Six real estate metrics boards and C-suites consistently get wrong — and what to measure instead.
When I was at Deloitte Consulting, I had the opportunity to spend just over two years as a direct report for Janet Foutty when she was appointed CEO.
I sat in rooms with our most senior leaders, our most important clients, and sometimes our newest people. Whether I was presenting on a strategy and transformation topic or simply being a fly on the wall, I was watching — watching how messages land, how strategic pivots get communicated, how you get a room full of people to move in a new direction without losing them in the argument.
There was one facilitation frame I saw her use again and again. It was always about changing the conversation. Taking a hard message — a cultural shift, an operational change, a strategic pivot that made people uncomfortable — and giving the room a new way to hold it.
"We need to stop talking about this. And start talking about that."
The words were always carefully chosen. She would agonize over them because there were so few. The frame was simple. The direction was clear. And it worked because it did not argue with the old conversation. It replaced it.
I have been using that frame ever since. And I want to apply it today to a conversation I see boards, C-suites, and department heads get wrong consistently — how organizations govern and assess their real estate portfolios.
Here is where I think those conversations need to go.
Less
Total Occupancy Cost as the primary portfolio metric.
More
Occupancy cost as a percentage of revenue — tracked by location, by team, by function.
Total Occupancy Cost tells you what you spent. Occupancy cost as a percentage of revenue tells you whether you are getting a return on it. A $50M real estate portfolio is cheap if it is housing the team generating $2B in revenue. It is expensive if that team has been remote for 18 months.
Less
Headcount per square foot as the measure of space efficiency.
More
Utilization rate by space type — collaboration, focus, social, amenity — tracked against actual attendance patterns.
Density ratios were designed for assigned seating in a pre-hybrid world. Today, a 90% density ratio can mean your space is perfectly calibrated or catastrophically wrong, depending on when and how your people actually show up. The metric without the behavioral data is meaningless.
Less
Lease liability (ASC 842) as the primary real estate risk metric.
More
Weighted average lease term against your organizational planning horizon.
Since ASC 842, every operating lease is on the balance sheet. CFOs are watching the liability. But the real risk is not the liability — it is the mismatch between your lease term and your ability to predict your workforce three years from now. A 10-year lease signed on a headcount plan that changes every 18 months is not a real estate decision. It is a bet.
Less
Cost per seat.
More
Cost per productive hour, cross-referenced with employee engagement scores and voluntary attrition by location.
The seat is not the unit of value. The person in it is. Organizations that measure cost per seat are optimizing for the furniture. Organizations that correlate occupancy cost with engagement and retention are optimizing for the talent.
Less
Portfolio consolidation as the default response to underutilization.
More
Portfolio elasticity — the ability to contract, expand, or reconfigure within 12 months without a capital event.
Consolidation is a one-time cost reduction. Elasticity is a strategic capability. In a market where a single product decision can double or halve a team's effective headcount, the organizations that will win are the ones whose real estate can move with them.
Less
Real estate strategy as a facilities function.
More
Real estate strategy as a direct input to talent acquisition and retention — reviewed at the same cadence as workforce planning.
Your portfolio determines where you can hire, who will commute, and what your physical environment says to the candidate sitting across from you. That is not a facilities decision. It is a talent decision. And it belongs in the same conversation.
I used to open every major client engagement with a version of this: "You have to make big changes to see big changes."
What I did not always finish saying — and should have — is the harder part. Those changes only work if every person in the organization can see themselves in them. Not in the strategy deck. In the actual day-to-day. What do I do here? How do I fit in? What are you asking of me?
The same is true for space. Your employees are asking that question every time they walk through the door. The organizations getting this right are not the ones with the best amenities. They are the ones where the physical environment gives a clear, honest answer.
We need to change that conversation too.
Matthew Bennett Alderman is the Founder and Managing Principal of Alderman Bennett. He spent 16 years at Deloitte, including just over two years leading strategy and transformation within the Office of the CEO during Janet Foutty's tenure — work that included directing Deloitte's own operating model redesign. He founded Alderman Bennett to close the gap between corporate strategy and physical execution. Inquiries: [email protected]
The Strategy Journal