THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN OFFICE DESIGN AND PRODUCTIVITY

Abstract

Increased personal control and comfort needs of employees triggered the concern among organizations to provide them with an environment and office design, which fulfills the employees’ needs and helps to boost their productivity. The main objective of this study is to find out the relationship between office design and productivity. For this purpose, 31 bank branches of 13 banks were contacted and studied. The findings of this study show that office design is very vital in terms of increasing employees’ productivity. Comfortable and ergonomic office design motivates the employees and increases their performance substantially.

Introduction

Most people spend fifty percent of their lives within indoor environments, which greatly influence their mental status, actions, abilities and performance (Sundstrom, 1994). Better outcomes and increased productivity is assumed to be the result of better workplace environment. Better physical environment of office will boosts the employees and ultimately improve their productivity. Various literature pertain to the study of multiple offices and office buildings indicated that the factors such as dissatisfaction, cluttered workplaces and the physical environment are playing a major role in the loss of employees’ productivity (Carnevale 1992, Clements-Croome 1997).

Hughes (2007) surveyed 2000 employees pertain to various organizations and industries in multiple levels. The reported results of these survey showed that nine out of ten believed that a workspace quality affects the attitude of employees and increases their productivity. Employees in different organizations have different office designs. Every office has unique furniture and spatial arrangements, lighting and heating arrangements and different levels of noise. The purpose of this study is to analyze the impact of the office design factors on employees’ productivity. The literature reveals that good office design has a positive affect on employees’ productivity and the same assumption is being tested in this study for the banking sector of Pakistan. This study will try to find out the effects of office design on employees’ productivity.

Defining Office Design

Office design is defined by BNet Business Dictionary (2008) as, “the arrangement of workspace so that work can be performed in the most efficient way”. Office design incorporates both ergonomics and work flow, which examine the way in which work is performed in order to optimize layout. Office design is an important factor in job satisfaction. It affects the way in which employees work, and many organizations have implemented open-plan offices to encourage teamwork. Office design is very vital in employee satisfaction, and the broad concept of office design also includes the workflow. The work is analyzed initially and it is identified that how it is accomplished and then the overall setting of the office is made according to that flow. This ensures the smooth running of work in the office without hindrances.

Defining Productivity

Rolloos (1997) defined the productivity as, “productivity is that which people can produce with the least effort”. Productivity is also defined by Sutermeister (1976) as, “output per employee hour, quality considered”. Dorgan (1994) defines productivity as, “the increased functional and organizational performance, including quality”. Productivity is a ratio to measure how well an organization (or individual, industry, country) converts input resources (labor, materials, machines etc.) into goods and services. In this case, we are considering performance increase as when there is less absenteeism, fewer employee leaving early and less breaks; whereas in a factory setting, increase in performance can be measured by the number of units produced per employee per hour. In this study, subjective productivity measurement method is used. The measures of this method are not based on quantitative operational information. Instead, they are based on personnel’s subjective assessments. Wang and Gianakis (1999) have defined subjective performance measure as an indicator used to assess individuals’ aggregated perceptions, attitudes or assessments toward an organizations product or service. Subjective productivity data is usually collected using survey questionnaires. Subjective data can also be descriptive or qualitative collected by interviews. (Clements-Croome and Kaluarachchi 2000) Subjective productivity data is gathered from employees, supervisors, clients, customers and suppliers.

Workplace and Productivity

Over the years, many organizations have been trying new designs and techniques to construct office buildings, which can increase productivity, and attract more employees. Many authors have noted that, the physical layout of the workspace, along with efficient management processes, is playing a major role in boosting employees’ productivity and improving organizational performance (Uzee, 1999; Leaman and Bordass, 1993; Williams et al. 1985).

An independent research firm conducted a research on US workplace environment (Gensler, 2006). In March 2006, a survey was conducted by taking a sample size of 2013. The research was related to; workplace designs, work satisfaction, and productivity. 89 percent of the respondents rated design, from important to very important. Almost 90 percent of senior officials revealed that effective workplace design is important for the increase in employees’ productivity. The final outcome of the survey suggested that businesses can enhance their productivity by improving their workplace designs. A rough estimation was made by executives, which showed that almost 22 percent increase can be achieved in the company’s performance if their offices are well designed.

But practically, many organizations still do not give much importance to workplace design. As many as 40 percent of the employees believe that their companies want to keep their costs low that is why their workplaces have bad designs; and 46 percent of employees think that the priority list of their company does not have workplace design on top. When data was summarized, almost one out of every five employees rated their workplace environment from, ‘fair to poor’. 90 percent admitted that their attitude about work is adversely affected by the quality of their workplace environment. Yet again 89 percent blamed their working environment for their job dissatisfaction (Gensler, 2006).

Relationship between Office Design and Productivity

The American Society of Interior Designers (ASID, 1999) carried out an independent study and revealed that the physical workplace design is one of the top three factors, which affect performance and job satisfaction. The study results showed that 31 percent of people were satisfied with their jobs and had pleasing workplace environments. 50 percent of people were seeking jobs and said that they would prefer a job in a company where the physical environment is good.

Brill et al. (1984) ranked factors, which affect productivity according to their importance. The factors are sequenced based on the significance: Furniture, Noise, Flexibility, Comfort, Communication, Lighting, Temperature and the Air Quality. Springer Inc (1986) stated that “an insurance company in a study revealed that the best ergonomic furniture improved performance by 10 to 15 percent.

Leaman (1995) conducted a survey which is briefly highlighted here. Author attempted to find the relationship between indoor environment, dissatisfied employees and their productivity. The results revealed that the productivity of the work is affected because the people were unhappy with temperature, air quality, light and noise levels in the office. The productivity level was measured by the method of self reported measurement, which is a 9 point scale from greater than -40 and less than +40 percent (loss/gain). The scale was associated with the question: “Does your office environment affect your productivity at work?” (Leaman, 1995). The data collected was correlated and results said that the coefficient of correlation (r)=0.92 and the correlation exists between people who showed dissatisfaction with their indoor environment and those reporting that their productivity is affected by the office environment.

Implications for Management

Based on the findings, following are the implications of the study.

Lighting was found to be the major factor, which is affecting the daily and overall productivity of employees in offices. Therefore, it is recommended to have proper and adequate artificial as well as natural light to improve the office design for better performance.

Most of the organizations do not give importance to office design; this study will give them ample reasons to consider office design as an important factor in increasing their employees’ productivity.

References

American Society of Interior Designers (1999) “Recruiting and retaining qualified employees by design.”

Black, S. & Lynch, L. (1996). Human-Capital Investments And Productivity. Technology, Human Capital and the Wage Structure. Vol 86. No. 2, 263 – 267.

Bnet Business dictionary 2008

Brill, M. Margulis S, Konar E, BOSTI (1984) Using Office Design to Increase Productivity. Vol. 1, 1984: Vol. 2, 1984. Buffalo, N.Y.: Workplace Design and Productivity.Buildings/IAQ, pp.495 500.

Carnevale, D.G., (1992), Physical Settings of Work. Public Productivity and Management Review, 15, 4, 423-436.

Clements-Croome, D.J., (1997). Specifying Indoor Climate, in book Naturally Ventilated Buildings, (Spon)

Clements-Croome, D., Kaluarachchi, Y. (2000) An Assessment of the Influence of the In-door Environment on the Productivity of Occupants in Offices Design, Construction and Operation of Healthy Buildings ,pp.67 81.

Dorgan, C.E. (1994) productivity Link to the Indoor Environment Estimated Relative to ASHRAE 62-1989 Proceedings of Health Buildings ‘94, Budapest, pp.461 472.