Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

A methodology for assessing the metropolitan locational flexibility of offices Sikstrom, Brian Murray 1978

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1978_A8 S54_3.pdf [ 10.39MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0094355.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0094355-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0094355-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0094355-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0094355-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0094355-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0094355-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0094355-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0094355.ris

Full Text

A METHODOLOGY FOR ASSESSING THE METROPOLITAN LOCATIONAL FLEXIBILITY OF OFFICES by BRIAN MURRAY SIKSTROM B.A., University of Calgary, 1974  A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS  in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (School of Community and Regional Planning)  We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard  THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA October, 1978  (c) Brian Murray Sikstrom, 1978  In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s  thesis  an advanced degree at the L i b r a r y I  the U n i v e r s i t y  s h a l l make i t  freely  f u l f i l m e n t o f the requirements f o r of B r i t i s h  available  for  Columbia,  I agree  that  reference and study.  f u r t h e r agree t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e copying o f t h i s  for  thesis  s c h o l a r l y purposes may be granted by the Head o f my Department or  by h i s of  in p a r t i a l  this  written  representatives.  It  thesis for financial  i s understood that copying or p u b l i c a t i o n gain s h a l l  not be allowed without my  permission.  Department of  School of Community and Regional Planning  The U n i v e r s i t y  of B r i t i s h  2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5  Date  October 11, 1978  Columbia  ii  ABSTRACT A METHODOLOGY FOR ASSESSING THE METROPOLITAN LOCATIONAL FLEXIBILITY OF OFFICES  The i n i t i a l premise of the thesis i s that the question of metrop o l i t a n l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y of o f f i c e s —  or the c a p a b i l i t y of o f f i c e s  to decentralize a c t i v i t i e s outside downtown but within the same metrop o l i t a n area —  needs to be investigated and objectively assessed.  It i s  apparent from the review of the l i t e r a t u r e no approach or method so f a r employed to assess o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y i s suitable for use by the researcher  and probably for Canadian urban planners and o f f i c e location  decision-makers.  The thesis concentrates,  therefore, on development and  testing on federal government o f f i c e s i n Vancouver of a new method f o r assessment of metropolitan  office locational f l e x i b i l i t y .  From the l i t e r a -  ture review ten i n t e r - r e l a t e d factors and their possible influences on o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y are i d e n t i f i e d and form a framework or " C r i t e r i a Check L i s t " for examination and evaluation of o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l flexibility. In the C r i t e r i a Check L i s t methodology analysis of a l l ten factors and t h e i r l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y influences on federal government o f f i c e s i s undertaken i n three stages.  The f i r s t stage, a quantitative and q u a l i -  tative analysis of s i x " i n t e r n a l " factors (nature of activity/work;  frequency,  character and pattern of contacts; prestige; o f f i c e establishment size and organizational structure; rate of growth and organizational change; t r a d i tion) i s based on existing information collected f o r each of 15 sample fede r a l departments.  "Working Departmental Composite Sheets", "Indicators",  and a point and weighting system are the major tools developed by the  iii  researcher to obtain a comparative evaluation of sample federal departments. Federal departments are c l a s s i f i e d as "most l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e " , "locat i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e " , " l o c a t i o n a l l y i n f l e x i b l e " and "most l o c a t i o n a l l y ble".  inflexi-  In the second stage, information gleaned largely from l i b r a r y research  on the four "external" factors ("general" and " s p e c i a l " physical a c c e s s i b i l i t y downtown; metropolitan telecommunications and transportation systems; metropolitan Vancouver o f f i c e market; planning and p o l i t i c s ) i s examined q u a l i t a t i v e l y and a synopsis of the "climate" for federal o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y i n Vancouver presented.  The t h i r d stage of the analysis i s a  synthesis of the findings from the two previous stages. The thesis presents conclusions about the methodology and conclusions derived from s p e c i f i c findings on federal o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y resulting from the testing of the methodology.  The chief conclusion , with  respect to the l a t t e r , i s that federal o f f i c e s have considerable metropolitan o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y but that prestige; t r a d i t i o n ; "general" and " s p e c i a l " a c c e s s i b i l i t y ; and the metropolitan o f f i c e market are prominent factors to be overcome i f federal o f f i c e s are to be relocated i n Regional Town Centres.  Of the f i f t e e n federal departments examined o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l  f l e x i b i l i t y i s found to be greatest for Supply and Services; Transport; Public Works; Energy, Mines and Resources; Unemployment Insurance; Manpower and Immigration; and F i s h e r i e s and Environment departments.  The major  methodological conclusion i s that the C r i t e r i a Check L i s t provides a much needed framework for clear thinking on, and examination  of, the broad range  of i n t e r - r e l a t e d factors which affect o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y . in the process of o f f i c e location decision-making  and/or planning could pro-  vide a r a t i o n a l basis with which perceived l o c a t i o n a l needs and of o f f i c e s could be called into question.  Its use  preferences  iv  TABLE OF CONTENTS Pag CHAPTER 1; I. II. III. IV. V.  THE PROBLEM, SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS, AND STUDY OUTLINE  THE PROCESS OF PROBLEM DEFINITION  1  STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM  3  SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS  3  THE STUDY OUTLINE  4  THE PROBLEM BACKGROUND  4  A. B. C. VI.  CHAPTER 2:  II.  Growth of the O f f i c e Growth of the Federal Government O f f i c e The Federal Government O f f i c e Locational F l e x i b i l i t y Problem i n Vancouver  4  6 7  DEFINITIONS A. B. C. D.  I.  1  Federal O f f i c e Locational F l e x i b i l i t y Federal Government Offices Federal Departments' O f f i c e Establishments Downtown  9 9 9 10 10  A REVIEW OF FACTORS INFLUENCING THE LOCATION AND LOCATIONAL FLEXIBILITY OF OFFICES AND METHODOLOGIES FOR ASSESSING OFFICE LOCATIONAL FLEXIBILITY  H  INTRODUCTION  11  BACKGROUND  12  Part 1 III.  REASONS FOR DOWNTOWN OFFICE LOCATIONS AND RELOCATIONS A. B. C. D.  Introduction O f f i c e Location Theory Empirical O f f i c e Location and Relocation Findings Urban O f f i c e Markets  i  6  16 17 21 24  V  Pag Part 2 IV.  THE NEED FOR DOWNTOWN OFFICE LOCATIONS: GENERAL FINDINGS AND APPROACHES TO EVALUATION OF'OFFICE LOCATIONAL FLEXIBILITY A. B. C. D.  Introduction O f f i c e Dispersal to Non-Downtown Locations Perceived Need for Downtown O f f i c e Locations Downtown O f f i c e Linkages  28 28 32 34  1.  35  Direct Linkage Analysis i ) Communications Questionnaire Survey i i ) Communications Desk Diary Survey  2.  V.  Critique of Communications Questionnaire and Desk Diary Surveys i n Evaluation of O f f i c e Locational F l e x i b i l i t y  SUMMARY AND GENERAL CONCLUSIONS A.  36 41 50  52  Factors Influencing the Location and Locational F l e x i b i l i t y of Offices  52  1.  "Internal" Factors  53  i ) The Nature of O f f i c e Activity/Work i i ) The Frequency, Character and Pattern of Contacts i i i ) Organizational and Occupational Prestige iv) O f f i c e Establishment Size and Organizat i o n a l Structure v) Rate of Growth and Organizational Change v i ) Organizational Inertia or T r a d i t i o n  53 53  56 56  "External" Factors  57  i ) "General" and "Special" Physical Accessib i l i t y Downtown i i ) The State of Telecommunications and Transportation Systems i i i ) The State of the Metropolitan O f f i c e Market iv) Metropolitan Planning and P o l i t i c s  57  2.  B. C.  28  General O f f i c e Locational F l e x i b i l i t y Findings Appraisal of Current Approaches to the Assessment of Office Locational F l e x i b i l i t y : The Need for an Alternative Methodology  55 55  57 58 59 59 60  vi  Page CHAPTER 3: A METHOD FOR ASSESSING THE METROPOLITAN LOCATIONAL FLEXIBILITY OF OFFICES AND ITS APPLICATION TO FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OFFICES IN VANCOUVER I.  INTRODUCTION  63.  63.  Part 1 II.  A METHOD FOR ASSESSING THE METROPOLITAN LOCATIONAL FLEXIBILITY OF OFFICES A. B. C.  The C r i t e r i a Check L i s t The Nature and Process of the Evaluation Stage One of the Evaluation  66. 68. 70.  1. 2.  Working Departmental Composite Sheets Indicators  70. 71.  i ) The Nature of Activity/Work Performed i n Department Offices Downtown i i ) The Frequency, Character and Pattern of Departmental O f f i c e Contacts Downtown i i i ) The Prestige of Federal Government Departments Downtown iv) Federal Government Departments' O f f i c e Establishment Size and Organizational Structure Downtown v) The Rate of Federal Departments' Growth and Organizational Change i n Vancouver v i ) The T r a d i t i o n of Federal Departments' O f f i c e s Downtown  71.  3. 4. 5. D. E. F. G.  66.  Quantitative Analysis Q u a l i t a t i v e Analysis Point System and Factor Weighting  Stage Two of the Evaluation Stage Three of the Evaluation Information Gathering Information Quality  73. 76. 77. 78. 79.  79. 81. 83. 89. 89. 90. 92.  Part 2 III.  APPLICATION OF THE "CRITERIA CHECK LIST" METHODOLOGY TO FEDERAL DEPARTMENTS IN VANCOUVER: THE FINDINGS A.  Analysis of Federal Government O f f i c e Location i n Metropolitan Vancouver  95. 95.  vii  Page B.  Federal Government Departments' Office Locational F l e x i b i l i t y i n Vancouver  102.  1.  Tables 6 and 7: The General Findings  102.  i ) The Nature of Federal Departmental Office Work/Activity Downtown i i ) The Frequency, Character and Pattern of Federal Departments' Contacts Downtown i i i ) The Prestige of Federal Government Departments Downtown iv) Federal Government Departments' Office Establishment Size and Organizational Structure Downtown v) The Rate of Federal Departments' Growth and Organizational Change i n Vancouver v i ) The Tradition of Federal Government Departments Downtown  106.  2.  Comparative Locational F l e x i b i l i t y of 15 Federal Departments i ) Table 9: Discussion  3.  4.  CHAPTER 4: I. II. III. IV.  109. 111. 113. H5. 117.  118. 121.  The Climate for Federal Departments' O f f i c e Locational F l e x i b i l i t y i n Vancouver  127.  i ) The "General" and "Special" A c c e s s i b i l i t y of Downtown Vancouver i i ) The Metropolitan Telecommunications and Transportation Systems i i i ) Vancouver's Office Market iv) Planning and P o l i t i c s  128.  The Locational F l e x i b i l i t y of Federal Government Offices i n Vancouver: A Synthesis  SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND DIRECTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH  131. 133. 135. 136.  141.  SUMMARY  141.  FEDERAL OFFICE LOCATION AND LOCATIONAL FLEXIBILITY IN VANCOUVER: CONCLUSIONS  144.  METHODOLOGICAL CONCLUSIONS  145.  DIRECTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH  149.  BIBLIOGRAPHY  151.  APPENDIX I  164.  APPENDIX I I  172.  viii Page APPENDIX III  174.  APPENDIX IV  186.  APPENDIX V  • (-to -be—f-ottnd—:in—aecompanyirng-rp-ri-)1* > W ^ > Cc4ii\^sJr g  195 to 203  ix  LIST OF TABLES  Pag TABLE I:  C r i t e r i a Check L i s t  67  TABLE I I : Selections of Combinations of Internal Factors Given Double Weights  87  TABLE I I I : Sample Federal Departments ( i n order of amount of o f f i c e space occupied i n metro Vancouver - 1976)  91  TABLE IV: Federal O f f i c e Space and Employment i n the Context of Metropolitan Vancouver  96  TABLE V: O f f i c e Space and Employment D i s t r i b u t i o n of 15 Sample Federal Departments' 1971-1976  97  TABLE VI: Comparative Assessments of Departmental Locational Flexibility (Based on Quantitative C r i t e r i a )  104  TABLE VII: Revised Comparative Assessments of Departmental Locational F l e x i b i l i t y (Based on Qualitative Reexamination of C r i t e r i a )  105  TABLE VIII: Comparative Locational F l e x i b i l i t y f o r the Six Internal Factors by Department  119  TABLE IX: Overall Evaluation of 15 Sample Federal Departments Locational F l e x i b i l i t y (Based on Examination of 6 Internal Factors)  120  X  LIST OF FIGURES AND  ILLUSTRATIONS Page  Figure 1: Stated personal, frequent CBD types i n Vancouver  contacts among firm  38.  Figure 2:  Daily Face-to-Face Office Contacts i n Central Dublin  39.  Figure 3:  Weekly Face-to-Face Office Contacts i n Central Dublin  39.  Figure 4.:  An Example of a Meeting Record Sheet.  42.  Figure 5:  An Example of a Telephone Contact Record Sheet.  43.  Figure 6: Sources of Information i n the Development Space (after Thorngren, 1970)  45.  Figure 7: Contact Patterns i n the Development Space (after Thorngren, 1970)  46.  Figure 8: A C l a s s i f i c a t i o n of Face-to-Face Meetings and Telephone Contacts Using Latent P r o f i l e Analysis (3 P r o f i l e s ) on Data From a Communications Desk Diary Survey Conducated on Firms i n Central London.  48.  Figure 9:  72.  Map  1:  Sample Working Departmental Composite Sheet  The Location of Federal Offices i n Downtown Vancouver (1976)  98.  xi  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS  I would l i k e to thank my advisers, Brahm Wiesman and Henry Hightower f o r their constructive c r i t i c i s m and encouragement during the preparation of this  thesis.  Thanks are due also to federal department o f f i c i a l s for their time and help.  F i n a l l y , a special thanks i s  extended to Marg de Raadt f o r typing this  thesis.  1.  CHAPTER 1: I.  THE PROBLEM, SCOPE AND  LIMITATIONS, AND  STUDY OUTLINE  THE PROCESS OF PROBLEM DEFINITION There i s recognition by planners and government o f f i c i a l s that the  l o c a t i o n of p r i v a t e and public o f f i c e s has played, and can play, a s i g n i f i cant r o l e i n shaping the p h y s i c a l , s o c i a l and economic character of Canadian cities.  In the words of V. Armstrong (1972, p. 2) The l o c a t i o n of o f f i c e a c t i v i t y i n an urban area has ceased to be an i s o l a t e d concern of the r e a l estate agent and has become an important matter of s o c i a l policy.  Recognition of the importance of o f f i c e s i n shaping c i t i e s i s a major step towards determining what locations might be chosen f o r , and what roles played by, o f f i c e s i n planning Canadian c i t i e s .  Planning and co-ordination of plan-  ning i s widely considered as necessary i f e f f o r t s to solve today's complex i n t e r - r e l a t e d urban problems are to succeed.  The question remains, what i s  the f e a s i b i l i t y of o f f i c e l o c a t i o n decisions which could r e i n f o r c e l o c a l l y formulated plans and help ameliorate urban problems yet not harm the e f f i c i e n c y of t h e i r operations?  Given the noted propensity of o f f i c e s to locate i n  downtowns (Allpass, 1966; 1955;  Richardson, 1971)  Cowan, 1969;  Gottman, 1970; Murphy, 1966;  Rannells  and the frequently sighted negative impacts of  e x i s t i n g and developing c i t y centre o f f i c e concentrations (some of these impacts are l i s t e d by Gad  (1976, p. 1) as:  t r a f f i c congestion; increasing  commuting distances; destruction of d i v e r s i t y of land uses and subsequent uneven use of f a c i l i t i e s ; the loss of h i s t o r i c buildings) the question frequently i s transformed tralized?"  into:  "Which o f f i c e s and o f f i c e types can or should be decen-  To answer this question i t i s a major premise of t h i s thesis that,  f i r s t o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y needs to be investigated.  2. Office l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y i s the c a p a b i l i t y (whether acted upon or not) of o f f i c e organizations  to relocate o f f i c e a c t i v i t i e s from c i t y centres  to either non-downtown locations within the same metropolitan region termed "metropolitan" o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y )  (this i s  or to c i t i e s and regions  away from the present metropolitan location (this might be termed "regional" office locational f l e x i b i l i t y ) .  Evaluation  i s p a r t i c u l a r l y important with respect  of o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y  to public o f f i c e s because they may be  used d i r e c t l y by planners and government o f f i c i a l s as a stimulus to encourage the o v e r a l l location of urban employment opportunities.  Understanding the  contribution that a deliberate p o l i c y of public o f f i c e location could make to the solution of metropolitan problems the o r i g i n a l idea of t h i s thesis was to evaluate using an existing methodology the o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y of federal government o f f i c e s i n Vancouver.  That i s to say an attempt would  be made to solve the federal o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y problem i n Vancouver. It became apparent during work on the l i t e r a t u r e review that the scope and aims encompassed i n the o r i g i n a l thesis idea were too broad and ambitious and would have to be modified.  The l i t e r a t u r e revealed  no o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l  f l e x i b i l i t y approach or method that seemed suitable for the researcher to undertake.  On r e f l e c t i o n and a f t e r further c r i t i c a l examination, the re-  searcher concluded that the approaches and methods found i n the l i t e r a t u r e would be unsatisfactory for urban planners and o f f i c e location decisionmakers as w e l l .  I t was clear investigation and assessment of federal govern-  ment o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y i n Vancouver should begin with development of a methodology.  3.  I I . STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM The problem addressed i n this thesis i s the development and testing on federal government o f f i c e s i n Vancouver of a new methodology f o r the assessment of o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y .  A c r i t i c a l examination of current  methods used to evaluate o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y reveals that a more appropriate and more e a s i l y undertaken methodology f o r use by urban planners and o f f i c e location decision-makers i s required i f the f e a s i b i l i t y  of o f f i c e  location decisions which could reinforce l o c a l plans and help ameliorate urban problems, yet not harm the e f f i c i e n c y of their operations i s to be determined.  I I I . SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS This thesis i s methodology and "process" directed rather than " f i n d ings" oriented.  I t takes only a small step towards answering the large  question of "the f e a s i b i l i t y  of o f f i c e location decisions which ..." and the  more s p e c i f i c question of "Which federal government o f f i c e s can or should be decentralized from downtown?"  Federal o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y findings  are,  of course, presented but i t must be kept i n mind they are generated from  the  exploratory process of methodology development and testing and are not the  study focus. The methodology i s developed to assess "metropolitan" rather than "regional" o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y though i t s application to the l a t t e r problem need not be precluded.  More generally, the thesis does not attempt  to undertake a cost/benefit type of analysis of downtown versus non-downtown o f f i c e locations nor does i t seek to advocate and marshal evidence i n favour of one location or the other.  4.  IV.  THE  STUDY OUTLINE  The outline for t h i s research  i s very simple.  In Chapter 2 a review of  o f f i c e location research l i t e r a t u r e i s presented with a view to 1) establishing the factors which influence o f f i c e location and l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y ; 2) exploring and assessing  and  (for Canadian urban planners and o f f i c e location  decision-makers) the usefulness of methods currently being used to assess private and public o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y . develops his own  In Chapter 3 the researcher  alternative methodology which arises from the l i t e r a t u r e  review findings for assessing o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y .  The method i s  applied and tested, s p e c i f i c a l l y , i n an analysis of the current federal government o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y problem i n Vancouver. 4, the conclusions  Lastly, i n Chapter  and directions for further research a r i s i n g from the test  of the methodology and from uncovered federal government o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y findings are presented.  V.  THE PROBLEM BACKGROUND A.  Growth of the O f f i c e  S t a t i s t i c s do not i l l u s t r a t e the growth of o f f i c e s and o f f i c e a c t i v i t i e s as well as do photographs of c i t y skylines.  Twenty years ago,  v i s u a l l y dominated the downtowns of Canada's major c i t i e s .  staid hotels  Today forests of  o f f i c e skyscrapers r e f l e c t the rapid s h i f t from a r u r a l , resource oriented economy to an urban technological  society.  Cowan (1969) and Armstrong (1972) b r i e f l y examine the history of o f f i c e s and reasons for their growth.  The need for o f f i c e s i s said to "have existed  with the emergence of c i t i e s and the invention of w r i t i n g " (Armstrong, p. 8).  1972,  O f f i c e demand took a gigantic leap with the i n d u s t r i a l revolution  the ensuing growth i n urban population,  business and government a c t i v i t y ,  and and  5.  levels of income. tinued to grow.  The need to co-ordinate and control complexity has con-  Inventions such as the telephone, typewriter, computer and  skyscraper have aided and abetted the s a t i s f a c t i o n of t h i s need and greatly influenced how and where i t would be met.  Cowan (1969, p. 44) s u c c i n c t l y  reveals the past, present and possible future of o f f i c e l o c a t i o n patterns F i r s t of a l l o f f i c e functions were d i f fused throughout the c i t y , i n houses of merchants or i n coffee houses; with certain concentrations around the court and government or i n professional enclaves. In the second phase (the i n d u s t r i a l revolution) the o f f i c e function became detached and concentrated i n s p e c i a l l y designed accommodation where economies of scale and rapid transmission of information were f a c i l i t a t e d . We are now entering upon a t h i r d phase i n which the impact of technological advance i s a l t e r i n g the balance once again. Automation i s reducing the importance of manufacturing as part of the r o l e of the c i t y , while at the same time the interchange of ideas and the information handling a c t i v i t i e s , of which the o f f i c e function i s one, are i n creasing i n importance. Soon the further impact of improved communication may lead to another dispersal of the o f f i c e function to the homes and gathering places of those with ideas to exchange. The wheel w i l l have come f u l l c i r c l e . The l i k e l i h o o d of f u l l r e a l i z a t i o n of the t h i r d phase i n o f f i c e l o c a tion patterns postulated by Cowan i s a matter for debate.  I t i s not only  the technological circumstances which underspin, i n varying degrees, a l l location decisions which a f f e c t s o f f i c e l o c a t i o n patterns and l o c a t i o n a l flexibility.  This i s but one factor to be considered i n an assessment of  office locational f l e x i b i l i t y .  The portion of Cowan's statement that i s  underlined, for example, suggests government o f f i c e s have been p h y s i c a l l y concentrated a very long time, even when other o f f i c e types were dispersed.  6.  The t r a d i t i o n of concentration  of government o f f i c e s i n the centre of c i t i e s  i s l i k e l y lengthy and d e f i n i t e l y needs to be considered i n assessment of government o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y .  B.  Growth of the Federal Government O f f i c e Growth of federal government o f f i c e s p a r a l l e l s increased  of a l l l e v e l s of government i n Canadian society. to be necessary because:  intervention  This intervention i s seen  1) Society's economic system has come to dominate  and dictate to (rather than interact with) a l l society's and nature's systems. Man's s o c i a l , l e g a l , and p o l i t i c a l systems and nature's natural systems cannot quickly adjust to rapid changes i n the economic systems. Man has created Governments, therefore, attempt to mitigate widespread adverse effects of the economic system through l e g i s l a t i o n and regulation. 2) In the economic system i t s e l f , a marked s h i f t i n strength from the competitive sector (small business, unorganized workers) to the monopolistic or o l i g o p o l i s t i c sector (big business, b i g labour unions) has occurred.  A l l l e v e l s of government, but p a r t i c u l a r l y the federal govern-  ment, are placed i n the r o l e of mediator or referee among economic disputants. In general, individuals and people i n organizations  have increasingly  become dependent upon "big government" and demanded more and more government intervention.  In Canada, while the p r o v i n c i a l l e v e l of governments i s  c o n s t i t u t i o n a l l y charged with s a t i s f y i n g much of what the public demands, e.g. roads, educational  f a c i l i t i e s , hospitals, etc., the v a r i e t y and expense of  public demands i s such that federal help i s increasingly engaged.  The federal  presence, i n the form of o f f i c e s and o f f i c e employees has, consequently ( i n  7. the l a s t decade) spread rapidly beyond Ottawa.  A policy of dispersal of  federal government c i v i l servants from Ottawa, termed "Regionalization", has further heightened federal o f f i c e space demand and requirements i n Canada's major c i t i e s .  The problem of federal o f f i c e accommodation —  where i t should be supplied —  of how  and  i s currently of extreme importance to federal  o f f i c i a l s as well as urban and regional planners.  The question:  "Should  the downtown post o f f i c e , long the only v i s i b l e federal presence i n many Canadian c i t i e s , necessarily give way to downtown federal government o f f i c e towers?" has arisen.  C.  The Federal Government O f f i c e Locational F l e x i b i l i t y Problem i n Vancouver Responding to a concentration of o f f i c e employment i n downtown Van-  couver and to the "trend toward continued business and c u l t u r a l  domination  of the region by downtown Vancouver" the Greater Vancouver Regional D i s t r i c t Board, i n 1972, reaffirmed: ;c  That i t i s the policy of the Board to regionally control and develop ' o f f i c e centers' or regional town centers outside of downtown, and decentralize some downtown growth to these centers.  Each regional town centre i s expected to serve a population of 100,000 to 150,000 people.  I t i s suggested "that regional town centres should have a  m i l l i o n square feet of o f f i c e space (approximately 7,000 o f f i c e  employees);  gross annual r e t a i l sales i n the order of $50 m i l l i o n ; and be able to draw audiences of several hundred to the theatre and other c u l t u r a l events." A catalyst for development of these centres i s expected to be government offices.  Both Vancouver the the Greater Vancouver Regional D i s t r i c t are  "seeking agreement with senior governments that they w i l l decentralize new  8.  major o f f i c e s i n the downtown and that e x i s t i n g government o f f i c e s w i l l be gradually decentralized." The federal government, at the p o l i c y l e v e l , seems attuned to Vancouver and G.V.R.D. o f f i c e decentralization plans. issued the Federal Land Management P o l i c y .  In 1973 the Federal Cabinet I t states:  Federal land should be managed so as to continue the e f f i c i e n t provision of government services with the achievement of wider s o c i a l , economic, and environmental objectives ... The p o l i c y recognizes that the magnitude of federal urban and r u r a l holdings gives them s t r a t e g i c importance and j u s t i f i e s the need f o r a more integrated approach to federal land management ... The new p o l i c y establishes a land management process that takes into account the wider public interest i n addition to the needs of departments and agencies. (Treasury Board C i r c u l a r No. 1975-8) Implementation of the "land management process", nevertheless,  presents  d i f f i c u l t i e s e s p e c i a l l y i f perceived l o c a t i o n a l needs of departments and agencies are at variance with the "wider public i n t e r e s t " .  In Vancouver,  federal departments and agencies are revealed to be unreceptive  to decentra-  l i z a t i o n of their o f f i c e a c t i v i t i e s from downtown (see Federal Requirements Study, 1974).  A proposal to construct a large federal government o f f i c e  building downtown to house departments and agencies has been brought forward. It i s clear now that there exists i n Vancouver the problem of determining how far the federal government, i t s departments and agencies, can support the G.V.R.D. o f f i c e decentralization goal by decentralizing e x i s t i n g and future o f f i c e a c t i v i t i e s to Regional Town Centres.  Which federal govern-  ment o f f i c e s r e a l l y need to be located i n downtowns, and which do not? can or should o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y be f a i r l y evaluated? factors l i m i t o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y and which do not?  How  What  Answers to  9. these questions would help ensure that opportunities for federal o f f i c e location decisions reinforcing  l o c a l plans but not harming the operational e f f i c i e n c y  of government o f f i c e a c t i v i t i e s are not missed by lack of knowledge.  VI.  DEFINITIONS In order to proceed a clear understanding of what i s meant by major  terms used i n this study heeds to be presented.  A.  Federal Office Locational F l e x i b i l i t y S p e c i f i c a l l y , i n this study, federal government o f f i c e locational  f l e x i b i l i t y means the c a p a b i l i t y ments to locate their future, and  (whether acted upon or not) relocate  of federal depart-  their existing o f f i c e a c t i v i t i e s ,  outside downtown Vancouver to the Regional Town Centres proposed by  the  G.V.R.D. i n i t s Livable Region Plan.  While federal o f f i c e locational  flexi-  b i l i t y might be measured empirically  ( i . e . the number or percentage of  civil  servants having jobs considered "location f l e x i b l e " by department or o f f i c e establishment), i n this study i t i s gauged r e l a t i v e l y and sample departments.  q u a l i t a t i v e l y for  Departments are c l a s s i f i e d into "most f l e x i b l e " , " f l e x -  i b l e " , " i n f l e x i b l e " and  "most i n f l e x i b l e " o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l  flexibility  categories.  B.  Federal Government Offices Federal government o f f i c e s are the physical  space ( o f f i c e structures  or o f f i c e establishments within o f f i c e structures) i n which the executive, administrative and  q u a s i - j u d i c i a l functions of the federal government orga-  nization are managed.  For purposes of information c o l l e c t i o n and  sample  selection, federal government o f f i c e s i n this study are more narrowly defined  10.  to include only o f f i c e s of federal departments and "departmental" tions.  corpora-  Excluded are "proprietary" and "agency" crown corporations o f f i c e s  (e.g. C.B.C., Bank of Canada, C.M.H.C., National Harbours Board) whose budgets, operations and o f f i c e locations are less subject to scrutiny by the Treasury Board and Treasury Board Advisory Committee on Federal Land Management.  C. Federal Departments' O f f i c e  Establishments  The Vancouver o f f i c e functions of federal departments are most often performed i n more than one location within the downtown and the metropolitan area as a whole.  Each separately located and functioning departmental  n i z a t i o n a l unit i s considered a separate department o f f i c e  orga-  establishment.  D. Downtown In this study downtown i s considered to be the whole of Vancouver's downtown peninsula, including the West End.  11.  CHAPTER 2;  A REVIEW OF FACTORS INFLUENCING THE LOCATION AND FLEXIBILITY OF OFFICES AND  LOCATIONAL  METHODOLOGIES FOR ASSESSING OFFICE  LOCATIONAL FLEXIBILITY  I.  INTRODUCTION Hoover, i n "The  Evolving Form of the Metropolis"  (1968, p.  239)  writes: "the f i r s t step i n building a useful conceptual framework for understanding urban s p a t i a l patterns i s to sort out the multifarious l o c a t i o n factors that influence the preferences and placement of s p e c i f i c a c t i v i t i e s i n types of decision units  In this chapter Hoover's f i r s t step i s taken as available o f f i c e location research  i s reviewed to ascertain factors which influence both the location  and l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y of o f f i c e s . As well, the l i t e r a t u r e i s reviewed to examine the approaches and findings of methods currently employed for assessment of o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y .  From this an appraisal i s made  of the usefulness of current approaches and methods for assessing metrop o l i t a n o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y for Canadian urban planners, o f f i c e location decision-makers i n general, and for solving the s p e c i f i c federal o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y problem i n Vancouver. discussion of o f f i c e location research major parts.  After a b r i e f background  the chapter i s organized into  two  In Part 1 the reasons found i n the l i t e r a t u r e for downtown o f f i c e  locations and relocations are presented. In Part 2 three approaches to assessing  office locational f l e x i -  b i l i t y are i d e n t i f i e d and the general findings of each presented. methods which make up one current and popular approach —  Two  d i r e c t linkage  analysis —  are c r i t i q u e d .  The chapter ends with a summary of factors found  to influence o f f i c e location and l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y , a summary of l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y findings and an evaluation of the usefulness to urban planners and o f f i c e location decision-makers  ( i n general and s p e c i f i c fed-  e r a l government/Vancouver contexts) of current approaches to assessment of office locational f l e x i b i l i t y .  II.  BACKGROUND A large and growing body of o f f i c e location and l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i -  b i l i t y research l i t e r a t u r e has emerged.  The stimulus for this research,  p a r t i c u l a r l y i n Europe, has been concern f o r the changing l o c a t i o n a l patterns of o f f i c e s , their public, as well as private, costs and benefits (Armstrong,  1972).  In Europe rapid, geographically concentrated, growth of o f f i c e employment i s thought to contribute to regional d i s p a r i t i e s ( i n terms of employment opportunities, decision-making power, wealth, population) and congestion i n the centres of the few dominant urban regions.  P o l i c i e s of  private and public o f f i c e dispersal to ameliorate these perceived problems have evolved and been implemented i n England, France, the Netherlands, and Sweden.  The process of policy implementation  i n England and Sweden  has led to the development of two research methods (discussed i n Part II) to assess the l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y of various (public and private) o f f i c e types.  A l l i n a l l European o f f i c e location research:  has progressed from basic descriptions of the d i s t r i b u t i o n of o f f i c e employment to a broader understanding of the r o l l of these a c t i v i t i e s i n steering urban and regional development P a r t i c u l a r attention has been focussed on the nature of the constraints that appear to t i e o f f i c e jobs to the c i t y centre and also the s o c i a l and economic consequences of o f f i c e d e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n . Research has therefore begun to move from description to prescription i n attempting to evaluate possible consequences of alternative p o l i c i e s . ' (Goddard, 1976 p. 1) North American o f f i c e location research i s found lacking i n both quantity and quality.  In the United States much research stems from largely  descriptive studies of metropolitan New York City (see Haig 1927;  Robbins  and Terleiky 1960; Litchtenburg 1960; Gottman 1964; Armstrong 1972; The Conservation of Human Resources Project 1977).  and  United States research  i s also aimed at gauging the strength and describing the pattern of o f f i c e dispersal from c i t y centres to suburban locations (see Foley Fortune Magazine 1967,  1971,  1972 and 1976).  1957;  Inter-metropolitan comparison  of o f f i c e market locations and c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s i s another notable United States research i n t e r e s t . Canadian planning interest and research into current and possible o f f i c e location patterns within and between metropolitan areas appears insubstantial.  With a few exceptions Takahashi's (1973) assessment of  Canadian o f f i c e location research stands today.  He concludes that most  Canadian research i s l i t t l e more than"inventories or surveys of o f f i c e space, d e s c r i p t i v e studies of existing o f f i c e f a c i l i t i e s , or opinion surveys of o f f i c e space users."  There i s , consequently, l i t t l e of a  Canadian research base from which t h i s thesis can work. O f f i c e location research,  i n general, concentrates on private sector  and neglects analysis of the public sector.  Turning to public f a c i l i t y  location research, we f i n d i t too overlooks the l o c a t i o n of public o f f i c e buildings, attempting, instead, to determine the best l o c a t i o n f o r public buildings which provide or house services d i r e c t l y demanded by the public ( i . e . l i b r a r i e s , hospitals, f i r e h a l l s , e t c . ) . To sum up, the lack of focussed and Canadian research  into the l o c a -  tion of both private and public sector o f f i c e s requires available, predominantly "private" and foreign o f f i c e l o c a t i o n research l i t e r a t u r e to be reviewed.  15.  P A R T  1  REASONS FOR DOWNTOWN OFFICE LOCATION AND RELOCATIONS  III. A.  REASONS FOR  DOWNTOWN OFFICE LOCATIONS AND  RELOCATIONS  INTRODUCTION There i s a plethora of factors seen as reasons explaining the l o c a -  t i o n of any a c t i v i t y .  The sorting out of these factors generally  combined t h e o r e t i c a l and empirical work.  involves  The great v a r i e t y of o f f i c e  a c t i v i t i e s , t h e i r intangible inputs and outputs, recent rapid growth of o f f i c e employment, the l o c a t i o n a l e f f e c t s of technological advances i n telecommunications and transportation —  i n short, the d i f f i c u l t y of  ascertaining o f f i c e " f a c t s " has challenged a l l o f f i c e researchers. sorting out of reasons for c i t y centre o f f i c e l o c a t i o n i s s t i l l  The  occuring.  Theoretical and empirical o f f i c e location research has not advanced i n tandem nor has i t completely meshed.  The former, emerging from the work of  location theorists and forming a part of urban land use theory, emphasizes physical a c c e s s i b i l i t y and economic antecedents for downtown o f f i c e l o c a tion.  The l a t t e r stresses more heavily the communication aspect of  physical a c c e s s i b i l i t y among o f f i c e s as a location factor and i s the most recent work undertaken.  In neither a t h e o r e t i c a l or empirical  approach i s adequate attention focussed on the downtown l o c a t i o n a l i n f l u ence of i n e r t i a or " t r a d i t i o n " of metropolitan planning and p o l i t i c s , l a s t l y , of the metropolitan o f f i c e market i t s e l f .  and,  The framework appro-  priate to d i s t i l l a t i o n of factors which might exert a downtown l o c a t i o n a l influence on federal government o f f i c e s i s , then:  a b r i e f examination of  o f f i c e location theory (including i n e r t i a / t r a d i t i o n and metropolitan p l a n n i n g / p o l i t i c s ) ; followed by a review of empirical research concluding with a look at the o f f i c e market.  findings;  B.  OFFICE LOCATION THEORY O f f i c e location theory i s a branch of the i n t e l l e c t u a l e f f o r t ,  encompassed by urban land use theory, to comprehend i n a s i m p l i f i e d but accurate way the complex and changing structure of urban land use. I t s emphasis, notwithstanding improved  transportation and telecommunications  systems, i s on o f f i c e ' s need f o r physical a c c e s s i b i l i t y and t h e i r a b i l i t y and willingness to pay i t s costs. " a c c e s s i b i l i t y seekers". has two major dimensions:  Offices are considered avid physical  The physical a c c e s s i b i l i t y they seek and value "general" a c c e s s i b i l i t y , or nearness i n t r a v e l  costs to a l l other urban uses and f a c i l i t i e s ; and " s p e c i a l " a c c e s s i b i l i t y , or nearness to p a r t i c u l a r types of complimentary  a c t i v i t i e s (Richardson,  1971, p. 48). The "general" a c c e s s i b i l i t y of downtown attracts o f f i c e s "to  take f u l l advantage of the surrounding metropolitan labour pool"  and to "minimize the reach and maximize the convenience of linkages with markets they serve" (Manners, 1974, p. 93). Offices serving national or regional markets are thought p a r t i c u l a r l y to desire downtown locations (Armstrong, 1973).  The s p e c i a l a c c e s s i b i l i t y of downtown i s closely r e -  lated to external agglomeration economies which o f f i c e s are thought to enjoy i n proximate locations.  External agglomeration economies are  e f f i c i e n c i e s an organization benefits from (often i n the form of lower input costs) but does not produce by i t s e l f .  They a r i s e because o f f i c e  a c t i v i t i e s , especially those l a b e l l e d " f i n a n c i a l " or " quaternary" (Gottman, 1970) are often specialized and interdependent.  The costs  of face-to-face i n t e r a c t i o n ( i . e . for bargaining, negotiating, signing l e g a l documents) among interdependent o f f i c e s i s lowered i n locations with  special a c c e s s i b i l i t y .  Special a c c e s s i b i l i t y downtown allows o f f i c e s to  benefit from other conveniences and i n t a n g i b i l i t i e s .  Gerald Manners  (1974, p. 93) writes: '(Offices) can readily exploit the p r o l i f e r a t i o n of information and ideas and the profusion of commercial and i n s t i t u t i o n a l services i n the central c i t y , taking advantage of business consultants and trade assoc i a t i o n s , f i n a n c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n s and advertising agencies, l i b r a r i e s and s p e c i a l i s t lawyers, restaurants and clubs and the l i k e . They can enjoy, moreover, the prestige frequently associated with a c e n t r a l c i t y address. In simple l o c a t i o n theory downtown i s the most "accessible", i n both dimensions, of a l l urban locations, s i t e s i n the c i t y centre consequently are i n great demand by most urban land users.  Office activities,  being e f f i c i e n t users of land and desiring "general" and  "special"  a c c e s s i b i l i t y are prepared to pay and outbid other a c t i v i t i e s for downtown locations.  In most c i t i e s , therefore, the majority of o f f i c e s are  located, and reluctant to move from, downtown.  The aggregate urban land  use pattern i s t h e o r e t i c a l l y the r e s u l t of a l l urban a c t i v i t i e s assessing and minimizing their i n d i v i d u a l "costs of f r i c t i o n " i n terms of l o c a t i o n rent/physical a c c e s s i b i l i t y trade o f f s i n an e f f o r t to maximize revenues, p r o f i t s or i n the case of government to "give taxpayers the most for their money." Office l o c a t i o n theory has been honed by several generations of location theorists but not greatly altered since Haig's (1927) i n i t i a l work.  While developed primarily as an economic explanation for downtown  o f f i c e location, i t i s adaptable to changed o f f i c e l o c a t i o n patterns.  It i s hypothesized,  for example, by Horwood and Boyce (1959), Cowan (1969)  and Clay (1974) that general and s p e c i a l a c c e s s i b i l i t y may  be obtainable  to a s a t i s f a c t o r y degree i n lower rent locations outside downtowns. Improved transportation systems, they claim, are creating pervasive metrop o l i t a n physical a c c e s s i b i l i t y .  Telecommunications improvements (video  phone, data transmissions, t e l e p r i n t e r s , closed c i r c u i t t e l e v i s i o n , computers and others) are enabling substitution of "declining i n costs" and "increasingly e f f e c t i v e non-physical for physical a c c e s s i b i l i t y . "  In  the future, a much more dispersed o f f i c e l o c a t i o n pattern can and w i l l l i k e l y emerge. Other researchers, notably Gottman and Vernon, f e e l " s p e c i a l " a c c e s s i b i l i t y i f not "general" a c c e s s i b i l i t y , w i l l remain at i t s apogee i n downtowns.  O f f i c e work they suggest w i l l become increasingly specialized  and require frequent face-to-face contacts. technology,  Reasonable cost communications  their researchers suggest, i s not l i k e l y to simulate face-to-  face communications "where only the f u l l nuances of gesture, eye gaze, and voice q u a l i t y can be appreciated."  (Custerton, 405, 1973).  A pattern  of increased o f f i c e concentration i n c i t y centres, therefore, might possibly emerge. Whether or not the c i t y centre continues to monopolize metropolitan "general" and/or " s p e c i a l " a c c e s s i b i l i t y a reason reinforcing downtown office location i s "inertia".  While not stressed i n o f f i c e l o c a t i o n  theory, the emphasis placed on i n e r t i a i n the i n d u s t r i a l l o c a t i o n branch of urban land use theory suggests i t s importance. writing primarily about industry states:  Isard (1956, p.  180)  20. Existing locations are characterized by a great deal of i n e r t i a , and advantages p i l e up over time; furthermore existing locations exert considerable influence on subsequent plant ( o f f i c e ) location decisions; so that once concentration i s established i t develops a self-perpetuating momentum.' Inertia of e x i s t i n g locations may operate a f t e r l o c a t i o n a l advantages have stopped p i l i n g up.  Indeed, i t may continue a f t e r l o c a t i o n a l  reasons have otherwise become f o s s i l i z e d .  In the sphere of a single orga-  nization, the s o c i a l l y rooted location factor " t r a d i t i o n " i s akin to i n e r t i a and may be a r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n f o r the p u l l of e x i s t i n g or past locations especially when economic and technological rationale f o r l o c a t i o n decisions has weakened.  I n e r t i a and t r a d i t i o n deserve e x p l i c i t incorporation into  o f f i c e location theory. A f i n a l reason f o r c i t y centre o f f i c e l o c a t i o n not emphasized enough i n o f f i c e location theory i s the downtown oriented influence quite c l o s e l y related to i n e r t i a and t r a d i t i o n — and p o l i t i c s . ment downtown.  of metropolitan  —  planning  Land use zoning may only permit substantial o f f i c e developRetention of a strong downtown core i s a frequently sought  p o l i t i c a l and planning objective.  Developers too are often unwilling to  encounter added r i s k s , time delays and expenses associated with land use rezoning, f l o o r space r a t i o adjustments and other planning and p o l i t i c a l hurdles  (see Robert Fisher, 1967) frequently associated with non-downtown  o f f i c e locations.  There often e x i s t s , as well, a strong downtown business  lobby with connections to, and influence upon, c i t y council and administ r a t i o n o f f i c i a l s (see D. Gutstein, 1973).  C.  EMPIRICAL OFFICE LOCATION AND RELOCATION FINDINGS Reasons stated by o f f i c e organization representatives f o r l o c a t i n g  or relocating inside and outside c i t y centres have been revealed through empirical research.  Survey interviews and questionnaires conducted i n  c i t y centres on samples of o f f i c e organizations (not a l l include government) usually reveal some or a l l of these reasons f o r l o c a t i n g downtown: contacts or communications with external o f f i c e organizations and the public at large; c e n t r a l i t y of l o c a t i o n ; general convenience; proximity to i n f r a s t r u c t i v e , i . e . services, restaurants, stores, t r a d i t i o n , and prestige.  The r e l a t i v e importance of these location influencing factors,  usually assessed by frequency or by stated p r i o r i t y , i s seen to vary with the type and size of o f f i c e organization as well as by methodology of research survey.* "Most o f f i c e l o c a t i o n decision-makers surveyed, nevertheless, regard communications as a key factor i n l o c a t i o n . "  (Goddard, 1971)  "In various interview studies conducted .... the respondents, senior managers responsible for o f f i c e location decisions, stressed the need to maintain personal (face-to-face) contacts with people i n Central London." (Goddard and Pye  10, 1975)  Daniels, (1975, p. 121) i n conducting h i s  review of these surveys states: ...Although the d e t a i l s vary, the r e l a t i v e importance of the main l o cation factors i s consistently expressed i n the findings of d i f f e r e n t surveys. In order of importance the major l o c a *The influence of questionnaire design and survey technique i s seen most c l e a r l y when a l o c a t i o n a l reason such as "prestige" i s e x p l i c i t l y l i s t e d or prompted and when i t i s l e f t absent. In the absence of a reminder or prompt ... prestige seems less l i k e l y to be evaluated as a l o c a t i o n a l variable by many o f f i c e organizations. (Daniels 120, 1975)  t i o n a l factors are therefore: communications (both inside and outside the central area), s t a f f i n g , rents and related costs, and prestige/tradition." The study conducted by the Vancouver Planning Department i n Office Space Demand i n Downtown Vancouver 1961-81 tends support Daniels' statement.  1973,  to  In the study sample of f i f t y firms (three of which  are federal government departments) representatives are asked to give reasons for their downtown l o c a t i o n .  Contacts or communications with  external firms and organizations " i s by f a r the most frequently mentioned reason, being given by 32 firms or 64 percent of a l l firms (Vancouver Planning Department, 1973 p. 11)  interviewed".  I t i s followed by  convenience and prestige as other frequently mentioned reasons.  general Two  of  three federal o f f i c i a l s interviewed mentioned " t r a d i t i o n " and "government p o l i c y " as reasons for locating downtown.  Only one of the three however,  mentioned "contacts with external firms and organizations" as a downtown location reason. Reasons downtown o f f i c e organizations relocate within and  outside  the c i t y centre have been examined by the Economist Intelligence Unit (1964); J.S. Wabe (1966); Facey and Smith (1968); Cowan (1969) and Bannon (1973).  Cowan (1969, p. 87) i n a l o c a t i o n a l case study of four  central London private firms  concludes:  'the most surprising fact to emerge from this part of our work (case studies) i s the extent to which organizations moved e n t i r e l y or i n part because of d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n with a building and the v a r i e t y of reasons which caused the b u i l d i n g to become, or seem to become, unsatisfactory."  23.  This conclusion i s supported by findings of other studies.  For example,  Bannon's survey of o f f i c e s (including government) indicates physical factors ( i . e . building too small, expiry of the lease) are the major reasons for o f f i c e relocations within central Dublin.  Wabe's empirical work i n d i -  cates physical factors r e l a t i n g primarily to expansion requirements are behind the majority of moves to locations outside central London. moves to non-central 1966)  Also,  locations are motivated by possible rent savings (Wabe,  and often a desire to consolidate at one s i t e parts of an  i n scattered locations downtown (Cowan, 1969).  organization  External factors such as  congestion, lack of parking, and deterioration of the downtown environment are further, less often stated, reasons behind o f f i c e moves from c i t y  centres.  S i g n i f i c a n t differences i n reasons f o r r e l o c a t i o n of d i f f e r e n t o f f i c e types within and outside c i t y centres have not been i d e n t i f i e d i n the literature.  Apparently public o f f i c e s relocate for reasons s i m i l a r to  those of private o f f i c e s . Daniels  (1975, p. 128) however, i n h i s extensive  review of o f f i c e  location l i t e r a t u r e relates that, "Merriman, working i n Christ Church found that f l o o r space and related problems were p a r t i c u l a r l y important to government o f f i c e s , insurance and o i l companies."  In h i s case study  Cowan also finds relocation a continuing problem facing the firms none of the organizations dation" (1969, p. 87).  looked very f a r ahead when planning  "as  i t s accommo-  The high percentage (49 percent) of o f f i c e estab-  lishments i n Bannon's survey that had been at more than one l o c a t i o n i n central Dublin tends to confirm Cowan's observation.  The reasons for the  high frequency of o f f i c e relocation and attending problems are, i n Cowan's opinion, complicated by the desire and consequent struggle for  the firms he studied to remain i n London's centre. F i n a l l y , then, there i s a hint that provision of accommodation, a continuing problem facing organizations, may be a p a r t i c u l a r l y important and problematic  government task.  I t may be complicated  i f government  departments, l i k e Cowan's private organizations, f a i l to plan ahead, yet desire to remain i n metropolitan downtowns. D.  URBAN OFFICE MARKETS A market perspective may shed a d i f f e r e n t l i g h t on possible reasons  for private and public downtown o f f i c e l o c a t i o n . Urban o f f i c e markets are sets of sub-markets i n which demands f o r types of o f f i c e space (according to l o c a t i o n , structure and space configuration, tenure type) are reconciled with supply through the price mechanism.  C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of urban o f f i c e  markets (and sub-markets) and governments' r o l e i n these markets may influence both public and private o f f i c e l o c a t i o n decisions. A major c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of urban o f f i c e markets i s that demand, i n the short run, i s more f l e x i b l e or "uncertain" than supply.  (Fisher 1967)  Urban o f f i c e markets are characterized by c y c l i c a l periods of over and under supply.  On both o f f i c e demand and supply sides public organizations  are major market p a r t i c i p a n t s . Their actions on both sides may add further to the already inherent uncertainty of the urban o f f i c e markets. Fisher (1967, p. 4) writes: Occupancy of f l o o r space i n public or private o f f i c e buildings by f e d e r a l , state and l o c a l governments and agencies has p r o l i f e r a t e d . Local prospects f o r the construction or leasing of f l o o r space i n p r i v a t e l y owned buildings accordingly depends p a r t l y on anticipations of public tenants, and the degree to which they w i l l be met by p u b l i c l y owned structures. This  Robert  25.  element of uncertainty distinguishes o f f i c e markets from those of many other types of income producing r e a l estate lacking any public demand for f l o o r space. Office market uncertainty may  by i t s e l f be a force influencing where  public and private o f f i c e space i s developed. favour established locations —  Uncertainty could generally  locations l i k e downtown where the demand  for o f f i c e s has proven strong i n the long run.  A tendancy to c l u s t e r  o f f i c e s where others have been located or to "follow the leader" might be a market supply side t r a i t , p a r t i c u l a r l y where large investments are at  stake. The intangible nature of o f f i c e a c t i v i t i e s might reinforce a general  clustering tendency from the demand side of urban o f f i c e markets.  The  costs and benefits concomitant with o f f i c e l o c a t i o n for o f f i c e space consumers are d i f f i c u l t to quantify.  Hoover and Vernon (1959, p.  97)  state: There i s no process of accounting that can weigh the enhancement i n the q u a l i t y of executive decision-making i n a given location against the added costs of operating i n that location." The importance of any one location to an o f f i c e space consumer may fore be diminished.  there-  Selecting a "well defined area" of generally perceived  benefits and acceptable costs (where demand and supply are already focussed) may  be of most concern. Governments' roles as demander, supplier and uncertainty generator  i n o f f i c e markets exposes and perhaps disposes i t to these general market tendencies.  A general tendency to group o f f i c e s downtown, spawned on both  supply and demand sides might be d i f f i c u l t f o r governments to withstand even i f they harboured and caused no such tendencies themselves.  A  propensity to lease (demand) rather than construct (supply) i t s own o f f i c e space may extenuate the influence of general market tendencies over public o f f i c e location (Marriot, 1967).  As a leasee the government  i s a location-taker to the extent i t i s limited by the location of existing available, suitable o f f i c e space.  I f such space i s grouped  downtown the public and private o f f i c e space consumer may have l i t t l e choice but to locate downtown.  As an o f f i c e supplier to i t s e l f , and  perhaps other o f f i c e space consumers, the l o c a t i o n a l influence on government of l o c a l market tendencies may be lessened. The p o s s i b l i t y of locating or relocating government o f f i c e s outside established supply and demand areas may be increased.  In general, the greater the market share  of public o f f i c e demand and supply i n a metropolitan o f f i c e market the stronger w i l l be i t s own market influence.  27.  P A R T  2  THE NEED FOR DOWNTOWN OFFICE LOCATIONS:  GENERAL FINDINGS  AND APPROACHES TO EVALUATION OF OFFICE LOCATIONAL FLEXIBILITY  /  IV.  A.  THE NEED FOR DOWNTOWN OFFICE LOCATIONS: GENERAL FINDINGS AND APPROACHES TO EVALUATION OF OFFICE LOCATIONAL FLEXIBILITY  INTRODUCTION Three approaches towards assessing  the need f o r downtown o f f i c e  locations or the p o s s i b i l i t y of relocating o f f i c e s outside downtown can be i d e n t i f i e d i n the l i t e r a t u r e .  F i r s t , the o f f i c e organizations  moving from downtown are monitored, surveyed and analyzed.  actually  Second, down-  town o f f i c e decision-makers are questioned to e s t a b l i s h the perceived for c i t y centre locations. among o f f i c e organizations  need  Third, physical and non-physical linkages downtown are monitored and an assessment made  of t h e i r strength. B.  OFFICE DISPERSAL TO NON-DOWNTOWN LOCATIONS By monitoring, surveying and analyzing o f f i c e organizations  which  are located i n , or relocate to, non-downtown locations researchers t r y to determine the amount of o f f i c e d i s p e r s a l , the attributes of non-downtown o f f i c e s , and the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of o f f i c e moves to non-downtown locations. Through t h i s research  factors delimiting the need f o r downtown locations  or, more generally, the l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y of various o f f i c e  organiza-  tions are indicated. Empirical investigation of o f f i c e s that disperse i s most extensive i n B r i t a i n and Sweden where dispersal from t h e i r respective c a p i t a l s i s encouraged by national government p o l i c y . a considerable  national  The findings show  number of public service jobs relocating.  Over 23,000  central government positions have relocated from the C i t y of London since 1963  (Hardman Report, 1973).  A further 30,000 central government jobs,  S i r Henry Hardman suggests, can be relocated from central London i n the 1970's.  In Sweden, "11,000 national government c i v i l service jobs (about  25 percent of the t o t a l ) are i n the process of being relocated from Stockholm". As d i f f i c u l t as monitoring the r e d i s t r i b u t i o n of central government jobs, i s the determination of private o f f i c e employment relocations from c i t y centres.  Since 1963  the Location of Offices Bureau (a body set  up to aid and encourage private o f f i c e dispersal from London) has assisted 1761  firms move 140,605 jobs out of central London.  1974/75.)  (L.O.B. Report  If the Bureau a s s i s t s i n relocations of one out of every  jobs from London as H a l l (1972, p. 389) private jobs have been removed. central London, of course, may l e v e l of replacement by new i n remaining firms.  two  suggests, then close to 300,000  The t o t a l number of o f f i c e jobs i n  or may  not be reduced depending on  or inmigrating o f f i c e jobs and by job  (Hall, 1970.)  the increases  Estimates of o f f i c e relocations i n  North American c i t i e s r e l y primarily on changing c i t y centre suburban proportions  of o f f i c e f l o o r space.  Changes indicate indigenous suburban  o f f i c e employment growth or suburban expansion of downtown based o f f i c e organizations as well as job relocations from c i t y centres.  Gerald  Manners (1974) finds that i n many of the larger United States c i t i e s the suburban share of o f f i c e s , i n terms of f l o o r space has r i s e n s t e a d i l y . In New  York, Houston, Dallas, Minneapolis and Atlanta over h a l f the o f f i c e  space i s located outside downtown. An a t t r i b u t e common to both public and private  organizations,  evident i n European and United States research, Is that o f f i c e  organiza-  t i o n very often relocate c l e r i c a l , records, or other "routine" ( i . e .  standardized; r e p e t i t i v e ) a c t i v i t i e s . Kan  Both Hammond (1967) and Rhodes and  (1972) point out the routine nature of jobs so f a r moved from central  London by the B r i t i s h Government. Bureau records  (Daniels, 1975,  Examination of Location of Offices  p. 187)  shows that private organizations  with large routine work departments (insurance, bank and finance companies) are responsible for almost a t h i r d of private d i s p e r s a l from central London. Organizational structure and size c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of private o f f i c e organizations relocated from central London indicate that "small organizations with s i n g l e , centralized head o f f i c e a c t i v i t i e s are potent i a l l y more mobile than large organizations which have complex tiered structures".  (Daniels, 1975,  p. 188)  l i z e d decision-making hierarchy may  Organizations with a decentra-  be better able to relocate from down-  town than those with a centralized hierarchy.  Wabe (1969) attempts to  discover the type of firm that moves or does not move from c e n t r a l London. Through c a r e f u l examination of L.O.B. f i l e s he discovers the following: • 1. Large firms or large moves (over 300 i n size) are the most d i f f i c u l t to make. Medium sized firms f i n d i t easiest to be able to move. 2. Medium sized firms that were expanding or were considering expansion were generally the ones that considered decentralization. 3. Large firms were to an even greater extent motivated by expansion when considering the mints of d e c e n t r a l i zation. 4. Small firms only seem to be able to move very short distances from the centre. Most small firms only considered decentralization from central London because their lease was expiring and presumably they were going to be faced with increasing rent." (Wabe, 1966, p. 49)  Empirical research into the patterns of o f f i c e organization r e l o cation i n B r i t a i n and North America suggest the great majority of private firms relocate short distances from c i t y centres i n the suburbs.  National  government o f f i c e s i n B r i t a i n have, however, relocated greater distances from London, over h a l f the c i v i l service positions relocated have l e f t south east England altogether (Daniels, 1969).  Many relocated o f f i c e  organizations (public and private) are attracted to, and help b u i l d up, o f f i c e clusters i n the suburbs.  In North America these tend to be low  density, planned, o f f i c e "parks" whereas i n Europe high density o f f i c e "centres" have emerged at already established commercial nodes. (Daniels, 1969)  The l o c a t i o n of o f f i c e "centres" and "parks" appears l a r g e l y  determined by good transportation/communications l i n k s (and concomitant physical and non-physical a c c e s s i b i l i t y ) to the c i t y centre, region, nation and world community.  Some o f f i c e organizations, the r e l o c a t i o n  patterns indicate, choose locations away from o f f i c e c l u s t e r s .  These are  thought generally to be large organizations ( t y p i c a l l y manufacturing firms) with non-office components already located at or near the r e l o c a t i o n s i t e ; or research oriented firms desiring r e l a t i v e privacy and quiet. The types of moves undertaken by o f f i c e organizations are c l a s s i f i e d into three groups (Rhodes and Kan, 1972, p. 17). Complete moves involve relocating the entire organization from one l o c a t i o n to another, p a r t i a l "majority" moves are those i n which the organization relocates most jobs i n a new area leaving a smaller group of employees i n the o r i g i n a l locat i o n ; and p a r t i a l "minority" moves describe the r e l o c a t i o n of some p o s i tions while most remain i n the o r i g i n a l l o c a t i o n . Analysis of L.O.B.  f i l e s i n England  (Wabe 1966, Rhodes and Kan 1972)  indicates that large  firms tend to engage i n p a r t i a l "minority" moves while small firms t y p i c a l l y undertake complete relocations. C.  PERCEIVED NEED FOR DOWNTOWN OFFICE LOCATIONS The need for c i t y centre locations i s expressed subjectively by  representatives of o f f i c e organizations.  In these surveys the perceived  need f o r c i t y centre locations i s e l i c i t e d by asking "How and why  i s i t essential you be located downtown?"  essential i s i t ,  A l t e r n a t i v e l y , per-  ceived need i s assessed by asking "Would you consider relocation from downtown i f such and such were offered or were to occur?" Office Space Demand i n Downtown Vancouver:  In the study,  1961-1980, of the f i f t y repre-  sentatives (including three federal government department o f f i c i a l s ) surveyed, only 38 percent f e l t i t was essential to be located downtown.  Just  one of the three federal o f f i c i a l s questioned f e l t a downtown location essential.  In general the findings i n Vancouver are supported  For example, Croft's L.O.B. study, (1964, p. 74) concludes: The p o t e n t i a l for dispersal must be regarded as considerable. Only about 1/3 of decision-makers from o f f i c e s i n the core of the central area thought that they were closely t i e d i n location. S i m i l a r l y , up to half of decision-makers from o f f i c e s i n the core of the central area thought they need not be i n the central area at a l l although this figure must be reduced somewhat i f we are to accept the weight given to prestige and t r a d i t i o n surrounding central locations by professional and f i n a n c i a l o f f i c e s .  elsewhere.  Bannon (1973, p. 76) finds i n h i s study: 44.7 percent (of o f f i c e l o c a t i o n ; decision-makers sampled) would at least give consideration to the idea (of moving from Central to NonCentral Dublin) i f they could get better accommodation. Rent or rent subsidy inducements would likewise bring a high l e v e l of interest i n the idea of moving to a non-central s i t e within Dublin. ::  Private o f f i c e representatives opinions on the need f o r departments, or types of departments, to be located i n the c i t y centre are e l i c i t e d i n the study, A Survey of Factors Governing  the Location of Offices i n the  London Area (1964, p. 44 and p. 79). Representatives indicate that "routine" departments, p a r t i c u l a r l y accounting, records and general admini s t r a t i o n are considered location f l e x i b l e .  These opinions are l i k e l y  antecedents to the observed relocation of these a c t i v i t i e s from c i t y centres to suburbs. There i s evidence indicating the perceived l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y of o f f i c e organizations i s , i n part, a function of whether a decision to relocate or not has been made. views conducted  Goddard and Pye (1975, p. 11) note i n t e r -  f o r the Location of Offices Bureau with  manufacturing  companies show that: Those who had decided against moving tended to stress a l l the d i f f i c u l t i e s associated with relocation, including communications. Those who moved tended to dismiss the d i f f i c u l t y arguing that by moving to a location only 30 minutes by t r a i n from the c i t y , maintaining a 'pied- a -terre" i n London, locating near an international a i r port or moving nearer their customers they could overcome a l l such problems.  After r e l o c a t i o n , changes i n attitude may be aided by organizat i o n a l adaptation.  Thorngren (1973) finds evidence suggesting that  organizations' i n t e r n a l and external contact patterns, functions, and organizational structures adapt over time to the new  environment's  opportunities and constraints. The major conclusion to be drawn from these studies i s that representatives i n a high percentage of firms surveyed  i n c i t y centres do not  consider such locations e s s e n t i a l but, nevertheless, prefer and would pay increased rents to remain.  From Vancouver evidence, t h i s appears to  apply with equal force to private and public o f f i c e s . f l e x i b i l i t y of o f f i c e s may  The l o c a t i o n a l  be underestimated before a r e l o c a t i o n decision  i s made. A f t e r , the d i f f i c u l t i e s inherent i n r e l o c a t i o n may be  dismissed  or r a t i o n a l i z e d i n other ways.  D.  DOWNTOWN OFFICE LINKAGES Linkages are defined by Rannells  between establishments  (1955, p. 36) as "relationships  characterized by recurrent interactions which require  movements of persons or of goods or exchanges of information."  The ease,  effectiveness, and economy with which information can be exchanged through physical and non-physical channels, i s c l e a r l y a downtown l o c a t i o n reason for many o f f i c e organizations whose p r i n c i p l e inputs and outputs often consist of information flows (Goddard, 1971).  Empirical research i n d i -  cates personal contacts with external organizations as well as the public i s a consistently mentioned reason for c i t y centre o f f i c e location. Needed face-to-face contacts or linkages may and government o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y .  p a r t i c u l a r l y delimit private  The p a r t i c u l a r study of linkages as downtown o f f i c e l o c a t i o n constraints i s currently popular and pursued d i r e c t l y and  indirectly.  Indirect linkage analysis attempts to delimit intra-downtown patterns of linked o f f i c e s (see Goddard 1972,  Takahashi 1973)  using s p a t i a l proximity  of o f f i c e types as a surrogate measure of the functional linkages amongst offices.  No clear or immediate conclusions on o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i -  b i l i t y have resulted from this approach, therefore, i t i s not discussed further. 1.  DIRECT LINKAGE ANALYSIS The d i r e c t methods of linkage investigation may  two groups:  Communications Questionnaire  be divided into  Surveys, often r e l y i n g on manage-  ment estimations of o f f i c e communications volume and c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ; and Communications Desk Diary Surveys which are recorded accounts of volume and c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of communications carried on by o f f i c e workers. They have been employed because, as Goddard, (1975, p. 12) points out, While stressing the importance of communications factors i n their location decisions, very few o f f i c e organizations have any detailed knowledge about their e x i s t i n g patterns. ' Further, Goddard (1976, p. 21) f e e l s , 'Before deciding on a r e l o c a t i o n an i n d i v i d u a l organization c l e a r l y needs to take account of i t s e x i s t i n g and future communications requirements. A communications survey of existing external (inter-departmental) and external (inter-firm) contacts can suggest a r e l o c a t i o n strategy which supports management objectives. The findings that individuals communicate i n d i f f e r e n t ways i n d i f f e r e n t places suggests that r e l o c a t i o n can  be used as a p o s i t i v e tool i n management; for example i t can be used to bring together departments which need to communicate more with each other and perhaps less with other firms; to improve linkages with other firms that are located elsewhere, perhaps i n newly emerging spheres of i n t e r e s t for the organizations; to encourage devolution of some functions to lower l e v e l s i n the organization thereby creating space and time i n a c i t y centre o f f i c e for decision-making a c t i v i t i e s . '  Data, supplied by d i r e c t linkage analysis, on volumes and  charac-  t e r i s t i c s of contacts maintained by o f f i c e organizations can guide organ i z a t i o n a l and c i t y planners i n assessing the l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y of various o f f i c e s and help i d e n t i f y i n t e r - l i n k e d o f f i c e s (assuming communications l i n k s imply functional relationships) which might locate or relocate jointly.  In Sweden and B r i t a i n d i r e c t linkage analysis has been incor-  porated into national government o f f i c e r e l o c a t i o n decision processes  to  select departments or agencies which need not be located i n Stockholm and central London respectively.  i)  Communications Questionnaire Questionnaire  Surveys  surveys of o f f i c e communications linkages ( i . e .  attempts to find out "who  contacts who  and where") are frequently part of  more general o f f i c e questionnaire surveys which examine the l o c a t i o n a l t r a i t s and motivations  ( i . e . l o c a t i o n reasons, perceived l o c a t i o n a l needs,  l o c a t i o n a l changes) of o f f i c e organizations.  Communications linkage  questions can be either programmed or open-ended but always necessitate the respondent to r e c a l l or estimate, often for the organization as a whole, the frequency and other c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of communications.  Pro-  grammed questions usually contain a l i s t of p o t e n t i a l meeting partners  categorized by industries.  The respondent i s asked to scan this l i s t and  estimate contact (face-to-face, telephone) frequencies, c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , locations, etc. partners.  Open ended questionnaires do not l i s t p o t e n t i a l meeting  The respondent i s asked to r e c a l l contact sources as well as  frequencies and c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . An attempt to d i r e c t l y monitor o f f i c e communications linkages i s made by the Vancouver Planning Department (1973) i n i t s questionnaire survey of downtown o f f i c e representatives.  Figure 1 i s used to i l l u s t r a t e  i n the Planning Department's survey the conclusion that i n terms of stated contacts "groups i n the general area of finance are most heavily t i e d i n to the downtown business community" (Vancouver Planning Department 1973, p. 14). Federal government o f f i c e s (the three departments included i n the survey) i n terms of stated contacts considered essential (e.g. face-to-face contacts) appear, from the figure, less t i e d i n to downtown than many other Standard Industrial C l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f f i c e groups. They appear to have, however, face-to-face contacts with S.I.C. o f f i c e groups ( l e g a l , business services, transportation companies) which themselves claim strong downtown contact t i e s .  Figures 2 and 3, taken from  Bannon (1973) reveal similar face-to-face (personal) o f f i c e linkage patterns i n central Dublin as those i n downtown Vancouver.  The I r i s h  national government o f f i c e organization i s seen not as central to the working of the c i t y centre as are f i n a n c i a l or l e g a l contacts but does generate some demand f o r regular face-to-face contacts with other central offices.  (Bannon, 1974)  38.  Figure 1  Stated personal, frequent CBD contacts among firm types i n Vancouver  The Figure 1 shows personal contacts taking place i n the firms own o f f i c e , another o f f i c e , or i n a club or restaurant. A l i n e represents a contact. These contacts are considered essential. (Taken from Vancouver C i t y Planning Dept., Office Space Demand i n Downtown Vancouver 1961-1980, p. 40, 1973)  39.  Estate Agents Accountants Architects Engineers Legal Banks Stockbrokers Building Societies Insurance Travel Agents Manufacturing Agents Advertising Agents Medical Practitioners Other Medical Trade Unions General Offices Central Government State Sponsored Local Authority Embassies Other Professional Services Other Dublin Firms ND Non Dublin Firms  Figure 2  Daily Face-to-Face Office Contacts i n Central Dublin -B.  1 Estate Agents 2 Accountants 3 Architects 4 Engineers 5 Legal 6 Banks 7 Stockbrokers 8 Building Societies 9  Insurance  10 Travel Agents 11 Manufacturing Agents 12 Advertising Agents 13 Medical PractitionerE 14 Other Medical 15 Trade Unions 16 General Offices 17 Central Government 18 State Sponsored 19 Local Authority 20  Embassies  O  Other Professional  S  Services  D  Other Dublin Firms  ND Non Dublin Firms X  Contact within same Group  One line represents one contact per week  Figure 3  Weekly Face-to-Face Office Contacts i n Central Dublin (Fig. 2 and F i g . 3 Taken from Bannon, M.J., Office Location i n Ireland: The Role of Central Dublin, p\ 2fT, 1973)  Croft's communications questionnaire survey i n Leeds (1969) further adds weight to the idea that frequency of face-to-face contacts constrains some o f f i c e types more than others to c i t y centre locations.  It i s  c h i e f l y for t h i s reason that Croft (1969, p. 89) concludes "manufacturing, physical service and miscellaneous  o f f i c e s are less t i e d to c e n t r a l l o c a -  tions than f i n a n c i a l and professional o f f i c e s . "  In his study Croft (1969,  p. 94) further generally concludes o f f i c e s most amenable to dispersal from downtown 1. Exhibit infrequent face-to-face contacts. 2. Generate face-to-face contacts over a wide geographical range. 3. Generate more t r i p s than v i s i t s . 4. Generate linkages over a r e l a t i v e l y narrow range, i . e . simple linkage pattern. 5. Promote i r r e g u l a r patterns of meetings. 6. Have opportunities for i n t r a - f u n c t i o n a l linkages across the o f f i c e / n o n - o f f i c e boundary e.g. linkages with f a c t o r i e s and shops and therefore would be more w i l l i n g to relocate i n non-traditional o f f i c e centers. Croft's Leeds o f f i c e survey i s e s p e c i a l l y important because i t s h i f t s research attention to other kinds of o f f i c e linkages.  For example, the  volume and c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of o f f i c e to non-office linkages are examined. Results of a "Pedestrian Questionnaire  Survey" indicate "most t r i p s  generated (by o f f i c e s ) are e n t i r e l y divorced from the economic a c t i v i t i e s from which they start and that only a small number of t r i p s generated by o f f i c e s have destinations i n other o f f i c e s . " (Croft 1969,  p. 14)  These  linkages, from an o f f i c e viewpoint, with the s o c i a l i n f r a - s t r u c t u r e (e.g. shops, restaurants, clubs) are usually stimulated by personal and domestic  41.  needs of o f f i c e employees.  They "appear more concentrated l o c a t i o n a l l y  than the economic infra-structure ( r e f l e c t i n g the needs of o f f i c e workers as functional economic u n i t s ) . "  (Croft, 1969, p. 23)  Croft concludes that  " i n spite of v a r i a t i o n s , the importance of contacts with restaurants, shops, etc.  remains preeminent.  These contacts are c l e a r l y v i t a l to a l l kinds of  o f f i c e s and i t can be inferred to a l l types of o f f i c e worker."  (Croft, 1969,  p. 50) A major downtown constraining force pointed out by Croft, then, i s not just o f f i c e linkages i n a complex economic infra-structure but o f f i c e linkages i n a socio-economic infra-structure as w e l l .  In evaluating o f f i c e  l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y the Leeds survey suggests both types of linkages need to be considered.  ii)  Communications Desk Diary Surveys As a detailed discussion of the Communications Desk Diary Survey  (C.D.D.S.) technique can be found i n Goddard's 1973 book "Office Linkages and Location" only the major points need be presented here.  In C.D.D.S.  more detailed examination of o f f i c e communications linkages i s undertaken. Rather than estimation or r e c a l l of communications linkages, survey respondents record d e t a i l s of each contact as and when i t occurs i n a diary i n which one sheet i s used f o r each contact.  A l l contacts, usually  for a three day period, are recorded by the respondent.  Each contact  (face-to-face, telephone) i s treated as a discrete event and no continuous record of the use of time i s maintained.  Figures 4 and 5 are examples of  "meeting" and "telephone contact sheets" used by Goddard i n h i s analysis of o f f i c e communications i n central London.  Similar sheets have been used  i n Stockholm and Dublin to d e t a i l , respectively, communications i n the Swedish C i v i l Service and i n the I r i s h Department of Health.  The data  42.  MEETING .J How long did the meeting l a s t ? 1 • 2 3 4 5  2  2-10  • • n •  RECORD 8  10-30 minutes 30-60 minutes 1 -2 hours m o r e than 2 hours  Was the meeting arranged in advance? 1 2 3 4 5  • • • • •  N o t p r e - a r r a n g e d at a l l A r r a n g e d on the s a m e d a y A r r a n g e d the d a y b e f o r e A r r a n g e d 2-7 d a y s i n a d v a n c e A r r a n g e d m o r e than 1 week in advance  4  Myself/another person in my f i r m A n y p e r s o n outside the f i r m o r any othor organization  1 O 2 O 3 O  a  ' 5 What is the work address of that person ?  Q What is the nature of business of his f i r m ?  I F there was m o r e t h a n o n e other person at the meeting, please complete the details overleaf 7 How often on average do you have a meeting with this person or particular set of people? 1 2 3 4 5  • • • CH •  Daily About once a week About once a month Occasionally F i r s t contact  Figure 4  s t  n  i • ? •  One other p e r s o n 2-4 people 5-10 people o v e r 10 p e o p l e  I F there was O n l y o n e other person at , the meeting : -  One specific subject Several specific subjects A w i d e r a n g e of g e n e r a l s u b j e c t s  10 ^ meeting concerned with the purchase or sale of goods or services?  How many people, apart from you. were at the meeting ? 1 • . 2 • 3 • 4CD  T o give an o r d e r o r i n s t r u c t i o n T o receive an o r d e r o r instruction T o give advice T o receive advice F o r bargaining T o give i n f o r m a t i o n T o receive information T o exchange information F o r general discussion Other (please specify)  Q What was the range of subject matter discussed?  3 Who initiated the meeting ? ! • 2 •  What was the main purpose of $ ho mooting ? 1 G3 2 E3 3(3 4 Q 5 • 6 O 7 • 8 0 9 a 10 •  minutes  3 •  e  D i r e c t l y concerned with purchases or sales Indirectly concerned; with purchases or sales N o t at a l l c o n c e r n e d w i t h purchases or sales  I F the meeting took place outside your place of work : H  What is the address of the meeting place?  | 2 What was your principal method of transport from your office or previous meeting place? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7  n • • n O • •  Walk Bus Private car Taxi Underground Train Plane  ^3 How Jong did this journey take? ) 2 3 4 5  a C3 • • CD  L e s s t h a n 10 m i n u t e s 10-30 minutes 3 0-60 minutes 1-2 h o u r s M o r e than 2 hours  An Example of a Meeting Record Sheet. (Taken from Goddard, J.D. "Office Communications and Office Location: A Review of Current Research" Regional Studies V o l . 5, No. 4, p. 267, 1971)  43.  TELEPHONE CONTACT RECORD 1  How long d i d the contact l a s t ? 1 • 2 • 3 • AC3 5 •  2  W a s the contact arranged i n a d v a n c e ? 1 CD 2C2 3U2 4 0 5C3  3  2-10 minutes 10-30 minutes 30-60 minutes 1-2 h o u r s M o r e than 2 hours  N o t p r e - a r r a n g e d at a l l A r r a n g e d o n the s a m e d a y A r r a n g e d the d a y b e f o r e A r r a n g e d 2-7 days in advance A r r a n g e d m o r e t h a n one w e e k i n a d v a n c e  W h o initiated t h e c o n t a c t ? 1 • 2 •  M y s e l f / a n y other person in m y f i r m A n y p e r s o n o u t s i d e the f i r m o r a n y o t h e r  organization  4  W h a t is the work address of the person w i t h whom you t a l k e d ?  5  W h a t is the nature of business of his firm ?  0  How often on average do you have contact w i t h this person or firm, whichever is the most frequent ? 1 2 3 4 5  7  • O • • •  W h a t w a s the main purpose of this contact ? 1 • 2 • 3 O 4 • SC3 6E3 7 O 8 • 9 • 10 •  3  Daily A b o u t once a w e e k About once a month Occasionally F i r s t contact  T o give an o r d e r or instruction T o receive an order or instruction T o give advice T o receive advice F o r bargaining T o give information T o receive information T o exchange information F o r general discussion Others - please specify  W h a t w a s the range of subject matter d i s c u s s e d ? 1 £3 O n e s p e c i f i c s u b j e c t 2 C D S e v e r a l s p e c i f i c subjects' 3 E 3 A w i d e r u n g o of g c n e i ' a l s u b j e c t s  9  W a s the contact concerned with purchaso or sale of goods or services ? 1 • 2C3 3 0  D i r e c t l y concerned with sales br burchases Iridireatly concerned with sales or purchases N o t iU a l l c o n c e r n e d with s o l e s 6r p u r c h a s e s  Figure 5  An Example of a Telephone Contact Record Sheet (Taken from Goddard, J.D. "Office Communications and Office Location: A Review of Current Research", Regional Studies, V o l . 5, No. 4, p. 268, 1971)  generated from these sheets has been analysed i n several d i f f e r e n t ways, the most important from a l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y standpoint, being Latent P r o f i l e Analysis. Latent P r o f i l e Analysis (a multivariate analysis technique best explained i n Goddard's 1971 paper "Office Communication and Location: A Review of Current Research") enables the p l o t t i n g of c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of respondents  recorded contacts and the concomitant  i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of three  processes which imply l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y of o f f i c e workers, sections, and whole organizations.  In Goddard's (1971, p. 271) words:  " i t can be  established which types of contacts most need face-to-face meetings and therefore demand that the individuals recording these contacts remain i n the c i t y centre."  A c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , stemming from the work of Thorngren  (1970) i n Sweden (see figures 6 and 7) describes three types of contacts (arising from organizational decision-making processes and interactions with the environment) which can be i d e n t i f i e d as p r o f i l e s i n Latent Prof i l e Analysis.  "Orientation" contacts emerge from scanning  socio-economic  environments i n order to i d e n t i f y future p o s s i b l i t i e s and alternatives. "In terms of actual contacts these are found to involve the highest l e v e l decision-makers  i n wide ranging discussions that often take place i n  large, lengthy, preplanned meetings."  (Goddard 1973, p. 190)  contacts occur as new alternatives suggested  "Planning"  i n orientation processes are  developed and r e a l i z e d .  They involve more intensive contact r e l a t i o n s  between individuals who  can use the telephone reinforced by occassional  face-to-face meetings.  A t h i r d and dominant type of contact are "pro-  gramming" contacts which involve day to day management of existing  Figure 6  Sources of Information i n the Development Space (after Thorngren, 1970)  The development space (a concept introduced by Jahstch (1967) i n connection with long run technological development) i s divided into a values environment and a knowledge environment, with a c t i v i t i e s located i n the central section. Most a c t i v i t i e s (programmed processes) (1) operate within contemporary socioeconomic and technological environments. The next largest group (planning processes) (2) l i n k potential s o c i a l values and technologies and are therefore concerned with l i k e l y changes i n the more immediate environments within which programmed a c t i v i t i e s currently operate. F i n a l l y , a very small proportion of t o t a l a c t i v i t y (orientation processes) (3) i s concerned with long term scanning of the environment, reaching out to ideology and basic science. (Taken from Goddard, J.B. Office Linkages and Location, p. 190, 1973.  46.  Figure 7  Contact Patterns i n the Development Space (after Thorngren, 1970)  Orientation processes and related contacts involve a wide ranging and often random scanning of the knowledge and values environments. Planning processes give r i s e to contacts that take the form of a more directed evaluation and development of new p o s s i b i l i t i e s isolated through previous orientation contacts. Programmed a c t i v i t i e s and contacts are severely constrained by existing arrangements, possibly l a i d down i n e a r l i e r planning contacts. (Taken from Goddard, J.B. Office Linkages and Location, p. 191, 1973.)  resources and therefore concern a large volume of routine contacts; i n d i viduals are i n contact on either a regular basis or come together usually by telephone for s p e c i f i c enquiries.  (Goddard 1976,  p.  18)  In Figure 8 (the v i s i b l e and i l l u s t r a t i v e r e s u l t of  undertaking  Latent P r o f i l e Analysis on C.D.D.S. data) class 1 p r o f i l e has i s t i c s corresponding  character-  to "orientation" contacts, class 2 p r o f i l e to  "programming" contacts, and class 3 p r o f i l e to "planning" contacts.  The  l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y this implies i s that c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of "orient a t i o n " contacts (most, for example, are face-to-face meetings) suggest these may  be achieved most e a s i l y i n "information r i c h " downtown locations.  The nature of "planning" and e s p e c i a l l y "programming" contacts on the other hand indicate these could be achieved centres.  i n locations outside c i t y  The number of contacts i n each class p r o f i l e made by an organi-  zation, i t s units, and employees can be determined and the l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y at various l e v e l s of organizational aggregation  deduced.  Goddard on the evidence of his Central London Communications Desk Diary Survey and h i s analysis of the r e s u l t s , concludes that i n terms of o f f i c e to o f f i c e contact c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s most do not need to be located i n central London.  He states:  (1973, p. 212-213)  °0n evidence of the communications survey, over 80% of a l l contacts i n Central London are of a type that could be r e a d i l y c a r r i e d on outside the center. S i g n i f i c a n t l y , around 20% of a l l meetings have characteri s t i c s similar to telephone c a l l s i n short and s p e c i f i c discussions between two familiar people, which suggests that even without the introduction of any technology there i s considerable scope for replacing face-to-face contact with e x i s t i n g telephone services. 1  48. Length  ir  Feedback  Figure 8  A C l a s s i f i c a t i o n of Face-to-Face Meetings and Telephone Contacts Using Latent P r o f i l e Analysis (3 P r o f i l e s ) on Data From a Communications Desk Diary Survey Conducted on Firms i n Central London.  Contacts i n class 1 are meetings of above average length, arrangement and number of people involved; also, these contacts are concerned with above average range of subject matter and an above average degree of feedback. These contacts take place with below average frequency and hence involve generally unfamiliar p a r t i c i pants. In complete contrast, contacts i n class 2 are generally made by telephone, are of below average length, arrangement and number of people involved; these contacts also have below average feedback and are concerned with a below average range of subject matter. On the other hand, contacts i n class 2 take place with above average frequency. Class 3 represents a small but d i s t i n c t i v e group. I t i s characterised by contacts that are generally short, very infrequent, involve only two participants, but which are arranged a long time i n advance. These contacts require a f a i r amount of feedback and are d i r e c t l y concerned with sales or purchases. On the evidence of the latent p r o f i l e analysis there can be l i t t l e doubt that contacts i n class 1 can be associated with the orientation processes. Contacts i n class 3 can be more tentatively associated with planning processes. F i n a l l y , contacts i n class 2 are c l e a r l y of the programmed variety. (Figure and Quote taken from Goddard, J.B. Office Linkages and Location, pp. 195-197, 1973.)  49. Further, (1973, p. 213) Goddard finds that of orientation contacts themselves "only 15 percent recorded i n the survey suggest present t e l e communications would be inappropriate .... p r i n c i p a l l y because they involve a large number of r e l a t i v e l y unfamiliar people i n wide-ranging discussion." While c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of o f f i c e - t o - o f f i c e contacts i n central London indicate latent o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y for o f f i c e s i n general, the l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y of p a r t i c u l a r o f f i c e types or functions Is also suggested.  In other research the r e l a t i v e frequency of "orientation",  "planning" and "programming" contacts i s found to vary with types of organizations.  Bannon (1976, p. 74) notes, for example, that the r e s u l t s of  C.D.D.S. conducted i n national government departments "contrast sharply with the r e s u l t s of studies i n the private sector where a higher proportion of contacts are of the orientation variety and a much smaller proportion are concerned with planning a c t i v i t i e s , i . e . research and development type work or medium range planning." In the work of both Goddard and Bannon the proportion of o r i e n t a tion contacts i n public and private o f f i c e organizations i s shown to vary widely by department type and employee status.  "Market research, long  range planning or organization departments generate a much higher proport i o n of orientation contacts compared with records or accounts departments." (Daniels 1975, p. 151)  "Office workers of the highest status l e v e l have  the highest proportions of contacts associated with the o r i e n t a t i o n network."  (Goddard 1973, p. 200)  Goddard finds, for example, "over 19 percent  of managing directors contacts involve orientation compared to almost 9 percent for executives."  F i n a l l y , analysis of contact c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and patterns of r e l o cated or about to be relocated o f f i c e s (through both C.D.D.S. and Questionnaire Surveys) indicates organizations that relocate from c i t y  centres  have fewer contacts than those which do not. (Goddard and Morris, 1974) Goddard and Morris f i n d , moreover, i t i s those departments most heavily involved i n a diverse network of "non-routine" (orientation) communications that are most reluctant to disperse.  "Departments involved i n routine  (programming) communications tasks (such as giving or receiving  information)  are those that are selected for dispersal or already i n dispersed l o c a tions."  2.  (Goddard and Pye 1976, p. 22)  CRITIQUE OF COMMUNICATIONS QUESTIONNAIRE AND DESK DIARY SURVEYS IN EVALUATION OF OFFICE LOCATIONAL FLEXIBILITY Communications and Desk Diary surveys have attempted to provide a  more s c i e n t i f i c and objective basis f o r evaluation of o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y and, more generally, f o r development of o f f i c e l o c a t i o n p o l i c i e s . They have done t h i s by concentrating upon o f f i c e to o f f i c e communications linkages.  These linkages, however, are not the only or necessarily even  the most important factors a f f e c t i n g o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y .  Croft  found, f o r example, o f f i c e to non-office (social infra-structure) linkages are extremely important.  To be considered  i n evaluation of o f f i c e l o c a -  t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y , as well, i s the nature of o f f i c e activity/work, the need f o r prestige, o f f i c e establishment  s i z e and structure, the rate of  o f f i c e growth and organizational change, i n e r t i a / t r a d i t i o n , and region wide a c c e s s i b i l i t y , technology, o f f i c e market, planning, and p o l i t i c a l f a c t o r s . F i r s t , then, i t must be r e a l i z e d evaluation of o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y through analysis of communications questionnaire and desk diary  surveys has a narrow factor base. The theoretical basis of communications surveys rests on the assumption contact linkages (face-to-face, telephone) are indicators of functional relationships.  While this assumption i s probably j u s t i f i e d i t i s bound by  the fact existing functional relationships indicated by patterns of communications might not r e f l e c t optimal or necessary locations with respect to currently available or future telecommunications technology.  It i s  especially d i f f i c u l t i n communications questionnaire surveys to get at the "essentialness" of existing o f f i c e communications linkages.  "Communications  questionnaire surveys most frequently obtain only a narrow assessment of needs as expressed  subjectively by representatives of firms which can only  give part of the o v e r a l l picture of linkages and, by inference, l o c a t i o n a l requirements."  (Croft, 1969,  p.  14)  By examining the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of contact linkages i n greater d e t a i l and as they occur desk diary surveys may,  perhaps, more o b j e c t i v e l y  measure the strength or need of e x i s t i n g contact linkages and the extent these may  limit office locational f l e x i b i l i t y .  Knowledge of the o b j e c t i v i t y  of desk diary surveys i s diminished by the d i f f i c u l t y of checking  the  actual diary d i s t r i b u t i o n and accuracy of recorded responses within o f f i c e s surveyed. In general, the value and p r a c t i c a l i t y of o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y evaluations based on desk diary and questionnaire communications surveys i s s u b s t a n t i a l l y reduced by survey and sampling procedural culties.  diffi-  Both types of surveys present serious access and motivation  problems for organizations and researchers a l i k e .  A lengthy personal  approach to e n l i s t the support and cooperation of o f f i c e organizations  and representatives, e s p e c i a l l y for desk diary surveys, i s frequently necessary.  The surveys, then, are time consuming, detailed and expensive.  Where the time horizon i s f i v e to ten years as i t usually i s i n urban planning, and so longer than the cycle of s i g n i f i c a n t organizational, environmental, and personnel changes these surveys may  be overly rigorous.  On the same grounds their p r a c t i c a l i t y at a broad l e v e l of planning p o l i c y determination  may  be doubted.  In summary communications questionnaire and desk diary surveys have made and can make important contributions to evaluation of o f f i c e locational f l e x i b i l i t y .  These methods also have however, both p r a c t i c a l  and t h e o r e t i c a l shortcomings which l i m i t t h e i r usefulness to urban planners and o f f i c e location decision-makers.  V.  SUMMARY AND  GENERAL CONCLUSIONS  A.  FACTORS INFLUENCING THE LOCATION AND OF OFFICES  LOCATIONAL FLEXIBILITY  A labyrinth of factors influence both the location and l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y of o f f i c e s .  I t i s d i f f i c u l t to categorize a l l these factors  or to i s o l a t e and define p r e c i s e l y t h e i r changing, intermingling a f f e c t s on o f f i c e location and l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y .  An attempt, nevertheless,  to i d e n t i f y and b r i e f l y summarize what appear to be major factors and  their  possible influences on o f f i c e location and l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y follows. It i s clear s i x i n t e r - r e l a t e d and important factors which operate largely within or " i n t e r n a l " to any organization and influence o f f i c e location and l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y are:  the nature of o f f i c e a c t i v i t y /  work; the frequency, character and pattern of contacts; organizational and  53.  occupational prestige; o f f i c e establishment size and organizational ture; the rate of growth and organizational  change; and  struc-  organizational  t r a d i t i o n or i n e r t i a .  1.  "Internal"  Factors  i ) The Nature of Office Activity/Work In the l i t e r a t u r e a c t i v i t y performed i n o f f i c e organizations broadly c l a s s i f i e d as either routine or non-routine. the two  o f f i c e a c t i v i t y types are l o c a t i o n a l l y and  is  To a c e r t a i n extent  organizationally  enmeshed and no clear d i s t i n c t i o n on the r e l a t i v e attractiveness of downtown for both i s ventured.  Routine processes, and organizations  i n which  they predominate, however, are t y p i c a l l y considered most location f l e x ible.  There i s evidence t h i s routine type o f f i c e a c t i v i t y i n  i s very often the type to be relocated outside c i t y Work performed by o f f i c e organizations  organizations  centres.  (reflected i n S.I.C. and  other o f f i c e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s ) permits only broad and q u a l i f i e d conclusions on i t s location and l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y .  Research and o f f i c e work  organizationally and functionally linked with non-office functions find c i t y centres least a t t r a c t i v e and, for dispersal from downtowns.  may  as a r e s u l t , have greater potential  Specialized o f f i c e work, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n  f i n a n c i a l or "quaternary" spheres may,  on the other hand, be especially  drawn to, and d i f f i c u l t to extricate from, downtown.  I i ) The Frequency, Character, and Pattern of Contacts Need of o f f i c e - t o - o f f i c e , public, and s o c i a l infra-structure contacts are major downtown location reasons and l i m i t the scope of o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l  flexibility.  In general, the greater the frequency of contacts (particu-  l a r l y face-to-face contacts) the greater i s assumed their need, the stronger the a t t r a c t i o n of the c i t y centre, and the more an o f f i c e organization i s thought " t i e d i n " to the c i t y centre.  Similarly the more o f f i c e - t o - o f f i c e  contacts that are " o r i e n t a t i o n " or "non-routine" i n character the greater the c i t y centre p u l l and the less location f l e x i b l e o f f i c e s are considered to be.  The proportion of these contact types i s largely a function of  o f f i c e a c t i v i t y or work type and organizational and occupational prestige. "Programming" or "routine" and to a lesser degree "planning" contacts are associated with routine a c t i v i t y or work i n middle lower status organizations, departments, and occupations. orientation contacts.  The opposite seems to be true of  O f f i c e - t o - o f f i c e contacts described as narrow,  simple or dispersed i n both organizational and geographical senses may be considered i n d i c a t i v e of inherent l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y .  Contacts  crossing the office/non-office occupational boundary ( i . e . contacts with warehouses, plants, laboratories) also suggest potential f o r l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y towards, at l e a s t , these contact sources. Apart from o f f i c e - t o - o f f i c e and public contacts are o f f i c e " s o c i a l " contacts.  Characteristics of o f f i c e s o c i a l contacts, not so f a r shown to  vary with o f f i c e activity/work types i n organizational or occupational prestige, remain sketchy.  The f a c i l i t a t i o n of s o c i a l contacts may, however,  demand their l o c a t i o n a l concentration and that primarily they be carried out i n a face-to-face fashion.  These contacts, as much as other types,  may l i m i t the l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y of o f f i c e s .  i i i ) Organizational and Occupational Prestige Symbolic and image-making nations of "being at the centre"; of being " v i s i b l e " ; and of being among prestigious organizations o f f i c e s downtown.  (and people) a t t r a c t  The extent of the a t t r a c t i o n and the degree these ideas  l i m i t the l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y of o f f i c e s i s currently being debated. At an organizational l e v e l the desire or need for prestige or status i s seen as a function of market s i z e .  At an occupational  l e v e l i t i s seen as a  function of decision-making authority and commensurate r e s p o n s i b i l i t y . Offices serving national or regional markets and decision-makers of high authority and r e s p o n s i b i l i t y may be thought p a r t i c u l a r l y to desire prestige and to gain i t s physical expression downtown.  iv) O f f i c e Establishment Size and Organizational  Structure  Office location theory suggests downtown, with i t s abundant external agglomeration economies may have greater attractiveness f o r small than large o f f i c e s .  Locational f l e x i b i l i t y i s t e n t a t i v e l y thought to decrease  with increasing o f f i c e establishment s i z e i n terms of employment.  Evidence  on moves made by o f f i c e organizations from central London, however, suggests both large and small o f f i c e s have more d i f f i c u l t y  dispersing from c i t y  centres than do medium size (in terms of employees) o f f i c e s . The e f f e c t of organizational structure on o f f i c e l o c a t i o n and l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y i s l a r g e l y unexplored.  I t i s suggested o f f i c e s having  complicated organizational structures are p o t e n t i a l l y less l o c a t i o n f l e x i b l e than those with simple, straight-forward  structures.  Also o f f i c e s having  decentralized decision-making and r e s p o n s i b i l i t y hierarchies may be more location f l e x i b l e than those where decision-making and r e s p o n s i b i l i t y are centralized.  They may also f i n d downtown locations less a t t r a c t i v e than  their "centralized"  counterparts.  v) Rate of Growth and Organizational Change Rapidly growing and/or changing o f f i c e organizations ( i . e . those increasing their employees, frequently reorganizing, merging, s p l i t t i n g ) are considered p o t e n t i a l l y more l o c a t i o n f l e x i b l e than their opposites. Reasons f o r relocating o f f i c e s within, and frequently to s i t e s outside c i t y centres, stem to a surprising degree from d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n with physical accommodation.  Organizations growing or changing r a p i d l y are l i k e l y to  more quickly become d i s s a t i s f i e d with the q u a l i t y , quantity, and l o c a t i o n of their o f f i c e accommodation.  They may have a strong desire to c o n s o l i -  date l o c a t i o n a l l y scattered u n i t s .  Locational f l e x i b i l i t y , more s p e c i f i -  c a l l y , amenability to suburban or other l o c a t i o n alternatives may increase as accommodation problems loom larger as a consequence of rapid organizat i o n a l growth or change.  v i ) Organizational I n e r t i a or Tradition Inertia or t r a d i t i o n , l i k e prestige, i s extremely abstract.  The  degree i t a t t r a c t s o f f i c e s downtown and l i m i t s their l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y i s unknown.  The broad influence of i n e r t i a , largely independent of any  single o f f i c e , i s probably dependent on e x i s t i n g and past l o c a t i o n a l concentration of o f f i c e s and i s l i k e l y r e f l e c t e d i n the conditions and configurations of the metropolitan o f f i c e market.  Tradition's influence,  working l a r g e l y within o f f i c e organizations, may be thought a function of organization age, the time length of senior s t a f f tenure, the time spent i n one l o c a t i o n , whether accommodation i s owned or leased, and perhaps generally the rate of organization growth or change.  2.  "External"  Factors  Four broad, multifaceted  factors operating  l a r g e l y outside the pur-  view of a single o f f i c e organization but influencing any o f f i c e ' s location and l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y are:  "General" and " s p e c i a l " physical a c c e s s i -  b i l i t y downtown; the state of telecommunications and transportation technology; the state of the metropolitan o f f i c e market; and metropolitan planning and p o l i t i c s .  i ) "General" and "Special" Physical A c c e s s i b i l i t y Downtown The benefits and costs of physical a c c e s s i b i l i t y are l i k e l y major o f f i c e l o c a t i o n considerations.  "General" a c c e s s i b i l i t y of downtown may  be p a r t i c u l a r l y a t t r a c t i v e to o f f i c e s looking f o r easy access to the urban labour market and the public at large.  "Special" a c c e s s i b i l i t y downtown  may be e s p e c i a l l y a t t r a c t i v e to o f f i c e s benefiting from a wide range of agglomeration economies, conveniences, and i n t a n g i b i l i t i e s .  The importance  of " s p e c i a l " a c c e s s i b i l i t y to a l l o f f i c e s i s enhanced by the " s o c i a l i n f r a - s t r u c t u r e " contacts i t f a c i l i t a t e s . The degree to which "general" and " s p e c i a l " a c c e s s i b i l i t y are obtainable  i n metropolitan locations other than downtown l i k e l y  p o t e n t i a l f o r o f f i c e relocation from downtown.  influences  The greater the monopoly  downtown has on both types of a c c e s s i b i l i t y the less location f l e x i b l e both private and public o f f i c e s are l i k e l y to be.  i i ) The State of Telecommunications and Transportation  Systems  The changes i n telecommunications and transportation systems have r a d i c a l l y altered urban land use patterns  i n the twentieth century.  There  i s no disagreement that the unadvanced state of transportation and communications technology e a r l i e r i n t h i s century promoted compact c i t i e s with dense, heterogeneous cores.  The automobile and telephone have permitted  a much more dispersed urban land use pattern today.  Location pattern of  o f f i c e s , however, has undergone the l e a s t and slowest transformation.  Dis-  cussion pivots today on the o f f i c e location pattern currently possible as well as the future o f f i c e location pattern that current and future transportation and communications systems might engender. suggest creation of pervasive metropolitan  Some researchers  physical a c c e s s i b i l i t y by  transportation technology and substitution of non-physical for physical a c c e s s i b i l i t y by communications technology can and w i l l decentralize o f f i c e s from c i t y centres.  Other researchers  suggest a growing need f o r face-to-  face communications not s a t i s f i a b l e by telecommunications technology may well perpetuate and perhaps increase the need f o r downtown o f f i c e concentrations.  i i i ) The State of the Metropolitan  O f f i c e Market  O f f i c e market l i t e r a t u r e (inherently oriented towards economics and finance) suggests uncertainty i n metropolitan  o f f i c e markets, a good portion  of which may be generated by public sector o f f i c e a c t i v i t i e s helps sway o f f i c e s to downtown or to other "established" locations. l o c a t i o n a l d i s p o s i t i o n of existing metropolitan  As w e l l , the  o f f i c e sub-markets at once  influences, and i s l i k e l y influenced by, the l o c a t i o n and r e l a t i v e s i z e of government o f f i c e space demand and supply.  The extent of influence, down-  town or elsewhere, i s affected by whether or not public o f f i c e space demand i s met by leased or self-constructed and owned o f f i c e space.  iv) Metropolitan Planning and P o l i t i c s Downtown oriented metropolitan planning and p o l i t i c s may increase the a t t r a c t i o n of downtown for public and private o f f i c e s and may l i m i t their l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y .  Land use, zoning, floorspace and other  planning regulations generally l i m i t major o f f i c e development to c i t y centres.  The more these l e g a l controls favor, or are seen to favor, down-  town over other metropolitan locations the less location f l e x i b l e private and public o f f i c e s are l i k e l y to be. The r i s k of public c o n f l i c t or controversy amongst levels of government may be lessened when established locations ( l i k e downtown) for public o f f i c e s are proposed and chosen.  B.  GENERAL OFFICE LOCATIONAL FLEXIBILITY FINDINGS The findings of the three approaches to assessment of o f f i c e loca-  tional f l e x i b i l i t y  ( i d e n t i f i e d i n the l i t e r a t u r e ) generally indicate o f f i c e  organizations i n Europe and North America have substantial i n t r a metropolitan l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y .  The monitoring of o f f i c e dispersal  from European and North American c i t y centres reveals that i n many c i t i e s private and public o f f i c e s are being relocated at least short distances outside c i t y centres.  The majority of o f f i c e representatives surveyed do not  f e e l a c i t y centre location e s s e n t i a l .  The volume and c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of  stated and recorded o f f i c e - t o - o f f i c e contacts suggests many could be conveniently maintained outside c i t y centres by existing telecommunications systems. It i s notable from the Federal o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y problem background of this thesis that communications questionnaire surveys i n  Ireland, B r i t a i n , and Vancouver indicate (in terms of stated o f f i c e - t o o f f i c e contacts) government o f f i c e s are less " t i e d - i n " to c i t y centre locations than many p r i v a t e o f f i c e s .  A similar conclusion i s implied i f  Bannon i s correct and Communications Desk Diary surveys do indeed show fewer " o r i e n t a t i o n " type contacts i n public than private o f f i c e s . *  C.  APPRAISAL OF CURRENT APPROACHES TO THE ASSESSMENT OF OFFICE LOCATIONAL FLEXIBILITY:  THE NEED FOR AN ALTERNATIVE METHODOLOGY  A l l three approaches to the assessment of o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y could be further employed and more findings obtained i n the general Canadian, and s p e c i f i c Vancouver, contents.  While each approach would  be h e l p f u l i n the evaluation of o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y , the scope for objectively determining which o f f i c e s r e a l l y need to be located i n c i t y centres, and which do not, seems greatest with the Direct Linkage Analysis approach.  Detailed data on contact volumes and c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s  p a r t i c u l a r l y obtained through Communications Desk Diary Surveys has been used i n B r i t a i n , Ireland, and Sweden to determine which national government departments (or sections of departments) have weak l i n k s with the c i t y centre and are therefore l i k e l y candidates for relocation to economically  *Opinions that government may have a less compelling need for c i t y centre o f f i c e locations than private firms are based primarily on the assumption that government i s able to give less weight to economic (location theory and o f f i c e market) reasons i n choosing o f f i c e locations. Jean Gottman (1967, 327) feels "Competition does not have the importance for governmental agencies as i t does for establishments that do not enjoy the monopolistic p r i v i l e g e s of government." Daniels s i m i l a r l y suggests that competition and "economics" place greater l o c a t i o n a l constraints on private o f f i c e s . He states (1969, 174) " P o l i t i c s rather than economics of location may well be an important factor on determining the d i s t r i b u t i o n of government o f f i c e s . " L a s t l y , Gerald Manners (1974, 100) f e e l s "Their (public o f f i c e s ) location i s constrained by the need to assemble an appropriate labour force, some public f a c i l i t i e s also need to afford a high l e v e l of public a c c e s s i b i l i t y . Nevertheless, most federal and state government a c t i v i t i e s are to a considerable degree footloose within the metrop o l i t a n area."  depressed regions ( i . e . o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y at the "regional" rather than "metropolitan" scale).  Unfortunately Direct Linkage Analysis  (valuable and important as i t i s ) provides only a narrow factor and theoretical basis f o r evaluation of o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y .  As  well, i n i t s undertaking, i t presents severe p r a c t i c a l problems f o r both researcher and the surveyed o f f i c e organizations.  In evaluation of o f f i c e  l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y by urban planners and/or o f f i c e location decisionmakers an alternative methodology needs to be developed.  A methodology  i s required which maintains a reasonable degree of o b j e c t i v i t y and s p e c i f i c i t y yet considers the broad range of factors a f f e c t i n g l o c a t i o n a l flexibility.  The method must be e a s i l y and quickly enough undertaken so  as to contribute to the planning and/or l o c a t i o n a l decision-making before and as they occur.  processes  I t should be applicable to o f f i c e s of a l l kinds  and, i f possible, be based on work already done to avoid duplication of effort.  The method should be adjustable and amenable to changes, new  findings and new  situations.  I t might be employed before or i n p a r a l l e l  with more rigorous and deterministic communications questionnaire and/or desk diary surveys.  When used f i r s t , questionable or controversial  findings of such a method might suggest where more detailed and rigorous analysis be undertaken.  If used i n p a r a l l e l with communications question-  naire and/or desk diary surveys the l a t t e r might serve as c r i t e r i o n with which to compare the findings of the former. In conclusion, i t i s clear from the review of the l i t e r a t u r e urban planners and, i n p a r t i c u l a r , federal o f f i c e location decision-makers benefit from development of an alternative methodology for assessing  could  office locational f l e x i b i l i t y .  In the next chapter of t h i s thesis such a  methodology i s developed and tested with respect departments' downtown o f f i c e s i n Vancouver.  to federal government  While an evaluation  of federal  government o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y based on findings generated i n a testing of an alternate, new methodology i s inevitable and desirable, i t i s insights into the general problem of o f f i c e l o c a t i n a l f l e x i b i l i t y assessment gained during the process of methodology development and testing which are c h i e f l y sought.  CHAPTER 3:  A METHOD FOR  ASSESSING THE METROPOLITAN LOCATIONAL FLEXIBILITY  OF OFFICES AND  ITS APPLICATION TO FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OFFICES  IN VANCOUVER I.  INTRODUCTION It i s posited that investigation of l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y i s a f i r s t  and necessary step i n determination of the f e a s i b i l i t y of o f f i c e location decisions which could reinforce l o c a l l y formulated plans yet not harm the e f f i c i e n c y of o f f i c e operational a c t i v i t i e s .  A review of the l i t e r a t u r e i n  Chapter 2 has exposed factors which influence the location and l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y of o f f i c e s and  three approaches:  1) the monitoring of o f f i c e  dispersal to non-downtown locations; 2) the determining of the perceived need of o f f i c e location decision-makers for downtown o f f i c e locations;  and  3) the d i r e c t analysis of o f f i c e communications linkages, used to assess office locational f l e x i b i l i t y .  The evidence obtained from application of  these three approaches to o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y problems does not present a strong nor s p e c i f i c enough foundation on which to base a p r a c t i c a l assessment of federal government o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y i n Vancouver. While a l l three approaches could be undertaken to assess federal o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y i t i s clear an alternative method of assessment needs to be developed.  An alternative methodology needs to be developed because:  1) the determining of the perceived need for downtown locations of o f f i c e location decision-makers and the monitoring of o f f i c e dispersal to  non-  downtown locations expose only the extent o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y i s perceived and acted upon and not the r e a l or possible degree of l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y that might be exercised by d i f f e r e n t o f f i c e organizations; the Direct Linkage Analysis approach, while providing  the greatest  2)  scope  for objective assessment of o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y , has only a narrow  64.  factor and theoretical basis. factor —  That i s to say i t generally considers only one  existing o f f i c e - t o - o f f i c e contacts —  i n i t s assessments of o f f i c e  l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y ; 3) undertaking Direct Linkage Analysis presents p r a c t i c a l problems c h i e f l y i n the form of the personal and lengthy approach required to e n l i s t support and cooperation within o f f i c e organizations. Direct Linkage Analysis surveys are thus time consuming and expensive. may not be able to contribute to the o f f i c e location decision-making when decisions are quickly required.  They  process  Also, considering their detailed nature  and the usual 5 to 10 year time horizon for urban planning, they may be overly rigorous for use by urban planners.  So even though i t i s recommended i n  Chapter 2 communications and desk diary surveys be further developed  and  findings obtained i n Canada neither of these methods meets the probable time and resource constraints of practicing planners and location  decision-makers  or the r e a l time and resource l i m i t s facing this researcher. In sum,  consideration of the merits and faults of the three approaches  used so far to assess o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y leads to questioning their p r a c t i c a l i t y and appropriateness. methodology i s developed  and tested.  In this chapter an alternative  The f i r s t part of the chapter c h i e f l y  explains the method which was constructed and applied to the problem of assessing federal government o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y i n Vancouver. The second part presents findings from the a p p l i c a t i o n of the methodology.  P A R T  1  A METHOD FOR ASSESSING THE METROPOLITAN LOCATIONAL FLEXIBILITY OF OFFICES  66.  II.  A METHOD FOR ASSESSING THE METROPOLITAN LOCATIONAL FLEXIBILITY OF OFFICES  A.  The C r i t e r i a Check L i s t The major factors influencing o f f i c e location and l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i -  b i l i t y (distilled  i n Chapter 2) make up a framework for the analysis of o f f i c e  locational f l e x i b i l i t y .  The framework consists of the ten factors (six  i n t e r n a l , four external to an o f f i c e organization) their relevant characteristics,  and their l i k e l y influence on l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y .  These  factors, c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , and influences are based primarily on current knowledge as r e f l e c t e d i n the l i t e r a t u r e .  The word " l i k e l y " preceding  loca-  t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y influences r e f l e c t s the uncertainty surrounding these influences.  I t i s by no means established, f o r example, how organizational  structure and o f f i c e establishment  size influence o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i -  b i l i t y or location, f o r that matter.  Indeed, these c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s are  themselves imperfectly understood and described. factors making up the framework.  This fact applies to a l l  E s p e c i a l l y d i f f i c u l t to assess are the  constantly changing influences of the external factors.  Metropolitan  general  and special a c c e s s i b i l i t y , communications and transportation systems, metrop o l i t a n o f f i c e markets, and planning and p o l i t i c s are unique and constantly changing elements acting on o f f i c e organizations i n every c i t y . In the framework, then (Table 1) location and l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y influences f o r i n t e r n a l factors and their c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s are described, depending on the evidence available, as tending towards "increased", "decreased" or indeterminate locational f l e x i b i l i t y .  ( i . e . possibly increased/possible decreased) For external factors no c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s or i n f l u -  ences are ventured i n Table 1.  67. C R I T E R I A  CHECK  FREQUENCY, CHARACTER AND PATTERN OF CONTACTS  PRESTIGE  ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE, ESTABLISHMENT SIZE  RATE OF ORGANIZATIONAL GROWTH AND CHANGE  TRADITION  INFLUENCE*  RELEVANT CHARACTERISTICS  INTERNAL FACTORS  NATURE OF. ACTIVITY/WORK  L I S T  PRIMARILY NON-ROUTINE ASSOCIATED WITH QUATERNARY SECTOR ASSOCIATED WITH NON-OFFICE WORK PRIMARILY RESEARCH PRIMARILY ROUTINE  4F IF i F t F t F  FREQUENT FACE-TO-FACT PUBLIC CONTACT INFREQUENT FACE-TO-FACE PUBLIC CONTACT PROBABLY "ORIENTATION" CONTACTS PROBABLY "PLANNING" CONTACTS PROBABLY "PROGRAMMING" CONTACTS FREQUENT NON-DOWNTOWN CONTACTS FREQUENT CONTACTS WITH NON-OFFICE WORKERS  4 F tF iF VF tF tF tF  HIGH ORGANIZATIONAL STATUS MIDDLE ORGANIZATION STATUS LOW ORGANIZATION STATUS HIGH OCCUPATIONAL STATUS MIDDLE OCCUPATIONAL STATUS LOW OCCUPATIONAL STATUS  JF H F tF i F S.F tF  "CENTRALIZED", COMPLICATED STRUCTURE "DECENTRALIZED", UNCOMPLICATED STRUCTURE LARGE SMALL MEDIUM 1  U i n Total Employ + %A  INDEX NUMBER = ^ ^ ^ V ^ ^ V J T n f i n % of Depts. Total Office | Space Outside Downtown LENGTH OF TIME DOWNTOWN  ° Short L  n g  i F tF i F tF t F  4F iF  tF  EXTERNAL FACTORS "GENERAL" AND "SPECIAL" ACCESSIBILITY COMMUNICATION/TRANSPORTATION  SYSTEMS  METROPOLITAN OFFICE MARKET METROPOLITAN PLANNING AND POLITICS * tF *F *»F  - Tends Towards Increased Locational F l e x i b i l i t y - Tends Towards Decreased Locational F l e x i b i l i t y - Locational F l e x i b i l i t y Influence Indeterminate  TABLE  I  68.  The framework i s a check l i s t of what are f a i r l y conventional but extremely d i f f i c u l t to measure and weight c r i t e r i a that need to be examined i n any evaluation of o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y . stable or immutable.  The framework i s not  I t i s an analytic tool which can be modified and  refined through use and as further o f f i c e research i s conducted. B.  The Nature and Process of the Evaluation The two major d i f f i c u l t i e s i n applying the C r i t e r i a Check L i s t to the  problem of evaluating o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y are:  1) the measurement  of each factors' influence on l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y and 2) weighting the r e l a t i v e importance of each factor.  These d i f f i c u l t i e s strongly influence  the nature and process of this evaluation.  The changeable, i n t e r - r e l a t e d ,  and complex nature of factors and their influences makes their r e l i a b l e i s o l a t i o n and measurement a d i f f i c u l t task.  In the use of the C r i t e r i a Check  L i s t , surrogate measures must be r e l i e d upon. The importance of "weighting" of factors by location decision-makers can vary from time to time and from one organization to another.  Indeed  there i s no reason to suppose any especially clear-cut weighting i s given to certain factors or combinations of factors when the downtown/non-downtown l o c a t i o n a l decision comes up.  It i s possible that an i n f i n i t e l y heavy but  fuzzy weighting i s consciously or unconsciously applied to one or a few factors i n r e l a t i o n to others.  It i s very l i k e l y the convenience and preju-  dices of senior management play a major part i n t h i s .  In using the C r i t e r i a  Check L i s t factors are encouraged to be e x p l i c i t l y weighted.  In this evalua-  tion the Check L i s t s ' internal factors (and d i f f e r e n t combinations of i n t e r n a l factors) are weighted by the researcher.  In r e a l i t y the weightings of a l l  factors should be discussed, agreed and/or disagreed upon, p e r i o d i c a l l y reviewed, and perhaps ultimately come from the collaboration of o f f i c e  69.  location decision-makers and urban planners. The evaluation, while systematic and a n a l y t i c , becomes, when factors must be weighted, a subjective "decision-making" problem with no easy or obvious r e s o l u t i o n .  Objective l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y analysis, and  simpler,  more e f f i c i e n t methods of undertaking i t , are necessary ( i f o f f i c e l o c a t i o n i s to be used as a t o o l i n urban or organizational planning strategies) but are not, i n fact, the problem's solution. but not a l l the way.  They may  take us a good way  there,  Consequently, i n application of the methodology to  federal government o f f i c e s i n Vancouver, an empirical and absolute of t h e i r l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y i s out of the question. mates of downtown federal o f f i c e employees who f l e x i b l e " are not derived.  evaluation  Departmental e s t i -  can be considered " l o c a t i o n  Rather a comparative, more general and  subjective  l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y appraisal of federal o f f i c e s downtown (at a Departmental l e v e l of organizational d e t a i l ) i s ventured by using written and already existent material (reports, pamphlets, organization charts, etc.) on federal departments i n Vancouver.  Application of the C r i t e r i a Check L i s t to  this information base becomes at each stage of the analysis more general, subjective, and judgemental and r e l i e s greatly upon reasonableness and personal judgement.  The v i r t u e of the C r i t e r i a Check L i s t , however, i s that  i t demands that what i s considered reasonable be made e x p l i c i t .  Criticism  and disagreement on reasonableness can be open and focussed whenever i t i s employed.  Use of the framework encourages the mind-frame of a judge —  open and as far as possible consciously objective attempt to evaluate  an office  locational f l e x i b i l i t y . After the information gathering phase, which i s f i r s t , there are three stages to this evaluation.  70.  C.  Stage One of the Evaluation The i n i t i a l stage of the evaluation i s an assessment of the comparative  l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y of 15 sample federal departments based on the s i x i n t e r n a l factors of the C r i t e r i a Check L i s t . c l a s s i f i e d into four categories:  The sample departments are  1) most l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e , 2) l o c a -  t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e , 3) l o c a t i o n a l l y i n f l e x i b l e , and 4) most l o c a t i o n a l l y i n flexible.  This evaluation i s made f i r s t with respect to each i n t e r n a l factor  as i f i t could be separated.  That i s to say s i x d i f f e r e n t r e l a t i v e o f f i c e  l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y evaluations of 15 sample federal departments are presented with respect to:  1) the nature of o f f i c e activity/work; 2) the  frequency, charcter, and pattern of contacts; 3) prestige; 4) o f f i c e establishment size and organizational structure; 5) the rate of growth and organizational change; and 6) t r a d i t i o n .  Second, a comparative evaluation (or  c l a s s i f i c a t i o n ) of these departments i s made for the s i x i n t e r n a l factors combined.  An explanation of the way departments are evaluated with respect  to each i n t e r n a l factor separately and with respect to a l l s i x i n t e r n a l factors combined follows.  1.  Working Departmental Composite Sheets To aid i n the analysis what t h i s researcher c a l l s "Working Departmental  Composite Sheets" are constructed for each department.  These sheets are  matrices which permit both quantitative and q u a l i t a t i v e information to be recorded.  Across the top of each sheet the i n t e r n a l factors, their relevant  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , and l i k e l y e f f e c t on l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y are arrayed to form columns.  On the l e f t margin of each sheet a department's downtown  o f f i c e establishments  and t i t l e s representing the various organizational  sections or units within o f f i c e establishments the r i g h t , the size of o f f i c e establishments  are l i s t e d .  Beside i t , on  i n square feet and numbers of  71.  employees as well as the breakdown (where ascertainable) of numbers of employees by various organizational sections or units i s presented. presents a sample Working Departmental Composite Sheet.  Figure 9  Completed Working  Departmental Composite Sheets can be found f o r the 15 departments sampled i n Appendix V.  2.  Indicators The type and quality of indicators used i n the analysis depends on the  nature of the factor evaluated, the information available, and the researcher's ingenuity.  While some indicators were developed before information gathering  from departments began most were conceived only as the information available became apparent.  The following pages explain, factor by factor, how  these  indicators are employed, the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s they denote, and the influences made on their use.  In Appendix I these written pages are capsulized i n  table form. i ) The Nature of Activity/Work Performed i n Department Offices Downtown The analysis c h i e f l y attempts to characterize federal o f f i c e employees as having jobs of either a "routine" or "non-routine" nature.  As well, an  e f f o r t i s made to i d e n t i f y employees whose o f f i c e jobs e n t a i l research work, are connected with non-office work, and/or are associated with the f i n a n c i a l or "quaternary" spheres downtown. From the l i t e r a t u r e i t seems reasonable to i n f e r that federal employees and o f f i c e s involved i n routine, research, or non-routine functions have (potentially at least) greater l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y than those comprising non-routine or " f i n a n c i a l " work.  The greater the proportion of employees  having jobs with the former c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s the greater i s assumed a department's o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y .  72.  SAMPLE WORKING DEPARTMENTAL COMPOSITE SHEET__  NATURE  INTERNAL FACTORS  OF ACTIVITY/  -WORK,  F R E Q U E N C Y , C H A R A C T E R 4P A T T E R N OF CONTACTS  PRESTIGE  OFFICE. ATIONAL  LOCATIONAL FLEXIBILITY INFLUENCES  T sq  OF  OF  R E L E V A N T CRAR| O F E I C E J ¥MFC6Y ACTER15T1C5 SPACE  DEPARTMENTS ESTABLISHMENTS  biFlF\FfFtFTF  ET  EES  S513  mi tli  3  or  3  x * x  •<0H  If f |f  !£2  Z  5  HO- C  t  *  [US IS f i s P ,  i£  £  Figure 9  O  o  a;  2 o o  -fsi s  u. a5^  1  ORGANIZATIONAL GROWTH +-CHANG E.  TRADITION  STRUCTURE.  ft OF "fcA«S>  f-  Is  ui 8  ttFiFTFlFtFfF. -(•Of  ESTABLISH-  M E N T SIZ.E. t O R G A N I Z -  c  ui  u  m  IH TcrrM-  IN T o T A U  INDE* 5Pnce. i n  O U  VANCOUVER.  mi--Jfe  THE % Op  mi--it>  SPA<£ tWTSIDg.  CP  73.  The two indicators mainly used to c l a s s i f y the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of employee's jobs i n federal o f f i c e establishments are:  Department, section,  unit and occupational t i t l e s found i n organization charts, reports, and government telephone l i s t i n g s ; and the government's own job c l a s s i f i c a t i o n and h i e r a r c h i c a l system seen i n organization charts and represented i n the Federal Job C l a s s i f i c a t i o n Pyramid (found i n Appendix I ) . Wherever possible both indicators are used to c l a s s i f y the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of employee's jobs (in sections and units of departments). The t i t l e s presented as i n d i c a t i v e of employee's job c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s i n the tables of Appendix I are chosen from the researcher's own reasoning, from the l i t e r a t u r e , and from information provided by interviews with Department o f f i c i a l s .  Employee's job c h a r a c t e r i s t i c categories derived from the  existing federal job and h i e r a r c h i c a l c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s are based primarily on the federal description of the nature of jobs or work represented by i t s c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s ( i n the Occupational C l a s s i f i c a t i o n Manual: Canada, 1971.  Census of  See Appendix I ) .  Further clues to the general nature of work performed by employees i n certain departmental  sections and-,,units are found i n job or task descriptions  and key words gleaned from reports, federal job advertisements, and i n the Canada Public Service Careers pamphlet.  Interview statements with, p a r t i c u -  l a r l y , personnel o f f i c e r s and observation are also h e l p f u l but more limited ways of gaining insight into the nature of work performed i n federal o f f i c e establishments downtown.  i i ) The Frequency, Character and Pattern of Departmental O f f i c e Contacts Downtown Quantification of frequency, character and pattern of contacts by the methods discussed i n Chapter 2 i s the major foundation from which recent  74.  assessments of o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y have been launched.  Since the  genesis of this study i s an e f f o r t to develop an alternative to these methods no s i m i l a r l y elaborate quantification of t h i s factor i s ventured. The major concern of this analysis i s to c l a s s i f y employee's jobs i n sections or units of departments as e n t a i l i n g either "frequent" or " i n f r e quent" face-to-face contacts with the downtown p u b l i c .  The downtown public  i s the public at large who may work downtown or come downtown to v i s i t a federal government o f f i c e (or on other pleasure or business related matters). The downtown public includes other government employees and specified department c l i e n t e l e whose place of work i s downtown.  Further an e f f o r t i s made to  i d e n t i f y employees l i k e l y having s i g n i f i c a n t amounts of face-to-face contacts with non-office employees and with s t a f f or c l i e n t e l e located outside downtown Vancouver. Judging from the l i t e r a t u r e i t seems legitimate to conclude that federal department o f f i c e s with few employees whose jobs e n t a i l frequent face-to-face public contacts downtown are p o t e n t i a l l y more location f l e x i b l e than those with many.  Federal department o f f i c e s with employees having frequent face-  to-face contacts across the office/non-office work boundary or with contact sources outside downtown might s i m i l a r l y be thought more location f l e x i b l e than department o f f i c e s lacking such employees. The findings i n the l i t e r a t u r e suggest, while frequency, character, and pattern of contacts i s associated with many v a r i a b l e s , the character of contacts may be p a r t i c u l a r l y covariant with occupational status/prestige and with the nature of activity/work performed.  Consequently, there i s no attempt  here to d i r e c t l y investigate the character of federal department o f f i c e s ' contacts.  Instead, the probable character of contacts —  t i o n " , "planning" or "programming" —  whether "orienta-  i s assumed to correspond with employees  75.  (high, middle, or low) job status.  Where prestige or status of employees'  jobs i s not ascertainable the general character of contacts i s taken by the nature of activity/work ( i . e . employees with "routine" jobs are assumed to have primarily "programming" contacts while those i n "non-routine" considered to have "orientation" or "planning" type contacts).  jobs are  It i s observed  that the greater the proportion of high status employees or o f f i c e employees performing non-routine work the greater the s i g n i f i c a n c e of " o r i e n t a t i o n " contacts. Observations were carried out during the course of information c o l l e c tion from federal departments that was useful i n giving an impression of the frequency and character of face-to-face public contacts.  Indicators noted  were the numbers of v i s i t o r s , the behaviour of employees towards v i s i t o r s (including the researcher), and the arrangements and physical accommodations provided for v i s i t o r s . of Appendix I.  Other "observed" indicators are found i n the tables  Further indications of frequency of public face-to-face  contacts are gleaned from reports and interview statements with department o f f i c i a l s and from perusal of telephone and lobby directory l i s t i n g s noting especially those sections or units included and/or those l e f t out.  Certain  department, section, unit and occupational t i t l e s are also considered to be i n d i c a t i v e of frequent face-to-face contacts (see the tables i n Appendix I ) . Evidence of s i g n i f i c a n t non-downtown contact sources and  face-to-face  contacts with employees engaged i n non-office work i s derived c h i e f l y from reports and interview statements with department o f f i c i a l s .  Again, c e r t a i n  department sections, u n i t s , and occupational t i t l e s or categories are considered to involve s i g n i f i c a n t non-downtown and/or non-office employee contact sources (see the tables i n Appendix I ) .  Job or task description key words  found i n reports, federal job advertisements, pamphlet are also h e l p f u l .  and the Public Service Careers  i i i ) The Prestige of Federal Government Departments Downtown The desire for prestige and i t s influence upon l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y i s extremely d i f f i c u l t to ascertain.  In this analysis i t i s derived from  h i e r a r c h i c a l status at both organizational and occupational l e v e l s . Federal o f f i c e organizations and o f f i c e employees i n positions of high status are considered to most covet prestige and to have less l o c a t i o n a l flexibility.  As the proportion of employees i n high status organizations  increases the l e s s l o c a t i o n f l e x i b l e departments' o f f i c e s are thought to be. Similarly, the greater the proportion of department o f f i c e employees having jobs with high status the less l o c a t i o n f l e x i b l e departments' o f f i c e s promise and are presumed to be. The major indicators of prestige at the organizational l e v e l are taken as departmental t i t l e s .  "Regional" headquarters or " D i s t r i c t " o f f i c e s  d i r e c t l y responsible to Ottawa f o r federal p o l i c y i n substantial geographical or p o l i c y areas, are considered  to have "high" status.  Office establish-  ments (frequently labelled " D i s t r i c t " o f f i c e s as well) i n subordinate  geo-  graphical or p o l i c y areas, directed from "Regional" or " D i s t r i c t " headquarters are characterized as having "middle" status.  So c a l l e d "Local" or  "Metro" o f f i c e s , responsible f o r the smallest geographical or functional areas are c l a s s i f i e d as "low" status. Occupational prestige or status was discerned from departmental organization charts.  Employee's occupational positions and l e v e l s are graded  and recorded on these charts according to duties and payscale, with to the Federal Job C l a s s i f i c a t i o n Pyramid.  reference  The f u l l l i s t i n g of employee's  positions considered "high", "middle", and "low" status i s found i n the tables of Appendix I. Where detailed organization charts were unavailable employees'  77.  job t i t l e s are used to c l a s s i f y t h e i r job status. sidered to represent  "high", "middle", and "low"  Occupational  t i t l e s con-  status are also presented  i n the tables i n Appendix I.  iv) Federal Government Departments' O f f i c e Establishment Size and Organizational Structure Downtown In this analysis "large", "medium", and "small" federal departments' o f f i c e establishments  are defined as having, respectively, greater than  between 20 and 100, and less than 20 o f f i c e employees.  100,  (This d e f i n i t i o n  i s f a i r l y common i n the l i t e r a t u r e ) The numbers of employees i n departments' o f f i c e s establishments  are estimated from organization charts.  Where  detailed organization charts were unobtainable, the number of o f f i c e employees downtown was  obtained  from other sources ( i . e . interview and written state-  ments) or a l t e r n a t i v e l y was  derived by converting the f l o o r area of o f f i c e  space into numbers of o f f i c e employees using a 202 square foot per federal employee conversion o f f i c e sutdy.  factor obtained from a Vancouver Planning Department  (Vancouver Planning Department Quarterly Review, October  To characterize departmental organization as " c e n t r a l i z e d " or  1975)  "decentra-  l i z e d " and as "complex, m u l t i t i e r e d " or "uncomplex, and straight-forward" on the information available to this researcher  i s extremely d i f f i c u l t .  q u a l i t i e s are themselves d i f f i c u l t to define —  These  what one might claim to be  "centralized" structure another might claim to be "decentralized" and  the  same i s true of the other two c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . The sketches of organizational structure gleaned from reports, organization charts, and interview statements are poor substitutes f o r personal knowledge and experience of the structure and function of the departments.  Only the most cursory and general statements  on organizational structure are ventured i n t h i s analysis. judgements are based on reported statements.  Wherever possible  78. While f a r from proven, even as a general r u l e , i t i s inferred i n this analysis that large federal o f f i c e establishments have less l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y than their middle or small-sized counterparts. In this analysis, therefore, the greater the proportion of departments' o f f i c e employees downtown i n large o f f i c e establishments the less i s considered departments' office locational f l e x i b i l i t y .  Based on evidence from England, "middle"  rather than "small" size o f f i c e establishments demonstrate the greatest l o c a tional f l e x i b i l i t y . are  Small federal department o f f i c e establishments, then,  considered to have l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y between that of large and  middle-sized departmental o f f i c e establishments. Based on the l i t e r a t u r e , as well, i t i s inferred i n this study that "decentralized" and/or "uncomplicated, straight-forward" organizational structures engender greater (potential) l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y than "cent r a l i z e d " and/or "complicated, m u l t i - t i e r e d " organizational structures. v)  The Rate of Federal Departments' Growth and Organizational Change i n Vancouver It seems f a i r to suggest that those federal departments growing and  changing (organizationally) most rapidly are p o t e n t i a l l y more location f l e x i b l e than those exhibiting slow expansion or organizational change.  In this  analysis the rate of departmental growth and change between 1971 and 1976 i s assumed to indicate future departmental growth and organizational change (though this assumption has no r e a l basis i n f a c t ) .  The rate of depart-  mental growth i s represented i n this analysis by the percentage change i n t o t a l ( o f f i c e and non-office) employees i n Vancouver, the percentage change i n departments' metropolitan o f f i c e space, and the change i n the percentage of the departments' o f f i c e space outside downtown.  The l a s t indicator i s  based on the premise that the greater the rate of departments' o f f i c e space  79.  growth outside downtown the greater may be thought departments' l o c a t i o n a l flexibility.  The figures obtained  f o r each indicator i n each department are  added together as an "index number" i n d i c a t i v e of departments' growth.  The  higher the index number the greater the departments' assumed o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l flexibility. The amount and nature of organizational change within departments i s gleaned c h i e f l y from report and interview statements.  The greater and more  frequent the organizational change the greater i s considered  departments'  potential l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y .  v i ) The Tradition of Federal Departments' Offices Downtown The strength of t r a d i t i o n as an i n h i b i t o r of Departments' o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y i s indicated i n this analysis by the length of time the department and/or i t s various components have been located downtown.  It i s  inferred that the longer departments' o f f i c e s have been located downtown the greater the presence of t r a d i t i o n and l o c a t i o n a l i n f l e x i b i l i t y .  In this  study the e f f e c t of i n e r t i a on federal o f f i c e s i s assumed to be r e f l e c t e d i n the influence of the Vancouver o f f i c e market.  3. Quantitative Analysis On Working Departmental Composite Sheets the downtown o f f i c e employees of sample federal departments (wherever possible f o r a l l their downtown o f f i c e establishments) are sorted at the o f f i c e establishment,  section, or unit l e v e l  of organizational d e t a i l (depending on the information available) into the relevant c h a r a c t e r i s t i c columns with respect to four i n t e r n a l factors:  1) the  nature of activity/work; 2) the frequency, character, and pattern of contacts; 3) prestige; and 4) s i z e and organizational structure (dots are used when numbers of employees cannot be ascertained).  Employees are sorted into relevant  80.  factor c h a r a c t e r i s t i c columns by means of "indicators".  The t o t a l number  of employees sorted into each relevant factor c h a r a c t e r i s t i c column i s t a l l i e d (to show the t o t a l number of employees whose work i s primarily routine, who have frequent face-to-face contact with the downtown public, etc.) f i r s t f o r each downtown o f f i c e establishment of a department ments' t o t a l downtown o f f i c e establishments.  and then f o r each depart-  These t a l l i e s , on the Working  Departmental Composite Sheets, are found on the row of the departments' name and, f o r o f f i c e establishments, on the row of the o f f i c e establishment address (or name) i n factor c h a r a c t e r i s t i c columns. After t a l l y i n g the number of employees each i n the relevant factor c h a r a c t e r i s t i c columns by each i n t e r n a l factor the number of employees with c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s which suggest "increased" and "decreased" l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y can be summed f o r each department.  Where the l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y  i s indeterminate (e.g. f o r "planning" type contacts, "middle" organizational status, "small" o f f i c e establishment size) half of the employees are a r b i t r a r i l y allocated to "increased" and to "decreased" l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y . On the Working Departmental Composite Sheets the departmental summations of employees with "increased" and "decreased" l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y are found i n the appropriately t i t l e d columns on the row of the department name. The percentage of departmental downtown o f f i c e employees with charact e r i s t i c s which suggest "increased" as well as "decreased" l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y f o r each of the four internal factors can now be calculated.  On  Working Departmental Composite Sheets these percentages are found on the row of the department  name i n the appropriately t i t l e d columns.  Departments'  percentages of downtown o f f i c e employees with factor c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s suggesting "increased" l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y are ranked from highest to lowest with respect to each of the four i n t e r n a l factors.  Departments are then categorized  81.  as:  1) most l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e ; 2) l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e ; 3) l o c a t i o n a l l y  i n f l e x i b l e ; and 4) most l o c a t i o n a l l y i n f l e x i b l e .  The percentage of depart-  ments' employees with factor c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s suggesting "increased" l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y i s thus used i n the case of these four internal factors as a surrogate of comparative departmental o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y . Quantitative analysis respecting the two remaining internal factors  —  the Rate of Growth and Organizational Change and Tradition -— i s undertaken solely at the departmental l e v e l of organization.  As a surrogate for the  former and i t s influence on departmental l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y an index i s constructed.  The influence of the l a t t e r i s quantitatively represented by the  number of years departments have been located downtown.  (and their major components where ascertainable) These figures are recorded under the appropriate  factor columns on Working Departmental Composite Sheets.  The  comparative  l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y evaluation of the departments, with respect to each internal factor, i s made by ranking (from highest to lowest i n the case of the Rate of Growth and Organizational Change and from lowest to highest f o r Tradition).  Departments are then categorized from "most l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x -  i b l e " to "most l o c a t i o n a l l y i n f l e x i b l e " for each of these two factors. Throughout  the evaluation the d i s t r i b u t i o n of departments  into the  various l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y categories i s guided by the data (both quantitative and q u a l i t a t i v e ) .  Uneven d i s t r i b u t i o n of departments  into the cate-  gories i s allowed when and i f the data points to i t .  4.  Qualitative Analysis The nature of the factors and of the information available largely  determines the r e l i a b i l i t y of quantitatively based comparative  departmental  o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y evaluations discussed i n preceding sections.  82.  For some factors, p a r t i c u l a r l y "Size and Organizational Structure" and "Rate of Growth and Organizational Change" q u a n t i f i c a t i o n alone i s p l a i n l y an inadequate basis f o r evaluation.  The "Organizational Structure" and "Orga-  n i z a t i o n a l Change" components of these two internal factors are not taken into account i n quantitative analysis.  For example, the large percentage of  o f f i c e s t a f f i n large o f f i c e establishments  categorizes Transport and Public  Works Departments as " l o c a t i o n a l l y i n f l e x i b l e " .  Consideration of the decen-  t r a l i z e d organizational structure of these departments and, moreover, their large operations oriented sections suggests they would be better c l a s s i f i e d as " l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e " r e l a t i v e to other departments. considers growth alone  S i m i l a r l y i f one  (as defined by the "index" of growth) then the Unem-  ployment Insurance Commission and the Manpower and Immigration Departments warrant being categorized as " l o c a t i o n a l l y i n f l e x i b l e " as they have not grown p a r t i c u l a r l y fast i n r e l a t i o n to other departments.  Taking into considera-  tion the major organizational changes involved i n the merger of these departments into one, however, suggests they should be categorized as " l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e " (as consideration of o f f i c e space and l o c a t i o n a l problems i s l i k e l y to be on the minds of o f f i c i a l s i n both departments). Evaluation of l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y based on q u a n t i f i c a t i o n alone i s inadequate, as well, because f o r some departments and their components downtown, available information i s incomplete. establishments  Because of this important o f f i c e  i n Fisheries and Environment, Health and Welfare, Unemploy-  ment Insurance Commission, Manpower and Immigration, and Post O f f i c e Departments are l e f t out of quantitative analysis and their absence can d i s t o r t quantitatively based comparative evaluations.  For example:  without including  the Post Office Department's Western Regional Office (for which no organization chart or quantifiable data could be obtained) the department's non-profit  83.  (policy, research) work i s seriously underestimated.  Consideration of the  Western Regional O f f i c e indicates•the Post O f f i c e should be c l a s s i f i e d as " l o c a t i o n a l l y i n f l e x i b l e " rather than " f l e x i b l e " as categorization based on quantification alone would have i t .  In general, o f f i c e establishments not  in the judgement of the researcher, adequately s i s are covered i n a q u a l i t a t i v e evaluation. evaluation amounts to a re-examination  covered by quantitative analyE s s e n t i a l l y this q u a l i t a t i v e  of the available information for each  department using the C r i t e r i a Check L i s t ' s consideration of quantitatively based evaluations already professed for other departments and their r e v i s i o n where the researcher feels changes i n the departmental make up of l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y categories can be j u s t i f i e d .  In this analysis, whenever changes  i n the quantitatively based evaluations are made a written explanation of the change i s offered.  5.  Point System and Factor Weighting No exhaustive e f f o r t i s made to investigate the various point and  factor weighting systems which could be invented to obtain an evaluation of federal departments' o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y for a l l s i x internal factors combined.  In this analysis this evaluation of the federal departments i s  begun by attaching 8, 6, 4 and 2 points, respectively, to "most l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e " , " l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e " , " l o c a t i o n a l l y i n f l e x i b l e " and "most l o c a t i o n a l l y i n f l e x i b l e " categories.  Then, for each department, the categori-  zations derived respecting the s i x i n t e r n a l factors are p r o f i l e d i n table forms (see Table 8 i n Part 2 of this chapter).  For example, i t i s shown  that the Revenue Taxation Department i s c l a s s i f i e d as "most l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e " with respect to the Rate of Growth and Organizational Change; " l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e " with respect to the Frequency, Character and Pattern of Contacts as well as with respect to Prestige; " l o c a t i o n a l l y i n f l e x i b l e "  84.  with respect to the Nature of Activity/Work; and l a s t l y "most l o c a t i o n a l l y i n f l e x i b l e " with respect to Tradition as well as with respect to Size and Organizational Structure.  The points associated with each departments'  categorizations are added together.  Revenue Taxation's one "most l o c a t i o n a l l y  f l e x i b l e " (8 points), two " l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e " (12 points), one " l o c a t i o n a l l y i n f l e x i b l e (4 points), and two "most l o c a t i o n a l l y i n f l e x i b l e (4 points) categorizations add up to 28 points.  A comparative evaluation of Departments  for a l l s i x factors combined i s obtained by ranking departmental t o t a l s from highest to lowest.  Revenue Taxation's 28 points, f o r example, i s surpassed  by eight departments, matched by two met by four other departments.  (Justice and the Post O f f i c e ) , and not  From the point t o t a l and subsequent rankings  departments are categorized once again as "most l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e " , " l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e " , " l o c a t i o n a l l y i n f l e x i b l e " and "most l o c a t i o n a l l y inflexible".  Revenue Taxation, with 28 points, i s c l a s s i f i e d as " l o c a t i o n a l l y  i n f l e x i b l e " r e l a t i v e to other departments with respect to a l l s i x factors combined.  (This evaluation and the evaluation of the other departments i s  presented i n Appendix III.) The c l a s s i f i c a t i o n above involves no weighting of factors. considered of equal importance  A l l are  i n influencing o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y .  In the example of Revenue Taxation i t does not matter whether the department i s "most l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e " with respect to Rate of Growth and Organizational Change or with respect to Prestige or any other factor.  The point  t o t a l for Revenue Taxation w i l l remain the same i f a l l factors are considered equally important. Of course, a l l factors need not be considered of equal importance.  In  r e a l i t y one or more factors are l i k e l y to be considered more important than others.  It probably matters very much with respect to which factors a  85.  department i s c l a s s i f i e d "most l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e " , " l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e " , etc.  The r e l a t i v e importance of factors i s , however, d i f f i c u l t to  ascertain. To meet and yet proceed from this problem the researcher's own "double weighting" of factors i s employed.  A "double" rather than t r i p l e or quad-  ruple weighting was selected after testing with the point system.  The tests  showed double weights were s u f f i c i e n t to produce changes i n point standings and subsequent departmental rankings but not, at the same time, so powerful as to make redundant those c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s with the lowest points attached ( i . e . " l o c a t i o n a l l y i n f l e x i b l e " or "most l o c a t i o n a l l y i n f l e x i b l e " categories) or c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s with respect to unweighted factors.  In other words, the  evaluation of l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y would not simply b o i l down to i d e n t i f cation of departments c l a s s i f i e d "most l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e " with respect to the weighted  factor or factors.  A double weighting means a departments' c l a s s i f i c a t i o n with respect to a factor w i l l not always have attached 8, 6, 4 or 2 points.  A departments'  c l a s s i f i c a t i o n with respect to a "double weighted" factor w i l l have attached, instead, 16, 12, 8 or 4 points corresponding to "most l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e " , " l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e " , etc. c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s .  Returning to the Revenue  Taxation example, i f the Rate of Growth and Organizational Change factor i s "double weighted"  ( i . e . considered doubly important i n influencing o f f i c e  l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y ) then the points attached to Revenue Taxation's "most l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e " c l a s s i f i c a t i o n with respect to t h i s factor w i l l be 16 rather than 8.  Evaluation of the comparative l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y of  Revenue Taxation w i l l be undertaken exactly as before except f o r the 16 rather than 8 points to be attached to the double weighted Rate of Growth and Organ i z a t i o n a l Change factor.  With new point t o t a l s , a new comparative evaluation  of Revenue Taxation and other departments i s achieved.  86.  Excluding the equal weighting options of applying or not applying double weights to a l l s i x internal factors (which result i n exactly the same comparat i v e evaluation only with the former option doubling department point totals) there are 62 d i f f e r e n t combinations of factors for which i t i s possible to give double weights.  In addition, then, to an evaluation of departments compar-  ative l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y based on factors having equal weights i t i s possible to undertake 62 more evaluations based on d i f f e r e n t combinations of factors having double weights.  To avoid undertaking, and laboriously synthesizing,  a l l the possible evaluations (including the "equal weighting" evaluation) but at the same time, to lessen a bias introduced by the researcher making h i s own  single choice of factors to be double weighted a selection of eleven  d i f f e r e n t combinations of factors were given double weights and evaluations (for a l l s i x i n t e r n a l factors combined) were made. tions.  Table 2 shows the selec-  These r e f l e c t generally the importance of i n t e r n a l factors as i n d i c a -  ted i n the l i t e r a t u r e hence the numerous combinations of i n t e r n a l factors i n which Prestige; Tradition; Frequency, Character and Pattern of Contacts; and Nature of Activity/Work are given double weights.  The selections r e f l e c t as  well the researcher's own f e e l i n g that only one or a few factors i n r e a l location decision-making  situations are l i k e l y to be considered of r e l a t i v e l y  great importance thus selections have only one, two or at most three factors double weighted.  There i s no p a r t i c u l a r j u s t i f i c a t i o n for eleven selections  except that the number seemed adequate to meet the above provisos placed on selections, represented a s i g n i f i c a n t proportion of the t o t a l possible s e l e c tions, and made undertaking and synthesizing the subsequent evaluations a comparatively easy task.  The eleven evaluations can be found i n Appendix I I I .  S E L E C T I O N S I N T E R N A L  OF  C O M B I N A T I O N S F A C T O R S  D O U B L E  OF  G I V E N  WEIGHTS  INTERNAL FACTORS GIVEN DOUBLE WEIGHTS  UNWEIGHTED INTERNAL FACTORS  Selection 1  Nature of Activity/Work; Frequency, Character and Pattern of Contacts; Prestige  Size and Organizational Structure; Rate of Growth/ Change; Tradition  Selection 2  Tradition; Frequency, Character and Pattern of Contacts; Prestige  Size and Organizational Structure; Rate of Growth/ Change; Nature of A c t i v i t y / Work  Selection 3  Prestige  A l l Other Internal  Factors  Selection 4  Tradition  A l l Other Internal  Factors  Selection 5  Frequency, Character and Pattern of Contacts  A l l Other Internal  Factors  Selection 6  Nature of Activity/Work  A l l Other Internal  Factors  Selection 7  Size and Organizational Structure  A l l Other Internal  Factors  Selection 8  Rate of Growth and Change  A l l Other Internal  Factors  Nature of Activity/Work; Frequency, Character and Pattern of Contacts  A l l Other Internal  Factors  Selection 9 Selection 10  Tradition; Prestige  A l l Other Internal  Factors  Size and Organizational Structure; Rate of Growth and Change  A l l Other Internal  Factors  Selection 11  TABLE II  88.  Examination of these evaluations shows the changes i n departments' point t o t a l s , rankings and consequent changes i n their l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y  clas-  s i f i c a t i o n s when different factors and combinations of factors are considered more important  than others.  For example, when only the Rate of Growth and  Change among the s i x internal factors i s given a double weighting, Revenue Taxation's point t o t a l of 36 places i t among departments considered " l o c a t i o n ally flexible".  On the other hand, when only Tradition among the s i x i n t e r n a l  factors i s given a double weighting, Revenue Taxation's 30 points categorizes i t among departments considered "most l o c a t i o n a l l y i n f l e x i b l e " . There are d i f f e r e n t ways the eleven evaluations based on d i f f e r e n t combinations of double weighted factors, and the evaluation given a l l factors i s considered of equal weight, can be synthesized to form one f i n a l comparative l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y evaluation of.federal departments for a l l six i n t e r n a l factors combined.  For consistency i t was decided simply to t o t a l for each  department the points acquired i n each of the twelve evaluations.  A compara-  t i v e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y evaluation of federal departments for a l l s i x internal factors combined synthesizing the. findings of a l l twelve evaluations undertaken i s obtained by ranking the departmental to lowest.  point t o t a l s from highest  On this basis departments, for the f i n a l time, are c l a s s i f i e d into  "most l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e " , " l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e " , " l o c a t i o n a l l y i n f l e x i b l e " and "most l o c a t i o n a l l y i n f l e x i b l e " categories (see Table 9 i n Part 2 of this chapter).  The f i n a l evaluation, for example, of Revenue Taxation i s obtained  by summing i t s 28 points when a l l factors are considered of equal weight; i t s 36 points when only the Rate of Growth and Change i s double weighted; i t s 30 points when only Tradition i s double weighted; and i t s nine other sets of points acquired i n the other nine evaluations.  Revenue Taxation's t o t a l of  89.  420 points, surpassed by nine other federal departments and not met by f i v e others, suggests i t f i n a l l y be categorized among departments considered " l o c a t i o n a l l y i n f l e x i b l e " with respect to a l l s i x internal factors combined.  D.  Stage Two of the Evaluation A largely q u a l i t a t i v e and cursory examination of the four "external"  factors of the C r i t e r i a Check L i s t —  1) "General and "Special" A c c e s s i b i l i t y  Downtown; 2) Metropolitan Telecommunications and Transportation Systems; 3) the Metropolitan Vancouver O f f i c e Market; and 4) Planning and P o l i t i c s — are the basis f o r a second complementary assessment which i s the second stage of the evaluation.  Examination of these factors and their influence on o f f i c e  l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y provides the opportunity f o r several theses and thus precludes their indepth analysis here.  In this study these factors are broadly  assumed to influence the l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y of a l l downtown federal departments equally though any extraordinary influences are looked for and noted i n their discussion.  The l i k e l y influence of these external factors are sepa-  r a t e l y examined as far as possible.  The findings of these examinations are  scrutinized and combined to e s t a b l i s h the metropolitan "climate" f o r o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y of federal departments.  E.  Stage Three of the Evaluation The t h i r d and l a s t stage of the evaluation i s an attempt to combine the  findings of the previous two stages.  I t attempts from this to draw conclusions  on federal departments current and prospective o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y , the factors influencing i t , and the s i g n i f i c a n c e a l l of this might have f o r federal o f f i c i a l s and urban planners i n Vancouver.  90.  F.  Information Gathering Information was  collected from three major sources.  The federal Depart-  ment of Public Works, Program Planning and Co-ordination  section, provided  "Accommodation Sheets" from which s t a t i s t i c a l and l o c a t i o n a l data on federal departments' o f f i c e s i n Vancouver were derived.  Library research  yielded  insight into the broad character, organizational structure, functions history of the federal government and i t s departments i n Canada.  and  Similarly  f a m i l i a r i z a t i o n with Vancouver's metropolitan structure, o v e r a l l o f f i c e l o c a tion pattern, o f f i c e markets, planning and p o l i t i c s was  gained through l i b r a r y  work (newspaper and magazine a r t i c l e s made a s i g n i f i c a n t contribution F i n a l l y , written information  and verbal information  (obtained  interviews with knowledgeable federal c i v i l servants) was  here).  from informal  collected d i r e c t l y ,  whenever possible, from the federal departments. The f i f t e e n largest federal government departments, i n terms of o f f i c e space (administered by the Department of Public Works) i n downtown Vancouver, were selected for the study sample.  The departments ( l i s t e d i n Table 3)  account for 85 percent of the t o t a l federal department o f f i c e space, and percent of federal department o f f i c e employment, downtown.  81  Personnel ( C l a s s i -  f i c a t i o n ) O f f i c e r s or Public A f f a i r s O f f i c e r s i n each department were approached, i n i t i a l l y over the telephone.  The purpose of the study was  briefly  explained.  Any available documents (organization charts, annual reports, research  papers,  pamphlets, etc.) were requested that would shed l i g h t on the departments' character with respect to i t s functions and a c t i v i t i e s , the types of c l i e n t s served, the organizational structure, the numbers and types of employees, and the department's l o c a t i o n a l h i s t o r y . i n a telephone interview  The request occasionally resulted  (e.g. the Post O f f i c e , the Immigration Branch of  Manpower and Immigration, the Department of Energy, Mines and Resources) and the receipt of any available l i t e r a t u r e by mail.  Most often personal,  un-  S A M P L E  F E D E R A L  D E P A R T M E N T S  (in order of amount of o f f i c e space occupied i n metro Vancouver - 1976)  ABBREVIATION  REVENUE (TAXATION)  REV. (TAX.)  MANPOWER AND IMMIGRATION  M. & I .  FISHERIES AND ENVIRONMENT  F. & E.  UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE COMMISSION  U. I. C.  TRANSPORT  M. o T.  POST OFFICE  P. 0.  REVENUE (CUSTOMS AND EXCISE)  REV. (C.&E.)  HEALTH AND WELFARE  H. W. C.  SUPPLY AND SERVICES  S. S. C.  INDIAN AND NORTHERN AFFAIRS  I. N. A.  PUBLIC WORKS  D. P. W.  VETERANS' AFFAIRS  D. V. A.  ENERGY, MINES AND RESOURCES  E. M. R.  SOLICITOR-GENERAL  C. P. S. N. P. B.  (Excluding R.C.M.P.)  JUSTICE  JUST.  TABLE I I I  structured interviews (in t o t a l - 22) with the public a f f a i r s or personnel o f f i c e r s and sometimes with their superiors preceded the granting and picking up of available documents.  Such interviews permitted explanations of the  documents' contents and helped, p a r t i c u l a r l y , with the interpretation of departmental  organization charts.  Also, on three occasions the researcher  was given a tour of the o f f i c e operation (e.g. the M i n i s t r y of Transport's Marine Transport Authority, F i s h e r i e s and Environment's Environmental tection Agency, and the Department of Veteran's A f f a i r s ) .  Pro-  Both the informal  personal and telephone interviews with federal o f f i c i a l s enabled the researcher to glean information unobtainable i n written form.  The chief information  sources, then, from federal departments included i n this analysis are: Departmental organization charts, The Vancouver-Victoria Federal Government Telephone Directory, departmental  annual reports and other documents, d i r e c t  observation, and personal or telephone, unstructured, interviews with knowledgeable federal c i v i l servants.  A complete l i s t of the personal i n t e r -  views from each department i s found i n Appendix I I .  G.  Information Quality The information obtained from sample departments i s of disparate q u a l i t y .  The willingness and/or a b i l i t y of department o f f i c i a l s to divulge both written and verbal information on departments' operations i n Vancouver varied considerably.  Also, the l e v e l of d e t a i l at which departments could be  examined varied. Organization charts provided the most complete quantitative information and substantially aided the q u a l i t a t i v e analysis of a l l the downtown o f f i c e establishments for nine departments (Revenue Taxation, Revenue Custom and Excise, Manpower and Immigration, Supply and Services, Indian and Northern  93. A f f a i r s , Public Works, Veteran's A f f a i r s , Solicitor-General, and J u s t i c e ) . The charts, sometimes out of date, nevertheless c l e a r l y revealed these departments' Vancouver organizational components and structures ( i . e . their organizational relationships) and their numbers and types of employees). Moreover, these charts presented indicators —  job t i t l e s and c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s  which enabled the Nature of Activity/Work; Frequency, Character and Pattern of Contacts; and the need or desire for Prestige to be inferred f o r each employee and progressively for each unit, section and o f f i c e establishment. Detailed organization charts were made available for some, but not a l l , downtown components and o f f i c e establishments of three other sample federal departments (Fisheries and Environment, Transport, and Health and Welfare). More general information on the missing components and indicators of i n t e r n a l factors c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s were obtained from the telephone directory for Vancouver and the federal government as well as from various reports, pamphlets and interviews. Only very general organization charts were obtained f o r the three remaining departments (Unemployment Insurance, Post O f f i c e and Energy, Mines and Resources) and an even greater reliance on reports, pamphlets, and i n t e r view statements  i n the o v e r a l l analysis was necessary.  —  94.  P A R T  2  APPLICATION OF THE "CRITERIA CHECK LIST" METHODOLOGY TO FEDERAL DEPARTMENTS IN VANCOUVER: THE FINDINGS  95.  Ill  APPLICATION OF THE "CRITERIA CHECK LIST" METHODOLOGY TO FEDERAL DEPARTMENTS IN VANCOUVER:  A.  THE FINDINGS  Analysis of Federal Government O f f i c e Location i n Metropolitan Vancouver Before presenting findings r e s u l t i n g from application of the " C r i t e r i a  Check L i s t Methodology" i t i s important to determine the current  (1976)  pattern of federal departments' o f f i c e location and employment pattern i n metropolitan Vancouver.  Once this i s established the importance of federal  departmental o f f i c e s i n Vancouver and, more p a r t i c u l a r l y , downtown Vancouver, becomes apparent.  Also, from the current federal o f f i c e l o c a t i o n pattern  one might make some judgements on the degree of l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y of federal departments' o f f i c e s so f a r exhibited.  No elaborate, department  by department, examination of o f f i c e locations past or present i s ventured. Nor i s the s p a t i a l proximity of various departments' o f f i c e establishments investigated i n an e f f o r t to postulate existing functional linkages amongst federal departments downtown. The findings of this analysis are summarized Map 1.  i n Tables 4 and 5 and  Office space and employment, e s p e c i a l l y of federal departments, i s  found to be concentrated i n downtown Vancouver. federal departments' o f f i c e accommodation  In 1976, 70 percent of  administered by the Department of  Public Works was located downtown (Greater Vancouver Forward Plan, 1977 P. 3) as against 60 percent f o r a l l o f f i c e accommodation (Real Estate Trends, 1975-76)  i n the metropolitan area.  The f i f t e e n departments analysed i n t h i s study  had an even greater concentration of o f f i c e space downtown i n 1976 — mately 77 percent.  approxi-  Only one department, the Unemployment Insurance Commission,  had less than h a l f (47 percent) of i t s o f f i c e space downtown. (Percentages derived from Public Works Accommodation Sheets, 1976)  From 1971 to 1976 the  FEDERAL OFFICE SPACE AND EMPLOYMENT IN THE CONTEXT OF METROPOLITAN VANCOUVER  Federal* 1971 1976 DOWNTOWN VANCOUVER REST OF VANCOUVER SUBURBAN MUNICIPALITIES TOTAL METRO-VANCOUVER  ) ) .90 )  1.13 .25  .12  .25  1.02  1.62  %A 1971-1976  OFFICE SPACE (in millions square feet) Federal O f f i c e % of Total Space As A % of A l l Kinds % A 1976 1971-1976 1971 1976 Total Office 1971 Space (1976)  % of Total 1971 1976  ) ) +53 ) +108  ) ) 89 ) 11  70  8.92  12.50  +46  65  60  15  2.98  4.48  +50  22  22  15  1.78  3.64  +104  13  18  ) ) 6 )  +59  100  100  13.68  20.62  +51  100  100  8  9  EMPLOYMENT (in thousands of employed)  DOWNTOWN VANCOUVER REST OF VANCOUVER SUBURBAN MUNICIPALITIES TOTAL METRO-VANCOUVER  .6 5 .1  1.2 8  +51  -  10.9  X  13.6  ALL S. I.C. GROUPS OFFICE + NON-OFFICE OFFICE 1975 1971 1975 1971 ) 98 61 )251 25 )  % A 197,1-1976 OFFICE + OFFICE NON-OFFICE  FEDERAL OFFICE + OFFICE NON-OFFICE 1971 1976 19 71 197 6 ) 5.6 )4 .5 1.2 )  +100 X  +25  +57  -  21  175  -  -  107  426  540  POPULATION 1971  1976  %  A  1971-1976  % of Total 1976 1971  VANCOUVER  426,298  410,188  -4  39  35  SUBURBAN MUNICIPALITIES  656,054  756,162  +15  61  65  1,082,352  1,166,350  +8  100  100  TOTAL METRO-VANCOUVER  ON *Data Obtained from Greater Vancouver Real Estate Board "Real Estate Trends i n Vancouver" *Includes only Space Administered by Public Works Based on City of Vancouver Planning Dept. Est. of 202 sq. f t . per o f f i c e employee (1974) S t a t i s t i c s Canada A  TABLE IV  OFFICE SPACE AND EMPLOYMENT DISTRIBUTION OF 15 SAMPLE FEDERAL DEPARTMENTS O f f i c e Space i n 1000's Sq. F t .  1971-1976  REV KWC C&E)  REV (TAX)  M&I  F&E  4 6  6 7  2 7  4 2  4 5  4 4  3 4  2 4  3 4  7 10  3 7  5 8  1 3  8 9  5 5  5 5  53 98 110 110 -13 +108  86 62 -27  69 93 +34  50 65 +30  71 54 -25  26 48 +80  .8 17 10 72 +329 +1104  50 35 -33  14 33 +33  # of O f f i c e E s t . Downtown  1971 1976  # of O f f i c e E s t . Outside Downtown  1971 1976  Amount of O f f i c e Space Downtown %A. 1971-1976  1971 1976  Amount of O f f i c e Space Outside Downtown % A 1971-1976  1971 1976  % of T o t a l O f f i c e Space Downtown  1971 1976  100 100  T o t a l Amount of O f f i c e Space i n Metro Vane. % A 1971-1976  1971 1976  # o f Employees i n Metro Vancouver % A 1971-1976  _  126 203 +61  -  12 40 40 61 +53 +231  P.O.  MoT  UIC  (  INA  SSC  EMR  DVA  DPW  CPS NPB  JUST I 4  2 1  42 60  1  -  38 52  7 23 +225  10 17 +65  752 966 +29  ? ?  -  158 292 +84  100 91 100 90-100  100 100  83 77  7 23 +225  10 17 +65  910 1,258 +38  36 304 95 508 +67 +164  9,747 11,502 +18  4,554  2 4  3 5  1 1  1 2  2 4  1  1 1  1  1  25 36 +43  29 43 +51  26 46 +80  60 28 -53  16 28 +71  5 15 21 13 -12 +282  -  3 2 -34  2  7 + .0  -.0  82 74  84 47  99 91  50 65  84 62  64 78  82 63  100 88  100 100  95 93  126 203 +61  65 138 171 150 +24 +131  102 134 +31  70 103 +46  100 100  85 87 +2  41 61 +45  30 57 +86  29 49 +74  26 46 +80  64 30 -52  18 28 +55  1971 1976  610 948 +51  550 791 +44  683 946 +39  675 783 +16  876 1070 +22  2890 4231 +46  504 615 +22  198 226 +14  181 275 +52  160 230 +44  443 1604 486 221 +10 -86  33 49 +48  E s t . it of O f f i c e Employees Downtown  1971 1976  610 948  460  470  300  450  400  210  150  18C  23C  300  162  49  150  36 95  O f f i c e Employees Downtown as a % of T o t a l Metro Employ.  1976  100  58  50  38  42  9  34  66  65  100  62  73  100  30  100  71 64  TOTAL 15 SAMPLE DEPTS.  - 1971 and * 0 f f i c e Space F i g u r e s derived from F e d e r a l Department of Public Works Accommodation Sheets 1976. F e d e r a l Employment Figures obtained from S t a t i s t i c s Canada. Federal " O f f i c e " Employment F i g u r obtained from Depts. and from estimates made by the Researcher. TABLE  V  THE LOCATION OF FEDERAL QFEIC LEGEND  i ~. s  FEDERALLY FEDERALLY  '6  •  OWNEp LEASED  OFFICE OFFICE"  SPACE SPACE  SQUARE.FEET OVVNEP OR L E A S E D  MAP 1  99.  percentage of t o t a l metropolitan o f f i c e space downtown, both for federal and o f f i c e s of a l l kinds, declined by 5 percent.  In absolute terms, the growth  of federal and a l l other o f f i c e space continued to be greatest downtown. About 60 percent (1971) of the metropolitan work force ( o f f i c e and  non-  o f f i c e ) are employed i n Vancouver while the c i t y i t s e l f has but 35 percent (1976) of the metropolitan population.  Office employees currently make up  20 percent of the t o t a l metropolitan work force (Vancouver Planning Department's Quarterly Review, October 1975, p. 16).  Of Vancouver's federal c i v i l  service roughly 60 percent work i n o f f i c e s (estimate confirmed by interview with Department of Public Works o f f i c i a l ) .  General and federal employment  estimates, based on o f f i c e space and land use surveys, indicate the focus of o f f i c e employment to be downtown.  Also, when these estimates are checked  with data on general employment ( o f f i c e and non-office), the i n d i c a t i o n i s of extremely rapid o f f i c e employment growth.  Between 1971 and 1976  almost  a l l the growth of the Vancouver federal c i v i l service seems to be i n o f f i c e employment and most of this i s i n Vancouver's downtown ( i . e . the increase i n non-office type employment i n the Post Office was balanced by the decrease i n hospital employment i n the Veteran's A f f a i r s Department).  In ten of the  f i f t e e n departments examined i n t h i s study at least half of t h e i r s t a f f , o f f i c e and non-office, i n metropolitan Vancouver are employed i n o f f i c e s downtown. The downtown concentration of federal departments' o f f i c e employment i s scattered i n no less than 33 separate b u i l d i n g s . In these buildings (7 of which are crown-owned) the f i f t e e n sampled departments comprise at least 60 separate establishments. The pattern of federal o f f i c e location downtown adheres to the general trend of c i t y centre o f f i c e location.  H i s t o r i c a l l y , Vancouver's o f f i c e  100.  buildings have moved westward along Pender and Hastings Streets.  What i s now  frequently termed the " f i n a n c i a l d i s t r i c t " emerged i n an area delimited (somewhat f u z z i l y ) by Hastings, Burrard, Dunsmuir and Seymour Streets. close to the harbour and C P .  This area,  s t a t i o n , was p a r t i c u l a r l y a t t r a c t i v e to the  forest i n d u s t r i a l firms, shipping agents and the l e g a l , f i n a n c i a l and techn i c a l services supporting the forest and shipping industries (Hardwick, P. 57).  As well, i t attracted the federal government.  1974,  Indeed, the embryo  of current federal o f f i c e and non-office a c t i v i t i e s developed here.  Immigra-  tion and postal operations were housed, early i n this century, i n crown-owned and b u i l t Immigration and Post Office Buildings adjacent to the harbour. Customs operations remain i n the area, i n a l a t e 1950's "Customs House" constructed at Burrard and Pender.  At one time or another most f e d e r a l depart-  ments have been provided with crown-owned or leased space i n t h i s f i n a n c i a l district.  O f f i c e space currently occupied by federal departments i n the area  amounts to about 350,000 square feet or almost one t h i r d of federally occupied o f f i c e space downtown. In the 1960's and 70's a new o f f i c e d i s t r i c t delimited by Granville, Georgia and Pender Streets (called the "golden t r i a n g l e " by r e a l estate people) emerged, p a r t i a l l y overlapping but generally west and south of the f i n a n c i a l district.  Most of Vancouver's large and prestigeous o f f i c e buildings of the  l a s t ten years have been constructed here.  About half of f e d e r a l departments'  downtown o f f i c e space and the majority of t h e i r downtown o f f i c e e s t a b l i s h ments are now  located i n this t r i a n g l e .  Federal departments (notably Man-  power and Immigration; F i s h e r i e s and Environment; Revenue (Taxation); Indian and Northern A f f a i r s ; and the Solicitor-General) completely lease two private o f f i c e buildings on Pender Street and considerable space i n the huge P a c i f i c  101.  and Royal Centre o f f i c e towers on Georgia Street.  Smaller amounts of space  are leased i n other new developments (e.g. Bentall Centre, Sandwell Building, MacMillan-Bloedel Building). The remaining federal departments' downtown o f f i c e space (about 200,000 square feet) i s on the eastern f r i n g e .  I t i s here on Block 56, across from  the Post O f f i c e Building, that i t i s proposed to construct a large new 950,000 square foot federal o f f i c e b u i l d i n g . In the 1970's the Broadway corridor, j u s t across False Creek from downtown, emerged as a s i g n i f i c a n t non-downtown o f f i c e location a l t e r n a t i v e .  In  1976 Broadway contained almost two m i l l i o n square feet or about 25 percent of the t o t a l non-downtown o f f i c e space i n metropolitan Vancouver.  O f f i c e space  i n suburban m u n i c i p a l i t i e s , by and large, remains dispersed though new o f f i c e s i n Burnaby's Metro-Town (B. C. Tel.) and along Canada Way as well as i n Richmond's Executive O f f i c e Park suggest some emergent concentrations. Federal departments' one half m i l l i o n square feet of non-downtown o f f i c e space ( i n 1976) i s s p l i t evenly between the rest of Vancouver outside downtown and suburban m u n i c i p a l i t i e s .  I t consists mostly of dispersed, compara-  t i v e l y small, l o c a l population serving o f f i c e s of Manpower, Unemployment Insurance, the Post O f f i c e and Health and Welfare.  Large Broadway and Marpole  o f f i c e establishments of the R.C.M.P. and Fisheries and Environment's West Vancouver (Park Royal) o f f i c e s are notable exceptions.  In Vancouver, at least  half of federal departments' non-downtown o f f i c e space i s i n the Broadway office district.  Almost 60 percent of federal departments' o f f i c e space i n  suburban municipalities i s i n Burnaby and downtown New Westminster.  Downtown  New Westminster i s the only proposed Regional Town Centre s i t e that currently has a s i g n i f i c a n t amount of federal o f f i c e space (approximately 70,000 square feet).  102.  In conclusion, federal o f f i c e space and o f f i c e employment, accounting for 8 percent of t o t a l metropolitan o f f i c e space and employment, i s an i n t e g r a l component of the metropolitan Vancouver o f f i c e market.  The c i t y centre con-  centration of federal o f f i c e space and employment heightens i t s downtown s i g nificance.  Federal departments' o f f i c e space and employment make up about 9  percent of the downtown totals but only 6 percent of non-downtown t o t a l s . Federal departments, then, following on their stated preference for downtown o f f i c e locations (revealed i n the 1974 "Federal Requirements Study i n the Greater Vancouver Regional D i s t r i c t " mentioned i n Chapter 1) currently show a small degree of o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y .  A latent potential for r e l o -  cation of at least some departmental sections and units may, however, be suggested by the existence of a great many separately sited establishments downtown and the very rapid growth of suburban federal o f f i c e space.  B.  Federal Government Departments' Office Locational in::. Vancouver  Flexibility  A comparative l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y evaluation of 15 federal departments i s derived from Tables 6 and 7.  Table 7 i s a q u a l i t a t i v e l y "revised"  version of Table 6 which presents comparative departmental l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y assessments, factor by factor, based s o l e l y on q u a n t i f i c a t i o n of factors and relevant factor c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s using indicators.  The following  discussion of Tables 6 and 7 provides an introduction to the comparative l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y evaluation of the 15 departments. 1.  Tables 6 and 7:  The General Findings  While the analysis of information and subsequent categorization shown i n Tables 6 and 7 produced no d i r e c t evidence as to which internal factors ( i f any) are the most important f o r o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y a sense was obtained of those factors which currently appear to be the strongest and  103. weakest constraints on t h i s f l e x i b i l i t y .  Examination of the quantitative  data used to categorize Federal Departments i n Table 6 reveals the following factor c o r r e l a t i o n s :  FACTORS WHERE THE QUANTITATIVE DATA SEEMS GENERALLY TO SUPPORT INCREASED DEPARTMENTAL LOCATIONAL FLEXIBILITY • Nature of Activity/Work  tF  Frequency, Character and Pattern of Contacts  tF  Organizational Growth  tF  FACTORS WHERE THE QUANTITATIVE DATA SEEMS GENERALLY NOT TO SUPPORT INCREASED DEPARTMENTAL LOCATIONAL FLEXIBILITY Tradition  IF  Organizational Size  ^F  Prestige  IF  The basis of the factor correlations i n the d i r e c t i o n of increased l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y (tF) are generally the high percentages of employees whose "routine" activity/work and "programming" communications c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s i n departments suggest conduciveness to a greater l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y .  Also,  the generally high "index of growth" figures for departments ( i n d i c a t i n g rapid growth) suggest departmental amenability to increased l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y . The factor correlations i n the opposite d i r e c t i o n of decreased l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y (4*F) stem, generally, from low percentages of employees i n departments where low organizational and occupational prestige and "medium" organizational s i z e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s suggest conduciveness to increased l o c a t i o n a l flexibility.  The generally high figures representing the many years (or  strong " t r a d i t i o n " of) departments and t h e i r major sections being located downtown also suggest a generally low amenability to increased l o c a t i o n a l  COMPARA  T I VE  A S S E S S M E N T S  L O C A T I O N A L  OF  D E P A R T M E N T A L  F L E X I B I L I T Y  (BASED ON QUANTITATIVE CRITERIA)  NFACTORS  CATEGORIES  NATURE OF ACTIVITY/ WORK  (% of employees with jobs suggesting Loca-. \ ^ tional F l e x i b i l i t y )  MOST LOCATIONALLY FLEXIBLE  LOCATIONALLY FLEXIBLE  FREQUENCY, CHARACTER AND PATTERN OF CONTACTS (% of employees with jobs suggesting Locational F l e x i b i l i t y )  Veterans' A f f a i r s (100) Transport (100) Supply and Services (100) Unemployment Insurance (95)  Supply and Services (95) Post Office (95) Unemployment Insurance (95)  Fisheries and Environment (90) Health and Welfare (90) Public Works (85) Post Office (85)  Revenue (Taxation) (95) Transport (90) Revenue (Customs and Excise) (85) Public Works (85) Solicitor-General (85) Fisheries and Environment (85)  OFFICE ESTABLISHMENT SIZE  PRESTIGE  i  TRADITION ORGANIZATIONAL GROWTH  ; ( % of employees with *  •jobs suggesting Loca' tional F l e x i b i l i t y )  (% of employees with jobs suggesting Locational F l e x i b i l i t y )  (Index of Growth)  (# of years located downtown)  Post Office (70) Supply and Services (70) Revenue (Customs and Excise) (65)  Justice (100) Health and Welfare (100) Energy, Mines and Resources (90)  Solicitor-General (292) Justice (<10) Solicitor-General Justice (229) Fisheries and Environ(<10) ment (178) Energy, Mines and Resources (<10) Supply and Services (157)  Manpower and Immigra! tion (50) Revenue (Taxation) (45) • Health and Welfare (45) iIndian and Northern i A f f a i r s (40) Transport (40)  Indian and Northern A f f a i r s (25) Manpower and Immigration (25)  Indian and Northern A f f a i r s (130) Revenue (Taxation) (115) Energy, Mines and Resources (94) Public Works (90)  (  Supply and Services (<10, services have a long history of being downtown) Fisheries and Environment (<10, some sections have a long history of being downtown) Veterans' A f f a i r s Public  LOCATIONALLY INFLEXIBLE  Solicitor-General (75) Manpower and Immigration (75) Energy, Mines and Resources (75) Revenue (Taxation) (70) Indian and Northern A f f a i r s (70)  Veterans' A f f a i r s (80) Indian and Northern A f f a i r s (80) Health and Welfare (80) Manpower and Immigration (80)  Revenue (Customs and Excise) (60) Justice (60  Justice (75) Energy, Mines and Resources (75)  Solicitor-General (35) Unemployment Insurance (35) -  Unemployment Insurance (20) Transport (20) Supply and Services (20) Public Works (15)  Unemployment Insurance (84) Transport (76) Manpower and Immigration (75)  Revenue (Taxation) (10) Revenue (Customs and Excise (10) Fisheries and Environment (10) Post Office (10) Veterans' A f f a i r s (0) Solicitor-General (0)  Health and Welfare (59) Revenue (Customs and Excise) (46) Post Office (31) Veterans' A f f a i r s (-136)  1  work's (20-30)  Revenue (Customs and Excise) (>"30) Post O f f i c e (^50, Manpower and Immigration ( >60, -£10) Transport (730,-clO,  i  Fisheries and Environment (30) Public Works (30) Justice (30) Veterans' A f f a i r s (30) Energy, Mines and Resources (25)  MOST LOCATIONALLY INFLEXIBLE i  TABLE  VI  Indian and Northern A f f a i r s (?-30) Unemployment Insurance (>30) Health and Welfare (760,<20) Revenue (Taxation) (>50)  R E V I S E D  C O M P A R A T I V E  A S S E S S M E N T S  L O C A T I O N A L  OF  D E P A R T M E N T A L  F L E X I B I L I T Y  105.  (BASED ON QUALITATIVE RE-EXAMINATION OF CRITERIA)  \  FACTORS  NATURE OF ACTIVITY/ WORK  FREQUENCY, CHARACTER and PATTERN OF CONCONTACTS  PRESTIGE  OFFICE ESTABLISHMENT SIZE AND ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE  ORGANIZATIONAL GROWTH AND CHANGE  TRADITION  CATEGORIES\  MOST LOCATIONALLY FLEXIBLE  LOCATIONALLY FLEXIBLE  LOCATIONALLY INFLEXIBLE  MOST LOCATIONALLY INFLEXIBLE  Veterans' A f f a i r s Transport Supply and Services  Post Office Supply and Services  Post Office Supply and Services Revenue (Customs and Excise)  Justice Health and Welfare Energy, Mines and Resources  Solicitor-General Justice Fisheries and Environment Supply and Services Revenue (Taxation)  Solicitor-General Energy, Mines and Resources  Unemployment Insurance Fisheries and Environment Health and Welfare Solicitor-General Public Works Energy, Mines and Resources  Unemployment Insurance Revenue (Taxation) Transport Public Works Solicitor-General Fisheries and Environment  Manpower and Immigration Revenue (Taxation) Unemployment Insurance Indian and Northern Affairs Transport  Indian and Northern Affairs Manpower and Immigration Transport Public Works  Public Works Unemployment Insurance Manpower and Immigration  Public Works Veterans' A f f a i r s Fisheries and Environment Justice Supply and Services  Revenue (Taxation) Manpower and Immigration Indian and Northern Affairs Post Office  Veterans' A f f a i r s Indian and Northern Affairs Health and Welfare Revenue (Customs and Excise) Manpower and Immigration  Solicitor-General Health and Welfare Energy, Mines and Resources  Unemployment Insurance Supply and Services Veterans' A f f a i r s Solicitor-General  Energy, Mines and Resources Indian and Northern Affairs Transport  Manpower and Immigration Revenue (Customs and Excise) Transport Post Office  Justice Revenue (Customs and Excise)  Justice Energy, Mines and Resources  Fisheries and Environment Public Works Justice Veterans' A f f a i r s  Revenue (Taxation) Revenue (Customs and Excise) Fisheries and Environment Post Office  Revenue (Customs and Excise) Health and Welfare Post Office Veterans' A f f a i r s  Revenue (Taxation) Indian and Northern Affairs Unemployment Insurance Health and Welfare  TABLE VII  106.  flexibility. In q u a l i t a t i v e analysis, "organizational change" as well as "growth" and "organizational structure" as well as " s i z e " are considered. organizational change i n most departments supports increased  F a i r l y rapid  locational f l e x i -  b i l i t y and the c o r r e l a t i o n suggested by generally rapid departmental growth. "Decentralized"  organizational structures discerned  the other hand, may  i n most departments, on  lessen the importance of departments' large o f f i c e estab-  lishment size as an i n h i b i t o r to o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y and thus does not support the decreased l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y d i r e c t i o n of i t s c o r r e l a t i o n . In sum,  the o v e r a l l analysis suggests "prestige" and " t r a d i t i o n " are  the current " i n t e r n a l " factors most l i k e l y to i n h i b i t federal departments' o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y downtown.  Barriers to relocation of federal  departments' o f f i c e s outside downtown presented by the remaining i n t e r n a l factors generally appear (due to t h e i r federal employee and departmental c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ) of lesser consequence.  Further general (and comparative)  findings derived from Tables 6 and 7 are presented factor by f a c t o r .  i ) The Nature of Federal Departmental O f f i c e Work/Activity Downtown The greatest proportion of federal o f f i c e work downtown i s undoubtedly of the routine, day-to-day v a r i e t y .  I t e n t a i l s implementation of  prescribed  policy which includes the keeping of records, correspondence and accounts (generally termed " c l e r i c a l " work); data processing  (through use of computers);  prescribed services to designated (statutory) c l i e n t e l e and information  to the  public at large; and p o l i c y implementation reviews (administrative audits inspections).  and  While these a c t i v i t i e s are interspersed throughout the federal  bureaucracy, there are notable concentrations.  Veteran's A f f a i r s appears to  be the most routinely " c l e r i c a l " of a l l departments analysed.  Both Supply and  Services and the Unemployment Insurance Commission have large data  processing  107.  (cheque issuing) components.  Revenue (Taxation); Manpower and Immigration;  Indian and Northern A f f a i r s ; and the Post O f f i c e each have p a r t i c u l a r sections and o f f i c e establishments  where routine day-to-day departmental work i s con-  centrated. The counterpart of "routine" federal o f f i c e work — routine" o f f i c e work —  federal  "non-  primarily involves decision making a f f e c t i n g p o l i c y  and program implementation and encompasses p o l i c y and program research, formul a t i o n , evaluation, and r e v i s i o n processes.  I t requires i n t e r and  intra  departmental co-operative e f f o r t s ( i . e . exchanging of information and often i n face-to-face meetings) of l i n e management executives and consultants, technicians, advisors and s p e c i a l i s t s .  ideas  staff  Federal non-routine  o f f i c e work probably r e s u l t s i n d i r e c t face-to-face contact with other government departments and designated  c l i e n t e l e and embraces negotiating, advising,  consulting and j u d i c i a l type administrative appeal procedures. non-routine work i s concentrated  i n comparatively  department headquarters downtown.  Most federal  small sections of  "Regional"  The Justice Department, however, seems  most c l e a r l y and predominantly constrained downtown by pervasive non-routine type o f f i c e work.  I t s highly specialized functions appear t i e d - i n with the  Courts, private law practice and c l i e n t departments.  Major sections of  non-  routine o f f i c e work i n Revenue (Taxation), Manpower and Immigration, and Indian and Northern A f f a i r s departments prevent c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of these as " l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e " with respect to the nature of activity/work. underestimation  Possible  of the "non-routine" work i n the Unemployment Insurance Commis-  sion r e s u l t i n g from a lack of detailed organization charts and the emphasis i n interview and written statements of i t s important presence suggest that i t be dropped into a lower f l e x i b i l i t y category than was i n Table  6.  quantitatively indicated  S i m i l a r l y the uncertain degree "non-routine" work i s i n t e r -  related with, and needs to be located by, routine o f f i c e and non-office work  108.  downtown i n the Post Office suggests a l o c a t i o n a l l y " i n f l e x i b l e " rather than " f l e x i b l e " c l a s s i f i c a t i o n most appropriate. Research i s another important downtown federal o f f i c e a c t i v i t y and i s largely accountable for c l a s s i f i c a t i o n (in Table 7) of Fisheries and Environment and Health and Welfare as departments considered " l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e " . As well, i t s importance i n the Energy, Mines and Resources Department, as emphasized i n interview and written statements,  suggests i t s underrating i n  quantitative analysis and that i t i s best classed among departments considered l o c a t i o n a l l y " f l e x i b l e " rather than " i n f l e x i b l e " .  In some instances the  research work performed downtown by.federal departments l i e s along the office/non-office occupational boundary.  P a r t i c u l a r l y i n the Fisheries and  Environment Department both:research and administrative a c t i v i t i e s are closely inter-connected with non-office ( f i e l d , laboratory) work performed outside downtown. While lacking a strong research emphasis, the Solicitor-General and Public Works Departments are also c l a s s i f i e d as l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e ( i n Table 7). The prime basis for this c l a s s i f i c a t i o n and that of the Transport Department (amongst the "most l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e " ) i s that their downtown o f f i c e administrations function closely with major non-office operational components both inside and outside downtown. Solicitor-General Department —  This aspect of work i n the  because three o f f i c e establishments that  l i k e l y function closely with penal i n s t i t u t i o n s outside Vancouver were not included i n the quantitative analysis —  was l i k e l y underestimated.  Therefore,  the department was c l a s s i f i e d i n Table 7 as l o c a t i o n a l l y " f l e x i b l e " rather than " i n f l e x i b l e " .  Downtown o f f i c e work i n Transport seems especially  "routine" and closely connected with operations of B. C. airports (particul a r l y Vancouver International A i r p o r t ) .  109.  F i n a l l y , Revenue (Customs and Excise) joins the Justice Department i n being considered "most l o c a t i o n a l l y i n f l e x i b l e " (with respect to the nature of departmental o f f i c e activity/work).  The o f f i c e work It undertakes i s  highly specialized and related to downtown's quaternary sector (customs brokerage) and non-office work associated with the functioning of the harbour (the shipping of imports and  adjacent  exports).  i i ) The Frequency, Character and Pattern of Federal Departments' Contacts Downtown Overall, federal departments included i n t h i s analysis appear to have f a i r l y infrequent face-to-face contact with the general public and (more speculatively) other federal and p r o v i n c i a l departments, private corporations, and organizations downtown.  This seems e s p e c i a l l y c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of depart-  ments' large downtown regional headquarters where much of the work serves the departments' c l i e n t e l e i n d i r e c t l y and i s s u b s t a n t i a l l y self-contained. The sketch of contact character and pattern follows from the nature of departmental work/activity.  Recurring face-to-face meetings of a non-routine  ("orientation" and "planning") character l i k e l y occur most often i n s p e c i a l ized, non-routine work sections of departments.  The major extra-departmental  contact sources for such meetings appear to be other federal and p r o v i n c i a l departments engaged i n s i m i l a r or related work.  Federal department sections  more d i r e c t l y responsible for program and p o l i c y implementation l i k e l y generate more "routine" or "programming" face-to-face contacts with the general public (e.g. Veteran's A f f a i r s , a s s i s t s war  veterans).  With the majority of federal, p r o v i n c i a l and private o f f i c e a c t i v i t i e s downtown the geographical pattern of federal face-to-face contacts l i k e l y i s focussed upon the c i t y centre.  Most federal departments with major o f f i c e s  downtown, however, serve c l i e n t e l e outside downtown.  Many departments  110.  depending on the s i z e , nature, and location of their c l i e n t e l e and the geographi c a l area of their j u r i s d i c t i o n a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y deploy major o f f i c e and nono f f i c e components outside downtown.  Face-to-face meetings with non-downtown  c l i e n t s and s t a f f are not necessarily most convenient downtown.  Evidence of  frequent t r i p s by downtown s t a f f (usually professionals, supervisors, s p e c i a l i s t s , inspectors, auditors) suggests the existence of more "dispersed" and perhaps non-downtown focussed face-to-face contact pattern than might generally be supposed i n many departments analysed (especially Transport, the Solicitor-General, and Fisheries and Environment). The categorization of federal departments with respect to "frequency, character and pattern of contacts" i n Tables 6 and .7 i s more speculative than for the "nature of activity/work" but does not d i f f e r greatly from i t . f i v e departments  Only  (Post Office, Revenue (Taxation), Veteran's A f f a i r s , Health  and Welfare, and Energy, Mines and Resources) change from a " f l e x i b l e " to "inflexible" classification.  The general reasoning behind the departmental  groupings concerning contacts i s the following. The Post Office and Supply and Services departments  are c l a s s i f i e d as  "most l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e " because, o v e r a l l , their regional and d i s t r i c t o f f i c e s downtown seem to have the fewest fact-to-face contacts with the general public.  In Supply and Services, moreover, the work i s preeminently  routine and i n t r a and extra departmental face-to-face contacts are l i k e l y to follow s u i t . The Justice and Energy, Mines and Resources departments as "most l o c a t i o n a l l y i n f l e x i b l e " .  are categorized  The l a t t e r i s assigned this c l a s s i f i c a t i o n  c h i e f l y because i t s l i b r a r y l i k e l y generates the patronage of public and private professionals downtown.  Justice Department i s given this c l a s s i f i -  cation because i t s lawyers face-to-face contacts with downtown's private  111.  practice lawyers, other departments' s t a f f , and Court o f f i c i a l s are l i k e l y necessary, frequent and most consistently of a non-routine or "orientation" character. The sorting of the remaining departments into l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e and i n f l e x i b l e categories i s based largely on the r e l a t i v e size of departmental sections generating frequent face-to-face contacts.  The large departmental  size and r e l a t i v e l y small sections dealing with the public and c l i e n t e l e d i r e c t l y suggest Revenue (Taxation), Transport, Public Works, S o l i c i t o r General, and Fisheries and Environment departments be considered flexible".  "locationally  The f i v e departments (Veterans' A f f a i r s , Indian and Northern  A f f a i r s , Health and Welfare, Revenue (Customs and Excise), and Manpower and Immigration) c l a s s i f i e d as " l o c a t i o n a l l y i n f l e x i b l e " have r e l a t i v e l y major sections and often whole o f f i c e establishments  downtown where work, serving  c l i e n t e l e d i r e c t l y , generates frequent face-to-face contacts. Lastly, the Unemployment Insurance Commission and Revenue (Customs and Excise) are r e c l a s s i f i e d from Table 6 to Table 7 into lower l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y categories.  Tabulation of the number of jobs having frequent  face-  to-face contacts i n the Unemployment Insurance Commission did not include a downtown " D i s t r i c t " o f f i c e which l i k e l y has frequent face-to-face contacts with benefit claimants.  The importance and convenience of face-to-face  contacts with Customs Brokers for Revenue (Customs and Excise) s t a f f downtown ( p a r t i c u l a r l y i n the "Long Room") l i k e l y i s undervalued i n the quantitative analysis. iii)  The Prestige of Federal Government Departments Downtown The c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of quantitative and q u a l i t a t i v e indicators found  i n this analysis suggest a strong need or desire for prestige.  The large  112.  majority (78 percent) of employees of the departments included i n this study work i n o f f i c e s of "Regional" or equivalent status downtown. proportion (40 percent) of the employees i n these downtown  A significant  departmental  o f f i c e s enjoy positions of high and middle occupational status.  In several  departments' downtown o f f i c e s (Fisheries and Environment, Manpower and Immigration, Public Works, Indian and Northern A f f a i r s and the Solicitor-General) over half of the employees have high or middle occupational status. Q u a l i t a t i v e l y , at the o v e r a l l federal l e v e l , the need or desire for prestige i s manifest i n the motive to establish a "federal presence" i n Vancouver.  This "federal presence" has been and i s a d r i v i n g force behind  proposals to construct a federal b u i l d i n g downtown (interviews:  with  Gary Webster (Public Works) and Larry McFarland, Arthur Erickson, A r c h i tects) .  On the departmental  and occupational plane aspiration for prestige  i s reflected by federal departments locating i n many of the new and prominent o f f i c e buildings downtown. Turning to the departmental  categorizations i n Tables 6 and 7 the  three departments (Post O f f i c e , Supply and Services, Revenue/Customs and Excise) classed as "most l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e " with respect to prestige stand out with r e l a t i v e l y small ( i n terms of employees) "Regional" o f f i c e s downtown compared to their downtown " D i s t r i c t " and "Metro" components.  As  well, a l l three departments have very high proportions of o f f i c e employees with comparatively low occupational status. The departments categorized as l o c a t i o n a l l y " f l e x i b l e " (Manpower and Immigration, Revenue (Taxation), Unemployment Insurance, Indian and A f f a i r s , T r a n s p o r t ) . " i n f l e x i b l e " (Solicitor-General, Health and  Northern  Welfare,  Energy, Mines and Resources) and "most i n f l e x i b l e " (Fisheries and Environment, Public Works, Justice, Veterans' A f f a i r s ) generally have progressively  113.  smaller proportions of s t a f f having low occupational status and an increasing preponderance of downtown departmental  s t a f f working i n o f f i c e s with "Regional"  r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s and j u r i s d i c t i o n . The l o c a t i o n a l  f l e x i b i l i t y categorizations of Health and Welfare  and  the Unemployment Insurance Commission are interchanged from Table 6 to Table 7 . In the former a major "Regional", and i n the l a t t e r , a major " D i s t r i c t " o f f i c e establishment were not included i n the quantitative analysis. downtown constraining influence of prestige was, for Health and Welfare and exaggerated sion.  The  therefore, underestimated  for the Unemployment Insurance Commis-  Energy, Mines and Resources i s r e c l a s s i f i e d to " l o c a t i o n a l l y  flexible"  i n Table 7 because the department has, i n f a c t , no o f f i c e s of "Regional" designation i n Canada though i n the quantitative analysis i t s o f f i c e s i n Vancouver were considered to have status equivalent to a regional o f f i c e .  iv) Federal Government Departments' Office Establishment Size and Organizational Structure Downtown Large downtown o f f i c e establishments (over 100 employees) and decentral i z e d organizational structures seem c h a r a c t e r i s t i c  of federal departments  analysed i n this study f o r which the number of employees i n o f f i c e ments could be obtained or estimated.  establish-  Most downtown federal o f f i c e employees  (77 percent) i n these departments work i n 16 large c i t y centre o f f i c e establishments.  A minority (23 percent) occupy 15 medium (between 20 and  100  employees) and 23 small (less than 20 employees) o f f i c e establishments. A l l but three departments have at least one large o f f i c e establishment downtown and four departments (Revenue (Taxation), Fisheries and Environment, Manpower and Immigration,  and the Post Office) have two.  Mention i n reports or interviews of "decentralized" organizational structures i s found for most of the departments included i n t h i s study.  Some  114.  of these statements may  be i n reference to Ottawa's control-the move to  establish "Regional" o f f i c e s i s as recent as the early 1970's i n some departments.  There are other h i n t s , however, that for many departments organization  and decision-making i n Vancouver i s f a i r l y decentralized. the large number of departmental o f f i c e establishments outside downtown).  This geographical  F i r s t evidence i s  (both downtown and  dispersion, more apparent than r e a l i n  terms of o f f i c e employees, nevertheless, suggests achievement of some degree of departmental decentralization.  Furthermore, examination of organization  charts reveals that numerous sections of departments downtown are headed by management executives with major decision-making r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s .  The  e f f i c i e n t management of the wide v a r i e t y of d i f f e r e n t programs and  operations  undertaken by e s p e c i a l l y large departments also suggests not j u s t the e x i s tence but the necessity of decentralized decision-making authority and operational autonomy. The c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of departmental s i z e and organizational structure downtown would seem to have opposite influences on l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y . The apparent hinderance to l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y a r i s i n g from the concent r a t i o n of employees i n large o f f i c e establishments decentralized organizational structures.  may  be mitigated  In other words, p a r t i a l  by  "majority"  or "minority" moves from downtown of departments' o f f i c e s may  be f e a s i b l e  because sections of departments' large o f f i c e establishments  often operate  quite independently of one another. Departmental categorizations i n Table 7, due to the lack of hard comparative evidence on the r e a l nature of departments' organizational structures i n Vancouver, d i f f e r only s l i g h t l y from Table 6.  J u s t i c e , Health  and  Welfare and Energy, Mines and Resources departments merit their "most l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e " c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , and stand out from a l l other departments, by having almost a l l their downtown o f f i c e s t a f f i n medium-sized o f f i c e  115.  establishments and are joined i n the " l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e " category by Transport and Public Works departments.  The l a t t e r are r e c l a s s i f i e d from  " l o c a t i o n a l l y i n f l e x i b l e " ( i n Table 6) because relocation of, at l e a s t , operations-oriented sections from downtown seems quite f e a s i b l e . Veterans' A f f a i r s and Solicitor-General departments are removed from the "most l o c a t i o n a l l y i n f l e x i b l e " category ( i n Table 6) and replace Transport and Public Works i n the " l o c a t i o n a l l y i n f l e x i b l e " c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of Table 7. Veterans' A f f a i r s and Solicitor-General departments j o i n the Unemployment Insurance Commission and Supply and Services and have fewer and smaller size "large" o f f i c e establishments than departments c l a s s i f i e d as "most locationally inflexible". The departments c l a s s i f i e d "most l o c a t i o n a l l y i n f l e x i b l e "  (Revenue  (Taxation), Revenue (Customs and Excise), Fisheries and Environment, Post Office) though organizationally quite decentralized, operate the largest of federal o f f i c e establishments downtown.  Revenue (Taxation), Fisheries and  Environment and the Post Office each manage two large downtown o f f i c e establishments.  v) The Rate of Federal Departments Growth and Organizational Change i n Vancouver The period between 1971 and 1976 was marked by rapid growth and organ i z a t i o n a l change i n federal departments.  The number of federal employees,  i n the f i f t e e n departments of this study, grew by 18 percent (from about 10,000 to 11,500).  The amount of o f f i c e space occupied i n metropolitan  Vancouver grew by 38 percent.  Examination of individual departments shows  that high percentage rates of employment and o f f i c e space growth are not confined to small departments.  Large departments (Revenue (Taxation), Fisheries  and Environment, Manpower and Immigration) have high employment and o f f i c e  116.  occupancy percentage growth rates which reinforce the fact that departmental growth has been rapid i n both the absolute and r e l a t i v e sense. A further i n d i c a t i o n of rapid departmental growth, p a r t i c u l a r l y as i t influences l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y , i s that f o r at least seven of f i f t e e n departments the percentage of t o t a l o f f i c e space outside downtown has grown. In three large departments (Manpower and Immigration, Fisheries and Environment, Unemployment Insurance) the Increase i n non-downtown o f f i c e space occupancy i s substantial ( i . e . over 20,000 square f e e t ) . The difference between the growth of departmental employment and of o f f i c e space i s i n d i c a t i v e of the more rapid growth of o f f i c e compared to nono f f i c e federal employees i n Vancouver.  I t l i k e l y r e f l e c t s , as w e l l , an  increasing square footage of o f f i c e space per employee.  Both trends seem  plausible i n l i g h t of major departmental organizational and l o c a t i o n a l changes which have accompanied rapid growth.  The major organizational  change, i n  several departments (Post O f f i c e , Solicitor-General, Fisheries and Environment, Transport, Manpower and Immigration) has been the setting up of "Regional" headquarters to decentralize decision-making from Ottawa.  As  well, major organizational restructuring between 1971 and 1976 r e s u l t s from the merging of departments (Unemployment Insurance and Manpower and Immigration) and a quickly changing and growing number of statutory functions  (Fish-  eries and Environment, Revenue (Taxation)) performed i n departments. A l l but one department (Veterans' A f f a i r s ) required increased  o f f i c e space.  Changes i n the locations of downtown o f f i c e establishments occurred for almost every department (even Veterans' A f f a i r s ) . established downtown.  Most often the growth of new and  components was accommodated i n new p r i v a t e l y owned o f f i c e space  117.  The c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s of Table 7 take into account organizational change i n departments as well as growth.  The most rapidly growing departments  i n terms of employment, metropolitan o f f i c e space occupancy and o f f i c e space percentage change outside downtown (Solicitor-General, Justice, Fisheries and Environment,  Supply and Services) are c l a s s i f i e d as "most l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e " .  The remaining departments exhibiting progressively slower growth and less evident organizational change are slotted into the remaining categories. Major ongoing organizational change i n the form of a merger of operations i s responsible for the interchange of c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s of Manpower and  Immigration  and the Unemployment Insurance Commission with Indian and Northern A f f a i r s and Energy, Mines and Resources.  The immanent organizational and l o c a t i o n a l  changes r e s u l t i n g from construction of a Taxation Data Center i n Surrey suggests Revenue (Taxation) should be considered ( i n Table 7) amongst departments c l a s s i f i e d as "most l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e " with respect to growth and change.  v i ) The T r a d i t i o n of Federal Government Departments Downtown Most of the federal departments and/or their components examined i n t h i s study have been located downtown for at least two decades.  For this reason  i t i s possible that a strong t r a d i t i o n of downtown location s t i l l exists despite recent rapid departmental growth and change and the infusion of younger employees into the c i v i l service who  l i v e i n the suburbs.  Table 7 d i f f e r s i n only one respect from Table 6.  The Justice Depart-  ment i s moved from the "most l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e " to the " l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e " category.  This seems reasonable, despite less than ten years of  existence downtown, because the law firms and courts with which the Justice Department i s connected have always been centered downtown.  118.  A l l other departments' categorizations from "most l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e " to "most l o c a t i o n a l l y i n f l e x i b l e " are based on the progressively longer periods of time their major sections could be traced to downtown locations.  2.  Comparative Locational F l e x i b i l i t y of 15 Federal Departments In Table 9 a f i n a l , o v e r a l l comparative evaluation of 15 federal depart-  ments' l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y i s presented. 8 —  I t s generation stems from Table  a rearrangement of the findings i n Table .7 —  department  which shows for each  the comparative l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y categories derived with  respect to each of the s i x i n t e r n a l factors.  From the points attached to  these categories, points associated with each departments' categorizations are added together and form the basis of comparative evaluation of departments for a l l s i x i n t e r n a l factors combined.  In t o t a l twelve d i f f e r e n t  evaluations result from eleven evaluations based on d i f f e r e n t combinations of double-weighted factors and an evaluation where a l l factors are given equal weights.  Table 9 i s the synthesis of these twelve evaluations based simply  on t o t a l l i n g the points for each department derived i n each of the twelve evaluations and ranking the department point t o t a l s from highest ("most l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e " ) to lowest ("most l o c a t i o n a l l y i n f l e x i b l e " ) . In general, the twelve evaluations which make up Table 9 do not d i f f e r greatly from one another.  Departments are consistently found on one side of  the f l e x i b l e / i n f l e x i b l e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n f r o n t i e r or another.  The difference  between the evaluation where a l l factors are weighted equally and where t r a d i t i o n and prestige are given double weights, for example, i s s l i g h t .  Only  the Unemployment Insurance Commission, Post Office and Fisheries and Environment departments change c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s .  Table 9, then, i s p a r t i c u l a r l y  C O M P A R A T I V E FOR  L O C A T I O N A L  T H E  S I X BY'  MOST FLEXIBLE REVENUE (TAXATION)  Rate o f Growth/ Change  .MANPOWER AND IMMIGRATION  FISHERIES AND ENVIRONMENT  Rate o f Growth/ Change  UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE COMMISSION  TRANSPORT  POST OFFICE -  F L E X I B I L I T Y  I N T E R N A L  F A C T O R S  D E P A R T M E N T  FLEXIBLE  j  INFLEXIBLE  Frequency, Charact e r and P a t t e r n of C o n t a c t s PrestiRC  Nature o f A c t i v ity/Work  Prestige S i z e and O r g a n i zational Structure Rate o f Growth/ Chanj>e '  Tradition Frequency, Charact e r and P a t t e r n of C o n t a c t s Nature o f A c t i v ity/Work  Nature o f A c t i v ity/Work Tradition Frequency, Charact e r and P a t t e r n of C o n t a c t s Frequency, Charact e r and P a t t e r n of C o n t a c t s Nnturc o f A c t i v ity/Work Rate o f Growth/ Change Prestige  Nature o f A c t i v - Frequency, Characity/Work t e r and P a t t e r n of C o n t a c t s Prestige Size andOrganizationol Structure i Frequency, Chara c t e r and Pattern o f Contacts PrestiRC  REVENUE (CUSTOMS AND EXCISE)  MOST  INFLEXIBLE  Tradition S i z e and Organizational , Structure  Prestige S i z e and Organizational Structure  S i z e and O r g a n i - • T r a d i t i o n zational Structure  Rntc o f Crowth/. Gianni Tradition  Nature o f A c t i v ity/Work Tradition  S i z e and Organizational Structure Rate o f Growth/ Change  TrndlLlon Nature o f A c t i v Frequency, Charac- ity/Work t e r and P a t t e r n S i z e and Orgaof C o n t a c t s nizational Structure Rate o f Growth/ Chnnp.c:  HEALTH AND WELFARE  S i z e and Organizational Structure  SUPPLY AND SERVICES  Nature o f A c t i v - T r a d i t i o n . ity/Work Frequency, Chara c t e r and Pattern of Contacts Prestige Rate o f Growth/ Change  Nature o f A c t i v ity/Work  INDIAN AND NORTHERN AFFAIRS  Prestige S i z e and O r g a n i zational Structure  PUBLIC WORKS  Nature o f A c t i v ity/Work Frequency, Charact e r and P a t t e r n of C o n t a c t s S i z e and O r g a n i zational Structure Rate o f Growth/ Change Tradition  Frequency, Charac- Rate o f Growth/ t e r and P a t t e r n Change of C o n t a c t s Tradition PrestiRe S i z e and O r g a n i zational Structure  Nature o f A c t i v Tradition ity/Work Frequency, Charact e r and P a t t e r n of C o n t a c t s Rate o f Growth/ Change Prestige  VETERANS' AFFAIRS  Nature o f A c t i v - T r a d i t i o n ity/Work  S i z e and O r g a n i Prestige zational Rate o f Growth/ Structure Change Frequency, Charact e r and P o t t e r n of C o n t a c t s  ENERGY, MINES AND RESOURCES  S i z e and O r g a n i - Nature o f A c t i v zational ity/Work Structure Tradition  Prestige Rate o f Growth/ Change  SOLICITORGENERAL  Rate o f Growth/ Change Tradition  Prestige S i z e and O r g a n i zational Structure  JUSTICE  S i z e and O r g a n i - T r a d i t i o n zational Structure ftate of Growth/ Change  Nature o f A c t i v ity/Work Frequency, C h a r a c t e r and P a t t e r n of C o n t a c t s 1  TABLE VIII  Frequency, Chara c t e r and Pattern of Contacts  Nature o f A c t i v ity/Work Frequency,' Chara c t e r and Pattern of Contacts Prestige  120.  OVERALL EVALUATION OF 15 SAMPLE FEDERAL DEPARTMENTS LOCATIONAL FLEXIBILITY  (Based on Examination of 6 Internal Factors)  DEPARTMENTS  POINT TOTAL FOR 12 DIFFERENT EVALUATIONS  CLASSIFICATION  SUPPLY AND SERVICES SOLICITOR-GENERAL TRANSPORT PUBLIC WORKS ENERGY, MINES AND RESOURCES  634 536 512 474 474  MOST LOCATIONALLY FLEXIBLE  UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE MANPOWER AND IMMIGRATION FISHERIES AND ENVIRONMENT  446 446 446  LOCATIONALLY FLEXIBLE  POST OFFICE REVENUE (TAXATION) JUSTICE  428 420 408  LOCATIONALLY INFLEXIBLE  VETERANS' AFFAIRS INDIAN AND NORTHERN AFFAIRS HEALTH AND WELFARE REVENUE (CUSTOMS AND EXCISE)  388 388 388 344  MOST LOCATIONALLY INFLEXIBLE  TABLE IX  121. consonant with a l l twelve evaluations using d i f f e r e n t combinations of weighted factors.  i ) Table 9:  Discussion  The c l a s s i f i c a t i o n presented i n Table 9 i s a guide f o r planning action based on the examination of s i x i n t e r n a l factors.  I t c e r t a i n l y does not  suggest that departments c l a s s i f i e d as " l o c a t i o n a l l y i n f l e x i b l e " or "most l o c a t i o n a l l y i n f l e x i b l e " have no o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y . In Vancouver we are primarily interested i n the p o s s i b i l i t y for decent r a l i z a t i o n of federal departmental o f f i c e s from downtown to Regional Town Centres.  Four of the s i x internal factors examined would seem comparatively,  and even absolutely, to be weak constraints on departments' o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l flexibility.  This b r i e f discussion, therefore, emphasizes whatever rationale  or potential exists for o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y for a l l departments i n a l l four c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s . It could almost be surmised from Table 9, without applying a point and weighting system, that the Supply and Services, Solicitor-General, Transport, Public Works and Energy, Mines and Resources departments could be considered "most l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e " of a l l the departments analysed i n this study. Most of the i n t e r n a l factors for these departments suggest they be considered l o c a t i o n a l l y "most f l e x i b l e " or " f l e x i b l e " .  In each of the twelve weighted  evaluations which are combined i n Table 9, Supply and Services always ranked f i r s t , the Solicitor-General and Transport departments consistently alternated between second and t h i r d positions, Public Works frequently ranked fourth, and Energy, Mines and Resources o s c i l l a t e d between t h i r d and f i f t h positions. These f i v e departments have i n common c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of work and contacts which seem most c l e a r l y to obviate the necessity for downtown o f f i c e locations.  122.  Indeed, i t i s possible i n the case of Transport and the Solicitor-General to argue that as f a r as departmental  operations are concerned  the downtown loca-  tion of o f f i c e a c t i v i t i e s i s unstrategic. In general, the operations of these f i v e departments do not d i r e c t l y a f f e c t the general public or private businesses downtown.  Contacts  generated  with these groups downtown appear especially low except i n Energy, Mines and Resources which operates a l i b r a r y open to the general p u b l i c . departmental  Intra-  and inter-departmental contacts nevertheless l i k e l y predominate,  i n Energy, Mines and Resources and the other departments.  For Supply and  Services and Public Works departments, whose c l i e n t s are other federal departments, the bulk of these contacts may or may not be made more convenient by a downtown location.  Further study i s needed here.  their operations and l i k e l y predominantly  The region-wide nature of  routine nature of their contacts,  however, lead one to suspect that the downtown location of both departments could be given up with small damage to operational e f f i c i e n c y especially i f their c l i e n t departments were to decentralize as w e l l . The downtown o f f i c e a c t i v i t i e s , and the contacts generated i n the Transport and Solicitor-General departments (and to a lesser degree i n Public Works) appear primarily associated with and directed towards management of large B. C.-wide operations.  Concentration of the major non-office components  of Transport and the Solicitor-General departments at Vancouver International Airport and i n Fraser Valley penitentiaries respectively, suggests the p o s s i b i l i t y gains i n operational e f f i c i e n c y by a closer location of related o f f i c e management.  Location of new, or relocating of e x i s t i n g , o f f i c e a c t i v i t i e s i n  these departments to nearby Regional Town Centre s i t e s (Richmond, New Westminster) might l o g i c a l l y be considered.  Research a c t i v i t y and contacts i n  123.  Energy, Mines and Resources suggests as well that a downtown location f o r i t i s unnecessary. The remaining factors examined f o r these f i v e departments, by and large, suggest the existence of potential o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y .  Only the  need or desire for prestige i s l i k e l y to function as a major i n t e r n a l cons t r a i n t on o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y of the Public Works department.  A  t r a d i t i o n of downtown location and comparatively slow growth and change may be an impediment to l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y f o r the Transport department. For both Supply and Services and the Solicitor-General departments comparatively centralized organizational structures of major downtown components could hinder their t o t a l or p a r t i a l removal from downtown.  As w e l l , the need or desire  for prestige i n the Solicitor-General and Energy, Mines and Resources departments could hinder their l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y . Three departments —  the Unemployment Insurance Commission, Manpower  and Immigration and Fisheries and Environment — t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e " i n Table 9.  are c l a s s i f i e d as "loca-  The p r i n c i p l e d i s t i n c t i o n between these three  departments and those c l a s s i f i e d as "most l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e " rests upon the  frequency of face-to-face contacts and, to a lesser degree, the nature of  their activity/work downtown.  These departments l i k e l y have more frequent  face-to-face contacts with c l i e n t s , private business, and the general public downtown.  Certainly more employees, sections and o f f i c e establishments of  these departments, especially Unemployment Insurance and Manpower and Immigrat i o n , provide d i r e c t services to c l i e n t s . The Fisheries Management section of the Department of Fisheries and Environment, f o r example, issues licences and provides over the counter i n f o r mation to the general public from the main f l o o r of i t s downtown o f f i c e . l o c a l population served by Canada Manpower and Immigration Centres and an  The  124.  Unemployment Insurance Commission Vancouver D i s t r i c t O f f i c e , meets the demands for program services generated from the c i t y centre and ties.  These o f f i c e s are most appropriately  inner-city communi-  located downtown.  In these three departments, also, there i s clear evidence of non-routine (policy formulation, planning, evaluation) type work performed i n comparat i v e l y small specialized sections. t a t i o n " type contacts i t may status of the s t a f f may  The nature of this a c t i v i t y , the  "orien-  engender, and the high or middle occupational  l i m i t their l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y .  Having considered  a l l t h i s other internal factors seem to legitimize their categorizations "locationally flexible". research and  as  For Fisheries and Environment the prevailing  science orientation of i t s o f f i c e work suggests a downtown l o c a -  tion i s unnecessary.  In the regional o f f i c e s of the Unemployment Insurance  Commission and Manpower and Immigration, major sections of routine work might enable at least p a r t i a l decentralization.  With major o f f i c e and  non-office  operations already outside downtown, the intra-departmental contact  pattern  of Fisheries and Environment, Manpower and Immigration and the Unemployment Insurance Commission regional o f f i c e s ( l i k e the Solicitor-General, Transport and Public Works departments) may, perspective  i n f a c t , be quite dispersed.  From the  of the department as a whole, the downtown, or even metropolitan  Vancouver, regional headquarters location may  be inconvenient.  Turning to a l l other factors, a l l three departments have organizational  and decision-making structures.  decentralized  This might a l l e v i a t e reloca-  tion d i f f i c u l t i e s caused by the large size of the regional o f f i c e e s t a b l i s h ments.  The departments have comparatively short organizational and down-  town l o c a t i o n a l h i s t o r i e s . recurrent  organizational  They have undergone, as well, rapid growth and  change.  Accommodation and i t s location are l i k e l y  to continue to be important departmental concerns.  125.  Crossing the l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e / l o c a t i o n a l l y i n f l e x i b l e c l a s s i f i c a tion boundary we find no sharp d i s t i n c t i o n to be drawn between the departments grouped i n one or the other categories. Indeed only the Post Office and Veterans' A f f a i r s departments i n the*"locationally i n f l e x i b l e " category have a p l u r a l i t y of factors with c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s which suggest comparative tional i n f l e x i b i l i t y .  loca-  The supporting rationale for the various departments  found i n both the i n f l e x i b l e categories of Table 9 i s best sketched department by department. The " l o c a t i o n a l l y i n f l e x i b l e " categorization of the Post O f f i c e stems mainly from uncertainty surrounding the extent i t s o f f i c e a c t i v i t i e s downtown are t i e d - i n and need to be near non-office (postal plant) operations downtown. Despite the non-routine (specialized) nature of work and a need f o r prestige i t may be that the regional o f f i c e of the Post Office holds the greatest potential for relocation from downtown. Revenue (Taxation) i s s p e c i a l , i n this analysis, because i t i s the only department where d e f i n i t e plans to relocate o f f i c e s t a f f from downtown were found.  The planned relocation i n Surrey of at least one t h i r d of the depart-  ment's current downtown contingent by 1981 i s the prime evidence that i t s " l o c a t i o n a l l y i n f l e x i b l e " c l a s s i f i c a t i o n i s unwarranted.  This c l a s s i f i c a t i o n  of the department i s retained, however, because factor c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the sections and units scheduled to remain downtown suggest strong l o c a t i o n a l inflexibility.  Chiefly the non-routine nature of this auditing work and i t s  close association with the downtown business community may prevent i t s early consideration f o r relocation i n Regional Town Centres. Specialized l e g a l work; the necessity f o r face-to-face contacts with other departments'  s t a f f , private lawyers, and court o f f i c i a l s ; and the  strong need for prestige of downtown indicate the Justice Department should  126.  be considered location i n f l e x i b l e but the frequent t r a v e l l i n g of the department's lawyers outside downtown hints that Regional Town Centre location f o r this department  i s possible though not necessarily convenient or e f f i c i e n t .  It i s mainly the routine " c l e r i c a l " nature of Veterans' A f f a i r s o f f i c e a c t i v i t i e s downtown which suggest the department i n a Regional Town Centre.  The department's  could function just as well  "most l o c a t i o n a l l y i n f l e x i b l e "  c l a s s i f i c a t i o n a r i s e s , however, from the frequent face-to-face contacts i t generates with i t s c l i e n t s , i t s lack of growth and declining importance, and i t s apparent comparatively strong need for prestige.  The frequency, however,  with which Veterans' A f f a i r s changes rankings and i s c l a s s i f i e d with departments considered " l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e " i n the twelve evaluations which comprise the f i n a l standings of Table 9 suggest i t might just as well be considered amongst either the " l o c a t i o n a l l y i n f l e x i b l e " or the "most l o c a t i o n a l l y i n f l e x i b l e " of departments. The f e a s i b i l i t y of relocating the d i s t r i c t o f f i c e of the Department of Indian and Northern A f f a i r s from downtown depends primarily, as i n Veterans' A f f a i r s , on the necessity and convenience of having regular face-to-face contacts with c l i e n t e l e downtown.  The d i s t r i c t o f f i c e of the department  might perhaps be located nearer the c l i e n t e l e i t serves i n a Regional Town Centre.  The work i t undertakes i s predominantly routine i n nature and i t s  o f f i c e establishment i s of medium s i z e . f l e x i b i l i t y of this department  Beyond this prospects f o r l o c a t i o n a l  are unpromising.  Key i n h i b i t i n g factors appear  to be a strong need for prestige, the non-routine (policy planning and r e search) nature of a c t i v i t i e s performed i n the regional o f f i c e and an o v e r a l l departmental t r a d i t i o n of downtown l o c a t i o n . The factors i n the Health and Welfare department  commending at least  the p o s s i b i l i t y of i t s p a r t i a l decentralization are i t s decentralized  127.  organizational structure, the medium size of i t s downtown o f f i c e e s t a b l i s h ments and the existence of a s i g n i f i c a n t amount of routine ( c l e r i c a l ) as well as research  (science) work.  S t i l l the majority of i n t e r n a l factors indicate  the department's comparative l o c a t i o n a l i n f l e x i b i l i t y .  Most important are  the regular face-to-face contacts which occur i n Medical Services Branch o f f i c e s downtown.  Also, important constraining influences a r i s e from a strong  need or desire for prestige as well as a r e l a t i v e l y long downtown l o c a t i o n a l history. In eight out of the twelve l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y evaluations which make up Table 9 the Revenue (Customs and Excise) ranked l a s t .  The department  appears the most l o c a t i o n a l l y i n f l e x i b l e of a l l departments analysed study c h i e f l y because the nature of i t s work — shipping and customs brokers —  i n this  i t s close association with  i s t i e d - i n with the harbour and quaternary  sectors downtown. In conclusion, more detailed reasoning behind the o v e r a l l departmental l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s proposed i n Table 9 and further information on c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the i n t e r n a l factors discerned for each department was  transferred to what might be termed " F i n a l " or "Finished"  Departmental Composite Sheets.  Two  examples of these sheets, one for Public  Works Canada, a department categorized "most l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e " ; and  one  for Revenue (Taxation), a department c l a s s i f i e d " l o c a t i o n a l l y i n f l e x i b l e " ; are presented i n Appendix IV.  3.  The "Climate" for Federal Departments' O f f i c e Locational F l e x i b i l i t y i n Vancouver Appraisal of the "climate" for federal departments' o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l  f l e x i b i l i t y r e s u l t i n g from the Interplay of the four "external" factors of  128.  the C r i t e r i a Check L i s t can never be e n t i r e l y objective or accurate as t h e i r r e a l and perceived  influences are ever-changing.  possible to venture t h i s synopsis.  I t seems nevertheless  Currently the comparatively high l e v e l of  (1) "general" and " s p e c i a l " a c c e s s i b i l i t y to downtown and (2) the downtown domination of the metropolitan  o f f i c e market seem the strongest " i n t e r n a l "  elements acting to constrain federal departments' o f f i c e s to the c i t y  centre.  On the other hand, (3) e x i s t i n g telecommunications system technology and increasingly congested transportation systems as well as (4) the growing regional orientation i n metropolitan  plans and p o l i t i c s are the recent factors  most strongly favouring increased federal o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y . The combined influence of these four factors would seem to have created a climate "moderately favourable" towards increased federal as well as private o f f i c e decentralization from downtown but not one which a c t i v e l y encourages i t as the proposal to construct a large federal o f f i c e building downtown might indicate.  The factor-by-factor survey follows.  i ) The "General" and "Special" A c c e s s i b i l i t y of Downtown Vancouver "General" a c c e s s i b i l i t y or the l o c a t i o n a l q u a l i t y of being central and convenient to the whole range of urban a c t i v i t i e s and to urban consumer and labour markets and " s p e c i a l " a c c e s s i b i l i t y or the l o c a t i o n a l t r a i t of having quick and easy access to complimentary f a c i l i t i e s are t r a d i t i o n a l advantages of downtown.  More than f o r most large North American c i t i e s , Vancouver's  downtown seems to have held on to i t s monopoly on these q u a l i t i e s i n r e l a t i o n to the competing suburban milieu.  "General" a c c e s s i b i l i t y of downtown  Vancouver r e l a t i v e to suburban locations has f a l l e n and i s declining due to congestion and increased commuting distances but i s s t i l l a major c i t y l o c a t i o n a l advantage.  centre  Downtown remains the preeminent centre f o r o f f i c e ,  129.  hotel, r e t a i l and c u l t u r a l a c t i v i t i e s .  Though on a peninsula, downtown i s  well connected by major roads, bridges, bus and now  ferry t r a n s i t to the  surrounding metropolitan consumer and labour markets. concentration — itself.  the West End —  A major population  i s adjacent to downtown on the peninsula  Recent improvements to Vancouver's road infra-structure and t r a n s i t  system might be seen, at l e a s t , to have maintained downtown's general accessi b i l i t y especially with regard to white c o l l a r suburban neighbourhoods.  Two  new bridges across the North Arm of the Fraser River provide better downtown access for Richmond and Delta commuters and a very convenient almost exclusive downtown airport l i n k .  Transit improvements include a trans-harbour  ferry service between downtown and affluent north shore suburbs as well as a new FASTBUS service designed to entice suburban commuters from their cars. Vancouver's dearth of freeways may,  perhaps, enhance the general accessi-  b i l i t y of i t s downtown. The "general" a c c e s s i b i l i t y aspect of downtown seems from interview statements especially important to federal departments such as Supply and Services, Post O f f i c e , Revenue (Customs and Excise), and Revenue (Taxation) employing large numbers of c l e r i c a l and/or seasonal s t a f f .  A reason for  Revenue Taxation's planned relocation of i t s routine, seasonal, data center operations to Surrey, however, i s the b e l i e f that a large untapped pool of housewives f o r seasonal s t a f f can be found there just as well as downtown. This may  indicate not only the r e l a t i v e decline of downtown's "general"  a c c e s s i b i l i t y advantage but i t s perception and serious consideration by federal departments i n l o c a t i o n a l decisions. In contrast to "general" a c c e s s i b i l i t y , downtown Vancouver's " s p e c i a l " a c c e s s i b i l i t y advantage f o r o f f i c e s seems to have substantially increased r e l a t i v e to suburban locations.  In part this i s the consequence of the  130.  burgeoning growth i n the number of o f f i c e s located downtown.  Just as impor-  tant, however, the majority of t h i s growth has been geographically delimited within the "golden t r i a n g l e " .  Most new o f f i c e s and most federal departments'  o f f i c e establishments downtown are within easy walking distance of each other. This may p a r t i c u l a r l y benefit departments which, besides contact with the general public, require or desire some face-to-face contacts with other federal and p r o v i n c i a l government departments and agencies or with private business downtown.  In this analysis important regular contacts, many, per-  haps, face-to-face were discerned as l i k e l y to occur downtown between: Justice and Revenue (Taxation); Fisheries and Environment and Transport; Supply and Services and most other departments; Public Works and most other departments; Solicitor-General and Justice; Manpower and Immigration  and large  private employers; Unemployment Insurance and the Post O f f i c e ; Health and Welfare and Indian and Northern A f f a i r s ; Revenue (Taxation) and corporate taxpayers; and Revenue (Customs and Excise) and customs brokers.  In general,  then, the downtown o f f e r s convenient services and maximizes opportunities for "choice" and planned or chance face-to-face contact. Also within easy walking distance of most downtown federal government o f f i c e s there i s now a well developed and complementary commercial c u l t u r a l and infra-structure.  The new hotels, clubs and theatres and suburban type  shopping malls and r e t a i l outlets downtown help to hold existing and a t t r a c t new private and government o f f i c e s downtown by providing the most concentrated v a r i e t y and choice of entertainment and urban l e i s u r e services within the region.  As was stated i n Chapter 2 this whole aspect of " s o c i a l " contacts of  o f f i c e s needs study.  I t may,  by i t s e l f , be a very important i n h i b i t o r to  federal departments' o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y .  131.  In sum, the current "general" and " s p e c i a l " a c c e s s i b i l i t y of downtown would seem to have a strong constraining influence on federal departments' o f f i c e f l e x i b i l i t y i n Vancouver.  While i n the long run this downtown con-  straining influence of a c c e s s i b i l i t y may be seen as weakening, that of " s p e c i a l " a c c e s s i b i l i t y may be strengthening.  i i ) Metropolitan Telecommunications and Transportation Systems Continuing developments i n telecommunications technology, r e s u l t i n g from the electronics "explosion" since World War I I , and the fact federal departments are major telecommunications systems users i n Vancouver suggest the  o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y these systems permit or encourage be care-  f u l l y evaluated. In Vancouver, as i n other c i t i e s , telecommunication i s dominated by the telephone with increasing use of teletype and computer linkups to send and r e t r i e v e information to and from sources within and outside the c i t y . Vancouver's transportation system r e l i e s on the private automobile as well as an improved downtown-oriented  t r a n s i t system.  Diurnal commuting to  and from downtown, i n cars and buses, i s the major pattern.  I t takes place  on a grid street infra-structure, lacking freeways, but with major and wide a r t e r i a l street corridors and bridges servicing the downtown.  In peak  periods this road and bridge infra-structure and the bus system together prove inadequate to the demands placed on them and congestion r e s u l t s . In Vancouver's telecommunications and transportation systems no major technological or i n f r a - s t r u c t u r a l changes appear imminent.  The advent of  f i b r e optics, which w i l l allow development and use of reasonable cost video telephone and conference f a c i l i t i e s i n o f f i c e s , i s s t i l l some years into the future and holds unforeseen l o c a t i o n a l implications.  Development  of a  132.  reasonable cost automobile powered by a source other than gasoline i s also to be awaited.  Another major bridge spanning the Fraser River i s mooted but has  not been d e f i n i t e l y announced.  The planning f o r construction of a l i g h t  rapid t r a n s i t system (LRT) to l i n k downtown Vancouver with Regional Town Centres i n Burnaby and New Westminster i s only i n i t s i n i t i a l stages.  There  i s controversy over just what l o c a t i o n a l consequences f o r o f f i c e s such a l i n e could have.  According to federal Public Works department o f f i c i a l s the l i n e  i s essential i f federal departments are to consider location of future o f f i c e s outside downtown i n Regional Town Centres.  O f f i c i a l s i n the department  believe that "maximizing a c c e s s i b i l i t y " to the general population should be the key factor i n determining future o f f i c e locations.  Other planners,  Richard Mann f o r example, question the wisdom of l i n k i n g downtown by LRT to Regional Town Centres.  Such a l i n e , by also increasing (or at least main-  taining) the l e v e l of general a c c e s s i b i l i t y of downtown may further boost i t s a t t r a c t i o n over Regional Town Centres f o r federal departments' o f f i c e s and o f f i c e s i n general. A l l i n a l l , the state of Vancouver's telecommunications and transportation systems now and i n the near future seems to favour increased l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y f o r federal departments' o f f i c e s .  Over time the overworked  state of the transportation system l i k e l y encourages greater u t i l i z a t i o n of the telecommunications system, i . e . substitution of non-physical for physical accessibility —  even f o r contacts within downtown.  The e x i s t i n g  telecommuni-  cations system of telephones, teletype and computer hookups has enabled a growing number of o f f i c e s (AO percent of t o t a l metropolitan o f f i c e space i s outside downtown) the choice of non-downtown locations.  In Los Angeles  current telecommunications technology has been successfully used by an insurance firm to set up neighbourhood "work centres" f o r i t s employees.  A similar  experimental scheme, f o r Vancouver, involving the p r o v i n c i a l government was  133.  proposed by B. C. Telephone but shelved with the change of government i n thel a s t election. Federal government departments, with but 30 percent of their o f f i c e space outside downtown, would seem especially able to take better advantage of the increased o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y f a c i l i t a t e d by existing t e l e communications  systems.  This may not necessarily permit relocation of whole  federal departments to Regional Town Centres but may allow various sections or units to relocate outside downtown.  i i i ) Vancouver's O f f i c e Market Between 1971 and 1976 the downtown o f f i c e market grew r a p i d l y .  Total  o f f i c e space downtown increased by three and one half m i l l i o n square feet from about nine to twelve and one half m i l l i o n square feet.  The o f f i c e space  supply kept pace with a demand which absorbed about 700,000 square feet and 10 percent r e n t a l increases (to $8.50 - $10.00 per square foot i n class "A" buildings) annually u n t i l 1975.  In 1975 and 1976 supply f a r outstripped a  demand which f e l l to 200,000 - 400,000 square feet annually due to depressed economic conditions and r e s t r i c t i o n s on governments' spending and h i r i n g . An over supply condition i n the downtown o f f i c e market has continued to the time of writing (1978). Between 1971 and 1976 the suburban o f f i c e alternative gained a larger market share as the price of downtown land rose and i t s a v a i l a b i l i t y declined. Suburban o f f i c e space grew from f i v e to s i x and one half m i l l i o n square feet. Leasing costs of class "A" suburban space r e f l e c t e d cheaper land costs and were about $2.50 cheaper per square foot than downtown.  The suburban o f f i c e  market's share of t o t a l metropolitan o f f i c e space rose from 35 to 40 percent. The downtown o f f i c e market remained, however, predominant.  134.  In t h i s market context, due to rapid increases i n departments' s t a f f and an inadequate inventory of suitable crown-owned o f f i c e space the federal government assumed the r o l e of an o f f i c e space consumer.  I t maintained i t s  occupancy of a roughly 9 percent share of t o t a l o f f i c e space downtown through leasing ( i . e . i t increased i t s metropolitan o f f i c e space occupancy by about 600,000 square feet between 1971 and 1976).  By 1976, 68 percent or almost  800,000 square feet of f e d e r a l l y occupied space downtown was leased at a cost of some $10 m i l l i o n annually (up 350 percent from 1971 leasing costs).  As a  leasee, downtown locations for new s t a f f were and are today (1978) encouraged by the a v a i l a b i l i t y and r e l a t i v e preponderance of o f f i c e space compared to the suburbs. The federal r o l e , between 1971 and 1976, as an "uncertainty generator" i n the metropolitan o f f i c e market was minimal.  The proposal to construct a  federal o f f i c e building downtown surfaced i n September 1973 but was shelved and not brought forward again u n t i l l a t e 1976.  The downtown location f o r  this building was l i k e l y influenced by the domination of the metropolitan o f f i c e market.  The large investment, perhaps $100 m i l l i o n , i s l i k e l y to  involve the least perceived r i s k i f i t i s downtown especially i f some private tenants are sought for the b u i l d i n g .  Certainly the current metropolitan  o f f i c e market, and federal departments' o f f i c e location patterns w i l l be changed l e a s t , and l i k e l y reinforced, by the choice of a downtown location f o r the proposed new federal b u i l d i n g . The p r i n c i p a l point, then, a r i s i n g from the above i s that characteri s t i c s of Vancouver's o f f i c e market and the federal r o l e i n i t between 1971 and 1976 has discouraged federal o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y .  135.  Iv)  Planning and P o l i t i c s While i t i s d i f f i c u l t to monitor, year by year, the strength of currents  and undercurrents i n the stream of planning and p o l i t i c s , i t i s clear the flow reversed d i r e c t i o n i n the 1970's.  The major p o l i t i c a l and planning concern i n  the 1960's was f o r the development and economic health of downtown Vancouver. Early i n the decade the lack of new downtown development, the rapid growth of suburbs and the American problem and experience of "dying" downtowns raised fears the same process was happening  i n Vancouver.  renewal investment downtown was encouraged politicians.  Private and public urban  and welcomed by planners and  The planning and p o l i t i c a l contribution to the "climate" f o r  private and public o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y was extremely unfavourable at that time. C i t i z e n opposition to public urban renewal and freeways downtown l e d quite quickly to planning and p o l i t i c a l reevaluation and eventual abandonment of the urban renewal and freeway program.  Concern f o r the mushrooming  private development, p a r t i c u l a r l y of o f f i c e s downtown, and i t s city-wide s o c i a l and physical implications took longer to emerge.  By 1974, however,  the worry that downtown Vancouver was becoming too "developed" too quickly to the detriment of the whole region's " l i v a b i l i t y " was c l e a r l y enunciated in the Greater Vancouver Regional D i s t r i c t ' s Livable Region Plan.  In the  plan Regional Town Centres are proposed to r e l i e v e the development pressure on downtown and to balance work, c u l t u r a l , educational and entertainment opportunities within the region.  Decentralization and diversion of o f f i c e  growth, especially of government o f f i c e s , from downtown to Regional Town Centres was to be encouraged.  Complementing, and i n accordance with the  G. V. R. D. plan, the c i t y of Vancouver acted i n 1973 to r e s t r i c t dense o f f i c e development by down-zoning both downtown and the Broadway districts.  commercial  Surrounding municipalities began the selection and planning  136.  of Regional Town Centre  sites.  Adoption of the G.V.R.D. plan i n 1976 by a l l member m u n i c i p a l i t i e s s i g nalled o f f i c i a l l y , then, the existence of p o l i t i c a l as well as planning conditions favourable towards o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y i n general and federal office locational f l e x i b i l i t y , i n particular. Land Management Policy —  Promulgation  of the Federal  i n which federal lands would be managed with a  view towards achievement of wider s o c i a l , economic and environmental tives —  objec-  enhanced this climate further at the federal p o l i t i c a l l e v e l .  F i n a l l y , while obvious, i t needs to be said that the l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y of federal departments' o f f i c e s i s more subject to the vagaries of p o l i t i c a l winds than that of private o f f i c e s .  P o l i t i c s , more than stated  p o l i c i e s , planning, economics or any other consideration, may ultimately be the important factor i n the l o c a t i o n a l decisions regarding major federal office buildings. Postscript(1978)  :  1976 may have been the year when p o l i t i c a l and  planning conditions most favoured and contributed to increased l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y of federal departmental  offices.  A sluggish metropolitan economic  climate, the announcement of a population decline i n the c i t y of Vancouver, election of a new Vancouver mayor with a major concern f o r the c i t y ' s continued economic development, and an approaching  federal e l e c t i o n l i k e l y have  helped to generate the p o l i t i c a l undercurrent which brought forward, again, the proposal to construct a federal o f f i c e b u i l d i n g downtown.  A.  Locational F l e x i b i l i t y of Federal Government O f f i c e s i n Vancouver: A Synthesis The examination  of f e d e r a l departments' o f f i c e location reveals t h e i r  concentration, to an even greater degree than f o r other types of o f f i c e s , i n downtown Vancouver.  Federal departments are shown, as w e l l , to be important  137.  o f f i c e space users and employment generators not only downtown, but i n the metropolitan  area as a whole.  The r e l a t i v e dominance of downtown as a l o c a -  tion for federal departments' o f f i c e s has declined only slowly and i n absolute terms growth continues  to be greatest downtown.  Federal departments i n their  o f f i c e location pattern to date, then, demonstrate only a small degree of office locational f l e x i b i l i t y .  The rapid percentage increase i n departments'  non-downtown o f f i c e space and their numerous and scattered o f f i c e e s t a b l i s h ments downtown, however, are the f i r s t intimations i n this analysis of existence of latent o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y i n federal departments i n Vancouver. From analysis of the ten factors which make up the C r i t e r i a Check L i s t , an appreciation was  secured of the factors which seem most l i k e l y to r e s t r a i n  federal departments' o f f i c e s from locating future or relocating e x i s t i n g o f f i c e s t a f f i n Regional Town Centres.  Overall, the analysis indicates a  need or desire for prestige and a long t r a d i t i o n of downtown l o c a t i o n as the most prominent i n t e r n a l f a c t o r s , which i n h i b i t f l e x i b i l i t y .  A continued  high  l e v e l of "general" and " s p e c i a l " a c c e s s i b i l i t y downtown as well as a strong downtown domination of the metropolitan o f f i c e market appear to be the chief external factors constraining federal o f f i c e s to the c i t y centre.  The r e -  maining i n t e r n a l factors (the nature of activity/work; frequency, character, and pattern of contacts; s i z e and organizational structure; rate of growth and organizational change) and external factors (telecommunications and transportation systems; planning and p o l i t i c s ) appear, by and large, amenable towards and sometimes p o s i t i v e l y encourage increased l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y . Altogether, then, c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of a p l u r a l i t y of factors seem to provide a f a i r l y convincing rationale supporting  the f e a s i b i l i t y , i f not  the  current l i k e l i h o o d , of increased o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y for federal  138.  departments i n Vancouver.  Many federal departments' o f f i c e s i t appears do  not need to be located downtown and could be relocated i n Regional Town Centres i n support of, and i n accordance with, the G.V.R.D. Livable Region Plan.  The f e a s i b i l i t y of at least p a r t i a l decentralization of federal o f f i c e s  from downtown to Regional Town Centres i s found, i n the comparative evaluat i o n of f i f t e e n sample departments' o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y , to be most evident  i n Supply and Services, Solicitor-General, Transport, Public  Works, Energy, Mines and Resources, Unemployment Insurance, Manpower and Immigration, and Fisheries and Environment departments.  Of the f i f t e e n depart-  ments examined, this study indicates these should be considered f i r s t as candidates f o r t o t a l or p a r t i a l relocation from downtown to Regional Town Centres by federal o f f i c i a l s and/or urban planners.  These federal o f f i c i a l s  and urban planners can, of course, by t h e i r future actions and plans a f f e c t the f e a s i b i l i t y and chances f o r locating new and relocating e x i s t i n g departments' o f f i c e s outside downtown i n Regional Town Centres.  The most s i g n i -  f i c a n t " i n t e r n a l " factors i n h i b i t i n g federal departments' o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l flexibility —  prestige and t r a d i t i o n —  are primarily psychological.  planners, to some extent might mitigate the downtown constraining  Urban  influence  of prestige by encouraging through physical design alternate prestigeous nondowntown o f f i c e centres as Regional Town Centres are meant to be.  But a  change i n attitude i s also required of federal as well as p r o v i n c i a l and private o f f i c e location decision-makers.  A consciousness i n federal o f f i c i a l s  that prestige or "federal presence" i s not the r e s u l t s o l e l y of a downtown o f f i c e location i s required.  Certainly the importance of prestige v i s a v i s  other l o c a t i o n a l c r i t e r i a and metropolitan objectives needs to be debated for the federal organization as a whole and i n a l l departments i n Vancouver. Urban planners, i t seems, can do l i t t l e about t r a d i t i o n as a factor i n h i b i t i n g either public or private o f f i c e decentralization from Vancouver's  139.  downtown.  Again, i t i s c h i e f l y , i n the case of the federal government,  departmental o f f i c i a l s whose consciousness must be raised i f t h i s factor's influence i s to be reduced.  Even so, not much can be done about t r a d i t i o n  except to have decision-makers recognize and "break i t " when i t i s necessary or appropriate to do so. The actions and plans, both of urban planners and federal o f f i c i a l s , can and w i l l a l t e r the "climate" a f f e c t i n g o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y i n Vancouver.  I t i s clear that the c i t y centre constraining influences of  "general" and " s p e c i a l " a c c e s s i b i l i t y and the o f f i c e market make these the major external factors to be faced i f Regional Town Centres are to become reality.  In this l i g h t the proposal to l i n k downtown by Light R a i l Transit  with Burnaby "Metro-Town" and New Westminster Regional Town Centres and other transportation system improvements which could maintain or even increase the levels of both "general" and " s p e c i a l " a c c e s s i b i l i t y downtown, need to be thoroughly re-examined by urban planners.  Considering the importance of  " s p e c i a l " a c c e s s i b i l i t y and associated " s o c i a l " infra-structure contacts to both private and public o f f i c e s and an apparent large c r i t i c a l mass of concentrated o f f i c e s required for i t to develop, the proposal to eventually construct seven Regional Town Centres also needs to be reviewed.  A strategy  to concentrate planning e f f o r t s on development of one much more s i g n i f i c a n t Regional Town Centre even a r i v a l to downtown, serviced by L.R.T. but not linked to downtown might better s a t i s f y both the Region's and federal departments' planning and o f f i c e location aspirations. With respect to the o f f i c e market, urban planners i n Vancouver have already hampered i t s growth i n the c i t y centre and Broadway by lessening permitted densities, though "bonusing" has been Instituted.  Further o f f i c e  140.  r e s t r i c t i o n s downtown and/or p o s i t i v e incentives for locating and developing o f f i c e s outside downtown i n Regional Town Centres may, however, be required to lessen the o f f i c e markets' downtown concentration and metropolitan  domi-  nation. Within Vancouver's federal departments a consciousness  needs to be  raised of their c o l l e c t i v e a b i l i t y to influence the geographical pattern of the o f f i c e market i n which they are i n t e g r a l components.  Associated with  this i s the need to assess the extent market variables should influence departments' o f f i c e location decisions.  The contribution of the o f f i c e market  towards creating a "climate" for increased, rather than decreased o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y i n the future i s to a s i g n i f i c a n t degree dependent on the actions of the federal government i t s e l f .  I f i n the future the federal  government departments c o l l e c t i v e l y take leading o f f i c e demand and/or supply roles, their o f f i c e market leverage might be employed to d i r e c t private o f f i c e supply and demand to Regional Town Centre s i t e s . In conclusion, the analysis of federal o f f i c e l o c a t i o n and l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y shows that while l i t t l e federal o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y has so f a r been demonstrated perhaps the f e a s i b i l i t y of federal departments' o f f i c e location decisions which could reinforce l o c a l l y formulated  plans, yet  not harm the e f f i e i e n c y of their o f f i c e operations, would seem considerable.  141.  CHAPTER 4:  SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND DIRECTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH  I. SUMMARY This study began by asking the broad question, "What i s the f e a s i b i l i t y of o f f i c e location decisions which could reinforce l o c a l l y formulated  plans  and help ameliorate urban problems, yet not harm the e f f i c i e n c y of their operations?"  In the Vancouver context the question has current and p a r t i c u -  lar significance. —  One class of federal and p r o v i n c i a l government a c t i v i t i e s  office activities —  are counted on by the G.V.R.D. to locate i n , and act  as development catalysts f o r , the "Livable Region's" Regional Town Centres. In i t s p a r t i c u l a r Vancouver " o f f i c e " context an important step towards answering the broad opening question required that f i r s t the l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y of senior government o f f i c e a c t i v i t i e s be investigated.  In l i m i t i n g  and focussing the study further only the o f f i c e s of the federal government were chosen for analysis. The research began with a l i t e r a t u r e review i n Chapter 2 to find out the factors which possibly influence the location and l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y of o f f i c e s as well as approaches and methods employed i n the assessment of office locational f l e x i b i l i t y .  From the l i t e r a t u r e ten i n t e r - r e l a t e d factors  and their possible influences on o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y were d i s t i l l e d . The influences of s i x factors —  the nature of o f f i c e activity/work; the  frequency, character and pattern of contacts; prestige; o f f i c e  establishment  s i z e and organizational structure; the rate of growth and organizational change; and i n e r t i a or t r a d i t i o n — were seen as l a r g e l y unique and " i n t e r n a l " to each o f f i c e organization. —  The a f f e c t s of the remaining four factors  "general" and " s p e c i a l " a c c e s s i b i l i t y downtown; the state of telecommuni-  cations and transportation systems; the state of the metropolitan  office  142.  market; and metropolitan planning and p o l i t i c s —  were viewed as givens and  therefore l a r g e l y "external" to any single o f f i c e or o f f i c e organization. Three approaches to assessment of o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y —  the  monitoring of o f f i c e dispersal from downtown; determination of the perceived need for downtown o f f i c e locations; and "Direct Linkage Analysis" —  were  i d e n t i f i e d i n the l i t e r a t u r e . The general findings r e s u l t i n g from application of these approaches were presented and contributed  to the c l a r i f i c a t i o n of  ten location and l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y influencing f a c t o r s . Two methods which comprise the Direct Linkage Approach — tions Questionnaire and Communications Desk Diary Surveys —  Communica-  seemed the most  adequate methods so f a r developed to objectively and s p e c i f i c a l l y establish which o f f i c e s (and o f f i c e types) r e a l l y need to be downtown and which do not. Their examination, however, revealed  t h e o r e t i c a l shortcomings and s i g n i f i c a n t  p r a c t i c a l implementation d i f f i c u l t i e s p a r t i c u l a r l y with respect cations Desk Diary Surveys.  to Communi-  These d i f f i c u l t i e s suggested investigation of  federal government o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y i n Vancouver should begin with development of a more appropriate and more e a s i l y undertaken methodology for use by urban planners and o f f i c e l o c a t i o n decision-makers.  The emphasis  of t h i s study thus became methodology and "process" directed rather than "findings" oriented as was thought before the l i t e r a t u r e review was  under-  taken . The methodology developed and applied to analysis and assessment of Vancouver's  federal government o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y i n Chapter 3  arose from the l i t e r a t u r e review findings.  The ten factors influencing  o f f i c e location and l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y i n Chapter 2 form a framework or " C r i t e r i a Check L i s t " f o r examination and evaluation of o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l flexibility.  In the framework, relevant c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the s i x " i n t e r n a l "  143.  factors were delimited postulated. influences  and their l i k e l y l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y  Analysis of a l l ten factors and  influences  their locational f l e x i b i l i t y  on federal government o f f i c e s i n Vancouver using the C r i t e r i a  Check L i s t was  undertaken i n three stages.  In the f i r s t stage,  and q u a l i t a t i v e analysis of " i n t e r n a l " factors was  quantitative  based largely on existing  written information collected for each of f i f t e e n sample federal departments. Development of "Working Departmental Composite Sheets" and employment of "indicators" of, and  surrogate measures f o r , l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y  influ-  ences resulted i n s i x quantitatively based comparative o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y evaluations.  These evaluations respecting  each i n t e r n a l factor  were revised by the researcher on a q u a l i t a t i v e re-examination of the i n f o r mation for each department.  The attachment of points to l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i -  b i l i t y categories ( i . e . most l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e , l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e , l o c a t i o n a l l y i n f l e x i b l e and most l o c a t i o n a l l y i n f l e x i b l e ) and weightings to d i f f e r e n t combinations of i n t e r n a l factors enabled o v e r a l l comparative evaluation for the six i n t e r n a l factors taken together. In the second stage of the analysis, information gleaned largely from l i b r a r y research on the four "external" factors of the C r i t e r i a Check L i s t i n the Vancouver context was  examined q u a l i t a t i v e l y .  or synopsis of the "climate"  for federal departmental o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l  f l e x i b i l i t y i n Vancouver was  thereby presented.  The  An o v e r a l l  evaluation  t h i r d stage of the analysis attempted to bring together the  findings  of a b r i e f examination of federal departments' o f f i c e location i n Vancouver and  the l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y findings derived from the two  t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y assessment using the C r i t e r i a Check L i s t .  stages of locaSome o v e r a l l  conclusions on federal departments' o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y ,  the  144.  factors influencing i t , and i t s significance f o r federal l o c a t i o n a l decisionmakers and urban planners i n Vancouver were drawn.  I I . FEDERAL OFFICE LOCATION AND LOCATIONAL FLEXIBILITY IN VANCOUVER; CONCLUSIONS The conclusions which a r i s e from the federal government o f f i c e location and l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y findings of t h i s study are presented at the end of Chapter 3.  Three major conclusions bear repeating here.  1) The f e a s i b i l i t y of federal departments' o f f i c e location decisions which could support the G.V.R.D.'s Regional Town Centres scheme yet not harm the e f f i c i e n c y of t h e i r operations seems considerable though l i t t l e federal o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y has so f a r been demonstrated.  2) Prestige; t r a d i t i o n ; "general" and " s p e c i a l " a c c e s s i b i l i t y ; and the o f f i c e market are the most prominent factors lessening federal o f f i c e l o c a tional f l e x i b i l i t y .  If r e a l i z a t i o n of Regional Town Centres i s to be cata-  lysed by federal departments' o f f i c e s these four factors would seem the major hurdles to be overcome.  3) Of the f i f t e e n federal departments examined the o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y was found to be greatest for Supply and Services; Transport; Public Works; Energy, Mines and Resources; Unemployment Insurance; Manpower and Immigration; and Fisheries and Environment departments.  These departments  downtown o f f i c e s , accordingly, should be considered f i r s t as candidates for t o t a l or p a r t i a l relocation from downtown Vancouver to Regional Town Centres.  145.  I I I . METHODOLOGICAL CONCLUSIONS The C r i t e r i a Check L i s t provides a much needed framework for clear thinking on, and  examination of, the broad range of inter-related  which affect o f f i c e location and needed and  locational f l e x i b i l i t y .  factors  Such a framework i s  i s of value because many o f f i c e location decision-makers, urban  planners, and  researchers never c a r e f u l l y , objectively  rationale behind their o f f i c e location; decisions.  Use  and openly examine the of the C r i t e r i a Check  L i s t i n the process of o f f i c e location decision-making and/or planning would encourage them to do so. and  It could, at the same time, reveal o f f i c e location  l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y presuppositions held by decision-makers and  and put  their v a l i d i t y to the test.  information i s lacking and and  planners  At the very least i t would show what  i s useful for consideration before o f f i c e location  l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y decisions or judgements are made. The method developed i n t h i s study —  using the C r i t e r i a Check L i s t to  evaluate the locational f l e x i b i l i t y of federal departments' downtown o f f i c e s —  i s an attempt to conform to the c r i t e r i a  for an " i d e a l " method of o f f i c e  l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y assessment l a i d out i n Chapter 2. included:  These  criteria  1) the maintenance of a reasonable degree of o b j e c t i v i t y  and  s p e c i f i c i t y ; 2) consideration of a broad range of factors a f f e c t i n g f l e x i b i l i t y ; 3) ease and  locational  speed of undertaking so as to contribute to  the  planning and/or l o c a t i o n a l decision-making process; 4) a p p l i c a b i l i t y to o f f i c e s of a l l kinds; 5) based on work already done and a d j u s t a b i l i t y to changes, new The  findings and new  6) amenability  situations.  framework, i t s e l f , i s based on work already done and  cation i s adjustable and amenable to changes, new  findings  Indeed, i t i s unlikely to be applied i n quite the same way The  in i t s appli-  and new  a v a i l a b i l i t y of information.  situations.  i n every s i t u a t i o n .  degree the method meets other aspects of the " i d e a l " depends on  nature, quality, and  and  the  This i n turn, depends on  146.  the number and s i z e of o f f i c e s being evaluated made by an " i n s i d e r " or "outsider".  and whether the evaluation i s  A l l these, together, determine the l e v e l  of organizational d e t a i l ( i . e . departmental, o f f i c e establishment,  section,  unit, "blocks of work") and the certainty with which i t i s possible and/or appropriate to assess o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y . For this study a l l that was required was  a general and comparative  federal o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y analysis and assessment at the broad departmental and o v e r a l l " f e d e r a l " l e v e l of organizational d e t a i l . study was  l i m i t e d by the large number and size of departments and  This their  o f f i c e s included, the uneven nature and q u a l i t y of information obtained departments, and the fact the researcher was  an "outsider".  For urban  planning purposes the degree of s p e c i f i c i t y and o b j e c t i v i t y achieved study l i k e l y would prove s u f f i c i e n t .  Though the method was  from  i n this  not e a s i l y nor  quickly undertaken, t h i s i s l a r g e l y a t t r i b u t a b l e to the exploratory nature of the process of methodology development and a p p l i c a t i o n . Incorporation of the C r i t e r i a Check L i s t method of o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y analysis and/or assessment into the o f f i c e l o c a t i o n decisionmaking process by o f f i c e organization o f f i c i a l s may meet the " i d e a l " method c r i t e r i a of Chapter 2 to a considerable degree.  A quite s p e c i f i c and  exact  type of assessment i n terms of the number of jobs and s p e c i f i c organizational units considered  or not considered  "location f l e x i b l e " would seem possible.  It might, furthermore, be done quite quickly and e a s i l y by organizational "insiders".  An organizational " i n s i d e r " or team of " i n s i d e r s " could obtain  detailed e x i s t i n g information  (e.g. organization charts and other documents,  candid interview statements) not e a s i l y available or perhaps unavailable to "outsiders" and use " i n s i d e " knowledge that would lessen r e l i a n c e on " i n d i cators" and increase the accuracy of quantitatively based l o c a t i o n a l  147.  f l e x i b i l i t y assessments.  As well, more informed q u a l i t a t i v e revisions of  these assessments and attachment of suitable weights to both " i n t e r n a l " and "external" C r i t e r i a Check L i s t factors may be f e a s i b l e .  An assessment team  would, as stages of the evaluation become more general, subjective and judgemental, increasingly involve and/or include the o f f i c e location decisionmakers themselves.  The figures and statements recorded on Departmental Com-  posite Sheets (see Appendix IV and V) could be reviewed, disputed and revised by team members and decision-makers. The inclusion of the C r i t e r i a Check L i s t method of l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y assessment i n the federal government o f f i c e location decision process i n Vancouver could aid implementation of the Federal Land Management P o l i c y . It would provide a r a t i o n a l basis with which the perceived l o c a t i o n a l needs and preferences of departments could be c a l l e d into question. Currently o f f i c e location decision-makers are dispersed i n the various departments and agencies of the federal government i n Vancouver.  A team,  using the C r i t e r i a Check L i s t to assess the o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y of departments i n Vancouver should include these decision-makers and be headed by Department of Public Works o f f i c i a l s responsible for overseeing the assessment process.  Department of Public Works o f f i c i a l s should head the  team because the department i s charged with servicing the space requirements of " c l i e n t " departments.  In such a position, while not able to dictate  o f f i c e location, the Department of Public Works influence on departments' o f f i c e location choices would l i k e l y increase.  The r e s u l t s of the assessment  process might be presented to the Treasury Board Advisory Committee on Fede r a l Land Management f o r consideration.  The committee might act to a r b i t r a t e  any disagreements not settled by the assessment team.  148.  The  approach to analysis and assessment of o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i -  b i l i t y , represented by the C r i t e r i a Check L i s t method, can, i n summation, be said to have i t s major strength i n promotion of a re-examination (or perhaps examination for the f i r s t time) of o f f i c e location r a t i o n a l e .  Its major weak-  ness, at the same time, i s an abundance of s i m p l i f i c a t i o n s and assumptions which make the evaluation of o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y a f i c t i t i o u s cise.  exer-  The assumptions and s i m p l i f i c a t i o n s of the C r i t e r i a Check L i s t method-  ology were made f a i r l y clear i n the course of i t s explanation (in the f i r s t part of Chapter 3) and need not be discussed at length. Chiefly, i t should be noted that i n application of the C r i t e r i a Check L i s t method, the " i n t e r n a l " factors and t h e i r influences pendent of one another and of "external"  factors.  are assumed inde-  Of course, the influences  of both i n t e r n a l and external factors on l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y are only partly a matter of how they affect o f f i c e organizations independently of each other.  I t i s primarily a matter of how they a f f e c t o f f i c e s i n combination  with one another that i s important and which t h i s evaluation, through a point system and factor weighting, was only marginally, i f at a l l , successful i n delimiting. "Indicators"  of i n t e r n a l factors' e f f e c t s ; surrogate measures of o f f i c e  l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y influences;  and " l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y categories" are  elements of the methodology which l i m i t i t s usefulness by lessening the s p e c i f i c i t y and certainty with which l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y evaluations can be made.  Ultimately, the methodology, for a l l i t s s i m p l i f i c a t i o n s and assump-  tions, i s limited by the available information.  For urban planners wishing  to analyse and perhaps assess the l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y of "private" o f f i c e s there i s no guarantee that information such as organization charts w i l l be obtainable.  149.  A l l of the above leads to the conclusion  that the C r i t e r i a Check L i s t  methodology, though f a r from perfect and perhaps at this stage described  charitably  as "unpolished", has p o t e n t i a l for further development and r e f i n e -  ment as an alternative t o o l for objective analysis and assessment of o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y by urban planners and o f f i c e l o c a t i o n decision-makers.  IV. DIRECTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH Many directions and f i e l d s for further research have emerged from t h i s study.  Most Important i t i s clear that the v a l i d i t y of each of the s i x  internal factors of the C r i t e r i a Check L i s t needs to be tested by empirical research.  That i s to say further inductive, detailed and painstaking  tion into the factors —  t h e i r relationships and inter-connections  —  exploraneed to  be undertaken to i d e n t i f y , understand and constructively use the factors that are actually relevant to o f f i c e s . o f f i c e organizations  Careful observation  of the behaviour of  i n dealing with changing influences of the factors  ( i n d i v i d u a l l y and c o l l e c t i v e l y ) i s also  required.  With respect to the C r i t e r i a Check L i s t methodology i t s e l f , a further testing with application to private o f f i c e s i s i n order.  As well an indepth  analysis and assessment using the C r i t e r i a Check L i s t of the o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y of a single government department or large private o f f i c e organization downtown should be undertaken.  Use of the Delphi Technique f o r  establishing factor weights and use of a computer for data and factor analysis are possible methodological improvements which should be considered i n future use of the methodology. Following  from, and complementing a C r i t e r i a Check L i s t analysis of  federal o f f i c e s a c r i t i c a l examination of the current and actual federal o f f i c e location decision-making process needs to be undertaken.  This could include a  150.  case study of a s p e c i f i c o f f i c e location decision.  I t would establish what  factors or c r i t e r i a are considered and how the location decisions reinforce or c o n f l i c t with current l o c a l , regional and federal plans and p o l i c i e s . Other worthwhile avenues f o r research include:  the study of the costs  and benefits of downtown versus non-downtown o f f i c e locations; the examination of s o c i a l i n f r a - s t r u c t u r a l linkages of o f f i c e organizations; and examination of o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y of government o f f i c e s i n the "regional" rather than metropolitan context.  F i n a l l y , further development and a p p l i -  cation of Communications Questionnaire and Desk Diary surveys should be carried out i n Canada.  151.  BIBLIOGRAPHY  Allpass, J . et a l "Urban Centres and Changes i n Centre Structure". Urban Core and Inner City, Proceedings of the International Study Week, Amsterdam 1966. Archer, R.  W. "The E f f i c i e n c y of the Sydney Central D i s t r i c t " . Australian Planning Institute Journal 7:3 (July 1969) 64-76  Armstrong, V. B. The Office Industry.  Cambridge M.I.T. Press 1972.  Baker, L.L.M. and Goddard, J . B. "Inter-sectoral contact flows and o f f i c e location". and Processes of Urbanization, Pion London, 1972.  Patterns  Bannon, M. J. "The Potential Impact of Telecommunications on Office Block Location". I r i s h Times Annual Review, 1972. "The Office Industry - A Facet of the White Collar Revolution" Geographical Review, (pp. 404-406) 1975 Studies of Office Linkages and Location i n Ireland. Paper to Conference on Interorganizational Communications, 1974. (ed.) Office Location and Regional Development: of a Conference, An Foras Forbartha, 1973.  Proceedings  "The Changing Role of the Office i n the Industrial Firm" Management, Vol. x x i , 1974. — O f f i c e Location i n Ireland: An Foras Forbartha, 1973.  The Role of Central Dublin  A Study of Person-to-Person Communications i n the Department of Health. (A Report prepared for the Department of Public Service on behalf of the I r i s h Government and the European Economic Community.), An Foras Forbartha Teoranta, 1976. B a r t l e t t School of Architecture "The Growth of Offices i n London". Transactions of the B a r t l e t t Society. University College, London, 1967-68. Berkley:  Center for Business and Economic Research The Suburbanization of Administrative Offices i n the San Francisco Bay Area. Research Report #10. Real Estate Research Program, 1957.  152.  Breckenfeld, G. "Downtown Has Fled to the Suburbs" October 1972.  Fortune Magazine,  Burrows, M. and S. Town Office Services i n the East Midlands: An Economic and Sociological Study. East Midlands Economic Planning Council, 1971. Burtenshaw, D. et a l i a "Office Decentralization - 10 years' Experience" Surveyor, 22 February, pp. 22-5, 1974 and 1 March, pp. 21-3, 1974. Carruth, E. "Manhattan's Office Building Binge" pp. 114-117 (October 1969).  Fortune  LXXX:5  "New York Hangs Out the For Rent Sign, Houston i s Where They're Moving". Fortune Magazine, February 1971. Chapin, F. "Taking Stock of Techniques for Shaping Urban Growth" Journal of A.I.P. XXIX, No. 2, p. 8 (May 1963). Cherry, C. "Electronic Communication: A Force for Dispersal" O f f i c i a l Architecture and Planning, V o l . 23, No. 9 Sept. 1970 C i v i l Service Commission The Analysis of Organizations i n the Government of Canada Ottawa 1964. Connell, S. A Review of Communications Survey Methodologies, Communications Studies Group, University College London. (Mimeo) Conservation of Human Resources Project The Corporate Headquarters Complex i n New York City Columbia University, New York, December 1977. Coughlin, R. E. "Programming Public F a c i l i t i e s to Shape Community Growth" A Place to Live. The Yearbook of Agriculture 1963. U.S.A. Department of Agriculture. Washington Government Printing Office, pp. 460-468, 1963.  153.  Cowan, P. The O f f i c e , A Facet of Urban Growth. Joint Unit for Planning Research, University College London and London School of Economics. Heinemann Educational Books Ltd. London, 1969. Custerton, A. "Telecommunications: the Key to the Non-City?". Environment, pp. 403-406, July 1973.  Built  Daniels, P. W. "Office Decentralization from London: . P o l i c y and P r a c t i c e " Regional Studies, Vol. 3 No. 2, 1969. Office Location: An Urban and Regional Study, George B e l l and Son, London, 1975. Davey, J . A. The O f f i c e Industry i n Wellington: A Study of Contact Patterns, Location and Employment. Wellington: Ministry of Works 1972. Diamond, D. "The Location of O f f i c e s " . February 1971. Downtown Idea Exchange "The O f f i c e Function" 18:10 (May 15, 1971) .  Town and Country Planning, London  Part I 18:7 (April 1, 1971) and Part I I  Economist Intelligence Unit Limited A Survey of Factors Governing the Location of Offices i n the London Area. Prepared for the Location of Offices Bureau, London, 1964. Elks, J . "Offices - D i r e c t i o n and Development". Vol. 16, March/April 1971.  Architect and Surveyor,  Elton, M. et a l An Approach to the Location of Government. Management Science London, 1970. (Mimeo)  Institute of  Evans, L. "Dispersal of Government Departments". Vol. 29, March 1961.  Town and Country Planning,  Faeey, M. and G. Smith Offices i n a Regional Centre: A Study of O f f i c e Location i n Leeds. Research Paper #2, L.O.B. London 1968.  154.  Fernie, J . "Office Linkages and Location: An Evaluation of Patterns i n Three C i t i e s " Town Planning Review, January 1977. Fisher, F. M. "The Boom i n Office Buildings". Urban Land Institute Technical B u l l e t i n , No. 58, Washington, D.C., Urban Land I n s t i t u t e , 1967. Foley, D. The Suburbanization of Administrative Offices i n the San Francisco Bay Area. Res. Report No. 10, Real Estate Res. Program, Berkley: Center for Business and Economic Research, 1957. Gad, H. R. Central Toronto Offices: Observations on Location Patterns and Linkages. City of Toronto Planning Board, Oct. 1975. Goddard, J . B. Contact Studies and Office Decentralization from London and Stockholm. To be published i n 1976, Public Policy, (ed.) J.C. Coppock and J . Sewell, Pergamon Press, Oxford. et a l . Office Linkages i n Central London, Report to the South East Economic Planning Council. 1971. :  O f f i c e Location i n Urban and Regional Development. University Press, 1975.  Oxford  —•  "Multivariate Analysis of Office Location: Patterns i n the c i t y centre: A London Example". Regional Studies, V o l . 2 Pergamon Press, 1968. "Office Communications and Office Location: a Review of Current Research". Regional Studies, Vol. 5, No. 4, Dec. 1971. — O f f i c e Linkages and Location: A Study of Communications and Spatial Patterns i n Central London. Pergamon Press, Oxford (Progress i n Planning Series) V o l . 1, part 2, 1973. and D. M. Morris. The Communications Factor i n Office Decentral i z a t i o n . To be published by Pergamon Press. •and Roger Pye. Telecommunications and Office Location. Communications Studies Group Joint Unit for Planning Research. Department of the Environment 1975.  155.  Gottman, J . "Urban Centrality and the Interweaving E k i s t i c s , Vol. 29, No. 174, 1970. "Why  the Skyscraper?"  of Quaternary A c t i v i t i e s "  Geographical Review, V o l . 56 No. 2,  1966.  "The New Geography of Transactions and Its Consequences for Planning". Application of Geographic Techniques to Physical Planning. (1974) Government of Canada Royal Commission on Government Organization. 1962.  J . Grant Glassco,  Vancouver-Victoria Telephone Directory, 1975. Organization of the Government of Canada, (Information Canada) 1975 and 1976. Graves, D. "Reported Communication Ratios and Informal States i n Managerial Work Groups" Human Relations, 25, 159-170, 1972. Greater Vancouver Regional D i s t r i c t Regional Town Centres: A Policy Report. The Livable Region 1976/1986: of Greater Vancouver, 1975.  November  1975.  Proposals to Manage the Growth  Living Close to Work: A Policy Study for the Vancouver Region. Wilbur Smith and Associates, 1974. Greenwood, D. Intra-Metropolitan Office Location - An Examination of Land and Building Costs as C r i t e r i a i n the Decision to Locate Offices, MBA Thesis U.B.C., 1973. Gutstein, D. Vancouver Limited. Haig, R.  James Lorimer and Company, Toronto  1975.  M.  Regional Survey of New York and i t s Environs. N.Y. (N.Y. Reg. Plan, Vol. 1) 1927. H a l l , P. G. "The Office Industry" New Society, No. 286, p. 419, 1968.  156.  H a l l , R. K. "The Movement of Offices from Central London". Vol. 6, pp. 385-92, 1972. "The Vacated Offices Controversy" 56, pp. 298-300, 1970. Hammond, E. "Dispersal of Government O f f i c e s : Vol. 4, No. 3, 1967.  Regional Studies  J . of Town Planning I n s t i t u t e  A Survey". Urban Studies,  Hardman, H. The Dispersal of Government Work from London (The Hardman Report) London H.M.S.O. cmnd. 5322, 1973. Hardwick, W. Vancouver, Collier-MacMillan Canada, Ltd.  1974.  Hawkes, D. "Offices: A Digest of Data" Working Paper No. 10. Land Use and B u i l t Form Studies, University of Cambridge, 1968. Hedlin Menzies and Associates Ltd. Downtown Vancouver 1969: January 1970.  An Economic Study.  Vancouver, B. C.  Herrera, P. "That Manhattan Exodus".  Fortune, pp. 106-109, June 1967.  Hesseling, P. "Communication and Organizational Structure i n a Large M u l t i National Company", i n Herald, G. (eds). Approaches to the Study of Organizational Behavior, Travistock, London, 1970. Hoover, E. M. "The Evolving Form of the Metropolis". Issues i n Urban Economics, ed. Harvey S. P e r l o f f and Lowden Winge, J r . John Hopkins Press, 1968. and R. Vernon. Anatomy of Metropolis. Cambridge, Mass. 1959.  Harvard University Press,  Horwood, E. M. and R. R. Boyce Studies of Central Business D i s t r i c t and Urban Freeway Development, Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1959. "The O f f i c e Park: A New Concept i n Office Space" I n d u s t r i a l Development, 15 September 1965.  157.  Isard, W. Location and Space Economy: A General Theory Relating To Location, Market Areas, Land Use, Trade and Urban Structures. M.I.T. Press, Cambridge, Mass. 1956. Janstch, E. Technological Forecasting i n Perspective.  P a r i s , O.E.C.D., 1967.  Kernaghan, W.D.K. and A.M. Willms Public Administration i n Canada, Second e d i t i o n , Methuen Publications, 1970. K r a l l , H. "Offices" the Issues Restated". pp. 468-9, October 1972.  B u i l t Environment, Vol. 1, No. 7,  L a z e r f i e l d , P. F. and N. W. Henry "The Application of Latent Structure Analysis to Quantitative Ecological Data" i n F. Massarik and P. Ratoosh (Eds.). Mathematical Explorations i n the Behavioral Services, Dorcey Press, I I I . Lichtenberg, R. M. One-Tenth of a Nation. Mass., 1960.  Harvard University Press, Cambridge,  Ling, A. "Office Building i n the Big C i t i e s " Vol. 24, Oct. 1956. Location of Offices Bureau Commuters to the London O f f i c e :  Town and Country Planning,  A Survey.  London 1966.  Offices i n a Regional Centre: Follow-up Studies on Infrastructure and Linkages (Research Paper No. 3). Based on a Report by M. J . Croft, 1969. Location of Offices Bureau Report, 1974/75, London. McKeever, J . R. Business Parks. Washington, D.C.: Tech. B u l l e t i n 65, pp. 7-44, 1970. McLoughlin, J . Control and Urban Planning.  Urban Land I n s t i t u t e .  Faber and Faber Limited, London, 1973.  158.  Manners. G. The Office i n Metropolis: An Opportunity to Shape Urban America. (Harvard: Joint Centre f o r Urban Studies, Working Paper 22, 1973) Mardberg, B. A Computer Programme f o r Green's Solution of Latent Class Analysis applied to Latent P r o f i l e Analysis. University of Bergen, 1974. Marriott, 0. The Property Boom.  (London:  Hamish Hamilton, 1967)  Meier, R. L. A Communications Theory of Urban Growth. Harvard: M.I..T. Press, 1962. Merriman, R. H. "Office Movement i n Central Christchurch: 1955 to 1965", New Zealand Geographer, V o l . 23, p. 123, 1967. Moore, R. B. "Downtown Office Building Versus the Office Park Complex". Skyscraper Management, No. 54 June 1969. Murphy, R. The Central Business D i s t r i c t . Chicago, New York.  Clark University, Aldine-Atherton,  Ontario Public Works Summary of the Proceedings of the Government Accommodation Toronto, 1971. Prendergast, C. A. "Decentralization:  the Pattern Changes"  Seminar,  Investors Chronicle  Public Service Canada Careers (pamphlet). 1976. Public Works Canada Accommodation Sheets (December 1975 and December 1971) . Xeroxed copies obtained from Program Planning and Coordination Section, Vancouver. Federal Requirements Study i n the Greater Vancouver Regional D i s t r i c t . Ottawa, 1974. -Greater Vancouver Forward Plan. A Long Range Office Strategy. P a c i f i c Region, February, 1977.  Accommodation  159.  Rannells, J . The Core of the City.  Columbia University Press, N.Y.,  1955.  "Approaches to the Analysis of the City Centre". Journal of the American Institute of Planners, Vol. 27, p. 17, 1961. Real Estate Board of Greater Vancouver Real Estate Trends i n Metropolitan Vancouver.  1974-1975, 1975-1976.  Regional Plan Association Growth and Location of' O f f i c e Jobs i n the United States and York Region: Summary Report. New York, N.Y. Rhodes, J . and A. Kan Office Dispersal and Regional P o l i c y . Press, 1971. Richardson, H. W. Urban Economics. England, 1971.  New  Cambridge at the University  Penguin Books Ltd., Harmondworth, Middlesex,  Samuels, A. "Control of O f f i c e and Industrial Development Act 1965", Conveyancer and Property Lawyer, V o l . 29, No. 5, Sept./Oct., pp. 374-384, 1965. Schermer Associates Policy Recommendations for the Location of Federal Work F a c i l i t i e s i n the National Capital Region. Washington, D. C. National Capital Planning Commission, 1970. Seligman, D. "The Future of the Office-Building Boom", Fortune, pp. 84-88, March, 1963. Shultz, E. and W. Simmons Offices i n the Sky. The New Bobbs - M e r r i l l Company Inc. Indianapolis - New York. 1955. S t a t i s t i c s Canada Federal Government Employment i n Metropolitan Areas. No. 72-005, 1971 and 1976.  Catalogue  Street, E. and G. Ledgerwood "Central Government O f f i c e Location and Design: Recent Experience i n Government Management of Land i n C i t i e s " Plan Canada, September 1977.  160.  Takahashi, D. L. C.B.D. Office Location Patterns - A Vancouver Case Study. M.A. Thesis i n the School of Community and Regional Planning, U.B.C. 1972. T e i t z , M. B. "Toward A Theory of Urban Public F a c i l i t y Location" Papers of the Regional Science Association, V o l . XXI, pp. 35-44 Thorngren, B. "External Economies of the Urban Core" Urban Core and Inner City ed. University of Amsterdam Sociographical Department. Proceedings of the International Study Week. B r i l l , 1967. "Communications Studies for. Government Offices Dispersal i n Sweden" i n Bannon, M.J. (ed.) Office Location and Regional Development (Dublin: An Foras Forbartha, 1973). and Goddard, J . B. Groupings of Government Agencies Through An Analysis of Contact Flows, Economics Research I n s t i t u t e , Stockholm School of Economics. 1973. Toby, J . "Regional Development and Government Office Location i n the Netherlands" i n Bannon, M.J. (ed.) Office Location and Regional Development (Dublin: An Foras Forbartha 1973). Town and Country Planning Association The Paper Metropolis: A Study of London's Office Growth London, 1962. Treasury Board Treasury Board C i r c u l a r . Federal Land Management.  Circular No.:  1975-80 T.B. No. 736554  Vancouver City Planning Department Non-Downtown Office Space, December, 1973. -Office Space Demand i n Downtown Vancouver 1961-1980.  Summary  Report and F u l l Technical Report, August 1973. "Employment  i n Vancouver"  Quarterly Review, pp. 15-19, October 1975.  "Downtown Employment Projections 1976-1986". Quarterly Review pp. 18-21, July 1975. "Growth of Downtown Employment". Quarterly Review, pp. 24-31 October 1974.  161.  Van Halten, Dr. M.H.H. (ed.) Urban Core and Inner C i t y . University of Amsterdam Sociographical Department. Proceedings of the International Study Week, 11-17, Sept. 1966. B r i l l , 1967. Vernon, R. „ , The Changing Function of the Central C i t y , New York: for Economic Development. 1959.  „ Committee  Wabe, J . S. "Office Decentralization: An Empirical Approach Urban Studies, I I I , 1 February 1966. Wheaton, W. L. "Public and Private Agents of Change i n Urban Expansion" i n (Webber, M. (ed.)) Explorations into Urban Structure, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, 1964. Wise, A.  "The Impact of Electronic Communications on Metropolitan E k i s t i c s , pp. 22-31, July 1971.  Form"  162.  BIBLIOGRAPHY (Continued)  Written Materials Obtained from Sample Federal Departments National Revenue (Taxation) - Organization Chart - Internal memo regarding decentralization - Booklet: "Inside Taxation" National Revenue (Customs and Excise) - Organization Chart for Customs - Drawn organization chart for Excise Manpower and Immigration -  Detailed Organization Chart Booklet: "Before Integration: a Staff Guide to UIC/M & I" Mimeo: "Programs and Services" Newspaper Clipping "The Emigration of Immigration." Vancouver  Sun.  Unemployment Insurance Commission - General Organization Chart Fisheries and  Environment  - Organization Charts for Atmospheric Environment, Environmental Management, Environmental Protection - 1090 W. Pender - Building Telephone L i s t - Environment Canada Annual Reports - Fisheries and Environment Canada "Guide to Services: B r i t i s h Columbia and the Yukon". - Booklet: "The Work of the Environmental Protection Service" - Letter: "Inland Waters Directorate" from Olive C h u r c h i l l Transport Canada -  Detailed Organization Chart (Marine Services) General Organization Chart (C.A.T.A.) Address by Herb Buchanan to Marine Underwriters of Western Canada Paper: "D.O.T. Marine R e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s , Role and Operations" Paper: "The H i s t o r i c a l Development of the Coast Guard Function i n Canada" - Newspaper Clipping: "Coast Guard i s Looking at the Future", Toronto Globe and M a i l , 1977.  163.  Public Works - Detailed Organization Chart National Health and  Welfare  - Detailed Organization Chart (Medical Services) - Paper: "A Brief History of Medical Services" Indian and Northern  Affairs  - Detailed Organization Charts, Regional and D i s t r i c t Offices - Departmental " i n t e r n a l " telephone l i s t i n g s - Annual Reports Supply and Services Canada - Detailed Organization Chart - Services section, Regional and District offices Department of Justice - Detailed Organization Chart - Paper: "Canada Department of J u s t i c e " - Paper: "Providing a Legal Service Within a Public Administration System" Department of Veterans' A f f a i r s - Detailed Organization Charts Ministry of the Solicitor-General - Detailed Organization Chart - Regional Office Penitentiary Service - Newspaper Clipping: "No One Seems to Know Who Runs Canada's P e n i t e n t i a r i e s " - Vancouver Sun, 1977. Post Office - General Organization Chart: Western Regional Office - Detailed Organization Chart: D i s t r i c t Office  APPENDIX  Federal Occupational Categories  I  (from Occupational C l a s s i f i c a t i o n Manual: Census of Canada, 1971)  —  Executive Category i s composed of occupational groups engaged i n the development of government p o l i c y , the d i r e c t i o n of government programmes and related functions i n which there i s a requirement f o r exceptional a b i l i t y i n u t i l i z i n g resources or i n i t i a t i n g or modifying administrative functions.  —  S c i e n t i f i c and Professional Category i s composed of occupational groups engaged i n the a p p l i c a t i o n of a comprehensive body of knowledge acquired through u n i v e r s i t y graduation i n f i e l d s specified i n group d e f i n i t i o n s , and of professional groups i n which membership i n Canada i s generally controlled by l e g a l l y established l i c e n s i n g bodies.  Some of the f i e l d s included within this occupational  category are:  auditing, b i o l o g i c a l sciences, dentistry, economics,  sociology and s t a t i s t i c s , engineering and land  —  survey.  Administrative and Foreign Service Category i s composed of occupational groups engaged i n the planning, execution, conduct and control of programmes serving the public i n t e r e s t , the p o l i t i c a l and economic relations between Canada, other countries, and the requirements of i n t e r n a l management i n the public service of Canada.  —  Technical Category i s composed of occupational groups engaged i n the conduct of a n a l y t i c a l , experimental  and i n v e s t i g a t i v e duties i n  165  the natural, physical and s o c i a l sciences, and the preparation, inspection and measurement of b i o l o g i c a l , chemical and physical substances and materials, and the design, construction, inspection, operation and maintenance of complex equipment, systems and  process  and the performance of similar technical data.  Administrative Support Category i s composed of occupational groups engaged i n the preparation, t r a n s c r i b i n g , transmitting, systemat i z i n g and maintenance of records, reports and communications of manual processes, or by operating various machines and equipment, as i n the d i r e c t a p p l i c a t i o n of rules and regulations.  Operational Category i s composed of occupational groups engaged i n the performance of a c r a f t or of unskilled work i n the f a b r i c a t i o n , maintenance and repair a c t i v i t i e s i n the operation of machines, equipment and v e h i c l e s , and i n the provision of postal protective, c o r r e c t i o n a l , personal and domestic services.  Other category i s composed of employees of a department or a departmental corporation or administrative, regulatory and special fund for whom no occupational breakdown i s available to our sources of information.  : ;-v FEDERAL:-::.::  166.  OBCLASSjEICATLOK i. PYRAMID  I  :  ADmiNlSTRATWff  SCIENTIFIC! •  .  , TECHNICAL.  +•  TRDFCSSIDMAI,  I '  .  i  . , . .....  -  FORCI&M  ADA H W I S T R A T W E  p  .  . - !  SUPPORT  -I  1  , SUPPORT  SERVICE  . -  • i  r*  -•  ' OPERATIONAL  ( F XF.Ct rPA/E. C A T E G O R Y  5«\/te> .  , : ADmiMSTWiTiME  1/ayaa-::. ,  ,  .  CATEGORY...  ..  ACTUARIAL S C i E J U C E  •; ADfOlNteiRftTiyE TRAIWEE. . '.  ic: . .  INFORMATION  ACr  j  ftH-  :  W W r r E d x i R E . ' -t-.TOUJN P L N C -  All  AUbiTihiCb-;. ... ,  BiCLc6 cAL. :  Sci£K<G£S> .  cksniSTRy. ] j  , ..  .:  i PROfrRAjYl}  CH  l»£L-FARt-  ?£.  comweAce. . , FOREIGN  a o i i K i E s w IJ fr. + LAV©. S W M &y  1  ',  i.!TjfV>AY S a a - ' C E  .  .  .  SAVCS  .  •.  !..  OUILAVIATICIO ftlRTRAfRC.  .fit^EARcH  INSPECTORS  . ELECTRaJlcS .  '.  EWfrtMeeWKikV  .  ;  .  .  v-SCIENniFIC  Pc PS  |  D P  ;  EL  j  ;  : '  S P  ;  ..  :  ••SW.  Soc^LWfcl-FARE. .  '!  •sew)  UNIV£(;'ilTyTeAa^i\i<3r-  j  VETERINARY 6 C i e W C E .  '  INS^ECTIOIO  !.  :  , j  i  i . ... 1  UT  vs  .  :  i  ' .  '  '  ' .  ,  ;  LAS  flH4)OELLAiJaws feKeoNftL-ijivce  mPS  HEVTlUC",  PCW6I5L  PRINTING..  REVciuiUS..  HP-  O?EPATI0Ay .  RDSTALQPc&YTfepiS  lis  .  IPO  i.  pa  6PEMTICN.5 POSTAL. d E M n n w s  SR.  EU.  „,  . .SHIPS cAEWJi . . . . . .  .  I•:  1" •  &ib  ' LAUNDfc/ . S P R V IOi^>  .H06P|TAi_ ^ E R U i C F i  6 1  :•  •' '  .  T I '  £\){»POfl.T.-...  . . . . . . . . . .  C M  CHAPLAIN)  j  TECHNICAL  ..  &L • i  . fWHECn^p-K^TOClAL-SRVCS P R C  &T  .. ;.  j EPUCffTIOlO AL  SoaAt- uucr<K.  E6-  :  REM  FPL  UOu-'R. 1 - T A P E ' S .  i  .SUPPORT  •  ;  I.  R£S  :  FOOD S E R V I C E S ;  SUPPORT  '  FIRE F l f r l t T E f t S  BLOfr S E R V I C E S  : • .  PILOTS  :  AX  .  $HIP6  CATEGORY  COAAecTlOiUAL.  'CAX  :  •,  ft-  .  :  . ftVDIO OPER.'vTlOi-i  ;  Tt.  ,  !  .;  PY PI RO so  OFRCtR.6  TELEPHONE. OPEWulOhJ  GENERAL S e r v i c e s  lN^pEcTiohj:.  •SHIPS  ST  AO  . fifliiYiMty. f f i o o i i c T S  . .'SOCIAL, SCIEWCE  scidxTlST  'R,FSeflRcrt '  ;  DCL  SECI^rifiRlAU'^THvJCC-flftPrttC, TVPiNCr '  riPERATIOWAl  CONTROL-  ' DRIFTING + 1LLUSTRAT/01M.  IS  .  7ft,  |  HE.  s c i e M T t R c •fvesEftacH-. ,  Ptr\.  CAICUWINC- EQUifi"  (^ENEtoL-  OPERATIONS.  LA  • •ScUEfv/TlPIC. R-kfrULATlOl'O : .  . , . PUPUiATir/i- £(§UlP C f t R A T O I i .  CO  • .:.  CEO  _...  P£.  !  . .  BOOKKEePlNvr EQUIP. tfawro'RL  OPO  .  TECHNICAL  '  OE. & EC  Pfr  mp  : PSYc\tUjcc-Y  . .. O F F I C E : e e v j i e m ' B O T v o r g R A T i o ^ . ...  CATEfrORY  T E C H KIICAL ftlftCflAPT  5Uft FO  .LAW/;'v:';  ..  F l XS  . . .  !  OA Cft.  WP  .  ;  .Dft-ift fRoccSsirOki-,  :  ;  ' HR  :  .  ftT  £Ni  soc:  :  ?R06ftAmS  TM^LATIOIv) •  ED  "'  ,<VDmiN16TnjOFiOI\)  i  cS  ,  . . fURCI+fVJlMG- .t- S U P P L Y . . .  .  ,  C6  . . „ . . : . —  .; OR&ftAifZATiON 4-«1ETHtoDS  BX  E e o M , S'OCloWrY', .fSTSPSTlCS'  '•. " ^ ' i V K V E Y : ; . -  ;SRV<£S>  ...  DiN'TiVrUY  ....  ,'  SUPPORT  : ccmmuNicftTioi\)  ft5  .. F I N A N C I A L . ADmiNISTPVATlOiO ! . AC  j A&AicpLTuke ;'.;:.J..'"..:  :  " ! GSfflftTCR. SY&TPWS ftWliNiSTPATiV'  i.  r . :  APfYllki ISTPRATWFT  ': ADmiMlSTRATWe + FoRB6tJiSKfo£.  "  ; 1  -  '.  1  j  •  '' 1  :  167  I;  INDICATORS  F A C T O R v N A T U R E  O F  A C T I V I T Y / W O R K  DEPARTFEDERAL OCCUPAiMENT, SEC- OCCUPATIONAL CA- TIONAL TION OR TITLES TEGORIES UNIT AND GROUPS TITLES J . C P . Technical' Category A l l But ' D r a f t i n g and I l l u s t r a t i o n and S o c i a l S c i e n c e Support A l l Operational r Category  NGN-OFFICE • WORK  PRIMARILY NONROUTINE ASSOCIATED WITH THE QUATERNARY SECTOR ASSOCIATED WITH NONOFFICE WORK.  Director's Office Investigations Appraisal Some A d m i n i s t r a t i v e Services  1  J.CP.  A l l i n the Investigators " E x e c u t i v e " Category. Employees o f High S t a t u s i n S c i e n t i f i c and P r o f e s s i o n a l and Admini s t r a t i v e Services Categories  Audit (Basic, F i e l d , Business) Long Room (Customs)  Auditors  Non-Officij Estab- . lishraent i . e . Warehouse L a b o r a tory  Advising, Evaluating Planning • Make D e c i s i o n s Manage Programs Orientation Level Design  Conference Rooms Large O f f i c e s Enclosed O f f i c e s  i  Vaults  J . C P . Occupations Listed i n Scientif i c and P r o f e s s i o n a l Category: AG, BI, CH, ED, FO, LA, MD.'NV, PC, SE, SW, VS  F i e l d Work  Program P l a n n i n g ( P u b l i c Works)  Most o f the Occupational Titles Listed i n Scient i f i c and P r o f e a 7 s i o n a l Category.  Analyse, Plan.  F i n a n c e , Records, Stores, Personnel Management S e r v i c e s , Administration, Word P r o c e s s i n g , Clerical Unit, Accounting '  J . C P . A l l Occupational Titles L i s t e d i n Administ r a t i v e Support A d m i n i s t r a t i v e and Foreign Service C a t e g o r y — L o w Status Employees. S c i e n t i f i c and P r o f e s sional Category— Some AU B.  1  . t.  Classifier Classification Officer. R e t r i e v e r and Records C l e r k C a l c u l a t i n g Equipment Operator. Cashiers Entry Processing Clerk. . AccountinR C l c r k n  OBSERVATION  Maintain,' Inspect, Construct, Experiments '  Marine Operations (Customs) Terminal Operations  PRIMARILY RESEARCH  PRIMARILY ROUTINE  Custodian  JOB OR TASK DESCRIPTION KEY WORDS  Scientific Displays Maps Library  Typing P o o l s C a l c u l a t i n g Equipment • Computers  *Abbreviations: J. CP.-Federal Job C l a s s i f i c a t i o n Pyramid  168.  FACTOR: FREQUENCY, CHARACTER, AND PATTERN OF CONTACTS  x FREQUENT PUBLIC • CONTACTS  INFREQUENT PUBLIC CONTACTS  FREQUENT NON-DOWNTOWN CONTACTS  Department, Section and Unit Titles  Federal Occupa- Occupational tional Titles Categor i e s and Groups Information Officer Cashier  Appeals, I n formation, .Manpower/U.I. C. Centers .Licences District Office "Long Room" (Customs) Regional Office  Regional Director's Office  J . C P . ExecuRegional t i v e Category Director- . Employees of General High Status in Scientific and P r o f e s s i o n a l Admin'. • Category  Some Visitors  J.CP. Executive Category  NATURE OF ACTIVITY/WORK  PROBABLY "PROGRAMMING" CONTACTS ' .  Primarily Non-Routine  Telephone and Lobby Directory Listing  Many People Mention of Observed LeavFrequent ing .and EnterContacts ing O f f i c e Establishment. Chairs f o r Waiting, Counters f o r Serving. V i s i b l e Ground f l o o r Location.  L i s t e d UnderFrequently C a l l e d Numbers L i s t e d i n Lobby Directory  Public At Large Significant " Segments of General Public  Mention of Infrequent Contacts  Opposites of the Above  Other Depts. Small Segment of General Public.  Opposites of the Above.  Clients  Mention of Significant "Non-Downtown" Contact Sources  Mention of Contacts . with NonO f f i c e Work.  Operations  FREQUENT CONTACTS WITH NON-OFFICE WORK -  PROBABLY "ORIENTATION" CONTACTS PROBABLY "PLANNING" CONTACTS  Report and ObservaInter-, tions viewStatements  Activity/Work  PRESTIGE High Occupational Status  Middle Occupational Status .•  Primarily Routine O f f i c e  Activity/Work  Low Occupational Status'  *Abbreviations: J . CP.-Federal Job C l a s s i f i c a t i o n Pyramid  169.  FACTOR^  PRESTIGE DEPARTMENT, SECTION AND UNIT TITLES  HIGH ORGANIZATIONAL STATUS  . MIDDLE ORGANIZATIONAL STATUS  LOW ORGANIZATIONAL STATUS  HIGH , OCCUPATIONAL STATUS  MIDDLE OCCUPATIONAL, STATUS  LOW OCCUPATIONAL .STATUS  FEDERAL OCCUPATIONAL. CATEGORIES AND GROUPS  OCCUPATIONAL OBSERVATION - TITLES  New B u i l d i n g . Large "Plush" E s t a b l i s h ment . Expensive Furnishings.  R e g i o n a l Headquarters or D i s t r i c t Office Directly Responsible to Ottawa  District Office Responsible to R e g i o n a l Headquart e r s or Another District Office  Older B u i l d i n g S m a l l e r more U t i l i tarian Establishment  -  F u n c t i o n a l , Small O l d , P e r h a p s Cramped "Quarters.  L o c a l o r "Metro" Office Responsible to R e g i o n a l Headquarters or to a District Office  Any E m p l o y e e i n t h e E x e c u t i v e ( S X ) C a t e g o r y . J . C P . S c i e n t i f i c and Professional Category: ES4; F I 4, 5, 6; EG-ESS '8, 9; EN-SUR 5; AU 5, 6; ED 4,. 5, 6; MOF 4-, 5; EN-ENG 6, 7; AR 7; WP 5, 6; CO 4. Admin, and F o r e i g n S e r v i c e .Category: P E 4, 5; AS 6 , 7 ; PG 3, 4; PM 5, 6; I S 4,'5; AS 5. Admin.. S u p p o r t : C R 6 ; ST-6.  Head ...; Regional Director Director-General • Deputy D i r e c t o r General R e g i o n a l Manager Regional Supervisor Regional Chief Regional C o l l e c t o r ' Customs  A l l Not A l r e a d y I n c l u d e d as H i g h Status i n the S c i e n t i f i c . a n d Professional Category. Admin, and Foreign Service: PE 2, 3; IS 2, 3; PG 2; WP 2, 3, 4; ED 2, 3; ES 1, 2, 3; PM 3, 4; F I 2, 3; AS 3, 4. Admin. S u p p o r t : CR 5; ST-SCY 4,-5; T e c h n i c a l C a t e g o r y : OD 4, 5; GT 4; EG-ESS 7, 8, 9.  Manager • ' • '• • S e c t i o n Head G r o u p Head Administrator •  Administrative  and F o r e i g n  PE  1, 2; I S 1.  Secretary Typist Trainee Assistant....  1; AS 1; PM  Administrative DA  3; OE-DE l j  Technical  Support:  3.  CR 2, 3;  STY-SCY 2, 3; CR  Category:  6; PD 3; GT  Service:  EG-ESS 4, 5,  4.  1  Chief Assistant.... Rulings.... Senior . Officer  Clerk Junior Cashier Emry. P r o c e s s i n g . Clerk  * Abbreviations: J. C P . Federal Job C l a s s i f i c a t i o n Pyramid  170.  FACTOR = OFFICE ESTABLISHMENT SIZE ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE REPORT AND INTERVIEW STATEMENTS  # OF EMPLOYEES .  LARGE OFFICE ~ ESTABLISHMENT SIZE  Over 100 Employees  MEDIUM OFFICE ESTABLISHMENT SIZE  Between 20 - 100 Employees  SMALL OFFICE ESTABLISHMENT, SIZE  Less Than 20 Employees /-•  CENTRALIZED/ MULTI-TIERED ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE DECENTRALIZED/ UNCOMPLEX ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE  -  •  •  •  Mention of Centralized Organizational Structure •'.  .  •  Complicated Organization Charts  '  Mention of Decentralized Organizational Structure Straight Forward Organization Charts  FACTOR= RATE OF GROWTH AND ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE  3#£  % Change i n T o t a l  - GROWTH  REPORT AND INTERVIEW STATEMENTS  INDEX OF GROWTH  % Change In T o t a l  % Change i n O f f i c e  Employment  Office.Space  Space Outside .  1971 - 1976-  1971 - 1976  Downtown 1971 - 1976  ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE  Mention of Locational and Organizational Change i . e . Mergers, Splits  *Abbreviations:. J.C.P.-Federal Job C l a s s i f i c a t i o n Pyramid  FACTOR: TRADITION  REPORT AND INTERVIEW STATEMENTS  .  . . ;  •  Number of Years Department and/or Its  TRADITION  Have- Been Located Downtown  (  Components .  172.  APPENDIX II  L i s t of Persons Interviewed  National Revenue (Taxation) Mr. Broughton (Public A f f a i r s O f f i c e r ) Mrs. D. E l l i n o r (Public A f f a i r s Officer) National Revenue (Customs and Excise) Ms. Cathy Caper (Personnel Department, Customs) Mr. L i o n e l l T r o t t i e r ( C l a s s i f i c a t i o n O f f i c e r , Excise) Manpower and  Immigration  Mr. Ted Lloyd (Regional Manager Personnel Services) Unemployment Insurance Commission Mr. Tony S. Strachan (Regional Public Relations Advisor) Mr. A.S. Hayre (Regional Chief, Administrative Services) Fisheries and Environment Canada Mr. George Grant (Senior C l a s s i f i c a t i o n O f f i c e r , Personnel) Mr. M.E. Tinck (Regional Administration O f f i c e r , Atmospheric Environment) Mr. G.B. Armstrong (Regional Director, General Environmental Management Service) Mr. G. Chambers (Regional Administration O f f i c e r , Environmental Protection Service) Transport Canada Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr.  Dutchak (Regional Personnel O f f i c e r , Marine Services) D.G. Hosgood (Regional Planning Manager, C.A. T.A.) Reg Vose (Regional C l a s s i f i c a t i o n O f f i c e r , C.A.T.A.) A.R. English (Regional Personnel Administrator, C.A.T.A.)  Public Works Canada Mr. Gary Webster (Forward Planning O f f i c e r , Program Planning and Co-ordination) Mr. H. Radke (Head C l a s s i f i c a t i o n and Staff Relations, Personnel) National Health and Welfare Mr. R.J. Fraser (Regional Personnel Advisor) Indian and Northern A f f a i r s Mr. A l a i n Cunningham (Planning, Regional Office)  Supply and Services Canada Mr.  John Stone (Personnel Services Administrator)  Department of Justice Mrs. Anne Beresford  (Librarian)  Department of Veterans' A f f a i r s Mr. Pyne (Manager, Administrative  Services)  Ministry of the Solicitor-General Mr. Ron Zapp (Regional C l a s s i f i c a t i o n O f f i c e r ) Post O f f i c e Mrs. Betty Amos (Public A f f a i r s , D i s t r i c t Office) Mrs. F l o r i d a Town (Public A f f a i r s , Regional Office) Arthur Erickson Architects Larry McFarland  174.  APPENDIX I I I  COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF LOCATIONAL FLEXIBILITY OF 15 FEDERAL DEPARTMENTS BASED ON SIX INTERNAL FACTORS GIVEN EQUAL WEIGHTS  Point System  Most F l e x i b l e Flexible Inflexible Most I n f l e x i b l e  8 6 4 2  Points Points Points Points  Index of l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y = a+b+c+d+e+f  SUPPLY AND SERVICES SOLICITOR-GENERAL TRANSPORT ENERGY, MINES AND RESOURCES UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE COMMISSION MANPOWER AND IMMIGRATION FISHERIES AND ENVIRONMENT PUBLIC WORKS JUSTICE REVENUE (TAXATION) POST OFFICE HEALTH AND WELFARE VETERANS' AFFAIRS INDIAN AND NORTHERN AFFAIRS REVENUE (CUSTOMS AND EXCISE)  42 36 34 32 30 30 30 30 28 28 28 26 26 26 22  Most Locationally Flexible Locationally Flexible Locationally Inflexible Most Locationally Inflexible  175.  COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF LOCATIONAL FLEXIBILITY OF 15 FEDERAL DEPARTMENTS BASED ON SIX INTERNAL FACTORS GIVING DOUBLE WEIGHTING TO NATURE OF ACTIVITY/WORK, FREQUENCY CHARACTER AND PATTERN OF CONTACTS AND PRESTIGE  Point System  Nature of Activity/Work ) Frequency, Character and) Pattern of Contacts ) Prestige ) Size and Organizational Structure Rate of Growth/Change Tradition  Most Flexible  Flexible  ^  ^2  Inflexible  Most Inflexible  ) ) ) )  Index of l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y = a+b+c+d+e+f SUPPLY AND SERVICES TRANSPORT SOLICITOR-GENERAL UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE COMMISSION POST OFFICE PUBLIC WORKS REVENUE (TAXATION) MANPOWER AND IMMIGRATION FISHERIES AND ENVIRONMENT ENERGY, MINES AND RESOURCES REVENUE (CUSTOMS AND EXCISE) HEALTH AND WELFARE INDIAN AND NORTHERN AFFAIRS VETERANS* AFFAIRS JUSTICE  66 54 52 48 48 46 44 44 44 44 42 40 40 40 34  Most  Locationally Flexible  Locationally Flexible Locationally Inflexible  Most Locationally Inflexible  176.  COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF LOCATIONAL FLEXIBILITY OF 15 FEDERAL DEPARTMENTS BASED ON SIX INTERNAL FACTORS GIVING DOUBLE WEIGHTING TO TRADITION, FREQUENCY, CHARACTER AND PATTERN OF CONTACTS AND PRESTIGE  Point System 3  ^ Most Flexible  Tradition ) Frequency, Character and) Pattern of Contacts ) Prestige ) Size and Organizational ) Structure ) Rate of Growth/Change ) Nature of Activity/Work )  Flexible  1  9  Inflexible  Most Inflexible  fi 4  °  °  *  4  Index of l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y = a+b+c+d+e+f SUPPLY AND SERVICES SOLICITOR-GENERAL TRANSPORT PUBLIC WORKS ENERGY, MINES AND RESOURCES POST OFFICE MANPOWER AND IMMIGRATION FISHERIES AND ENVIRONMENT REVENUE(TAXATION) UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE JUSTICE REVENUE (CUSTOMS AND EXCISE) INDIAN AND NORTHERN AFFAIRS VETERANS' AFFAIRS HEALTH AND WELFARE  64 54 50 46 46 46 44 44 42 42 38 38 36 36 36  Most  Locationally Flexible  Locationally Flexible  Locationally Inflexible Most Locationally Inflexible  177.  COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF LOCATIONAL FLEXIBILITY OF 15 FEDERAL DEPARTMENTS BASED ON SIX INTERNAL FACTORS GIVING DOUBLE WEIGHTING TO PRESTIGE  Point System  Prestige  Most Flexible  Flexible  16  12  Inflexible  Most Inflexible  8  A l l Other Factors Index of l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y = a+b+c+d+e+f SUPPLY AND SERVICES TRANSPORT SOLICITOR-GENERAL MANPOWER AND IMMIGRATION POST OFFICE ENERGY, MINES AND RESOURCES UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE COMMISSION PUBLIC WORKS REVENUE (TAXATION) FISHERIES AND ENVIRONMENT INDIAN AND NORTHERN AFFAIRS REVENUE (CUSTOMS AND EXCISE) JUSTICE HEALTH AND WELFARE VETERANS' AFFAIRS  50 40 38 36 36 36 36 34 34 32 32 30 30 30 28  Most Locationally Flexible Locationally Flexible Locationally Inflexible Most Locationally Inflexible  178.  COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF LOCATIONAL FLEXIBILITY OF 15 FEDERAL DEPARTMENTS BASED ON SIX INTERNAL FACTORS GIVING DOUBLE WEIGHTING TO TRADITION  Point System  Tradition  Most Flexible  Flexible  16  12  Inflexible  Most Inflexible  A l l Other Factors Index of l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y = a+b+c+d+e+f  SUPPLY AND SERVICES SOLICITOR-GENERAL ENERGY, MINES AND RESOURCES TRANSPORT PUBLIC WORKS JUSTICE FISHERIES AND ENVIRONMENT MANPOWER AND IMMIGRATION VETERANS' AFFAIRS POST OFFICE UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE COMMISSION REVENUE (TAXATION) HEALTH AND WELFARE INDIAN AND NORTHERN AFFAIRS REVENUE (CUSTOMS AND EXCISE)  48 44 40 38 38 34 34 34 32 32 32 30 28 28 26  Most Locationally Flexible Locationally Flexible Locationally Inflexible  Most Locationally Inflexible  179.  COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF LOCATIONAL FLEXIBILITY OF 15 FEDERAL DEPARTMENTS BASED ON SIX INTERNAL FACTORS GIVING DOUBLE WEIGHTING TO FREQUENCY, CHARACTER AND PATTERN OF CONTACTS  Point System  Frequency, Character and Pattern of Contacts  Most Flexible  Flexible  16  12  Inflexible  Most Inflexible  A l l Other Factors Index of l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y = a+b+c+d+e+f SUPPLY AND SERVICES SOLICITOR-GENERAL TRANSPORT PUBLIC WORKS UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE COMMISSION FISHERIES AND ENVIRONMENT POST OFFICE REVENUE (TAXATION) MANPOWER AND IMMIGRATION ENERGY, MINES AND RESOURCES HEALTH AND WELFARE INDIAN AND NORTHERN AFFAIRS JUSTICE VETERANS* AFFAIRS REVENUE (CUSTOMS AND EXCISE)  50 42 40 38 36 36 36 34 34 34 30 30 30 30 26  Most Locationally Flexible Locationally Flexible Locationally Inflexible Most Locationally Inflexible  180.  COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF LOCATIONAL FLEXIBILITY OF 15 FEDERAL DEPARTMENTS BASED ON SIX INTERNAL FACTORS GIVING DOUBLE WEIGHTING TO NATURE OF ACTIVITY/WORK  Point System  Nature of Activity/Work  Most Flexible  Flexible  16  12  Inflexible  Most Inflexible  A l l Other Factors Index of l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y = a+b+c+d+e+f SUPPLY AND SERVICES SOLICITOR-GENERAL TRANSPORT ENERGY, MINES AND RESOURCES PUBLIC WORKS UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE COMMISSION FISHERIES AND ENVIRONMENT VETERANS' AFFAIRS REVENUE (TAXATION) HEALTH AND WELFARE MANPOWER AND IMMIGRATION POST OFFICE INDIAN AND NORTHERN AFFAIRS JUSTICE REVENUE (CUSTOMS AND EXCISE)  50 42 42 38 38 36 36 34 32 32 32 32 30 30 24  Most Locationally Flexible Locationally Flexible  Locationally Inflexible Most Locationally Inflexible  181.  COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF LOCATIONAL FLEXIBILITY OF 15 FEDERAL DEPARTMENTS BASED ON SIX INTERNAL FACTORS GIVING DOUBLE WEIGHTING TO SIZE AND ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE  Point System  Size and Organizational Structure  Most Flexible  Flexible  16  12  Inflexible  Most Inflexible  A l l Other Factors Index of l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y = a+b+c+d+e+f SUPPLY AND SERVICES TRANSPORT SOLICITOR-GENERAL ENERGY, MINES AND RESOURCES PUBLIC WORKS MANPOWER AND IMMIGRATION JUSTICE HEALTH AND WELFARE UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE COMMISSION FISHERIES AND ENVIRONMENT INDIAN AND NORTHERN AFFAIRS REVENUE (TAXATION) VETERANS' AFFAIRS POST OFFICE REVENUE (CUSTOMS AND EXCISE)  46 40 40 40 38 36 36 34 34 32 32 30 30 30 24  Most Locationally Flexible Locationally Flexible Locationally Inflexible Most Locationally Inflexible  182.  COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF LOCATIONAL FLEXIBILITY OF 15 FEDERAL DEPARTMENTS BASED ON SIX INTERNAL FACTORS GIVING DOUBLE WEIGHTING TO RATE OF GROWTH AND CHANGE  Point System  Rate of Growth and Change  Most Flexible  Flexible  16  12  Inflexible  Most Inflexible  A l l Other Factors Index of l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y = a+b+c+d+e+f SUPPLY AND SERVICES SOLICITOR-GENERAL FISHERIES AND ENVIRONMENT TRANSPORT PUBLIC WORKS REVENUE (TAXATION) MANPOWER AND IMMIGRATION ENERGY, MINES AND RESOURCES JUSTICE UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE COMMISSION POST OFFICE INDIAN AND NORTHERN AFFAIRS HEALTH AND WELFARE VETERANS' AFFAIRS REVENUE (CUSTOMS AND EXCISE)  50 44 38 38 38 36 36 36 36 32 30 30 28 28 24  Most Locationally Flexible  Locationally Flexible Locationally Inflexible Most Locationally Inflexible  183.  COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF LOCATIONAL FLEXIBILITY OF 15 FEDERAL DEPARTMENTS BASED ON SIX INTERNAL FACTORS GIVING DOUBLE WEIGHTING TO NATURE OF ACTIVITY/WORK AND FREQUENCY, CHARACTER AND PATTERN OF CONTACTS  Point System  Nature of Activity/Work ) Frequency, Character and) Pattern of Contacts )  Most Flexible  Flexible  16  12  Inflexible  Most Inflexible  A l l Other Factors Index of l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y = a+b+c+d+e+f SUPPLY AND SERVICES TRANSPORT SOLICITOR-GENERAL PUBLIC WORKS UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE COMMISSION FISHERIES AND ENVIRONMENT ENERGY, MINES AND RESOURCES POST OFFICE REVENUE (TAXATION) MANPOWER AND IMMIGRATION VETERANS' AFFAIRS HEALTH AND WELFARE INDIAN AND NORTHERN AFFAIRS JUSTICE REVENUE (CUSTOMS AND EXCISE)  58 48 48 44 42 42 40 40 38 38 38 36 34 32 28  Most Locationally Flexible Locationally Flexible  Locationally Inflexible Most Locationally Inflexible  184.  COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF LOCATIONAL FLEXIBILITY OF 15 FEDERAL DEPARTMENTS BASED ON SIX INTERNAL FACTORS GIVING DOUBLE WEIGHTING TO PRESTIGE AND TRADITION  Point System  Tradition ) Prestige )  Most Flexible  Flexible  16  12  Inflexible  Most Inflexible  A l l Other Factors Index of Locational F l e x i b i l i t y = a+b+c+d+e+f SUPPLY AND SERVICES SOLICITOR-GENERAL ENERGY, MINES AND RESOURCES TRANSPORT MANPOWER AND IMMIGRATION PUBLIC WORKS POST OFFICE FISHERIES AND ENVIRONMENT UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE COMMISSION REVENUE (TAXATION) JUSTICE VETERANS' AFFAIRS REVENUE (CUSTOMS AND EXCISE) INDIAN AND NORTHERN AFFAIRS HEALTH AND WELFARE  56 48 44 44 40 40 40 38 38 36 36 34 34 34 32  Most Locationally Flexible Locationally Flexible Locationally Inflexible Most Locationally Inflexible  185.  COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF LOCATIONAL FLEXIBILITY OF 15 FEDERAL DEPARTMENTS BASED ON SIX INTERNAL FACTORS GIVING DOUBLE WEIGHTING TO SIZE AND ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE AND RATE OF GROWTH/CHANGE  Point System  Size and Organizational ) Structure ) Rate of Growth/Change )  Most Flexible  Flexible  16  12  Inflexible  Most Inflexible^  A l l Other Factors Index of l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y = a+b+c+d+e+f SUPPLY AND SERVICES SOLICITOR-GENERAL ENERGY, MINES AND RESOURCES JUSTICE PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORT MANPOWER AND IMMIGRATION UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE COMMISSION FISHERIES AND ENVIRONMENT HEALTH AND WELFARE REVENUE (TAXATION) INDIAN AND NORTHERN AFFAIRS VETERANS' AFFAIRS POST OFFICE REVENUE (CUSTOMS AND EXCISE)  54 48 44 44 44 44 42 40 40 36 36 36 32 30 26  Most Locationally Flexible Locationally Flexible  Locationally Inflexible Most Locationally Inflexible  186.  APPENDIX  IV  TWO EXAMPLES OF "FINAL" DEPARTMENTAL COMPOSITE SHEETS  Public Works Canada 1971 3  # of o f f i c e est. downtown # of o f f i c e est. outside downtown  -  25,823 25,823/100%  amount of o f f i c e space amount of o f f i c e space downtown amount of o f f i c e space n/downtown  -  443  # of employees i n Vancouver # of o f f i c e employees i n Vancouver # of o f f i c e employees i n downtown Vancouver  Locational F l e x i b i l i t y  1975/76 5 1  '...% 66% 100%  46,462 46,462/100%  80%  —  486  10%  ?  1  300/62%  Categorization  "Most Locationally F l e x i b l e "  SUMMARY The major internal factor l i k e l y  to function as a constraint on o f f i c e  l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y of the department i s the need or desire f o r prestige. A l l s t a f f downtown are i n Regional headquarters o f f i c e s and over half occupy high and middle status positions. Public Works with respect increased  On the whole the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of  to the other f i v e i n t e r n a l factors seem amenable to  locational f l e x i b i l i t y .  A s i g n i f i c a n t feature of i t s downtown work  i s i t s region-wide orientation and association with non-office operations outside downtown.  Face-to-face contacts with the general public downtown are  187.  minimal as the department's c l i e n t s are other federal departments. the major departmental o f f i c e establishment  downtown i s large, a  decentra-  l i z e d organizational structure would seem to permit the geographical tion of components currently centralized downtown.  While  separa-  F i n a l l y the rate of  departmental growth has been b r i s k and the length of time the department has been located downtown (between 20 and 30 years) less than for many other departments and sections of departments.  GENERAL The Department of Public Works i s generally responsible for the management and d i r e c t i o n of federal public works i n Canada.  Specifically i t is  responsible for the construction and maintenance of public buildings, the a c q u i s i t i o n of leased accommodation for public use, construction and maintenance of wharves, p i e r s , roads;and bridges, and improvements of harbours and navigable  channels.  In Vancouver, P a c i f i c Regional Headquarters for the  department, almost a l l o f f i c e s t a f f work i n f i v e downtown o f f i c e e s t a b l i s h ments.  The department, however, operates a trades shop (Vancouver Trades  Shop) downtown and maintains a small survey o f f i c e i n Steveston.  THE NATURE OF DEPARTMENTAL ACTIVITY/WORK DOWNTOWN While most of i t s c l i e n t s (other federal departments) are headquartered downtown, the department's work i s region-wide.  A s i g n i f i c a n t amount of  t r a v e l l i n g of s t a f f , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n Design and Construction and  Realty  (Property Services and Administration D i v i s i o n s ) , outside downtown Vancouver would seem required as part of the work, i . e . supervising, inspecting, negotiating and consulting.  Other downtown o f f i c e s t a f f routinely administer  the department's non-office work, e.g. b u i l d i n g repair, maintenance and  188.  security, project construction, r i v e r dredging, land surveying.  Personnel  and Finance Administration s t a f f also seem involved with f a i r l y routine duties.  THE FREQUENCY, CHARACTER AND PATTERN OF DEPARTMENTAL CONTACTS DOWNTOWN Like most departments, face-to-face contacts with the general public downtown are infrequent. routine i n character.  Contacts within the department are l i k e l y f a i r l y  Clear exceptions  are the weekly Regional Management  and Regional Strategy Committee meetings and meetings with other federal departments' s t a f f ( c l i e n t s , private construction, r e a l t y ) and a r c h i t e c t u r a l firms.  I t i s l i k e l y most of these contact sources have o f f i c e s i n or near  downtown convenient to Public Works.  PRESTIGE Prestige i s the factor which seems most l i k e l y to i n h i b i t the department's o f f i c e l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y . quarters, has high status.  Also, over half of Public Works', s t a f f occupy  high and middle status positions. with those considered  The department, as Regional Head-  The department, therefore, i s grouped  "most i n f l e x i b l e " with respect to prestige.  SIZE AND ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE While 85 percent of the department's o f f i c e s t a f f are currently accommodated i n one large o f f i c e establishment  downtown (this quantitatively  suggests "comparative l o c a t i o n a l i n f l e x i b i l i t y " ) the decentralized  organiza-  t i o n a l and decision-making structure of the department indicates this may be unnecessary.  The "Design and Construction" d i v i s i o n , f o r example, might  possibly be geographically separated  from the rest of the department.  There  fore, considering structure and as well s i z e , the department i s best cate-  189.  gorized as l o c a t i o n f l e x i b l e relevant to other sample departments.  RATE OF DEPARTMENTAL GROWTH AND CHANGE The department's recent spurt of growth ( p a r t i c u l a r l y the past rapid increase i n downtown o f f i c e space occupied) and plans f o r r e l o c a t i o n downtown (to the Crown-owned Begg Building) j u s t i f y at least i t s temporary c l a s s i f i c a t i o n among departments considered l o c a t i o n a l l y f l e x i b l e with respect to this f a c t o r .  TRADITION The department has been headquartered downtown for between twenty and t h i r t y years.  This no doubt i s s u f f i c i e n t time f o r a t r a d i t i o n of downtown  location to emerge.  I f , however, length of time downtown increases t r a -  dition's strength progressively, the department can be classed " l o c a t i o n f l e x i b l e " with respect to t r a d i t i o n as other departments have been located downtown longer.  190.  Revenue Canada - Taxation 1971 # of o f f i c e est. downtown # of o f f i c e est. outside downtown amount of o f f i c e space amount of o f f i c e space downtown amount of o f f i c e space n/downtown  1975/76  '%  6 0 6  50%  125,648 125,648 0  202,773 202,773/100% 0/0%  61% 61%  610 610  948 948/100%  51% 51%  610  948/100%  51%  4 0 4  # of employees i n Vancouver # of o f f i c e employees i n Vancouver # of o f f i c e employees i n downtown Vancouver  -  Locational F l e x i b i l i t y Categorization "Locationally  Inflexible"  SUMMARY Considered as a whole Revenue (Taxation) i s given a comparative f i c a t i o n as " l o c a t i o n a l l y  inflexible".  classi-  At an o f f i c e establishment l e v e l of  d e t a i l , however, this categorization i s misleading because work, primarily of a different nature, i s concentrated i n two separate and large o f f i c e establishments downtown.  In the largest, a c t i v i t y predominantly involves the  largely routine but labour intensive task of processing taxation forms.  Major  sections undertaking this work are already planned to relocate outside downtown by 1981.  Business auditing i s the major work performed by s t a f f i n the  second largest o f f i c e establishment downtown.  Its non-routine nature and close  associations with the business community downtown suggests i t s locational  191.  inflexibility.  The long departmental t r a d i t i o n of downtown location and the  large size of i t s o f f i c e establishments may reinforce, p a r t i c u l a r l y , the locat i o n a l i n f l e x i b i l i t y of auditing and related sections as w e l l , perhaps, as f o r sections not currently planned to relocate from downtown. Factors which could suggest the f e a s i b i l i t y  of continued decentralization  of the department (beyond what i s currently planned) are i t s rapid growth, the comparatively infrequent face-to-face contacts with people outside the department of most sections, i t s decentralized organizational structure and the predominance of low occupational status employees i n many sections currently slated to remain downtown.  F i n a l l y with relocation of sections already planned  department o f f i c i a l s d i s p o s i t i o n to consider a regional town centre location (perhaps i n Surrey) f o r further decentralization may be most favourable.  GENERAL Revenue Canada (Taxation) i s charged with assessing and c o l l e c t i n g taxes, contributions and premiums under law f o r residents of Canada.  Under  Canada's self-assessment tax system the main r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of the department i s to ensure the accuracy of self-assessments and uniform observance of the law.  A l l Revenue Canada (Taxation) s t a f f (almost 1,000) i n Vancouver are  currently housed i n s i x o f f i c e establishments downtown. In t h i s study the department i s s p e c i a l because i t i s the only one where d e f i n i t e future plans for relocation of o f f i c e s t a f f downtown were revealed. Construction of a Taxation Data Centre (for i n i t i a l processing of taxation forms formerly sent to Ottawa) i n Surrey (outside two proposed Regional Town Centre s i t e s ) i s underway.  In 1981 this centre w i l l be converted to a  "Taxation Service Centre" and house at least one t h i r d of the s t a f f currently working downtown.  192.  THE NATURE OF DEPARTMENTAL ACTIVITY/WORK DOWNTOWN In Revenue Canada Taxation's main o f f i c e establishment (the largest of a l l federal department o f f i c e establishments downtown) a great body of employees perform routine processing work In " V e r i f i c a t i o n and C o l l e c t i o n s " and "Admini s t r a t i v e Services" d i v i s i o n s . relocated i n Surrey.  I t i s primarily these d i v i s i o n s which w i l l be  The department's "Audit Support" section, i n another  o f f i c e establishment downtown, also undertakes f a i r l y routine work. The notable and sizeable unit not currently being considered f o r relocation i n Surrey i s the Audit D i v i s i o n . o f f i c e establishment downtown.  I t constitutes the department's second largest While some of this auditing work i s complex  and non-routine, the important aspect seems to be i t s close association with large business enterprises and t h e i r entrepreneurs downtown.  The important  work, from an auditor's viewpoint, should be close at hand as auditing i s conducted at the place of business.  The extent to which the nature of t h i s  work r e a l l y restrains federal auditors downtown, however, needs detailed study.  The work of the " F i e l d " and " O f f i c e " audit d i v i s i o n s should, speci-  f i c a l l y be examined.  THE FREQUENCY, CHARACTER AND PATTERN OF DEPARTMENTAL CONTACTS DOWNTOWN By and large face-to-face contacts with the general public downtown are infrequent. A few sections of the department (Assessing, Regional and D i s t r i c t Appeals) l i k e l y have face-to-face contacts regularly and these may be convenienced downtown.  I t i s possible that "orientation" and "planning"  type contacts, of the department, occur most frequently i n the "Directors O f f i c e " , "Special Investigations", "Appeals" and "Audit" sections of the department.  Such "contacts", and the extent they are necessary, especially  with the Justice Department and business o f f i c i a l s downtown possibly lessens  193.  the l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y of these departmental sections.  A l l things con-  sidered the great amount of routine work i n the department l i k e l y generates a great number of routine or "programmed" (day-to-day) contacts that could occur just as well outside downtown.  There e x i s t , as well, s i g n i f i c a n t  contact sources outside downtown and outside Vancouver (the Vancouver Taxat i o n D i s t r i c t includes West Central and Northern B. C. and the Yukon) necessitating frequent t r a v e l l i n g of supervisors, administrators, investigators and auditors both i n and beyond metropolitan Vancouver.  PRESTIGE The r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for a large, populous and important d i s t r i c t  and  i t s large number of employees i n Vancouver suggest, despite i t s " D i s t r i c t " designation, that the department desires and needs high organizational prestige.  The q u a s i j u d i c i a l Western Regional Taxation Appeals o f f i c e located  downtown may,  p a r t i c u l a r l y , require accommodation and l o c a t i o n a l "status".  Perhaps lessening the organization's need or desire for prestige i s the large proportion of f u l l - t i m e and seasonal employees possessing  low  occupational  status.  SIZE AND  ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE  The vast majority of Revenue (Taxation) employees work i n large o f f i c e establishments  which could impede l o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y of sections planned  to remain downtown.  Of the department's organizational structure as a whole  i t can claim to be decentralized, multi-tiered but quite straight-forward. It no doubt enables the p a r t i a l minority move to Surrey to be undertaken.  194.  RATE OF DEPARTMENTAL GROWTH AND CHANGE The comparatively rapid growth of the department from 1971 - 1976 both i n terms of employees and amount of o f f i c e space occupied as well as locat i o n a l changes between 1971 and 1976 and planned i n the future ( i . e . p a r t i a l relocation of the department i n Surrey) suggest accommodation and location problems are much on department o f f i c i a l s minds.  Now and f o r the next few  years, their d i s p o s i t i o n to consider a regional town centre location (perhaps i n Surrey) f o r o f f i c e sections currently planned to remain downtown, may be most favourable.  TRADITION The department has always been located downtown. existence spans f i v e decades.  In Vancouver i t s  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0094355/manifest

Comment

Related Items