From sustainability to adaptation: Goldman Sachs' corporate real estate strategy

Keenan, J M (2016) From sustainability to adaptation: Goldman Sachs' corporate real estate strategy. Building Research & Information, 44(4), pp. 407-422. ISSN 0961-3218

Abstract

This paper is premised on a conceptual framework that attempts to draw theoretical and practical connections between sustainability, resilience and adaptation. The framework is explored through a case study of the corporate real estate (property) strategies of Goldman Sachs (a multinational investment banking and investment management company) developed over the course of the consolidation and development of its corporate headquarters. This case seeks to identify the existence and nature of the relationships by and between sustainable corporate real estate strategies, resilient operations planning and the firm's adaptive capacity. A secondary proposition seeks to evaluate whether the capacity of the firm to adapt and be resilient to changing conditions has been positively advanced by the firm's sustainable corporate real estate strategies. The findings support the proposition that these connections do exist, as well as the proposition that sustainability was promoting adaptive capacity and operational resilience. However, it remains an open question to what extent these practices and capacities are deterministic of one another. This paper sets the stage for future research that seeks to measure and model organizational adaptive capacity and to understand the potential co-benefits that may serve the interests of firms who struggle to rationalize the costs of sustainability.;This paper is premised on a conceptual framework that attempts to draw theoretical and practical connections between sustainability, resilience and adaptation. The framework is explored through a case study of the corporate real estate (property) strategies of Goldman Sachs (a multinational investment banking and investment management company) developed over the course of the consolidation and development of its corporate headquarters. This case seeks to identify the existence and nature of the relationships by and between sustainable corporate real estate strategies, resilient operations planning and the firm's adaptive capacity. A secondary proposition seeks to evaluate whether the capacity of the firm to adapt and be resilient to changing conditions has been positively advanced by the firm's sustainable corporate real estate strategies. The findings support the proposition that these connections do exist, as well as the proposition that sustainability was promoting adaptive capacity and operational resilience. However, it remains an open question to what extent these practices and capacities are deterministic of one another. This paper sets the stage for future research that seeks to measure and model organizational adaptive capacity and to understand the potential co-benefits that may serve the interests of firms who struggle to rationalize the costs of sustainability.;  This paper is premised on a conceptual framework that attempts to draw theoretical and practical connections between sustainability, resilience and adaptation. The framework is explored through a case study of the corporate real estate (property) strategies of Goldman Sachs (a multinational investment banking and investment management company) developed over the course of the consolidation and development of its corporate headquarters. This case seeks to identify the existence and nature of the relationships by and between sustainable corporate real estate strategies, resilient operations planning and the firm's adaptive capacity. A secondary proposition seeks to evaluate whether the capacity of the firm to adapt and be resilient to changing conditions has been positively advanced by the firm's sustainable corporate real estate strategies. The findings support the proposition that these connections do exist, as well as the proposition that sustainability was promoting adaptive capacity and operational resilience. However, it remains an open question to what extent these practices and capacities are deterministic of one another. This paper sets the stage for future research that seeks to measure and model organizational adaptive capacity and to understand the potential co-ben fits that may serve the interests of firms who struggle to rationalize the costs of sustainability.;

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: adaptive capacity; business strategy; corporate real estate; corporate governance; resilience; property development; sustainability; organisational capacity; capacity; energy; business relationships; performance; environment; climate-change; construction & building technology; comfort management; systems; firm; investment banking; commercial real estate
Index terms: property development, conceptual framework, corporate governance, organizational capacity, corporate real estate, comfort, adaptive capacity, strategy, investment banking, corporate headquarters, business strategy, adaptation, commercial real estate, case study, business relationship, building technology
Subjects: occupational health and safety management, sociology, theoretical framing, management, economic development, urban design, real estate economics, economic analysis, strategic management, construction type, data collection methods, user focus, business, engineering systems
Topics: Health and Safety, Business Strategy, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Governance, Sustainability, Construction Technology, Urban Studies, Design Practice, Organizational Design
Descriptive scope: 4 PCEA

N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here