Purpose

This paper aims to draw on the field of real estate management to explore the cost of flex-offices as well as the corporate discourse toward it and to identify the possible gap between real estate directors' discourse and the real cost of flex-offices.

Design/methodology/approach

This paper follows the grounded theory approach. Three studies were conducted: 16 semi-structured interviews with real estate actors, categorization of internal corporate documents and a thorough content analysis of the press discourse.

Findings

There is a positive vision as well as a very optimistic outlook on the flex-office on the part of real estate actors and the press. This research shows that reality does not reflect the discourse as 12 hidden costs identified are not currently factored into costs when setting up a flex-office, which can distort the discourse and efficiency. It will be interesting to measure those hidden costs in future research so as to have an objective discourse and a better cost estimate when deploying this kind of workspace.

Originality/value

Contradict the widespread discourse about flex-offices by highlighting the hidden costs that should be taken into consideration to allow managers to make accurate estimates. Although these hidden costs may seem ancillary at first sight, they might have an impact on efficiency.

中文翻译：

---

弹性办公室的实际成本：话语和现实

目的

本文旨在借鉴房地产管理领域，探讨弹性办公室的成本以及企业对其的论述，并确定房地产董事的论述与弹性办公室的实际成本之间可能存在的差距。

设计/方法/方法

本文遵循扎根理论方法。进行了三项研究：对房地产参与者的 16 次半结构化访谈、公司内部文件的分类以及对新闻话语的彻底内容分析。

发现

房地产参与者和媒体对灵活办公有着积极的愿景和非常乐观的前景。这项研究表明，现实并未反映这种说法，因为在设立弹性办公室时，目前确定的 12 项隐藏成本并未计入成本，这可能会扭曲讨论和效率。在未来的研究中衡量这些隐藏成本会很有趣，以便在部署这种工作空间时有一个客观的讨论和更好的成本估算。

原创性/价值

通过强调应该考虑的隐性成本，以允许管理人员做出准确的估计，从而与关于弹性办公室的广泛讨论相矛盾。尽管这些隐性成本乍一看似乎是辅助性的，但它们可能会对效率产生影响。