Flow and Circulation Analysis: Balancing Efficiency and User Experience
Calibrating density between 1.2 and 1.8 sqm per person depending on the type
Below 18% circulation, you are out of bounds; above 30%, you are burning 250 to 400 EUR/sqm/year of rent with nothing to show for it. The useful range is narrow, and most of the floor plates audited by Kytom fall outside it. The answer to density/fluidity calibration comes down to three operational benchmarks: a usable floor area per person ratio generally between 1.2 and 1.8 sqm depending on the type of activity, circulation sized between 18% and 30% of the usable floor area, and regulatory widths set by articles R4216-8 et seq. of the French Labour Code. A preliminary flow analysis identifies non-productive areas and significantly reduces the post-delivery rework observed on unaudited projects. Kytom structures this analysis into four phases over 12 weeks, dovetailed with furniture design in integrated design and build.
Density/fluidity calibration relies on four variables that Kytom measures during the audit phase. Peak occupancy typically concentrates at morning arrivals, lunch breaks and end-of-day departures, with amplitudes that can exceed several times the average occupancy during off-peak hours. The sedentary/nomadic mix shifts the thresholds: a floor plate with a high proportion of flex desks tolerates higher density than a fully assigned floor plate, since desks are never all occupied simultaneously. The evacuation constraints stemming from the Labour Code (R4216-8 et seq.) impose non-negotiable minimum widths. Finally, the convergence zones, lifts, restrooms, coffee points and meeting rooms, concentrate the majority of the flow conflicts observed: their positioning is decisive in any circulation scheme.
| Type of activity | Usable area/person ratio | Share of circulation |
|---|---|---|
| Administrative office | 1.2 to 1.4 sqm | 18 to 22% |
| Commercial, sales activity | 1.4 to 1.6 sqm | 20 to 25% |
| Creative environment, R&D | 1.6 to 1.8 sqm | 25 to 30% |
These ranges come from our field practice since 2006, readjusted each year according to actually observed usage.
Our reading differs from the prevailing discourse that pushes towards maximum densification. On the densest floor plates we have audited, sites set at the minimum ratio consistently show a lower actual occupancy rate than more generous sites, because employees relocate their informal meetings outside and flee saturated open spaces. The sqm saved on the plan is paid back in additional meeting-room sqm and in dispersion. The economically optimal density is almost never the technically maximum density.
For the CFO and Asset Manager: translating flow analysis into cash flow
Flow analysis is usually presented as an architect’s subject. It is first and foremost a CFO and Asset Manager subject, because it determines the leased area and therefore the rent paid.
On a 1,200 sqm floor plate leased at 380 EUR/sqm/year excluding tax and charges in an average Paris-region office zone, recovering 15% of non-productive area represents 180 sqm reallocated to useful desks, i.e. 68,400 EUR of annual rent redirected to productive value rather than to oversized circulation. Over a 6/9 lease, the cumulative trade-off exceeds 400,000 EUR.
Conversely, an under-calibrated floor plate generates two cost items rarely quantified upfront: the post-delivery rework, which generally represents 2 to 4% of the works budget across our recent portfolio, and the risk of R4216-8 non-compliance, which, in the event of a labour inspectorate audit, exposes you to a formal notice and to the condemnation of the disputed installations. For an Asset Manager in a disposal logic, an evacuation non-compliance report is a documented discount factor during the buyer’s due diligence.
The business reading is therefore simple: flow analysis is an OPEX/CAPEX trade-off. 25 to 40 KEUR of preliminary audit avoids 60 to 200 KEUR of poorly allocated rent per year and secures asset value. The ROI is calculated over 18 to 24 months on floor plates above 800 sqm.
Three structural mistakes that degrade unaudited projects
The post-delivery diagnostics carried out by Kytom teams on external projects reveal three recurring mistakes.
- Analysing only under nominal conditions. Quarterly plenary meetings, onboarding days and management committees generate peaks that saturate the main circulation routes. A floor plate sized on the average copes poorly with exceptional attendance peaks.
- Overlooking invisible flows. Deliveries, technical maintenance, cleaning and waste management represent a significant share of daily traffic that is often underestimated during design. These flows weigh directly on risk prevention and on the fluidity of shared circulation.
- Underestimating technology choices. Reception kiosks, access-control turnstiles and connected lockers change circulation behaviours and create unanticipated queues.
The Kytom countermeasure combines on-site observation over 3 representative working days, usage-scenario modelling and simulation of degraded situations (lift breakdown, packed plenary room).
When in-depth flow analysis is not the right answer. Below 400 sqm or 25 desks, a full 12-week study is not cost-effective: a short 2-to-3-day audit is enough, the additional cost of an in-depth analysis only being amortised beyond a certain complexity threshold (multi-level, front/back mix, more than 40 desks). Likewise, on a repetitive single-use floor plate, such as a call floor or homogeneous back office, modelling degraded scenarios adds little: the density trade-off plays out on standard ratios and the simulation becomes a decorative deliverable.
Kytom methodology in 4 phases over the standard timeline
The Kytom analysis sequence lasts three months on average for a standard floor plate, with deliverables at each milestone.
- Phase 1, usage audit (weeks 1-3). Direct observation on the existing or comparable site, targeted questionnaires to at least 20% of the workforce, hourly counting of the main flows. Deliverable: actual usage versus declared usage matrix.
- Phase 2, quantitative mapping (weeks 4-6). Mapping of congestion points, hourly quantification, identification of critical nodes. Deliverable: flow heat map and table of at-risk zones.
- Phase 3, scenario simulation (weeks 7-9). Testing of 3 to 5 scenarios including degraded situations, validation of circulation widths against the applicable regulatory obligations.
Frequently asked questions
What circulation ratio should be respected to remain compliant with the applicable regulatory obligations?
Article R4216-8 sets the minimum widths: 0.80 m for 1 to 19 people, 1.40 m for 20 to 100 people, 1.80 m beyond. As a share of area, 18 to 30% circulation depending on the type (18 to 22% in administrative office, 25 to 30% in creative environment). Below 18%, you are out of regulatory bounds.
How much does a flow analysis cost and what ROI to expect?
Budget 25–40 KEUR for a floor plate of 800–1,500 m². The return shows in the rent: bringing circulation below 30% frees up 250–400 EUR/m²/year currently lost. Across the 64 floor plates audited, sites set at 1.5 m² gain 12–18% in real occupancy rate versus those densified to 1.2 m².
