Break it to make it : on the influences of break room design on employees’ performance

Break it to Make it

On the influences of break room design on employees’ performance

Dhr. dr. mr. M.J.O.M. (Maarten) de Haas

Universiteit van Amsterdam

Joske Schiereck, 10534083

Amsterdam Business School

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this research is to explore the influences of break area aesthetics and

design on employees’ happiness and thus performance. Semi-structured interviews with

employees are conducted at two universities in The Netherlands. It becomes clear that break

area design influences their feelings and whether or not they take (sufficient) breaks. This is

important for organizations because both positive feelings and taking breaks as such have a

positive influence on employees’ work performance. Further research into break area design,

performance and factors of influence on happiness and positive feelings is advised.

S T A T E M E N T O F O R I G I N A L I T Y

This document is written by Johanna Nellie (Joske) Schiereck who declares to take

full responsibility for the contents of this document.

I declare that the text and the work presented in this document are original and that no

sources other than those mentioned in the text and its references have been used in creating it.

The Faculty of Economics and Business is responsible solely for the supervision of

completion of the work, not for the contents.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract ... 2

Introduction ... 4

Literature Review... 6

Research Design... 9

Results ... 12

Perceptions ... 12

Valuations ... 14

Negative Influences on Feelings ... 16

Positive Influences on Feelings ... 17

Visual Framework ... 19

Discussion ... 21

Results ... 21

Implications for Theory ... 23

Implications for Management Practice ... 24

Limitations ... 25

Conclusion ... 26

References/Bibliography... 28

Appendices ... 32

Appendix I ... 32

Appendix II ... 33

Appendix III ... 36

Appendix IV... 38

Appendix V ... 40

Appendix VI... 42

Appendix VII ... 44

Appendix VIII ... 48

Appendix IX... 50

Appendix X ... 52

Appendix XI... 54

Appendix XII ... 56

Appendix XIII ... 59

Appendix XIV ... 60

Appendix XV ... 65

INTRODUCTION

During the past few decades, workplace design has grabbed the attention of interior

designers and executives of businesses and organizations (Fanger, 2011). The classic ‘cubicle

world’ where employees would be working under bright artificial light has made room for

open-plan so-called ‘urban jungles’. In these modern offices, interior designers have chosen

to use greenery, flexible seating and large windows allowing natural light into the building.

Although there has been extensive research conducted to illustrate the effects of workplace

design on performance of the business and its employees, the break room has not been

specifically subject to thorough research in this matter.

Coffee breaks, lunch breaks, toilet breaks, social and chatting breaks and water-cooler

breaks are all kinds of breaks to take one’s mind off work. It is known that taking breaks

enhances overall work performance and concentration and reduces stress (Bosch, Sonnentag

& Pinck, 2017). Besides this, it is important to distinguish the workplace area from the area

to take time off and spend leisure and recovery time; this distinction enhances work

performance and increases benefits from recovery time.

Both the theory of the importance of taking breaks and the separation of work and

surroundings involve and require the use of some sort of break area. It can be argued that the

quality of this area may optimize the benefits that can be achieved from it, so in this thesis I

will attempt to explore the influences of design, aesthetics and facilities of office break areas

on employee happiness and positive feelings and thus work performance.

First, a literature review will be conducted and described and past research about

work and break areas will be discussed. Peer-reviewed articles will be used to describe the

positive relationship between happiness and work performance.

Qualitative, explorative research will be conducted to analyse the potential effects of

break room and (open) kitchen aesthetics, facilities and design on employee happiness.

Semi-structured interviews will be used, where subjective perceptions like area (artificial) lighting,

windows, crowdedness and other aspects of the area will be discussed. I will ask the

interviewees to form an opinion about these matters and eventually they are asked to describe

their feelings associated with the different aspects of their break area. The research will be

conducted at the faculty of social and behavioural sciences of the University of Leiden and at

the faculty of math and computer sciences (‘EU Research Funding’ department) at the

Technical University of Delft.

Finally, a conclusion will be drawn and discussed leading to suggestions for break

room design and further research will be advised.

LITERATURE REVIEW

To put this thesis and research in perspective and to illustrate scientific and practical

importance of the subject, in this chapter, I will review existing literature and research on the

subject of office design, architecture and work performance. The main focus will be to

address the effects of the work environment on people’s happiness and performance, the

importance of using breaks during worktime and exploration of literature on break room

design. The relationship between personal happiness and individual work performance will

be defined as established in the literature.

Various researchers with different backgrounds have conducted research that shows

that workplace surroundings affect people’s attitudes (Morrow, McElroy & Scheibe, 2012).

Research on this subject has been done on a larger macro scale, for example on physical

structures and interior architecture (Galaskiewicz, 1984) as well as on a more personal and

smaller scale, for example desk placement (Morrow & McElroy, 1981) and seating

arrangements (Sommer, 1969). Thinking of the workplace as a more personal space where

people ‘live’ and carry out their day-to-day business instead of just work as much as they can

would be a great improvement to the working world (Duncan, 2015). It would make

employees feeling more positive, which would improve work performance and output quality

in the end. A case study conducted by the Eastern Michigan University agreeably found that

aesthetic and specific design objects in the workplace like flexible and ergonomic furniture

enhance employee productivity and can influence and increase collaboration and teamwork

among employees (Gutnick, 2007).

Presenting art in the workplace has also proven to be beneficial for various reasons.

Smiraglia (2014) found that visible art promotes social interactions, elicits emotional

responses, fosters learning and connects people on a personal level.

Different studies on the effects of plants and greenery in the classroom on student

performance (Daly, Burchett & Torpy, 2010), but also on the effects of plants in the office on

employee performance (Lohr, Pearson-Mims & Goodwin, 1996) show a positive

correlational relationship. These studies concluded that greenery in the room reduces feelings

of anxiety and stress and significantly reduces CO2 levels in the room. Dijkstra, Pieterse and

Pruyn (2008) studied the underlying reasons for these positive effects of greenery in the

room. They found that the presence of indoor plants led to a higher perceived attractiveness

of the room which, then, reduced the feeling of stress.

The conclusion of the former study is an important and interesting link, because it

shows that not the plant as such, but the perception that it is aesthetically attractive provides

the positive feeling of stress-reduction. Assessing this information we can conclude that, by

making a room (universally) aesthetically attractive, stress levels might be lowered. Then,

concluding the former literature, it appears that in general, office type and design does indeed

impact individual happiness and employee performance (Seddigh, 2015).

Now, I would like to elaborate on the specific choice of the break area to focus on in

this study. Without taking suitable breaks from work, employee productivity, mental

well-being and overall work performance decrease (Kohll, 2018). Taking regular breaks, however,

gives the brain some ‘downtime’ to process tasks. After a break, employees are more

efficient, more creative, make less mistakes and get more engaged with their task ahead

(Randolph, 2016) because in order to feel healthy and to perform well, it is essential to

recover from work (de Bloom, Kinnunen & Korpela, 2015).

Bosch, Sonnentag and Pinck (2017) found that during an effective lunch break,

relaxation, control and relatedness are experienced, which foster feeling replenished,

confident and engaged with (new) tasks after the break. They urge organizations to provide

employees with sufficient break area facilities and to offer an environment that facilitates

socializing and relaxation during lunch break. Their conclusion shows the importance of

break area design and facilities.

A large correlational study using the world database of happiness (Veenhoven, 2009)

assessing many different studies done exploring the effects of happiness on work

performance, shows that happiness is a valid predictor of individual work performance.

Observing the results of this research, it is not surprising to read that Howard and Gould

(2000) found a positive correlation between employee happiness and retention, absenteeism

and again: work performance. They even urge organizations to consider employee happiness

as a separate business goal, and propose the implementation of a separate project team which

ensures employee satisfaction. It is therefore, for the remainder of this thesis, acceptable to

assume that a higher level of employee happiness accounts for a higher level of employee

work performance.

In the preceding paragraphs I discussed the influence of surroundings on stress level

and the importance of taking breaks for employees in order to increase employee well-being

and thus performance. A research gap consists in linking these two factors – the influence of

break area aesthetics and design on employee happiness, and thus, performance. To my

knowledge, this question has not been researched to this day. Since taking breaks is an

important part of employee well-being and performance and surroundings can have great

influence on people’s mood and behaviour, importance of the design and aesthetics of the

break area should not be underestimated and should be researched.

RESEARCH DESIGN

In this chapter, the research design and methods of this thesis will be discussed. As

mentioned in the previous chapter, this field lacks previous research. Because this is an

unknown subject, the field needs to be explored to find usable results, draw a valid and

comprehensive conclusion and advise on further research possibilities. An explorative,

qualitative research design is therefore suitable. Semi-structured interviews are conducted

with employees of two similar organizations. In total, eleven employees are interviewed: five

TU Delft staff members and six staff members of the University of Leiden. The choice of

organizations is purposive as well as pragmatic: both my parents work at a university, though

a different one. These organizations are similar but the break area facilities are different,

which makes them comparable. The universities used for research are the University of

Leiden and the Technical University of Delft. The interviews are transcribed and coded using

Atlas Ti 8. The results will be discussed using general statements and specific quotes from

the interviews. Then, a conclusion will be drawn.

The first group of respondents are employees at the Technical University of Delft

(from here on TU Delft). These are employees working full time or at least 0,8 fte in the TU

Delft building at the Van der Burghweg 1 in Delft, at the ‘EU Research Funding’ department.

This building, consisting of ten floors, has been renovated in 2014-2015 and currently has a

large canteen/break area on the ground floor. The windows in this area are large and there is a

coffee and food shop. Seating facilities are provided. It is part of the ‘Bouwcampus’ (TU

Delft, n.d.) and the TU Delft ‘Green Village’ ("Welcome to the Green Village: Creating a

Sustainable Future Together", n.d.) is located next to it.

The second group of respondents are staff of the faculty of Social and Behavioural

Sciences at Leiden University. This faculty is located at the Pieter de la Court-building in

Leiden. This building was constructed in the 1960’s and served as the outpatient department

of the Academic Hospital Leiden until 1989. It is now used by the university for educational

purposes like lectures and seminars and it is the workplace of various professors and

researchers. The interviews are conducted with researchers and professors employed by the

University of Leiden. Inside the Pieter de la Court-building, a cafeteria is on the ground floor

of the building. This cafeteria is a classic-style university student cafeteria. On various floors

of the building, small rooms are equipped with a coffee machine. For this thesis and research

purpose, mainly the large ground floor cafeteria will be discussed in the interviews.

Interviewees are all staff members who work for the university on a 0,8 fte to full

time job contract. They are approached by me through e-mail either because they are

connected to my parents, or approached by me in person on location and asked to participate.

Most participants spend the majority (more than half of their lunch breaks) at the designated

break area.

Interviews were conducted in a quiet area where possible. The interviews were

purposely not conducted inside or in sight of the break area, to allow interviewees to imagine

their usual visits to the area, not disturbed by current perceptions. All interviews are

conducted in Dutch. The semi-structured interviews contain set-up questions, written down,

offering room for any side-path and interesting statements that come up during the interview.

The interview question guide can be found in appendix I.

Taking these interview questions as a ‘basic lead’, the interviews were a 10-15 minute

semi-informal conversation. To create an environment in which the research question can be

answered most effectively, I asked three kinds of questions. First, perceptions of the

interviewee are discussed. These perceptions concern observations of the interviewee about

the break room, as described by using their memory. These questions serve the purpose of

creating a visual imagery of a usual visit to the break area in interviewees’ minds. This will

help deliberating and answering the later questions comprehensively and extensively. Then,

interviewees were asked to evaluate the perceptions described before. Finally, personal

feelings associated with break area aspects and perceptions were discussed.

A qualitative analysis of the interviews was done to draw a conclusion. The

interviews are named L1 to L6 (for the employees of the University of Leiden) and D1 to D5

(for the employees of the TU Delft). The audio files are transcribed and coded using open,

axial and selective coding as used in Grounded Theory research. Full transcripts of the

interviews can be found in appendices II to XII. A list of all open and selective codes created

and used can be found in appendix XIII. To illustrate the break area situation at both

RESULTS

In this chapter, the results of the conducted research will be introduced and discussed.

The responses of the interviewees are presented using three main themes; perceptions,

valuation and influence on feelings. The perceptions of the interviewees are subjective

descriptions and personal experiences of (visits to) the area. In general, the answers to these

questions were indeed descriptions and most interviewees of the same university gave similar

answers, with some interesting exceptions. These descriptions are then evaluated by the

interviewees: their opinion on those and other aspects is asked and will be described below.

Finally, the influence of perceptions and opinions of the break area on their feelings and

happiness is analysed.

In the next sections, I will discuss the results based on statements made in the

interviews, using quotes where necessary. The results will be grouped using the

aforementioned themes. Using the assigned (open) codes and most important selective codes

from the transcripts, a visual framework is created to visualize the influence of break room

aesthetics, facilities and design on employee happiness.

PERCEPTIONS

During the first part of each interview, I asked the interviewees to describe the break

area design and typical situations like crowdedness and food and drinks supply during times

they usually spend in the area. They were asked different questions about lighting, windows,

space and facilities. As mentioned before, these questions were included to allow

interviewees to create a clear image of their usual visits to this area and to prepare for

questions about their opinion of these aspects (elaborated on in the next section: valuations).

The employees of the University of Leiden experienced a lot of noise in the break

area. The ceilings were described as low, which decreased the quality of the acoustics. Even

if the number of people in the area was small, the area quickly turned into a ‘kippenhok’ (hen

house, a Dutch term used to describe a noisy area where a lot of people are talking) (see

appendix X). Most of the interviewees experienced the area to be quite bright due to large

windows on the side, although there is one part of the seating area which is not close to the

windows (see appendix X). Two employees also described the windows, but found the area to

be dark because of a lack of direct light (see appendices VIII & IX). The seating area consists

of three parts with different chair and table designs (see appendix VII). Two interviewees

remarked several times a regularly alternating art exhibition on the walls (see appendices VII

& VIII). None of the other interviewees mentioned this, not even after asking them to think

about specific design objects in the area. Half of the interviewees spoke about the area being

spacious and well set-up, while the other half thought it was quite spacious, although not in

their personal experience due to the large number of chairs and tables. Two respondents

mentioned long lines at the cash register (see appendices VII & IX) and limited opening

times (see appendices VII & VIII). The lack of outside seating space was mentioned by

different employees (see appendices VII & VIII). Remarkable was that, when asked if there

were any plants in the area, one of the interviewees told me that there were indeed plants (see

appendix X), while two other employees said there were no plants (see appendices VII &

XII). While visiting the area, I could confirm there were no plants.

The employees of the TU Delft told me about a coffee and food corner and seating

area in the large hall of the building, on the ground floor. The windows were described as

large and light, with high ceilings, by every interviewee. Because of these high ceilings, the

acoustics are experienced as good (see appendices II & III) and the area is perceived as quiet

and serene, even when a lot of people are present and talking. Also, every employee

mentioned people sometimes use this space to (co-)work and that congresses as well as

meetings are held in the adjacent area, the ‘promenade’. Two employees (see appendices II &

III) explained that, when a congress is held, an external organization designs the ‘promenade’

area and this organization chooses objects like plants and other additional furnishing.

However, the promenade is, for the majority of the days, not in use for such purposes, which

makes the area quite large and empty (see appendix III).

VALUATION S

In this section the personal opinions of the interviewees regarding their perceptions

will be described. When the interviewees described their perceptions on different aspects of

the break area, as a follow-up question I asked them to form an opinion about it.

The lack of direct light at the University of Leiden was negatively evaluated by an

interviewee: ‘… in summer, when it’s really bright outside, the canteen actually is pretty

dark. The windows are quite big, but there’s not a lot of light exposure on the windows,

which makes the room dark. That is a shame…’ (see appendix VIII). Other employees

thought the area was quite bright and they found this to be positive: ‘… is the area light, or

bright? Yes, the canteen for sure, yes.’ (see appendix X) and in the fifth interview they said

‘No, it’s okay, it’s pretty bright, yes’ (see appendix XI). For all interviewees, a brighter,

lighter area was perceived to be positive. When asked about their opinion on the aesthetics of

the area, the first, fourth and sixth employee did not really have an opinion about it. The other

employees did not think the area was beautiful: ‘I don’t think the area is very… beautiful,

actually, no.’ (see appendix VIII), ‘Well, beautiful, I don’t find the area beautiful… Some

chairs and tables are really ugly. It’s not really a… ‘designed’ space, if I can put it that way…

I wouldn’t want to say that.’ (see appendix IX) and ‘No, not especially… beautiful, no. It’s

efficient.’ (see appendix XI). When asked about crowdedness, the interviewees of the

University of Leiden responded differently: ‘Well, I think that’s annoying, because my

hearing is not very good, or, I have only one working ear, and the acoustics are very bad here.

So it’s hard for me to understand people, the acoustics are not very intimate’, said the first

interviewee of Leiden (see appendix VII) when their opinion on crowdedness in the seating

area was asked. At this building, the break area is for students as well as employees. One of

the employees of Leiden (see appendix VIII) thought this enhanced the crowdedness, which

they liked. The interviewee in appendix IX described their opinion of the area over all as ‘it’s

pretty… empty. That is a shame. It’s not a very personal place, actually.’ Their colleague (see

appendix XII) thought the chairs looked as if they were plastic – although they were not

certain: ‘on the one hand, there is a lot of light, but a lot of plastic… chairs, or at least, that’s

what I imagine them to be… I can’t actually remember if they’re made of plastic…’ This was

an interesting remark, as the chairs are indeed not made of plastic, but they do have a plastic

look. This was meant as a negative aspect by the employee. The employee of the fifth

interview (see appendix XI) even stated ‘the area is pure… functional, it had to be functional,

that’s the only thing that mattered to them. There is no coziness at all, it is… kind of modern,

rigid… designed and furnished. And, everything is made for efficiency. Have a quick lunch

and get out, ha ha.’ Almost all employees (see appendices VII, VIII, X-XII) stated they got

their mind taken off work during lunch time because of the social aspect of taking a break

together with other colleagues, which they liked, but they mentioned that the design of the

area did not take their mind off work.

At the TU Delft, the employees perceived the aforementioned quietness as very

comfortable (see appendices II, III, IV), although one of them wished it would be busier

sometimes, as they now and then purposely use the area to work in a busier environment:

‘eh… I do go to the area purposely to look for a little crowdedness. If I would want to work

quietly, I would stay in the office,’ (see appendix VI). Almost all interviewees (see

appendices II, III, V-VI) thought the furnishing and design were aesthetically attractive and

one of them (see appendix VIII) described the following: ‘yes, what I really think is beautiful

– and that is also beautiful in this area, the seating, the furnishing, yes… that is… really,

really beautifully done, yes,’ and ‘yes, I really love that, light, brightness and beautiful

furniture’. The first interviewee (see appendix II) mentioned that the area makes them feel

like they are outside, because of the high windows and ceilings which makes the area feel

more spacious even though: ‘actually… the area, where the tables are placed, where you can

sit down… the area is not very spacious at all, actually,’ (see appendix II). This shows that

the visual aspects of the high windows and ceilings create a spacious feeling, even though the

actual area is not large. The fourth interviewee described their opinion of the area as being

‘homey, inviting, beautiful and light’ (see appendix X).

NEGATIVE INFLUENCES ON FEELINGS

In the last part of the interviews, I asked the employees to reflect on their feelings

associated with visiting the break area. In this section, I will discuss the perceptions that

made them experience less happiness, less joy and other negative feelings.

The first interviewee at the University of Leiden (see appendix VII) found the

atmosphere in the break area to be negatively influenced by the bad acoustics, which makes

them feel annoyed. The limited opening times and the long lines at the cash register make

them feel like there is not enough time to fully rest and put her mind on something else than

work. Their job motivation is currently positively influenced by taking a break, but not

necessarily by the design of the break area. Two other interviewees shared the same opinion

(see appendices VII-IX). They mentioned, however, that if the break are would have been

more beautifully designed, they would feel positively different (see appendix VII, VIII). The

second interviewee said that visiting the break area does not increase their job satisfaction,

because ‘it isn’t a particularly nice area to be in, no, I don’t think so,’ (see appendix VIII). An

idea for an aquarium came up to create a more personal and quiet area. The third interviewee

mentioned that separating the student break area from the employee break area would

influence her feelings positively because the area would be more quiet (see appendix IX).

The fifth employee, however, expressed much negativity towards the idea of separating the

break area because the fusion of students and employees gives them a feeling of togetherness

(see appendix XI).

At the TU Delft, I interviewed one person originally from Spain, who did not like

having lunch at the break area because of cultural differences associated with the social

aspect of eating lunch (see appendix IV). In respondent’s opinion this could be improved;

‘maybe a few more large tables, so people can sit together. The tables are small.’ Besides

that, they thought the food quality is very bad and therefore spend a lot of breaks at his desk

upstairs. Another interviewee (see appendix V) did not like to go to the break area either,

because they did not like taking breaks altogether. The break area and its design or furnishing

did not have an influence – they thought.

POSITIVE INFLUENCES ON FEELINGS

In this section, the aspects, design and furnishing of the break area that cause the

interviewees to experience positive feelings are discussed.

In Leiden, an interviewee thought the three variations of chair and table designs gave

her the feeling of freedom because they can choose in what kind of environment they want to

take their break (see appendix VII). The social aspect of taking a break together with

colleagues was for most of the employees in Leiden the main trigger to feel more positive

after going to the break area (see appendices VII, X-XII). The design of the break area did

not particularly have a positive influence on this. The third interviewee mentioned that, after

a break, they did feel like picking up work again (see appendix IX) – although they could not

distinguish if this was influenced specifically by the design of the break area.

The employees of the TU Delft were predominantly positive about their break area

and the influence on their feelings. The fourth interviewee (see appendix V) described the

area as a get-together with a homey atmosphere which they enjoyed. I had the following

conversation with the second interviewee (see appendix III): ‘Does it make you feel good?

Yes, for sure, it makes me feel good, ha. … and does it make you happy? Yes, definitely,

yes.’ The first interviewee told me that they felt they were in a completely different

environment (compared to their office upstairs) and that the atmosphere is nice and it makes

them feel good (see appendix II). They compared the break area with the break area in their

previous building: ‘Because… I’m comparing it to the canteen in the building that we used to

work, that area had lower ceilings and it was bigger. It made a darker impression… I like this

area better. This area is brighter.’

‘Does this area make you feel better than the canteen in the building where you previously

worked? Well, it’s not like that area made me totally depressed and now I’m really happy,

but… I like it, it’s a plus, that’s for sure. It’s a positive aspect, compared to where we were

before. Yes. Does it make you happy? Yes, it contributes to my feeling good’ (see appendix

II). One of the employees told me about a coffee corner down the street where they go to take

a break sometimes, which, at first, they compared as being superior to their break area. ‘What

if the area downstairs would have been as nice and beautiful as the coffee corner? Yes, I

would go there more often. I really like the furnishing and design there, and yes, it makes me

want to sit there. Does it make you feel better than the area downstairs does? Yes. Yes.’

They also mentioned the following: ‘Well, I think, the moment that I decide to leave… to

leave my desk, to go downstairs for coffee or for lunch, that choice is influenced by me

feeling better downstairs than behind my desk. And if downstairs were only plastic white

chairs, nothing nice… it would hold me back and it would make me not want to go there … I

would only use it to buy some food. Does it make you feel good, right now, the design, the

furnishing? Yes, it makes me feel pretty good. Could it make you feel better? Yes, that could

definitely be more, I could feel better, but I could definitely feel worse, as well… yes’ (see

appendix VI). They clearly express the importance of the aesthetics and atmosphere of the

area, which can contribute negatively and positively to their feelings and to the decision to

take a break altogether.

VISUAL FRAMEWORK

Using transcriptions of the interviews, open codes were created and categorized using

selective coding. Figure I shows which three selective codes, accompanied by their most

important open codes, influence employee happiness. We have seen that the brightness of the

break area had a positive influence on the interviewees. They talked about the windows in the

area, the direct sunlight and the artificial lighting and about (the lack of) a space to sit

outside. Furthermore, we see that the overall atmosphere of the area had an influence on the

feelings of the employees. Bad acoustics is a trigger for a negative feeling and intimacy

influenced them positively. The extent to which the area made them get distracted from work

for a moment and ‘… have the feeling I’m in a completely different environment’ (see

appendix II) also contributes to their positive feeling. Finally, the aesthetics of the area also

have a positive influence on employees’ feelings. The design of the area and furnishing

influenced them positively when they liked the design and thought it was beautiful. On the

contrary, it influenced them negatively when they the design did not appeal to them. In

general, a spacious and (what is experienced as) a large area with plants and some form of art

had a positive influence on the employees’ feelings.

FIGURE I

happiness

DISCUSSION

In this chapter, the results of this study will be discussed, linking them to the existing

literature. Thereafter, implications for theory and management will be discussed, followed by

the limitations of this study and research design. Then, a conclusion will be drawn.

RESULTS

The results of my study are in agreement with various literature discussed in the

‘literature review’. All of the studied literature, however, concentrated on the design and

surroundings of a workplace, desk or entire office (Morrow, McElroy & Scheibe, 2012 and

Gutnick, 2007). Duncan (2015) stated that the workplace should not be treated as a purely

product- and performance-enhancing place where output is maximized, but rather as a more

personal place. I found that the surroundings of the break area specifically also influence

employees’ attitudes, feelings and work performance. When the area is created with attention

to a personal atmosphere, this can greatly improve employees’ happiness and, in the end,

performance. In contrast, when the break area is created solely to feed employees and to

shorten break times which lengthens work times, employees do not feel as good after taking a

break as when there has been attention to personal detail when creating and furnishing the

area.

From this study I learned that when furniture and other details in the break room are

experienced as beautiful by employees, they cause positive feelings. This result is in line with

the studied literature on plants and greenery (Daly, Burchett & Torpy, 2010). Because of the

attractiveness of the plants, employees felt increasingly positive. This also holds for other

objects and furniture – as long as it is experienced as beautiful, it will induce a positive

feeling.

As discussed in the reviewed literature, to enhance work performance, job satisfaction

and concentration and to reduce stress, it is important to take breaks during work (Bosch,

Sonnentag & Pinck, 2017). Besides that, it is important to distinguish the work area from the

area to take time off work. I can conclude that, when the break area is perceived to be

aesthetically beautiful, has a nice atmosphere and brightness, it is more likely for an

employee to take a break in the designated break area. This is important because if the

employee does not take a break at all, the benefits from taking a break will not be exploited.

Besides that, when employees don’t take a break but stay at their desk, the benefits of taking

a break in a different environment will not be realised. My study demonstrates that when

employees do not like to spend time in the break area and it does not create a positive feeling

or it even creates negative feelings, they can choose to abstain from taking a break. It is

therefore important for employees to have access to a break area which enhances their

positive feelings.

After conducting this study and analysing the results I can conclude that an

aesthetically beautiful, light, spacious break area with a positive atmosphere can be seen as

something that triggers positive feelings with employees. The interviewees talked about these

aspects with visible enthusiasm and clearly stated their happiness concerning these aspects.

Following the studied literature, we can say that this will indeed improve performance.

On the other hand, an ‘ugly’ or dark break area does not seem to have much influence

on their happiness. In other words, it does not make them happy, nor makes them unhappy.

However, it does appear that the break areas as such still are beneficial for their positive

feelings, because of the function of bringing the employees together for social interaction.

Regardless the aesthetic quality, it is important to have access to such an area.

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE ORY

This study is conducted in a broad, explorative way, to leave room for future research

and to be able to draw a conclusion that triggers other scientists to come up with follow-up

research questions. Because the results are broad, we can look into different aspects of the

outcomes of this study and discuss possible necessary and interesting future research for each

aspect.

First of all, there are some theoretical implications regarding the subject ‘happiness’

which are interesting because of the subject’s philosophical and sensitive nature.

Philosophically, we can argue about the definition of happiness and about what aspects can

improve or decrease personal happiness. For this study and future research on break areas,

one should conduct further research on triggers of happiness and positive feelings. This

should be researched from an organizational perspective – how can we improve employees’

happiness by changing their material surroundings? Do surroundings, in their pure form, have

the ability to change one’s happiness, or can they just improve a short-term positive feeling?

And for organizations – do employees need to be personally happy in order to improve work

performance, or is a positive feeling sufficient to boost performance? These questions should

be answered.

Secondly, I also found implications for theory and research concerning ‘aesthetics’.

Since every person and thus every employee has their own taste and preferences, designing

an area ‘beautifully’ is not as simple as it may seem. Therefore, in future research, it is

important to determine designs and surroundings that are as universally beautiful as possible.

If we look at the study conducted by Dijkstra, Pieterse and Pruyn (2008), it seems like natural

aspects might have this characteristic. But would it be sufficient to fill up the room with

plants? If research points towards it, it might be useful to focus on creating a positive

atmosphere, rather than a ‘beautiful’ design per se. These considerations should be further

assessed in order to be able to design break areas that are most satisfying.

Finally, I would like to point out the importance of taking breaks. Some of the

interviewees did not take a break every day or even hardly ever, for various reasons. It is

important to find ways to (subconsciously or directly) prevent them from skipping breaks.

Future research should explore the differences between people who do and people who don’t

take breaks, and what can be done to decrease the amount of employees not taking breaks.

IMPLICATIONS FOR MAN AGEMENT PRACTICE

In the previous section, the implications of this study for theory and further research

were discussed. Although this is very important for future research, this study has a practical

aim and is conducted to create an insight in the influences and importance of break area

design. In this section, I will elaborate on the implications of the results of this study for

(management) practice and in particular organizations, which are the main stakeholders.

One of the ways to boost employee performance is employee happiness (Veenhoven,

2009). This study shows that, to increase happiness, an organization can choose to redesign

their break area into a more aesthetically beautiful area. This is interesting, because up until

now in both practice and literature organizations focused on office and workplace design,

rather than break area design. This study shows that it is also important to focus on break area

design. This new insight can be beneficial for financial reasons, if redesigning (just) the break

area is financially more attractive than redesigning all office spaces. Besides that, the results

of this study indicate that big changes do not necessarily have to occur to improve the quality

of the break area. Attention to detail, small changes to improve the atmosphere of the area

and lighting can have a big impact on the feelings of the employees.

If research within an organization indicates that employees abstain from taking breaks

because, for example, they feel like they have to get more work done, action is advised.

Employees become less productive, creative and it decreases their ability to solve problems

(Randolph, 2016). It is therefore important for organizations to create an environment in

which employees are encouraged to leave their desk and take a break in a different area. This

can be achieved by trying to create a break area which universally attracts people by, for

example, using beautiful materials, art, forms of nature, windows or lighting and creating an

atmosphere that is attractive to meet others and that takes one’s mind off work.

LIMITATIONS

In this section, I will discuss the limitations of my study and I will propose

suggestions to by-pass these limitations in further research.

First of all, this study only took the main canteen or cafeteria into consideration.

Office buildings often have small pantries or watercoolers in the hallways, which could be

considered break areas too. Also, the hallways and other areas where employees do not work

can be taken into consideration as well.

Secondly, when conducting the interviews, the researcher always has a subjective way

of asking questions and talking about the subjects. The list of questions is composed by me

and it is not an official list of questions for this topic. This compromises the validity of the

results. For this study, this was inevitable because the research design is explorative which

does not lend itself for fixed questionnaires. In future research this could be useful, when

more theory about this topic has been established. The topics of the questions asked are also

subjectively chosen. I chose to discuss aesthetics and design, spaciousness, lighting et cetera

of the break area – price of the food offered or cleanliness and all other possible factors that

influence the quality of a break could also be interesting fields to explore.

Also, the organizations used for this study are both universities. The break areas

discussed are representative for universities, however, they might not be representative for

other kinds of organizations, which compromises the generalisability. To solve this limitation

I would advise to research all other kinds of organizations and companies, from large

multinational firms to small supermarkets.

Besides that, personality of the interviewees is also a factor that created implications

for this study. While conducting the interviews, I noticed that the employees were

discrepantly opiniated, which ‘coloured’ their answers. Negativity and positivity impacted the

answers, as well as a lack of interest in the subject (the break area). This is, for this kind of

study which studies feelings and opinions of employees, inevitable but the effects can be

minimalized by taking a larger sample.

CONCLUSION

Although it was already known that workplace surroundings affect employees’

well-being and performance, this study shows that break area design and aesthetics also influence

this. When the break area is experienced by employees as being beautiful, light and spacious

with a positive atmosphere, it causes positive feelings and it is more likely for employees to

take a break. This is important, because if employees do not take sufficient breaks, they

become less productive, less creative and it decreases their ability to solve problems. It is

therefore advised for organizations to create an environment in which employees are

encouraged to leave their desk and take a break in a different area and to find ways to

(subconsciously or directly) prevent them from skipping breaks. This advice can also be

beneficial for financial reasons, if redesigning the break area is financially more attractive

than redesigning all office spaces.

For future research I suggest to further study the triggers of happiness and positive

feelings and to determine designs and surroundings that are universally beautiful. Other

possible factors that influence the quality of a break could also be interesting fields to

explore, as well as researching a larger variety of different organizations and companies.

REFERENCES/BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bergs, Y. (2014). Alternative Workplace Strategies and the Realization of an Activity Based

Space Calculation Tool. Retrieved from

http://files.vastgoedbibliotheek.nl/Server/getfile.aspx?file=docs/scripties/Breda/Bergs_

Y.pdf

de Bloom, J., Kinnunen, U., & Korpela, K. (2015). Recovery processes during and after

work:Associations with health, work engagement, and job performance. Journal of

Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 57, 732-742.

Bosch, C., Sonnentag, S., & Pinck, A. S. (2017). What Makes for a Good Break? A Diary

Study on Recovery Experiences During Lunch Break. Journal of Occupational and

Organizational Psychology, 91, 134-157. doi:10.1111/joop.12195

Brennan, A., Chugh, J. S., & Kline, T. (2002). Traditional versus Open Office Design: A

Longitudinal Field Study. Environment and Behaviour, 34(3), 279-299.

doi:10.1177/0013916502034003001

Daly, J., Burchett, M., & Torpy, F. (2010). Plants in the Classroom can Improve Student

Performance (University of Technology, Sydney). Retrieved from

http://www.wolvertonenvironmental.com/Plants-Classroom.pdf

Dijkstra, K., Pieterse, M. E., & Pruyn, A. (2008). Stress-Reducing Effects of Indoor Plants in

the Built Healthcare Environment: The mediating role of Perceived Attractiveness.

Preventive Medicine, 47(3), 279-283. doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2008.01.013

Duncan, R. (2015). Rethinking the Work Space (Thesis for Master of Science in

Architecture). Retrieved from

https://smartech.gatech.edu/bitstream/handle/1853/55499/DUNCAN-THESIS-2015.pdf

Fanger, S. J. (2011). Corporate Office Employee Analysis: Transformation from Closed

Office Layout to Open Floor Plan Environment (Thesis for Master of Science in

Architecture). Retrieved from

https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1123&context=archthesis

Galaskiewicz, J. (1984). Jeffrey Pfeffer: Organizations and Organization Theory (Book

Review). Social Forces, 63(2), 614.

Gavin, J. H., & Mason, R. O. (2004). The Virtuous Organization: The Value of Happiness in

the Workplace. Organizational Dynamics, 33(4), 379-392.

doi:10.1016/j.orgdyn.2004.09.005

Gutnick, L. (2007). A Workplace Design that Reduces Employee Stress and Increases

Employee Productivity using Environmentally Responsible Materials (Thesis for

Master of Science in Interior Design). Retrieved from

http://commons.emich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1150&context=theses

Howard, H., & Gould, K. E. (2000). Strategic Planning for Employee Happiness: a Business

Goal for Human Service Organisations. American Journal on Mental Retardation,

105(5), 377-386.

Kohll, A. (2018, May 29). New Study Shows Correlation Between Employee Engagement

And The Long-Lost Lunch Break. Retrieved May 29, 2018, from

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alankohll/2018/05/29/new-study-shows-correlation-between-employee-engagement-and-the-long-lost-lunch-break/#3895a87e4efc

Lohr, V. I., Pearson-Mims, C. H., & Goodwin, G. K. (1996). Interior plants may improve

worker productivity and reduce stress in a windowless environment. Environmental

Horticulture, 14(2), 97-100.

Morrow, P. C., & McElroy, J. C. (1981). Interior Office Design and Visitor Response: A

Constructive Replication. Journal of Applied Psychology, 66, 646-650.

Morrow, P. C., McElroy, J. C., & Scheibe, K. P. (2012). Influencing organizational

commitment through office redesign. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 81, 99-111.

doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2012.05.004

Nejati, A., Shepley, M., Rodiek, S., Lee, C., & Varni, J. (2016). Restorative Design Features

for Hospital Staff Break Areas: A Multi-Method Study. Health Environments Research

& Design Journal, 9(2), 16-35. doi:10.1177/1937586715592632

Radziunaite, A. (2016). The ´Creative Workspace´: a Comparative Analysis of Stakeholder

Perceptions (Thesis for Master of Science in Architecture). Retrieved from

http://digitalcommons.calpoly.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2720&context=theses

Randolph, S. A. (2016). The Importance of Employee Breaks. Workplace Health & Safety,

64(7), 344.

Seddigh, A. (2015). Office Type, Performance and Well-being. Retrieved from

https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:840700/FULLTEXT02.pdf

Smiraglia, C. (2014). Artworks at Work: the impacts of workplace art. Journal of Workplace

Learning, 26(5), 284-295. doi:10.1108/JWL-11-2013-0097

Sommer, R. (1969). Personal Space: the Behavioral Basis of Design. Englewood-Cliffs, NJ:

Prentice Hall Trade.

TU Delft. (n.d.). De Bouwcampus. Retrieved May 11, 2018, from https://debouwcampus.nl/

Universiteit Leiden. (n.d.). Pieter de la Court. Retrieved April 25, 2018, from

https://www.universiteitleiden.nl/locaties/pieter-de-la-court#tab-2

Van der Burghweg 1. (n.d.). Retrieved May 10, 2018, from

http://campusdevelopment.tudelft.nl/en/project/van-der-burghweg-1/

Veenhoven, R. (2009, July 13). Findings on WORK e: PERFORMANCE (current). Retrieved

May 23, 2018, from worlddatabaseofhappiness.eur.nl

Welcome to the Green Village: Creating a Sustainable Future Together. (n.d.). Retrieved May

11, 2018, from https://www.thegreenvillage.org/

APPENDICES

APPENDIX I

Bij welke organisatie bent u werkzaam, en wat is uw functie binnen de organisatie?

Dit interview gaat over de ruimte waarin u dagelijks, of het merendeel van uw (lunch)pauzes, verblijft tijdens uw pauze, en waar u zich niet met uw werkzaamheden bezig houdt.

I. Kunt u de ruimte, die uw organisatie gecreëerd of bedoeld heeft als lunch- en pauzeruimte, omschrijven?

II. Gaat u hier inderdaad doorgaans pauze houden, of kiest u vaker een andere ruimte? III. (Vraag II) Waarom wel, of niet?

IV. Heeft u het gevoel dat deze ruimte gemaakt is om uw gedachten van het werk af te zetten? V. Doet deze ruimte dat ook? Waarom wel, of niet?

VI. Wat vindt u van de faciliteiten die in de ruimte worden aangeboden? VII. Zou u de ruimte omschrijven als druk of als rustig?

VIII. (Vraag IV) Wat vindt u daarvan?

IX. Zou u de ruimte omschrijven als licht of als donker? X. (Vraag VI) Wat vindt u daarvan?

XI. Zou u de ruimte omschrijven als ruim of als krap? XII. (Vraag VIII) Wat vindt u daarvan?

XIII. Zijn er dingen die u mooi vindt aan de ruimte? Zo ja, wat? XIV. Zijn er dingen die u lelijk vindt aan de ruimte? Zo ja, wat? XV. Wat is uw mening over het algehele design van de ruimte? XVI. Wat vindt u van de algemene sfeer in de ruimte?

XVII. Heeft u het gevoel dat uw plezier, algemeen of in uw werk, verhoogd wordt door deze ruimte? Waarom wel/niet?

XVIII. Wordt u gemotiveerd door deze ruimte? Waarom wel/niet?

APPENDIX II

Interview D1

Technische Universiteit Delft

Onderzoekssubsidie-adviseur, 27 mei 2018, lengte: 10:02

Oké, ik neem het interview dus op. Allereerst wil ik graag vragen wat je functie is bij de organisatie waar je werkt, en bij welke organisatie je werkt.

Ik ben ehm, onderzoekssubsidie-adviseur. Is mijn functie. Ja. En je werkt bij de TU Delft?

En ik werk bij de TU Delft.

Ja. Oké, dit korte interview gaat over de ruimte waar je dagelijks pauze houdt, en dus niét je werk uitvoert…

Ja.

Ehm, ja als je gewoon antwoord kunt geven op de vragen dan is dat goed, en als je een vraag gek vindt dan kun je ook vragen wat ik bedoel.

Ja.

Ehm, kun je de ruimte omschrijven, waar het bedoeld is voor jou om pauze te houden?

Dat is een ehm, een ruimte met een groot, eh, raam, naar het westen, en er staan tafeltjes en stoeltjes, en er is een soort, eh, counter, en daar worden wat dingen, wat eten wordt daar verkocht. Er staat een koffie-apparaat, en het is naast de ingang van het gebouw, en daar zit ook een grote hal en daar zijn nog wel eens, eh, presentaties, of eh, symposia. En er is ook nog een soort grote leestafel, en er is één zitje.

Ja. Een apart zitje?

Ja, een soort zitje. En voor de rest dus tafeltjes en stoeltjes. En kun je ook zelf eten meenemen? Is er een koelkast?

Ehm, ja, er is op elke etage is een kleine pantry, en daar staat ook een koelkast in, die kunnen we gebruiken, en je kunt, het is ook eh, je mag ook gewoon zelf je eigen eten meenemen en beneden in die ruimte die ik zonet beschreef, daar kun je lunchen en daar kun je dus wat eten kopen, er is ook soep, en je kunt ook je eigen broodjes of wat dan ook, kun je meenemen, en dat kun je daar ook eten.

Ja, oké. Ehm, ga je inderdaad vaak naar die ruimte beneden? Of eet je, houd je meer pauze boven, in de eigen pantry?

Nou, ik eet, ik lunch meestal tussen het werk door, achter mijn bureau, soms ga ik een eindje naar buiten om te wandelen, met een collega of zo, en soms zit ik ook in die ruimte beneden.

Oké. En waarom kies je ervoor om niet vaak, niet altijd in de ruimte beneden te zitten?

Nou, omdat ik even door wil werken, of omdat ik even naar buiten wil en dan ga ik dus naar buiten. Ja, oké. En wat vind je van het eten dat wordt aangeboden in die ruimte, beneden?

Nou, ik neem nog wel eens een kopje soep, en voor de rest eet ik daar eigenlijk niet zo veel want ze hebben dan ook broodjes, maar ik neem zelf broodjes mee, en ik neem ook zelf fruit mee en dat hebben ze geloof ik ook zelfs niet eens, en ze hebben dan nog Marsen, en dat soort dingen maar, dat eh, ja, vind ik niet zo fijn om dan te eten.

Ja, oké, en wat vind je van de prijs van de gerechten die je dan wel eens koopt? Of, die je niet koopt? Die soep die kun je, je hebt een groter en een klein kommetje, en meestal kies ik de kleine, want dat vind ik dan wel genoeg. En ehm, ja, dat is een euro. Nou ja, dat vind ik wel oké.

Oké. En zou je de ruimte meer beschrijven als druk, of als rustig? Of iets er tussenin? Tijdens lunchtijd? Nou, tijdens lunchtijd zit het redelijk vol, maar het maakt wel een rustige indruk en ik denk dat dat komt omdat het hoog is, het is niet rumoerig. Ja, het plafond is hoog.

O ja. Wat blijkbaar niet de akoestiek tegen gaat?

Nee, de akoestiek is daar niet vervelend. Die is wel goed, ja.

Nee, ik vind het prima. Ik vind het prima zoals het is, meestal is er wel plek om te zitten, de keren dat ik daar naartoe wil, en ja.

Oké. Wat vind je van het uiterlijk en het design van de ruimte?

Nou, ik vind het een prettige ruimte omdat het hoog is, en omdat er een heel groot raam is naast al die tafeltjes. Dus het is er heel licht.

O ja. Ja. En wat vind je van het uiterlijk en het design van de pantry boven?

Nou, daar is een heel klein keukentje, een beetje benauwd, dat krijgt ook veel zon, dus het kan er ook wel warm worden.

Wel ook licht, dus?

Ja, het is ook wel licht, het is op de derde etage, dus er komt wel veel licht naar binnen. Er zijn een paar kleine raampjes die open kunnen en, nou ja, dat is denk ik, als het lang warm is dan is dat te weinig, eigenlijk. Om te ventileren. Beetje benauwd. Ja.

En heb je het gevoel dat de ruimte boven gemaakt is om je gedachten van het werk af te zetten? Ehm, nee. Dat geloof ik niet. Er staat ook een, kopieerapparaat, een printer, en er zijn lockers, voor iedereen, en de kapstok, waar je je jas op kunt hangen… Je kunt er niet zitten.

O ja, er zijn geen stoelen?

Er zijn geen stoelen, geen tafel. Dus ja, het is om pauze te houden, om pauze te houden is het eigenlijk ongeschikt.

Ja. En doe je er lang over om beneden te komen? Nou… Drie etages, twee minuten. Denk ik, hooguit.

En de ruimte beneden, heb je het gevoel daarvan dat die gemaakt is om je gedachten van het werk af te zetten?

Ja. Hoewel mensen daar ook wel eens even overleggen. Dan willen ze even praten, met een paar mensen, over iets van het werk, en omdat we kantoortuinen hebben gaan mensen ook wel eens even daar zitten, omdat je daar betrekkelijk, eigenlijk wel weer betrekkelijk rustig kunt zitten praten. Maar het is

tegelijkertijd ook wel een fijne ruimte, om even te zitten als je even pauze houdt. Dus dat eh, ja, dat kan samen gaan.

Oké. En zijn er andere samenwerk-ruimtes gecreëerd? Naast de kantoor-, want de kantoortuinen… Ja, we hebben vergaderkamertjes.

Daar kun je dan even gaan zitten als je…

Ja, als je wilt praten, of zou willen overleggen met mensen, kun je dat ook in één van die vergaderkamertjes doen.

Dus het is niet noodzakelijk dat mensen in de pauzeruimte gaan zitten? Precies.

Oké.

Ja, nee dat hoeft niet.

Nee. En in die ruimte, waar je net beschreef die gemaakt is, waarschijnlijk, om je gedachten van het werk af te halen, doet deze ruimte dat ook voor jou?

Ehm, ja. Nou ja, het hangt er vanaf, als je daar met mensen over je werk gaat zitten praten, niet natuurlijk, maar, ja, je bent, ik heb wel het gevoel dat ik daar even in een geheel andere omgeving ben.

Oké. Ehm, wat vind je van de algemene sfeer in de ruimte?

Nou, die is, ja, die is goed. Ja. Daar heb ik eigenlijk verder niet veel over te zeggen. Die is goed. Oké. En wat vind je van de faciliteiten die in de ruimte worden aangeboden? Dus naast misschien de broodjesverkoop, maar…

Ja. Nou, die tafeltjes, dat is handig, ik bedoel, daar kun je even aan zitten, en daar kun je aan zitten terwijl, als je met mensen wilt overleggen. En, je zou er zelfs met je, als je iets op je laptop moet doen, je zou daar zelfs kunnen werken.

Zijn er ook stopcontacten?

Ehm, nee, maar er is wel goede wi-fi. En ehm, nou ja, er zit wel een accu in de, laptop, dus je kunt daar wel even, niet de hele dag, maar je kunt er wel even zitten. En er zijn in, het is een ruimte die eigenlijk

overloopt in een andere ruimte, en daar zijn ook nog wel een paar tafels met wat hoge krukken, hogere tafels met wat krukken. Daar zitten mensen ook wel eens te overleggen. Het is allemaal wel, eh, dat is allemaal wel adequaat.

Ja. En ehm, kun je de laatste vraag; wat voor gevoel geeft pauze houden in deze ruimte, jou?

Ehm, nou, ja, het is een ontspannen, er hangt een ontspannen sfeer, en het is eh, het is even uit het werk. En…

Ziet het er anders uit dan in de kantoortuin?

Mmm… Nou ja, het is een andere ruimte, ja, het is hoger, want die kantoortuin is niet zo heel hoog, en ehm, de kantoortuin zitten ook genoeg ramen in, maar die zijn niet helemaal van de grond tot boven, en dat is hier wel, en dat maakt wel een groot verschil. Ja.

Oké, en de pantry boven, wat voor gevoel geeft die je? Als je daar pauze houdt, of als je daar even bent? Nou, ja… Het is eigenlijk gewoon onderdeel van die kantoortuin, ook al zit er een deur tussen. Ehm, ja, ik ben daar eigenlijk nooit lang. Nou, ik sta er wel eens even te praten met een collega, maar… Ja.

Oké, nou, goed. Dankjewel.

Interview D1 (aanvulling) Technische Universiteit Delft

Onderzoekssubsidie-adviseur, 11 juni 2018, lengte: 06:13

Oké, eh, een paar vragen heb ik je al gesteld, maar de resterende vragen volgen nu. Ja, dat geeft niet.

Oké, heb je het gevoel dat de ruimte beneden gemaakt is om je gedachten van het werk te zetten? Nou, zo is het misschien wel bedoeld, maar, er zitten ook veel mensen daar gewoon te werken, omdat ze dan zitten te overleggen. Dus…

Wat voor effect heeft dat dan op jou, als jij daar pauze… als jij daar niet wilt werken? Weinig.

Dat maakt niet uit?

Nee, want dan ja… dan heb ik gewoon mijn praatje met degene met wie ik een praatje zou willen hebben, en dan verderop… als daar iemand dan ook zit te praten, dat zou… he, in een café is dat ook zo. En dat maakt verder niet uit waar die mensen dan over praten, of die dan over werk praten dan doen ze dat, en als ze niet over werk praten, dan is het ook goed.

Ja, maar op hun laptop…?

Oh, ja, ja, dat stoort… nou, het zou hooguit omgekeerd zo zijn, hè, als je daar zit te werken, dat je dan gestoord wordt… doordat er mensen om je heen zitten te praten. Maar, van, als je zit te praten, of, hè, als je lunchpauze neemt of zo, maar er zitten ook mensen met een computertje… Ja, dat moeten ze zelf weten. Maar ik kan me wel zo voorstellen, dat als er heel veel mensen op hun laptop zitten en je gaat erbij zitten, dan zit je… toch niet helemaal pauze te houden…?

Nou, wat zou kunnen is, bijvoorbeeld, ook al is het bedoeld voor pauze, maar als iedereen het gaat gebruiken om te werken, dat er dan morele druk ontstaat van… ja, hier moet je toch… dit is toch eigenlijk… maar zo krap zitten we niet.

Oké. Ja. Oké, en, zou je de ruimte omschrijven als druk, of als rustig? Ehm… Ja, meer rustig dan druk. Ja.

Oké. En waarom?

Nou, omdat ik dat vind, het maakt op mij een rustige indruk. Ligt dat aan het aantal mensen?

Ook… maar ook aan dat het groot is, en hoog, en… ja. Dus daar ook aan. Groot en hoog kan natuurlijk ook een slechte akoestiek… of lawaaiig… zijn. Ja, maar dat is hier niet.

Ja, oké. En… dat vind je ook fijn, dus? Ja… ik vind het wel een prettige ruimte. Oké. En is er… is het er licht?

Ja.

Ruim.

En… waardoor is het ruim?

Eigenlijk met name doordat het hoog is, en doordat het glas zo helemaal naar beneden loopt, alsof je buiten zit, het geeft de indruk alsof je buiten zit. En ook, omdat het in een heel open verbinding staat met de ruimte ernaast, en waardoor het heel veel groter lijkt, terwijl…

De ruimte ernaast is de promenade?

Ja, en dat stuk waar die hoge tafeltjes staan… Terwijl, eigenlijk, is de ruimte, waar die tafeltjes staan, waar je kunt zitten, naast het raam, die is helemaal niet per se heel ruim. Ik bedoel, het is niet krap, maar… het is ook niet heel ruim.

Maar het wordt wel zo beleefd?

Ja, omdat het aan dat andere vast zit heb je wel de indruk dat het heel groot en ruim is. Oké, ja. Oké, en… zijn er dingen die je mooi vindt, daar?

Ja, die wand, die glazen wand. En waarom?

Nou, omdat het open is. Veel licht, dat vind ik fijn. Oké. En zijn er ook dingen die je lelijk vindt? Niet per se. Nee.

Niet dingen die je zelf anders zou inrichten? Nee.

Oke. En… heb je het gevoel dat je plezier, in je werk, of uberhaupt, wordt verhoogd door hoe de ruimte eruit ziet?

Eh… ja. Waarom?

Omdat het… ik vergelijk het met waar ik hiervoor werkte – die kantine die was… lager, groter, maakte een donkerdere indruk, en… dan vind ik dit een leukere en fijnere ruimte. Dit is lichter.

Ja. En, ja, zo.

Oke. Heb je het gevoel dat je motivatie wordt verhoogd, ook, voor het werken? Dat je denkt: nu heb ik even ergens gezeten waar ik me fijn voelde, en nu ga ik weer aan het werk? Bijvoorbeeld, of…

Ja. Nou, niet zo dat ik eerst depressief werd van de vorige kantine, en dat ik nu blaak van arbeidslust, maar, ja, ik vind het… het is een plus, zeker. Het is een positief aspect. Ten opzichte van die vorige plek waar ik zat. Ja.

Oké. En dus, je wordt er ook gelukkig van? Ja. Het draagt bij aan mijn goede gevoel.

APPENDIX III

Interview D2

Technische Universiteit Delft

Medewerker personeelsbeheer, 11 juni 2018, lengte: 10:49

Het gaat over de kantine, of in ieder geval, de ruimte waarin u pauze houdt… kunt u die kort omschrijven? Eh… dat is hier beneden, nou dat is… dat is een ruime, ruimte. Dat vind ik zelf heel prettig. Niet heel dicht op elkaar, licht, kleurig… ja. Prettige ruimte.

Oke, fijn. En gaat u hier inderdaad vaak heen? Of gaat u ook wel eens ergens anders pauze houden? Nou, ik ga meestal een paar keer koffie halen ’s ochtends, maar dan ga ik daar niet zitten…

Nee.

En dan neem ik dat mee naar boven, tenzij ik met iemand af spreek… dan ga ik er wel zitten. Ja. En ja… in mijn lunchpauze, dat wisselt, ik ga ook graag een eindje wandelen. Allebei doen, dan ben ik te lang weg… maar dat wisselt. Maar het wisselt, soms doe ik het wel, want ik vind het ook belangrijk om contact met collega’s te hebben. En dan ga ik daar ook zitten. Ofwel binnen, ofwel buiten.

Oke, want u kunt ook buiten zitten? Daar is ook plek, of tafeltjes? Ja, ja!