In 2017, I asked Michael Bull how owners should respond to emerging commercial real estate trends. His answer included an example that began in a parking deck. If cell service mattered to a company's salespeople, his team would check the signal as they entered the deck, rode the elevator, and moved through the office.
The example made a broad technology discussion physical. The question was no longer whether connectivity sounded important. It was whether the building supported the work people needed to do along the route they actually used.
Begin with the route people take
Michael Bull described connectivity as a tenant-representation question before it became an equipment question. His team first asked how important cell service was to the people in the company, especially employees who moved in and out of the office. Only then did the conversation turn to reception equipment, wireless access points, and building infrastructure.
That order matters. Technology can strengthen a signal. It cannot decide whose work depends on that signal, where the failure becomes disruptive, or whether the improvement belongs in the investment case. Those answers have to come from the people using the property and the owner responsible for the decision.
Let the property challenge the trend
When Michael Bull talked about portfolio decisions, he did not apply one market outlook to every asset. He described analyzing each property independently against its lease structure, capital stack, debt, interest rates, occupancy, rents, age, new supply, and competition. His standard was to make decisions that were "based on reality" and "based on facts."
A trend can point to a question worth asking. The property facts decide how much weight that question should carry. A flexible lease may matter in one situation. Better connectivity may matter in another. Neither becomes a sound decision merely because it appears on a list of future trends.
Ask beyond the executive suite
For corporate tenants looking for space, Michael Bull said his team wanted to speak with leaders and the chief financial officer. They also asked to talk with a wider group of employees. People doing the daily work might share operating problems with an outside advisor that they had not raised with senior leadership.
Employee input does not turn every preference into project scope. It gives the owner another source of information before choices about space, location, and nearby amenities become difficult to change. The point is to learn how the business operates, not to collect opinions without a decision attached.
Flexibility needs people willing to pay for it
Michael Bull used parking design to show the cost behind adaptability. He described parking decks designed for conversion to another use if travel patterns changed. That option cost more at the beginning, so investors, lenders, tenants, and developers needed to understand why it was being preserved.
He also named flexibility in space, furniture, and lease terms as part of the 2017 corporate real estate conversation. The useful distinction is between flexibility tied to a plausible operating need and flexibility purchased because the future feels uncertain. An option earns its place when the people funding and using it can explain the decision it protects.
Take one property decision for a walk
Choose one property decision already under discussion and follow the route Michael described. Put the relevant asset facts beside the experience of the people who use the space. If connectivity is part of the decision, check the actual path from arrival to the work area. Then bring the findings to an advisor who specializes in that type of property and decision.
This is not another trend survey. It is a way to decide whether a trend survives contact with the building. The strongest commercial real estate choice is the one the property facts, user experience, and business purpose can support together.
