Search results

Personalization and the non‐territorial office seem to be contradicting concepts. It is generally accepted that it is not possible to personalize workplaces in environments where no fixed individual workplaces are allocated. However, people seem to have a human need of personalization. Personalization can be done in different ways and for different reasons. Based on a literature review and a qualitative case study at a Dutch governmental organization, the purpose of this paper is to explain why and how personalization occurs in environments where non‐territorial office concepts are introduced.

Qualitative interpretative research design, in which literature study, document analysis, observations and talking, and interviews are combined, to understand the actor's perspective and behavior in the non‐territorial office of organization X.

Conclusions of the study indicate personalization to be a relevant factor for consideration when implementing a non‐territorial office design: when objects are prohibited to personalize your work environment, people seek several additional ways to make the environment familiar and comfortable for them and to mark their identity in the organization.

Access to organization X went via top management, which makes it possible that the position of the independent researcher was not clear to people. The research took place in three months, but not full time. Missing important behaviors is amongst possible consequences for the findings. Since this is one case study, further research is recommended.

Balanced decisions and rules between organizational policy and human needs help the acceptance of own workplace lost in non‐territorial offices.

Personalization is a well‐researched subject; as applied in non‐territorial offices, it is not well researched yet. This research paper suggests that aspects of emotion and psychological need should be considered as well in the development of a non‐territorial office.

Many organisations have changed to new ways of working, steered or followed up by design interventions and sharing of activity related workplaces. Expectations have been high. Innovative offices should lead to more efficient use of space and other facilities; greater job satisfaction; the projection of a positive image to clients; an improved performance of the organisation and its staff; and reduced costs. Have innovations in the working environment fulfilled these high expectations? Are the new offices really more efficient and more pleasant to work in? Or will constant changing of the workplace reduce satisfaction and productivity? What are the ‘pros’ and ‘cons’ of teleworking? Are the extra costs of nice ergonomic furniture, high‐tech information and communication technology (ICT) and image‐boosting gadgets counterbalanced by the expected profits in higher productivity and more efficient use of space? Evaluative research results show a mixed picture. Besides the considerable satisfaction with the attractive design and the improved opportunities to interact, there are many complaints about problems in concentrating on work. Psychological mechanisms, such as the need for status, privacy and individual territory, do not necessarily hinder ‘flexi‐working’, but only when the new situation provides considerable added value. Teleworking offers more freedom of choice, but there are attendant risks.

The office is considered as a strategic resource that can support knowledge‐based organisations to gain competitive advantage and operational efficiency. Although the modern scholar emphasises the role of user involvement in workplace design and management, there is little evidence showing how it can be linked to occupancy cost performance. The purpose of this paper is to investigate benefits of a user‐centric workplace practice by focusing on working time and space utilisation practice of office users.

A scenario‐based approach was designed to analyse office occupancy cost performance. A questionnaire survey was conducted from a number of UK‐based offices to create three workspace utilisation scenarios, namely, existing, property‐centric and user‐centric. Key comparison criteria include potential areas of savings, potential total cost savings and cost saving per person.

It was found that a user‐centric approach reflects an opportunity to save annual occupancy costs in terms of total costs and cost per person where users indicated how they utilised working time and space. In return, the organisations can gain more productivity from office users who are likely to perform better when they can work in the preferred workplace practice.

By adopting this approach, organisations can understand the occupancy characteristics of the offices from multi perspectives, leading to better management in office premises.

This paper is concerned with the analysis of how to achieve higher office efficiency by focusing on office user's working time and space utilisation practice.

The study aims to provide insight on the relationship between a newly implemented workplace concept, its intentions, the actual use and ultimately its ability to function as a strategic tool. By addressing the intended and unintended consequences of planned spatial arrangements, the interest lies in studying underlying factors affecting the concepts’ ability to function as a strategic tool.

The case study builds on semi-structured interviews and observational studies from a larger Norwegian organisation that recently implemented an activity-based workplace concept. Concept descriptions and architectural drawings have also been important sources to study how the concept was interpreted and used by different groups.

Taking a socio-material perspective, the findings illustrate that spatial aspects and different concept structures, together with issues such as employee mobility and time spent in the office, different work processes, management style and departmental cultures influenced the way the activity-based workplace concept was perceived and taken into use.

The findings indicate that social and cultural aspects may play a more significant role in the adaptation process than previously emphasised. The article further provides knowledge on how organisations, in planning and implementation of such concepts, may address the right issues to overcome challenges and achieve the higher strategic ends.

This paper aims to examine how the existing organisational culture of organisations changed with the introduction of activity-based working (ABW) office layouts from the employees’ perspectives.

A questionnaire was used to measure the influence of introducing ABW. The study focused on three different industry sectors in Australia – financial, IT and government – and one organisation from each sector who had introduced ABW during the period of 2012–2019 was selected. The Competing Value Framework was used to measure the dimensions of organisational culture. A paired sample test was used to measure the changes in employees’ perceptions after the layout changes.

Findings identify that the nature of workplace designs has a considerable impact on an organisation’s corporate culture which can be used to leverage and change its culture. However, some noticeable discrepancy between the perceptions of public and private sector employees was identified, where public sector employees felt that standardised procedures still governed their actions even in ABW layouts.

This research highlights that workplace designs directly influence culture by supporting the engagement, motivation and behaviours of the employees. It emphasises the importance of in-depth examination of the behavioural and attitudinal characteristics of employees to obtain a better understanding of how they interact in ABW layouts. Such an analysis provides the context for a more inclusive understanding of the operation of modern office layouts.

This paper aims to identify the employee characteristics which are most strongly associated with perceived requirements for different aspects of the workplace environment.

A questionnaire was completed by 364 employees from a large private-sector organisation. Respondents were surveyed on different work-related, personality and demographic characteristics. They then completed a series of items measuring perceived requirements for four aspects of the workplace environment (workspace segregation, workspace territoriality, individual environmental control and aesthetic quality). Associations between employee characteristics and perceived workplace requirements were explored using multiple regression analyses.

Numerous significant associations emerged. For example, the requirement for more segregated workspaces was associated with higher susceptibility to distraction, and the requirement for higher workspace territoriality was associated with less positive perceptions regarding the impact of flexible working on work effectiveness.

The individual difference factors which moderate satisfaction with the workplace environment have received relatively little attention in past research. The present study addresses this knowledge gap by including a wider range of employee characteristics and comprehensively investigating which of these most strongly predict differences in perceived requirements for the workplace.

Technology, mergers and acquisitions, changing workforce demographics, constantly shifting organizational strategies, new ways of working, global competition – all of these factors generate chronic organizational uncertainty. This article focuses on the nature of integrated portfolio strategies (IPS) which companies in North America and Europe have adopted to manage organizational uncertainty. It draws on the developing work on the science of complexity and adaptive strategies to explore issues of standardization and customization, supply chain relationships, knowledge and workplace options. It argues that uncertainty is best met with a diverse set of options that continually emerge and disappear over time in response to changing business conditions.

The purpose of this study is to pilot test the effectiveness of the experience sampling approach for measuring employee satisfaction with the workplace environment. Additionally, the authors also aimed to explore, which aspects of environmental comfort have the strongest impact on momentary well-being and productivity.

In total, 15 knowledge workers in an open-plan office environment were sent a brief survey (measuring environmental comfort, momentary well-being and perceived productivity) each day over an 11-day study period and provided 78 individual survey responses in total.

All but one of the measures on the survey had low test-retest reliability, indicating that employees’ experiences of environmental comfort varied significantly each time they completed the survey. Additionally, higher environmental comfort was associated with improved well-being and productivity.

The results suggest that an experience sampling approach to the workplace occupant survey is justified to better capture the temporal variability in experiences of environmental comfort. The results also suggest that improving environmental comfort, particularly by reducing the level of distractions, will enable employees to work more productively.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first field study which has attempted to directly address limitations in traditional occupant surveys by using an experience sampling approach rather than a one-time-only questionnaire.