Ten years ago, the term “flex” certainly needed explaining. In some corners of the industry, it even needed defending. Today, it is a mainstay of the office market. Landlords, brokers, operators, and occupiers all understand that people increasingly want convenience, speed, and simplicity. Flexible space, or “flex,” catered to that need.
Ironically, that success may have created a new conundrum.
Flex has now become a catch-all term for such a wide range of workspace products that it is perhaps in danger of no longer telling prospective occupiers very much about what they’re actually looking at.
There’s no doubt that flex has become a useful industry shorthand, and it still has its place. Whether it remains useful as catch-all shorthand is another question.
Has flex become too broad?
When I first entered commercial property in the 80s, an office was an office, and the conversation largely revolved around leases, terms, and square footage. Over time, the market moved on.
Naturally, new products (and new terminology) emerged. By the 2010s, flex had entered the industry’s vocabulary as a useful shorthand for agility, convenience, and reduced commitment.
Originally, flex was a relatively straightforward concept. The appeal was simple: less commitment, greater agility, and a quicker route into workspace.
Today, the term can be used to describe all and sundry — you’ve got coworking memberships, serviced offices, managed offices, not to mention a growing number of hybrid products. While those solutions share some characteristics, they operate distinctly and solve different business challenges.
That is where confusion begins.
An occupier looking for a more flexible space may be shown products with entirely different levels of privacy, operational support, commitment length, and workplace experience. They are all described as flex, but they are often not directly comparable.
Occupiers are now comparing unlike-for-like products
Imagine a small business views several different offices. Every option is described as “flex.” One is predominantly coworking. Another is a serviced office. A third is a managed workspace with dedicated meeting rooms.
The occupier now faces the challenge of comparing fundamentally different products under the same label. The difficulty therein lies less in finding offices, and more so in understanding what is actually being offered.
They’re not comparing apples with apples, even when every option on the viewing schedule may be described as flex.
People are doubling down on certainty
Counterintuitively, many businesses seeking “flex” aren’t even necessarily searching for flexibility. I’d actually argue that many of them are searching for certainty.
They want to know:
- What will this cost?
- How quickly can we move in?
- Will the space be private?
- Will the layout work for our team?
- What happens if something goes wrong? Who do we call?
The word used in the search (or even by the broker) may be flex. The outcome being sought is often simplicity, predictability, and ease of management.
Why clearer differentiation should be a priority
Managed offices provide a useful example. Managed is typically a dedicated private workplace, often supported by third-party operational management and designed to provide a more stable long-term solution. Even within managed there are different models being offered — the three main ones being:
Operator managed: managed by an operator (which partners with the landlord) and offered to clients on a licence agreement. This is the model we work to, and one of the key benefits is that we are already operating the managed office before the client secures it, as well as being able to sign a licence without back and forth negotiation with additional parties. We understand the office, the building, the workings and fitout.
Landlord Managed: clients deal directly with a landlord rather than an operator. These offices are sometimes offered on a licence agreement but often on a short-form lease.
Managed Bolt-on: This is a lease or short-form lease contracted directly with the landlord with a separate agreement with the managed operator. With this arrangement the operator who takes it on may or may not be familiar with the space.
Interestingly, an additional term — “bespoke” — is often attached to managed offices, too. In reality, many spaces are offered as seen, with few truly bespoke elements for occupiers.
Managed space isn’t necessarily better than coworking or serviced space, but it is different. And different products deserve clearer explanations.
Are we asking occupiers the wrong question?
The answer isn’t necessarily creating more terminology. But it is worth considering what needs to change to help occupiers understand the implications behind the terminology that already exists.
Landlords, operators, and agents can all play a role by focusing less on product labels and more on outcomes. Rather than asking, “are you looking for flex?” perhaps the better question is:
“How do you want your workspace to function?”
The term “flex” isn’t going away, nor should it. It earned its place as an established part of the market. But as the sector continues to mature, clearer differentiation may ultimately prove more valuable than broader categorization.
