The data is talking. It’s just saying things we probably didn’t want to hear out loud.
At last month’s Flexible Space Association conference, I went to a session by Valve that basically did something quite dangerous: it brought receipts.
Not vibes. Not opinions. Actual data. Cold, hard, slightly unromantic data about what people are doing in flexible workspace right now.
And it turns out the industry is behaving exactly like a group of people who say one thing in meetings and then quietly do something else entirely when it comes to actually signing a lease.
Valve (who, for context, sit on an absolutely wild amount of workspace data: 20,000+ buildings, billions in enquiry value, millions of datapoints, etc.) shared a snapshot of where things are heading across serviced and managed space.
And there were a few uncomfortable truths in there.
Managed space is having a moment. Serviced space is still paying the bills.
Managed space is growing. Properly growing. In London especially, managed listings are increasing at pace, and in some areas there are now more managed buildings than serviced ones.
So far, so “future of work is changing” LinkedIn post.
But here’s the bit people tend to skip past: serviced offices are still doing most of the actual deals.
Around 72% of inferred transactions in the data were serviced spaces. Managed is growing its share of proposals, yes, but serviced is still where the majority of decisions are being made.
So the reality is less “one is replacing the other” and more “both are absolutely thriving, just in slightly different moods”.
It’s not a takeover. It’s a split personality.
Everyone is asking for less space (and nobody is surprised)
Pre-COVID, average requirements sat around 40 desks.
Now it’s closer to 20.
Which, depending on your outlook, is either:
- “a structural shift in how businesses operate”
- or “everyone realised half their team was fine working from home”
Either way, the outcome is the same: smaller, more considered requirements, with more scrutiny on what space actually does rather than just what it is.
Offices are no longer being chosen like wedding venues. They’re being chosen like gym memberships: “I’ll go, but only if it’s worth it and I can park nearby.”
Amenities are no longer optional. They’re just silent deal breakers.
One of the clearest signals in the data was around amenities.
Buildings with “premium” features like gyms, wellness spaces, better communal areas, event space, are getting significantly more enquiries.
Sometimes double. Sometimes more in regional markets.
Which is interesting, because nobody ever writes in a brief:
“must have ping pong table and emotional wellbeing zone”
And yet… here we are.
The truth is occupiers are still sensitive to price and location, but experience is quietly creeping up the priority list. The space has to feel like something. Not just function like somewhere.
The slightly awkward bit: supply and demand don’t always like each other
There are parts of the market where supply and demand are beautifully aligned.
And there are parts where they are absolutely not speaking to each other at all.
Serviced space in smaller desk ranges (1–10 desks) is one of those areas where supply is heavy and demand is less enthusiastic.
Managed space, interestingly, looks more balanced. Often because it’s built differently, or because it’s being created in response to demand rather than just being speculatively filled and hoped for.
So what do you actually do with all this?
This is where things got quite refreshing.
Because the conclusion wasn’t “AI will solve everything” or “the future is flexible”.
It was basically:
- Build what people actually want (annoying, but correct)
- Stop pretending all square footage behaves the same
- Pay attention to where demand is actually going, not where you wish it was
- And stop over investing in the wrong kind of space just because it used to work in 2017
Which, again, sounds obvious until you realise how many buildings are still designed around assumptions rather than behaviour.
The bit I keep coming back to
The best line from the session wasn’t even a stat. It was this idea:
The winners in this market will be the ones who can turn data into decisions quickly enough to matter.
Not just having the data. Not just having a dashboard somewhere that someone opens once a quarter.
Actually using it.
