October 13, 2020

Economics + Attraction/Retention

Losing a good employee can cost a business between $50,000 to $150,000 USD. On average, there is a 10-20% turnover per year in an average organization. If turnover could be reduced by even 5%, the cost of green building features could be easily justified from the savings of employee retention alone (Yudelson 2010).

Keywords

Economics, Attraction/Retention, High Performance Building, Productivity, Green Labeling

Productivity and Wellness

• A study found that improving the health and wellbeing of the occupants was one of the top reasons to build green and the benefits on health can be used as a way to recruit and retain employees (Dodge Data & Analytics 2018).
• By improving the indoor air quality, acoustics, and other green building environmental qualities in an office building in London, United Kingdom, the rate of employee turnover was reduced by 27% along with a 58% reduction in absenteeism. Together, these two elements saved the company approximately 200,000 GBP a year (WGBC 2018).
• A post occupancy survey at the Plantronics Office in the Netherlands found that the new office had a 6.6 point improvement on employee’s perception in comparison to the previous space attributed to the features supporting health and productivity (WGBC 2018).

Green Labeling

• Buildings labeled as green or as high performance buildings have been linked to an increase in attraction and retention for both the employees of a company as well as the tenants of a building (O’Mara 2012).
• Social responsibility has become of great importance to people choosing companies to work for, especially among young professionals. A survey found that 92% of respondents reported if a company is environmentally friendly, they are more likely to work there (Deloitte, 2008).
• In a survey conducted by Deloitte, they found that by implementing a green retrofit, 93% reported an increase in the ability to attract talent and 81% reported an increase in the ability to retain talent (Deloitte 2008).

Key References

Review Articles

• Attema, Jeremy, Fowell, S.J., Macko, M.J., & Neilson, W.C. “The Financial Case for High Performance Buildings.” San Francisco: Stok LLC. (2018).
• Edwards, Brian. “Benefits of green offices in the UK: analysis from examples built in the 1990s.” Sustainable Development 14, no. 3 (2006): 190-204.
• Heerwagen, Judith. “Green buildings, organizational success and occupant productivity.” Building Research & Information 28, no. 5-6 (2000): 353-367.
• O’Mara, Melissa, and S. Bates. “Why invest in high-performance green buildings.” Education & Smart Campus Solutions. White paper (2012).
• Rupp, Ricardo Forgiarini, Natalia Giraldo Vásquez, and Roberto Lamberts. “A review of human thermal comfort in the built environment.” Energy and Buildings 105 (2015): 178-205.
• WGBC (World Green Building Council). The Business Case for Health and Wellbeing in Green Building. 2018.
• Wiley, Jonathan A. “Green design and the market for commercial office space.” The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics 41, no. 2 (2010): 228-243.

Primary Research

• Fuerst, Franz, and Patrick McAllister. “An investigation of the effect of eco-labeling on office occupancy rates.” Journal of Sustainable Real Estate 1, no. 1 (2009): 49-64.
• MacNaughton, Piers, Usha Satish, and Joseph G. Allen. “The impact of working in a green certified building on cognitive function and health.” Building and Environment 114 (2017): 178-186.

Print Media

• Lockwood, Charles. “The dollars and sense of green retrofits.” Washington DC: Deloitte (2008).
• Yudelson, Jerry. The green building revolution. Island Press, 2010.