In the corporate world, the address matters more than the ornament. A survey of senior executives shows that a company’s reputation depends more on the location of its headquarters than on the interior design of its offices. That logic holds in Mexico, where SiiLA figures show that one out of every ten tenants maintains a simultaneous presence in the country’s three largest office markets—Mexico City, Guadalajara, and Monterrey.

Behind that concentration, it’s not just corporate prestige at play: in certain sectors, office location is also a direct business driver. Banks, investment funds, and marketing agencies rely on their address as much for reputation as for attracting clients. By contrast, for manufacturing or energy companies, the effect is marginal: their performance is defined by the supply chain.

In Mexico, SiiLA’s data bears this out. Real estate, finance, and insurance tenants hold the highest number of properties per company—up to four locations on average—well above industrial sectors like manufacturing, energy, or agribusiness, where the pattern is to operate with one or two sites. The contrast shows that for capital and service players, the address is a reputational and commercial asset, whereas for production-oriented firms, it plays a secondary role, providing more administrative support than a business engine.

Here’s the value of the finding: understanding which sectors turn location into symbolic capital and which view it only as an operating cost explains why not all spaces hold up equally in terms of price and demand during periods of uncertainty. Thus, during the worst year of the pandemic, sectors intensive in symbolic capital (FIRE and business services) released fewer square meters on average per move than several production sectors (manufacturing, consumer, utilities), evidence that in offices, symbolic geography sustains resilience as much as economic fundamentals.