Life cycle analysis (LCA) is a crucial instrument in the construction industry, offering a comprehensive evaluation of the environmental impacts at every stage of a building’s lifecycle. Recently introduced into Finnish construction legislation, this approach has not yet been thoroughly researched in relation to the Finnish Ministry of the Environment (FMoE) assessment method, nor have new calculation techniques been proposed to address its shortcomings. Furthermore, Finnish research on environmental impact assessment has predominantly focused on residential buildings, leaving a scarcity of studies on office buildings. This paper aims to fill these gaps in the literature, considering LCA, carbon footprint, and carbon handprint assessment tools of concrete-, timber-, and steel-framed cases. Our results are as follows: (1) the majority of the carbon footprint of a concrete-framed case originated from emissions associated with energy use and second largest share of total emissions occurred during the product phase of the building and within this phase, the building services contribute the most to product-related emissions; (2) a significant portion of these emissions came from facades and floor structures; (3) the carbon footprint of the timber-framed option was significantly lower than that of its concrete- and steel-framed counterparts; (4) steel-framed option’s carbon footprint was nearly equivalent to that of the concrete-framed option; (5) estimated carbon handprint of the timber-framed option was considerably higher than that of the concrete- and steel-framed options, primarily due to the carbon storage capacity of the timber components; (6) steel-framed option’s carbon handprint surpassed that of the concrete-framed option because of the high recycling and reuse potential of steel components; (7) the LCA method used by FMoE has some unclear areas. These ambiguities include how to assess the impacts of carbonation in cement-based products and the replacement of building components.