When an office relocates from London, its accommodation costs and salary costs decrease substantially. Some contacts must, however, be maintained with people in the capital, resulting in an increase in travel costs. Those increases are compared with accommodation and salary savings to show that the greatest net saving is usually obtained by a move to a town in the outer South East. Such moves have been very common.
Few offices would obtain greater savings by moving to the assisted areas, despite government incentives, which would have to be increased substantially to make those areas attractive. Similarly the replacement of 30% of meetings by cheap teleconferences would not alone persuade many more offices to move there.
Policies concerning many aspects of travel and communications would have to be combined before relocation to the assisted areas would be worthwhile for more than a very small minority of offices.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ABC Rail Guide, February 1975, ABC Travel Guides Ltd, London
2.
Alfred Marks Bureau, 1975“Survey of secretarial and clerical salaries: February, 1975”Statistical Services Division, Alfred Marks Bureau, London
3.
ChristieBEltonM C J, 1975“Research on the differences between telecommunication and face-to-face communication in business and government” CSG report P/75180/CR, Joint Unit for Planning Research, University College London
4.
CollinsH A, 1971“The telecommunications impact model, stages I and II, September 1971” CSG report P/71275/CL, Joint Unit for Planning Research, University College London
5.
CollinsH A, 1972“The telecommunications impact model, January, 1972” CSG report P/72031/CL, Joint Unit for Planning Research, University College London
6.
CollinsH A, 1973“Analysis of face-to-face and telephone contact generation in the public and private sectors” CSG report P/73200/CL, Joint Unit for Planning Research, University College London
7.
ConnellS, 1972“Report on the pilot office communications survey contract volume 4: The findings of pilot surveys and general conclusions” CSG report P/72293/CN, Joint Unit for Planning Research, University College London
8.
ConnellS, 1974a“The 1973 Office Communications Survey” CSG report P/74067/CN, Joint Unit for Planning Research, University College London
9.
ConnellS, 1974b“The 1973 Office Communications Survey: Additional analysis” CSG report P/74225/CN, Joint Unit for Planning Research, University College London
10.
CookA, 1975“A more detailed comparison of the costs of travel and telecommunication” CSG report P/75008/CK, Joint Unit for Planning Research, University College London
11.
CowanP DFineDIrelandJJordanCMercerDSearsA, 1969The Office: A Facet of Urban Growth (Heinemann, London)
12.
EltonM C JHillsP MHunterJ M HMillenD WTurnerT P, 1970“An approach to the location of government” paper presented to the Institute of Management Science International Conference, London, 1970
13.
Evening Standard, 10 March 1975“Offices in suburbs face rent crisis” by GoddardRobert Langton J B, 1973Office Linkages and Location (Pergamon Press, Oxford)
14.
GoddardJ BMorrisD M, 1976The Communications Factor in Office Decentralization (Pergamon Press, Oxford)
15.
GoddardJ BPyeR, 1975“Telecommunications and office location” CSG report P/75175/PY, Joint Unit for Planning Research, University College London; to be published by the sponsor, Directorate of Research Requirements, Department of the Environment
16.
HooverE MVernonR, 1962Anatomy of a Metropolis (Doubleday, Garden City)
17.
LOB, 1975aOffice Relocation Facts and Figures: LOB Statistical Handbook 1975Location of Offices Bureau, 27 Chancery Lane, London WC2
18.
LOB, 1975bAnnual Report 1974–1975Location of Offices Bureau, 27 Chancery Lane, London WC2
19.
MeierR, 1962A Communication Theory of Urban Growth (MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass)
20.
PerssonC, 1974Kontaktarbete och Framtida Lokaliserings-Forandringar (CWK Gleerup, Lund) in Swedish, with a 16 page English summary
21.
PyeR, 1976“Communications effectiveness and efficiency” in “Technology assessment of telecommunication/transportation interactions: Volume II, detailed import analyses”Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, Calif.
22.
RhodesJKanA, 1971Office Dispersal and Regional Policy (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge)
23.
SnyderF W, 1971“Travel patterns: Implications for new communications facilities”Bell Laboratories, Holmdel, NJ
24.
ThorngrenB, 1972“A communication study of government relocation in Sweden”Stockholm School of Economics
25.
ThorngrenB, 1973“Swedish office dispersal” in “Office location and regional development” Ed. BannonM, An Foras Forbartha, Waterloo Road, Dublin 4
26.
TylerR MCartwrightBCollinsH A, 1976“Interaction between telecommunications and face-to-face contact: Prospects for teleconference systems” Long Range Intelligence Bulletin number 9, Telecommunications Systems Strategy Department, British Post Office
27.
UK, 1973“The dispersal of government work from London” Cmnd 5322, The Hardman Report (HMSO, London)
28.
WeinshallT D, 1968“Some uses of communications pattern research in analyzing and influencing organizational behavior” paper presented at the sixth International Program, the Graduate School of Management Studies of the University of Navarra, Barcelona, Spain, June, 1968
