Ted Moudis Associates‘ Workplace Strategist Kate Wieczorek shares her ideas on the current Harvard research analyzing the results of the open plan.
For a lot of, together with articles discussing the just lately launched Harvard research which examines the results of “open plan” on collaboration, trendy office design is regarded as anti-walls – with no enclosure nor sense of particular person area. Principally, an enormous variety of workstations are densely crammed onto a flooring with no spatial boundaries, at a detriment to employees productiveness.
This isn’t the office strategist’s suggestion.
The position of a office strategist is what colloquially might be referred to as “pre-pre-design,” which consists of the actions that allow each the firm and the architects to have a robust understanding of how the group features, its strategic objectives, present and future methods of working, and distinctive departmental wants. That is an all-encompassing endeavor, requiring the proper individuals at the desk, and completed by way of conducting visioning periods, focus teams, interviews, office observations, employees surveys, and different strategies of knowledge assortment. Workplace Strategists analyze the knowledge, ask the “right” questions, problem management and organizational assumptions about what their office can obtain, and current options each from a spatial and programmatic perspective. This finally cultivates into the firm’s office technique, main the cost in matching the group’s area to help its enterprise wants.
Sadly, readers of the Harvard research might come to the false conclusion that trendy workplaces being constructed as we speak are all “open plan” they usually may consider any transformation from conventional to extra trendy workspaces will end in dysfunction.
A number of years in the past, there was an preliminary push to rework conventional workplaces into the “open plan,” as the authors outline in the analysis paper. These efforts resulted in organizations taking down partitions and eliminating cubicles with the focus of realizing actual property value efficiencies. Many pursued this path with out regard for the general office technique, as an alternative solely focusing on densification. Not sufficient due diligence was achieved to perceive a corporation’s distinctive wants and worker methods of working. It’s no shock that loads of these endeavors began the poor notion of “open plan.”
As we speak, office strategists promote a office that aligns to the strategic objectives of the enterprise; offering areas the place individuals can do their greatest work. Workplaces with quite a lot of areas, each enclosed and open, shared and particular person, give staff and departments the potential to select the area that fits them greatest. From particular person focus duties in a quiet room to collaboration in huddle rooms to recharging in a meditation space – selection allows and helps productiveness. Determine 1 under demonstrates the evolution of workplaces.
It is crucial that the evident lower of excessive partitions is addressed right here. By means of greatest apply we perceive that reconfiguring areas and taking down partitions encourages daylight all through the area, which has proven to promote worker wellbeing and productiveness, and allow staff to entry fellow colleagues and leaders. Nevertheless, boundaries and a way of construction are nonetheless essential. This may be completed by means of the neighborhood idea – as demonstrated in Determine 2. This setup supplies each open and enclosed various and particular person working areas, giving employees a way of house and possession of their area, entry to number of areas, and allows pure mild to move all through the area.
Past the assumption that each one trendy office design is “open plan,” the Harvard research concludes from two case research that corporations shifting into an open setting will see a lower in collaboration (face-to-face) and a correlating improve in digital communications (e-mails and IMs). This conclusion was based mostly on two knowledge assortment durations, one earlier than the transfer whereas the firm was of their conventional workplace and one two months after of their new area. This research was executed by way of voluntary members sporting a sensor to report face-to-face interactions.
Firstly, the measurement of the research must be evaluated. The dimensions of Research 1 was 52 people, representing roughly 40 % of the firm. The dimensions of Research 2 was 100 people, representing roughly 45 % of the firm, and solely represented one flooring. These are too small of a pattern measurement to symbolize a whole firm, and a few of the individuals may fit in much less collaborative departments. Is it correct to assess a corporation, and its technique, via partaking with lower than 50 % of its staff?
Secondly, the Harvard research outlined and measured collaboration as face-to-face interactions between two or extra people dealing with each other, conversing forwards and backwards, and inside 10 meters of each other. This was collected by means of members sporting a sociometric badge outfitted with infrared sensor, microphones, Bluetooth sensor capturing location, and accelerator for capturing participant’s motion. The research notes that for the sociometric badge to rely an occasion of collaboration, three situations had to exist:
- Two or extra badges had to be instantly dealing with one another, with “uninterrupted infrared line of sight”
- Detection of alternating talking
- Inside 10 meters of the corresponding sensor
This face-to-face collaboration measure serves as a key aspect in assessing the influence of open workplaces on worker interactions. The research forwent any qualitative observations of the members of their previous and new workspace, as an alternative relying on knowledge from the sociometric badges. Though this eradicates any bias that an observer might encounter and permits for a real 24/7 knowledge assortment interval, I might query if lots of the present methods of collaboration in the office would have been counted.
Aspect-by-side collaboration, the place two or extra people are sitting subsequent to each other taking a look at the similar monitor or doc collectively, is certainly one of the commonest and in style methods of collaborating. In accordance to the research’s knowledge assortment technique, this may increasingly haven’t counted as collaboration since the sensors wouldn’t instantly face each other (Picture 1).
Think about workforce rooms, the place the setup can range however a typical association includes a number of teammates on their very own laptops dealing with each other round a big convention desk (Picture 2). This kind of working collectively might not have been counted in the collaboration research as the laptops might inhibit the “interrupted infrared direct line of sight” requirement. Any object between members has the potential to impede recording an occasion as collaborating.
One other instance of a brand new approach of working is ad-hoc desk-side collaboration. Considered one of the main advantages of a extra clear setup is the capability of teammates to talk to each other with out leaving their workstation. With no tall ugly cubicle limitations between colleagues, one doesn’t want to depart their very own pc to speak to the individual subsequent to them face-to-face (Picture three). Merely turning your head to talk new shopper requests, make clear a query, request some assist, bounce concepts, and socialize is now possible. Sharing information and knowledge has by no means been simpler. In accordance to the knowledge assortment strategies, this may not be counted as face-to-face collaboration.
Think about non-participant collaboration, since the pattern measurement was so small, there’s over a 50 % probability a participant is speaking with a non-participant inside their group or division. Shopper interactions usually are not counted, which might rely for a majority of a person’s collaboration efforts if they’re in a really client-facing position.
Face-to-face interplay just isn’t the solely advantage of a extra seen office. Studying and progress alternatives are usually not solely vital elements in trendy office design, but in addition a precedence of latest hires. Via witnessing and listening to your supervisor or different teammates’ conduct – whether or not its listening to your supervisor on a name with a shopper or observing interoffice interactions, transparency and openness allow studying.
To find a way to consider a technique because it pertains to precise collaboration, qualitative knowledge ought to be factored in together with the quantitative knowledge to present a extra anthropologic view. Firsthand information that one learns from observing an organization might be so vital and informative to the improvement of a office technique. The vibe, power, tradition is one thing that’s extra felt than quantified – and it’s important to translate this intangible quantifier into the group’s future area.
Digital Communication is just not the Enemy
Counting digital communications as anti-collaboration also needs to be evaluated additional. IMs have been counted in the research together with e-mails to function a counter to face-to-face interplay, despite the fact that IMs are a really casual and private approach of speaking. IMs are nice instruments for fast and ongoing collaboration, as a means to save time spent sending e-mail or touring to a non-adjacent coworker, and subsequently shouldn’t be counted as anti-collaboration.
E-mails akin to contracts, authorized paperwork, and deliverables can’t be changed by face-to face communication – until one is now hand delivering these things of their new office. If utilizing e-mail as a destructive measure, these e-mails must be taken out of the equation.
The research refutes the linkage between e-mail and face-to-face interplay, stating “Across all models, we find that F2F [face-to-face] networks and email networks respond very differently to changes in the built environment, with one type of network failing to predict changes in the other.” Nevertheless, it goes on to proceed to correlate e-mail / IMs with face to face interplay all through the commentary.
One sort of communication doesn’t want to substitute the different. A number of situations exist the place face-to-face conversations might immediate and improve digital communications, corresponding to sending an e-mail/ IM:
- “It was great meeting you….”
- “Based on our conversation earlier…”
- “What was that ____ we discussed earlier today?”
- Or perhaps a easy IM “Hey, are you at your desk?”
It’s the number of collaboration instruments, each in individual and nearly, and having choices of speaking to greatest help the particular person, the group, and the division that’s the answer. Eliminating digital communications all collectively is just not the reply.
The primary speculation of the analysis paper is that open plan reduces collaboration. Staff really feel unease in a totally open setting and subsequently should resort to digital communications. The authors help this by relaying the knowledge conclusion that “participants collectively sent 56 percent more emails” after the transfer than earlier than the transfer. Digging into the analysis, this interprets to just one.2 extra emails per participant in a 15-business day span. Using “56 percent more” misrepresents the precise outcome, as one individual sending lower than 2 further emails in three weeks just isn’t that persuasive nor conclusive of a discovering. Hypothetically talking, if the research had discovered the inverse to be true, that open-plan elevated collaboration and was supported by the discovering of emails decreasing by 1.2 per individual in a 15-day span, I don’t consider the research would have been seen as conclusive findings.
What’s Lacking: Change Administration
Though the article states the two corporations in the case research moved right into a extra open workplace setting, little element is given on the extent of transformation.
As a office strategist, I might need to know:
- How is their present office configured? How lengthy have they lived in the area?
- What current or historic transitions has the firm been by means of – how have been these communicated and acquired by employees?
- What’s the foremost driver(s) behind the transfer to a brand new office? What are the primary objectives the group needs to obtain by means of this transition?
- What was the degree of employees / division engagement on new office selections? How have been these included (or not included) into the last design?
- How does every division work collectively and collaborate of their groups? What new methods of working would improve their productiveness and be factored into the area?
- What’s at present inhibiting productiveness in the previous area and the way has this been factored into the new office?
These solutions, together with an evaluation by a licensed change administration practitioner, would all give clues into the degree of change and into how will employees adapt to their new surroundings.
With any disruptive occasion or change to present state, there’ll all the time be a dip in the productiveness of a office or system in place, as proven in Determine three and four.
Assuming a lower in productiveness is indicative of an unsuccessful office design and technique is just not true, as was famous in the Harvard research. The research doesn’t point out if there’s a change administration technique in place for both firm. Change Administration consists of the efforts to put together and help people, groups, and organizations going via an organizational change. It’s a part of the challenge course of to allow a profitable return on funding. That is completed via efforts of teaching, coaching, and speaking to employees as they put together for and undergo the transition. The aim of change administration is to scale back the degree of impression to enterprise operations and to scale back the period in the state of disruption. Utterly mitigating the results of a change just isn’t possible.
Moreover, the analysis states that knowledge collected post-move was “just over two months” after shifting in, and that that is “enough for people to have settled into the environment.” Every firm shifting into a brand new area requires a unique timeline of a transitionary interval. Normally, it may well take an organization three to six months to absolutely adapt to a brand new area, typically one to three years if going by means of a serious transition. Assuming staff have absolutely settled into their new area, with out investigation into how they’re adapting, is an incomplete evaluation.
With any new office design or transition, all corporations ought to have a change administration plan in place to allow a clean transition, as every group, division, and worker handles change in another way.
How Ought to Organizations View their Workplace?
A corporation’s office is an asset. It elements into the whole lot – employees retention, recruiting prime expertise, conveying model and values, partaking with shoppers and guests, and supporting worker productiveness.
Solely eliminating boundaries and enclosures is just not the answer for making a extra productive and efficient office. Understanding your staff and your group by way of office technique is the answer. To comprehend the advantages that a office can present, a corporation should do the due diligence, and hunt down employees and division opinions by way of engagement, so as to develop their very own distinctive office technique. Staff have gotten extra knowledgeable on office design and anticipate extra of their employers when it comes to the office surroundings and insurance policies, and employers want to ship robust outcomes.
With every firm having a finite quantity of sq. footage to occupy, the greatest return on funding is to construct areas that help and are utilized by staff. It isn’t simply the precise design that’s the success or failure of a office design, it’s the tradition, insurance policies, and procedures in place at an organization. It’s the humanistic view that a corporation should modify its lens to when enterprise a office transformation.