

re

fre

sh

me

nt fa

cil

itie

s

Ge

ne

ral cle

an

lin

ess

Co

mp

uti

ng

eq

uip

me

nt,

fixed

(des

ktop

)

To

ile

ts /

W.C

.

Prin

tin

g /

co

py

ing

/ s

ca

nn

ing

eq

uip

me

nt

Te

lep

ho

ne

eq

uip

me

nt

Re

sta

ura

nt / c

an

tee

n

IT S

ervi

ce /

Hel

p de

sk

WiF

i n

etw

ork

co

nn

ec

tiv

ity

in th

e offi

ce

Ge

ne

ral ti

din

ess

Wir

ed in

-offi

ce n

etw

ork

co

nn

ec

tiv

ity

Co

mp

uti

ng

eq

uip

me

nt,

mo

bil

e (la

pto

p, t

ab

let,

etc

.)

Pa

rkin

g (ca

r, m

oto

rbik

e o

r b

icy

cle

)

Rem

ote

acce

ss to

wor

k fil

es o

r n

etw

ork

Se

cu

rit

y

Acce

ss (e

.g. l

ifts

, sta

irw

ay

s,

ram

ps e

tc.)

Ma

il &

po

st-

roo

m s

erv

ice

s

Re

ce

pti

on

are

as

Hea

lth

and

safe

ty p

rovi

sion

s

Le

isu

re f

acil

itie

s o

nsit

e o

r n

ea

rby

Inte

rna

l sig

na

ge

Sh

ow

er fa

cil

itie

s

Hos

pita

lity

serv

ices

Au

dio

-Vis

ua

l e

qu

ipm

en

t

Gu

est / v

isit

or n

etw

ork

acce

ss

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

% im

por

tanc

e%

imp

orta

nce



18

The impact of work setting

Below we show the impact of employee work setting

on workplace experience. The tables show the odds of

an employee selecting the respective activity / feature

in comparison to a base sample – those based in a

private office.


Planned meetings







Video conferences







Audio conferences

Reading



Business confidential discussionsHosting visitors, clients or customers



Planned meetings

Relaxing taking a break








Business confidential discussionsAudio conferences


Reading

Thinking creative thinking

Video conferences

Using technical specialist equipment or materials


Hosting visitors clients or customersIndividual focused work desk based

1.261.221.111.091.081.071.061.05n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

0.970.960.940.930.880.880.82

1.081.07n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

0.950.930.910.900.840.840.830.820.780.760.750.730.720.680.56

Cubicle or

designated desk

in open plan area Flexible



Baseline group = Private or shared enclosed office

19






Chair


Toilets / W.C.


General tidiness

Office lightingGeneral Décor

Tea, coffee and other refreshment facilitiesShared storage

Noise levels

Variety of different types of workspacePersonal storage


Plants & Greenery

Temperature control

Desk


Restaurant / canteen

Air quality

General cleanliness

Reception areas

Computing equipment, fixed (desktop)Internal signage


Natural light


Security


Wired in-office network connectivityArt & Photography

Mail & post-room services

Leisure facilities onsite or nearby


Health and safety provisions Telephone equipment


Shower facilities

Computing equipment, mobile (laptop, tablet, etc.)


WiFi network connectivity in the officeArchive storage

IT Service / Help deskParking (car, motorbike or bicycle)

Hospitality services

Variety of different types of workspaceQuiet rooms for working alone or in pairs



General tidiness


General Decor



WiFi network connectivity in the officeMeeting rooms (small)


Tea, coffee and other refreshment facilitiesToilets / W.C.

Internal signage

Reception areas



Security

Art & Photography

Office lightingShared storage

Noise levels

Plants & Greenery

Temperature control


Air quality

General cleanliness


Shower facilities



IT Service / Help deskHospitality servicesAccessibility of colleagues

Health and safety provisions Chair


Personal storage


Natural light


Wired in-office network connectivityParking (car, motorbike or bicycle)

Computing equipment, fixed (desktop)Desk

Archive storage

Telephone equipment


2.401.801.701.451.451.411.331.321.311.291.281.251.231.201.191.171.161.161.141.141.121.111.091.071.061.04n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

0.970.960.960.960.950.940.940.910.900.900.900.880.830.81

1.871.641.471.411.361.361.281.221.221.161.151.141.141.131.091.051.05n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

0.950.940.920.920.920.910.890.870.840.840.710.700.670.660.630.63

Cubicle or

designated desk

in open plan area Flexible



Baseline group = Private or shared enclosed office

20

The impact of work setting

Below we again show the impact of employee work setting on

workplace experience. These charts report on the raw ‘agreement’ and ‘satisfaction’ percentages and graphically illustrate the differences between the four work setting groups. The tables opposite show the distribution of respondent and resultant Lmi.

Design impact by work setting


is important to me



It enables me to

work productively




100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

Private or shared

enclosed officeCubicle or designated

desk in open plan area

Flexible with

low choice

Flexible with

high choice

Perceived support for activities by work setting

% a

gree

men

t

Private or shared

enclosed officeCubicle or designated

desk in open plan area

Flexible with

low choice

Flexible with

high choice

Ind

ivid

ua

l fo

cu

se

d w

ork

,

de

sk b

ase

d

Ind

ivid

ua

l ro

uti

ne

ta

sk

s

Co

lla

bo

rati

ng

on

fo

cu

se

d w

ork

Busi

ness

con

fiden

tial

d

iscu

ssio

ns

Priv

ate

co

nv

ers

ati

on

s

Te

lep

ho

ne

co

nv

ers

ati

on

s

Le

arn

ing

fro

m o

the

rs

Re

lax

ing

/ t

ak

ing

a b

rea

k

Sp

rea

din

g o

ut p

ap

er o

r m

ate

ria

ls

Ind

ivid

ua

l fo

cu

se

d w

ork

aw

ay

fro

m y

ou

r d

esk

Pla

nn

ed

me

eti

ng

s

Info

rma

l so

cia

l in

tera

cti

on

Re

ad

ing

Hos

ting

vis

itor

s, c

lient

s o

r cu

sto

me

rs

La

rge

r g

rou

p m

ee

tin

gs

or a

ud

ien

ce

s

Info

rma

l, u

n-p

lan

ne

d m

ee

tin

gs

Au

dio

co

nfe

ren

ce

s

Th

ink

ing

/ c

rea

tiv

e t

hin

kin

g

Co

lla

bo

rati

ng

on

cre

ati

ve

wo

rk

Vid

eo

co

nfe

ren

ce

s

Usin

g t

ech

nic

al / s

pe

cia

list

eq

uip

me

nt o

r m

ate

ria

ls

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

% s

atis

fact

ion

21

Distribution of respondents by home work setting

Distribution of respondents by work setting


60,849

17,515

11,607

9,205

5,749

2,534

1,248

579

428

316

287

In the office, what type of work setting do you use most often?

My own workstation in an open plan office area

A shared office (enclosed room/space)

A flexible / non-allocated workstation

A private office assigned solely to you

A cubicle

A shared team table

A meeting room

Other

An informal work-setting such as a break-out zone

A quiet room / private office (available for flexible use)

A specialist practical or technical setting

%

56

16

11

8

5

2

1

1

–

–

–

Lmi

58.2

60.7

60.4

68.1

59.8

61.9

58.1

57.7

60.9

59.9

58.5

When working from home, what type of work setting do you use most often?

A non-work specific home location (such as a dining table)

A dedicated work room or office

A dedicated work area (but not a separate room)

Other


12,604

10,751

5,367

387

%

43

37

19

1

22

The impact of activities undertaken

Below we show the number of workplace activities

selected as “important” in a respondent’s work from 21 possible options, reflecting the complexity of work profile. Opposite we assess how this differs across the various age demographics.

Number of activities selected by all respondents

16% 0 to 5

38% 6 to 10

24% 11 to 15

22% 16 to 21

Activities

10 95 13 183 117 15 202 106 14 194 12 178 16 21

10

9

8

7

6

5

% o

f res

pond

ents

4

3

2

1

0

16% 38% 24% 22%

Number of activities selected as important

23

Activity profile under 25

Activity profile 25 – 34

Activity profile 35 - 44

Activity profile 45 – 54

Activity profile 55 and over

25% 0 to 5

45% 6 to 10

19% 11 to 15

11% 16 to 21

19% 0 to 5

41% 6 to 10

24% 11 to 15

16% 16 to 21

15% 0 to 5

38% 6 to 10

25% 11 to 15

22% 16 to 21

14% 0 to 5

35% 6 to 10

25% 11 to 15

26% 16 to 21

16% 0 to 5

34% 6 to 10

23% 11 to 15

27% 16 to 21

24


Below we show the impact of employee activity complexity

on their workplace needs. The tables show the odds of

an employee selecting the respective feature based on

comparison to a base sample – those employees who select

less than 5 activities as important to them in their work.

Variety of different types of workspaceMeeting rooms (large)




Office lightingPrinting / copying / scanning equipment




Noise levels

Air quality

Remote access to work files or networkInternal signage

Wired in-office network connectivityNatural light

General Décor

Telephone equipment

Art & Photography

Health and safety provisions Quiet rooms for working alone or in pairs


General tidiness

Reception areas

Archive storage

Shared storage


Security



General cleanliness

Hospitality servicesPersonal storage

Temperature control


Desk

Plants & Greenery


Tea, coffee and other refreshment facilitiesChair


Toilets / W.C.


Computing equipment, fixed (desktop)Shower facilities




WiFi network connectivity in the officeIT Service / Help desk

4.806.879.024.76

4.014.485.404.973.945.214.583.964.873.534.73

4.843.814.873.403.495.083.953.973.612.842.963.133.44

3.313.214.083.113.833.73

2.715.323.182.584.454.782.493.202.272.332.031.871.821.681.481.35

24.0621.2520.3819.4117.1216.4716.0215.8515.5715.3814.6914.1313.5613.5313.5213.2113.0712.7512.6712.5712.4312.0411.8911.7311.5411.4411.2311.1110.9410.7610.3810.119.889.699.589.509.458.678.017.76

6.526.315.574.003.913.512.822.001.681.54

16-21

1.982.653.252.051.911.922.242.141.822.352.061.862.271.692.202.181.832.211.701.682.381.841.881.721.571.521.631.681.661.682.011.661.891.811.452.361.701.482.072.151.551.781.471.591.501.391.421.541.411.30

6-10

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00

0-5 11-15



Baseline group = Number of activities 0-5

Number of activities

25

This table shows the odds of an employee selecting the

respective feature based on specific activities undertaken and then illustrates the frequency of those features across

the collection of collaboration / interaction activities.

Collaboration/interaction


Accessibility of

colleagues 1.3


1.4Meeting

rooms (small)1.6

Informal work areas /

breakout zones 1.5

Accessibility

of colleagues 1.8

Meeting

rooms (small)1.2

Art Photography1.2

Meeting

rooms (large)1.3


1.3Security

1.3

Remote access

to work files or network

1.2Air quality

1.3Quiet rooms for

working alone or

in pairs

1.3Natural light

1.4Air quality

1.4

Space between

work settings1.2

Meeting

rooms (large)1.2

Desk / Room

booking systems1.2

Atriums and

Communal Areas1.3

Telephone

equipment1.3


1.2Guest / visitor

network access1.3


breakout zones 1.4

Accessibility

of colleagues 1.4

Health and safety

provisions 1.5

Natural light1.2

Meeting

rooms (small)1.2

Tea, coffee and other refreshment

facilities

1.2General Décor

1.3Access e.g. lifts

stairways ramps etc.1.3


breakout zones 1.2

Quiet rooms for

working alone or

in pairs

1.3Remote access


1.3Art Photography

1.4Office lighting

1.4

General

cleanliness1.2

Leisure facilities

onsite or nearby1.2


1.2Plants & Greenery

1.3General tidiness

1.3

Desk / Room

booking systems1.2

Audio-Visual

equipment1.2


1.3Shower facilities

1.4General

cleanliness1.4

Shared storage1.2

Accessibility

of colleagues 1.2

Atriums and

Communal Areas1.1

WiFi network

connectivity in

the office

1.3Wired in-office network connectivity

1.3





Weighted by activity response frequencies




Variety of different types of workspaceWired in-office network connectivityNatural light



Remote access to work files or networkAir quality

1

2

3

4

5

6

78

9

10

4 =

3 =

2 =

26




the collection of formal interaction activities.

Formal meetings


Video conferences Hosting visitors clients or customers

Planned meetings

Meeting

rooms (large)2.7

Reception areas 1.3

General tidiness1.4

Office lighting1.3

Meeting

rooms (small)1.7

General cleanliness1.3

Desk / Room

booking systems1.4

Informal work areas

breakout zones 1.3


1.4

Accessibility

of colleagues 1.3

Guest / visitor

network access2.4

Mail & post room

services1.5

Reception areas 1.7

Shared storage1.4

Hospitality services1.9

Meeting

rooms (small)1.5

Meeting

rooms (large)1.6

General Décor1.3

Archive storage 1.6


1.3

Audio-Visual

equipment3.0

Art Photography1.4

Hospitality services1.5

Meeting

rooms (large)1.4

Guest / visitor

network access1.6

Leisure facilities

onsite or nearby1.4

Remote access


1.5

Reception areas 1.4


1.4

Internal signage1.3

Meeting

rooms (small)2.8

Chair1.4

Desk / Room

booking systems1.8

Quiet rooms for

working alone or

in pairs

1.4

Meeting

rooms (large)2.3

Printing / copying /

scanning equipment1.4

Desk1.5

Computing

equipment, mobile

(laptop, tablet etc.)

1.3

Remote access


1.4


1.3







Reception areas


Hospitality services


1

2

3

4

5

6

78

9

10

4 =

3 =

2 =

27



the collection of individual / focused activities.

Individual work

Individual focused work desk based

Individual routine tasks Reading Thinking/creative thinking

Desk3.0

Tea coffee and other refreshment

facilities

1.4

Noise levels1.5

Dividers (between

desks areas)1.4

Chair2.1

Personal storage1.4



People walking past

your workstation1.4

Computing equipment,

fixed (desktop)1.4

Natural light1.4

Noise levels1.4

Personal storage1.2

Quiet rooms for

working alone or

in pairs

1.3

Archive storage 1.2

Chair1.3

Dividers (between

desks areas)1.2

People walking past

your workstation1.2



Desk1.2

Air quality1.2

Desk1.6

Health and safety

provisions 1.5

General tidiness1.5



Shared storage1.5

Internal signage1.5

Chair1.5

Archive storage 1.5

Office lighting1.5

Mail & post room

services1.5

Noise levels1.5

Natural light1.2


1.3

Accessibility

of colleagues 1.2

Quiet rooms for

working alone or

in pairs

1.3

Air quality1.2

Remote access


1.2

Space between

work settings1.2

People walking past

your workstation1.2


1.2


Desk

Chair

Noise levels




Natural light

Computing equipment, fixed (desktop)Office lightingTemperature control

1

2

3

4

5

6

78

9

10

4 =

3 =

2 =

28

The impact code

On the final two pages we offer the overall performance figures across the entire database against all core elements of the Leesman Index survey, reporting on agreement,

importance and satisfaction figures. We have then shown where Gender, Age or Length of Service impact on these.

% im

po

rta

nce

ov

era

ll

% s

atis

fa

ctio

n o

ve

ra

ll

% s

atis

fa

ctio

n L

ee

sm

an

+

Ove

rall

/ Lee

sman

+ ga

p

Ge

nd

er

Ag

e

Tim

e w

ith

org

an

isa

tio

n

Q3 Which activities do you feel are important in your work and how well is each supported?


Planned meetings




Reading






Audio conferences

Business confidential discussionsHosting visitors, clients or customersSpreading out paper or materials





Video conferences


12 3

4

56

7

89101112 1314151617 18192021

93.578.077.966.559.556.255.653.050.950.550.047.7

46.144.243.7

43.142.039.035.431.526.7

8.32.9

12.220.414.315.721.216.94.9

15.08.0

15.315.318.44.1

14.314.312.817.421.710.2

= of greater impact = of some impact = of no impact

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

77.177.6

63.963.172.658.462.250.986.973.577.3

65.151.661.458.964.3

46.261.164.053.464.6

85.480.576.183.586.974.183.467.891.888.585.380.466.979.863.078.660.573.981.475.174.8

% im

po

rta

nce

ov

era

ll

% p

osit

ive

ov

era

ll

% p

osit

ive

Le

esm

an

+

Ove

rall

/ Lee

sman

+ ga

p

Ge

nd

er

Ag

e

Tim

e w

ith

org

an

isa

tio

n

Q2. What impact do you think the design of your workspace has on the following elements of your organisation?

Corporate Image (for visitors, clients, potential recruits etc.)

Workplace Culture

Environmental Sustainability

12 3

–

–

–

32.322.528.4


–

–

–

54.554.141.1

86.876.6

69.5

% im

po

rta

nce

ov

era

ll

% in

ag

re

em

en

t o

ve

ra

ll

% in

ag

re

em

en

t L

ee

sm

an

+

Ove

rall

/ Lee

sman

+ ga

p

Ge

nd

er

Ag

e

Tim

e w

ith

org

an

isa

tio

n

Q1. How much do you agree or disagree with the following statements about the design of your organisation’s office?

The design of my workspace is important to me

It contributes to a sense of community at work

It creates an enjoyable environment to work in

It enables me to work productively


12 3

4

5

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

– –5.3 15.6 22.2 15.3 33.0


84.858.0 56.754.8 48.7

90.1 73.6

78.9 70.1 81.7

Ga

p r

an

kin

g

1721153

107

26

199

1884

201010131351

16

29

Q4 Which physical / service features do you consider to be an important part of an effective workspace and how satisfied are you with each?

Desk

Chair

Tea, coffee and other refreshment facilitiesGeneral cleanliness

Computing equipment, fixed (desktop)Toilets / W.C.


Temperature control

Telephone equipment



IT Service / Help deskPersonal storage

Natural light

WiFi network connectivity in the officeNoise levels


General tidiness

Wired in-office network connectivityAir quality


Office lightingParking (car, motorbike or bicycle)


Remote access to work files or network General Décor

Security







Plants & Greenery





Reception areas

Health and safety provisionsLeisure facilities onsite or nearby

Art & Photography

Shared storage

Internal signage

Shower facilities

Hospitality servicesAudio-Visual equipment

Archive storage

Variety of different types of workspaceGuest / visitor network access

12 3

4

56

7

89101112 1314151617 1819202122 2324252627 2829303132 33

34

3536

37

3839404142 43

44

4546

47

484950

% im

po

rta

nce

ov

era

ll

93.392.188.982.882.181.080.980.780.379.578.978.978.277.3

76.7

76.571.469.969.769.668.766.4

65.363.163.0 62.357.555.955.955.755.655.255.154.954.754.153.153.052.250.449.342.641.440.139.038.437.4

36.835.135.0

% s

atis

fa

ctio

n o

ve

ra

ll

% s

atis

fa

ctio

n L

ee

sm

an

+

Ove

rall

/ Lee

sman

+ ga

p

3.56.2

20.124.17.8

21.38.37.88.1

14.618.1-0.81.8

18.94.89.4

14.225.54.8

15.617.417.66.3

20.95.1

34.910.58.4

36.4

-6.6

4.4

6.18.2

23.88.7

12.337.6

14.124.714.715.318.48.8

16.26.2

22.121.42.8

35.512.9

Ge

nd

er

Ag

e

Tim

e w

ith

org

an

isa

tio

n

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–


72.667.163.7

59.066.047.966.7

26.968.348.850.257.354.957.158.329.751.357.268.134.063.3

54.549.325.859.2 40.968.731.236.046.243.4

37.7

46.228.168.166.942.767.261.261.739.121.740.443.831.546.6

42.736.7

27.237.2

76.173.3

83.883.173.869.275.034.7

76.4

63.4

68.356.556.776.063.139.165.582.772.949.680.772.155.646.7

64.3

75.879.239.672.439.647.843.854.451.976.879.280.381.385.976.4

54.440.149.260.037.7

68.764.139.562.750.1

Ga

p r

an

kin

g

47

40137

36

1133

36

35231650491444

29245

44

201817391243

4

28322

3846

4234

831271

256

2221153019409

10483

26

30

Our clients

ABB

Aedas

Allen & Overy

AMF Fastigheter

Amgen

AON

AOS Studley

Artillery

Aster Group

AstraZeneca

Atlas Copco

ATOS Consulting

BBC

Bethpage Federal Credit Union

BMC

BNP Paribas

Bosch

British American Tobacco

Buro HappoldCadillac Fairview

Capita

Capital Group

Catlin Group

CD&B

CDS

Channel 4

CHS Inc.Ciena

Coca Cola

Colliers International

Colt Technology Services

Compass Group

Contract Workplaces

Crédit Agricole

Cripps

Data-Info Oy

Deloitte

Delta Lloyd

Dentsply

Derwent London

DeVono

Diners Club

Direct Line Group

Duke University

Edge Architecture

eHalsomyndighetenElekta

Emcor

Erie Federal Credit Union

Essex County Council

Eurosport

Fidelity International

FKA Architecture + InteriorsFNV

Fortum

Fraikin

Freedom Credit Union

Gavi Alliance

GDF Suez

Gilead Sciences

GMW - Architects

Go to Work

Grant Thornton

Guide Dogs for the Blind Association

HachetteHarry’sHeeremaHeinekenHelsedirektoratet

Herman MillerHOKHufvudstadenHusqvarnaIBM

ICA

Ikano Bank

IKEA

Institution of Engineering and Technology (IET)

International Air Transport Association (IATA)

Interxion

ISO

ISS

JAC Group

Jaguar Land Rover

Johnson & Johnson

Johnson Controls

Jones Lang LaSalle

KBL

Kingsley Napley

KKS Strategy

KPMG

Landgate

Lendlease

Lewis Silkin

Liberty Syndicates

Lidingö stad

LinkedIn

Lloyds Register

London Pensions Fund Authority (LPFA)

Maples Teesdale

Marks and Spencer

MASS Design Group

Max Fordham

MBDA

MCM Architecture

Medical Protection Society Limited (MPS)

Mentor Graphics

Merck Serono

Mikomax

Mills & Reeve

MITIE

Moelven Modus

MOMENTUM

Moore Blatch

Morgan Lovell

Morgan Stanley

NATS

NCC

Nesta

Nestlé

Network Rail

NHS Property ServicesNN Slovakia

Nordea

npower

Nuffield HealthOktra

Orange Centre

Orangina

OSU Federal

Pan Macmillan

Pantheon Ventures

Peabody

PGGM

Plantronics

Posten Norge

Preem AB

Pringle Brandon

Prisma Medios de Pago

Produbanco - Grupo Promerica

Provident

Rabobank

Rational Group

Realinform

RLF

Rockwell Collins

Saab AB

Saffron Building SocietySafran

Sainsburys

SanofiSAS

Savills

SEB

Sheppard Robson

Sisley

Skanska

SKF

SMABTP

Sodexo

Solocal

Solved

Southend-on-Sea Borough Council

Spirit Airlines

Staples

Statsbygg

Stockholm Stad (City council)

Sweco

Swedavia

Swedbank

Swedish Red Cross

Talokeskus

Tavistock

TDC Sverige

Tele2Telefónica

TeliaSonera

Tenant and Partner

Tengbom

Tetra Pak

The Law Society

The Prostate Cancer Charity

Tillväxtverket

TLV

Trader Media Group

TSK

TTSP

TU Delft

TV4

University of Cambridge

University of Glasgow

University of St Andrews

University Properties of Finland Ltd

Uppsala Kommun

USG People

Utbildningsradion (UR)

Valley of the Sun United Way

Veldhoen + CompanyVinci Concessions

Vodafone

Volvo Cars

Wellcome Trust

Withers worldwide

Woningstichting Haag WonenXchanging

Yarra Ranges CouncilZespri International

100,000+ employees, colleagues, partners, workmates,

team-mates, co-workers, comrades and associates have

now contributed their personal opinions of how their work

is supported in their workplace. It is helping us build the

largest ever insight into people and place. So we thank

every contributor for the time they spent answering our

questionnaire. For more information on our work,

or to visit us at our base, please feel free to contact:

Leesman Ltd.

London

t. +44 20 3239 5980

New York

t. +1 212 858 9665

Stockholm

t. +46 (0)8 692 65 00

Amsterdam

t. +31 (0)20 893 2598

e. [email protected]

leesmanindex.com

For six years Leesman has measured

one thing, just one way: how workplaces

support the work of the employees

they accommodate.

This focused approach to performance

measurement has quickly established

Leesman as the world leader in

measuring the effectiveness of corporate and educational workplaces

with the Leesman Index benchmark

now generated from the largest global

database of employee workplace

satisfaction surveys available.

Our simple, standardised e-survey and analytics tools provide an inexpensive,

systematic approach to the collection,

analysis and benchmarking of workplace

performance data and generate a single,

transferable measure of effectiveness – our Leesman ‘Lmi’. This gives clients and their consultants the unrivalled ability to

compare their results with thousands of

others, offering deep insights into how their places are supporting organisational

performance. Together we are changing

the way workplace is measured.

leesmanindex.com

Design – fullyfledgeddesign.comPrint – mayfield-press.co.uk

Leesman is a registered trademark and

all content is copyright to Leesman Ltd

July 2016. All rights reserved.

lmi 59 - leesman...merging techniques developed from an interest in lean six sigma process...

Documents