Booking.com, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
LearnAdaptBuild, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
PLoS One. 2020 May 19;15(5):e0232943. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0232943. eCollection 2020.
Over the past few decades many corporate organisations have moved to open-plan office designs, mostly due to financial and logistical benefits. However, recent studies have found significant drawbacks to open plan offices and it is unclear how office designs can facilitate the best work output and company culture. Current design practice aims to optimise efficiency of space, but no previous research has tested the effect of office design experimentally in a working office. This paper describes an experiment comparing four different office designs (Open-plan, Zoned open-plan, Activity based, and Team offices) against a suite of wellbeing and productivity metrics in a real world technology company. Results suggest that two very different designs (Zoned open-plan and Team offices) perform well compared to Open-plan office designs. Zoned open-plan and Team office designs improved employee satisfaction, enjoyment, flow, and productivity, while Activity based and Open-plan designs performed poorly by comparison. The Open-plan office design was rated more poorly by employees, had higher levels of unsafe noise, and once employees no longer had to be in the Open-plan office design of the experiment, they spent more time at their desks.
在过去的几十年中,许多企业组织都采用了开放式办公设计,这主要是出于财务和后勤方面的考虑。然而,最近的研究发现开放式办公室存在显著的缺陷,目前尚不清楚办公设计如何能促进最佳的工作产出和公司文化。当前的设计实践旨在优化空间效率,但之前没有研究在实际办公环境中通过实验来测试办公设计的效果。本文描述了一项在一家真实的科技公司中,通过比较四种不同办公设计(开放式、分区开放式、基于活动和团队式办公室)与一系列幸福感和生产力指标来进行的实验。结果表明,两种非常不同的设计(分区开放式和团队式办公室)与开放式办公室设计相比表现良好。分区开放式和团队式办公室设计提高了员工的满意度、享受度、流畅度和生产力,而基于活动的和开放式设计的表现则相对较差。员工对开放式办公室设计的评价较差,噪音水平更高,而且一旦员工不再需要在实验中的开放式办公室设计中工作,他们就会花更多的时间在办公桌前。