Collaboration Requires More Than Shared Space

Evidence context

Gensler finds that time spent working with others in person has increased across much of its 15-country sample, while socialising has grown and working alone has declined. JLL reports that 50% of employees positive about office policies associate presence with better teamwork.

These findings support the continuing importance of shared work, but not the assumption that open space automatically creates collaboration. Useful collaboration requires the right participants, purpose, preparation, setting and follow-through.

Osmos Global analysis

Workplace design should support several forms of collective work: short coordination, confidential discussion, creative development, decision-making, learning and informal connection. One generic meeting room or open collaboration zone cannot serve all of them equally.

Operational data can reveal whether collaborative capacity is available when needed, while team feedback explains whether settings support the task. Meeting volume alone is not evidence of quality.

What this changes for decision-making The practical significance of “Collaboration Requires More Than Shared Space” is that workplace decisions must be framed as testable operating choices rather than expressions of preference. Leaders should identify the affected workforce, the work moment being improved, the constraint being removed and the evidence that would justify further investment. This prevents a global survey average from becoming a local design instruction and makes the decision transparent to finance, employees and operational teams.

The decision record should also include trade-offs. More collaboration space may reduce focus capacity; higher service coverage may increase operating cost; stronger attendance coordination may reduce individual flexibility; and greater data precision may create privacy concerns. A credible workplace strategy does not hide these tensions. It states which outcome has priority, which safeguards apply and when the choice will be reconsidered.

Leadership implications

Workplace, FM, CRE, HR and technology leaders should treat this issue as a connected operating decision. The objective is not to maximise attendance, satisfaction or space efficiency independently; it is to create an environment that supports defined work while using capital and services responsibly. Business leaders remain responsible for specifying the outcomes that workplace investment is expected to enable.

Implementation guidance

Begin with one workforce segment, location or recurring moment where the present experience can be reconstructed. Record employee perception, actual demand, environmental or service conditions and the business purpose of the setting. Design a bounded intervention, establish the expected evidence before launch, and compare the result across peak and normal periods. Scale only when the improvement is repeatable and material.

What the evidence does not prove

The cited research does not demonstrate that the proposed action will increase individual productivity, prevent resignation or produce a specific financial return. Survey respondents describe experiences, preferences and intentions; portfolio benchmarks describe participating assets and clients. Osmos Global uses those findings to structure a decision, not to promise an outcome. Any external website statement should retain this distinction and avoid converting correlation, sentiment or benchmark position into causation.

Practical actions

• Define collaboration modes by team. • Match acoustic and technology standards to each mode. • Coordinate presence before expanding shared space. • Measure access, effectiveness and repeat problems.

Risks, limitations and unresolved questions The surveys report work patterns and perceptions. They do not isolate workplace design from management, team composition or organisational culture.

Source notes

[1] Gensler Research Institute. Global Workplace Survey 2025. 23 April 2025. https://www.gensler.com/gri/global-workplace-survey-2025