Brown's current guidelines for support spaces like kitchens, wellness rooms, and storage are general. **Action:** Adopt a detailed, quantitative approach similar to UPenn's. Specify target square footages and quantity ratios (e.g., SF per 100 work seats) to ensure consistency, improve budgeting accuracy, and optimize the allocation of these critical shared amenities.

Relying primarily on traditional conference rooms may not support modern, flexible work styles. **Action:** Formally introduce a wider "palette of spaces" into the guidelines. This should include dedicated "Focus Spaces" (40-60 SF) for quiet work and "Open Collaboration" areas (100+ SF) for informal brainstorming, catering to diverse needs and reducing pressure on formal meeting rooms.

Without continuous monitoring, identifying underutilized space is reactive. **Action:** Develop a system for tracking space utilization using data from room reservation systems, sensors, or regular audits. Establish a formal process for periodic reassessment of all assigned spaces to enable proactive, data-driven reallocation of resources.

A strict rank-based system can lead to underused private offices. **Action:** While maintaining competitive allocations for senior roles, incorporate criteria like "proportion of time working from an office" (from Stanford) and "majority functional need" (from Yale) for other roles. This ensures valuable private space is allocated where most needed, supported by hoteling spaces with necessary infrastructure like lockers.

The needs of a lab-intensive science department differ greatly from an office-intensive humanities department. **Action:** Create distinct guideline addendums for different types of departments. For sciences, specify lab bench space and write-up areas. For humanities, focus more on quiet zones and diverse collaborative spaces. This tailored approach will maximize functional efficiency across campus.