Enhancing Creativity Through Workspace Design

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.

Understanding the Mechanisms of Activity-based Workspaces: A Case Study

“…Over time, companies have adopted various types of office design in pursuit of different goals. In the early 20th century, supervisors were positioned to have a good view of their subordinates in order to ensure accurate and efficient task performance (Suckley & Nicholson, 2018). In the 1950s, professionalization of knowledge work and the separation of business functions increased the need for private offices to enable independent work and concentration on a particular task.…”

“…Traditional layouts typically involved a single workspace type (e.g., cell-like offices or open plan) to meet users' general requirements, driven by corporate real estate managers' focus on the most efficient use of space (van Ree, 2002). Conventionally, the only variations related to workspace elements that functioned as status symbols (e.g., office size, furniture quality) (Suckley & Nicholson, 2018). It was not until the 1990s that companies began to recognize office design as a tool for enhancing aspects of organizational performance (van Ree, 2002) such as working style and leadership (Danielsson et al, 2013).…”

Balancing privacy and communication in activity-based workspaces: a longitudinal study

“…The decline in manufacturing jobs and the related increase in knowledge-based work has prompted companies to experiment with different forms of PWEs to optimize employee support (Suckley and Nicholson, 2018) and thus enhance performance (Blok et al , 2012). The existing literature argues that privacy (Jahncke et al , 2013; Kim and de Dear, 2013) and communication (De Croon et al , 2005; Haapakangas et al , 2019; Bennis et al , 2022) are key prerequisites for high employee performance.…”

“…As organizational tasks become increasingly diverse, both privacy (Suckley and Nicholson, 2018) and communication (Elsbach and Pratt, 2007) are critical for individual and team performance, which means that territorial fixed-desk offices are no longer ideal (Kim and de Dear, 2013). Activity-based workspaces (ABWs) – also known as activity-based flexible offices (Rolfö, 2018), flex offices (Bodin Danielsson and Bodin, 2008) or nonterritorial offices (Kim et al , 2016) – are meant to meet both demands (Haapakangas et al , 2019) by enabling employees to switch between a range of different spaces for different tasks.…”

“More than meets the eye”: Unveiling the full potential of creative workspaces in modern organizations

“…The combination of open spaces and desk sharing facilitates frequent interaction and communication between employees, accelerating the flow of information and decision-making (Moultrie et al, 2007), while closed spaces support confidential and concentrated tasks that require greater privacy and fewer distractions (Maher & Von Hippel, 2005). This mix of spaces ensures the flexibility that individuals and teams need for collaboration, knowledge sharing and idea generation, prerequisites for productivity and creativity (Arundell et al, 2018;Suckley & Nicholson, 2018).…”