Open to the floor

Over the past two decades there has been a definite shift in workplace design.

Today, open-plan arrangements with ‘breakout’ areas are the accepted norm.

Theoretically, this ‘wall-less’ office allows employees to collaborate more freely, providing a boost to both productivity and team morale. It’s a trend that has accelerated during the economic downturn, most likely due to the imperative to maximise occupancy rates and reduce overheads.

There are, though, suggestions that the balance may now have shifted too far towards collaboration, at the expense of a private workspace in which individuals are able to concentrate. A recent study by real estate association CoreNet Global found that 43 per cent of organisations now have more collaborative spaces than private areas, while a third believe this could impact on employee performance.

It’s a trend Ken Raisbeck, vice president of global workplace strategy at Johnson Controls, which offers consultancy services to external customers as well as helping the organisation manage its own working environment, has also noticed. “The surveys we’ve done indicate that things have gone too far and that one of the barriers to productivity in the office is that people want more quiet space,” he says. “In the past there was a big assumption that everyone could desk-share but people work in different ways. We don’t want to hinder work; we want to enable it.”

Nigel Oseland is workplace consultant at his own business, Workplace Unlimited, and feels there’s often an inherent assumption that individuals and organisations want such collegiate environments. “Architects and designers were brought up working in studios and open-plan environments and I still feel when I’m briefing them that that is their default position,” he says. “But it’s not appropriate for all industries.”

Quiet revolution?

Recent thinking — such as the US lecturer Susan Cain’s 2012 book Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can’t Stop Talking — has also recognised the importance of providing the correct setting for individuals who may not enjoy the limelight or more social scenarios, he adds.

“Introverts have an inclination to do work that is more logical, process-oriented, can be a bit complicated and requires attention to detail,” says Oseland. “They don’t actually like the open-plan, buzzy environments, partly because it distracts them from their work but also because it’s just not their personality. By focusing on open-plan and collaboration spaces we’re ignoring 50 per cent of the working population.”

There are, though, cases where more collaborative settings work very well. Monica Parker, head of workplace consultancy at Morgan Lovell, gives the example of National Australia Bank’s new offices in Melbourne Docklands. “It’s probably the finest example of a corporate workplace that I’ve ever seen, taking out Google,” she says. “There are a variety of workspaces, no assigned desks and lots of quiet areas that people can use. The potential for performance there is very high. To say open-plan impacts performance is too broad.”

The concept works particularly well among younger workers, suggests Roy Parrish, managing director of interior design firm Ranne Creative Interiors. “Generation Y grew up in open-plan offices,” he says.

“They aren’t influenced by the hierarchy of private offices because they never knew that world.

“Generation Y-ers also go to work to make new friends and have influenced an increasing socialisation of the workplace,” he adds. “They naturally use collaborative spaces in offices to work, in the same way that they studied in Starbucks, and chatted in college campuses.” By contrast, many older workers, who spent much of their careers in more hierarchical offices, struggle to adapt to the concept, he says.

The challenge for organisations — and those tasked with redesigning or modifying office space — as the economy begins to pick up is to identify and implement the most appropriate working environment for that particular workforce. “The range of different tasks that people have to perform on an ongoing basis can be very different and if you’re going to try and get the maximum out of them, which is primarily what we should be doing, we need to recognise that they need different sorts of space at different times,” says Andrew Mawson, managing director of Advanced Workplace Associates.

“Our approach is to say that if we can understand more about what people do and need, in terms of technology, interaction, quiet, noisiness and stimulation, then we can take an intelligent punt at working out what sort of workplace environment they might require.” The fact that most offices are only 60 per cent occupied during a typical day also means there is potential for significant space savings, he adds, potentially by reclaiming parts of the building that are rarely used.

Our survey says…

Raisbeck, meanwhile, points to the use of data in helping to understand how existing space is currently deployed.

“This is the real big trend in the workplace now,” he says. “Certainly at Johnson Controls we’ve spent a lot of time investing in survey tools and other mechanisms to generate information, and that allows us to have a much more detailed understanding as to what is the right type of workspace, both for today and tomorrow.” This includes a desk space utilisation monitoring tool to provide information into how and when each desk is used, he adds.

The end-result of such reviews is likely to involve a number of dedicated private spaces while retaining the open-plan model in most cases, suggests Parrish. “Even the most ardent supporter of open-plan working will need to sit quietly and concentrate without interruption at some stage,” he says. “Small, non-bookable rooms which contain just a small desk and the necessary technology are proving very popular, so long as organisations can ensure that people don’t turn them into personal offices. I’ve also seen organisations create library spaces where people are encouraged to work silently, as a counterpoint to the café culture embraced in some organisations.”

Alongside such investigations and changes, consultancies and organisations need to ensure the culture of a workforce is able to adopt any new regime, suggests Parker, to avoid situations where individuals feel they are unable to use communal areas. “We’ve got to have a full appreciation of what kind of cultural shift has to occur in order to achieve the behavioural outcomes of appropriate collaboration and contemplation, and then we’ve got to give individuals the autonomy to pick what space is going to suit them,” she says.

This could be as simple as explaining to individuals or groups of employees the idea that different tasks will require alternative work spaces, and outlining the intention behind the various areas.

This is particularly important for those people who may lose a traditional office as part of any re-organisation, suggests Phillip Ratcliffe, managing director of real estate advisory firm Procure. “You have to really put yourself in the position of somebody who’s been with that company 10 or 20 years,” he says.

“These people really need to understand that if they have a different task, they need to find a different work setting to be able to do it. So their desk is there to do certain things, but if they want quiet time, there should be other suitable work settings. People need to be encouraged to do that, and made aware of the work setting they need to use, because it doesn’t come naturally to them.”

Increasingly, one option for employees is likely to be working from home; something which arguably has become part of the working environment already, perhaps in some cases as an unofficial response to the issue of a lack of concentration space in the office. “The home is one option, but it shouldn’t be a forced option,” says Oseland. “People should be able to say they want to write a report at home and get it done. But it has to be seen as a choice, not because they cannot work in the office.”

Companies, though, need to ensure individuals have the freedom to choose where they work best, rather than dictating to people the days on which they must work from home. “That’s not about flexibility and choice; that’s about saving space,” he says.

Where are they?

Some organisations may start to push back against the trend towards working from home in any case, suggests Ratcliffe. “There may be a point where companies realise that there’s a danger they’re becoming too disconnected with their workforce,” he says. “That may actually require an increase in workspace, where people can come in and collaborate with colleagues and where the chance meetings happen. Companies are becoming much more aware of where their workforce is.”

Yet if organisations are to ensure they have a productive and efficient workforce while also keeping office costs under control — particularly once businesses start expanding again — they will need to give employees much greater choice over where and when they work. “I’d say we’re significantly behind certain other cultures,” says Parker. “I’d like to say that in the next five years we will see that shift, and then I’d like to see greater consideration put to the purpose of the office and to create a space to facilitate that specific behavioural outcome you want to achieve.”

It’s a point Mawson also makes, suggesting that a well-planned design can not only help balance productivity and costs but also give organisations the flexibility to respond to their own changing requirements. “It may be that the building is designed to provide a home for people who need it and a hub for those who can work a bit of their time elsewhere, thereby not destroying the integrity of the original design but thinking abount how the company will support growth and contraction,” he says.