The Overall Model For Success

The constructs in the conceptual model above are interrelated, with community being at the core of the coliving product. During my research, I found that Zoku capitalises on their human capital (i.e. having staff with excellent soft skills), Quarters capitalizes on their technological resources and Greystar on their experience and scale. Regardless of the operator, the community starts by creating a homely atmosphere for residents, to which spatial design substantially contributes. Carefully designing and decorating spaces around human behaviour substantially influences the extent to which people feel comfortable, safe and at home. Sustainability is important in the sense that it is close to the residents’ hearts and can therefore make or break the coliving operator’s reputation. As such, successfully applying sustainable practices is a tool to make residents identify with the coliving product, creating loyalty in turn.

Past academic literature on cohousing and coliving fails to distinguish the different role community plays among different types of coliving operators.

‍

‍

My research, however, reveals that residential coliving operators aim to build one community per property, of which the look and feel differs per project. Destinational operators, on the other hand, strive to build one global community which should be equally alive throughout all their properties in their global portfolios. This would allow people to change cities but stay in the same community. To do this effectively, a proper technological infrastructure is required. Many operators are already aware that technology influences sustainability, for instance through smart buildings and sensors.

However, my research reveals that technology influences community as well, as technology allows coliving operators to build a central platform to create one global, connected community. That is, technology allows destinational coliving operators to create a community where individuals would feel connected

to each other even when they are longer living in the same space. Thus, technology contributes to value creation as it can enable (virtual) human-to-human contact in the community, as well as allowing operators to become greener.

The degree to which the three operators focus on those aspects differs per operator. To illustrate this, I created the table below, that summarises how the different types of coliving operators go about the main constructs identified in the elaborated conceptual model. Where past academic research used coliving as an umbrella term to describe both residential as well as destination coliving, I believe it is fundamental to specify which type of coliving is being addressed and to highlight their individual differences regarding certain practices, in order to avoid comparing apples with oranges.

‍

Socially Distant Coliving?

Considering that community provides the foundation of coliving, a common concern is that coliving will lose its value as social distancing continues. Naturally, there are many insecurities for operators. For instance, it is more difficult to fill up rooms, as it is unknown when travel will pick up again, and projects under construction are being re-evaluated and slowed down. However, I argue that coliving as a movement is likely to persist.

Firstly, community will not diminish, instead, the role of community might simply change. Over the past months, the function of the community has become primarily to make people feel safe, comfortable and listened to, rather than providing them with a social and professional network. In other words, operators were forced to take a step back and focus on residents’ primary instead of secondary needs.

Secondly, spending much time alone also makes people long for human connection more than before. As identified by many, loneliness is a driver of coliving. This implies that if people feel lonelier due to physical distancing, they will be more inclined to participate in coliving. Although people’s incomes might change, their mindsets and need for comfortable housing and meaningful connection will not.

Thirdly, whilst a lot of destinational coliving operators (i.e. Zoku or Sun and Co.) are currently suffering from lower demand than usual and/or temporary closure, my research revealed that the COVID-19 is expected to continue boosting remote working styles, allowing for more working travellers once travel restrictions are lifted. In turn, this could increase future demand for both destinational and residential coliving.

Fourthly, all operators studied proudly highlighted the advantages their products have over hotels, who are currently experiencing dreadful occupancies, whereas the occupancy drop for coliving operators has so far been manageable. This could signify an opportunity for traditional hotel companies to integrate a coliving product into their business models.

‍

‍

Intergenerational Coliving

An interesting theme that emerged during my research was also the future potential of intergenerational coliving. Essentially, this entails having different generations living together under one roof in synergy, with a strong focus on combining millennials with baby boomers. For millennials it is more the experience and the mentorship that counts, whereas for the boomers it represents an attractive, social alternative to a nursing home. Especially with Western populations ageing and staying more active as they age, this hybrid model of coliving is commercially interesting. During various coliving meet-ups, it became apparent that coliving’s main purpose should be to shape communities around common needs and interests rather than age.

Blending Bricks is a future coliving property aimed at intergenerational coliving, and also Greystar is already catering to active seniors in the US. However, the Greystar model does not mix different target groups under one roof, but has separate buildings located close to each other. An obstacle seems to be that the difference in needs of millennials and boomers could cause friction and discomfort. Moreover, there are not many success stories yet. Consequently, processes regarding permits are unclear and valuation is difficult and complex. Thus, many operators are waiting for mainstream adoption of intergenerational coliving, so that the business case can be proven and banks and investors can be more easily convinced of the potential financial returns.

Is Coliving Here To Stay?

Overall, my findings show that the movement of coliving as a lifestyle is here to stay. Community represents the beating heart of coliving, regardless of the type of operator. However, crises might force operators to change what a valuable community entails, by carefully listening and responding to residents’ primary needs to feel comfortable, safe and connected. Despite the financial challenges operators are faced with, people’s desire for a headache-free lifestyle in the city will persist. Now that people are forced to stand still, reflect and reduce travel, it only becomes more clear how much they value travel, meaningful connections and a sense of belonging. It is up to the operators to respond to this in order to stay relevant.