STRATEGIC INTEGRATION OF WORKPLACE FOR ENTREPRENEURS AND INTRAPRENEURS

Joshua Hall Kelley

A Thesis Submitted to the University of North Carolina Wilmington in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Business Administration

Cameron School of Business

University of North Carolina Wilmington

2008

Approved by

Advisory Committee

L. Vince Howe Coordinator

Accepted by

______Dean, Graduate School TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS...... ii

ABSTRACT...... iii

LIST OF FIGURES...... iv

CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION...... 1

CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW ...... 3

Functions of Office Design ...... 3

The Concept of Workplace Performance and Its Value to Managers...... 9

Technological Innovations in the Work Environment...... 16

Workplace Design in Practice...... 18

CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY...... 22

CHAPTER IV: RESULTS & FINDINGS...... 24

Figure 3. Three Pillars of Strategic Workplace Design (WD)...... 26

Purpose of the Three Pillars of Strategic Workplace Design Model ...... 27

Testing the Three Pillars of Strategic Workplace Design Model...... 29

Figure 5. Three Pillars of Strategic Workplace Design @ SEI...... 41

CHAPTER V: CONCLUSIONS...... 42

REFERENCES...... 44

ii ABSTRACT

This study was designed to explore the effects of workplace design on employees, organizational culture, and the work environment. A Meta­analysis of academic literature on workplace design was conducted and revealed three functional roles of workplace design that affect business operations. Furthermore, the analysis revealed that workplace design can influence productivity levels on individual, team, and organizational levels.

These findings led to the creation of a generic business model that can be used as a starting point to evaluate the potential role of strategic workplace design strategies in a company.

The “Three Pillars of Strategic Workplace Design” model’s usage is validated by cross verification with a case study that examines the Software Institute’s successful design strategies. Based on current research, the “Pillar” model will work as a generic model and starting point for companies looking to enhance the business by investing in workplace design. The model acts as a guide for businesses to develop a design strategy that reflects and clarifies the culture of the company, but also embody all of the overarching values that drive the fir in order to increase market competitiveness and business sustainability.

iii LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

1. A Framework of Leveraged Office Design ...... 7

2. Ranges of Environmental Comfort ...... 13

3. Three Pillars of Strategic Workplace Design (WD)...... 26

4. Workplace Design and Art Are Drivers of Growth and Innovation ...... 31

5. Three Pillars of Strategic Workplace Design @ SEI ...... 41

iv CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION

As today’s business environment changes, so does how, when, and where workers perform their daily tasks. The advent of mobile technology and electronic communication has, in part, led to a new corporate focus on strategically designing workspaces that maximize both individual and company output.

A framework of the effects office design has on business operations reveals three functions: instrumental functions (improving performance and satisfaction), symbolic functions

(creating identities and cultures), and aesthetic functions (invoking sensory responses and place attachment). The environmental conditions molded by office design have effects on three levels of productivity: individual task performance, collaborative teamwork, and organizational effectiveness. Further, recent innovations in workplace design have created new office design concepts, such as the “hoteling” office, the office as a club, the virtual office, the home office, and the paperless office. In addition, Ernst & Young (US tax company) and Vodafone (New

Zealand based international mobile network company) have effectively integrated their corporate missions with design concepts and created fun work environments that foster productivity and efficiency.

Based on a Meta­analysis of research studies, four research questions evolve: What role does office design play in the daily business operations of a company? How does the workplace affect performance and productivity of employees? What are some recent innovations in the working environment? How has workplace design been applied in a “real world” setting? In answering these questions the need for a systematic approach to design considerations was developed. The main purpose of the study is to therefore develop and support the creation of a business model that provides a method for new and existing businesses to evaluate the integration of workplace design into their business.

2 CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW

Functions of Office Design

A corporate focus on office design has increased the amount of academic research conducted among fields such as sociology, environmental psychology, organizational identity, and organizational symbolism (Elsbach, 2007, p. 82). Research among these fields has revealed that outside of practical function, office design, also affects every part of a firm’s operations. In the sociology field, studies show that office design can signal status and group membership, improve collaboration and problem solving between groups, and affect people’s attachment to their workplaces (Elsbach 2007, p. 82). In the other three aforementioned fields, research has provided evidence that office design influences individual identities, creativity, and mood, in addition to traditionally researched variables such as comfort, safety, and ergonomics (Elsbach,

2007, p. 82).

The many effects of office design on business operations have led researchers to develop a framework that encompasses the business functions of office design. Anat Rafaeli and Iris

Vilnai­Yavetz’s framework portrays the role of office design in three functions: instrumental functions, symbolic functions, and aesthetic functions (Vilnai­Yavetz & Rafaeli, 2006).

First, instrumental functions can be defined as any function resulting in improvements in the performance and satisfaction of office workers. Traditional research in instrumental functions focused on efforts to improve efficiency and output, whereas more current research has been focused on the effects of office design on information transfer and transmission among knowledge workers and groups (Vischer, 2007, p. 83). Office design positively affects the decision making process while encouraging collaboration.

3 Important decision making processes require that all necessary resources are easily accessible. According to “evidence­based management” theory(Elsbach, 2003), managers make better decisions when they use “hard” data and archives during the decision making process. This is to say that strategic office design can deter managers from seeking personal, less reliable sources by making all resources readily available. Also, office design affects collaboration by managing boundaries and providing sufficient space and objects that facilitate social interaction among co­workers. Boundary objects are located between groups with divergent viewpoints and are used to pool heterogeneous information and help solve organizational problems (Elsbach, 2007, p. 93). The creation of a location, in an office, that acts as a hub for workers can help foster informal communication and develop strong ties, resulting in increased collaboration.

Second, symbolic functions (identities and cultures) are perceived, in variance, by employees according to office layout and décor. A company can affirm an employee’s individual distinctiveness by allowing them to decorate their office with personal mementos or they can affirm the status of a group by using task­relevant décor.

Personal décor allows an employee to develop their workplace identity. Workplace identities help employees control their self­esteem and provide meaning to their work, resulting in increased performance. Office encouraging décor that fosters individual distinctiveness are more attractive to employees than those that constrain or disallow it.

“One of the most interesting findings of recent organizational research is that,

contrary to conventional wisdom, office décor and personalization are more

important to signaling an occupant’s personal distinctiveness (i.e., how a person is

4 qualitatively different from others) than his or her personal status (i.e., how a

person is quantitatively ranked in comparison to others). That is, despite the fact

that we commonly hear stories about the importance of the corner office with the

fancy furnishings as a symbol of individual status, it appears that the office may

be more important to its occupant as a symbol of individual distinctiveness

(Elsbach, 2007, p. 86).”

Group status within a company is important because it reflects the degree that an organization values hierarchy or egalitarianism. Office design, décor and objects can be considered as the visible part of an organization’s culture. Organizations looking to maintain social order and equality among groups discourage obvious status indicators, such as fancy executive lunchrooms or offices. Designing offices and providing access to objects and places affects perceptions of group status, thus companies should direct office construction efforts toward their desired corporate levels of status.

Third, aesthetic functions are best defined, by Vilnai Yavetz and Rafaeli, as the “sensory experience of an artifact,” such as a sense of coherence or a sense of confusion experienced when viewing a subway map (Vilnai­Yavetz & Rafaeli, 2006). Aesthetic functions are essentially the responses of users or observers to elements of office design. Aesthetic functions promote a customized sensory experience and place attachment.

Office design elements can be used to create customized sensory experiences that can excite or calm a worker based on the elements visual aspects. “Exciting” surroundings are typically vivid in color and highly detailed, whereas “calming” surroundings parallel elements of the environment with high degrees of order and naturalness. Today’s ability to alter workspaces

5 (through portable and adaptable work boundaries and screens) allows employees to change their work environment almost instantaneously. “Researchers have recently found that viewing a scene statically (while not moving) led to higher general preference ratings than did viewing the scene dynamically (while moving), and that dynamic viewing meanwhile led to higher ratings of potential learning (perceptions that they would learn more by exploring the scene in depth) than did static viewing (Elsbach, 2007, p. 89).” This is to say that companies should consider modifying their design elements according to the position employees will be viewing them.

Place attachment is the notion that people become attached to their workplace because individuals develop emotional bonds by interacting with objects that typify their workplace.

Changes in office design have an impact on work because changes affect the atmosphere of the work environment. Sociologists explain the development of place attachment as the “emotional bonding to a site that decreases the potential substitutability of other sites for the one in question

(Milligan, 1998, p. 6).” Organizations can promote employee satisfaction by leveraging aesthetic elements while cultivating place attachment by generating emotional bonds to their workspace.

The framework depicted below offers a way for companies to evaluate office design features and their value­adding potential. Applying the framework to design features reveals potential instrumental, symbolic, and aesthetic function benefits. Design features offering benefits across all three functions are the most desirable and offer more potential benefits than features with benefits in one or two functions. Figure 1 provides the definition of each function as well as examples of each.

6 Figure 1. A Framework of Leveraged Office Design

Source: Elsbach, K. D., & Bechky, D. A. (2007). It's more than a desk: working smarter through leveraged office design. California Management Review. 49/2, p. 91

Implementing leveraged office design also presents certain pitfalls, such as neglecting the interaction of office design and office task, multiple functions for one design or object, and unintended use of design and décor. Employees’ perceived effects of office designs often differ from the real effects on office tasks. It must be understood that the effects of office design vary based on the specific tasks performed, which increases the need for managers to use flexible design techniques to accommodate various tasks.

7 Certain office design measures have the ability to affect multiple functions, thus managers must analyze multiple functionality to see if benefits in one function are causing damage in other functions. For example, plants in the workplace can offer symbolic and aesthetic appeal, but they do not always benefit the instrumental performance function. The use of plants in the design process may not be conducive to increasing performance, thus managers may choose to avoid this tactic.

The effects of design and décor cannot always be anticipated and sometimes result in unintended uses. For example, the layout changes associated with adding an in­office café affects the work environment, but can also affect group dynamics and the overall organizational culture. This makes it imperative for managers to consider all possible influences and outcomes when choosing design strategies.

8 The Concept of Workplace Performance and Its Value to Managers

The workplace performance concept defines a workplace whose sole objective is to optimize worker productivity. In an effort to reduce the blurred understanding of how environmental conditions affect productivity, it is useful to define worker productivity in terms of environmental design­relevant categories. These three categories are individual, group and organizational productivity, in which each category implies a variation in scale of environmental influence (Vischer, 2007).

Individual Productivity

Individual task performance (ITP), the speed and accuracy of an employee’s completed task, is evaluated at the individual workspace and considers micro­environmental influences. At the individual level, performance is affected by environmental conditions such as lighting and visual conditions, variations in temperature and humidity, furniture ergonomics, and acoustics. Managing these environmental conditions can result in positive productivity or negative productivity. Positive productivity is increasing the speed and accuracy of completion, while negative productivity results in slower completion times, high error rates or bad health effects on workers.

ITP is the most often measured form of productivity and is evaluated using ergonomic analyses and questionnaire surveys. These surveys ask respondents to focus on the effects of ambient conditions like noise levels, furniture comfort, temperature and indoor air quality.

9 Effects of the Work Environment on Individual Productivity

BOSTI­Westinghouse conducted a study that used employee self­reports of productivity to determine the relationship between productivity and office design. The study quantified workers’ value to the organization by using gross salary figures, which gave BOSTI­

Westinghouse the ability to assess organizational effectiveness as well. The study was conducted mainly in workplaces with open office design and concluded that “better” (private offices instead of open offices) workspaces resulted in higher levels of task completion and a higher return on investments (Brill et al, 2001). In terms of individual productivity at the collaborative teamwork level, studies found that changing the furniture and layout produced increases in process speed and results (Springer, 1986). The studies surveyed different organizations that were conducting similar paper processing tasks.

Organizational Ecology, as defined by Fritz Steele, is an analysis of a company’s structure and function, which includes workspace. Because workspace was identified as a key factor in organizational function, Steele collaborated with Franklin Becker to develop the

“workscape” idea and how it affected the planning and design of the work environment. As a result, occupant satisfaction has become one of the major metrics used in assessing workspace features (Vischer, 2007, p. 66).

Ergonomically oriented research studies the effects that environmental conditions

(lighting and “daylighting,” noise control, and furniture placement and comfort) have on productivity. “Daylighting” research has linked increased comfort and self­reported productivity with window size and proximity, as well as with view out, control over blinds, and shielding from glare (Vischer, 2007, p. 66). Workers in open plan workspaces tend to judge noise to be a primary source of discomfort and reduced productivity. Multiple studies reveal that office

10 workers feel uncomfortable in open office configurations and prefer to work in private enclosed workspaces. In addition, aspects of psychological comfort such as territoriality and privacy are strongly affected by spatial layout: office size and location is linked with sense of status; partitioning influences acoustic as well as visual privacy; amount of work­related storage affects sense of territory and status (Vischer, 2007, p. 67).

Workgroup Productivity

Collaborative team­work (CTW) takes place on the scale of the mid­range environment and is evaluated based on the quantity and quality of group processes. CTW productivity is measured in tangible terms (such as time to market of a new product) or in terms of more qualitative outcomes (such as number of useful new ideas or successful recommendations)

(Vischer, 2007, p. 63). Group functions are affected by workgroup size, the proximity of team members, the positioning of work areas and varying degrees of access to tools and equipment.

CTW is facilitated or retarded based on how the mentioned factors affect a group’s ability to communicate and share ideas.

CTW studies are based more on personal observations, case study reports, and random investigations rather than systematic scientific evaluation. Indirect measures such as social network analysis or comparing similar groups in differing environments have also provided value­adding results.

Organization Productivity

The company or organizations productivity is viewed in terms of the entire workspace or accommodation – the macro­environment (Vischer, 1996, Chapter 1). Considering this level of

11 productivity as organizational effectiveness (OE), it becomes possible to determine the extent to which workspace strengthens competitive advantage or influences the achievement of business objectives. OE is affected by locational advantages and ease of access, balancing consolidation under one roof (centralization) with dispersion of different groups in different facilities over manageable distances, and by building amenities such as fast elevators, convenient restrooms, adequate parking, and attractive eating areas (Vischer, 2007, p. 64).

Effects of the Work Environment on Group and Organizational Productivity

The “environmental comfort” approach recognizes that people need to feel more than just healthy and safe at the workplace. There is a need for functional comfort, which is environmental support for their particular role in the company. Comfort provides managers and employees a link between worker satisfaction and task completion, as well as organizational productivity. All levels of management must understand environmental comfort in order to actualize full benefits associated with investments in the workspace. J.C. Vischer, author of

Workspace Strategies: Environment as a Tool for Work, breaks down environmental comfort into a pyramid with three comfort types: physical comfort, functional comfort, and psychological comfort. The pyramid comfort model was built around the hierarchical model of human needs first proposed by Abraham Maslow.

The base of the pyramid is formed by the physical comfort level, which includes basic human needs such as safety, hygiene and accessibility. These needs are necessary to develop an environment that is habitable and the needs are often outlined in existing building codes and standards. Traversing the pyramid vertically leads to the next level of comfort, the functional comfort level. This level contains the elements necessary to facilitate user’s activities and

12 performance tasks, such as appropriate lighting, ergonomic furniture and works areas that facilitate collaboration. The peak of the pyramid is psychological comfort, which is difficult to measure but instrumental in workspace satisfaction. Psychological comfort is defined as the feelings of belonging, ownership, and control over one’s workplace. Organizational effectiveness can be maximized by ensuring that all environmental support is provided at all three levels (Vischer, 1996, Chapter 1).

Figure 2. Ranges of Environmental Comfort, from Basic Habitability to Optimal Well­Being

Source: J.C.Vischer, Space Meets Status: Designing Workplace Performance (Oxford, U.K.: Routledge/Taylor &

Francis, 2005).

The “environmental comfort” approach can also act as a management tool in the workplace improvement decision making process. The base level of the triangle presents a

“habitability threshold” where physical comfort is just above the threshold and discomfort is

13 below. Building habitability at the basic level is referred to as “building convenience” and implies that negative factors, such as unsafe or health­threatening conditions must be avoided.

Physical comfort problems translate into negative effects on overall assessment of the work environment.

The second level, functional comfort, creates a need for managers to focus on investing in workspace design and management that adds value to work being performed. In terms of the stress/arousal and motivational models, “studies have shown that inappropriate lighting, ventilation, and noise levels are environmental stressors that have negative effects on worker morale and productivity, as well as health (Vischer, 2007, p. 70).” Organizational effectiveness is negatively affected through poor employee health by means of employee lateness, absenteeism, increased health insurance premiums, and “burnouts” resulting in increased employee turnover. This is to say that functional comfort reduces organizational effectiveness by negatively affecting individual task performance and collaborative teamwork.

The top of the pyramid contains a new, less­studied concept of psychological comfort. It is the link between psychosocial aspects and workplace design through territoriality, privacy and control. The primary component of psychological comfort is sense of territory, both individual territory (office, workstation, micro­workspace) and group territory (team, group, midrange workspace), affecting both employee stress levels and motivation (Vischer, 2007, p. 71). The need for privacy seems to be only indirectly related to workspace design and to be dependent more on psychological factors, such as concerns about status and control (Vischer, 2007, p. 71).

Experimental efforts to increase users’ environmental control provide evidence of the beneficial effects on workers, including one experimental design that found a clear association between

14 participation in decision making and degree of workplace satisfaction following a move to a new facility (Vischer, 2007, p. 71).

“The key to designing a performing workspace is ongoing and reliable feedback from users on their levels of physical, functional, and psychological comfort, and applying this feedback systematically to workspace planning and design (Vischer, 2007, p. 72).”

15 Technological Innovations in the Work Environment

There is a growing need for businesses to embrace technological advances by adapting their work environments through restructuring of the organization and office space. Many companies encourage workforce mobility to cultivate communication of knowledge, which implies that the “traditional office” is beginning to phase out as global communications technology use becomes more widespread and affordable. Workplaces today and in the future need to offer flexibility of both space and personnel, breaking away from hierarchical patterns of the past (Anjum et al, 2005, p. 74). Hoteling, the office as a club, the virtual office, the home office, and the paperless office are five major design concepts that have developed to meet new and future workplace flexibility needs.

Office space costs are rising and increasing the need for companies to concentrate on maximizing cost efficiency by eliminating under­utilized workplaces. The increasing need for efficiency and cost reduction created the idea of hoteling, which can also be referred to as “hot­ desking” or “desk­sharing.” This concept gets the name “hoteling” because employees call ahead to reserve workspaces at specific times, much like booking a room at a hotel. A study undertaken by DEGW, a leading architectural firm specializing in offices in the UK, has revealed that on average workers are at the office for less than 60% of their time and of that time less than

50% is actually spent at their workstation (Anjum et al, 2005, p. 75). Companies who recognize a similar situation in their firm can maximize efficiency by utilizing workspaces not in use. This can be analogous to the need for airline companies to fill their planes before a flight because an empty seat produces no value.

16 Designing an office to resemble a “club” setting offers companies the ability to promote knowledge work by providing a casual and informal environment. This concept promotes intellectual activity by simultaneously providing private spaces for individual work, community areas for collaborative work, and relaxation areas for reflective and creative thinking. Another term which has evolved is that of “touchdown” spaces describing places where workers can work for a very short period of time (Anjum et al, 2005, p. 76). The mobility associated with today’s technologies make “touchdown” spaces very convenient for workers who find themselves constantly on the go.

Organizations have the advantage, provided it matches their work structure, to offer employees the option to work from virtual offices. The prevalence and quality of mobile technology allows today’s workforce to be “nomadic” and work from many locations such as home, a car, a train or a coffee shop. The idea of virtual offices has led to the development of communication consoles that workers can wear on their arm, as well as backpacks that transform into modular workspaces. As technology continues to advance, so will methods enabling employees to work, productively, from anywhere.

The domestic (home) office concept benefits employers by increasing employee productivity because it gives their employees the freedom to balance work and home commitments. Also, cell phones, e­mail and video conferencing can be used to keep employees in touch with their colleagues despite the distance gap. Working from home, or

“telecommuting” has been popular since the late 1990s and will become increasingly more popular, as technology aiding distance collaboration becomes more sophisticated.

17 Workplace Design in Practice Vodafone

Vodafone, a mobile network operator located in Auckland, New Zealand, sought the advice of Dean Croucher during the process of designing Vodafone’s new corporate headquarters. Croucher, the managing director of working environment and property strategy company Dow Group, said, “the trick lies in balancing how an organization wants its people to work and how it wants them to change versus what individuals' personal requirements maybe

(Le Pla, 2005, p. 52).”

David Sullivan, finance director at Vodafone, received the support of top level management to design a new corporate headquarters that reflected the desires of three key elements – the combined needs of staff, the company’s brand promise, and customers’ expectations. To reach the desired outcome of a state­of­the­art office building, Vodafone had to change its organizational behavior, furniture, and technology simultaneously. It was easy to change the furniture and technology; however, in order to restructure organizational behavior

Vodafone developed an employee classification system that divided the workforce into four categories – homers, foners, roamers, and zoners.

Homers are allocated their own desk and personal computer because they are the employees that conduct their daily work at a desk. Next, foners are contact center (call center) employees that are allowed the freedom to choose where they want to work within the contact center area. Further, roamers spend 90 % of their time away from the company’s home base.

These employees are provided laptop computers with wireless access because they have no allocated desk space. They are encouraged to use “touchdown” points throughout the office when they are in the office and need a workspace. Finally, the zoners are employees who spend

18 two­thirds of their work day shuffling between meetings. Zoners make use of numerous, un­ allocated desks in various different “collaboration” or “backyard” areas (Le Pla, 2005, p. 52­54).

Vodafone considered all of the varying performance tasks and performance needs of their employees when designing their new headquarters. Winston Churchill said, “We shape our buildings. Thereafter they shape us.” The new corporate headquarter office building was successfully designed to convey corporate missions and goals, while shaping and fostering change in the workforce. Vodafone can foster employee satisfaction and maintain a goal­ oriented workforce through continual work environment evaluation and modification based on changing business needs (Le Pla, 2005, p. 55).

Ernst & Young Shared Services

The typical tax accounting office resembles the “traditional” office model and is characterized by a sea of cubicles on every level of the building. Ernst & Young Shared

Services, in Indianapolis, IA, wanted to reduce employee turnover ­ a problem that plagues many accounting firms because tax work is demanding and requires long work shifts during tax season.

Ernst & Young wanted to design an office concept that maintained efficiency and encouraged employees through recreation, relaxation, and fun. The design team, GHK, surveyed employees to find out what was most important to them in a workplace. Other companies with low employee turnover rates used a corporate culture designed to nurture their employees, thus Ernst

& Young took the survey results and integrated them into their corporate mission and design concept. The design concept was based around three key elements employees defined as important – individual work areas, common areas, and amenities (Babcock, 2003, p. 48).

19 Much of the work done within Ernst & Young was individual, quiet work that required privacy and concentration. The design team used high partition walls to separate the modern­ looking cubicles to provide privacy. In terms of concentration, employee cubicles were designed to provide ample space and outfitted with quality pendant lighting systems that help keep workers focused.

GHK used design features in common areas to create a fun environment for workers throughout the day. One conference room had a giant heart above the conference table while a

42­foot paper airplane made out of a mock 1040 tax form hung over three other rooms. These design features offered a feeling of relief for workers during their busy day. Further, the office housed a training facility, and interactive media room/lunchroom, a patio with picnic tables, a relaxation room, a putting green, and a game room with ping pong and foosball tables. The relaxation room and the lunchroom were critical because employees voiced their desire to have a quiet place to read a book and a fun place to enjoy a meal.

The office site location offered many different amenities for employees such as a close proximity to childcare services and long hallways lined with windows that embrace natural lighting. Also, the building was located near a photographic pond with a nature walk. Ernst &

Young encouraged employees to use their downtime to exercise and connect with nature; they even offered on­site access to bicycles.

According to Robert Wright, director of design and construction at Ernst & Young, the workspace design was a tremendous success and has produced high efficiency level and happy employees. He said, “The employees do group activities together and feel like a family. It is amazing the culture that has developed in this group (Babcock, 2003, p. 49).” Ernst & Young has been able to successfully duplicate their design concepts in other tax compliance offices

20 located in varying regions. This is evidence that office design can add value to a company, provided companies’ seek input from employees and integrate that input into the corporate mission and the design concept.

21 CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY

The meta analysis technique was used to answer four research questions and pull information from secondary research together to create a generic workplace design business model. A collection of resources were used including management journals, design journals, weekly design publications, and engineering and real estate publications. The different groupings of literature explored the functions of office design and how workplace performance can create value for managers and the organization. Further, technological innovations in workplace design and current real­world workplace design practices were evaluated.

The meta analysis results were then translated into the “Three Pillars of Strategic

Workplace Design” model that grouped the findings into three categories: the organization, the workforce, and the design team. The model was structured to show the role the categories play in office design both individually and collectively. In order to test the model’s viability, a cross­ examination of the model based on a decade long success story of workplace design at the

Software Engineering Institute was conducted. The cross­examination was used to reveal similarities or differences in the approach to workplace design, considerations in workplace design, and workplace design procedures between the model and real life practice.

For the purposes of this paper, the term entrepreneurship refers to starting a new business or “greenfield operations.” In a “greenfield operation” an entirely new business entity is created from the ground up and requires an investment in the land and infrastructure that will be required to support the new business.

The term intrapreneurship is used in reference to driving change in an existing business much like “brownfield operations.” “Brownfield operations” are characterized by taking existing

22 land an infrastructure and completely restructuring it to be more competitive in the current business environment or compete in a new business environment.

23 CHAPTER IV: RESULTS & FINDINGS

A major factor in the success of office design is the extent to which the company integrates their design concept into their corporate missions and visions, thus changing the corporate culture. One method to sustain a corporate culture is by embedding it in the design process. By giving careful thought to the workforce, the company’s culture and designing an environment to support it, organizations can strengthen their culture and values and link them more directly to the operations of the company. Linking design strategies to operations involves choosing design concepts that benefit corporate performance metrics, such as productivity, return on investments or sales turnover. Every company is driven by different performance metrics, thus there is no generic “best­fit” design strategy for all companies. Companies can also design their workspaces for more effective responses to changes in the business environment that are inevitable. Overall, workplace design can help develop a sustainable competitive advantage for firms that are willing and able to integrate design concepts across all levels of the organization.

Workplace design is an accessible, yet complex concept for companies in today’s business environment. Companies must understand the culture they are trying to create and how employees currently feel and act within their working environment. In the beginning phase of office design, involving the workforce allows companies to make strategic designs as to which design features should be used to add value. The “environment comfort” model helps companies assess users’ relations to environmental conditions and how these relations are influenced by different buildings, task types and corporate cultures. Employees need spaces for interaction and as well as places for concentration and reflection. Areas designed for socialization can encourage informal communication which is often an excellent motivator for information sharing and creating innovative ideas. If a company fails to include the needs reflected by the 24 workforce they will not be able to design a workplace that adds value by increasing happiness and productivity.

These findings led to the creation of a generic business model that can be used as a starting point to evaluate the potential role of strategic workplace design strategies in a company.

25 Figure 3. Three Pillars of Strategic Workplace Design (WD)

Source: Josh Kelley

Organization – “Foundation” Pillar § WD must be organizationally embedded for maximum effectiveness Mgmt. Support: Financial ­ investment return benefits Cultural – “reinforcement” of new/modified culture Integrated Concept: Aligning design concept with corporate identity (mission, vision), organizational culture, performance metrics

Workforce – “Knowledge” Pillar § The workforce is the source of knowledge for working environment insight, which shapes WD Involvement: Workforce input must be consider from conception, reveals positive/negative factors affecting the work environment, employee satisfaction, and employee productivity; classifying workforce by task completion processes Assessment Metrics: Using workforce input to develop evaluative measures to analyze pre­,post­, and future design concept effects; tools to ensure on­going success via improvements in the design model

Design Team –“Action” Pillar § Selection of the “best­fit” design firm/team is critical to develop a business enhancing design concept. Information: Design firms are the paramount source for information regarding successful, industry­specific design concepts; vast knowledge of design features and success rates Implementation: Experience; transitional “know­how”­ using design features to change the work environment

26 Purpose of the Three Pillars of Strategic Workplace Design Model

The “Three Pillars of Strategic Workplace Design” model was designed to provide entrepreneurs and intrapreneurs with a tool that can be used to holistically evaluate workplace design’s role in a startup or existing business, respectively. The foundation, knowledge and action pillars make up the backbone that supports the value­adding integration of office design concepts into businesses operating in today’s perpetually changing business realm.

The “Pillar Model” is a tool that can help one understand the culture that must be supported by top management and established within the organization to achieve operational efficiency and sustain growth in the work environment. This understanding is critical for entrepreneurs because no culture or work environment has been established in the startup business. Understanding what culture drives the company in its field of business is invaluable because these values, norms and practices can be instilled in the workforce and work environment from day one. In an existing business, it is a daunting task to change an established culture because if it is not done subtlety and strategically it can have negative effects on the workforce, interactions in the work environment and overall operational efficiency. The “Pillar

Model” helps develop an understanding of the existing organizational culture and whether or not workplace design can be used to change the work environment to help recharge the culture, modify the culture or create an entirely new culture.

Furthermore, understanding the culture of the company is only “half of the battle.” An organizational culture is inextricably intertwined with the workforce because it guides motivation and absorbs retaliation. It is critical to know how the business’s culture facilitates or retards workers productivity, collaboration, satisfaction and well­being. For the entrepreneur,

27 the “Pillar Model” will help classify the job completion processes that are most critical to the success of the company. In other words, it reveals if the company will be driven mainly by individual productivity or collaborative teamwork or some combination of the two.

Intrapreneurs can use the model with existing or historical data to typify the job completion processes of the workforce within their business. This may sound simple, but very few companies understand the characteristics of the different types of workers that execute daily business operations. Workplace design cannot and will not be effective without an in­depth understanding of the entire workforce, so that all physical, functional and psychological needs are consistently satisfied.

Neither entrepreneurs nor intrapreneurs have the information or implementation skills necessary to integrate office design concepts. In order to strategically integrate design concepts expertise from outside the organization must be consulted. Matching the design firm and company on multiple dimensions is an important beginning. This is to say that the consulting firm must fully understand the company’s organizational culture and workforce as thoroughly as the company itself. In addition, the company must choose a consulting firm that has the experience and unique skill set that will accommodate the company’s industry specific and firm specific needs. Consultants working with entrepreneurs will be able to take a “clean slate” approach and have all office design concepts at their disposal; whereas, intrapreneurial office design requires working around existing physical structures, established organizational cultures, and a seasoned workforce. Both scenarios create advantages and disadvantages to each party in the design process. The critical aspect of the action pillar is establishing and nurturing a trusting relationship between client and consultant so that mutual benefits can be actualized.

28 Testing the Three Pillars of Strategic Workplace Design Model

The Three Pillars of Strategic Workplace Design (“Pillar”) model’s usage is validated by cross verification with a case study utilizing successful design processes. SEI Investments

Developments, Inc. has experienced a decade of operational success attributed strongly to workplace design changes and the resulting strengthening of corporate culture. The case study was co­authored by Alfred P. West, Jr. and Yoram (Jerry) Wind. Mr. West is the founder,

Chairman and CEO of SEI and Mr. Wind is the Lauder Professor and Professor of Marketing and Director of the SEI Center for Advanced Studies in Management at The Wharton School.

The cross validation illustrates the practical and effective use of the “Pillar” model for both entrepreneurial startups and intrapreneurial changes in existing businesses.

Workplace Design at SEI

SEI began, in 1968, as a small startup firm and has grown into a leading provider of investment accounting and administrative services. Today, they currently operate in 12 countries with a total of 22 offices. SEI processes over $50 trillion of investment transactions annually, manages over $160 billion in investments, and administers $350 billion in mutual fund and pooled assets (West, 2007, p. 139).

SEI created a new work environment by using design concepts and artwork that pushed egalitarianism, empowerment, transparency, flexibility, teamwork, and interaction. In 1996, these design concepts were implemented fully when the company moved their corporate headquarters to a 125 acre campus in Oaks, Pennsylvania. Since the move, financial performance improved, realizing earnings growth of 40 percent per year from 1996 to 2001, with no increase in workforce. Furthermore, annual return since the move was 28 percent and the 29 company managed to post strong performance during the downturn in the investment industry since 2001 (West, 2007, p. 150­151).

The innovative approach to and success of workplace design at SEI presents a legitimate example of how a work environment can reflect and support a company’s culture by providing flexibility in adapting to changing environments and business strategies. SEI’s story proves that new approaches to workplace design, differing from the typical design strategies used by most companies, can provide benefits to the organization on many levels.

Foundation Pillar Aspects

Office design ideas that are not fully supported by top management or integrated with the corporate mission and vision will remain as ideas and never make it from the planning phase to the implementation phase.

The first part of the foundation pillar, management support, is divided into a financial aspect and a cultural aspect. Financially, the design ideas themselves must be fiscally responsible and provide the company investment return benefits to gain full commitment from top management. Fiscal responsibility is necessary for intrapreneurs to get top management committed to design ideas, while fiscal responsibility is imperative for entrepreneurs because of limited startup capital. The notion of fiscal responsibility in workplace design is supported by the following excerpt from the SEI case study.

“Organizations need to avoid the “edifice complex” seen in many companies that waste a

lot of money creating expensive showcases. In designing its buildings, SEI has always

sought to be innovative and fiscally responsible. The whole project was value

engineered, using industrial materials rather than commercial ones. All the floors are

30 covered with tiles made of recycled tires. This facilitates rolling offices and dampens

sounds in open spaces, but also reduces costs as well as being ecologically sound. The

building façade is made of concrete because an earlier plan to employ fieldstone in the

Pennsylvania “barn” was revised to reduce costs (West, 2007, p. 150).”

In addition, design ideas at SEI provided benefits that led to growth, achievement of corporate objectives, and continuous innovation. The figure below shows the investment return benefits that SEI experienced and also reveals benefits that other companies can actualize if they successfully adopt and implement smart design concepts.

Figure 4. Workplace Design and Art Are Drivers of Growth and Innovation

Source: West, A. and Wind, Y. (2007). Putting the Organization on Wheels: Workplace Design at SEI. California Management Review. 49/2. p. 152

31 Top management support ultimately determines, influences, and reinforces the company’s identity. At SEI, creating the new work environment was a top­down process.

Radical changes to organizations are often very difficult and cannot be passed on to a project team because democratic approaches to large change processes often lead to inaction. Many people at SEI who could not shift with the organizational change left the company, but those who stayed were engaged advocates, aligned with organizational values, through the transition process. Workplace design facilitated the transition by helping make the culture concrete (West,

2007, p. 148).

“Although driven from the top, the company’s executive committee played a central role

in implementing the changes. The CEO took the new model and the underlying

principles to this committee – along with the cultural principles it was based upon – and

this team of more than a dozen senior managers played a critical role in adopting the

changes and carrying them out to the organization. The organization also paid careful

attention to the transition process. The transfer to the new workplace was done in stages

with CEO Al West moving in the first phase. This allowed the rest of the organization to

see what was happening before it moved. It also made it clear that this new workplace

would apply to everyone. This transition process also helped create interest in and

excitement about the new workplace (West, 2007, p. 148­149).”

Thus the support of top management in the creation, implementation, and transition stages of modifying or creating a new work environment is essential.

The second part of the foundation pillar is creating concepts. The

“Pillar” model’s focus on integrating design concepts with culture is important to entrepreneurs 32 because it shows the importance of taking the time to think about the best culture that will motivate employees and sustain growth and innovation within their business area. The determination for the “culture of best fit” is vital to the implementation of a design concept that nurtures a value­adding work environment. For intrapreneurs, the established culture in the existing business will be affected by workplace design features that create a new work environment. The current culture must first be understood before tactical decisions about workplace design can be made.

Integration in this sense describes the idea that the design concept(s) must be aligned with the culture and corporate identity of the company. “Cultures are norms and values that define how people work and think about work (West, 2007, p. 139).” Workplace design concepts must be integrated with the culture because culture is the substance that binds companies together by motivating collective strategy and aligning individual activity. Workplace design can be used to align the company’s culture with strategy, which creates a powerful force for creativity and innovation. “For SEI, the creation of a flexible work environment supported their culture [of creativity and innovation] while allowing the organization to quickly change strategic direction to seize new opportunities or respond to new threats (West, 2007, p. 140).”

Knowledge Pillar Aspects

The knowledge pillar is the portion of the model that is used to develop an in­depth understanding of the company’s workforce. Understanding the workforce is important because it offers insight into the working environment of employees, which reveals the information necessary to choose and implement design concepts that will provide the most benefit for the

33 company. Without the full commitment of the workforce any attempts at promoting or benefiting from concepts are not possible.

The approach to using the model to understand the workforce will vary between entrepreneurs and intrapreneurs. First, entrepreneurs have the added benefit of involving employees in the office design process from conception. Before hiring the first worker, the entrepreneur can consider the positive and negative factors in the work environment that could affect them in their day to day operations. Also, tools that measure employee satisfaction and productivity could be made known to potential employees before they are hired rather than introduced to them after they have been in the company for some amount of time. Forecasting the task completion process for the workforce allows the entrepreneur to understand what work environment will be most conducive to enabling the workforce. For example, if the company’s critical operations are performed in teams an office that provides open areas, few barriers to communication, easy relocation for team meetings and promotes a flexible, collaborative environment would be most beneficial. This same work environment would not be very effective in an environment in which the business relies heavily on individual productivity, such as an accounting firm. This type of environment would need to have some common areas, but the focus should be on providing areas where people can work on their own in a calm and quiet environment.

Second, for intrapreneurs the knowledge pillar should trigger the need to take a step back and determine if the company truly understands its workforce. For instance, “a 2005 survey by

Spherion Corporation of more than 1,000 U.S. workers in different organizations found that only

44 percent believed that their organizations had a widely embraced and understood corporate culture (West, 2007, p. 139).” This survey shows that there is a strong need for companies to

34 find a way to reinforce their culture. Workplace design offers a way to embed the company’s expectations and identity into the work environment. Unlike entrepreneurs, intrapreneurs will have to utilize tools and methods that can be used to dig in to the workforce and develop a better understanding of how the people function within the firm’s walls. As mentioned previously, the tools used by the company should be targeted at revealing levels of employee satisfaction, employee productivity, negative and positive factors affecting the work environment (such as lighting, location, colors, etc.), and classifying the workforce by job completion process.

Finally, to receive continual benefit from workplace design concepts both entrepreneurs and intrapreneurs must employ assessment metrics that evaluate the design concepts used. These metrics should evaluate the design concepts on pre­adoption, post­adoption and future use levels.

The metrics established by various assessment methods can be used by the company to ensure on­going success of workplace design by continuously improving the design model. It is not expected for entrepreneurs or intrapreneurs to have the knowledge of which assessment tools are best for evaluating the workforce or evaluating design concepts, but they should know where to get access to this information. Design firms hold a wealth of knowledge about evaluating the workforce and the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of many design concepts across many industries. In addition to obtaining employee insight through interviews and surveys, the organization might consider direct employee involvement in the design process. By collaborating with design experts, employees develop a sense of ownership and ultimately commitment to both the values and culture behind the design.

At SEI, an analysis of the workforce revealed changes in the work environment that could be made to increase efficiency and effectiveness of operations. Among these were the removal of secretaries, the team phone concept, and a teamwork transformation. SEI found it

35 clear that secretaries were the only people in the organization with no upward mobility. The company saw secretaries as a buffer between the manager and the business world that repressed the free flow of ideas; a key to the company’s competitiveness and success. The change was drastic, but SEI muffled the negative effects by offering all secretaries jobs in different roles.

In the financial services sector, it is strategically important for clients to speak with an informed employee when they call for consultation. It is unrealistic for SEI to expect its employees to be at their desk one hundred percent of the time, so they developed the team phone concept. Under this concept, if an SEI team member could not answer his/her phone then the call was passed on to the rest of the team. Whoever was available to take the call would answer it thus enabling the customer to speak with someone knowledgeable and not a machine. An added perk to using team phones was that it kept all team members in the loop as to what was going on with the business.

Furthermore, in their analysis SEI discovered that their old office design was not conducive to the shift of focus on teams. Doing work in teams was the most beneficial way for

SEI to spark creativity and execute innovation, but as workers were moved from team to team costs increased. They estimated reconstruction costs of $1,400 per employee relocated and days of lost productivity (West, 2007, p. 140). This realization was one of the factors that led to the move to a new business campus with cutting edge office designs.

The design strategy at SEI created a unique competitive advantage, providing a screening method for new employees, and developing a signaling effect for both new and existing employees. Two top executives at SEI describe the company’s competitive advantage by saying,

“SEI’s people are uncommon, personifying both entrepreneurial initiative and cooperative teamwork. They are flexible, eager to learn, generous with knowledge and skills, and creative,

36 yet practical. Innovation is everywhere in the company’s strategies, products, client relationships and even the physical environment (West, 2007, p. 142).” The work environment at SEI also acts as a screening method for potential employees because people who choose to join the company appreciate and like the culture reflected in its office design. This helps to filter out the potential employees who would not be a good fit for the company’s open culture. The company’s culture is so deeply nested in the office design that it signals to new and existing employees the high level of commitment to teamwork, creativity, empowerment and other values.

Action Pillar Aspects

Design firms are an ideal resource that provides an unbiased view of the organization and the workforce while providing . Considering an internal view, employing a design firm will help ensure that the company truly understands their workforce by providing third person input. Frequently organizations lack the knowledge and empathy regarding employee desires and motivators. The company should establish a relationship with the design firm that enables continual evaluation of design concepts to continually improve the design strategy in the future. The design firm brings the unique skill of narrowing down the plethora of design concepts and choosing the ones that are a best­fit for the individual company based on experience and practice. Overall, the design firm provides all the information and implementation skills necessary to execute strategic workplace design.

The action pillar’s application differs between entrepreneurs and intrapreneurs, but in terms of the necessity of a design firm being the center of strategy creation it is the same. First, entrepreneurs are most focused on getting their business started and have the most understanding

37 of the company and the company’s budget. They don’t have the time that a design firm has to focus on the design strategy. Entrepreneurs can provide the design firm with a description of the ideal working environment for the workforce, and the budget allocated to the design process.

These are the critical elements that design firms need to develop a unique and value­adding design concept that is specific to the company because there is no such thing as a generic design strategy that works for all companies.

Intrapreneurs have the added task of taking an existing physical structure and re­shaping it. Management may not have the resources or desire to support new workplace design ideas that require purchasing new real estate. It is the intrapreneur’s task to compile all of the information about the changes that the company wants to see when they adopt office design concepts and the investment they are willing to make. This includes the desired changes in the company’s culture, workforce, and work environment. The design firm can then take that information and custom tailor a holistic design strategy that considers all of the company’s parameters.

SEI is a unique story of workplace design because design firms were not readily available when they began to focus on workplace design over a decade ago. Design firms did exist, but the current trend of office design as a motivator and business enhancing tool was not yet mainstream. SEI, led by CEO Alfred West, was a pioneer in workplace design making choices about design concepts based on what would improve job task completion and satisfaction of the workforce, as well as improve organizational efficiency. Aligning design concepts with organizational culture and corporate strategy exemplifies the knowledge, experience, and “know­ how” that today’s design firms can offer companies looking to put workplace design into action.

38 SEI chose specific design concepts that could be used to embed their organizational culture in the workplace. They chose design concepts that reinforced egalitarianism, empowerment, transparency, teamwork and interaction, and flexibility.

Hierarchy is not as important as ideas. To support a flat organizational structure the new workplace was designed to have no offices. Instead, they used desks on wheels in large barn­like rooms with high ceilings and open spaces. They installed some private conference rooms around the open work areas, but no one received a private office. Even the CEO had the same desk and furniture as the rest of the employees. Such design concepts send the message that seniority and title do not matte as they do in more traditionally structured companies (West, 2007, p. 143).

The company wanted their employees to be empowered and act as owners of their work.

Each employee was allowed to change their location in the organization without approval from top managers and doing so was easy because their desk was on wheels. Top management set the overall strategy and vision, but employees were encouraged to reposition themselves on different teams on their own. This mobility allowed for greater collaboration and talent sharing within the organization (West, 2007, p. 143).

“In an office without walls, there are no secrets (West, 2007, p. 143).” Open architecture in an office building creates an open culture where little or no private conversations exist. Managers can passively monitor their teams by simply listening to the conversations and interactions taking place. By listening, the manager will know when things start to get heated and can step in to mediate before the situation gets out of control. In this environment, employees learn to read body language, respect space and respect signals of their co­workers, which lead to more openness and interaction, and mentoring and learning (West, 2007, p. 143).

39 Because change is constant at SEI offices were designed for flexibility and reconfiguring work teams as needed with minimal cost. Each year the company has a “clean up day” where each business unit competes to see who can throw away the most non­critical material. This event ensures and reinforces that the workforce is always ready to move. The definition of flexibility is embodied in the employees’ ability to form a new team by simply rolling their desks to a new location and plugging in to the readily­accessible multimedia connections (West, 2007, p. 144).

Teamwork and interaction are consistently encouraged in SEI’s large barn­like open rooms. In these rooms there is nothing to block interaction because everything is in the line of sight and no objects are higher than a desk. Employees don’t gather around the water cooler to share ideas and information because it happens everywhere. SEI chose to install a large cafeteria for all employees, including top executives to eat and meet. The cafeteria has become a central location for both informal and formal interactions. To encourage spontaneous meetings and informal interactions there are small sitting locations throughout the office. Very few closed door areas exist and the on­campus health club makes the office both engaging and fun to work in (West, 2007, p. 144).

SEI’s design strategy can be applied across all three pillars of the “Three Pillars of

Strategic Workplace Design” model. The design strategy was driven through the organization across all levels by CEO Alfred West. Design concepts were chosen based on input from employees and the direction provided by a design team of committed SEI executives. The following chart illustrates the “Pillar” model as applied to SEI, but also portrays the model’s ability to be used as a framework for workplace design strategy decision making.

40 Figure 5. Three Pillars of Strategic Workplace Design @ SEI

Foundation Pillar – The Organization (Software Engineering Institute) § SEI’s buildings were designed to reflect a flexible and creative culture Driven top­down: Financial ­ Investment return benefits: Continuous Innovation, (Mgmt. Support) Growth, Achievement of Corporate Objectives Cultural ­ Transition and implementation driven from the top Culture Infused Design: Corporate identity “baked into the fabric of the work (Integrated Concept) environment”

Knowledge Pillar – The Workforce (SEI Employees) § Analyzing the workforce shaped the design strategy; removal of secretaries & team phone concept Empowerment: Encourages teamwork & interaction; attracts and retains the right (Involvement) people; facilitates communication and transparency; encourages creativity; signals innovation and fiscal responsibility to all stakeholders; faster, more efficient & effective decisions Employee Surveys: Consistently recognized by Fortune magazine as one of the best (Assessment Metrics) companies to work for in America; continual feedback on success and failure in the design strategy; “clean up day”

Action Pillar – The Design Team (Executive Committee) § Unique, innovative, pioneering approach led by CEO and an internal design team Design Concepts: Promoting egalitarianism, empowerment, transparency, (Information) flexibility, teamwork and interaction Design Principles: Embrace the Culture, Fiscal Responsibility, Build for Flexibility (Implementation)

41 CHAPTER V: CONCLUSIONS

Today’s business environment requires companies to embrace change and adopt organizational cultures that enable flexibility, innovation, and creativity. Workplace design should not only reflect and clarify the culture of the company, but should also embody all of the overarching values that drive the firm. The design strategy itself should be a convergence of the culture, mission, vision, objectives, and performance drivers of daily operations. The ideal design strategy will provide increased output and efficiency, aside from reinforcing the culture and enhancing the work environment. Shaping the work environment through workplace design creates a more direct link between the company’s culture and the work of the organization. This link will enable the company to shift strategic direction when market demand or performance outcomes require a new focus.

A “best­fit” design strategy for all companies does not exist, thus strategic workplace design strategies must be crafted with company and industry specific criterion. Examples of design concepts portrayed in this thesis are not meant to be model design strategies, but the examples do reveal that there are many more varied approaches available to workplaces design than the traditional “cubicle office” thinking.

Based on current research, the “Three Pillars of Strategic Design” model will work as a generic model and starting point for companies looking to enhance the business by investing in workplace design; however, there are limitations to this study of workplace design. Only one case of successful workplace design was thoroughly evaluated and applied to the model.

Strengthening the model’s viability could be achieved by applying similar cross­examinations using both large and small firms, as well as more entrepreneurial and intrapreneurial firms. Also,

42 there was no hard (quantitative) data used in the evaluation. The findings based on anecdotal data can be further supported by quantitative data once the model is put into practice.

The workplace design study conducted presents to two areas for future research within functionality of the model and the model’s application internationally. Different departments within a single company may require different design strategies to provide the desired workplace design benefits. This is to say that very different approaches between the marketing department and accounting department may be necessary to implement a design strategy that is holistically value­adding. Research designed to reveal best practices in accommodating different departments with different design concepts would add a new level of functionality to the “Pillar” model. In addition, the effectiveness of design concepts and strategies will vary across different national and regional cultures in the world. Design concepts that work in the United States may not be effective in Germany or vice versa. Studying the variance in design concepts across different cultures would add an entirely new dimension to the model and make it globally applicable. In order for the model to be widely accepted and used, further research in functionality and international application must be used to drive the evolution of the model.

43 REFERENCES

Anjum, N., Paul, J., & Ashcroft, R. (2005). The changing environment of offices: a challenge for furniture design. . 26, 73­95.

Babcock, R. (2003, March). Tax Breaks. Buildings & Buildings Interiors, 48­49.

Becker, F. and Steele, F. Workplace by Design: Mapping the High Performance Workscape (San Francisco, CA: Jossey­Bass, 1994).

Bontis, N. Dragonetti, N.C. Jacobsen, K. and Roos, G. “The Knowledge Toolbox: A Review of the Tools Available to Measure and Manage Intangible Resources,” European Management Journal, 17/4 (1999): 391­402.

Brill, M. et al., Disproving Widespread Myths About Workplace Design (Jasper, IN: Kimball International, 2001).

Elsbach, K.D. “Relating Physical Environment to Self­Categorizations: A Study of Identity Threat and Affirmation in a Non­Territorial Office Space,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 48/4 (December 2003): 622­654.

Elsbach, K. D., & Bechky, D. A. (2007). It's more than a desk: working smarter through leveraged office design. California Management Review. 49/2

Evans, G.W. Environmental Stress (New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 1982)

Heft, H. and Nasar, J.L. “Evaluating Environmental Scenes Using Dynamic Versus Static Displays,” Environment and Behavior, 32 (2000): 301­322.

Kampschroer, K. “Workplace Making: Experiment and Transformation,” lecture, Harvard Design School Executive Education Program, August 2004.

Leather, P. Pyrgas, M. Beale, D. and Lawrence, C. “Windows in the Workplace: Sunlight, View, and Occupational Stress,” Environment and Behavior, 30/6 (1998): 739­762 Le Pla, R. (2005, August). Building great workplaces. New Zealand Management, 50­55.

Milligan, M.J. “Interactional Past and Potential: The Social Construction of Place Attachment,”Symbolic Interaction, 21 (1998): 1­33, p. 6.

“News Briefs.” HR Focus. 82/12 (December 2005): 9.

Niemela, R. Rautio, S. Hannula, M. and Reijula, K. “Work Environment Effects on Labor Productivity: An Intervention Study in a Storage Building,” American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 42/4 (2002): 328­335).

Schein, Edgar. Organizational Culture and Leadership. 3rd Edition (New York, NY: Wiley Publishers/Jossey­Bass, 2004)

Springer, T. Improving Productivity In the Workplace: Reports from the Field (St. Charles, IL; Springer Associates, 1986).

Stokols, D. and Scharf, F. “Developing Standardized Tools for Measuring Employees’ Rating of Facility Performance,” in G.Davis and F.T. Ventre, eds., Performance of Building and Serviceability of Facilities (Philadelphia, PA: American Society for Testing and Materials, 1990), pp. 55­68.

Vilnai­Yavetz, I. and Rafaeli, A. “Managing Artifacts to Avoid Artifact Myopia,” in A. Rafaeli and M. Pratt, eds., Artifacts and Organizations (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2006), pp. 9­21.

Vischer, J.C. Workspace Strategies: Environment as a Tool for Work (New York, NY: Chapman and Hall, 1996)

Vischer, J.C. Space Meets Status: Designing Workplace Performance (Oxford, U.K.: Routledge/Taylor & Francis, 2005).

Vischer, J. C. (2007). The concept of workplace performance and its value to managers. California Management Review. 49/2.

West, A. and Wind, Y. (2007). Putting the Organization on Wheels: Workplace Design at SEI. California Management Review. 49/2.

45 Zelinsky, M. The Inspired Workspace: Designs for Creativity and Productivity (Gloucester, MA:Rockport Publishers Inc., 2002).

46