Xymax Real Estate Institute

RESEARCH REPORT

Metropolitan Areas Office Demand Survey
Autumn 2017
Expansion of work style reforms and changes in office space demand

December 7, 2017

More companies are starting to allow employees to be flexible on where and when they work, in order to secure
human resources and improve productivity on the back of a decline in labor force. This trend will have an impact
on office space demand. Against this backdrop, Xymax Real Estate Insititute started a survey on a semi-annual
basis in autumn 2016 on office use and work styles, analyzing their influence on office space demand. This reportcovers the results of our third survey.

Summary of Survey Results
1. Office Space Demand Change (October 2016 – September 2017) (Page 2 – Page 6)
 37.5% of companies had an increase in the number of office workers over the past year. This is larger
than companies that had a decrease (12.3%) (Figure 1). 8.6% of companies expanded their officespace, while 2.2% downsized (Figure 2). Office space demand was robust.
 Similar result for rent per tsubo (incl. CAM): Increased (15.9%) Decreased (1.9%) (Figure 3).
 32.6% of companies still think that their current office is not large enough (Figure 4).
2. Promoting Work Style Reforms (Page 7 – Page 11) 29.1% of companies currently promote work style reforms. Including companies that have alreadycarried out the reforms, 37.9% of companies have introduced work style reforms (Figure 6).
 Most popular motive was decision of management (77.9%, Figure 7). Most popular purpose was toimprove productivity (67.1%, Figure 8).
 70% of companies realize the effects of the reforms “very much” or “somewhat” (Figure 9).
3. Diversification of Work Places (Promotion of Telework) (Page 12 – Page 16) 26.2％ of companies are making efforts in providing places and programs for telework (Figure18). Alternative work places are becoming more available, as evidenced in the growth in“work-from-home program” (19.2%) and “use of serviced or shared offices provided by specialized
operators” (6.7%) from the previous survey (Figure 19).
 Larger companies have a higher introduction rate of work-from-home programs and third place offices(Figure 20).
 Office space per person is smaller at firms allowing telework than those that do not (Figure 22).
4. What Companies Require in an Office (Page 17 – Page 19)
 The most popular tangible element was “convenient location” (88.6%), followed by “good cleaning,
sanitation, and maintenance conditions” (82.8%) and “high security performance” (82.0%) (Figure23). The most intangible elements were “comfortable work environment” (89.6%) and “motivates
employees” (85.5%), indicating companies’ awareness toward employee satisfaction (Figure 24).
5. Topics: Interest in Using Third Place Offices (Page 20 – Page 21) 20–30% of companies are very interested or somewhat interested in the five major third place offices(Figure 26). Especially high in “support features for workers with small children” (35.7%).

Metropolitan Areas Office Demand Survey Autumn 2017
The contents of this report are as of the time of writing. Xymax Real Estate Institute does not guarantee their accuracy or completeness.
This report may not be reproduced, cited, transmitted, distributed, or reprinted without prior permission of Xymax Real Estate Institute.
Copyright © 2017 Xymax Real Estate Institute Corporation. All rights reserved.

1

RESEARCH REPORT｜Xymax Real Estate Institute

1. Office Space Demand Change October 2016 – September 2017
1-1. Changes in the Number of Office Workers, Size of Office, and Rent per tsubo (incl. CAM charge) Over the
Past Year

More companies had an increase in number of office workers (37.5%) than a decrease (12.3%).

More companies expanded (or decided to expand) office size (8.6%) than downsized (or decided todownsize) (2.2%).
More companies saw an increase in rent per tsubo (incl. CAM) (15.9%) than a decrease (1.9%).

Changes in the number of office workers, size of office, and rent per tsubo (including CAM charge; the same
applies hereafter) over the year starting October 2016 and ending September 2017 are as follows.
The number of office workers has a large impact on office demand. Companies that had an increase in thenumber of workers far exceeded companies that had a decrease by 25.2 points (Figure 1, bottom row).
Likewise in the size of office space, the companies that expanded (or decided to expand; the same applies
hereafter) exceeded companies that downsized (or decided to downsize; the same applies hereafter) by 6.4
points (Figure 2, bottom row), while companies that saw an increase in rent per tsubo exceeded those that saw
a decrease by 14.0 points (Figure 3, bottom row). There was no significant change to this trend from the past
two surveys (autumn 2016 and spring 2017; refer to end of report for details), indicating that demand remained
strong.
This continued strength in office demand may be one of the factors of the limited availabilities of office space inmetropolitan areas. The survey also indicates that some companies added workers without expanding theiroffice space, since fewer companies expanded their office space compared to those that had an increase in thenumber of office workers. Such situation may have led to the results of the impression of office size (Figure 4).

Figure 1: Change in Number of Office Workers
0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Autumn 2016 (n=1,124)

36.5%

49.8%

12.5% 1.2%

Spring 2017 (n=1,073)

37.6%

48.6%

12.9%

Autumn 2017 (n=1,294)

37.5%

49.1%

12.3% 1.2%

Increased

No change

Decreased

Don't know

Metropolitan Areas Office Demand Survey Autumn 2017
The contents of this report are as of the time of writing. Xymax Real Estate Institute does not guarantee their accuracy or completeness.
This report may not be reproduced, cited, transmitted, distributed, or reprinted without prior permission of Xymax Real Estate Institute.
Copyright © 2017 Xymax Real Estate Institute Corporation. All rights reserved.

1.0%

2

RESEARCH REPORT｜Xymax Real Estate Institute

Figure 2: Change in Size of Office
0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Autumn 2016 (n=1,124)

9.2%

84.9%

3.2%

2.8%

Spring 2017 (n=1,073)

7.9%

85.3%

2.0%

4.8%

Autumn 2017 (n=1,294)

8.6%

86.1%

2.2%

3.2%

Expanded

No change

Downsized

Don't know

Figure 3: Change in Rent per tsubo
0%

20%

40%

60%

Autumn 2016 (n=1,124)

12.9%

67.5%

Spring 2017 (n=1,073)

14.0%

65.4%

Autumn 2017 (n=1,294)

15.9%

Increased

No change

80%

3.6%

2.6%

70.1%

Decreased

Don't know

12.0%

4.0%

13.1%

4.8%

1.9%

12.1%

No response

Metropolitan Areas Office Demand Survey Autumn 2017
The contents of this report are as of the time of writing. Xymax Real Estate Institute does not guarantee their accuracy or completeness.
This report may not be reproduced, cited, transmitted, distributed, or reprinted without prior permission of Xymax Real Estate Institute.
Copyright © 2017 Xymax Real Estate Institute Corporation. All rights reserved.

100%

3

RESEARCH REPORT｜Xymax Real Estate Institute

1-2．Impression of Office Size

More than 30% of the companies think that their current office is “very small” or “somewhat small.”We asked the respondents about the size of their current office. In total, 32.6% replied that their office was “verysmall” or “somewhat small” (Figure 4, bottom row). This is larger than the percentage of companies that said
their office was “very large” or “somewhat large” (16.0%). This can be looked as a continued potential demandfor office expansion, which has been seen since the beginning of this survey (Figure 4, top and middle rows).

Figure 4: Impression of Office Size
0%

Autumn 2016 (n=1,124)

Spring 2017 (n=1,073)

Autumn 2017 (n=1,294)

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Somewhat small

Good size

Somewhat large

No response

27.8%

52.9%

10.9%

1.2%

Very small

Very large

5.2%

2.0%

Somewhat small

Good size

Somewhat large

No response

26.8%

50.2%

13.2%

1.3%

Very small

Very large

4.8%

3.6%

Somewhat small

Good size

Somewhat large

No response

27.4%

50.0%

12.4%

1.5%

Very small

Very large

5.2%

3.6%

Metropolitan Areas Office Demand Survey Autumn 2017
The contents of this report are as of the time of writing. Xymax Real Estate Institute does not guarantee their accuracy or completeness.
This report may not be reproduced, cited, transmitted, distributed, or reprinted without prior permission of Xymax Real Estate Institute.
Copyright © 2017 Xymax Real Estate Institute Corporation. All rights reserved.

4

RESEARCH REPORT｜Xymax Real Estate Institute
PICK UP
Changes in Size of Office and Rent per tsubo by Company Type
Analysis by type of company (size of company, industry, and location of office) showed different ranges in
the increase and decrease of office space and rent.
Figure 5 shows the two types of diffusion index (DI) based on changes in the year starting October 2016
and ending September 2017: Office Size DI, which is the percentage of companies that expanded theiroffice minus the percentage of companies that downsized their office; and Rent DI, which is the percentage
of companies that saw an increase in rent minus the percentage of companies that saw a decrease in rent.
▲ By Size of Company (Number of Employees)
Office Size DI was relatively high among large companies with employees of 1,000 or more, while Rent DI
was relatively large at medium-sized companies with employees of 100–999.
◆ By Industry
In the telecommunications industry, both Office Size DI and Rent DI were higher than other industries.
The DI for rent increase was lower than the DI for office expansion in the construction and realestate/leasing of goods industries. The manufacturing industry, which was the most conservative in thespring 2017 survey (Reference), showed a jump in both DIs.
● By Location of Office
Both the DI for office expansion and rent increase were higher in Tokyo 23 Wards than other areas. They
were relatively low in Nagoya, although both were positive. The rent DI for Osaka rose from the survey inspring 2017.

Figure 5: Office Size DI and Rent DI
22

Rent DI

Companies with rent increase (%) minuscompanies with rent decrease (%)

20

Telecommunications

18
Tokyo 23 Wards

16

Employees: 100–999

14Wholesale, retail

Manufacturing
Academic research,
professional or technicalservice

1210Service (those not classified

Employees: Up to 99

to other sector)

Finance, insurance

Employees: 1,000 and
above

8

Osaka city

6

Construction
Real estate, leasing of

4

goods

Nagoya city

2
0
0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Office Size DI Companies that expanded (%) minus companies that downsized (%)

Metropolitan Areas Office Demand Survey Autumn 2017
The contents of this report are as of the time of writing. Xymax Real Estate Institute does not guarantee their accuracy or completeness.
This report may not be reproduced, cited, transmitted, distributed, or reprinted without prior permission of Xymax Real Estate Institute.
Copyright © 2017 Xymax Real Estate Institute Corporation. All rights reserved.

5

RESEARCH REPORT｜Xymax Real Estate Institute

Reference: Office Size DI and Rent DI (Results of Survey in Spring 2017)

Rent DI

Companies with rent increase (%) minus companies
with rent decrease (%)

22
Telecommunications

20
18
16
Tokyo 23 Wards

14

Employees: 1,000 and
above

12

Academic research,
professional or technicalservice108Employees: 100–999

Employees: Up to 99
Service

Manufacturing

Real estate,

Wholesale, retailleasing of goods
Finance, insurance

Construction(those not classified to othersector)6
Nagoya city

4
2

Osaka city

0
0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Office Size DI Companies that expanded (%) minus companies that downsized (%)

Metropolitan Areas Office Demand Survey Autumn 2017
The contents of this report are as of the time of writing. Xymax Real Estate Institute does not guarantee their accuracy or completeness.
This report may not be reproduced, cited, transmitted, distributed, or reprinted without prior permission of Xymax Real Estate Institute.
Copyright © 2017 Xymax Real Estate Institute Corporation. All rights reserved.

14

6

RESEARCH REPORT｜Xymax Real Estate Institute

2．Promoting Work Style Reforms
2-1．Promoting Work Style Reforms


37.9％ of companies replied that they were “currently promoting work style reforms” or had “alreadycarried out work style reforms.”



The top motive for introducing work style reforms was “decision of management” (77.9%). The mostpopular purpose of the reforms was to “improve productivity” (67.1%), followed by employee
satisfaction purposes such as “work-life balance of employees” (59.5%) and “motivate employees”(58.4%).



Around 70% of companies said they realized the effects of the reforms “very much” or “somewhat.”

29.1% of companies replied that they were “currently promoting work style reforms.” Including companies thathave “already carried out work style reforms,” the survey indicated that 37.9% of companies have embarked onreforms (Figure 6). In addition, 13.5% of the companies said they “plan to carry out/considering carrying out”
the reforms. It is expected that work style reforms will continue to accelerate.

Figure 6: Implementation of Work Style Reforms
Other, 0.5%

Do not think work

Already carriedout work style

style reforms arenecessary andDon't know

reformshave not carried it

11.4%

8.8％

out

Currently

10.5%

promotingwork styleThink work stylereformsreforms arePlan to carrynecessary, buthave not yet
carried out

29.1％

out/considering
carrying out work

26.1%

style reforms
13.5％(n=1,294)

We asked companies that have carried out, currently promoting, plan to carry out, or considering carrying out
work style reforms what motivated them to promote the reforms. “Decision of management” ranked top with
77.9% of replies (Figure 7). In terms of the purpose of promoting the reforms, “improve productivity” was top(67.1%), followed by “work-life balance of employees” (59.5%) and “motivate employees” (58.4%). Others highon the list were “improve employee satisfaction” (47.3%) and “promote employees’ well-being” (32.7%), while
cost-related purposes such as to “reduce office occupancy cost” (9.5%) and “reduce office space and achieve
efficient use” (8.9%) ranked low, indicating a rise in companies’ awareness in employee satisfaction (Figure 8).
Metropolitan Areas Office Demand Survey Autumn 2017
The contents of this report are as of the time of writing. Xymax Real Estate Institute does not guarantee their accuracy or completeness.
This report may not be reproduced, cited, transmitted, distributed, or reprinted without prior permission of Xymax Real Estate Institute.
Copyright © 2017 Xymax Real Estate Institute Corporation. All rights reserved.

7

RESEARCH REPORT｜Xymax Real Estate Institute

Figure 7: Motive for Promoting Work Style Reforms
0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

Decision of management

77.9%

Change of the times

32.6%

Proposal or request from employees

30.3%

Decision of general manager, etc.

25.5%

Necessity in developing business

9.8%

Layout change

9.5%

Office relocation

9.3%

Other company's example

7.7%

Other

100%

1.2%

(Multiple answers, n=666)

Figure 8: Purpose of Work Style Reforms
0%

20%

40%

60%

Improve productivity

80%

67.1%

Work-life balance of employees

59.5%

Motivate employees

58.4%

Reduce long work hours (overtime, extra days)

52.1%

Achieve work efficiency

51.5%

Improve employee satisfaction

47.3%

Promote employees' well-being

32.7%

Support workers' childcare and eldercare

29.7%

Reduce employee turnover rates

26.1%

Make the office more comfortable

24.2%

Achieve workplace diversity (women, elders,…

23.6%

Achieve better communication between employees

23.0%

Strengthen recruitment

16.5%

Improve customer service and satisfaction

12.2%

Reduce employees' travel cost (time and…

10.5%

Innovation and new business

9.9%

Reduce office occupancy cost

9.5%

Reduce office space and achieve efficient use

8.9%

For BCP (business continuity plan)

7.1%

Other

0.5%

(Multiple answers, n=666)

Metropolitan Areas Office Demand Survey Autumn 2017
The contents of this report are as of the time of writing. Xymax Real Estate Institute does not guarantee their accuracy or completeness.
This report may not be reproduced, cited, transmitted, distributed, or reprinted without prior permission of Xymax Real Estate Institute.
Copyright © 2017 Xymax Real Estate Institute Corporation. All rights reserved.

8

RESEARCH REPORT｜Xymax Real Estate InstituteWe asked companies that said they had already carried out or were promoting work style reforms about theeffects of the reforms. As much as 70% of the companies replied that they realize the effects “very much” or“somewhat” (Figure 9). The highest-ranking effects were “work-life balance of employees” (47.7%) (Figure10) and the top objectives of promoting work style reforms mentioned in the previous paragraph (Figure 8). It
is assumed that companies that promoted the reforms with a sense of purpose feel the effects of the reforms.

Figure 9: Realization of the Effects of Work Style Reforms
Don't know, 4.1%
Do not realize at all

Realize very much

3.5%

14.9%
Do not realize thatmuch, 22.4%

Somewhat realize
55.2%(n=491)Figure 10: Effects of Work Style Reforms
0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Work-life balance of employees

47.7%

Reduction in long work hours (overtime, extra days)

45.8%

Improved motivation of employees

43.2%

Improvement in productivity

38.3%

Improved employee satisfaction

37.9%

Achievement of work efficiency

37.5%

Promotion of employees' well-being

30.8%

Better communication between employees

23.6%

More comfortable office environment

21.4%

Support in workers' childcare and eldercare

15.9%

Achieved workplace diversity (women, elders, foreigners)

13.0%

Reduced employee turnover rates

11.6%

Strengthened recruitment

9.4%

Reduced employees' travel cost (time and transportation cost)

8.8%

Reduced office space and achieved efficient use

8.1%

Improved customer service and satisfaction

8.1%

Reduction in office occupancy cost

7.5%

BCP (business continuity plan) measures
Innovation and new business
Other

5.9%
4.1%
1.4%

(Multiple answers, n=491)

Metropolitan Areas Office Demand Survey Autumn 2017
The contents of this report are as of the time of writing. Xymax Real Estate Institute does not guarantee their accuracy or completeness.
This report may not be reproduced, cited, transmitted, distributed, or reprinted without prior permission of Xymax Real Estate Institute.
Copyright © 2017 Xymax Real Estate Institute Corporation. All rights reserved.

60%

9RESEARCH REPORT｜Xymax Real Estate InstituteWe also asked all respondents, including companies that have not promoted work style reforms, what efforts
they were making in the following four areas to enable employees to work better: Use of ICT, commitment ofmanagement, human resources and labor, and education/enlightenment of workers.
In the use of ICT, relatively many companies promoted initiatives such as “introduction of TV/web conference
system” (46.8%) and “paperless internal documents” (33.7%) (Figure 11).
In terms of initiatives in the commitment of management, 34.5% of the companies had issued a message by top
management on work styles, which indicates the large impact management has on a company’s work styles(Figure 12), which is also evident in the “motive for promoting work style reforms” described earlier (Figure 7).
In human resources and labor, around 30% of the companies had introduced evaluation based on achievement
instead of work hours or a flextime program (Figure 13). Regarding initiatives in education and enlightenmentof workers, education of managers was carried out slightly more than education of members (Figure 14).

Figure 11: Initiatives in Work Styles – Use of ICT
0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

Introduction of TV/

50%

46.8%

web conference system
Paperless internal documents

33.7%

Introduction of chat and online

23.4%

conference systems
Work efficiency and reforms

3.7%

through RPA* and AI
Other(Multiple answers, n=1,294)

0.8%*RPA (Robotic Process Automation): Automation of work processes using machine learning and cognitive technology.

Figure 12: Initiatives in Work Styles – Commitment of Management
0%

10%

20%

30%

Issuance of message by top

34.5%

management on work styles
Division/internal organization

15.1%(committees, etc.) dedicated to work styles
Adoption of healthy management

13.8%

Set KPI (key performance indicator)

11.0%

of work styles
Other

40%

0.7%

(Multiple answers, n=1,294)

Metropolitan Areas Office Demand Survey Autumn 201710

The contents of this report are as of the time of writing. Xymax Real Estate Institute does not guarantee their accuracy or completeness.
This report may not be reproduced, cited, transmitted, distributed, or reprinted without prior permission of Xymax Real Estate Institute.
Copyright © 2017 Xymax Real Estate Institute Corporation. All rights reserved.

RESEARCH REPORT｜Xymax Real Estate Institute

Figure 13: Initiatives in Work Styles – Human Resources and Labor
0%

10%

20%

30%

Evaluation based on achievement

40%

30.2%

instead of work hours
Flextime program

27.9%

Workplace diversity

23.9%(women, elders, foreigners)
Introduction/promotion of

19.2%

work-from-home program
Permit side jobs

5.4%

Other

2.0%
(Multiple answers, n=1,294)

Figure 14: Initiatives in Work Styles – Education and Enlightenment of Workers
0%10%

Education of managers

30%

40%

29.9%

(training/seminars on work styles)
Education of members

26.9%(training/seminars on work styles)
Other

20%

1.2%
(Multiple answers, n=1,294)

Metropolitan Areas Office Demand Survey Autumn 2017
The contents of this report are as of the time of writing. Xymax Real Estate Institute does not guarantee their accuracy or completeness.
This report may not be reproduced, cited, transmitted, distributed, or reprinted without prior permission of Xymax Real Estate Institute.
Copyright © 2017 Xymax Real Estate Institute Corporation. All rights reserved.

11

RESEARCH REPORT｜Xymax Real Estate Institute

3．Diversification of Work Places (Promotion of Telework)
3-1．Office LayoutAlthough there was no significant change from the survey conducted a year ago, spaces that allow
flexible use such as open meeting space and refreshment space saw a small increase.

Figure 15 (lower row) shows the layout of companies’ current offices.
Although there was no significant change from the survey in autumn 2016 (Figure 15 (upper row)), the results
show that spaces allowing flexible use according to users’ needs such as open meeting space and refreshment
space are on a mild increasing trend.
Figure 15: Layout of Current Office
0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%
94%

Fixed seats
79%

59%

Reception space

61%
63%

Lockers
52%

Library, warehouse

54%

45%

President's/officer's room (private rooms)

37%

Server room

35%

40%

37%
36%

Changing room

33%

29%

Space for disaster provisions
22%

Space for refreshing

26%

19%

14%

Smoking room

14%

10%

Show room, seminar space

10%
7%

Cafeteria

7%11%Group address seats

Nursery space
Others30%

18%Free-address seats

Storage battery/emergency power generator space

60%

42%

Open meeting space

ABW*

95%

78%

Conference room

6%
3%

2%
3%

2%
1%

0%

Autumn 2016 (n=1,124)

2%

Autumn 2017 (n=1,294)

2%*ABW (Activity Based Working): An office layout that features various work areas within the office, such asbooths that enable workers to concentrate and space for team work.

Metropolitan Areas Office Demand Survey Autumn 2017
The contents of this report are as of the time of writing. Xymax Real Estate Institute does not guarantee their accuracy or completeness.
This report may not be reproduced, cited, transmitted, distributed, or reprinted without prior permission of Xymax Real Estate Institute.
Copyright © 2017 Xymax Real Estate Institute Corporation. All rights reserved.

12

RESEARCH REPORT｜Xymax Real Estate Institute

3-2．Initiatives in Promoting Telework

66.2％ of companies have made some kind of ICT investment to support telework of employees.



26.2％ of companies replied that they were developing places and programs for employees to do
telework. “Work-from-home program” (19.2%) and “use of serviced offices and shared offices
provided by specialized operators” (6.7%) have increased, while some companies have provided“satellite offices that are owned or leased by own company” (5.4%). The results indicate thatalternative work places are becoming more available.



Development of places and programs for telework is active among large companies with 1,000
employees or more as well as in the telecommunications industry.

66.2% of all companies said they have implemented at least one of the following initiatives to support teleworkof employees: “Develop an IT environment or system that enables workers to check emails and schedule outside
the office;” ”use of a system with which workers can work outside the office in the same network environment as
in the office;” and “provide IT devices such as notebook computers and tablets” (Figures 16, 17). These
indicate that a majority of companies have made some kind of ICT investment to achieve efficient work styles.
Figure 16: ICT Investment to Support Telework

No
33.8%

Yes
66.2%

(n=1,294)

Figure 17: Breakdown of ICT Investment
0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Develop an IT environment or system thatenables workers to check emails and57.2%

schedule outside the office
Provide employees IT devices such as
notebook computers and tablets

48.8%

to enable mobile work
Use of a system with which workers canwork outside the office in the

36.9%

same network environment as the office(Multiple answers, n=1,294)

Metropolitan Areas Office Demand Survey Autumn 2017
The contents of this report are as of the time of writing. Xymax Real Estate Institute does not guarantee their accuracy or completeness.
This report may not be reproduced, cited, transmitted, distributed, or reprinted without prior permission of Xymax Real Estate Institute.
Copyright © 2017 Xymax Real Estate Institute Corporation. All rights reserved.

13

RESEARCH REPORT｜Xymax Real Estate InstituteFurthermore, 26.2% of all companies said they were making efforts in developing places or programs for
employees to do telework (Figure 18).
“Work-from-home programs” (19.2%) and “use of serviced offices or satellite offices provided by specialized
operators” (6.7%) increased from the survey in spring 2017 by 6.6 points and 1.1 points, respectively, whilesome companies provided a “satellite office or other similar facility owned or leased by own company” (5.4%).
These results illustrate that alternative work places are slowly becoming more available (Figure 19).

Figure 18: Development of Places and Programs for Telework

Yes
26.2%

No
73.8%

(n=1,294)

Figure 19: Types of Places and Programs for Telework
0%

5%

10%

provided by specialized operators

5.6%
6.7%

6.0%

owned or leased by own company

5.4%

Spring 2017 (n=1,073)

25%

19.2%

Providing satellite office, etc.

Use of other company's office

20%

12.6%

Work-from-home program

Use of serviced office, shared office, etc.

15%

7.0%
4.8%

Autumn 2017 (n=1,294)(Multiple answers)

Metropolitan Areas Office Demand Survey Autumn 2017
The contents of this report are as of the time of writing. Xymax Real Estate Institute does not guarantee their accuracy or completeness.
This report may not be reproduced, cited, transmitted, distributed, or reprinted without prior permission of Xymax Real Estate Institute.
Copyright © 2017 Xymax Real Estate Institute Corporation. All rights reserved.

14

RESEARCH REPORT｜Xymax Real Estate Institute
These initiatives varied depending on the attributes of the companies, such as company size.
By company size, larger companies are more likely to have work-from-home programs and third place offices(Figure 20). For example, while 5.4% of all companies said they had a “satellite office or other similar facility
owned or leased by own company” (Figure 19), 17.3% of large companies with 1,000 employees or more didso. Similarly, as much as 15.2% of large companies used a “serviced office, shared office, or other similar facility
provided by specialized operators,” while 6.7% of all companies did so. These results indicate that large
companies with financial resources are beginning to offer diversified and flexible work places.
Figure 20: Telework Spaces and Programs – By Company Size

programoffice, etc. office, etc.

homesatellite
sharedoffice,Serviced

Own

Work-from-

0%

10%

20%

Up to 99 (n=593)

17.0%

100–999 (n=504)

16.7%

30%

1,000 and above (n=197)

40%

32.0%

Up to 99 (n=593)

2.0%

100–999 (n=504)

4.8%

1,000 and above (n=197)

17.3%

Up to 99 (n=593)

4.4%

100–999 (n=504)

6.2%

1,000 and above (n=197)

15.2%(Multiple answers)

By industry, although telework is being promoted relatively more in the telecommunications industry, there was
not much difference between industries as there was between different company sizes. This illustrates thattelework is being promoted in a broad range of industries (Figure 21).
Figure 21: Telework Spaces and Programs – By Industry

home program
office, etc.
etc.

shared office,Serviced office,Own satellite

Work-from-

0%

10%

20%

Manufacturing (n=207)

30%

17.4%

Telecommunications (n=181)

33.1%

Wholesale / Retail (n=200)

14.5%

Service* (n=266)

24.4%

Manufacturing (n=207)

7.2%

Telecommunications (n=181)

7.2%

Wholesale / Retail (n=200)

6.0%

Service* (n=266)

5.3%

Manufacturing (n=207)

5.3%

Telecommunications (n=181)
Wholesale / Retail (n=200)
Service* (n=266)

40%

11.6%
4.0%
9.8%
(Multiple answers, major industries only)*Service industries that do not fall into any other sector

Metropolitan Areas Office Demand Survey Autumn 2017
The contents of this report are as of the time of writing. Xymax Real Estate Institute does not guarantee their accuracy or completeness.
This report may not be reproduced, cited, transmitted, distributed, or reprinted without prior permission of Xymax Real Estate Institute.
Copyright © 2017 Xymax Real Estate Institute Corporation. All rights reserved.

15

RESEARCH REPORT｜Xymax Real Estate Institute

PICK UP
Office Space per Person by Companies’ Telework Availability
A calculation of office space per person (median value) by telework availability indicates that in all types oftelework, companies that allow employees to do telework have a smaller office space per person thancompanies not allowing telework (Figure 22).
In particular, the office space per person was 3.00 tsubo at companies that have a work-from-homeprogram (compared to 3.86 tsubo at companies that do not), and 2.50 tsubo at companies that use aserviced office or shared office (compared to 3.75 tsubo at companies that do not). The diversification ofwork places may be contributing to more efficient use of conventional office space. Attention should be paid
to the impact on the demand for office space, since further availability of telework may cause workers to
shift from fixed office space such as company headquarters to various work places in diverse locations.

Figure 22: Office Space per Person by Companies’ Telework Availability

programoffice, etc.

1.0

2.0

3.0

Available (n=215)

4.0

3.00

Not available (n=971)

3.86

Available (n=54)

3.14

Not available (n=1,132)

Available (n=68)

5.0

3.71

2.50

etc.

shared office,Serviced office,Own satellite

Work-from-home

0.0

Not available (n=1,118)

3.75(Median value, tsubo. 1 tsubo = 3.3 sqm)

Metropolitan Areas Office Demand Survey Autumn 2017
The contents of this report are as of the time of writing. Xymax Real Estate Institute does not guarantee their accuracy or completeness.
This report may not be reproduced, cited, transmitted, distributed, or reprinted without prior permission of Xymax Real Estate Institute.
Copyright © 2017 Xymax Real Estate Institute Corporation. All rights reserved.

16

RESEARCH REPORT｜Xymax Real Estate Institute

4．What Companies Require in an Office
4-1．What Companies Require in an OfficeThe most popular tangible element was “convenient location” (88.6%), followed by “good cleaning,
sanitation, and maintenance conditions” (82.8%), “high security performance” (82.0%), and “highseismic capacity” (80.8%).



In intangible elements, “enables employees to work comfortably” (89.6%) and “motivates
employees” (85.5%) dominated top ranks, indicating companies’ awareness in employee
satisfaction.

We asked companies how much importance they place on major tangible elements (building specifications, etc.)
and intangible elements (those related to work styles, etc.) of offices.
The most popular tangible element was “convenient location,” with 88.6% of companies saying they consideredvery important or important (Figure 23). This was followed by “good cleaning, sanitation, and maintenanceconditions” (82.8%), “high security performance” (82.0%), and “high seismic capacity” (80.8%). These results
indicate that such elements have become preconditions when choosing an office. A majority of companies also
consider “accommodates BCP (business continuity plan)” (65.4%) important, implying companies’ highawareness toward safety after the Great East Japan Earthquake.
Figure 23: What Companies Require in an Office (Tangible Factors)
0%

20%

Convenient location

40%

60%

31.5%

Good cleaning, sanitation, and maintenance condition of building

80%

57.1%

18.1%

100%
9.1% 1.9% 0.5%

64.7%

14.6% 1.9% 0.7%

High security performance

24.1%

57.9%

15.1% 1.9%1.1%

High seismic capacity (new standards, seismic isolation/control, etc.)

26.7%

54.1%

16.4% 2.0%0.9%

Accommodates BCP

16.3%

Power supply at blackout (private power generator, etc.)

15.2%

High-grade exterior and common areas

3.6%

49.1%

29.4%

43.7%

34.1%

33.7%

LED in rooms

3.2% 23.1%

Relatively new building

1.9% 23.1%

Easy to measure electricity use (smart meter, etc.)

3.0% 21.5%

Building has environmental certification

2.4% 19.3%

Large building

2.9% 15.5%

40.0%
51.9%
47.5%

3.7% 1.5%
5.6% 1.4%

17.5%

5.3%

16.8%

4.9%

19.9%

54.3%
56.0%
41.2%

27.2%

Consider very important

Consider important

Neither consider nor not consider important

Do not consider important that much

7.5%

15.9%

5.3%

15.2%

7.0%

13.2%

(Multiple answers, n=1,294)
Metropolitan Areas Office Demand Survey Autumn 2017
The contents of this report are as of the time of writing. Xymax Real Estate Institute does not guarantee their accuracy or completeness.
This report may not be reproduced, cited, transmitted, distributed, or reprinted without prior permission of Xymax Real Estate Institute.
Copyright © 2017 Xymax Real Estate Institute Corporation. All rights reserved.

17

RESEARCH REPORT｜Xymax Real Estate InstituteOn the intangible side, the most popular elements were “enables employees to work comfortably” (89.6%) and“motivates employees” (85.5%). Companies also placed emphasis on elements related to employee satisfaction,such as “enables employees to feel refreshed” (70.0%), and “improves work-life balance of employees” (69.2%)(Figure 24). These probably express companies’ recognition that offices focusing on workers improve thecompany’s productivity and work efficiency. On the other hand, relatively few companies required elements suchas “promotes innovation and new business” (37.9%) and “induces collaboration” (30.5%).
Figure 24: What Companies Require in an Office (Intangible Factors)
0%20%

Enables employees to work comfortably

26.1%

Motivates employees

23.7%

Improves work efficiency

22.6%

Improves productivity

21.9%

Reduces work hours, improves efficiency

40%

60%

80%

100%

63.5%

8.8%

1.2% 0.4%

12.9%

1.1%

0.5%

59.4%

16.1% 1.1%

0.9%

58.2%

17.7%

61.8%

17.5%

55.4%

1.5% 0.7%

24.3%

1.9%

0.9%

25.7%

1.7%

0.9%
0.7%

Improves internal communication

14.5%

57.2%

Enables employees to feel refreshed

13.0%

57.0%

25.7%

3.6%

Improves work-life balance of employees

15.1%

54.1%

27.6%

2.5% 0.8%

Better well-being of employees

12.5%

Strengthens recruitment

12.5%

45.1%

Reduces employee turnover rates

10.7%

45.1%

Improves engagement in the organization

8.7%

Supports workers' childcare and eldercare

6.5%

Promotes innovation and new business

7.3%

Induces collaboration

5.2%

52.9%

30.2%

41.3%
38.1%

25.3%

33.8%

5.7%

2.8%

35.4%

5.7%

3.0%

45.3%

3.8%

0.9%

44.7%

30.6%

3.7% 0.7%

50.0%
55.3%

Consider very important

Consider important

Neither consider nor not consider important

Do not consider important that much

8.0%

2.8%

8.7%

3.5%

10.2%

4.1%

Do not consider important(Multiple answers, n=1,294)

Metropolitan Areas Office Demand Survey Autumn 2017
The contents of this report are as of the time of writing. Xymax Real Estate Institute does not guarantee their accuracy or completeness.
This report may not be reproduced, cited, transmitted, distributed, or reprinted without prior permission of Xymax Real Estate Institute.
Copyright © 2017 Xymax Real Estate Institute Corporation. All rights reserved.

18

RESEARCH REPORT｜Xymax Real Estate Institute

4-2．Concerns and Obstacles in Implementing Office Strategy
Cost-related concerns and obstacles such as “heavy cost” (44.7%) and “unclear cost effectiveness”(40.4％) ranked high on the list.

Regarding the concerns or obstacles in implementing office strategy, more than 40% of the companies said theyfelt the cost was heavy, which was also the most popular response in the survey in spring 2017 (41.8%) (Figure25). Issues relating to the organization also ranked high, such as “no team/person to lead the strategy in across-sectoral manner” (20.3%) and “discuss/arrange with system department (security measures, etc.)”(20.0%).

Figure 25: Concerns and Obstacles in Implementing Office Strategy
0%

10%

20%

30%

Heavy cost

50%
44.7%

Unclear cost effectiveness40.4%

No team/person to lead strategy in cross-sectoral

20.3%

manner
Discuss/arrange with system department (security

20.0%

measures, etc.)
Discuss/arrange with personnel department

16.6%

Unable to obtain approval of management

16.2%

Don't know appropriate implementation method

12.8%

Difficult to set KPI (key performance indicator)

11.0%

Few examples at other companies to refer to

8.8%

Unable to obtain understanding from managers

7.7%

Unable to obtain understanding from employees

7.7%

Other

40%

1.5%

None in particular

22.8%(Multiple answers, n=1,294)

Metropolitan Areas Office Demand Survey Autumn 2017
The contents of this report are as of the time of writing. Xymax Real Estate Institute does not guarantee their accuracy or completeness.
This report may not be reproduced, cited, transmitted, distributed, or reprinted without prior permission of Xymax Real Estate Institute.
Copyright © 2017 Xymax Real Estate Institute Corporation. All rights reserved.

19

RESEARCH REPORT｜Xymax Real Estate Institute

5．Topics: Interest in Using Third Place Offices
The presence of the third work place (“third place office”) after offices at the company or home is increasing withthe diversification of work styles. Types of offices that are gaining attention in particular are serviced offices andshared offices, which are provided to companies by operators for use by employees of the contract company.
Such services are often available on a monthly or hourly basis, allowing flexible use compared to conventional
fixed offices owned or leased by the company.
Unique services are emerging with the boom in the market, but what kind of work place does companies’ staff incharge of offices actually want the employees of their company to use? We asked their interest in using thefollowing five major types of third place offices.

Five major types of third place offices（１）(1) Touch-down type (mainly used by individuals)
Area, period・Major office area in city center. Irregular, one-off use.
Ideas of use・Sales representatives drop by while out of the office or upon
direct attending/direct leaving, and work as in the office.
・Concentrate in paper work, etc.

（２）・Can choose a convenient place each time and use immediately.

(2) Project room type (mainly used in team units)Area, period・Major office area in city center. Monthly or annual contract.
Ideas of use・Fixed-term use for system development or projects.
・Use when working with internal and external personnel.

（３）(3) Shared satellite type (used in company units)Area, period・Suburban residential area. Monthly or annual use agreements.
Ideas of use・Jointly used by several companies as a satellite office.
・Exclusive sections for companies with dedicated lines, and common space.
・Employees living nearby can gather to work.

(4) Office with support features for workers with small children（４）Area, period・Suburban residential area. Irregular, one-off use.
Ideas of use・There is a nursery space, which can be used mainly by
individual employees with small children on a one-off basis as needed.

(5) Co-working type（５）
Area, period・Major office area in city center.
Ideas of use・Jointly used by people from various industries and professions,
inducing collaboration and innovation.
・Not only corporate but also individual contracts are often possible.

Metropolitan Areas Office Demand Survey Autumn 2017
The contents of this report are as of the time of writing. Xymax Real Estate Institute does not guarantee their accuracy or completeness.
This report may not be reproduced, cited, transmitted, distributed, or reprinted without prior permission of Xymax Real Estate Institute.
Copyright © 2017 Xymax Real Estate Institute Corporation. All rights reserved.

20

RESEARCH REPORT｜Xymax Real Estate Institute

20–30% of the companies said they were “very interested” or “somewhat interested” in all five types.

Interest was especially high (35.7%) in “office with support features for workers with small children,”indicating companies’ large needs in supporting employees with small children.

When asked about their interest in the five types of third place offices, 20–30% of the companies replied thatthey were “very interested” or “somewhat interested” in all types (Figure 26).
Interest was especially high in “office with support features for workers with small children” (35.7%), indicatingcompanies’ large needs in supporting employees with small children. Shared offices with nursery space for young
mothers are gaining attention on the back of labor shortage and the issue of children waiting for admission in day
care centers. The market may continue to expand following an increase in demand. On the other hand, interest
was the lowest in the “co-working type” (21.4%), which aims at exchanges and collaboration between users.

Figure 26: Interest toward the Five Types of Third Place Offices
0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

1. Touch-down type

6.3%

24.5%

32.1%

28.4%

8.7%

2. Project room type

5.3%

24.2%

34.5%

27.4%

8.7%

3. Shared satellite type

3.6%

21.1%

4. Office with support features forworkers with small children
5. Co-working type
Very interested

5.6%

35.2%

30.1%

3.4% 18.0%

Somewhat interested

31.4%

30.0%

36.1%

25.2%

33.3%

Not interested that much

Not interested

8.7%

9.1%

9.2%

Don't know

（Single answer for all types, n=1,294 for all）

６．Summary
As was illustrated in Figure 19, places for telework and work-from-home programs by companies are slowly
becoming more available. It is expected that the switch to flexible work styles not tied down to fixed offices will
accelerate. Figure 22 indicated a decreasing trend of office space per person due to more available alternative
work places. Furthermore, with the emergence of diverse services as introduced in “5. Topics,” options for office
workers’ work places are increasing.
The continuation of work style diversification may change office space demand, as conventional office space suchas company headquarters is reduced and alternative work places become more available. In addition toquantitative changes such as demographics, we will continue to focus on the qualitative changes in office spacedemand due to social factors including work style reforms.
Metropolitan Areas Office Demand Survey Autumn 2017
The contents of this report are as of the time of writing. Xymax Real Estate Institute does not guarantee their accuracy or completeness.
This report may not be reproduced, cited, transmitted, distributed, or reprinted without prior permission of Xymax Real Estate Institute.
Copyright © 2017 Xymax Real Estate Institute Corporation. All rights reserved.

21

RESEARCH REPORT｜Xymax Real Estate Institute

Survey Overview
TimingOctober 2017
4,234 companies

Target Respondents・Companies that are tenants of office buildings managed by Xymax Group・Client companies of XYMAX INFONISTA Corporation

Valid Responses
GeographicalCoverage
Survey Method

1,294 companies

Response rate: 31％

Nationwide (Tokyo, Osaka, Aichi, Fukuoka, Kanagawa, Saitama, Chiba Prefectures and others)

Either by email or questionnaire sheet
Current office・

Location, contracted area, number of office workers, percentage of fixed seats, impressionof office size, rent per tsubo

How the office is used・

Office layout

・Initiatives in promoting employees to do telework

Office space demand change (October 2016 – September 2017)

Topics Covered in
Survey・Change in number of office workers (increased, decreased, no change)

・Change in size of office (expanded, downsized, no change)

・Change in rent per tsubo (increased, decreased, no change)

Promoting work style reforms
・

Promoting reforms or not・

Motive, purpose, effects

・

Initiatives in work styles, office strategy

What companies require in an office・

Priority elements (tangible, intangible)・Concerns and obstacles in implementing office strategy

Interest in using third place offices (by office type)Company profile
・Industry, location of headquarters, number of employees, year of establishment

Respondent profile
・

Division, position, age

Related surveys
・“Metropolitan Areas Office Demand Survey 2016 Demand Trends” January 12, 2017: Autumn 2016 Survey
https://www.xymax.co.jp/english/research/release/170112.html
・”Metropolitan Areas Office Demand Survey 2016 New Ways of Working and Office” January 30, 2017: Autumn 2016 Survey
https://www.xymax.co.jp/english/research/release/170130.html
・” Metropolitan Areas Office Demand Survey 2017 Demand Trends” August 2, 2017: Spring 2017 Survey
https://www.xymax.co.jp/english/research/release/170802_2.html

Metropolitan Areas Office Demand Survey Autumn 2017
The contents of this report are as of the time of writing. Xymax Real Estate Institute does not guarantee their accuracy or completeness.
This report may not be reproduced, cited, transmitted, distributed, or reprinted without prior permission of Xymax Real Estate Institute.
Copyright © 2017 Xymax Real Estate Institute Corporation. All rights reserved.

22

RESEARCH REPORT｜Xymax Real Estate InstituteProfile of Respondent Companies (Upper row: % Lower row: number)
Industry
ServiceAcademic reseach /(those not classified to

Manufacturing

Wholesale / Retail

Telecommunications

Construction

Real estate /Profesional orother sector)

Leasing of goods

technical service

20.6%

16.0%

15.5%

14.0%

7.2%

5.6%

5.1%

266

207

200

181

93

73

66

Financial /Unclassified

Insurance

Transportation /Education /Postal service

Learning support

Medical / Welfare

Daily life services /Multi-service

Entertainment

business

3.4%

3.3%

2.3%

1.5%

1.3%

1.1%

0.9%

44

43

30

20

17

14

11

Electricity, Gas,
Heat, Water

Civil service (except

Accommodation /for those classified toFood & beverageother sectors)

service

Agriculture /Mining / Quarry /Fishery

Forestry

Gravel extraction

0.7%

0.6%

0.6%

0.2%

0.1%

0.1%

9

8

8

2

1

1

Number of Employees
Up to 99

100 – 999

1,000 and above

45.8%

38.9%

15.2%

593

504

197

Type of Office
Head Office

Branch Office

Sales OfficeSatellite OfficeCall Center

Other

Computer Room

60.3%

26.8%

9.4%

1.7%

0.3%

0.2%

1.4%

780

347

121

22

4

2

18

Location of Office
Tokyo 23 Wards

Osaka City

Nagoya City

Fukuoka City

Other

62.5%

10.8%

8.0%

5.4%

13.3%

809

140

103

70

172

Size of Office under Lease Contract
Up to 30 tsubo

Up to 50 tsubo(1 tsubo = 3.3 sqm)
Up to 100 tsubo

Up to 200 tsubo

Over 200 tsubo

No response

18.2%

14.5%

21.4%

17.7%

22.7%

5.6%

235

187

277

229

294

72

About the charts contained in this report:
・The sum of percentage mix may not be 100% since they are rounded to the second decimal place.

Please contact below for inquiries on this report
Xymax Real Estate Institutehttps://soken.xymax.co.jp TEL: 03 3596 1477 | FAX: 03 3596 1478 | EMAIL: info-rei@xymax.co.jp

Metropolitan Areas Office Demand Survey Autumn 2017
The contents of this report are as of the time of writing. Xymax Real Estate Institute does not guarantee their accuracy or completeness.
This report may not be reproduced, cited, transmitted, distributed, or reprinted without prior permission of Xymax Real Estate Institute.
Copyright © 2017 Xymax Real Estate Institute Corporation. All rights reserved.

23