Abstract
Although real estate resources represent a high percentage of the corporate assets of non-property companies, their future role is unclear. Longevity and difficulty in revising property-related decisions clash under dynamically changing environmental conditions. This makes it necessary to consider the ownership strategy and its altering role in order to avoid inefficiencies and not to hinder companies in mastering structural change successfully. In a first step, data from a telephone company survey (CATI) among 69 corporate real estate managers of German companies are grouped by performing a two-step cluster analysis according to the degree to which they are affected by structural change. The resulting clusters are then tested regarding differences in their ownership strategy. The empirical analysis shows that firms highly affected by structural change exhibit a higher willingness to decrease the proportion of ownership. The decline in real estate assets is particularly evident in the office segment and in increased acceptance of sale-and-rent-back solutions. First hints show that structural change and associated new business requirements change the relevance of CRE ownership. To avoid competitive disadvantages, especially European firms should scrutinize their high ownership ratios.
Highlights
Since the early 2000s at least, the economies and societies of industrial nations have been undergoing massive structural change
The empirical results show that the ownership rates in the portfolios of German companies are projected to decrease
Due to the study design, it cannot be said with ultimate certainty; there is much to suggest that the cause of decline in corporate real estate ownership lies more in structural change than in evolutionary and cyclical changes in the corporate environment
Summary
Since the early 2000s at least, the economies and societies of industrial nations have been undergoing massive structural change. In an empirical survey in 2016, for example, only 12% saw their company well positioned for structural change in the real estate industry: 58% answered ‘to some extent’ while 30% gave a negative response to the question (Pfnür & Seger, 2017). After such announcements and survey results, research and practice should be aware of the possible consequences for corporate real estate management (CREM) resulting from structural change.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
More From: International Journal of Strategic Property Management
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.