The Effects of Traditional and Innovative Office Plan Concepts on Employees: A Comparative Literature Study

Yıl 2020, Sayı: 55, 91 - 116, 27.04.2020

Merve Gerçek

https://doi.org/10.18070/erciyesiibd.580160

Cited By: 1

Öz

The term “office” refers to the physical environment in which employees spend a considerable amount of time depending on their working hours. The workplace layout is defined as the organization and design of the physical workspace and the objects within it. There are studies in different disciplines about the positive and negative effects of various types of workplace layout in terms of productivity, job satisfaction, psychological well-being, motivation and organizational culture. Within the framework of changing working traditions from the emergence of modern workplace concept to present day, it was seen that innovative workplace designs taking into consideration the needs of employees are becoming more common. The aim of this study is to examine the office plan concepts in the context of traditional and innovative approaches and to examine their effects on employees comparatively. As a result of this study, it was determined that there are superior aspects of both closed office plan concepts and open office plan concepts in terms of employee outputs.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Office Plan, Traditional Office, Open Office, Workplace Environment

Geleneksel ve Yenilikçi İşyeri (Ofis) Düzeni Türlerinin Çalışanlar Üzerindeki Etkileri: Karşılaştırmalı Bir Derleme Çalışması

Öz

İşyeri (ofis) kavramı, çalışanların çalışma saatlerine bağlı olarak önemli ölçüde zaman harcadıkları fiziksel ortamı ifade etmektedir. İşyeri düzeni, fiziksel çalışma alanı ve içindeki nesnelerin örgütlenme ve tasarlanma biçimi olarak tanımlanmaktadır. Çeşitli işyeri düzeni türlerinin verimlilik, iş doyumu, psikolojik iyi oluş, motivasyon ve örgüt kültürü gibi değişkenler açısından olumlu ve olumsuz etkilerine ilişkin farklı disiplinlerde çalışmalar bulunmaktadır. Modern işyeri kavramının ortaya çıkışından günümüze değişen çalışma gelenekleri çerçevesinde, çalışanların ihtiyaçlarını dikkate alan yenilikçi işyeri tasarımlarının giderek yaygınlaştığı görülmektedir. Bu araştırmanın amacı, işyeri düzeni türlerini geleneksel ve yenilikçi türler bağlamında ele almak ve çalışanlar üzerindeki etkilerini bu iki tür açısından karşılaştırmalı olarak incelemektir. Yapılan inceleme sonucunda, kapalı işyeri düzeni ve açık işyeri düzenlerinin çalışanlar üzerindeki farklı değişkenler bağlamında birbirinden üstün yönlerinin bulunduğu belirlenmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

İşyeri Düzeni, Ofis, Kapalı Ofis, Açık Ofis, Çalışma Mekânı.

Kaynakça

• Albert, S., ve Whetten, D. A. (1985). Organizational identity.L.L. Cummings, B.M. staw, eds. Research in organizational behavior. 7, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT. 263-295
• Allen, T. J., ve Gerstberger, P. G. (1973). A field experiment to improve communications in a product engineering department: The nonterritorial office. Human Factors, 15(5), 487-498.
• Alsop, R., (2015), Açık Ofis Çalışanları Nasıl Etkiliyor?, Erişm adresi: https://www.bbc.com/turkce/haberler/2015/05/150513_vert_cap_acik_ofis, (Erişim Tarihi: 14.06.2019)
• Armstrong, M. (2006). A handbook of human resource management practice. Kogan Page Publishers.
• Bailey, D. E., ve Kurland, N. B. (2002). A review of telework research: Findings, new directions, and lessons for the study of modern work. Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior, 23(4), 383-400.
• Baldry, C., ve Barnes, A. (2012). The open-plan academy: space, control and the undermining of professional identity. Work, employment and society, 26(2), 228-245.
• Becker, F. D., Gield, B., Gaylin, K., ve Sayer, S. (1983). Office design in a community college: Effect on work and communication patterns. Environment and Behavior, 15(6), 699-726.
• Bergström, J., Miller, M., ve Horneij, E. (2015). Work environment perceptions following relocation to open-plan offices: A twelve-month longitudinal study. Work, 50(2), 221-228.
• Bodin Danielsson, C., Chungkham, H. S., Wulff, C., ve Westerlund, H. (2014). Office design's impact on sick leave rates. Ergonomics, 57(2), 139-147.
• Bodin Danielsson, C., Wulff, C., ve Westerlund, H. (2013). Is perception of leadership influenced by office environment?. Journal of Corporate Real Estate, 15(3/4), 194-212.
• Brennan, A., Chugh, J. S., & Kline, T. (2002). Traditional versus open office design: A longitudinal field study. Environment and behavior, 34(3), 279-299.
• Brookes, M. J., ve Kaplan, A. (1972). The office environment: Space planning and affective behavior. Human factors, 14(5), 373-391.
• Brunia, S., ve Hartjes-Gosselink, A. (2009). Personalization in non-territorial offices: a study of a human need. Journal of Corporate Real Estate, 11(3), 169-182.
• Carlopio, J. R., ve Gardner, D. (1992). Direct and interactive effects of the physical work environment on attitudes. Environment and behavior, 24(5), 579-601.
• Daniels, K., Lamond, D., ve Standen, P. (2001). Teleworking: frameworks for organizational research. Journal of Management Studies, 38(8), 1151-1185.
• Dougherty, D. (1992). Interpretive barriers to successful product innovation in large firms. Organization science, 3(2), 179-202.
• Danielsson, C. B., ve Bodin, L. (2009). DIFFERENCE IN SATISFACTION WITH OFFICE. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 26(3), 241.
• Danielsson, C. B., ve Bodin, L. (2008). Office type in relation to health, well-being, and job satisfaction among employees. Environment and Behavior, 40(5), 636-668.
• Davis, M. C., Leach, D. J., ve Clegg, C. W. (2011). The physical environment of the office: Contemporary and emerging issues. International review of industrial and organizational psychology, 26(1).
• De Been, I., ve Beijer, M. (2014). The influence of office type on satisfaction and perceived productivity support. Journal of Facilities Management, 12(2), 142-157.
• De Croon, E., Sluiter, J., Kuijer, P. P., ve Frings-Dresen, M. (2005). The effect of office concepts on worker health and performance: a systematic review of the literature. Ergonomics, 48(2), 119-134.
• Dozie Ilozor, B., Love, P. E., ve Treloar, G. (2002). The impact of work settings on organisational performance measures in built facilities. Facilities, 20(1/2), 61-67.
• Duffy, F. (1999). The New Office (2nd ed.). London, UK: Conran Octopus Limited.
• Elsbach, K. D. (2003). Relating physical environment to self-categorizations: Identity threat and affirmation in a non-territorial office space. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(4), 622-654.
• Elsbach, K. D., ve Bechky, B. A. (2007). It's more than a desk: Working smarter through leveraged office design. California management review, 49(2), 80-101.Fan Ng, C. (2010). Teleworker's home office: an extension of corporate office?. Facilities, 28(3/4), 137-155.
• Feige, A., Wallbaum, H., Janser, M., ve Windlinger, L. (2013). Impact of sustainable office buildings on occupant's comfort and productivity. Journal of Corporate Real Estate, 15(1), 7-34.
• Gensler US Workplace Survey 2019, Erişim adresi: https://www.gensler.com/uploads/document/614/file/Gensler-US-Workplace-Survey-2019.pdf (Erişim Tarihi, 14.06.2019)
• Göçer, Ö., Karahan, E., ve İlhan, I. O. (2018). Esnek çalışma mekânlarının çalışan memnuniyetine etkisinin akıllı bir ofis binası örneğinde i̇ncelenmesi. Megaron, 13(1), 39-50.
• Haynes, B. P. (2007). The impact of the behavioural environment on office productivity. Journal of facilities management, 5(3), 158-171.
• Hedge, A. (1982). The open-plan office: A systematic investigation of employee reactions to their work environment. Environment and Behavior, 14(5), 519-542.
• Heerwagen, J. H., Kampschroer, K., Powell, K. M., ve Loftness, V. (2004). Collaborative knowledge work environments. Building research & information, 32(6), 510-528.
• Hill, E. J., Ferris, M., ve Märtinson, V. (2003). Does it matter where you work? A comparison of how three work venues (traditional office, virtual office, and home office) influence aspects of work and personal/family life. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 63(2), 220-241.
• Huws, U., Jagger, N., ve O'Regan, S. (1999). Teleworking and globalisation. Institute for Emploment Studies. IES Report no: 358
• Kayan, N. (2009). Çok Katlı Ofis Yapıları ve Açık Ofis Planlama Yaklaşımları/ Harmancı Giz Plaza, Sabancı Center, Kanyon Ve Nida Kule Örneklerinde Açık Ofis Planlama Yaklaşımlarının İrdelenmesi. (Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Yıldız Teknik Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, İstanbul.
• Kim, J., ve De Dear, R. (2013). Workspace satisfaction: The privacy-communication trade-off in open-plan offices. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 36, 18-26.
• Kok, W., Meyer, M., Titus, S., Hollis-Turner, S., ve Bruwer, J. P. (2015). The influence of open plan work-environments on the productivity of employees: the case of engineering firms in Cape Town. Problems and Perspectives in Management13(2), 51-56.
• Lee, Y. S. (2010). Office layout affecting privacy, interaction, and acoustic quality in LEED-certified buildings. Building and Environment, 45(7), 1594-1600.
• McElroy, J. C., ve Morrow, P. C. (2010). Employee reactions to office redesign: A naturally occurring quasi-field experiment in a multi-generational setting. Human relations, 63(5), 609-636.
• Nathan, M., ve Doyle, J. (2002). The State of the Office: The politics and geography of working space. Industrial Society.
• Oldham, G. R., ve Brass, D. J. (1979). Employee reactions to an open-plan office: A naturally occurring quasi-experiment. Administrative science quarterly, 267-284.
• Oldham, G. R., ve Rotchford, N. L. (1983). Relationships between office characteristics and employee reactions: A study of the physical environment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 542-556.
• Oldham, G. R. (1988). Effects of changes in workspace partitions and spatial density on employee reactions: A quasi-experiment. Journal of applied psychology, 73(2), 253.
• Olson, J. (2002). Research about office workplace activities important to US businesses‐And how to support them. Journal of Facilities Management, 1(1), 31-47.
• Oommen, V. G., Knowles, M., & Zhao, I. (2008). Should health service managers embrace open plan work environments?: A review. Asia Pacific Journal of Health Management, 3(2), 37.
• Ornstein, S. (1989). The hidden influences of office design. Academy of Management Perspectives, 3(2), 144-147.
• Pejtersen, J. H., Feveile, H., Christensen, K. B., ve Burr, H. (2011). Sickness absence associated with shared and open-plan offices—a national cross sectional questionnaire survey. Scandinavian journal of work, environment & health, 376-382.
• Robertson, M. M., Huang, Y. H., O’Neill, M. J., ve Schleifer, L. M. (2008). Flexible workspace design and ergonomics training: Impacts on the psychosocial work environment, musculoskeletal health, and work effectiveness among knowledge workers. Applied ergonomics, 39(4), 482-494.
• Ross, P. K., ve Blumenstein, M. (2015). Cloud computing as a facilitator of SME entrepreneurship. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 27(1), 87-101.
• Ross, P., & Ressia, S. (2015). Neither office nor home: Coworking as an emerging workplace choice. Employment Relations Record, 15(1), 42.Schein, E. H. (1984). Culture as an environmental context for careers. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 5(1), 71-81.
• Smith-Jackson, T. L., ve Klein, K. W. (2009). Open-plan offices: Task performance and mental workload. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29(2), 279-289.
• Stallworth Jr, O. E., ve Kleiner, B. H. (1996). Recent developments in office design. Facilities, 14(1/2), 34-42.
• Sundstrom, E., Herbert, R. K., ve Brown, D. W. (1982). Privacy and communication in an open-plan office: A case study. Environment and Behavior, 14(3), 379-392.
• Sundstrom, E., Town, J. P., Brown, D. W., Forman, A., ve Mcgee, C. (1982). Physical enclosure, type of job, and privacy in the office. Environment and Behavior, 14(5), 543-559.
• Sundstrom, E., Bell, P. A., Busby, P. L., ve Asmus, C. (1996). ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY 1989–1994. Annual review of psychology, 47(1), 485-512.
• Şahin A. (2017). Ofislerin Yeni Normali. Fortune Turkey. Erişim adresi: https://www.fortuneturkey.com/ofislerin-yeni-normali-42849.
• Uda, T. (2013). What is coworking? A theoretical study on the concept of coworking. Discussion Papaer, Series A., No: 2013-265, Graduate School of Economics & Business Administration, Hokkaido University, Japan.
• Vilnai-Yavetz, I., Rafaeli, A., ve Yaacov, C. S. (2005). Instrumentality, aesthetics, and symbolism of office design. Environment and Behavior, 37(4), 533-551.
• Vos, P., ve van der Voordt, T. (2002). Tomorrow’s offices through today’s eyes: Effects of innovation in the working environment. Journal of Corporate Real Estate, 4(1), 48-65.
• Vos, P. G. J. C., van Meel, J., ve Dijcks, A. (1999). The Office, the Whole Office and Nothing but the Office: A Framework of Workplace Concepts, Version 1.2. Department of Real Estate & Project Management, Delft University of Technology.
• Winchester, T.(2010). Transitioning from an Open to a Closed Office Environment: Case Study of a University Admissions Office, (Unpublished PhD Dissertation).University of Minnesota Duluth College of Education and Human Service Professions
• Yıldırım, A.B.B. ve Renklibay, U. (2014). Fiziksel Ve Davranışsal Ofis Ortamının Verimlilik Üzerine Etkilerinin İncelenmesi”. UYMS 2014, VIII. Ulusal Yazılım Mühendisliği Sempozyumu. 8-10 Eylül, Güzelyurt. KKTC.ODTÜ Kuzey Kıbrıs Kampüsü.
• Yildirim, K., Akalin-Baskaya, A., ve Celebi, M. (2007). The effects of window proximity, partition height, and gender on perceptions of open-plan offices. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27(2), 154-165.
• Zalesny, M. D., ve Farace, R. V. (1987). Traditional versus open offices: A comparison of sociotechnical, social relations, and symbolic meaning perspectives. Academy of Management Journal, 30(2), 240-259.
• Zerella, S., von Treuer, K., & Albrecht, S. L. (2017). The influence of office layout features on employee perception of organizational culture. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 54, 1-10.
• Zhang, Z., & Spicer, A. (2014). ‘Leader, you first’: The everyday production of hierarchical space in a Chinese bureaucracy. Human Relations, 67(6), 739-762.