Mind the gap between workplace ambition and workplace reality

Corporate real estate leaders are clear about one thing: employee experience matters. It sits at the centre of workplace strategy. But when it comes to the decisions that actually define the office, the picture looks very different.

Leesman’s new ‘Mind the Gap’ report, based on responses from 129 CRE leaders representing organisations occupying 915m sq ft of office space, suggests workplace strategy is no longer suffering from a lack of ambition. It is suffering from an execution problem.

The report identifies three critical gaps that now define the market: between strategy and execution, hybrid policy and leadership confidence, and occupier needs and market supply. Together, they reveal a growing disconnect between what organisations say they want from the workplace, the policies they put in place, and the reality employees experience day-to-day. 

The experience gap

From the outset, a clear gap emerges between expectation and reality. Of the CRE leaders surveyed, 84% say employee experience is the primary driver of workplace strategy. Yet only 27% prioritise it when selecting a new office. Instead, location (74%) and cost (67%) dominate. This reflects a clear gap between ambition and execution.

Organisations want to create workplaces that strengthen culture, support retention and attract top talent. But when strategy moves to execution, budget pressure reasserts itself. Insufficient budget, cited by 35% of respondents, remains the single biggest barrier to delivery.

That shortfall is not felt equally. The report also highlights that DEI is a lagging priority for CRE Leaders, with only 42% saying it’s a primary goal in their real estate strategy. This underlines that workplace experience is far from universal, and that design, policy, and investment choices can widen inequalities as easily as reduce them.

Hybrid has stabilised, but not progressed

Although 98% of organisations now operate a hybrid model, with three days a week emerging as the new normal, stability should not be confused with success. 

Some 60% of leaders say their current approach still needs refinement, suggesting many organisations have reached a “good enough” equilibrium rather than an optimised one. The challenge is no longer whether hybrid exists, but whether it is working well enough to support performance, coordination and experience.

Uneven attendance patterns cited by 34% of leaders remain the biggest barrier to delivering a strong workplace experience, followed by resistance to new ways of working at 24%. 

The danger here is complacency. If a hybrid policy is standard but the everyday employee experience is still inconsistent, the office risks becoming a compromise rather than a competitive advantage. 

Market versus occupier needs

For the built environment audience, the most important gap may be the one between occupiers and the market built to serve them. Nearly half of CRE leaders (48%) identified flexibility of space and lease terms as the biggest mismatch between what the market offers and what occupiers need. As organisations continue to recalibrate their portfolios, it’s no surprise when 57% have already reduced their footprint in the past 18 months. 

Occupiers are evolving faster than the market. Their portfolios are becoming leaner, more dynamic, and more dependent on adaptability. Yet much of the office market still operates around longer-term certainty, fixed assumptions and product-led thinking.

This disconnect can also be seen in landlord relationships. Only 10% of occupiers view landlords as active or progressive partners in supporting their needs and none of those surveyed see that relationship as influential when selecting office space. That should be a wake-up call. The problem is no longer just the office itself, but the operating model behind it.

Closing the gap

As we look toward 2026, the next phase of workplace strategy has shifted from experimental to essential. The report identifies a “triple threat” of priorities that leaders must balance: the cold reality of cost efficiency and rightsizing, the human-centric demand for wellbeing and experience, and the logistical puzzle of occupancy optimisation.

It is no longer enough to simply offer a desk; the office must earn its commute by serving as a seamless, high-value destination. However, the true differentiator for the coming year won’t just be the sophistication of these strategies, but the execution of them.

The organisations that succeed will not be the ones with the strongest rhetoric around experience. They will be the ones who finally close the gap between what they say matters and what they are prepared to deliver.