Hybrid office location - city centre, or out of town?

[blutterfly]

You work in consulting. Most of your job is on email/teams calls but your company want you in the office 1-2 days a week to build team relationships and to host client meetings, do interviews, collaborate etc. Rest of the week you can work anywhere.

Would you rather

A - an office that had parking, easy road/bus access, but not good rail connections and no local shops/cafes/sandwiches (BYO lunch)

B - an office in busy city centre and all its amenities, good rail and bus connections but limited parking and hideous traffic

C - a rural out of town office with no rail connections but ample parking, outdoor space, away from hustle of city but no shops/cafes within 2 miles (BYO lunch)

Am about to launch a new office and struggling with where to locate it. I figure if we are hoping to encourage people in 2 days they might want a ‘destination’ eg shops and cafes nearby, but does that outweigh transport ease?

We have just moved office from an A to a B (only 3 miles apart) with no parking and it is a pain in the arse for many, especially parents who need the flexibility to jump in the car to go pick up kids and suddenly find themselves with an uncomfortable 60-70min bus commute twice a day instead of a quick 30min drive to wind down during with the music blasting. I dread to think what it is going to be like in a cold, wet, dark Scottish winter, I will probably spend most of my days in the office slightly damp.

The much younger ones with masses of disposable income to spend on lunches and no home responsibilities to get back to like it.

A or C with a lunch van visit every day?

I don't need shops, but I do like to stretch my legs and get some fresh air.

A for me, our work are talking about having city based hubs and I'm dreading it due to no parking availability 😩

I’m not really seeing the difference between A and C

Definitely B for me - having good public transport links and plenty of shops / cafes to wander around at lunchtime. A lot of people don’t have cars that can be tied up with the commute

B.

A or C I may as well stay at home.

Also not everyone drives - incl your clients for meetings?!- but almost everyone can use public transport.

The main difference between A and C is setting (A off a motorway junction, C more rural). Also A has a train station. But A has nothing else, nowhere for a lunchtime walk, no shops nearby (but does have a lunch van)

I have asked many friends and family and colleagues and the answers vary. Those with caring/childcare responsibilities just want to get in and out easy. Don’t care much for shops and city centre locations. The younger generation seek a “destination”, arguing I’d need to have a good reason for getting them into the office when they can do most of their job from home.

Sorry correction to my last post - A has no train station. It’s an office off a motorway in a business park.

C is an office in a rural location with lovely surroundings so perhaps slightly better than A for lunch walk options.

young people in my office like to go out grab a sandwich and walk into town at lunchtime. And sometimes go for a drink after work. Rail links are important as well.

A sounds terrible. I can see the appeal of C but B is a clear winner (especially as I don’t drive and think that everyone should drive less).

if you have a clear sense of the demographic of the existing workforce then poll them.

B limits you to able-bodied people who either live in the city (which skews to a young bias) or who live on the nearby train routes, before the commute becomes too expensive to be justified. Have a look at season ticket prices as a percentage of your salaries to establish where your talent pool would come from.

A and C are pretty similar - I'd go for the most attractive office so that people want to come in, and get things like a fruit delivery, good vending machines, drinks fridges and free coffee to make it an appealing place. If you had the countryside one, you could offer lunchtime guided walks too, maybe even let people bring their dogs to the office.

Also, mindful of the poster above who doesn't drive, you could also offer a minibus service from the nearest station to the office.

B

As a PP said, what about external people coming in for meetings? Will you expect them to drive in? Or take a bus? Otherwise you could end up with teams meetings happening in the office anyway but people just plugged in at the desk on calls

Husband's company went with C and it's made life very difficult. They're often having to pay for taxis from the distant train station for clients and staff who don't want to drive or cannot. Also relevant, C isn't an environmentally conscious choice either so didn't go down well with some and continues to raise eyebrows with many prospective clients and potential new employees as it's at odds with the company moto!

Employees wanted B when polled but it was the most expensive (I bet all these taxis and lost revenue weren't factored in though).

Depends if your having visitors to the office ! A or C would be ok if keeping hybrid working. We are moving to C dreading it only about 3 miles away but got a busy section of road then 2 miles into nothing most of it single track expecting to spend any days of snow or ice working from home.

B
if you want to attract me to work in the office the fact I could nip to the bank, shop etc in my lunch break would help
also it would provide the opposite of a or c - in terms of isolation. I’ll see and interact with lots of people. My concern about a or c is that I could sit at my desk all day and think “I could just be working from home”

Definitely B. We moved from a city centre location to an A and within weeks had 2 leavers as it took over an hour to get in on public transport, which meant anyone who had a school run or simply needed to get back in time for dinner was inconvenienced.

Not everyone has a car, plus for those who do if you’re on the wrong side of town for the office you can take up to an hour stuck in motorway traffic.

Finally, don’t underestimate the convenience of having shops nearby. Now if I need to pop out for a loaf of bread or to pick up a prescription from the pharmacy it involves a car journey, whereas before I could just pop out in my lunch hour.

For me, it would be the length of the commute door to door that would matter. That doesn't really help you though.

A.

B. No parking is just a nightmare.
C. Will have limited bus routes.

I moved from a B to an A last year and it’s a PITA. All the little things I could do in my lunch break, like buy things I’d run out of, get presents / cards for upcoming occasions, pop to the bank or optician etc, I now have to make a special trip for - or, as is more often the case, order online (where possible) so local businesses lose out. Now on my office days I literally sit in an “office hub” all day with nowhere to walk, thinking how I could have been doing the exact same job at home only more productively as I’m wasting time driving for nearly 90 minutes a day just to sit at a slightly different desk.

I think B. It has the advantage of being different to home - a pull to city amenities for a range of lunch/ after work options and abilities run errands. Good public transport links so is more inclusive and better environmentally. Also re parking - it probably isn't as easy (big car park outside) but I imagine there would be some options, even if you have to pay for it. And better for client visits too.

What's your workforce demographic?

B the only reason I like going to the office is due to the city location

Depends on your staff demographic. If young and/ or very sociale (the norm in consulting? ) definitely B. Part of the point of going to the office is to have lunch and a beer after. It's they're all unsociable or like to drive the remote office is better, but I bet load won't come in. Is there no solution with lunch but less traffic? Or remote office but lunch provided by company 1 day per week.

B, much more fun and opportunties to combine going to the office with lunch, evening out etc.