Property disposal is predominantly driven by financial considerations
Environmental liability is relatively low
Internal company barriers impede disposal
Portfolio size is small
Property disposal is not a high priority for executive leadership
Individual transactions are favored over portfolio sales
One-third of firms do not have well-defined disposal plans
Remediating and selling property is favored over redevelopment
Annual carrying costs of maintenance and operations are relatively high
Elevate the issue to the executive level or C-suite
Making the topic of surplus property disposal a routine agenda item for top executives results in swift action and leads to large financial and social benefits.
Empower a senior leader with the authority to dispose of surplus property
The absence of a single, clear authority often leads to internal politics and infighting that prevent timely and effective decision-making.
Set a clear divestment plan with an exit strategy
Successful firms develop clear strategies for the disposal of the bulk of their surplus properties with a well-defined endpoint, normally not more than five years.
Adopt a portfolio strategy
Selling surplus properties solely on an individual basis, rather than in portfolios, is slow and costly. In contrast, the transaction cost of a portfolio is relatively low, and owners can bundle low-value properties with higher-value assets.
Sell environmentally contaminated property
Progressive firms are successfully selling contaminated surplus properties with few legal or financial problems.
Profit should not be the sole motive for surplus property disposal
When firms focus more on timely and effective disposal rather than on a simple calculation of profit, they are more likely to reduce their portfolios rapidly, lower total cost of ownership significantly, and enable leadership to focus on their core business.