办公空间室内设计外文翻译（7000字）

​​​​​​​附 录

附录一 中文译文

R.H.克劳福德和史蒂芬（编），《生活与学习》：研究改善建筑环境：2015年，第49届国际建筑科学协会会议，第203-214页。©2015，建筑科学协会和墨尔本大学。

对办公空间设计变化的看法：重新设计Barwon Water的办公环境

杰西卡·查普曼，大卫·琼斯和菲奥娜·格雷

迪肯大学（澳大利亚吉朗）jechapma@deakin.edu.au，david.jones@deakin.edu.au，fiona.gray@deakin.edu.au

摘要：2015年初，Barwon Water获得了州XX的资助，以将其位于吉朗的各种行政办公室合理化和翻新为一个综合体。GHD Woodhead对现有Ryrie街综合楼进行了新的绿色星级改造，是翻新工程的一部分。该项目将把Barwon Water的所有办公室合并到一个地点，增加占地面积，提供新的“绿色”中庭，并采用开放式布局。设定了新的战略方向后，Barwon Water现在正在进行全面的文化和运营变革，以实现这些战略目标。工作场所设计的愿望被确定为：环境可持续发展；促进创新和创造力；建立联系；改善沟通与协作；为有效的工作提供有效的空间；随着时间的推移具有灵活性；欢迎社区并与社区建立联系；健康;以及最新的技术。本文调查了Barwon Water员工对这种未来合并的看法和忧虑，特别是提议的开放式办公环境。虽然有关此主题的大多数研究是通过即时的员工需求预设计研讨会来进行的，但该研究提供了人类对工作场所环境变化的看法的纵向透视图，并回顾了办公环境的变化如何协同地适应建筑的响应和变化。公司战略。

关键字：更换管理层;内部重新设计；工作场所文化；自来水公司。

介绍

本文介绍了对白领在入住前对开放式办公室的看法的调查，以便就这种新工作场所环境中的职员看法，期望和忧虑提供知情的观点。

这项研究旨在审查员工在不同工作场所属性上的价值观，并探索与他们现有的工作场所环境相关的当前工作模式。该案例研究涉及Barwon Water员工在翻新和合并新总部之前的一项研究，该工作将于2018年完成。该研究将继续进行，并以2010年完成的基础认知调查为基础，以评估员工的认知和工作模式随时间的变化，尤其是随着发布用于办公场所改造的新建筑计划，并审查有关发布新建筑的计划和图像所引起的新问题的发现开放式办公室转换存在与建筑和室内设计有关的学术和专业实践文献，这些文献涉及物理工作空间的变化对员工满意度，生产力和工作健康的影响。但是，这些文献中的大多数都存在于占用后评估领域中，而不是在占用前环境中。

从传统的办公室配置和环境到开放计划环境的转换尤其受到了许多消费者的焦虑和焦虑。尽管存在这种焦虑，并且消费者显然不接受创建的新开放式计划环境，但是关于前后影响，包括员工消费者对设计草案的理解以及对习惯设计的潜在影响，几乎没有明确的定量信息或可衡量的数据。体验。

例如，室内设计从业人员最近对开放式计划和封闭式工作空间的关注表明，员工对关键因素的满意程度不同，这些因素包括噪音，隐私以及成功地沟通，编写/键入内容并成功协作的能力。这项研究主要包含在发布的结果中，该结果涉及占用后评估，通常涉及从封闭式办公室转移到开放式办公室的劳动力。许多研究得出的结论是，开放式办公室会对员工满意度产生负面影响，从而影响他们的工作绩效和生产。一些研究表明，在有效评估开放式工作区的员工满意度时，需要考虑缓解因素和假设。包括工作状态，年龄和对工作站的个人控制。另一个因素是质量变更管理本身的性质和实施，包括咨询和沟通。几位作者已将后一种参与过程确定为使员工能够成功地从封闭/半封闭的办公环境过渡到开放式办公环境的关键因素。

许多文献假设在体力劳动环境与消费者工人的满意度和生产率之间存在因果关系。Veitch等人清楚地确定了这一结论。（2007年）专门试图探索这一假设。Veitch等人的研究。（2007年）旨在测试和验证建筑环境满意度和消费者工作满意度之间存在直接联系，认为对工作环境更满意的消费者对工作也更满意。

几位研究人员已将噪音和隐私视为开放式办公室环境的主要负面问题。文献调查了员工对其工作环境的满意度（Daniellson＆Bodin，2009； Kim＆de Dear，2013； Sandstrom等，1982；Maher＆von Hippel，2005）得出结论，员工受到大量噪音和缺乏噪音的负面影响开放式办公室环境中的隐私保护。据记录，过多的噪音会影响员工的积极性，这会导致沟通和工作分散精力，因此会影响工人以与封闭式/半封闭式办公室环境相当的水平直接集中精力和完成工作的能力。缺乏隐私被记录为会导致无法控制的不必要的社会联系和干扰，基于计算机的无效通信，过多的刺激或过度刺激，以及无法进行机密任务和讨论而不会将自己从开放式空间中挤出来另一个更半私人的空间或走廊空间。

例如，Kim和de Dear（2013）的研究得出的结论是，噪音和缺乏隐私的负面影响超过了开放式办公室所能带来的好处，例如更轻松的协作。此外，Maher和von Hippel（2005）观察到，与隐私量较小的工人相比，隐私量较大且较少受到干扰和刺激的工人比其他工人更满意，并且同样，隐私权越大，生产和活动的数量和质量就越大。 ，从而强调了隐私对员工幸福的重要性的结论。

几位偏向工作管理的作者认为，加强协作和沟通是一项政策目标，因此被明确表述为组织选择采用政策实施开放式地板空间设计的关键原因之一（Hua等，2010）。相反，大多数学者通常得出结论，实际上，开放式办公室中的协作并没有比传统的封闭式/半封闭式办公室环境更好，有时甚至更糟。Kim and de Dear（2013）得出结论，在封闭/半封闭办公室中，沟通被认为更好，将其与沟通与隐私之间的既定人类关系以及封闭/半封闭办公室所提供的增加的隐私联系起来。Rashid等人（2009年）观察到，由于面对面互动的增加，具有更高可达性和可见性的办公环境导致员工的个人满意度较低。因此，与管理层知情的业内人士认为开放式办公室可以使员工更轻松，更好地进行沟通和协作相反，建筑和室内设计的学术研究则相反。

开放式办公室的研究主要集中于工作站规模和布局规模变量的影响，这些变量是影响员工满意度的物理环境要素。Spreckelmeyer（1993）列出了工作站变量，其中包括照明，个体工作空间的大小和隐私等因素，这些因素是工人幸福感的关键决定因素。Lee和Brand（2005）还确定了工作站因素是导致员工满意度的主要因素，尤其是工人个性化其工作站空间的能力。Danielsson和Bodin（2009）将环境舒适度和空气质量列为影响员工满意度的关键因素，这些变量比之前的变量具有更大的影响力。华等。（2010年）指出以下事实：办公室布局变量（例如，从单个工作站到最近的会议地点的距离以及从单个工作站到最近的复印/打印区的距离）决定了员工对他们的工作场所环境如何支持和支持的看法。合作。因此，这些文献表明，在检查物理环境对员工绩效，沟通，协作和生产的影响时，必须考虑不同的变量。

尽管上述许多文献已经确定了与开放式办公环境相关的负面和绩效问题，但很少有作者探索解决这些负面问题的方法。似乎很明显的一种补救办法是，提高工人的满意度与良好的变更管理有关，这种补救办法已被许多作者巧妙地提及。如果组织的经理可以授权，参与并成功地与员工进行沟通，说明为何以及如何发生对开放式办公室的更改，以使员工能够参与其新工作场所环境的设计过程，则员工可以更好地过渡并发现自己对自己的新环境更加满意（O’Neill，2010年）。为了在这个新的开放式办公环境中导航并生存，Hedge（1982）指出，对于员工来说，学习新的行为以适应新的开放式工作环境至关重要。管理倡导者已经指出，变更管理是成功实现从封闭/半封闭环境到开放计划环境的关键因素。办公室室内设计从业人员就如何最好地管理办公室变更产生了许多建议和指导性文件（O’Neill，2008； O’Neill，2010； O’Neill，2010； O。

约翰逊（2009年），但是良好的变革管理的影响尚未得到该文献的研究。因此，在将员工调至开放式办公环境方面，缺乏有关变革管理策略的研究和文献，而且几乎没有信息可证明变革管理策略确实能使员工对新工作场所的环境更加满意。

巴旺水

Barwon Water是一家大型区域性供水公司，为维多利亚州超过8100平方公里的区域提供高质量和可持续的水，污水处理和回收服务。Barwon Water的服务集水区包括维多利亚的部分地区，该地区从东部的小河和贝拉林半岛延伸，从北部的梅勒迪斯延伸至西南海岸的阿波罗湾。Barwon Water的历史可以追溯到1908年成立的吉朗市自来水厂信托，而Barwon Water则根据1989年《维多利亚州水法》重新组建为法定机构，并一直沿用至今。Barwon Water的资产基础约为23亿美元，包括数个水库，污水处理厂，泵站和广泛的管网。该组织雇用约310名员工，在运营，战略，工程，计划，财务和行政部门中发挥作用。

在最近对工人地点的干扰之前，由于Ryrie街的翻新工程的进行，吉朗地区的Barwon Water工人被划分为三个工作地点； Ryrie街，Mercer街和Lonsdale街（图1）。

图1：Barwon Water办事处的位置图。

自2007年以来，随着Ryrie和Lonsdale Street办事处日趋老旧，过时且效率低下，Barwon Water一直在研究办公室住宿和办公室合并方案以现代公司的运作方式和以计算机为主导的不断变化的工作环境为例（Begg 2015）。在考虑翻新Ryrie街道办事处之前，Barwon Water在2010年探讨了在吉朗火车站附近建造新建筑物以取代Ryrie街道和Lonsdale街道办事处的可行性，但是该项目未能获得内部和州XX的资金支持。XX消息来源。

他们目前的《企业计划》（2014a）中表示，需要对Barwon Water的房屋进行翻新和合并。Barwon Water的战略意图（2014b，第1页），以“通过效率，创新和领导力提供水和污水处理服务”为计划涵盖的时期的使命。因此，目前的Barwon Water工作空间中效率低下是推动新住宿环境的关键因素。

确定了Barwon Water当前的办公场所不适合其目的并且不支持该组织的战略方向后，决定购买新的工作场所……（Meinhardt＆DEGW 2011，第11页）

新的Barwon Water住宿设施的既定目标是：

根据现代住宿原则容纳现有和将来的员工；

提高生产力，培训和教育；改善环境绩效；并

为Barwon Water成为可持续发展的领导者提供了手段（Meinhardt＆DEGW 2011，p。11）。

GHD Woodhead作为项目建筑师表示，将Barwon Water的运营合并到一个新的住房中将可以提高效率和生产力，并且可以节省运营，维护和能源成本的45％。他们的设计中包括：使用低VOC材料； 60％的建筑面积可使用自然光并享有科里奥湾的北部美景；自行车存放处可容纳40辆自行车，淋浴和储物柜；用于厕所冲洗和灌溉的雨水；现有结构的90％可以重复使用。

GHD Woodhead制作的图像（图2-4）描述了现有建筑群的主要外部变化，包括提供了一个新的内部新中庭和一个宽敞的开放式办公环境。

图2-4：拟议的外立面将更改为位于Ryrie Street的现有Barwon Water建筑群，以及新的内部中庭和开放式办公环境，并具有北部外观。（资源：Barwon Water，2015年）

Barwon Water与顾问DEGW于2007年开始在内部对Barwon Water员工的替代性和更具凝聚力的办公场所进行调查。2010年，Barwon Water委托DEGW进行了详细研究，以调查现有员工的工作模式以及员工对工作环境及其现有环境的总体看法（DEGW 2010）。DEGW（2010）研究的目的是提供一个信息库，为2010年新建筑项目的简介提供参考。

该研究分为三个部分：经理访谈，员工研讨会和在线工作场所绩效调查。经理访谈的重点是了解特定功能的详细要求。员工讲习班与来自各个级别和部门的代表一起进行，以探讨文化变量和相互关系，当前的工作方式以及这些因素如何影响Barwon Water现有的工作场所。进行在线工作场所绩效调查是为了了解员工的工作场所优先事项，并由190名员工匿名完成。还举办了第二次人员讲习班，以审查和反思在线调查产生的结果，并探讨理想的工作环境。

经理访谈和员工讲习班的调查结果很大程度上为新大楼的功能需求提供了简要的建议。相反，在线工作场所绩效调查的结果提供了有关工作模式，工作文化和员工对现有工作场所的看法的广泛信息，这些发现总结如下。

在线调查中确定的最重要的工作场所变量是与能够集中精力和执行任务有关的变量。工作场所中表现最好的变量是与技术支持系统和与同事联系有关的变量。表现最低的变量是停车场，体育馆，茶室和社交中心等辅助设施以及建筑物温度。在性能和重要性之间的最大差距是停车场的可用性和专心的能力。就受访者所使用的现有工作站方案的类型而言，大多数受访者将“他们的工作区”识别为开放式计划区域中的“他们自己的办公桌”。只有5％的受访者拥有自己的封闭办公室。在与Barwon Water客户的互动方面，大多数员工与客户进行面对面的互动，这是他们日常工作和活动的一部分。

关于会议，受访者表示，他们的大多数会议仍按计划进行，而不是计划外。此外，当被问及在现有办公室内部区域中所花费的时间时，受访者表示他们将大部分时间都花在自己的工作场所中，而不是在建筑物中开会或其他空间。最后两个变量表明，Barwon Water的大多数员工在工作场所的活动都是静态的，并且这种现有环境不灵活且不可调整。

DEGW研究的建议与上述文献综述中提出的建议有关，这些建议涉及所需的功能和新工作环境的感觉。这些建议包括用于不同功能的各种空间（例如，用于电话的安静和私人空间，非正式会议的休息区，偶然相遇的场所），具有适应性的空间的灵活性，建筑物中的视觉透明性以增强连接性，以及充足的自然采光，通风能力和视野。DEGW研究没有利用开放式回应的机会，从而限制了就个人话题和看法提供的反馈的数量和质量。此外，DEGW的研究并未直接询问Barwon Water员工对他们对不同类型工作空间（即开放式办公环境）的看法。这种缺陷导致对Barwon Water员工如何看待GHD Woodhead设计所体现的新开放式办公环境中潜在的工作环境缺乏全面的了解。此外，对于员工对开放式办公室的看法也缺乏了解，这是否会限制管理层规划和管理从当前到新工作环境的变更管理流程的能力。

方法

作者在2015年进行了更具包容性和定性的员工调查。来自Barwon Water的24位来自不同级别，角色和位置的Barwon Water工作人员参加了调查。此外，还选择了代表Barwon Water的一系列任期的员工。这使得可以从不同的工作人员那里收集到各种反馈，这些反馈在当前Barwon Water工作环境中存在着截然不同的经验。.这项调查于2015年2月和2015年3月进行，通常在Ryrie Street办事处工作的大多数员工在Ryrie Street办事处准备进行建筑和装修时已被迁移或倾泻到其他办事处。这项研究的结果是，一些员工最近经历了变化的工作环境。在这种情况下，要求员工在相关情况下根据Barwon Water的两种工作环境提供答复。

调查是面对面进行的。受访者对调查进行了澄清，并在必要时从研究人员澄清了更多细节。这项调查包括17个结构性和开放性问题，并采用了多种回答类型。这些包括排名选项，选择最合适的选项以及对未解决问题的书面答复。这些问题检查了工作场所类型和在不同位置花费的时间，会议类型，客户互动，不同工作场所方面的重要性和表现以及对开放式办公室的看法。邀请了43名员工参加。其中，有29例呈阳性，在进行研究时有24例可用。

这项研究的样本组比以前的DEGW研究要小得多，但在Barwon Water的地点，角色，级别和工作年限方面得到了证实和更广泛的分布。与以前的DEGW研究相比，它是亲自进行的，而不是在线进行的。这种执行策略为研究人员提供了与受访者互动的机会。

使其能够全面完成每个问题。尽管新研究中包括了问题的交叉比较，但新调查中提供了其他未包括在DEGW调查中的开放式回答问题，以使受访者能够提供有关其对开放式办公室的看法的更详细反馈。第二次调查的目的是在与DEGW调查相同的问题上对受访者进行重新测试，以直接比较答案，以确定答案自2010年以来是否基本保持不变，或是否存在显着差异。

进行第二次调查的目的是深入了解Barwon Water工作人员的看法，以确定自2010年第一次调查以来所经历的时间是否带来了观念上的改变。此外，第二次调查是在装修工程开始之前进行的，旨在为新工作环境建成和居住后进行的任何未来调查提供一个比较点。这项收集了许多年的调查问卷，也使我们能够纵向研究工作场所环境，以探索工作模式和员工价值观是否由于办公环境的变化而发生变化。

讨论区

一般发现

对一般调查结果的讨论分为四个部分：工作模式，员工价值观，员工对开放式办公室的看法以及与2010年调查的比较。

工作模式

就分配的工作空间而言，绝大多数受访者将自己的办公桌放置在开放式区域中，或者将自己的办公桌放置在多人封闭区域中。只有8％的受访者将其工作环境归类为封闭办公室。大多数受访者将所有时间都花在主要的Barwon Water站点上，很少有员工跨站点或在外地工作。很少的工作时间是在家中。在主要的Barwon Water站点内，受访者将大部分时间都花在了自己的工作站上，而很少的时间花在了开会空间上。受访者表示，他们的大多数会议都是有计划的，而不是无计划的。关于与客户的互动，在接受调查的受访者中，大约三分之二的受访者确认他们与Barwon Water办公室和/或客户所在地的客户直接互动。这表明大多数工人目前以开放式办公室的封闭形式工作，并且劳动力的移动是静态的，在使用空间方面没有太大的灵活性。

工人价值观

要求受访者首先评估工作场所变量的重要性，然后再评估他们对工作场所变量表现的满意程度。确定最重要的变量是能够在办公桌上舒适地工作，建筑物的温度，可使用自然光和良好的人造光以及在必要时集中注意力的能力。在工作重要性和表现之间差距最大的工作场所变量是建立温度和支撑空间，例如就餐和使用体育馆的社交中心。受访者评价的最高绩效变量是安全进入Barwon Water建筑。

以及与同事并肩工作的能力。表现最差的因素是可使用支持设施，例如体育馆和社交和饮食中心。受访者还认为建筑温度不佳。

在生产率方面，受访者在工作环境对其个人生产率和团队生产率产生的影响方面存在分歧。在这两种情况下，两者都仅略多于一半的受访者，这表明工作环境对生产率产生了积极影响。

工人对开放式办公室的看法

口头答复使受访者有机会直接表达他们对开放式办公室的想法。受访者的普遍共识认为，开放式办公室是可以接受的，但前提是它们必须经过精心设计。受访者表示，需要各种空间来满足不同的个性和工作角色。受访者担心开放式办公室中的潜在噪音和干扰因素，以及隐私和机密性的丧失。这些受访者指出，与Barwon Water的其他同事和工作团队保持联系是一个主要优势。

与2010年调查的比较

与2010年DEGW调查相比，答复存在一些显着差异，但是在很大程度上，这两项调查提供了相似的结果。就工作场所而言，最重要的变量是建筑物温度，在办公桌前舒适地工作，能够集中注意力和获取自然光，这两项调查均被认为非常重要。在两项调查中，建筑物温度都是工作场所变量，在重要性和性能之间存在较大差距，而在2010年DEGW调查中，停车场存在较大差距，但在2015年调查中则没有。在两次调查中，被评为最高绩效的变量差异很大，而最低绩效变量则非常相似（表1）。

表格1：2010年和2015年调查中工作场所因素的比较。

2010年调查2015年调查

最重要的

专注能力能够在办公桌前舒适地工作

进行电话交谈的能力在工作时间内的建筑物温度

能够在办公桌上舒适地工作享有自然采光最高表现

共享实用程序空间安全地进入企业

能够与同事安排面对面的会面

与同事并肩工作的能力

高效有效的中央预订系统附近的停车场可用性最低

5.2.主要发现

调查中最重要的发现是与工作场所变量的表现和重要性有关的结果（表2）。对于这些问题，要求受访者在5个变量中对变量的性能和重要性进行评分，其中5个变量非常重要，并且表现良好。

表2：工作场所因素得分

确定的两个最重要的工作场所变量是能够在办公桌前舒适地工作，平均评级为4.75，而建筑物温度，平均评级为4.71。这意味着单个工作空间的布置是员工满意度和生产率的关键变量，而建筑温度对员工的舒适感有很大影响。单个工作空间对员工的重要性表明，与整体办公室布局相比，员工更关心工作站设计规模上的变量。措词上的措词强调，这是因为获得资源以及对噪声和干扰的即时保护是员工生产力的关键变量。

员工对空调的重视与其性能相反，建筑物温度是工作场所的变量，在感知的重要性和性能之间存在最大的差异。其重要性等级（4.71）和绩效等级（2.33）之间的差异是

2.38分。在措词上，一些工作人员指出了空调的不一致性，这显然是许多工作人员共同关心的问题，这在其平均评分中得到了反映。因此，在许多工作人员中，关键的问题是始终保持舒适的温度范围内稳定的空调，并且目前对他们的舒适工作能力产生了显着的负面影响。

措辞上的措词表明，许多工作人员担心噪音和隐私。45％的员工提到高噪音水平是他们对开放式办公室的看法的关键变量。三分之一的受访者提到隐私问题是他们对开放式布局的看法的主要变量。积极的一面是，有20％的员工认为开放式办公室可以轻松，快速地促进与同事和其他工作团队的联系。

结论

调查结果表明，Barwon Water员工对工作站规模变量和工作场所规模变量都高度重视。在具有良好照明和建筑物温度的办公桌上舒适地工作是员工生产力和幸福感的最重要变量。就……而言员工对开放式办公室的感知，噪音和隐私是关键问题，提供各种不同的空间是关键要求。开放式办公室布局的主要优势是易于协作和与同事联系。调查表明，出于这些原因，工作人员对开放式办公室保持警惕，但并不反对。

2010年DEGW和2015年调查之间的差异表明，在这段时间内，Barwon Water工作人员仍然重视类似的变量，即可以在办公桌前舒适地工作的能力以及提供幸福支持设施的能力。两次调查之间，工作场所变量的感知表现有所不同，但这很可能归因于地点变化和技术发展。

针对适合2015年员工的工作环境的建议与适合2010年员工的建议相类似，其中包括各种空间，以实现不同的功能，舒适的温度，精心设计的个人工作站以及良好的自然采光。结论是工作环境符合Barwon Water的新办公室设计目标。根据新的工作环境对员工进行的最终调查将有助于分析开放式办公室如何改变员工的观念，价值观和工作模式。

致谢

作者要感谢Barwon Water管理层和员工的参与。

此项目已获得科学，工程和建筑环境人类伦理委员会STEC-02-2015-CHAPMAN的伦理学批准。这项研究的一部分得到了迪肯大学科学，工程与建筑环境学院夏季研究奖学金的支持。

参考文献

Barwon Water（2014a）2014/15 – 2018/19公司计划。吉朗Barwon Water。Barwon Water（2014b）战略意图。吉朗Barwon Water。

Begg，P.（2015），至尊化妆：Barwon Water的升级为总部带来了新的面貌，吉朗广告商3月7日。

Danielsson，C.B.和Bodin，L.（2009）不同办公室类型的员工对办公室环境的满意度差异，《建筑与规划研究》，26（3），241-257。

DEGW（2010）BarwonWater Accommodation项目：员工敬业度的发现。吉朗Barwon Water。Hedge，A.（1982）开放式办公室：对员工对其工作环境的反应的系统调查，

环境与行为，14（5），519-542。

Hua，Y.，Loftness，V.，Kraut，R. and Powell，K.M.（2010），工作场所协作空间布局类型和协作环境的使用者感知，环境与规划B：规划与设计，37（3），429-448。

Johnson，J.，《从封闭式办公室向开放式计划的转变》，可从以下网站获得： Allsteel，www.cms.allsteeloffice.com /SynergyDocuments / TheTransitionfromClosedOfficestoOpenPlan.pdf（已访问14

2014年11月）。

Kim，J.和de Dear，R.（2013）工作场所满意度：开放式办公室中的隐私通信权衡，

环境心理学杂志，第36卷，第18-26页。

Kooymans，R.和Haylock，P.（2006），《居住评估和工作场所生产力》，载于D. Levy（编），《 2006年环太平洋房地产协会会议记录》，第1-15页。环太平洋房地产协会，新西兰奥克兰。

附录二 外文原文

R.H. Crawford and A. Stephan (eds.), Living and Learning: Research for a Better Built Environment: 49th International Conference of the Architectural Science Association 2015, pp.203–214. ©2015, The Architectural Science Association and The University of Melbourne.

Perceptions of change in office space design: redesigning Barwon Water’s office environment

Jessica Chapman, David Jones and Fiona Gray

Deakin University, Geelong, Australia jechapma@deakin.edu.au, david.jones@deakin.edu.au, fiona.gray@deakin.edu.au

Abstract: In early 2015 Barwon Water received State government funding to rationalise and renovate its various Geelong-based administrative offices into one complex. Integral to the renovations is a new green-star retrofit of the existing Ryrie Street complex by GHD Woodhead. The project will consolidate all of Barwon Water’s offices onto one site, increase floor space, provide a new ‘green’ atrium, and adopt an open plan layout. Having set a new strategic direction, Barwon Water is now undergoing a wholesale cultural and operational change in order to realise these strategic objectives. Aspirations for workplace design have been identified as: environmentally sustainable; foster innovation and creativity; establish connections; improve communication and collaboration; provide efficient space for effective work; flexibility over time; welcoming and connected to the community; healthy; and, up to date technology. This paper investigates Barwon Water staff perceptions and apprehensions of this prospective consolidation, particularly the proposed open plan office environment. While most research in this topic is informed by an immediate pre-design workshop of staff needs, this research provides a longitudinal perspective of human perceptions about work place environment change and a review of how changes in office environment synergistically align to architectural responses and changes in corporate strategies.

Keywords: Change management; interior re-design; workplace culture; water corporation.

Introduction

This paper profiles an enquiry into white-collar worker perception of open plan offices prior to occupancy so as to offer an informed perspective as to staff perceptions, expectations and apprehensions of this new work place environment.

This research aims to review the values staff place on different workplace attributes and explores their current work patterns relational to their existing work place environments. The case study involves a study of Barwon Water staff prior to the refurbishment and consolidation of their new headquarters, to be completed in 2018. The research continues and builds upon foundational perception surveys completed in 2010, to assess changes in staff perceptions and work patterns over time, especially with

the release of new architectural plans for the office transformation, and reviews findings about new issues that have arisen with release of plans and images portraying the new complex

Open plan office conversions

Considerable architectural and interior design-related academic and professional practice literature exists on the impact of changes to physical workspace on staff satisfaction, productivity and health at work. Most of this literature, however, exists in the post-occupancy evaluation realm rather than in the pre-occupancy context.

Transformations of traditional office configurations and environments into open plan environments in particular has been subject to much consumer angst and anxiety. Notwithstanding this anxiety and apparent lack of consumer acceptance of new open plan environments created, there is little clear quantitative information or measurable data as to before-and-after impacts including staff consumer perceptions of draft designs and the potential impacts upon what they are used to experiencing.

A recent focus on open plan and enclosed workspaces by interior design practitioners, for example, has shown different levels of staff consumer satisfaction to the key factors including noise, privacy, and the ability to successfully communicate, write/type content coherently and to successfully collaborate. This research is largely contained in published result involving post-occupancy evaluations, often involving workforces that have been relocated from enclosed offices to open plan offices. Much of this research concludes that open plan offices negatively impact staff satisfaction levels and thus their work performance and production. Some of this research has indicated that there are mitigating factors and assumptions that need to be considered when validly assessing staff satisfaction with open plan workspaces; including job status, age, and individual control over one’s workstation. An additional factor is the nature and implementation of quality change management itself, including consultation and communication. The latter engagement process has been identified by several authors as a key factor in enabling a workforce to successfully transition from an enclosed/semi-enclosed office environment to an open plan office environment.

Much of this literature assumes that a causal link exists between a physical work environment and the satisfaction and productivity of consumer workers. This conclusion is clearly identified by Veitch et al. (2007) that specifically sought to explore this assumption. Research by Veitch et al. (2007) aimed to test and validate that a direct link exists between built environment satisfaction and consumer job satisfaction concluding that consumers who were more satisfied with their work environment were also more satisfied with their jobs.

Noise and privacy have been identified by several researchers as the primary negative issues of open plan office environments. Literature examining staff satisfaction with their work environment (Daniellson & Bodin, 2009; Kim & de Dear, 2013; Sandstrom et al., 1982; Maher & von Hippel, 2005) concludes that employees are negatively impacted by large amounts of noise and the lack of privacy in open plan office environments. Excessive noise has been documented as affecting staff motivation that it contributes to communication and work production distractions, and therefore affects their ability of workers to directly concentrate and perform their job at a level comparable to that in an enclosed/semi- enclosed office environment. A lack of privacy is documented as enabling uncontrollable and unwanted social contact and interruptions, unproductive computer-based communication, nurturing too much stimulation or over-stimulation, and an inability to conduct confidential tasks and discussions without ejecting one’s self from that open plan space into an alternate more semi-private space or a corridor space.

Kim and de Dear’s (2013) research, for example, concluded that the negative impact of noise and lack of privacy outweighed the perceived benefits of open-plan offices, such as easier collaboration. Additionally, Maher and von Hippel (2005) observed that workers with larger amounts of privacy and less exposure to distractions and stimulations were more satisfied than those with lesser amounts, and similarly that the more the privacy the greater the volume and quality of production and activities, thus highlighting a conclusion of the importance of privacy to staff happiness.

Several work management-biased authors identified that increased collaboration and communication was a policy aim, and thus articulated as one of the key reasons why organisations choose to adopt policies to implement open-plan floor space designs (Hua et al., 2010). In contrast, most academic generally concludes that in reality, collaboration in open plan offices is no better, and in some cases worse, than in traditional enclosed/semi-enclosed office environments. Kim and de Dear (2013) concluded that communication was perceived as being better in enclosed/semi-enclosed offices linking this to established human relationships between communication and privacy and the increased privacy afforded by enclosed/semi-enclosed offices. Rashid et al (2009) observed that office environments with greater accessibility and visibility resulted in staff having lower personal satisfaction levels due to increased face-to-face interactions. Thus, contrary to the management-informed industry- held belief that open plan offices enable easier and better worker communication and collaboration, architectural and interior design academic research indicates otherwise.

Research on open plan offices has largely focused on the effects of workstation scale and layout scale variables as elements of the physical environment that affect worker satisfaction. Spreckelmeyer (1993) lists the workstation variables as including factors of lighting, size of individual workspaces and privacy as the key determinants of worker happiness. Lee and Brand (2005) also identified workstation factors as the main contributors to worker satisfaction, especially the worker’s ability to personalise their workstation space. Danielsson and Bodin (2009) list the ambient factors of thermal comfort and air quality as key factors on staff contentedness, and these variables had a stronger influence that the preceding variables. Hua et al. (2010) points to the fact that office layout variables (such as distances from individual workstation to nearest meeting place and distances from individual workstations to the nearest copy/print area) determined staff perceptions about how supportive their work place environment is of nurturing and enabling collaboration. This literature therefore demonstrates that there are different variables that must be considered when examining the physical environment’s effects upon staff fulfilment, communication, collaboration and production.

While much of the above literature has identified negative and performance issues associated with open plan office environments, few authors have explored remedies to address these negative issues. One remedy that appears evident, and is subtly mentioned by several authors, is that to increase worker satisfaction is linked to good change management. If managers of an organisation can empower, engage and communicate successfully to employees about why and how the change to open plan offices is occurring, to enable the workers to participate in the design process towards their new work place environment, then staff may transition better and find themselves more satisfied with their new environment (O’Neill, 2010). To navigate this process and to survive in these new open plan office environments, Hedge (1982) has stated that it is essential for staff to learn new behaviours to assimilate with their new open plan work environment. Change management has been pointed to by management advocates as a key factor in achieving the successfulness of a move from enclosed/semi-enclosed environment to an open plan environment. Office interior design practitioners have produced many advice and guideline documents on how to best manage office change (O’Neill, 2008; O’Neill, 2010;

Johnson, 2009), but the impact of good change management has not been examined by this literature. Accordingly, there is a dearth of research and literature about change management strategies in relocating staff to open plan office environments, and little information exists to validate that change management strategies does in fact result in greater staff consumer satisfaction with their new work place environment.

Barwon Water

Barwon Water is a large regional water corporation that provides high quality and sustainable water, sewerage and recycling services to an area of over 8100 ²km in Victoria. The service catchment of Barwon Water includes parts of Victoria stretching from Little River and the Bellarine Peninsula in the east and from Meredith in the north to Apollo Bay on the southwest coast. The history of Barwon Water can be traced back to the establishment of the Geelong Municipal Waterworks Trust in 1908, and Barwon Water re-constituted as a statutory authority under the Victorian state Water Act 1989 and continues under this legislation today. Barwon Water has an asset base of approximately $2.3 billion, including several reservoirs, treatment plants, pumping stations and an extensive pipe network. The organisation employs approximately 310 staff who perform roles in operational, strategic, engineering, planning, financial and administrative sectors.

Before a recent disruption to worker locations, due to the current commencement of the Ryrie Street refurbishment works, the Barwon Water workers in the Geelong region were split between three work sites; Ryrie Street, Mercer Street and Lonsdale Street (Figure 1).

Figure 1: Locational map of Barwon Water offices.

Barwon Water has been investigating office accommodation and office consolidation options since 2007 with the Ryrie and Lonsdale Street offices becoming increasingly aged, out-of-date and inefficient

for the workings of a modern corporation and a changing work environment dominated by computers (Begg 2015). Prior to the consideration of refurbishing the Ryrie Street Office, Barwon Water explored the feasibility of constructing a new building near the Geelong Railway Station in 2010 to replace the Ryrie Street and Lonsdale Street offices, but this project failed to gather funding support from internal and state government sources.

The need for the refurbishment and consolidation of Barwon Water’s premises is expressed in their current Corporate Plan (2014a). Barwon Water’s Strategic Intent (2014b, p. 1) to ‘provide water and sewerage services through efficiency, innovation and leadership’ as it’s mission for the period covered by the Plan. The lack of efficiency in the current Barwon Water workspaces was therefore a key driver for new accommodation.

Having identified that Barwon Water’s current office accommodation is not fit for purpose and does not support the organisation’s strategic direction, the decision was made to procure a new workplace … (Meinhardt & DEGW 2011, p. 11)

The stated objectives for the new Barwon Water accommodation are to:

accommodate existing and future staff in accordance with contemporary accommodation principles;

improve productivity, training and education; improve environmental performance; and to

provide the means for Barwon Water to be a leader in sustainability (Meinhardt & DEGW 2011, p. 11).

GHD Woodhead, as project architects, have stated that consolidating Barwon Water’s operations under one roof in renewed accommodation would boost efficiency and productivity, and would save 45% on operational, maintenance and energy costs. Included in their design is; use of low VOC materials; 60% of floor area to have access to natural light and views in particular northern views to Corio Bay; bike storage for 40 bikes, showers and lockers provided; rainwater used for toilet flushing and irrigation; and, 90% of existing structure to be reused.

Images prepared by GHD Woodhead (Figures 2-4) depict the major external changes to the existing complex, including the provision of a new internal new atrium and an extensive open plan office environment.

Figures 2-4: Proposed exterior façade changes to the existing Barwon Water complex in Ryrie Street, and the new internal atrium and open plan office environment with northern outlook. (Source: Barwon Water, 2015)

Investigations into alternate and more cohesive office accommodations for Barwon Water’s employees commenced internally by Barwon Water in conjunction with consultants DEGW in 2007. In 2010, Barwon Water commissioned a detailed study by DEGW to investigate existing staff work patterns and staff perceptions about work environments generally and their existing environments (DEGW 2010). The aim of the DEGW (2010) study was to provide an information base to inform a brief for the 2010 new building project.

The study was conducted in three parts; manager interviews, staff workshops and an online workplace performance survey. The manager interviews focused upon understanding detailed requirements for specific functions. The staff workshops were conducted with representatives from all levels and departments to explore cultural variables and inter-relationships, current work styles and how these affect Barwon Water’s existing workplace. The online workplace performance survey was conducted to understand staff workplace priorities and was anonymously completed by 190 staff. A second staff workshop was also conducted to review and reflect upon the findings arising from the online survey and to explore ideal work environment scenarios.

The findings from the manager interviews and staff workshops largely informed the brief formulation for the new building in terms of functional requirements. In contrast, it is the findings from the online workplace performance survey that offered extensive information about work patterns, work culture and staff perceptions of existing workplaces, and these findings are summarised as follows.

The most important workplace variables, identified in the online survey, were those relating to being able to concentrate and perform tasks. The highest performing workplace variables were those relating to technological support systems and access to colleagues. The lowest performing variables were car parking, support facilities such as gyms, tearooms and social hubs, and building temperature(s). The largest gaps between performance and perceived importance were the availability of car parking and the ability to concentrate. In terms of the types of existing workstation scenarios that respondents worked at, the majority of respondents identified ‘their work area’ as comprising ‘their own desk’ in an open plan area. Only 5% of respondents had their own enclosed office. In terms of interactions with Barwon Water customers, the majority of staff had face-to-face interaction with customers as part of their daily roles and activities.

In regards to meetings, the respondents indicated the majority of their meetings remained planned as opposed to unplanned. Additionally, when asked about time spent in areas inside the existing office(s), respondents indicated that they spent the majority of their time in their individual workplace, as opposed to meeting spaces and other spaces in the building. These last two variables indicate that the majority of Barwon Water’s workforce was static in their movements in their workplace, and that such existing environments were not flexible and adjustable.

The recommendations of the DEGW study were parallel to those raised in the above literature review relating to the required functions and the feeling of new workplace environments. These recommendations include a variety of spaces for different functions (ie. quiet and private spaces for telephone calls, breakout areas for informal meetings, places for serendipitous encounters), flexibility of spaces to enable adaptability, visual transparency in the building to enhance connectedness, and adequate natural lighting, ventilation capabilities and views. The DEGW study did not avail the opportunity of open-ended responses thereby limiting the volume and quality of feedback provided on personal topics and perceptions. Additionally, the DEGW study did not directly ask Barwon Water staff about their perceptions of different types of workspaces, i.e. open plan office environments. This deficiency has resulted in a lack of comprehensive understanding as to how Barwon Water staff perceive the potential work environment to be constructed in the new open plan office environment embodied in the GHD Woodhead design. Additionally, there was also a lack of understanding of staff perceptions of open place offices as to whether this would limit management’s ability to plan and manage the change management process from the current to the new work environment.

Methodology

In 2015 a more inclusive and qualitative focused staff survey was conducted by the authors. 24 Barwon Water staff members from different levels, roles and locations at Barwon Water participated in the survey. Additionally, staff were also selected to represent a range of employment tenures at Barwon Water. This enabled a variety of responses to be collected from different staff members with vastly different experiences extant in the present Barwon Water work environment. . The surveys were executed in February and March 2015, with the majority of employees who would normally be based at the Ryrie Street office having already been relocated or decanted to other offices while the Ryrie Street office was being prepared for construction and renovation. The result of this research was that some staff members had recently experienced changed work environments. In this instance, the employees were asked, where relevant, to provide responses based on both work environments at Barwon Water.

The surveys were administered face-to-face. The respondents completed the survey with clarifications and further detail with clarification from the researcher where necessary. The survey consisted of 17 structured and open-ended questions, with a variety of response types employed. These consisted of ranking options, selecting the most appropriate option, and written responses to open questions. The questions examined workspace type and time spent in different locations, meeting types, customer interactions, the importance and performance of different workplace aspects and perceptions towards open-plan offices. 43 staff were invited to participate. Of these, 29 responded in the positive, and of these 29, 24 were available at the time the study was conducted.

This study involved a much smaller sample group than the previous DEGW study, but with a confirmed and more comprehensive spread across locations, roles, levels, and lengths of employment at Barwon Water. In comparison to the previous DEGW study, it was conducted in person, rather than online. This executive strategy enabled the opportunity for the researcher to engage with a respondent

individually to enable them to complete every question comprehensively. While a cross-comparison of questions was included in the new study, additional open response questions were provided in the new survey that were not included in the DEGW survey to permit the respondents to provide more detailed feedback as to their perceptions about open plan offices. The aim of this second survey is to re-test the respondents on the same questions as the DEGW survey to directly compare the responses to determine if responses had largely remained the same, or if there had been noticeable differences since 2010.

The objective of conducting a second survey was to gain insights into the perceptions of Barwon Water staff to determine whether the time lapse since the first survey in 2010 had brought about changes in their perceptions. Additionally, the second survey, conducted immediately before the commencement of construction on the refurbishment, sought to provide a point of comparison for any future survey conducted following the completion and inhabitation of the new work environment. This collection of surveys, spread across a number of years, also enables a longitudinal study into workplace environment perceptions exploring if work patterns and employee values change due to changes in office environments.

Discussion

General findings

The discussion of general findings has been broken into four parts: work patterns, worker values, worker perceptions of open plan offices, and comparison to the 2010 survey.

Work patterns

In terms of allocated workspace, the vast majority of respondents had their own desk in an open plan area or their own desk in a multi-person enclosed area. Only 8% of respondents classified their work environment as an enclosed office. The majority of respondents spent all of their time working at their primary Barwon Water site, with few employees working across sites or in the field. Very little working time was from home. Within their primary Barwon Water site, respondents spent the vast majority of their time at their individual workstation, with a minority of time being spent in meeting spaces. Respondents indicated that most of their meetings were planned as opposed to unplanned. In regards to customer interaction, of those surveyed, approximately two thirds of respondents confirmed that they had direct interaction with customers at their Barwon Water office and/or the customer site. This indicates that most workers currently work in an enclosed form of open plan office, and that the workforce is static in its movements, without much flexibility in terms of spaces used.

Worker values

The respondents were asked to rate workplace variables firstly on how important they perceived they were, and secondly by how well they perceived the workplace variable performed. The most important variables were identified as being able to work comfortably at a desk, building temperature, access to natural light and good artificial light, and the ability to concentrate when necessary. The workplace variables with the biggest gap between how important they were and how they performed were building temperature and support spaces such as social hubs for eating and access to a gymnasium. The highest performing variables rated by the respondents were secure entry to the Barwon Water building

and the ability to work side-by-side with colleagues. The lowest performing factors were access to support facilities such as a gymnasium and a hub for socialising and eating. Building temperature was also rated as performing poorly by respondents.

In terms of productivity, respondents were split as to what impact the work environment had on both their individual productivity and on team productivity. Both were only slightly more than half of the respondents in both cases indicating that the work environment positively affected productivity.

Worker perceptions of open plan offices

The oral responses provided respondents with an opportunity to directly express their thoughts of open plan offices. The general consensus by respondents identified that open plan offices were acceptable, conditional that they were well designed. Respondents stated the need for a variety of spaces to cater for different personalities and job roles. Respondents were concerned about the potential noise levels and distractions in open plan offices, as well as a loss of privacy and confidentiality. Such respondents noted a main advantage as being access to other colleagues and work teams in Barwon Water.

Comparison to 2010 survey

In comparison to the 2010 DEGW survey, there were some significant differences in responses, but largely, the two surveys provided similar results. In terms of the workplace variables rated the most important, building temperature, working comfortably at a desk, being able to concentrate, and access to natural light were rated as being very important in both surveys. Building temperature was a workplace variable in both surveys that had a large gap between importance and performance, whereas car parking had a large gap in the 2010 DEGW survey, but not in the 2015 survey. The variables rated as the highest performing were quite different in the two surveys, whereas the lowest performing variables were very similar (Table 1).

Table 1: Comparison of workplace factors in 2010 and 2015 surveys.

2010 Survey 2015 Survey

Most Important

Ability to concentrate Ability to work comfortably at a desk

Ability to conduct phone conversations Building temperature during working hours

Ability to work comfortably at a desk Access to natural light Highest Performing

Shared Utility Space Secure entry to business

Ability to have scheduled face-to-face meeting with colleagues

Ability to work side-by-side with colleagues

An efficient and effective central booking system Availability of car parking nearby Lowest Performing

5.2. Key findings

The most significant findings from the surveys were those related to the performance and importance of workplace variables (Table 2). For these questions, respondents were requested to rate both the performance and the importance of the variables out of 5, with 5 being that it is very important, and that it performs very well.

Table 2: Workplace factor scores

The two most important workplace variables identified were being able to work comfortably at a desk, with an average rating of 4.75, and building temperature, with an average rating of 4.71. This implies that the arrangement of individual workspaces is the key variable to staff contentedness and productivity, with building temperature having a significant influence on the comfort of staff. The importance of the individual workspace to staff would suggest that staff are more concerned with variables on the scale of workstation design, than they were with overall office layout. The worded responses emphasised that this is because access to resources and immediate protection from noise and distraction are key variables to staff productivity.

The importance placed on air conditioning by staff is in contrast to its performance, with building temperature being the workplace variables with the greatest difference between perceived importance and performance. The difference between its importance rating (4.71) and performance rating (2.33) is

2.38 points. In the worded responses, some staff noted the inconsistency of the air conditioning, which is clearly a concern shared by many of the staff as reflected in its average rating. Thus, consistent air conditioning at a comfortable temperature variable is of key concern to many staff, and is currently having a significantly negative impact on their ability to work comfortably.

The worded responses demonstrated that many staff were concerned about noise and privacy. 45% of staff mentioned high noise levels as a key variable to how they perceived open plan offices. A third of respondents mentioned privacy concerns as a major variable in their perceptions of open plan layouts. On the positive side, 20% of staff perceived open plan offices as easily and quickly facilitating access to colleagues and other work teams.

Conclusion

The findings demonstrate that Barwon Water staff place high importance on both workstation scale variables and workplace scale variables. Being able to work comfortably at a desk with good lighting and building temperature are the most important variables to staff productivity and happiness. In terms of

staff perception of open plan offices, noise and privacy are key concerns, and the provision of a variety of different spaces is a key requirement. Easier collaboration and access to colleagues is the main perceived advantage of the open plan office layout. The surveys illustrated that staff are wary of open plan offices for these reasons, but are not opposed to them.

The differences between the 2010 DEGW and 2015 surveys demonstrate that the Barwon Water staff still place importance on similar variables over this time period, being the ability to work comfortably at a desk and the provision of well-being support facilities. The perceived performance of workplace variables differed between the two surveys, but this can likely be attributed to location change and technological development.

The recommendations for a work environment to suit the 2015 workforce are similar to those to suit the 2010 workforce, being a variety of spaces for different functions, comfortable temperature, well- designed individual workstations, and good natural lighting. This concludes that work environment matches Barwon Water’s objectives for the new office design. A final survey of staff upon the inhabitation of the new work environment will allow for analysis of how open plan offices have changed staff perceptions, values, and work patterns.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Barwon Water management and staff for their participation in this research.

This project has been subject to ethics approval by the Faculty of Science, Engineering & Built Environment Human Ethics Committee as STEC-02-2015-CHAPMAN. Part of this research was supported by a Deakin University Faculty of Science, Engineering & Built Environment Student Summer Research Scholarship.

References

Barwon Water (2014a) Corporate Plan 2014/15 – 2018/19. Barwon Water, Geelong. Barwon Water (2014b) Strategic Intent. Barwon Water, Geelong.

Begg, P. (2015), Extreme makeover: Barwon Water’s upgrade to give HQ fresh new look, Geelong Advertiser March 7.

Danielsson, C.B. and Bodin, L. (2009) Difference in satisfaction with office environment among employees in different office types, Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 26(3), 241-257.

DEGW (2010) Barwon Water Accommodation Project: Findings From Staff Engagement. Barwon Water, Geelong. Hedge, A. (1982) The open-plan office: a systematic investigation of employee reactions to their work environment,

Environment and Behavior, 14(5), 519-542.

Hua, Y., Loftness, V., Kraut, R. and Powell, K.M. (2010), Workplace collaborative space layout typology and occupant perception of collaboration environment, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 37(3), 429-448.

Johnson, J., The Transition from Closed Offices to Open Plan, Available from: Allsteel, www.cms.allsteeloffice.com/SynergyDocuments/TheTransitionfromClosedOfficestoOpenPlan.pdf(accessed 14

November 2014).

Kim, J. and de Dear, R. (2013) Workplace satisfaction: The privacy-communication trade-off in open-plan offices,

Journal of Environmental Psychology, 36, 18-26.

Kooymans, R. and Haylock, P. (2006), Post occupancy evaluation and workplace productivity, in D. Levy (ed.) Proceedings from the Pacific Rim Real Estate Society Conference 2006, pp. 1-15. Pacific Rim Real Estate Society, Auckland, New Zealand.

Lee, S.Y. and Brand, J.L. (2005) Effects of control over office workspace on perceptions of the work environment and work outcomes, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 25(3), 323-333.

Maher, A. and von Hippel, C. (2005) Individual differences in employee reactions to open-plan offices, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 25(5), 219-229.

Meinhardt & DEGW (2011) Basebuild Brief. Barwon Water, Geelong.

O’Neill, M. (2010) What to Consider when Shifting from Private Offices to an Open Office Plan, Available from: Knollwww.knoll.com/media/172/381/wp_what_to_consider.pdf (accessed 14 November 2014).

O’Neill, M. (2008) Open Plan and Enclosed Private Offices, Available from: Knoll www.knoll.com/media/878/738/OpenClosed_Offices_wp.pdf (accessed 14 November 2014).

Rashid, M., Wineman, J. and Zimring, C. (2009) Space, behavior, and environmental perception in open-plan offices: a prospective study, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 36(3), 432-449.

Schjølberg, T.E. (2012) Evaluation of Workplace Quality: A Method for Improvement and Further Development of Workplace Design for the Future, unpublished MArch thesis, Faculty of Architecture and Fine Art, Engineering Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.

Spreckelmeyer, K.F. (1993) Office relocation and environmental change, Environment and Behavior, 25(2), 181-204.

Sundstrom, E., Herbert, R.K. and Brown, D.W. (1982) Privacy and communication in an open plan office: a case study, Environment and Behavior, 14(3), 379-392.

Veitch, J.A., Charles, K.E., Farley K. and Newsham, G.R. (2007) A model of satisfaction with open-plan office conditions: COPE field findings, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27(3), 177-189.

View publication stats

李善业和布兰德（J.L.（2005）对办公室工作区的控制对工作环境和工作成果感知的影响，《环境心理学杂志》 25（3），323-333。

Maher，A.和von Hippel，C.（2005）员工对开放式办公室反应的个体差异，Journal of Environmental Psychology，25（5），219-229。

Meinhardt＆DEGW（2011）BasebuildBrief。吉朗Barwon Water。

O’Neill，M.（2010）从私人办公室转变为开放办公室计划时应考虑的事项，可从以下网站获得：诺尔www.knoll.com/media/172/381/wp_what_to_consider.pdf（2014年11月14日访问）。

O’Neill，M.（2008）开放式和封闭式私人办公室，可从以下网站获得： 诺尔www.knoll.com/media/878/738/OpenClosed_Offices_wp.pdf(2014年11月14日访问）。

Rashid，M.，Wineman J.和Zimring，C.（2009）开放式办公室中的空间，行为和环境感知：前瞻性研究，环境与规划B：规划与设计，36（3），432-449。

Schjølberg，T.E.（2012）工作场所质量评估：未来工作场所设计的一种改进和进一步发展的方法，未发表的硕士学位论文，挪威科学技术大学建筑与美术学院，工程科学，挪威特隆赫姆。

斯普雷克尔梅耶（K.F.）（1993）办公室搬迁与环境变化，《环境与行为》，第25卷第2期，第181-204页。

E.Sundstrom，R.K。Herbert和布朗（1982）开放式办公室中的隐私和通讯：案例研究，环境与行为，14（3），379-392。

Veitch，J.A.，Charles，K.E.，Farley K.和Newsham，G.R.（2007）对开放式办公室条件的满意模型：COPE领域的发现，《环境心理学杂志》 27（3），177-189。

办公空间室内设计外文翻译（7000字）

价格 ¥5.50 发布时间 2023年2月13日

下载查看全文内容

已付费？登录 或 刷新