Office Design, Creativity and Collaboration: The effects of basic
office design characteristics, office openness, and break-out zones.
By WOUTER VELDKAMP Address: Billitonstraat 106 9715 EZ GRONINGEN w.veldkamp@student.rug.nl student number 1925350 First supervisor: dr. W.G. Biemans Second supervisor: dr. K.R.E. Huizingh
Faculty of Economics and Business June 2015
Word count: 14232
Abstract: Office design is a frequently discussed but little understood topic. Extant literature and popular business press articles are scattered over three main categories (BOBZ): basic office design characteristics, office openness, and break-out zones. This study examines the relationship between these categories and employees’ creativity and collaboration. Data is collected from 15 employees in 10 firms in Groningen, The Netherlands. The results show that basic office design characteristics and break-out zones positively influence creativity, and that office openness positively influences collaboration. Subsequently, a BOBZ model is proposed which can help managers with (re)designing their offices. This study puts forward 10 propositions which can be input for future research.
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION ... 3
2. LITERATURE REVIEW ... 6
2.1 Office design characteristics ... 6
2.2 Office design and casual interactions ... 7
2.3 Office design and fun ... 8
2.4 Employee creativity ... 8
2.5 Basics, openness, and break-out zones ... 9
3. METHODOLOGY ... 11
3.1 Research design ... 11
3.2 Controllability, reliability, and validity ... 11
3.3 Case selection ... 12
3.4 Data collection ... 13
3.5 Data analysis ... 14
4. RESULTS ... 15
4.1 Reasons for design ... 15
4.1.1 Inspire employees and customers ... 15
4.1.2 Efficient use of space and collaboration ... 16
4.1.3 Importance of creativity and collaboration ... 17
4.1.4 Trend towards multi-functionality, adaptability and transparency ... 18
4.2 Basic Characteristics of the Office ... 18
4.2.1 Art and decoration ... 18
4.2.2 Natural light and bright colours ... 18
4.2.3 Ergonomic design, furniture and plants ... 19
4.3 Openness of the office ... 20
4.3.1 Flex-working and social density ... 20
4.3.2 Private offices and openness ... 21
4.3.3 Casual interactions ... 21
4.3.4 Cosiness and fun ... 22
4.3.5 Privacy, acoustics and back protection ... 22
4.3.6 Proximity ... 23
4.4 Break-out Zones ... 23
4.4.1 The restaurant has changed ... 23
4.4.2 Themed rooms ... 23
4.4.3 Games and sports ... 25
2
4.4.5 Location: inside the building ... 26
4.4.6 Job satisfaction surveys ... 26
4.4.7 Ten companies. One BOPZ model. ... 27
5. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS ... 27
5.1 Basics ... 27
5.2 Openness ... 29
5.3 Break-out Zones ... 31
5.4 Concluding remarks ... 32
5.4.1 Managerial implications ... 33
5.4.2 Research limitations and further research ... 33
6. REFERENCES ... 35
7. APPENDICES ... 38
Appendix A: Interview Protocol ... 38
Appendix B: Second and shortened interview guide ... 40
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES Table 1: Prior research on office design 10 Table 2: Description of case data and respondent characteristics 14 Table 3: Reasons for design and role of creativity and collaboration in daily jobs 17
3
1. INTRODUCTION
Thanks to corporate giants like Google and Pixar, that have demonstrated huge success in spite of their unconventional workplaces, more people are embracing the idea that creative work environments help stimulate minds and inspire innovation (Steinbergs, 2010). A well-known example is the way the late Steve Jobs, who believed in the power of space to enhance the work of groups, designed Pixar’s headquarters in 1999 (Lehrer, 2012). Jobs had the building arranged around a central atrium so that the diverse staff of artists, writers, and computer scientists at Pixar would run into each other frequently. The mailboxes and meeting rooms moved to the lobby, as well as the cafeteria, the coffee bar, and the gift shop. Even the only set of restrooms moved to the lobby. This design of work space promoted more interaction among employees, particularly among people who worked in different departments (Egolf and Chester, 2013). Another famous example of promoting creativity and the flow of information by design is Google’s headquarters, where workers are clustered in shared workspaces with sofas, dogs, exercise balls, and mocha lattes (Sinclair, 2007). This design, too, maximizes chance encounters (Waber et al., 2014).
Pixar’s success story initiated a new way of thinking about office design, as since the beginning of this millennium there is a growing enthusiasm for replacing private offices with, for example, open floor plans in order to encourage community and collaboration (Fayard and Weeks, 2011). As a result of this growing enthusiasm, popular business press is overwhelmed by office designers, professionals, and agencies that all have different claims about what is the right design for modern offices (Krasny, 2013; Saint-Amand, 2015; Stillman, 2012).
4 office permanent by using cosy furniture, so employees will stick around for a while. And conference rooms, dining areas, and isolated phone booth spaces are part of the plan.
Saint-Amand (2015) makes a similar statement by arguing that traditional private offices and cubicles are unimaginative and restrictive. However, Saint-Amand (2015) introduces activity based working (ABW), what basically means that people should be working in spaces neither open nor full of private offices, that support the work they are actually doing. Saint-Amand (2015) elaborates that in this way it is easier to share knowledge and stay innovative. In short, Saint-Amand’s (2015) argument is that different kinds of work demand different environments, therefore, no one should have assigned desks or offices. Some people excel in energetic environments filled with interactions. Others work best alone. Overall, the workspace should encourage collaboration, circulation and interaction because business benefits when folks from different departments, backgrounds, and roles share their ideas (Egolf and Chester, 2013; Saint-Amand, 2015).
5 Unfortunately, none of the claims described above are supported by academic research. This can indicate either that there is no research conducted on office design and creativity at all, or that it is a too recent and emerging topic. In addition to the variety of claims, the years of publication [2012, 2013, 2015] of the articles in the business press tend to favour the second explanation. Indeed, existing literature on office design merely focuses on other effects than creativity and collaboration, such as turnover and satisfaction (Oldham and Fried, 1987; Kim and Young, 2014). Accordingly, there is a lack of a comprehensive framework in which it becomes clear which particular characteristics of an office design have direct or indirect effects on collaboration and employee creativity. Hence, the link between office design, creativity and collaboration remains disconnected from the academic research. This gap needs to be filled because managers need to know what they should take into account regarding office design, if the aim is to facilitate collaboration and spark creativity amongst their employees. Bearing in mind that corporate giants like Google and Pixar have millions to spend on office design, the question remains what to do, in general, with the office design to achieve better collaboration and creativity. This paper aims to provide a deeper understanding of the role of office design in relation to collaboration and employee creativity by collecting empirical data from 10 firms in the Groningen area. The research question of this paper is:
How does office design foster creativity and collaboration?
The key metric companies use to design their space -cost per foot- is focused on efficiency, but few companies measure whether a space’s design helps or hurts creative performance and collaboration (Waber et al., 2014). The following two sub-questions also need to be answered:
Which office design characteristics influence creativity, and how?
Which office design characteristics influence collaboration, and how?
6
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
The structure of this literature review is as follows. First, office design characteristics are discussed. Casual interaction and fun designs are next. Then, relevant information is extracted from the large body of literature on creativity. This section ends with a summary.
Several studies examined office design characteristics, but described them as workspace characteristics (Oldham and Fried, 1987), office environments (Turner and Myerson, 2000; Ford et al., 2003), or office layouts (Haslam, 2010). To avoid any confusion about terminology, this paper sticks to the term ‘office design characteristics’ by Kim and Young (2014) and to the corresponding description of Turner and Myerson (2000): the materials, space plans, and equipment that make up the office design.
2.1 Office design characteristics
7 In summary, the office should not be dark and people should not work too closely to each other (Oldham and Fried, 1987). Ergonomics should be taken into account as well as personalizing the office (Haslam, 2010). These office design characteristics influence turnover and satisfaction (Oldham and Fried 1987; Kim and Young, 2014), health and perceived effectiveness at work (Kim and Young, 2014), accomplishments, initiatives, happiness, productivity (Haslam, 2010), and morale (Turner and Myerson, 2000). Surprisingly, none of these studies takes a closer look to the office design characteristics in relation to collaboration and creativity. However, a study from Fayard and Weeks (2011) about physical barriers in the office design does examine this relationship.
2.2 Office design and casual interactions
Fayard and Weeks (2011) state that casual interaction is the cornerstone of creativity and that promoting casual interactions starts with removing physical barriers and bringing people closer to one another. Chance encounters on the job promote cooperation and innovation. At the same time, Fayard and Weeks (2011) acknowledge that open spaces can reduce privacy (Kim and Young, 2014; Oldham and Fried, 1987) and thereby do not foster informal exchanges. However, they found that a space may or may not encourage interaction depending on how it balances three dimensions, that have both physical and social aspects: proximity, privacy, and permission.
Regarding proximity, it is not only important how far employees are from each other, but also how far they are from centrally located areas containing shared resources, such as photocopiers and coffee machines. The office design must drive traffic to such shared spaces and give people reasons to remain. Regarding privacy, people must feel confident that they can converse without being interrupted or overheard. They must also be able to avoid interacting when they want to. Regarding permission, company leadership and culture, as well as the space itself, must convey that casual interaction is encouraged. Management should not create too many rules about the use of the space; informal interaction cannot be legislated.
8 However, Fayard and Weeks (2011) state that “the most effective spaces bring people together and remove barriers while also providing sufficient privacy that people do not fear being overheard or interrupted. In addition, they reinforce permission to convene and speak freely.” With their research, Fayard and Weeks (2011) extend other studies mentioned before. For instance, they replaced social density (Oldham and Fried, 1987; Turner and Myerson, 2000; Kim and Young, 2014) with the more comprehensive dimension proximity. In addition to little rules about the use of the space, Haslam (2010) found that giving people more control of their office spaces make them feel physically more comfortable at work, identify more with their employers, and more positive about their jobs in general.
2.3 Office design and fun
There is another way to let the office design foster collaboration and creativity. So far, the right office design impacts employees’ happiness and health, especially when the offices are personalized (Haslam, 2010) and tuned to the needs of the employees (Turner and Myerson, 2000). Employees in such offices are more productive and creative, accomplish more and take more initiative, taken into account the social density (Oldham and Fried, 1987; Kim and Young, 2014), proximity, and privacy of the employees (Fayard and Weeks, 2011) as well as other basic office characteristics (e.g. lightning). But if an office design also allows employees to relax, have fun, and enjoy at work, employee morale and productivity will improve even more (Ford et al., 2003). Moreover, fun integrated with work can stimulate creativity and innovation, as well as counter the effects of stress (Yerkes, 2003). However, while fun is good, functionality still has its place when it comes to office furniture, especially for reasons of ergonomics and health and safety (Rowe, 2015). Bottom line is that the office design should get employees in a positive mood in order to enhance creative problem solving (Brief and Weiss, 2002). Also, laughter helps to remain creative under pressure and stay healthier in the process (Weiss, 2002). But what kind of creativity is important for this study?
2.4 Employee creativity
9 will be on the general conceptualization of creativity given by Caniëls et al. (2014): the production of ideas that are novel as well as useful (Amabile et al., 1996; Shalley, Zhou and Oldham, 2004), combined with Staw’s (1990) translation of creativity into creative problem solving: a presentation or discovery of problems and generating of alternative solutions. Combined, this results in the following definition: “Creativity is the production of ideas, or a
presentation or discovery of problems, and the subsequent generating of alternative solutions that are novel as well as useful.” To stimulate creative outputs, office designs must therefore
facilitate a climate of employee interaction, sharing ideas, skills and knowledge (Chen and Kaufmann, 2008). For instance, open spaces allow employees to sit next to someone they do not know, or invite someone they would like to get to know better to lunch, or solicit an opinion from someone they have never asked before. But does this mean that private offices are negatively related to creativity and collaboration? Waber et al. (2014) state that companies believe that more open space will boost productivity and creativity, but they have no evidence to prove it. Therefore, the biggest challenge for managers is presenting enough diverse spaces for the various moments throughout the workday (Brustein, 2013). Some of these require privacy or a team space with audio-visual facilities, others a place where the employees are not going to get distracted by too much hubbub.
2.5 Basics, openness, and break-out zones
After reviewing the disparate literature and a variety of business press articles on office design, creativity and collaboration, a conclusion can be drawn that currently most emphasis amongst academics and practitioners is on the following three categories:
Basic characteristics of the office Openness of the office
Break-out zones for privacy or group work, or to have fun and relax
10 in one place (Oldham and Fried, 1987), privacy, flex-working and technology integration, belong under the denominator of the openness of the office. Lastly, there is a third category, emerged in the last decade (Alter, 2013; Fayard and Weeks, 2011; Krasny, 2013; Saint-Amand, 2015; Stillman, 2012): break out zones; places where you can relax during breaks or during normal worktime. Examples are bars and restaurants, games and entertainment, and exercise facilities in the office. The three dimensions - proximity, privacy, and permission - of Fayard and Weeks (2012) belong in all three categories as they are concerned with the relative distance between colleagues (basics and openness), shared resource spaces, and break-out zones. Table 1 summarizes the literature review.
Table 1
Prior research on Office Design
Subject Examples Effects Source
B
asics
Office design characteristics
Indoor environment and ergonomic design
Positively related to effectiveness and satisfaction.
Kim and Young, 2014
Ergonomic and personalized office design Ergonomics Positively related to accomplishments, initiative, and satisfaction. Haslam, 2010 Personalized design Positively related to happiness, health and productivity. Tuned office design
Materials, space plans, equipment, and environmental controls
Positively (when tuned) OR negatively related to morale and organizational functionality.
Turner and Myerson, 2000
Creative office design
Space for small groups, cosy furniture for permanence
Foster creativity, fun, and
cosiness. Krasny, 2013 O pe nne ss Office design characteristics
Social density, room darkness, number of enclosures, interpersonal distance
RD, NoE, and ID are negatively related to turnover and satisfaction.
Oldham and Fried, 1987 Proximity, privacy, and
permission
Removing physical barriers
Positively related to
casual interactions. Fayard and Weeks, 2011
The right lay out (Activity Based Working)
Neither open nor full of private offices, technology is key
Easier to share knowledge and stay innovative, flexible and mobile.
Saint-Amand, 2015
Collaborative office design
Thinking areas and open plan spaces
Accidental interactions primary ingredient for creativity and collaboration. Alter, 2013 B re ak -out Z one
s Fun work environments
Social events, stress release activities, and games
Positively related with employee morale and productivity.
Ford et al., 2003
Fun integrated with work Trust and perform
Fun stimulates creativity and innovation. Negatively related to stress.
Yerkes, 2003
Ten tips to foster creativity
Zones, personal items, buzz, plants and natural light
Office design reinforces culture and inspires creativity, innovation and collaboration.
11
3. METHODOLOGY
3.1 Research design
As this paper tries to provide a better understanding of the relationship between office design, collaboration and creativity, and what constitutes these concepts, the research approach I followed is theory development (Eisenhardt, 1989). The theory development process is based on the first part of the empirical cycle; observation and induction (Van Aken, Berends and Van Der Bij, 2012). The business phenomenon that was not thoroughly explained in academic literature, was the effect of office design on employees’ creativity and collaboration. In other words, the literature regarding this topic was still very exploratory in nature. The theory development process ends with the development of propositions, which are changes or additions to existing theories (Van Aken, Berends and van der Bij, 2012).
3.2 Controllability, reliability, and validity
The three major criteria for the evaluation of research are controllability, reliability, and validity (Yin, 1994). Controllability is a prerequisite for the evaluation of reliability and validity (Van Aken, Berends and van der Bij, 2012). In order to make this research controllable, what follows is a detailed description on data collection, data analysis, and synthesis (Crossan and Apaydin, 2010). The result is that other researchers should be able to replicate this study or judge the reliability and validity. Two potential sources of bias are anticipated to make this research reliable: instruments and respondents.
Reliability is served by using multiple research instruments (Van Aken, Berends and van der Bij, 2012). This approach is called triangulation (Yin, 2003). By collecting primary data (i.e. interviews) as well as secondary data, the potential bias of instruments is taken into account. For instance, I observed proximity - how far employees are from each other, but also how far they are from centrally located areas containing shared resources (Fayard and Weeks, 2011). Also, three out of ten respondents provided information from their firms’ job satisfaction surveys to support their answers in the interviews (i.e. TradeNL, People Inc, and Nanocom). Triangulation made possible by multiple data collection methods provides stronger substantiation of constructs and hypotheses (Eisenhardt, 1989).
semi-12 structured interview instead of a Q&A session. The interviews I conducted were taped and transcribed, most within 24 hours of their occurrence. Taping allowed me to make additional notes during the interviews when necessary, and transcribing allowed me to send a transcription to the interviewees after each interview to ask for approval of the content. This was done for every single interview and improves the reliability of this research.
3.3 Case selection
Multiple cases are effective because they enable collection of comparative data, and so are likely to yield more accurate, generalizable theory than single cases (Eisenhardt, 1991; Yin, 1994). Building theory from case studies relies on theoretical sampling instead of random selection, in order to replicate or extend the emergent theory (Eisenhardt, 1989). For these reasons I made two starting criteria for potential focal firms. First, I decided that it would not be interesting to conduct research in firms where no one has thought about the office design. In other words, I was looking for companies with relatively new or creative office designs. I thoroughly searched the Internet for Groningen located companies and found TradeNL, Jupiter, Vingo, Nanocom, and Dazzle. Furthermore, I got two companies recommended by fellow students (Chemsol and People Inc), and one company (Vingo) was recommended by the Jupiter interviewee.
The first moment of contact was sending an email to a general company email address (e.g. info@company.nl) in which I explained the main topics and purpose of my research. This method allowed the company to let someone respond that could tell more about the topic. I also mentioned that the interviews would take no more than an hour and were kept anonymously. Discretion regarding personal information was secured. For this reason, I replaced the actual names of the companies for fictional ones. From the 50 companies I approached, 10 answered and invited me for an interview which means a response rate of 20%. 24 companies took the effort to send me an email with an explanation for the rejection. Reasons varied from “no time” to “no knowledge about the topics”. The remaining companies did not respond at all.
13 It did not really matter in which industry the company was operating, except that some degree of creative thinking and collaboration was required. Generally, the two criteria described above gave me a good idea whether a company would be interesting for my research or not.
3.4 Data collection
I collected data through interviews and observations. The primary source was semi-structured interviews with individual respondents. Semi-structured interviews were selected as the means of data collection because of one primary consideration. They are well suited for the exploration of the perceptions and opinions of respondents and enable probing for more information and clarification of answers (Bariball and While, 1994).
At each company I either interviewed managers who had made decisions regarding the office design of their company or played a decisive role in choosing those designs, or other managers and employees who experienced the consequences of the chosen designs on a daily base. In both cases, the interviewees could explain the thoughts behind implementing particular designs or the effects of the designs on their personal working circumstances.
A key feature of theory-building case research is the freedom to make adjustments during the data collection process (Eisenhardt, 1989, p.539). This resulted in an iterative process of adjusting the interview questions. For instance, after the first interview it became clear that the integration of technology in offices goes far beyond the scope of merely collaboration and creativity. I decided, therefore, to not include the effects of technology in this study, and to only focus on the design topics. See Appendices A and B for the resulting differences in interview guides.
14 Table 2
Description of case data and respondent characteristics
Company Strategic
profile/sector #employees #respondents Gender Age Function DoYou Public administration and defense 1700 1 Male 52 Business Advisor TaxMax Public administration and defense 1200 1 Male 59 Facility Manager Chemsol (international) Manufacturing of chemicals 30 1 Male 58 Brands Director
Beltel Marketing and
Sales 100 4 Males 33,22, 22,25 Team leader and three junior agents TradeNL (international) Trade of natural gas 250 1 Male 58 Purchase and Facility Manager Jupiter Design agency 2 (excl.
freelancers) 2 Males 38, 43 Concept Designers People Inc Human health and social activities 950 1 Female 37 Facility Manager Vingo Construction
and wholesale 12 2 Males ?
Commercial Manager and trainee Nanocom (international) Engineering services 110 1 Female ? Director Operations
Dazzle Branding agency 16 1 Male 41 CEO and
owner
3.5 Data analysis
15
4. RESULTS
What emerged from my data were insights that linked different characteristics of office design to creativity and collaboration. In the next sections, I elaborate on these insights and describe their grounding in the data. First, general descriptions of why companies chose for certain office designs will be mentioned as this gives a better understanding of the viewpoints of the companies towards the intended effects of their office designs. Second, I shortly describe the importance of creativity and collaboration in the participants’ jobs. Finally, I elaborate on how the companies applied the three categories found in the literature (basic characteristics, openness of the office, and break-out zones).
4.1 Reasons for design
I found that companies design their offices for plenty of reasons – sometimes fundamentally different. However, two separable main reasons emerged. For five out of ten companies the main reason for their design was to inspire their own employees and also their customers. At the other five companies the emphasis was more on achieving more efficient usage of the space and facilitating better collaboration. Three companies mentioned both reasons as equally important.
4.1.1 Inspire employees and customers
16 However, at Nanocom and Chemsol, the core activities were not directly related to creativity. Chemsol’s core business is the development of very innovative products and systems which development processes are characterized by continuous adjustments or extensions of applications, demanding intensive collaboration between employees of different departments. Moreover, the employees need new ideas on a daily base. Therefore, the founder of Chemsol built an Inspiring Room in the middle of the office building, where employees can meet and brainstorm, eat and drink with each other and with customers. Similarly, Nanocom’s diverse staff of programmers, developers, and other IT professionals need new ideas on a daily base too, but they work on an agile base. For all the small teams that change often in size and face a variety of problems every day, Nanocom designed a centrally located atrium in the office with dartboards, table soccer and a treehouse. Generally, all five companies wanted to convey creativity to breed creativity. How they done it will be described in the next sections.
4.1.2 Efficient use of space and collaboration
For the other five companies the reasons for design were a matter of efficiency and finance. The idea is to offer the same facilities with less square meters. At TradeNL, DoYou, TaxMax (as well as Nanocom), flex-working was introduced, what basically means that there are no assigned desks. Every employee should find a workplace for him or herself every single day. All participants stated that the advantage of this flex-working open office design is that employees meet each other spontaneously, resulting in ad hoc collaborations and faster problem solving. Moreover, at firms were project teams were supposed to work very closely and intensively together, separate departments were devoted in the building (DoYou, Nanocom, Dazzle, People Inc, TradeNL). For instance, DoYou was developing a new study finance system which required a lot of employees’ attention and devotion.
17
4.1.3 Importance of creativity and collaboration
There were differences in the importance of creativity and collaboration across firms. At six firms (Chemsol, Beltel, Jupiter, Vingo, Nanocom, and Dazzle) creativity played a crucial role in the daily work of the employees. For example, at Beltel, creativity was important to create opportunities and find different ways of persuading customers to buy products. At design agency Jupiter, creativity and originality were said to be their raison d’être. For their work, the two employees of Jupiter get hired to make creative translations from brands to spaces (i.e. branding spaces). Lastly, employees of Vingo are consultants for companies in the area of “dynamic working”. Their main goal is to create pleasant and inspiring work environments. Creativity, freedom, and taking initiative, are three cornerstones of their jobs. At the other four firms (DoYou, TaxMax, TradeNL, and People Inc) creativity played a less crucial role, as indicated by the interviewees. At these firms the emphasis was more on collaboration. Especially at TradeNL, collaboration was being regarded as pretty important when it comes to sharing ideas with people you do not see regularly. At all firms interaction and free flow of information as positive results of their office design were mentioned.
Table 3
Reasons for design and role of creativity and collaboration in daily jobs
Inspire employees and customers
Efficient space usage and collaboration
Creativity importance
Collaboration importance
DoYou No Yes Medium High
TaxMax No Yes Low Medium
Chemsol Yes Yes High High
Beltel No No Medium Medium
TradeNL No Yes Medium High
Jupiter Yes No High High
People Inc No Yes Low High
Vingo Yes No High Medium
Nanocom Yes Yes High High
18
4.1.4 Trend towards multi-functionality, adaptability and transparency
At office design agency Vingo, they had noticed a shift from making design plans that are fixed for, say, 10 years, to a continuous process of adaptations in office design. The possibility to keep making alterations to the workplace (e.g. easily removable fences, create workspace, multifunctional desks) ensures the sustainability of the office. The Vingo manager stated: “When you see the office design as loosely coupled modules like LEGO, switching and adjusting is easier.” In this way Vingo was able to timely adjust the interior to the wishes and demands of the moment.
Furthermore, a trend of more transparency in today’s offices was noticed. Vingo’s manager stated: “The classical offices of 10-20 years ago, are gone completely. There still is a need for privacy so there are acoustic separations, but more and more walls become glass walls. Visual transparency.” This trend of visibility has already put its mark on the offices at Chemsol, Nanocom and Dazzle, which all used glass not only to let natural light come into the office, but also to make the office more transparent. This will be discussed in more detail in the next sections.
4.2 Basic Characteristics of the Office
4.2.1 Art and decoration
The evidence of this study suggests that all companies design their offices more or less according to similar principles regarding basic office design characteristics. However, there are some differences. For instance, some companies have Art Committees while others let their employees decide about art and decoration. Three companies worked together with artists for custom made paintings, three other companies did not have art at all. The employees which had a saying in the decision making for art in their offices, appeared to be the more satisfied ones. The People Inc manager elaborated: “We notice that people really like it to personalize their office. That is why our employees can order art at our art supplier.”
4.2.2 Natural light and bright colours
19 Six out of ten firms worked closely together with architects to design their offices. Jupiter, Vingo and Dazzle did the design themselves because of their creative backgrounds as well as Beltel, except without a creative background. What was seen the most is the use of a white coloured base with some bright contrasting colours. For example, in Vingo’s office, neutral colours were used, with contrasting coloured furniture. All of the participants stated that these contrasting colours (e.g. red, green, yellow, blue) are happy colours. One of the respondents stated that to really foster creativity, he should be in a certain mood. Definitely not grumpy, stressed or tired. To stimulate that certain mood he used happy colours in his office to create a happy environment (Jupiter manager).
At People Inc, every department had its own design with its own colours, fitting the specific work that needs to be done. One department was called the fishbowl and is characterised by glass walls and bright colours while another department was characterised by private offices and secretariats only. Also, everywhere in People Inc’s building are corners with seats and pantries in the same colours as the departments. The bright colours have a positive effect on the respondents’ job satisfaction as the People Inc manager stated that she is happier now, compared to working in the old grey environment. On the sixth floor of the People Inc building, there are pink sofas against purple walls. According to the respondent very inspiring as she stated: “Everyone gets happy there, higher level managers, and customers, too.”
4.2.3 Ergonomic design, furniture and plants
20 4.3 Openness of the office
As described in the previous section, the use of glass walls and windows results in natural light in the office. However, glass serves another purpose. At Chemsol, glass is been used a lot in the office to create an open atmosphere. The manager of Vingo stated that the trend is transparent offices with the use of glass. This statement is supported by the Nanocom manager, who argued that employees must be visible for each other, to facilitate better collaboration. “Moreover, you want people to know each other, instead of hiding in private offices.” This is important especially in teams, who have to communicate intensively. Thus, the office should facilitate teamwork. Therefore, at eight out of ten companies, the office was designed according open work floor principles. But there were closed spaces too, project rooms, and conference rooms. Generally, multi-functionality and visibility were key in all rooms.
4.3.1 Flex-working and social density
As stated earlier, four companies introduced flex-working (DoYou, TaxMax, TradeNL, Nanocom). At TradeNL this resulted in direct perceived benefits. The old building of TradeNL had a U-shape, with two long halls, and private offices. This building did not invite to meet colleagues. The new building is much more compact, has more floors, and is more open. The TradeNL manager stated: “Now colleagues meet each other automatically”. In the old situation there were separated segments, and now people are working everywhere throughout the building. “We designed this space so people sit next to people they usually do not see.” The respondent stated that the overall advantage is a combination of openness and privacy. However, not all participants experienced the same benefits or agreed on the advantages. For instance, the TaxMax respondent had been working in classical offices for 40 years and admitted that it is more convenient to sit next to each other for intensive collaboration and communication. However, now they just planned meetings instead of talking about everything all day. And this is where efficiency benefits. In a planned meeting there is more focus. Therefore, on every floor there was room for such meetings.
21 time in the office. A glimpse into the future of DoYou: they are experimenting with scrum
sessions, in which the meetings are organized in rooms for circa ten people where everybody
is standing. The thesis is that standing employees are more active, more alert, so meetings last for ten minutes instead of 30 or 45.
4.3.2 Private offices and openness
At two companies (Chemsol, People Inc) only certain spaces were open but the rest of the offices consisted of private offices. However, at Chemsol, due to the glass walls there still was an open atmosphere. This affected the coordination and collaboration in a positive way because an open-door-policy had emerged, so everybody walked in in each other’s offices. At People Inc this was not the case. There was only one open work space department. What was typical for this department, were all the fences in between the blocks, to minimize the noise coming from other colleagues, and improve the privacy. In the open room, there was a glass meeting room, also to silence the noise. The rest of the building was divided in private and shared offices, and more striking, higher managers had bigger offices, with conference tables and other features. However, if they were not present, these offices were available for other employees. This availability indicates some degree of flex-working. At other companies the slogans lead by example (Nanocom) and practice what you preach (Dazzle) made sure every employee had the same facilities at their disposal. At these companies the managers were on the same level as the employees, which created an open atmosphere and put less emphasis on hierarchy.
4.3.3 Casual interactions
22
4.3.4 Cosiness and fun
An open office can contribute to a cosy atmosphere and also allows the employees to have some fun. For example, at Beltel the office is one big open space with “islands” of desks, chairs, and desktops. The islands are separated from each other, however, per island there are eight employees working together. The employees stated that sometimes it was hard to concentrate because of all the background noise, but a perceived benefit of the openness was better and more efficient communication with colleagues. One employee elaborated: “When I have a question, this design of islands allows me to get an answer within a matter of seconds.” The respondents all agreed that this makes their work easier and more fun. On the downside, there is little privacy and much distraction. However, according to the respondents, this does not outweigh the benefits of the cosiness and the corresponding job satisfaction.
4.3.5 Privacy, acoustics and back protection
Although most participants stated that they had difficulties with concentration in open spaces due to the background noise or the fact that there were only a few silence rooms, eight out of ten companies took into account that some people cannot concentrate in open spaces and thus there should be space for all kinds of work. For example, implementing special rooms for two persons, four persons, and also quiet rooms to deal with this fact. At two companies there were no silence rooms at all. Furthermore, the DoYou manager noticed that there is a need for some bigger workplaces where people can work with, say, ten people. At this moment DoYou does not have such spaces available yet. Two companies solved this problem of privacy in open spaces in two different ways. At Dazzle, every workspace was designed in such a way that no one could be encountered from the back. In this way the employees of Dazzle still have the benefits of an open space (i.e. easy contact) but see each other coming from the front because of the back protection.
23
4.3.6 Proximity
Proximity deals with not only the relative distance between colleagues but also distances from spaces such as restaurants, water coolers, and photocopiers. The Inspiring Room at Chemsol is centrally located in the office building so everyone has easy access. Also, the R&D department is located very closely, as well as the rest of the offices are built around the room. The bar is adjacent to the Inspiring Room, too. The centrally located position has a positive impact on collaboration as employees from all departments pass by and enter this room multiple times every day. Similarly, at TradeNL, on every floor there are several pantries where people can get coffee and read a newspaper. These pantries are places where people meet on a regular base. Also, official meetings are held in open spaces. When the group is too big or there is confidential information, there are closed meeting rooms available. At People Inc, these meeting rooms are located next to the company restaurant. Deliberately, to have easy access to coffee and tea and food, before, during, and after meeting. The restaurant also functions as a place where people have small meetings. These examples illustrate that centrally located shared resource spaces drive employees to each other. One manager stated: “When you see each other more often, more ideas will be shared.”
4.4 Break-out Zones
4.4.1 The restaurant has changed
What becomes evident from this study is that the restaurant has gained much more functionality than just having lunches with colleagues. One respondent stated: “Traditionally food was only served between 11:30 and 13:30, nowadays we can sit there 8 hours a day, with good food!” At seven out of ten companies (except from Jupiter, Vingo, and Nanocom) the restaurant had become an area where short meetings are held, diners with business relations, alone work or with two or three colleagues. For example, in the DoYou building, there is a Grand Café and a big restaurant with Wi-Fi.
4.4.2 Themed rooms
24 Dazzle’s office contained several other creative spaces like a White Room for concentrated work, and an Alps room with grass on the floor and a mountain hut. The Alps room was used primarily for presentations with clients and secondarily to impress these same clients. Most of Dazzle’s employees like hiking, so the wall in the Alps room is covered with a canvas of Swiss nature. The photo on the canvas is made by one of Dazzle’s own photographers, who made a trip to Switzerland solely for this picture. According to all the employees this room is very inspiring. Lastly, the Dazzle manager stated that one important aspect in office design is to create a theme around the brand, like “Nike, just do it.” The key is to let this theme reflect in the office design (i.e. name of the company, logo, corporate identity, colours, materials, etc.) and that it is consistent over time. However, there should be room for minor adjustments in this theme, to address the needs of different customers. This is in line with the design policy of Vingo and Nanocom, which alter their design, if needed, in order to address the needs of the employees.
The Inspiring Room of Chemsol is a lounge area where people can sit and relax and drink a beer together. But what makes this room so inspiring? No one sits straight next to or in front of each other. The room has glass fronts and a balcony and there are no square or round tables but “creative tables” with indentations and whimsical shapes. The Inspiring Room is also used for brainstorm sessions as in the room “people feel free to think outside of the box.” That is the reason why the room is created and, perhaps, why it is such a success (the respondent said that lots of ideas have been generated in that room). Another room in Chemsol is called the
Experience Room, where customers can actually feel and see the various applications of the
products, as well as get an explanation of the relative advantages compared to competitors’ products. “It is the combination of the experience first, and the inspiration room later, what makes our customers speak freely about their potential problems in the field.” In conclusion, to relax or fall back for a moment, there is a bar, a restaurant, big conference rooms with large television screens, and lastly, the Inspiring Room for smaller groups, brainstorm sessions, further discussion of R&D activities, or “just to be cosy together”.
25 At the other companies, there were no themed rooms. Nevertheless, some rooms were described as quite inspiring. Rooms with art, statues, chandeliers, and big flat screens. On the top floor of TradeNL there are some meeting rooms with a view on the city of Groningen. At the rest of TradeNL’s floors, everywhere are manually adjustable desks. There are some lounge areas and a big roof terrace. Also, there is a phone booth for private calls. Lastly, in the basement there is a table soccer table and an “octopus table”. It is a table with five tentacles, so that people are sitting close to each other and mix with each other, resulting in spontaneous conversations with colleagues one do not meet otherwise.
4.4.3 Games and sports
At six out of ten firms (DoYou, TaxMax, TradeNL, Jupiter, Nanocom, Dazzle) employees have the possibility to play games during breaks or just in between working hours. Examples are table tennis, table football, air hockey tables, dart boards, chess boards, LEGO, video game consoles, and even punching bags were seen. The main reason for installing these games in the offices was that they can be stress releasing and energizing. At these six companies, employees were allowed to take a 10-15 minutes break whenever they want, to recharge themselves. At Nanocom, they believe that the human brain resets after 15 minutes of fun, after which employees continue work more productive and creative, instead of staring at a computer for 15 minutes and being unproductive. That is why Nanocom allows this kind of entertainment. The manager of Nanocom stated that the quality of work delivered by employees improved significantly because of the opportunity of playing games. Similarly, at Dazzle games are installed to free the minds of the employees. The manager stated: “You cannot expect to get a new idea every hour. When it does not work, go play. After 10 minutes we notice that we get productive and creative again.” Moreover, in Dazzle’s building there is a sport facility where employees can exercise during the day. It is proven that when people are fit, there will be less absenteeism. Similar to playing games, sports can recharge employees, empty their minds, in order to proceed work more productive and creative. For the same reasons DoYou and TaxMax had a sport centre in the pavilion on their complex.
26 time recognized that that would be at the expense of the concentration during work. However, “colleagues would stick longer at work for a drink to discuss work related things.” Finally, one respondent would value some sport facilities because at his office there was little fresh air. Together with sitting on a chair behind a desk all day, employees can get slow and unproductive. In that case, a treadmill or some halters can fresh up the body and mind.
4.4.4 Location: outside the building
For some companies the environment outside of the office building functioned as break-out zones. At DoYou and TaxMax there is a city garden available for everyone. Especially for visiting customers the pavilion offers a great opportunity for a dinner. Similarly, the Jupiter office is located near to a park, so employees can have a nice walk “or get an ice-cream”. The two managers said that they get very different conversations about the same topics if they get out of their office once and a while. “This makes us see our room differently constantly, and that is creativity too.” The Nanocom management wanted to create a business setting that is vibrant, energetic, creative, and living. That started with the location. It had to be near to the city centre, to keep employees at a close distance. Also, the bars around the building allow for after-work drinks, so there was no need to build a bar in the office.
4.4.5 Location: inside the building
What was interesting in the Jupiter case, was that their office is part of a larger building with 18 other offices; co-working spaces. At the entrance were some sofas and a coffee corner. One of the respondents stated that their creativity arises from interaction. However, they only had contact with one of the 18 other companies, located in the same building. “When you meet each other occasionally in the hallway, we often share ideas or come up with new ones.” Similar to Jupiter, Dazzle is located in a creative collaborative building in which 50 other businesses are part of the environment of entrepreneurs, start-ups, and professionals. Dazzle does business with ten of them regularly. The advantage of being part of such a collaborative environment is that Dazzle easily finds a partner for a pilot, in case of a viable new idea.
4.4.6 Job satisfaction surveys
27 satisfied about the little noise coming from outside. Apparently, the building is well isolated. The surveys are kept on a regularly base, and the management of TradeNL tries to really take the feedback of its employees into consideration and take affirmative action when possible. In other words, employees have a saying in the design, resulting in happier employees. Lastly, the management chose to not make any rules regarding the use of the office space (e.g. food on the desk, radio). “After two years we still did not have to introduce a strict policy, and that is working best for us.”
4.4.7 Ten companies. One BOPZ model.
The results of this study show that there are numerous ways to design the office in such a way that it has an impact on employees’ creativity and collaboration. Lots of examples are given, supported by quotes and statements of the respondents. The results lead to the BOPZ model, illustrated in Figure 1.
5. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
The results of this study show that creativity and collaboration play different roles in different organizations. Accordingly, the reasons to choose for particular designs vary from firm to firm as well as the effects on the employees. However, findings from the cases suggest that there are some general office design characteristics to take into account when designing an office in order to foster creativity and facilitate collaboration. In this section, the results will be compared with existing literature and articles from popular business press, resulting in a set of propositions. This section ends with a conclusion in which the main research question will be answered. Also, managerial implications, limitations, and future research will be discussed.
5.1 Basics
29 this study shows that ergonomic design has a positive effect on employees’ health and productivity. Examples are adjustable desks, chairs, tables, and standing desks. The multi-functionality of these kinds of furniture facilitate easier collaboration. Also, there should be enough multi-functional rooms available in the office to really foster collaboration (rooms for alone work, with two, three or a small group of colleagues). In addition to ergonomic furniture, strange furniture (e.g. octopus table or other creative tables with indentations and whimsical shapes) seems to have a positive effect on creativity, as people are encouraged to sit next to each other and brainstorm, or get out of their comfort zones to breed new ideas. Another contribution to existing literature is that plants are multifunctional, too. Besides positive effects on health and creativity, plants silence noise. In contrast with an article from the business press (Stillman, 2012) in which is stated that “buzz” is good for privacy, this study reveals that employees’ concentration and privacy suffers from background noise. However, in open spaces background noise seems inevitable, so plants are a perfect means to reduce the buzz. Moreover, plants can contribute to a cosy office. In this context, Haslam (2010) stated that people in personalized offices are happier, healthier and more productive. My study finds weak support for this statement as in only two companies employees had a saying in the decision making for the office design. Indeed, employees in these two companies were happy about their environment. Lastly, findings of this study suggest that the use of bright lights in the office makes employees happier and more creative. Moreover, if departments and furniture are coloured correspondingly, this will generally contribute to a happy and fun work environment. The above findings lead me to put forward the following propositions:
Proposition I: Natural light, as well as bright colours, positively influence productivity, creativity, happiness and job satisfaction.
Proposition II: Ergonomic design, and multi-functional rooms and furniture positively influence health, productivity and collaboration.
Proposition III: Strange furniture positively influences employee creativity.
Proposition IV: Plants can help regulate the privacy and concentration of employees and, therefore, positively influence collaboration.
5.2 Openness
30 to employee satisfaction. Although this study indeed finds that the openness of spaces can result in poor concentration and privacy, these negative effects can be reduced tremendously with the use of noise silencing materials (furniture, fences, lamps, plants) and back protection. Especially back protection makes sure that people do not fear being overheard or interrupted (Fayard and Weeks, 2011). Moreover, all the participants in this study agreed that the wide range of benefits of an open office outweigh the few negative effects. Generally, this study shows that the open (flex-working) office design creates an open atmosphere in which people meet each other spontaneously, automatically, and more often in general. The result of these casual or accidental interactions is that more knowledge, information, and ideas are shared with colleagues. This positively influences both creativity and collaboration. Even more when people are from different departments as they can have totally different ideas and perceptions. Although Fayard and Weeks (2011) acknowledge that open spaces can reduce privacy and thereby do not foster informal exchanges, the results of this study show that it is the combination of open space and privacy room that maintains the free flow of information while still having the possibility to do concentrated work. In other words, there should be room for all kinds of work. This is in line with the arguments made in the business press articles (Krasny, 2013; Saint-Amand, 2015; Stillman, 2012). Stillman (2012) argued that there should be zones in the office where people can go to for small talk and privacy in order to facilitate better collaboration. Krasny (2013) stated that there should be spaces where small groups of people can gather. Saint-Amand (2015) suggested that people should work in spaces neither open nor full of private offices, that stimulate the work they are actually doing (Activity Based Working). In other words, offices that are open enough to collaborate successfully, without being overlooked or potentially approached from the back, improve and stimulate interaction, idea sharing, and casual meetings, taken into account that there should be enough privacy and quiet working spaces.
31 complex picture of an office design need to be tuned to the changing needs of the organization and the people who work in it.
Lastly, the location of the rooms seems to be of importance, too. Similar to how the late Steve Jobs had designed the Pixar headquarters, in this study it became clear that centrally located shared resource spaces drive employees to each other, resulting in ad hoc collaborations and knowledge sharing, faster problem solving and more creativity in general. The atrium in Pixar’s headquarters had the same effects (Lehrer, 2012). The above lead me to put forward:
Proposition V: Openness conveys casual interaction, and has a positive effect on creativity, collaboration, and the speed of problem solving.
Proposition VI: Silencing materials and back protection have a positive influence on privacy, concentration and collaboration.
Proposition VII: Dynamic office design continuously fits employees’ needs, therefore, positively influences creativity and collaboration.
Proposition VIII: Centrally located rooms drive employees to each other and positively influences casual interaction, knowledge sharing and collaboration.
5.3 Break-out Zones
Although the concept of break-out zones is yet not thoroughly studied in academic literature, articles from popular business press are full of these areas where employees can have fun, fall back, or relax. The rationale is that employees come back more productive, more creative, and more relaxed, after spending time in break-out zones. The findings of this study are in favour of this rationale. In addition, at the firms were creativity played a major role, employees were allowed to play all kinds of games during working hours. This might indicate that these firms value the moods of their employees more than, for instance, whether these employees exactly work for, say, nine hours a day. This speculation is fed by the study of Brief and Weis (2002), who found that positive moods can enhance creative problem solving. Surprisingly, none of the interviewees mentioned that the purpose of the games might be to just have fun.
32 transformed into true restaurants with Wi-Fi and work areas. This confirms Krasny’s (2013) statement that dining areas should be part of the whole office design plan to foster collaboration. Thus, the final two propositions are:
Proposition IX: Sports and games are stress releasing, energizing and therefore positively influence productivity and creativity.
Proposition X: Themed rooms, for drinks or thoughts, and restaurants, positively influence creativity and collaboration.
5.4 Concluding remarks
This paper explores how collaboration can be facilitated and creativity can be fostered by office design. The purpose of this study is to provide a deeper understanding of the relationships between these concepts. The research question of this paper is “How does office
design foster creativity and collaboration?” To answer this question it would be foolish to
assume that all offices can be designed the same as firms have to deal with a lot of different needs from employees. But also customers play a role in designing the office. That is why there is no such thing as the right design, but with a fine balance between basic office design characteristics, openness of the office, and break-out zones, managers should be able to facilitate collaboration as well as foster creativity amongst the employees. Dependent on every single situation per firm, employees should also be happier, more productive, experiencing the benefits of open spaces while having enough space for concentrated work. To conclude, firms that want to facilitate collaboration and foster creativity should make sure that the following design characteristics are part of the office:
Natural light and bright colours
Art and decoration (let employees be part of the decision making) Ergonomic design, strange furniture, and plants
Glass walls for transparency Open office without assigned desks Acoustic materials and back protection Rooms for alone work and group work
33
5.4.1 Managerial implications
In addition to contributing to research, this study also contributes to practice. The BOBZ model gives a simplified representation of the positive influencers of collaboration and creativity. When managers have to (re)design an office, this model gives them some core elements that should not be overlooked. However, if all the elements are present in the office design, the outcomes (better collaboration and/or creativity) still depend on management and leadership style towards the use of these elements, and behaviour of employees (Fayard and Weeks, 2011). Concluding, BOPZ is an easy term to remember. It reminds managers to take the basics, the openness, and break-out zones into account.
5.4.2 Research limitations and further research
As with all research, this study had several limitations. First of all, the geographical scope of this study might limit the generalizability of the results. The research is done in firms only in the Groningen area. An interesting avenue for future research might be to conduct the same study in firms in the Western area of the Netherlands to see if office design is related to cultural differences (Gagliardi, 1992).
The sample size of ten firms consists of a mix of relatively large, small and medium sized firms, which have their origins in different sectors. Therefore, no conclusions can be drown for specific industries. Another study might examine more firms in the same industry.
As stated earlier, little research was done on office design in relation to creativity and collaboration. However, popular business press pays a lot of attention to these topics. The result is that this study partially relies on articles and claims from business press.
Lot of office design characteristics contributed to job satisfaction. Most of these characteristics also had a direct effect on creativity and collaboration. However, the link between job satisfaction on the one hand, and creativity and collaboration on the other hand did not become clear in this study. This might be an interesting avenue for future research. Also, productivity emerged as an outcome of some office design characteristics. Although the link between productive thinking and idea generation was made by many respondents, productivity is a much broader concept. Future research may elaborate more on the link between productivity and creativity and collaboration in general.
34 diversity of perspectives and knowledge, stimulates higher creativity in teams (Hoever et al. 2012). Moreover, if teams stay longer with each other, groupthink can occur. This might harm creativity and collaboration as well. Does the size of the company influence the design decisions? Although flex-working might be attractive for larger size companies due to more efficient use of space, the negative side of the coin is that employees might spend less time at the office. The result might be less casual interaction and less idea sharing, which have negative influence on creativity and collaboration.
35
6. REFERENCES
Aken, van J. E., Berends, H., Van der Bij, H. 2012. Problem solving in organizations – A
methodological handbook for business and management students.
Alter, A. (June 9, 2013) How to Build a Collaborative Office Space Like Pixar and Google. Retrieved at June 11, 2015 from
http://99u.com/articles/16408/how-to-build-a-collaborative-office-space-like-pixar-and-google.
Amabile, T.M., Conti, R., Coon, H., Lazenby, J., and Herron, M. 1996. Assessing the Work Environment for Creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 39: 1154-1184. Bariball, K.L. and While, A. 1994. Collecting data using a semi-structured interview: a
discussion paper. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 19: 328-335.
Brief, A.P. and Weiss, H.M. 2002. Organizational Behavior: Affect in the Workplace. Annual
Review of Psychology, 53: 279-307.
Brustein, J. (December 19, 2013) Designing Workplaces for Healthy Hubbub and Dimmer
Lights. Retrieved at February 4, 2015 from http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles/
2013-12-19/ideos-tom-eich-on-workplace-design
Caniëls, M.C.J., De Stobbeleir, K., and De Clippeleer, I. 2014. The Antecedents of Creativity Revisited: A Process Perspective. Creativity and Innovation Management, 23(2): 96-110.
Chen, M.H. and Kaufmann, G. 2008. Employee Creativity and RandD: A Critical Review.
Creativity and Innovation Management, 17(1): 71-76.
Crossan, M.M. and Apaydin, M. 2010. A Multi-Dimensional Framework of Organizational Innovation: A Systematic Review of the Literature. Journal of Management Studies, 47(6): 1154-1191.
Darke, P., Shanks, G., and Broadbent, M. 1998. Successfully completing case study research: combining rigour, relevance and pragmatism. Information Systems Journal, 8: 273-289. Egolf, D.B. and Chester, S.L. 2013. Forming Storming Norming Performing: Successful
Communication in Groups and Teams (Third Edition). iUniverse, Thinkstock.
Eisenhardt, K.M. 1989. Building Theories from Case Study Research. Academy of
Management Review, 14(4): 532-550.
Eisenhardt, K. M. 1991. Better stories and better constructs: The case for rigor and comparative logic. Academy of Management Review, 16: 620-627.
36 Fayard, A. and Weeks, J. 2011. Who Moved My Cube? Harvard Business Review, 89(7/8):
102-110.
Ford, R.C., McLaughlin, F.S., and Newstrom, J.W. 2003. Questions and Answers about Fun at Work. Human Resource Planning, 26(4): 18-33.
Gagliardi, P. 1992. Symbols and Artifacts: Views of the Corporate Landscape. Walter de Gruyter and Co., Berlin.
Haslam, A. 2010. Designing Your Own Workspace Improves Health, Happiness and Productivity. Management Services, 54(4): 6-7.
Hoever, I.J., Van Knippenberg, D., Van Ginkel, W.P., and Barkema, H.G. 2012. Fostering Team Creativity: Perspective Taking as Key to Unlock Diversity’s Potential. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 97(5): 982-996.
Kim, S. E. and Young, W. R. 2014. Office Characteristics and Perceived Behavioral
Outcomes in a Public Agency. Public Performance and Management Review, 38(1): 76-99.
Krasny, J. (November 4, 2013) 5 Steps to a Millennial-Friendly Workplace. Retrieved at February 12, 2015 from http://www.inc.com/ss/millennial-friendly-workplace Lehrer, J. (2012). Groupthink. The New Yorker, January 30, 22-27.
Oldham, G.R. and Fried, Y. 1987. Employee Reactions to Workspace Characteristics. Journal
of Applied Psychology, 72(1): 75-80.
Rowe, S. 2015. Re-inventing ‘Office Life’. Belfast Telegraph, Edition 1, p. 42-43.
Saint-Amand, A. (February 3, 2015) 4 Reasons You Should Consider This Alternative Office
Design. Retrieved at February 5, 2015 from
http://www.fastcompany.com/3041833/4-reasons-you-should-consider-this-alternative-office-design
Schilling, M.A. 2009. Strategic Management of Technological Innovation (third edition). New York University, McGraw-Hill Irwin.
Shalley, C.E., Zhou, J. and Oldham, G.R. (2004) The Effects of Personal and Contextual Characteristics on Creativity. Journal of Management, 30: 933–958.
Sinclair, B. (2007). Commons 2.0: Library Spaces Designed for Collaborative Learning.
Educause Quarterly, 4: 4-6.
37 Stillman, J. (October 23, 2012). 10 Office Design Tips to Foster Creativity. Retrieved April
17, 2015, from http://www.inc.com/ss/jessica-stillman/10-office-design-tips-foster-creativity
Turner, G. and Myerson, J. 2000. By the Book: New Workspace, New Culture. Journal for
Quality and Participation, 23(5): 45-47.
Waber, B., Magnolfi, J., and Lindsay, G. (2014). Workspaces That Move People. Harvard
Business Review, 69-77.
Wang, K. 2014. Factors Influencing the Adoption and Effective Use of Creativity Techniques in Business Settings: An Exploratory Study. Engineering Management Journal, 26(4): 29-37.
Yerkes, L. 2003. How to Create a Place Where People Love to Work. Journal for Quality and
Participation, 26(4): 47-50.
Yin, R. K. 1994. Case study research—Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Yin, R.K. 2003. Case Study Research, Design and Methods, 3rd ed. Sage Publications,
