Open plan office environments are considered to offer workplace productivity benefits because of the opportunities that they create for interaction and knowledge exchange, but more recent research has highlighted noise, distraction and loss of privacy as significant productivity penalties with this office layout. This study aims to investigate if the purported productivity benefits of open plan outweigh the potential productivity penalties. Design/methodology/approach Previous research suggests that office environments are experienced differently according to the gender and age of the occupier across both open-plan and enclosed configurations. Empirical research undertaken with office occupiers in the Middle East (N=220) led to evaluations to establish the impact different offices had on perceived productivity. Factor analysis was used to establish five underlying components of office productivity. The five factors are subsequently used as the basis for comparison between office occupiers based on age, gender and office type. Findings This research shows that benefits and penalties to workplace productivity are experienced equally across open-plan and enclosed office environments. The greatest impact on perceived workplace productivity however was availability of a variety of physical layouts, control over interaction and the 'downtime' offered by social interaction points. Male occupiers and those from younger generations were also found to consider the office environment to have more of a negative impact on their perceived workplace productivity compared to female and older occupiers. Originality/value The originality of this paper is that it develops the concept of profiling office occupiers with the aim of better matching office provision. This paper aims to establish different occupier profiles based on age, gender and office type. Data analysis techniques such as factor analysis and t-test analysis identify the need for different spaces so that occupiers can choose the most appropriate space to best undertake a particular work task. In addition, it emphasises the value that occupiers place on 'downtime' leading to the need for appropriate social space.

This paper explores ‘evolution’ as a means of complementing our understanding and interpretation of creative innovation networks in small firms. The abstracted evolutionary mechanisms of variation, selection and retention (VSR) are employed to add a more dynamic interpretative framework to the reading of social networks and group structures. The paper thus presents a lens through which to appreciate creativity as an evolving and shared process. The principal aim of this research is to illustrate otherwise tacit informal relations within a small business through the application of a qualitative approach to social network analysis (SNA) and, in doing so, to present intra-firm relations as central to creativity and innovation – particularly as the organizational structure moves beyond the dominance of the founding entrepreneur.

Purpose-The paper aims to explore the relationship between office occupier work activity and workplace provision. It tests the proposition that location-fixed office workers are not as wellsupported in the working environment as location-flexible office workers. The research also explores the perceptions of the workplace provision based upon the types of tasks completed at the desk-location, whether this was collaborative or focused. Design/methodology/approach-The research adopts a cross-sectional approach using an online questionnaire to collect data from several offices in the Middles East. The dataset consists of 405 responses. One-way ANOVA was conducted to understand the relationship between location flexibility and perception of productivity. In addition, a series of T-Test were used to evaluate the relationship between work activities and office environment. Findings-The results show that those workers who were location-fixed perceived the workplace provision to have a more negative impact on their productivity than those who had a greater level of location-flexibility, particularly with regards to noise levels and interruptions. In terms of types of activities, those that undertook more collaborative tasks valued the facilitation of creativity and interaction from the workplace provision. Research limitations/implications-The research has limitations as data collection was at onepoint in time and therefore lacks the opportunity to undertake longitudinal analysis. However, the research gives greater insights into the alignment of office environments based on flexibility and work activity. Practical implications-The paper identifies implications for the design and development of office environments by identifying the need for office occupier activity profiles. These profiles can underpin data led design which should promote a tailored choice appropriate work setting that can maximise productivity. Originality/value-This paper contributes to the research area of workplace alignment. It establishes that optimal workplace alignment requires a better understanding of office occupier needs based on location-flexibility and work activity.

No abstract

Creativity and innovation has been discussed in the context of differing spatial dimensions; national, regional; from the perspective of localised clusters of innovation within places, and at the dimension of face-to-face contact (physical co-proximity). Creativity within an organisational context can be greatly influenced by the characteristics of the physical environment in which each stage of the creativity process is undertaken, whether this is providing the personal, private space for individual contemplation or working with others for elaboration and evaluation (facilitating physical co-proximity). The design and layout of the space in which this work is undertaken can be a key enabler or constraint of creative working and therefore creativity itself. Rather oddly, in an increasingly micro-level focus on space in the creativity and innovation literature, the most micro-level dimension (office space) has not been thoroughly examined through a synthesis between the facilities management literature and the innovation and creativity literature. The most micro-level physical space or environment for knowledge work is most often in the form of an office that is furnished with desks, chairs (workstations) and meeting rooms. Though the design and the allocation of this space can vary across organisations, for the purpose of this chapter, this most fundamental definition of the physical space will be referred to as 'workspace'. The Hawthorne experiments in the 1930s 1 were one of the first studies to identify the role of the workspace on creativity, innovation and work performance, and has since been studied in a range of fields including environmental psychology, ergonomics, architecture, sociology and human resource management. Organisations are increasingly regarding their workspace as a core element of their innovation strategy. For high tech companies, this is clearly evident when seeing images of the offices at Google or Facebook or watching the film The Internship to see the use they make of the physical environment to support creativity such as using chalet lifts for meeting spaces and providing bean bags and hammocks for individual work − using unusual design to stimulate creative thinking and dialogue.