9:00 – 10:30 a.m.

CoreNet Global's Opening General Session at the Atlanta Summit was jam-packed as attendees listened to CEO Angela Cain and Chairman Matt Fanoe share how the organization is competing on a global level in a fully connected world. Here are some of the initiatives CoreNet Global is working on or has already accomplished:

- The Summit Connect desktop broadcasts allow absentee attendees to view live streams of important sessions they were unable to attend in person.
- Our organization's Knowledge Center Online has been updated to an easier-to-use platform, where the information you need is at your fingertips.
- CoreNet Global has formed a new partnership with Realcomm, the only organization that addresses technology, automation and innovation for corporate real estate.
- Our organization has also partnered with the International Economic Development Council to offer recertification credits for CEcDs who are attending the Atlanta Summit.
- CoreNet Global's Corporate Real Estate 2020 global transformative research initiative is being shared throughout the Summit at various breakout sessions and meetings.
- Our organization's Moving in the Right Direction workplace transformation – completed through the help of more than 50 members and 30 member companies – has been viewed throughout the Summit via special tours offered to attendees.

CoreNet Global CEO, Angela Cain, and Board Chair, Matt Fanoe

The second portion of the Opening Session was led by Andrew Zolli, a Global Trends Consultant and National Geographic Visiting Fellow, as he discussed "Learning to Thrive in a Period of Radical Change."

"We are getting used to the fact that the world is more volatile – it's harder to predict," he said. "In our society, faster-moving trends get the most attention, while the slower-moving trends have the most impact."

Zolli listed several characteristics of companies who are best at maintaining resilience, including:

- make the TOP accountable for innovation
- constantly place a lot of small bets
- invest in employees close to the customer
- leverage innovations outside the organization
- copy existing best practices – but sparingly
- actively cultivate internal and external networks
- embrace a cognitive portfolio approach
- systematically scan for weak signals
- create highly differentiated partnerships

Zolli closed out the session citing demographic transformation, thinking in network terms, paying attention to diversity and risk and the power of place as ideas to pay close attention when trying to foster resilience in today's unpredictable work. "We are at the forefront of rethinking what we need," he said. "We need to be in places where we can work extraordinarily."

11:00 a.m. – 12:30 p.m.

Francisco J Acoba, MCR, SLCR, , Deloitte Consulting

David Dunn, Leader, Nortel Real Estate, Nortel
Paul McKenzie, Senior VP, HOK
William Mitchell, Senior VP, HOK

The Effective Response to divesting a global company session focused on how multinational telecom giant Nortel's real estate was divested after filing for bankruptcy in 2009. In 2008 Nortel had over 230 buildings in 55 countries, an annual CRE budget of around $285 million. By 2011, they had 8 sites, and a total CRE cost of $37 million. At the time Nortel filed for bankruptcy, the CRE team's focus was on the future and on reinventing the portfolio, but that focus changed overnight to shedding the portfolio.

What helped them through this turnaround were the tools and strengths that they had built over the years. For example, Nortel had used IWMS in the past, maintaining the data, and making sure it was up-to-date. It also had a strong team-based approach and had built strong and longstanding relationships with HOK and Regus. These aspects were very useful as the divestiture went into full gear. After bankruptcy was filed, many people left the team, but by being honest with the team that remained they were able to get the CRE portfolio either sold or leased. Using IWMS technology helped when it came to bargaining with those who were buying the portfolio. The CRE team was able to push for the concessions that they wanted like making sure that more unattractive parts of the portfolio were bought along with those parts that were in higher demand.

As the team worked through the portfolio, there was opportunity for them to deal with lawyers and others working on the merger and acquisition process. Holding their ground, backed with the data that they could produce using IWMS, the team was able to get a higher price for properties that would have otherwise been sold for much less. One of the challenges faced was executives' lack of understanding of what the CRE team could do. For example, the Merger and Acquisition teams wanted to sell but did not know how the CRE process worked. Since the two teams had to work together, the CRE team took on the task of educating the various stakeholders as to how the CRE portfolio could be leveraged to maximize returns.

The team also had to push back and make sure that the right deals were made when there was a rush to sell as soon as possible. One example of how the CRE team succeeded: through the due diligence and persistence of the team, a property which would have been sold for $50 million was sold for more than $200 million.

The main lessons that the team learned from this divesting procedure were that the CRE team needs to be in control of dealing with the portfolio. In order to make sure that the portfolio is valued correctly, there needs to be an investigation to evaluate the market and the property needs to be viewed from the perspective of a buyer and a potential tenant. Additionally, the CRE team needs to persist in order to get the deals it wants.

11:00 a.m. – 12:30 p.m.

Brady Mick, Architect/ Workplace Strategist, BHDP Architecture

Chris Hood, Managing Director of Workplace Innovation, Workplace Strategies, CBRE
Brian Collins, Director, Global Workplace Strategies, Microsoft
Mark Gilbreath, CEO/Founder, LiquidSpace
Joe Aki Ouye. Ph.D., Co-Founder, New Ways of Working

ITo a standing-room-only crowd, a panel of workplace experts staged a lively debate, arguing for and against the concepts of mobility and co-location. Brian Collins, Microsoft, argued for co-location and presence, positing that people crave personal interaction and connectivity. Person-to-person communication is oftentimes clearer and less prone to misunderstanding. Face-to-face meetings also provide network possibilities through the physical environment. Further, in emerging markets, there is no case to work from home. We are seeing extreme population growth in these markets, and there is simply no room to work from home because of space restrictions in the home and other challenges. Meanwhile, Microsoft is improving productivity and group synergy in the workplace through physical space in four ways: presentation rooms, spaces for networking (such as cafes), tactical spaces for individuals and teams (as in desks and focus rooms), and strategic spaces where the "who" and "how" of work are taken into account in developing specialized spaces.

Dr. Joe Ouye of New Ways of Working LLC, a research consortium that looks at new technology, new ways and new space, asked the question, "Do we need space?" And he came to the conclusion: We need place. He argued that place engenders trust, as face-to-face communication is the highest fidelity communication we have. Face-to-face reinforces our need for places: to work socially, engender trust, communicate effectively, and create happy accidents such as impromptu meetings in the hallway. Taking the opposite view and arguing for mobility was Chris Hood of CBRE. Taking the podium wearing a Virginia Tech pajama set – a playfully provocative choice, considering Atlanta is home to the school's football archrival, Georgia Tech, and the teams meet this same week – Hood pointed out that, of course, pajamas are inappropriate for the New York CBRE offices. But some of us do our best work in pajamas. He then made the case against buildings: the commute is a hangover from the industrial revolution and buildings are a huge emitter of CO2. As a proponent of mobile work, he stated, "Sometimes being together is overrated. Just look at Congress. Meanwhile, the President chooses to work from home."

Mark Gilbreath, LiquidSpace, also took the case for mobility. He said we are in a tale of two cities: It's either an extremely hard time to be in CRE or it's an insanely great time to be in CRE. People are leaving work to get work done. Work has changed – 9-5 does not exist anymore. Gen Y and technology are changing the way work gets done. As CRE executives and service providers, we trust that people will make the smart decisions to be productive. LiquidSpace is an answer to that, as an extension of workplace strategy for some companies (10,000 people have used it over the last four months). He gave a demo of the LiquidSpace app to find workspace on the fly, quite easily and effectively, leaving the audience thinking, "Is this where workplace is headed in the future?"

Audience members then asked questions and made conclusions to the debate. Who won the argument between mobility and co-location? Ultimately, we have (or are moving toward) a blend of fixed corporate offices and extended assets such as the cloud. Some other key takeaways: Space matters. Space matters on an on-demand basis. Finally, organizational choice versus individual choice as a concept: if there are no options, no choices—organizations must provide a range of choices to be effective.

2:30 – 4:00 p.m.

Jane Mather, Ph.D., CoChair, SPP Community, President, Critical Core

Richard Podos, President, Lance, LL
Russ Howell , Managing Director, Jones Lang LaSalle
Christelle Bron, Managing Director, Studley, Inc.
Charemon Tovar, MCR, Director, CB Richard Ellis / Sprint
Pierre Ratte, Director, Hartford Holdings, LLC
Paul Garity, Partner, Capstan Advisors
Trex Morris, MCR, Global Real Estate Leader, Ernst & Young LLP
Rachel Blankenship, Vice President, Sage Software

Are we there yet? Not quite, but we are making progress, according to CoreNet Global's Strategy and Portfolio Planning (SPP) community and its Monday afternoon discussion at the Atlanta Global Summit.

Corporate real estate executive recognize the importance of strategic planning but generally have different definitions of "strategic planning." Essentially, the SPP community formed to create a common language and share best practices.

After reviewing the SPP community's progress to date, the breakout session panel revealed results of a sampling of U.S. end users. A little more than 60 percent have written strategic plans that include more than performance goals and guiding principles, and the largest share of respondents (approximately 25 percent) have plans for three to five years, with the second largest (nearly 20 percent) having one- to three-year plans. Less than 50 percent of respondents indicated their CRE strategic plan requires formal approval by business line management or senior staff external to CRE – most noted that it was for internal guidance and planning only. Business alignment is the primary driver for 60 percent of respondents. Cost reduction is the primary goal for 32 percent of respondents, but only 42 percent have explicit cost-saving targets. Approximately 15 percent have cost-savings targets of 5 to 10 percent or 10 to 15 percent, while approximately 10 percent had cost-savings targets exceeding 15 percent.

In terms of metrics, 72 percent of respondents consider real estate cost per person a primary driver, but less than half compare real estate costs to enterprise revenue or costs. Also, 43 percent include sustainability metrics in their strategic plans. After discussing the survey findings, the panel delved into a couple of case studies from Ernst & Young and Sage Software. For more than a decade, CRE strategic planning has been a focus for Ernst & Young, which has 22 million square feet of primarily Class-A office space – all of it leased – across its global portfolio. The first big piece of the puzzle involves making sure you have all the portfolio data available, said Trex Morris, MCR, E&Y's Global Real Estate Leader. One of the firm's most useful benchmarks is profitability per square foot/meter, which tends to pique the interest of business unit leaders and kick start interaction and collaboration with them.

Session Panelists

"When you have that kind of data, that gets people's attention immediately," Morris said. E&Y goes through strategic planning every five years, but the company's CRE team perpetually works with business unit heads and to make them fully aware of occupancy costs as a percentage of revenue – if it's over 4 percent, something needs to be done to bring costs down, Morris said. That kind of information also gives the BUHs flexibility in terms of CRE. Rachel Blankenship, Vice President of CRE at Sage Software, discussed her team's role in working through M&A and bringing Sage's CRE function to maturity.

Sage initially had four divisional real estate leaders across North America, and CRE basically was managed by lease expiration. Sage began CRE strategic planning around 2006 and created a North American CRE team that was visible and available to the enterprise, aligning CRE with business strategy and the company's organic growth. As a result, Sage reduced its total portfolio from 2 million square feet to 1 million square feet in five years.

"It wasn't all closure but optimization," Blankenship said. "We've been very active in consolidating footprints. We're in a much better place because we have a voice with the C-suite."

Sage also measures percentage of revenue per square foot/meter and occupancy costs per person to improve utilization. The company also reviews its strategic plan with senior management once a year during capital budget planning and reviews the plan with division presidents twice a year, Blankenship said.