Occupancy tracking sounds like one problem and is four, and the four measure genuinely different populations. A manual count measures desks in use. Badge data measures people who entered a building. Booking records measure people who book. Sensors measure whatever the sensor is pointed at, which is usually a desk or a doorway. Choosing between them is not a technology decision so much as a decision about which question you are answering, and getting that backwards produces a confident number about the wrong thing. This page sets out what each method counts, what it costs, and which one to start with.
The manual count: an occupancy tracker that is free and usually skipped
Somebody walks the floor at fixed times, twice or three times a day, for a fortnight, and records desks occupied against desks provided. It costs attention rather than money, it produces the figure everything else is checked against, and it is the only method that requires no procurement, no installation and no privacy conversation. Nearly every estate that buys sensors first would have got a usable answer this way in a fortnight, and would then have known whether the sensors were worth it. Start here, then decide.
Badge data, booking data, and who they actually count
Badge or access data counts entries to a building, which is a good proxy for attendance and a poor one for desk use: a person in a meeting all day badges in once and uses no desk. Booking data counts bookers, which is a self-selected population and systematically over-states use in an estate where booking is optional and under-states it where people turn up without booking. Both are free if you already have the systems, and both are worth reading as a cross-check rather than as the answer.
Occupancy sensors for offices, and what they are actually good for
Desk and room sensors count continuously and are the only method that tells you about a specific desk at a specific hour. That resolution is what they are worth paying for: not the headline utilization figure, which a fortnight of counting gives you, but the pattern underneath it, which is what a layout change is designed against. They cost real money per desk, they need a privacy conversation with the people whose desks they are on, and they answer a question most estates have not yet earned the right to ask because they have not worked the headline figure.
Turning any occupancy tracking system into the figure that decides something
All four methods end in the same place: occupied against provided, and what the gap costs. On the utilization sheet here, 180 desks with 108 occupied is 60% utilization and 72 empty desks, $2,333 per desk provided against $3,889 per desk used, $168,000 of a $420,000 cost carried by empty desks, and 5,600 of 14,000 square feet releasable. Whichever way you measured it, that is the arithmetic that turns a reading into a decision, and it is worth doing before you commit to the more expensive way of reading.
Questions people ask about occupancy tracking
What is the cheapest way to measure occupancy?
A manual count at fixed times over a fortnight. It costs somebody's attention twice a day, needs no procurement or installation, and produces a figure good enough to decide whether continuous measurement is worth paying for. It is also the check that every other method should be compared against.
Do occupancy sensors measure the same thing as badge data?
No. Sensors measure a desk or a doorway; badge data measures entries to a building. A person in meetings all day badges in and uses no desk, so badge data over-states desk use, while booking data measures the people who book rather than the people who come in. Read them as cross-checks, not as one number.
When are workplace occupancy sensors worth it?
When you already know your headline utilization and need the pattern underneath it, usually to design a layout change rather than to size a lease. They cost real money per desk and require a conversation with the people whose desks they sit on, and both are easier to justify once a fortnight of counting has produced a number worth investigating.
What does occupancy planning actually decide?
How much space to hold and how to lay it out, which are two decisions with two different inputs. The average utilization sizes the estate; the peak decides the layout. Record both, because an estate cut to its average will fail one day a week and the objection will arrive in the room where the decision is made.
Are space utilization sensors worth it for a first figure?
Rarely. A manual count over a fortnight produces the headline utilization figure; sensors earn their cost by showing a specific desk at a specific hour, usually to design a layout change.
What does continuous occupancy monitoring ask of the office?
Real money per desk and a conversation with the people whose desks the sensors sit on. Both are easier to justify once a fortnight of counting has produced a number worth investigating.