Search results

This study investigates the role of collaborative spaces as organizational support for internal innovation through cross-functional teams and for open innovation with external stakeholders. In particular, the study focuses on collaborative spaces as tools for multiplex (i.e., simultaneous internal and external boundary management in innovation projects).

The authors conducted a qualitative study in a multi-divisional organization that set up in its headquarters a collaborative space for collaborative product development. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews and participant observations.

Findings highlight that the relation between expectations and experiences about the collaborative space impact on employees' ability to perform boundary work inside and outside the organization. In addition to the collaborative space's affording role for expectations about hands-on collaborative innovation (space as laboratory), the study also highlights a set of collaboration constraints. These latter are generated by perceived boundary configurations (i.e. degree of boundary permeability and infrastructure in internal and external collaborations) and by discrepancies between expectations (space as laboratory) and actual collaboration experiences in the space (i.e. space as maze, cloister, showcase and silo). We show that space-generated constraints slow down internal and external boundary work for innovation and generate a trade-off between them.

Using the process-based perspective of boundary work, the paper connects studies on cross-functional teaming and open innovation through the concept of “multiplex boundary work.” It also contributes to the literature on boundary work by showing the challenges of using collaborative spaces as organizational support tools for multiplex boundary spanning.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether virtual space can be used to alleviate physical space constraints for group collaboration in an urban academic library environment. Specifically, this paper looks to uncover whether library users will turn to library‐provided virtual space when there is a scarcity of physical space.

This project discusses the design of the physical and virtual environment, and then measures the use of this environment quantitatively over a 47‐month period (2005‐2009).

Results indicate that physical spaces for group collaboration are in very high demand, whereas virtual ones are not. A scarcity of physical collaboration spaces does not lead users to library‐provided virtual space, but rather to work around the scarcity in the physical world.

The paper highlights the value of the library as a gathering place and the ways in which virtual collaboration space cannot easily take the place of physical collaboration space.

The purpose of this paper is to define coworking in juxtaposition to open, collaborative workspaces that have already long existed at companies and universities and to establish that this model of coworking has taken off in the business world, but has not taken off at education institutions.

The literature and existing resources on flexible work arrangement in academic settings are reviewed to explore the possible applications of a coworking model to higher education. Because of minimal empirical research on the topic, the paper opens up a much-needed discussion on coworking in a scholarly context and its potential benefits for institutions of higher education.

Establishing scholarly coworking units on a broader scale could enhance the development of a cross-regional dimension in education by encouraging mobility of both students and scholars and promote cooperation among educational institutions. The implementation of coworking spaces for universities has occurred at a much lower rate than business-oriented coworking spaces, and several potential reasons for this asymmetry are considered.

While establishing an on- or off-campus coworking environment for graduate and postgraduate pupils is explored to some extent, the possibility and beneficial role of a scholarly coworking space model are poorly understood and under-studied. This conceptual paper provides a framework for applying the coworking model to scholarly settings, with the potential to facilitate more open and inclusive scientific collaboration, research and education, addressing one of the central problems of geographic and institutional barriers to scholarship.

Supporting entrepreneurship and innovation is a goal for many college campuses. How can your library support those goals? Should you add a makerspace to your library? Or make other costly changes? Library spaces help students think at a higher level, to be creative, innovative, and entrepreneurial. It is rare to have a dedicated spot on campus for thinking. Our libraries are those spaces. Spaces that strongly foster entrepreneurial thinking range from quiet reflective spaces to noisy collaborative spaces. You do not need to do an elaborate study to understand your library spaces. To assess your library spaces as they relate to innovative and entrepreneurial thinking, first take an inventory of your existing library spaces. By examining your existing spaces and the activities in them, you see which of the six essential types of spaces you have and which ones you lack. Once you have done a space assessment, you can see how you can readily add any of the six spaces you lack. A case study of an academic library’s space inventory, assessment, and recommendations helps illustrate the process. You use your space inventory for present and future space planning and to communicate your worth to your stakeholders. Libraries can market unique spaces to students (e.g. “Here are spaces to help you think creatively”), support Creative Campus initiatives, and promote library spaces which foster entrepreneurial thinking.

The purpose of this paper is to study and analyse the authorship pattern, degree of collaboration, prepare list of prolific authors and test Lotka’s law of scientific productivity in spacecraft technology research.

Data are collected from the print versions of three journals in the field of spacecraft technology for the period 2001-2011. In all 154 volumes containing 1,907 papers have been analysed, and data are presented in different table headings.

Study reveals that 4,355 authors have contributed 1,907 papers. Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets has published maximum (1,487) number of papers during the study period. Multi-authored papers with 87.15 per cent of contributions have dominated this field of research. Journal of Spacecraft Technology has recorded highest degree of collaboration of 0.90. James M. Longuski has published 20 papers in Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets during the period 2001-2011. Lotka’s law of scientific productivity is tested and conforms only partially.

Study is restricted only for the period 2001-2011, and the data are collected from the print versions of three journals in the field of spacecraft technology research.

As far as space science and technology is concerned, there are not many bibliometric studies reported in the published literature. The present study will add value to the bibliometrics literature and provide publishing trends in spacecraft technology research.

Corporations balancing real estate holding (CRE) costs with recruitment-retention increasingly use activity-based flexible offices (AFO) to right-size environments for a mobile workforce. In this layout, workers have the option to select between a mix of unassigned workstations and alternative work settings (AWS) that support autonomy and mobility. The open layout encourages visibility and access to colleagues to enhance communication and collaboration. Nevertheless, studies into the effects of AFO environment attribute effects on worker needs and work outcome are sparse. Therefore, this study aims to focus on understanding how environmental features and psychological or job needs impact observed and perceived satisfaction, communication, collaboration and perceived productivity.

Data were collected in a case organization piloting an AFO before implementation across their CRE portfolio. A mixed-methods approach was used, including systematic observations, space syntax and surveys collecting information on the observed and perceived satisfaction, communication, collaboration and productivity.

Collaboration instances were higher in AWS, especially more visible and accessible open areas, supporting higher impromptu interactions and enhanced perceptions of productivity of team members and cross-team members. Privacy requirements linked to a greater demand for enclosed AWS. Team communication satisfaction depended on how easily teams were located. Almost half of the user teams clustered within workstation zones corresponding to territoriality needs. Job autonomy satisfaction depended on the availability of preferred workstation or AWS, enabling private, uninterrupted work that enhanced perceived productivity.

The case study findings indicated a correlation between the AFO environment and worker needs impacting workplace satisfaction, communication, collaboration and perceived productivity.

The findings form this case study indicated that a fit between the AFO environment and needs impacted workplace satisfaction, communication, collaboration and perceived productivity.

This chapter examines what teacher training has taught us through numerous studies and collaborations on how space can be used to develop a unique culture with students. The principal concept here is that classroom and education design has evolved. The pandemic has spotlighted the physical and virtual spaces we use while learning desired qualities of collaboration, communication, critical thinking and designing for creativity and belonging.

While the benefits of teacher collaboration are well documented, less is known about how emotions intersect with teachers’ collective work. Educational change is an emotional process, as reform efforts often involve shifts in teachers’ daily routines and professional identities. To better understand these complexities, the purpose of this paper is to investigate the emotional dimensions of teachers’ collaborative efforts to improve instruction.

Drawing on qualitative data, this longitudinal case study of one teacher team explores how teacher collaboration for instructional improvement intersects with emotional geographies. Data analyzed include three years of meeting observations and annual interviews with teachers and school leaders.

An analysis of data reveals how emotions both shaped and were shaped by teachers’ collaboration experiences. Varying beliefs about practice, expectations about collective work and identity (in this case, gender) impacted collaboration and subsequently opportunities for instructional improvement.

This study demonstrates how attending to the emotional aspects of teacher collaboration could serve as an effective strategy for bolstering capacity-building efforts. Findings highlight the interplay between emotional geographies, suggesting that common ground across one geography could potentially be built upon to close gaps across others.

This study provides a unique longitudinal exploration of the emotional dimensions of teachers’ collective work. The study also contributes to new knowledge about the ways in which teachers’ emotions and collaborative experiences intersect, including the interplay between emotional geographies.

This paper aims to review the concept and characteristics of coworking space, especially physical and operational characteristics and its objectives. The authors propose three models of coworking spaces, such as revenue, synergistic and customer contact, which organizations can use as a part of their corporate real estate strategies to build workplace flexibility and resiliency. This paper also addresses research gaps and a research agenda for future research.

This paper is a literature review of academic research focusing on coworking spaces. Because of the relatively limited existing academic literature on the topic, industry sources and white papers are also reviewed.

The authors categorized common threads of the existing literature on coworking spaces to emergence and growth trends, the types of users, the type of work to be completed in these spaces, characteristics of coworking spaces and the desired outcomes of coworking space models. Coworking spaces are expected to grow worldwide because of the increase in knowledge-based economy, the “digital nomad” lifestyle and mobile technologies, however, there is limited research on the relationship between spatial and operational characteristics of coworking spaces and users’ collaboration, social well-being and creativity. No research identified fully articulated the nuanced differences between the types of coworking spaces now found in the real estate ecosystem.

There is limited academic, empirical research focusing on coworking spaces. Thus, the search for literature itself is limited to a small number of papers. Although the authors extended the search to non-academic sources, the conclusion of this study is tentative because of the prematurity of the topic.

This paper urges the identification of research questions, considering the fast growth of coworking spaces and suggests future research directions based on newly proposed models. Industry practitioners, including building owners, managers, coworking space providers and corporate real estate practitioners, can consider using variations of coworking space concepts and characteristics, as they understand the importance of social needs and connectivity among users. By addressing the history of the coworking space as a concept and business model, and updating the types of models to include new coworking spaces, the authors provide further options to industry practitioners as to how to integrate coworking into their real estate.

To report on the process of redesigning a previously inaccessible room in the center of Emerson College’s Iwasaki Library for student use.

Library staff solicited input from multiple stakeholders through informal suggestion boards; conversations with staff and faculty; a 3-hour Participatory Design Workshop (PDW) with students, both undergraduates and graduates from multiple departments; and a month-long collaboration with a Business Studies class. A particular emphasis was placed on student input in the design process because of their status as the library’s primary users.

It was not possible to incorporate all of the students’ suggestions into the final design: particularly the requests for a homey, “living room” feel. However, through repeated inquiry, the library was able to find a match between some of the things students wanted and what the library could provide, namely a flexible event and study space.

Although libraries do not often have the opportunity to “expand” with their existing footprints, this chapter will be of use to other libraries planning an expansion or renovation. Library expansion is often dependent on well-documented need and student voices can have a high impact and, therefore, should play a critical role in the design process.