Claremont’s Workplace Psychologist Becky Turner will be taking part in a panel session on Wellbeing in the workplace – Keynote Theatre, 8th October at 12.30 pm – 13.00 pm.

Zero carbon, 100% renewable electricity supplier Bryt Energy has moved into its new UK headquarters with the help of award-winning nationwide interior design and fit-out business Claremont.

Bryt Energy, part of the Statkraft Group, supplies British businesses with zero carbon, 100% renewable electricity*, sourced solely from solar, wind, and hydro power. The company is proud to be accredited as a Silver Carbon Literate Organisation, making it the first renewable electricity supplier globally to achieve Carbon Literate status.

Previously located in Victoria Square, Birmingham, Bryt Energy signed a lease at the end of 2024 for 12,500 sq. ft of space in Bruntwood Sci-Tech’s Cornerblock, situated in the heart of the city’s central business district. The building offers a range of shared amenities, including an on-site gym, secure bike storage, and Birmingham’s largest private roof terrace.

Cornerblock was a strategic choice for Bryt Energy, aligning with its commitment to sustainability. As a renewable electricity supplier, Bryt Energy had specific environmental criteria for its new office, including the use of renewable energy, to ensure their move aligned with their near term SBTi targets set in 2023.

Claremont has now completed an ambitious 14-week design and fit-out programme to give Bryt Energy an inspiring and attractive workspace for its 150-strong and growing team. Claremont’s strategy was to embody Bryt Energy’s environmental values by making sustainable choices throughout, including the use of furniture made from natural fabrics and recycled plastic. As a result, the scheme has achieved the RICS SKA Silver standard. 

The new office is rich in choice and offers ample room for collaborative working and enhanced employee facilities. The movement design concept takes clever design cues from the renewable energy sector.  In reception, visitors are welcomed by a striking brand wall featuring angled ribbon lights, echoing the angles at which sunlight hits solar panels and a blade shaped reception desk made from recycled CDs and refrigerators. A tunnel walkway continues the theme, with jagged acoustic panels mimicking wind turbines, and bespoke turbine-inspired divider walls to zone the space.

A social and collaboration zone is at the heart of the floorplate, which acts as a town hall space for company events and is fully equipped with AV, plus there’s an impressive client suite. As employee wellbeing was a driving force behind the design, a wellbeing and multifaith room, enclosed focus rooms, and multiple quiet zones have also been included.  

Heidi Wilbor, Customer Operations and HR Director at Bryt Energy said: “We are proud to have an office that prioritises both sustainability and employee wellbeing, ensuring that our growing team has all that they need to thrive. Our Silver SKA rating reflects the thought and care that was put into crafting our office with sustainability in mind, at every level. We will continue to seek ways to develop our new home even further, to make it as welcoming and inclusive as possible.”

Patrick Ames, Client Director at Claremont said: “Sustainability is no longer a nice-to-have, it’s becoming a core driver in the design and fit-out briefs we’re seeing, especially from value-led businesses that know the importance of action when it comes to environmental responsibility and carbon reduction.

“From day one, Bryt Energy has brought a real energy and commitment to doing things differently, and we made sure that passion for sustainability was embedded in every part of the design – not just in materials, but also in the way the office supports their team. Now the team has moved in, we’re excited to see how they use their new Destination Office and put its many features and spaces to work.”

Claremont has been delivering office interior design and fit-out projects across the UK for over 48 years. 

White paper from Assurity Consulting

Assurity will be exhibiting at Stand E4 at the show.

The inquiry into the Grenfell Tower tragedy has already seen significant changes with how in-scope buildings need to manage the risk of fire.

This has continued this month with the introduction of the Fire Safety (Residential Evacuation Plans) (England) Regulations 2025, so we are sharing information on the scope, enforcement and the measures that fall to the duty of the Responsible Person, for these requirements.

So, what does this mean for your business?

1. Introduction

The need for improved planning for the evacuation of vulnerable residents were recommended in the Phase 1 Inquiry Report and these were: 33.22(e) and (f) concerning Personal Emergency Evacuation Plans (PEEPs), which said:

“the owner and manager of every high-rise residential building be required by law to prepare personal emergency evacuation plans (PEEPs) for all residents whose ability to self-evacuate may be compromised (such as persons with reduced mobility or cognition)”; and “that the owner and manager of every high-rise residential building be required by law to include up-to-date information about persons with reduced mobility and their associated PEEPs in the premises information box’”

33.22(c) concerning evacuation plans which were to be actioned through legislation, which said:

“the owner and manager of every high-rise residential building be required by law to draw up and keep under regular review evacuation plans, copies of which are to be provided in electronic and paper form to their local fire and rescue service and placed in an information box on the premises”.

The new regulations, according to GOV.UK, addresses these with the aim to “improve the fire safety of disabled and vulnerable people in high rise and higher risk residential buildings.”

2. What are the requirements?

The Fire Safety (Residential Evacuation Plans) (England) Regulations 2025 were laid on 4th July 2025, will come into force on 6th April 2026, applying in England only.

Their aim is to improve the processes in place to evacuate residents in specified residential buildings in England who would have difficulties evacuating a building by themselves in the event of a fire, whether that be due to a:

• mobility;
• visual;
• hearing;
• or cognitive impairment

The Regulations will also make it mandatory for building evacuation plans to be developed and implemented.

3. Enforcement

The enforcing authorities (e.g. Fire and Rescue Authorities) under the requirements of the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order (2005), already have the power to enforce compliance, and as such, the Responsible Persons’ duty to follow the Residential PEEPs would be an extension to this.

4. Scope

Within England, the Regulations apply to all buildings that contain two or more sets of domestic premises, and which is either:

a. at least 18 metres above ground level or have at least seven storeys; or

b. is more than 11 metres in height above ground level that has a simultaneous/phased evacuation strategy in place (i.e. evacuation is the priority, rather than to stay put)

The Regulations also refer to the need for PEEPs for ‘relevant residents’ only. These are defined as domestic residents who occupy a building in scope, and it is their only or principal residence; and their ability to evacuate the building without assistance in the event of a fire is compromised because of a cognitive or physical impairment or condition.

5. Responsible Person- Measures

The Residential PEEPs process includes a set of measures which fall to the duty of the Responsible Person:

• The Responsible Person (typically the building owner or manager) must use reasonable endeavours to identify relevant residents who need Residential PEEPs
• A Person-Centred Fire Risk Assessment – a conversation between the Responsible Person and the resident, if one is requested by the resident – to understand their particular risks and identify how their fire safety and evacuation can be improved. The Person-Centred Fire Risk Assessment must include an assessment of the risks relating to the relevant resident and the premises considering that resident’s impairment or condition and consider the resident’s ability to evacuate the building without assistance in the event of a fire
• An emergency evacuation statement documenting what the resident should do in the event of a fire (if agreed between the Responsible Person and the resident)
• Information for the Fire and Rescue Services to help inform any operational response and in case they need to undertake evacuation (but only if the resident explicitly agrees to that information being shared) e.g. flat number, floor number, basic info on degree of assistance and whether an emergency evacuation statement is in place, documented in a premises information box or digitally (determined by the Fire and Rescue Services) but in line with GDPR requirements
• To review the Person-Centred Fire Risk Assessment, documented emergency evacuation statement, and the building emergency evacuation plan at least annually
• Personal Emergency Evacuation Plans (PEEPs) are well understood in the workplace, as they are intended to allow for the evacuation of everyone in advance of the Fire and Rescue Service’s attendance in the event of an emergency.

These types of evacuation plans should be specific to the individual and provide a suitable plan for the safe evacuation of this person whilst not relying upon the intervention of the Fire and Rescue Service to make it work. These are typically implemented using a ‘buddy system’ (on-site staff), designated evacuation lifts, evacuation chairs, and refuge points (where available).

For the Residential PEEPs, the Fire and Rescue Service will support with the evacuation, but typical control measures may include the support of family, friends, neighbours or carers, providing relevant fire safety information in varying formats.

Resident consent is needed throughout every stage of developing a Residential PEEP. For instance:

• The decision as to whether to participate in Residential PEEPs lies with the resident and they cannot be compelled to participate.
• The decision as to whether to agree an emergency evacuation statement lies with
• the resident. This also needs to capture the costs associated with mitigating the risks
• The assessment as to whether a measure is ‘reasonable’ and ‘proportionate’ may differ depending on who is to bear the costs. It may not be deemed reasonable and proportionate if all residents are to bear the costs, and the mitigating measure doesn’t benefit the majority of the building’s residents. If the costs were to fall to the resident, and the resident declines to pay, then they may decline to have the measures or equipment provided.
• The decision as to whether the prescribed information can be shared with the local Fire and Rescue Services lies with the resident; sharing requires the resident’s explicit consent

The Government intends through future primary legislation to introduce further requirements on Responsible Persons. This is to consider the fire safety risks within the relevant resident’s domestic premises (as part of the Person-Centred Fire Risk Assessment in Residential PEEPs). This requirement will also mandate a consideration of reasonable and proportionate measures that the Responsible Persons and resident may take within the domestic premises to mitigate these risks.

While relatively new there is already advice and guidance being produced including “Residential Personal Emergency Evacuation Plans (Residential PEEPs)” from GOV.UK, which includes:

• A Residential PEEPs factsheet;

• A Responsible Person toolkit – including examples of Person-Centred Fire Risk

• Assessments and guidance on how to identify and engage with relevant residents;

• A Responsible Person toolkit – additional resources; and

• A Residential PEEPs impact assessment.

A new study by Attensi, the world’s leading provider of game-based solutions for skills and people development, has revealed a widespread but under-acknowledged workforce challenge: skill masking — the act of employees hiding skill gaps to appear more competent. The findings suggest that companies may be overlooking a quiet, internal struggle with confidence among workforces that begins during the onboarding process and continues through the employee lifecycle.

According to the study of 2,000 employees across industries and age groups, a majority (58%) say they’ve engaged in skill masking at some point in their current role. Nearly half (46%) admit to pretending to understand tasks they don’t, and 40% actively avoid asking for help, even when unsure how to proceed. 

“The data shows a clear mismatch between how organisations evaluate onboarding and what employees actually experience,” said Trond Aas, CEO of Attensi. “Too often, success is measured by checklists, not mastery and confidence. And when employees don’t feel safe learning in person, they mask their gaps rather than close them.”

This phenomenon, rooted in what the study terms skill-set anxiety, is especially pronounced among younger workers. Over half of employees aged 18-44 report frequent worries about being underqualified, and 29% say this anxiety strongly reflects their experience on the job. Importantly, these feelings take root early: the most common reported consequence of poor onboarding isn’t churn or performance — but diminished confidence (55%).

Yet the report offers hope. Despite the stigma, most employees (58%) say they would feel comfortable admitting skill gaps to a manager. Even more strikingly, two-thirds (67%) express willingness to use confidential, AI-powered role-play tools to practice and strengthen job-critical skills privately.

Aas adds: “The good news is that technology is catching up to human psychology. AI-powered simulations now allow people to rehearse tough conversations, practice decision-making, and close real skill gaps without fear of embarrassment. For organisations serious about performance, the key is creating environments where people can safely stop pretending and start progressing.”

The full findings offer organisations rich insight into how confidence, safety, and digital tools intersect to shape onboarding and upskilling outcomes.

“Skill masking is what happens when people don’t feel safe learning in front of others. They hide uncertainty, perform surface competence, and miss the chance to truly master their roles.”

“The data shows a clear mismatch between how organisations evaluate onboarding and what employees actually experience. Too often, success is measured by checklists, not confidence. And when employees don’t feel safe to share weaknesses, they mask their gaps rather than close them. This also creates a lot of bad data for employers who are trying to benchmark skills and implement training programs to improve employee confidence and performance.”

“The good news is that technology is catching up to human psychology. AI-powered simulations now allow people to rehearse tough conversations, practice decision-making, and close real skill gaps without fear of embarrassment. For organisations serious about performance, the key is creating environments where people can safely stop pretending and start progressing.”

From CBRE

Take-up of office space across the UK has reached 20.3m sq ft in Q2 2025, marking the highest rolling 12-month level since Q3 2022, which saw take-up of 20.6m sq ft, according to new research from CBRE.

The 12-month rolling take-up across the UK was split between Central London (11.8m sq ft), the South East (2.4m sq ft) and the UK regions (6.5m sq ft), representing an increase of 3% when compared to the same period last year, and 2% above the 10-year average.

In Central London, five deals over 100,000 sq ft completed in the second quarter, the highest number of transactions of this scale in a quarter since Q3 2018. Outside of Central London and the South East, the largest deal of the quarter saw Altrad take 70,400 sq ft at The Apex, Howe Moss Crescent, Aberdeen. Completing the top three regional deals are Aviva Central Services with more than 38,000 sq ft in Southampton and Softcat, who took 35,400 sq ft in Manchester.

Availability across the regional markets decreased by 3% in the second quarter to stand at 20.7m sq ft at the end of Q2, broadly in-line with the five-year average. However, the supply of new stock remained constrained, representing less than a quarter of available space (23%).

A total of 1.6m sq ft of development space completed across the regional markets* in H1 2025, 41% of which was already let by the end of Q2. There is 0.8m sq ft of space under construction that is due to complete by the end of the year.

According to CBRE’s data, there is 3.1m sq ft of space under construction across the regional markets with the earliest possible completion dates up to 2028. Of this space, 17% is already pre-let or under offer.

At a sector level, Tech, Media and Telecoms (TMT) accounted for more than a quarter (27%) of total UK office take-up during H1 2025, a larger proportion of take-up than any H1 over the last ten years.

However, nuances exist at a city level. While TMT dominated in Manchester, accounting for 31% of office take-up over the last 12 months to the end of Q2 2025, the Banking and Finance sector led the way in Edinburgh and Central London at 38% and 30% respectively. In Oxford and the South East, Manufacturing, Industrial & Energy was the prevalent sector at 44% and 34% respectively. 

Simon Brown, Head of UK Office Research says, “Our data shows us that in recent quarters, take-up has started to climb back above the 10-year average, which aligns to our view that occupiers are starting to take larger office footprints again.

The UK office market is starting to show clear signs of normalisation after a period of relatively low demand. Driven by an increase in return-to-work mandates, we expect companies across the country to continue to acquire space to meet the demands of their growing workforces.”

Rob Madden, Head of UK Investor Leasing says, “We know that the quality of the building itself is a top priority for occupiers, but so is location. Choosing the right UK market to access the best talent will be determined by the sector you operate in, but beyond that, accessibility and surrounding amenities are incredibly important. However, the thinning supply of new stock and the physical cost of moving are likely to result in more regears. If the office is well located and can be refurbed to meet the future needs of the occupier, staying put is a compelling option.”

Join Dan Andrews Executive Director at CBRE Global Workplace Solutions (GWS) at Facilities & Estates Management Live where he will share his expertise in managing one of the most distinctive portfolios of CBRE GWS – the towers and skyscrapers housing thousands of occupants at any one time.

Kelly Donoghue: Head of Training and Education, looks at the importance of evidencing fire risk assessor competence.

The FPA Manifesto

In 2024, the FPA launched its 2024 Policy Manifesto to coincide with both a change of leadership within the association and a change of Government for the UK. The manifesto set out six targeted priorities to provide clear direction for the organisation and as a statement of commitment of purpose. One of the priorities focused on ensuring the competency of fire risk assessors. The FPA Manifesto proposed that all fire risk assessors are appropriately qualified and certified under a suitable, UKAS-accredited scheme, as well as being supported with ongoing development to maintain competence. 

Current situation

Establishing minimum standards for fire risk assessments ensures poor practices are identified and rectified efficiently.The BSI is due to publish ‘BS 8674: Built Environment- Framework for Competence of Individual Fire Risk Assessors’ which gives crucial guidance on the competence criteria for individuals conducting  fire risk assessments in occupied buildings. On 1 April 2025, Jenna Marsh, Deputy Director of the National Resilience and Fire Safety Unit penned, “It will be of significant interest to those of you interested in fire risk assessor competence, that we intend to bring into law, mandatory competence requirements for fire risk assessors, to be independently verified by a UKAS-accredited certification body and overseen by a regulator” and “certification bodies will also be required to use standards currently being developed by the British Standards Institution, against which they must assess competence”.

This step will provide accountability, enhancing the overall safety of buildings where the public live and work and improves the public’s confidence in the services provided. Without standards being mandated/formalised, historically some have chosen to ignore them and remain confused by the ambiguous landscape. To support this priority, end users must have an increased awareness and support the mandated requirement of the role. 

How to choose a competent professional in the current landscape

Whilst we await implementation of the British Standard and UKAS-accredited certification, we still operate in an unregulated industry where definitions of ‘competent’ are open to interpretations. 

The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 (RRO) states the responsible person (RP) is responsible for making “a suitable and sufficient assessment of the risks to which relevant persons are exposed for the purpose of identifying the general fire precautions he needs to take”. If employing a fire risk assessor, it requires effort for the RP to reassure themselves that they are receiving accurate and reliable information. Advice in this matter has existed for some time, for example some may lean on documents such as the Fire Sector Confederation’s ‘Guide to choosing a competent fire risk assessor’. 

However, those responsible may still be liable in the event of a fire if they cannot evidence that they have done what is reasonable to use a competent provider in ensuring that their fire risk assessment is suitable and sufficient.

According to the Fire Sector Confederation, there are currently two principal methods whereby a fire risk assessor can demonstrate their competence: professional body registration schemes and certification by a Certification Body that is UKAS accredited for the activity.  It is also important that the company who the fire risk assessor works for has adequate management systems in place, even if the fire risk assessor is self-employed. For a responsible person, understanding of the difference in meaning of schemes and registers can be confusing and therefore is defined within the aforementioned document in the following ways:

• A ‘scheme’ identifies what needs to be assessed and what methods of assessment are used.
• A ‘company scheme’ is operated by a certification body and looks at the competence of personnel and the management systems within the company.
• A ‘person certification scheme’ operated by a certification body and is concerned with the competence of the individual and not the competency of a company. 
• A ‘professional body scheme’ is operated by a professional body and is concerned with the competency of the individual and not the competency of a company. 

Certification bodies assess individuals or companies against the requirements of a scheme. UKAS will accredit certification bodies against agreed standards to confirm they are assessing correctly against the scheme.

By checking registrations and certifications, you will be able to ascertain that the chosen assessor and/or the assessment company meet competency criteria. As discussed, currently there is no legal requirement in the UK for fire risk assessors to be registered. However, we would advocate this is good professional practice as it means that the individuals or the organisation have evidenced competency. This registration allows the responsible person to locate and select a fire risk assessor that the third party has deemed competent. Ongoing accreditation will often require CPD evidence as part of these schemes, alongside other validation activities such as witnessed assessments. 

If you are considering an individual rather than a company, you should be aware that fire risk assessing is a very different skillset to any other fire safety profession such as a health and safety practitioner, installer, engineer, or maintenance professional to name a few. The different roles cannot be transposed or confused with each other. Complete your due diligence in reference to your criteria and record how you selected a professional who met the criteria at the time of employment. Once you have ascertained the scope, ensure this is agreed in writing with the fire risk assessor.

Individuals should provide you with a wealth of information regarding their competency. If this includes qualifications, you should request copies of certificates. You can confirm the qualification specification by using OFQUAL/SQA to check what they have learnt for the qualification. This can be conducted by inputting the qualification number to OFQUAL/SQA search engines. This will allow you to  seek further clarification. 

Fire risk assessors will likely have gained competence over a variety of ‘building types’. You should not only ensure a fire risk assessor is competent but that they are experienced in carrying out fire risk assessments on premises similar to your building or occupancy type. If you are responsible for a school, a church, or a leisure centre, you must ask whether they have previous experience with this type of building. Other questions might be what is the frequency, currency, or the independence of their fire risk assessment experience? Ask for references and contact their previous customers to see if they were satisfied with the service provided. A competent fire risk assessor should have no trouble in sharing this information with you.  Equally, you must ensure they have sufficient professional indemnity insurance and public liability insurance.

British Standard 8674

Soon, it is likely that BS 8674 will recognise three levels of competence which are expected to support individuals across a wide range of occupied buildings and workplaces. The competence levels broadly relate to high, moderate, and low levels of risk where fire risk assessors will meet criteria of competence in advanced, intermediate, or foundation levels. Each level of competence will require meeting the criteria for skills, knowledge, experience, and behaviours as a benchmark against which organisations and responsible persons can assess individual competence.

It is anticipated the new standard will have key principles for behaviours within a model code of conduct. Looking ahead, this aims to greatly assist with fire risk assessors understanding their competence and empowering refusal of tasks that are beyond their competence levels.

JLL’s new Occupancy Planning Benchmark Report reveals shifting workplace strategies across all regions, as hybrid adoption declines

In a dramatic swing that signals evolving corporate real estate priorities, JLL’s 2025 Occupancy Planning Benchmark Report reveals portfolio optimisation has surpassed cost-cutting as the primary focus for corporate real estate leaders and office utilisation has increased as organisations tighten policies on hybrid work. Improving space data accuracy and reporting; increasing employee presence on site; and growing the use of utilisation data for space planning round out the top five priorities.

Rather than simply slashing expenses, companies are now strategically reimagining their workspace footprints with 73 per cent of respondents identifying portfolio optimisation as their top objective, overtaking improved reporting and cost reduction (70 per cent) for the first time. Additionally, sustainability continues as a key priority, with 74 per cent of organisations reporting active sustainability programmes integrating with occupancy planning through waste reduction initiatives, rightsizing scenarios and furniture reuse plans.

“JLL’s report highlights that workplaces are at a pivotal moment of transformation signalled by corporate real estate leaders changing their priorities,” said Paul Morgan, COO of Work Dynamics at JLL. “Data has become the critical factor in enabling organisations to better understand how their spaces are being used so they can best leverage their real estate portfolios and navigate new work styles. Forward-thinking companies are employing data to reimagine their workplaces as strategic assets that drive both organisational performance and employee satisfaction in the evolving hybrid-work era.”

Global office utilisation improves with organisations taking action

The global office utilisation rate grew to 54 per cent globally, up from 50 per cent in 2024, and utilisation targets are up 4 per cent to 79 per cent. Regional improvements include North America (+4 per cent), EMEA (+8 per cent), APAC (+3 per cent) and Latin America (+9 per cent). This highlights the ongoing tension between workplace flexibility and maintaining vibrant office environments, as employers recognise delivering compelling reasons for office attendance is critical.

Badge swipe data remains the predominant utilisation tracking method (90 per cent), while reservation systems (49 per cent) and visual observations (41 per cent) are also widely used. Effectively analysing the data collected through these tracking methods is a key component of a successful space optimisation strategy.

“Despite most organisations tracking utilisation through various technologies, our research reveals a startling capability gap: Only 7 per cent of rate their data collection as excellent,” said Wei Xie, Head of Research and Strategy for Workplace Management at JLL. “A successful real estate strategy starts with an effective data strategy. Organisations with advanced data capabilities gain significant advantages in pattern identification, space allocation and ultimately portfolio optimisation.”

Additionally, companies aren’t just talking about utilisation – they’re acting, with 55 per cent cutting real estate footprints, 42 per cent implementing return-to-office mandates and 38 per cent completely reimagining their workspaces. The data also reveals that structured office mandates are delivering the strongest results with a remarkable 61 per cent effectiveness rate, proving that clear direction can significantly outperform other utilisation strategies.

Hybrid work displays signs of deceleration

The report shows hybrid work adoption declining by 10 per cent year-over-year, and approximately half of employees now work in offices three to five days per week. As 37 per cent of organisations reported increased in-office expectations, 51 per cent of organisations are mandating specific numbers of in-office days, up 5 per cent.

“The pendulum has swung dramatically toward structure in hybrid work arrangements, with nearly half of organisations mandating specific in-office days, nearly double from 2022,” said Melissa Michalik, Global Leader of Occupancy Planning and Management at JLL. “Even more telling is the collapse of fully flexible arrangements, which have plummeted from 40 per cent to 15 per cent in the same timeframe, signalling a definitive shift as companies reclaim control of workplace attendance patterns to drive collaboration and culture.”

To facilitate effective hybrid environments, organisations continue investing in supporting technologies and facility modifications, with reservation systems (58 per cent), collaboration spaces for overflow occupancy (56 per cent) and furniture reconfigurations (50 per cent) being the most common adaptations.”

Space standards evolve for balance between efficiency and experience

Space standards continue to change as companies refine workplace strategies. The average space per person for office and administrative space has decreased from 171 to 165 rentable square feet year-over-year, though still above the target of 132 rentable square feet. Sit-to-stand desks continue becoming standard, with 77 per cent of organisations providing them in new buildouts, up from 67 per cent last year.

Workplace designs also are evolving, and the report shows a year-over-year increase in more substantial workspace changes, including space program modifications (44 per cent from 36 per cent) and major facility renovations (30 per cent from 17 per cent). Organisations are notably expanding both focused work and collaborative spaces, including private phone booths, focus areas and small meeting spaces to meet employee needs for privacy, in addition to concentration, and collaboration areas to support team interactions. Companies also are increasing health and cultural spaces like mother’s rooms, prayer and meditation spaces and wellness areas.

“Organisations are increasingly sophisticated in their approach to space planning, with 78 per cent using occupancy planning services to maintain their space data,” said Matt Quadro, Senior Director, Occupancy Planning and Management at JLL. “The workplace is transforming into an experience-centered environment that prioritises collaboration and employee wellbeing while optimising real estate investments, with the most successful organisations balancing portfolio optimisation with human-centric design to create magnetic workplaces that attract employees through experience-rich environments while delivering strategic value.”

Mitie, the UK’s leading facilities transformation company, has found that employers could help boost the country’s productivity levels by investing in well-designed and high performing workspaces. The financial implications of not doing so could be huge, the research reveals, with poorly designed and maintained workplaces potentially costing the UK economy £71.4 billion in gross domestic product (GDP) every year.

If employers want to get the best out of their workforce, they must put more emphasis on curating and shaping high-performance settings. The findings show that UK employees estimate they lose 68 minutes every week to unproductive tasks, for example finding a room with good Wi-Fi connection for a meeting, poorly maintained building services such as slow lifts, or a lack of spaces for collaboration. This rises to 74 minutes for full time workers. Scaled across the workforce, this amounts to a weekly salary cost of £485.2m to employers.

Britain’s productivity puzzle

The findings come as Britain battles with low productivity rates – specifically output per hour worked. Despite pockets of progress, the UK continues to lag behind its peers. In Q1 2025, productivity was estimated to be 0.2% lower than a year ago. According to the latest data from the OECD, the UK was rated the fourth highest out of the G7 countries on GDP per hour worked behind the US, Germany and France.^[1]

Better workplace experience means better outcomes

The research also reveals how physical workplace factors are central to how people feel about their employer and whether they are happy to stay. In fact, nine in ten (89%) workers who are satisfied with their workplace are also satisfied with their employer. This compares to people who are dissatisfied with their workplace environment of whom, less than a quarter (23%) say they are satisfied with their employer.

The survey also highlights the relationship between physical workplace factors and job satisfaction. Over half of people (51%) say a poorly maintained workplace is a top cause of their job dissatisfaction. Almost nine out of ten (88%) survey respondents said a safe working environment, contributes to their satisfaction while access to the right technology and tools, and a comfortable and well-designed office also contribute to job satisfaction for 83% and 75% of the respondents respectively. 

Contrary to popular belief, the research also finds that employees are less likely to be lured in to the office by opportunities to socialise (55%) with less than a third (29%) of respondents saying recreational amenities like gyms and social breakout areas contribute to their overall satisfaction. 

Mark Caskey, Managing Director, Projects, Mitie, said:

“Employers have a real opportunity to improve workspaces so they increase employee engagement, actively fuel productivity and drive innovation in a way that benefits the multi-generational workforce.

“Currently, across the UK, there are a number of friction points within office environments that adversely impact employee satisfaction which directly impacts productivity. But all is not lost, some are within the employer’s control, for example, ensuring that the right spaces for the right tasks are readily available, from collaborative through to quiet spaces, and that any tech is in full working order. 

“When workplaces are designed with people in mind and managed effectively, they become powerful enablers of collaboration and transformation, high in both productivity and satisfaction. People want to spend more time in them. People thrive, and communities benefit leading to a workforce that ultimately helps the economy gain critical momentum.”

Conflicting requirements of clinical and corporate spaces pose major challenge for FM and NHS space planners…

Technology fragmentation is costing NHS Trusts both money and efficiency, while the unique difference between clinical and corporate workforce requirements is hampering NHS efforts to make its existing workspace work harder. That’s according to the findings of a new virtual NHS seminar hosted by workplace solutions provider HubStar.

With the NHS estate already one of the largest publicly owned property portfolios in Europe, the virtual seminar examined the mounting challenge of how to make existing NHS spaces work smarter without the budget for major investments.

The insightful online discussion included three senior leaders from NHS property and estates departments: Leigh Whitbred from NHS South West London ICB, Philip Boorman from Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, and David Mander from Royal Berkshire NHS Foundation Trust.

The event was chaired by Joe Harris, Director of Business Development at HubStar, a leader in advanced workplace technology designed to enhance the day-to-day operational needs of hospitals and healthcare facilities.

The virtual seminar found that technology fragmentation is prevalent across the NHS, with key tools such as space booking, access control, motion sensors, and Wi-Fi analytics rarely fully integrated—even in the same building.

As Philip Boorman from Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust told the online attendees: “We’re very good at reinventing the wheel in the NHS. We’ll have one system for booking, another for workplace management, another for sensors, but none of these systems talk to each other.”

The attendees heard that this technology fragmentation is leading to higher costs because NHS Trusts are unable to save money on bundled technology solutions or platforms. Additionally, siloed data means there is no unified view of space utilization. Incompatible booking systems are also preventing Trusts from sharing underutilized spaces with neighbouring NHS services, resulting in inefficient space management.

The seminar heard that the NHS can no longer afford to treat space as an unlimited resource. With Trusts like Royal Berkshire operating on ‘island sites’ with no room to expand, and others facing 15-year delays on new hospitals, it is now critical for the NHS to get more from its existing spaces. 

The virtual seminar also heard that NHS Trusts face a significant space planning challenge because of the unique difference between clinical and corporate space requirements.

“The NHS hasn’t got a lot of money to spend on lots of tech or collaboration spaces, or on lots of interesting ways to help people work flexibly and remotely,” Sussex Partnership’s Philip Boorman said. “So we’re trying to make our buildings work harder, for less money, while also giving people better spaces in the office. But in the clinical environment, it’s a whole different ball game.”

The unpredictability of each clinical day makes traditional space planning models inadequate. Clinical teams need immediate access to specialized equipment, confidential spaces for patient discussions, and flexible space scheduling around patient care. This requires space utilization targets and measurement approaches that are substantially different from corporate areas.

David Mander of the Royal Berkshire NHS Foundation Trust told the virtual seminar: “At present, if we need extra space we have to buy more space externally because there is no more space available on site. But we know that if we could use a space on site better, and more efficiently, it would save us money.”

The virtual seminar heard how it was becoming increasingly vital to design both corporate and clinical spaces for activity-based working. This would involve creating spaces for different types of work, such as confidential meeting pods for sensitive discussions, collaboration areas for team meetings, and drop-in spaces for flexibility.

Royal Berkshire’s David Mander said: “I think the answer lies in accepting that we have to design our space in a way that makes it more flexible for future use. We need to be able to work the space differently and more flexibly in the future, while still making sure consulting space or clinical space is available and accessible. But it’s a real challenge.”

Transport for London (TfL) has expanded its wildflower verges by the size of around 18 football pitches – 130,000m² – a 50 per cent increase in the last financial year. This takes the total amount of rewilded space to 390,000m² – the equivalent of around 52 football pitches. TfL is now well over halfway to reaching the goal set back in 2024 of doubling the total area to 520,000m² of wildflower verges along its road network by 2026.

The newest sites range in size and include a verge along the A1 in Barnet (1,700m²), a central reserve on the A30 near Heathrow (2,900m²) and a large verge that backs onto woodland along the A312 in Hounslow (2,600m²). There are also some publicly accessible sites, so people can enjoy the green spaces, such as at Redbridge Roundabout via the pedestrian underpass and by a shared foot and cycle path alongside the A40 in Hillingdon.  

Each site is selected based on a range of factors, including the suitability of converting the existing vegetation to wildflower meadows, easy access for cut and collect mowers, as well as proximity to residential houses and maintaining road safety.

TfL manages each site to promote biodiversity, reducing the number of times it mows down from around five to eight times a year down to, typically, twice a year. This allows the grasses and wildflowers more chance to grow. The extra flowers and taller grasses create a supply of nectar and other food, plus shelter for wildlife, including bees, butterflies, birds and small mammals. Wildflower verges bring additional benefits beyond London’s biodiversity, including the transfer of carbon dioxide from the air into the soil and reduced carbon emissions from mowing.

There have been promising results from TfL’s changed management of roadside verges – particularly at the more mature sites where the new mowing regime has been implemented for at least two years. As well as butterflies, other insects such as hoverflies, craneflies, grasshoppers, dragonflies, damselflies, beetles, and bees have been observed across the capital.

To celebrate London Climate Action Week, Greater London Authority (GLA) employees and volunteers have been giving away 12,000 packets of wildflower seeds today (Monday 23 June) near the entrances of several stations spanning the London transport network. The aim is to encourage more people to develop their own green thumbs, planting and nurturing the seeds themselves at home.

Deputy Mayor for the Environment, Mete Coban, said: “I’m delighted that TfL has expanded London’s wildflower verges by an impressive 50 per cent since last year, boosting biodiversity and bringing much-needed green space across the capital for wildlife to thrive.

“This is a huge milestone and I’m proud to be working with our partners to engage Londoners in our efforts to rewild local areas, including giving away 12,000 packets of wildflower seeds to Londoners today for London Climate Action Week as we work to build a better, greener city for everyone.”

David Mooney, CEO of London Wildlife Trust, said: “It’s inspiring to see Transport for London making such strong progress in rewilding our capital’s road network. These wildflower verges are vital nature corridors for pollinating insects, birds, and mammals and they play an important role in nature recovery. At London Wildlife Trust, we applaud TfL’s commitment to creating a greener, wilder London — one verge at a time.”

William Walsh, a partner in the employment team at law firm DMH Stallard, explains.

“All employers have an obligation to ensure the health and safety of their employees in the workplace so far as reasonably practicable.

“Failure to do so can not only result in sanctions against the organisation, but also criminal liabilities for directors and managers.

“When it comes to working in hot conditions, there is no maximum working temperature specified in the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974. This would be impractical, as some work environments will always involve exposure to high heat, for example those working in glass works. From a risk perspective, there will also be a difference between those undertaking very physical tasks in the heat, compared to those with more sedentary roles.

“While there is no specified maximum temperature, this does not mean that heat can be ignored.

“The legal responsibilities in respect of health and safety in the workplace still apply and this means carrying out a risk assessment and ensuring that employees work in temperatures that are reasonable and do not place their health and safety at risk.

“The nature of the work will be relevant, as will factors such as whether employees need to wear protective clothing as part of their job that may make it harder still for employees to keep cool.

“For office workers, employers should also consider dress codes, particularly if the normal requirement is that employees wear long trousers, shirts and ties. Employers need to be aware of the health risks and the warning signs of an employee suffering from heat exhaustion or other physical effects caused by the heat.

“Employers need to remember that, if employees are working from home, the health and safety obligations still apply to that working environment.

“The risks should be much lower, as home workers are unlikely to be undertaking physical tasks and, even if they were told to stop working, those individuals would still be in their same home environment. But the issue should not be discounted altogether.

“If, for example, it was known that an employee was working from their home office set up in a small box room up in a loft conversion, where it could get uncomfortably hot, they should be encouraged to move and, if necessary, given flexibility around their tasks to allow them to do so.”