Literature Review On Work Environment: Improving Productivity And Collaboration

Brief Summary

Discuss about the Literature Review for the Work Environment.

In new trend is taking shape in the business world as innovation spaces are already changing the landscape. In the last ten years, the world has experienced a considerable growth in co-working spaces, innovation centres, incubators, research institutes, and start up spaces (Wagner & Watch 2017). However, people have missed the innovation spaces that are manifested in physical aspects because of the broader cultural, economic, and demographic forces. The ambition to remain the market leader has pushed many leading corporations to adopt a creative experimentation in designing their working environment. Companies are measuring whether designing their workspaces is helping or hurting their performance. Based on the published work of Weber, Magnolfi, and Lindsay (2016), workspaces could be offering a new competitive edge to the businesses. Every company is in a hurry to redesign its workspaces such as Telenor, Google, and Samsung are among the companies that have redesigned their working environment to create the best working atmosphere that can maximize productivity. This mini-literature review confirms the level of attraction that this topic has received from architecture and other companies worldwide.

In this article, Weber et al. (2016) have acknowledged the significance of the new workspaces that encourages collaboration by increasing personal interaction through innovation. These scholars have identified the major companies that are leading the park in redesigning their workspaces in hope of improving employee performance. According to these scholars, the companies would never achieve their goals by compelling works to sit behind the monitors. The new designs enhance collaboration and innovation. However, the core question is whether the executives can prove that the new designs work. For example, Google is establishing a new campus to maximize performance, Facebook building a single mile-long room for is employees, while Samsung is introducing new workspaces just to motivate employees. Despite all these efforts, nobody is sure of the effectiveness of these initiatives.  The new deigns embraced by some companies like Facebook is a threat to employee’s privacy, the power of proximity, and the significance of virtual working environment. It has thus raised the issues of Density, proximity, and social nature relating to the working environment.

The world is becoming digital and companies are already taking the initiative to adapt to these changes. Reeve (2016) has identified that the new dispensation has compelled companies to compete on the perspective of innovation and creativity. Since employees are the most important internal clients of an organization, it is important to consider their needs and expectations. For example, allowing them to work from home or outside the offices would justify their ability to work independently. Ferrazzi (2014) maintains that virtual teams have ensured the workers operate in a flexible working environment. The employees can use the opportunity to manage their lives and work flexibly. However, getting virtual teams has proved a nightmare in the society because most people value face-to-face interaction as important. Nonetheless, the new technology promotes collaboration as dispersed teams have outperformed that those working in offices. According to Fayard and Weeks (2011), the use of virtual teams has improved organization’s performance and employee productivity by about 43 percent.

Working Environment

The main problem revolves around creating a virtual team because the managers must consider various factors. However, research has indicted that experience can help managers to navigate collaborative environment and overcome challenges by putting together the right team, technology, touch points and leadership (Botsman & Rogers 2011). It involves following the simple high-return rules that maximize productivity.  Reeve (2016) believes that virtual teams are perfect and would always meet deadlines.

The virtual environment ensures the employees are physically separated. It bars the employees from enjoying the nonworking activities such as accessing the restrooms because it separates them. Research has indicated that the virtual working environment in the new workspaces can thrive in an environment that promotes awareness, voluntary engagement, and the rules or occasions for engagement. Fayard and Weeks (2011) held that physical workspaces have incessantly stimulated interactions thus promoting awareness among them. It also creates a sense of teamwork. To this effect, Reeve (2016) believes that a virtual environment should also convey or embrace similar situation where workers experience a sense of interaction and awareness. This involves the use of various software applications such as instant messaging, Twitter, Facebook, and Skype. The modern managers have never underestimated the significance of these factors and have allowed employees to use smartphones and desktops or other mobile devices to complete their tasks. Some team leaders have requested their members to customize Skype mood messaging or IM status thus discourage informal interactions.

Promoting knowledge management system is essential because it reduces time wastage. In fact, it provides the environment where discussion forums and virtual teams can operate. Conversely, the new technology has created a chicken-and-egg problem because promoting an online social environment is impossible without a core group (Cappelli & Keller 2013). It has created a sense of proximity that has further proved for many virtual team members. For instance, in educational programs, lecturers have used various technologies such as interactive whiteboards and video links to reach out to their students. Nonetheless, the managers must ensure they protect virtual privacy (Lange 2011). For instance, when employees understand that their bosses are monitoring them through electronic exchanges, they would be reluctant to engage in the virtual conversation.

The knowledge economy has provided opportunity for workers to interpret data online. The new workspaces have given a cold bath to the physical spaces by promoting online networking among the employees (Reed 2007). Without a doubt, a collaborative production is always the best approach to maximize the opportunities available in the environment. Therefore, embracing a network-based processes prove significant to sustainable production as explained by Moriset (2014). The social media has promoted corporation and networking among the workers. In fact, the companies can organize audio conferencing to manage the workers beyond the proximity (Musterd & Murie 2011). This new development is evident in freelancing where workers complete tasks online and adhere to the laid down rules of the game (Florida 2002). Therefore, creativity and collaboration have ensured the employees maximize their performance thus triggering economic growth as determined by Pratt (2008). Grugulis and Stoyanova (2012) highlighted the significance of the technology in the promoting urban economies.

Virtual Proximity

The new workspace design is increasing the performance of employees. According to Giang (2014), workers must avoid sitting pretty in offices to maximize their performance. Waber, Magnolfi, and Lindsay (2014) have affirmed that the new path that involves unique workspaces, designing agile environment provide solutions to the problems they experience. The new design promotes creativity, collaboration, and productivity. The modern office must maximize the impact of technology and sustainability. To Giang (2014), the infrastructural solution maximizes human performance, potential, and productivity.  But what could productivity mean for the organization? The productivity of employees is beyond sitting at the desk but focuses on solving problems and creating ideas collaboratively.

The businesses should also design spaces that nobody has to sit in a designed spot. In fact, the social hub has connected co-workers thus promoting working environments. According to Giang (2014), an agile design ensures the employee feel comfortable and can balance work and life. An agile working environment also increases the movement of employees based on choice and the assignment. This implies that people or workers have the choice, power and more control. However, the issues emerging from such an agile working environment agreement as the worker should work on strategies to control destructions (Giang 2014). Studies have also shown that sitting for so long is harmful to one’s health. To this effect, an individual should be concerned about the employee’s health as explained by Johns and Gratton (2013). Therefore, the solution would be based on adjusting the desk that has been proved to be healthier thus make people feel alert (Guang 2014).

Conclusion

The increasing customer base and global workforce has made the employees to consider working beyond their office spaces. This has made the working environment complex thus increasing the aspects of collaboration and teamwork. The new workspace designs seem to promote productivity and performance. In this era of innovation, the physical offices are becoming scarce and companies have to respond. In fact, the physical office spaces increase the operating costs that many companies are turning to virtual working environment to maximize their performance. With the technology and internet, managers are opting for digital working spaces to remain relevant and minimize costs. The large conglomerates are taking the leads, but managing virtual teams proves difficult.

Botsman, R. & Rogers, R. 2011, What’s mine is yours: how collaborative consumption is changing the way we live. Collins, New York.

Cappelli, P. & Keller, J.R. 2013, ‘Classifying work in the new economy’, The Academy of Management Review, vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 1-22.

Fayard, A-L. & Weeks, J. (2011) ‘Who moved my cube’, Harvard Business Review, July/August. (Available at https://hbr.org/2011/07/who-moved-my-cube)

Ferrazzi, K. (2014) ‘Getting virtual teams right’, Harvard Business Review, Dec. (available at https://hbr.org/2014/12/getting-virtual-teams-right) 

Florida, R. (2002) The rise of the creative class. Basic Books, New York.

Giang, V. (2014), ‘Workspace design trends to increase your productivity’, FastCompany, Sep 7, (available at https://www.fastcompany.com/3032792/6-workspace-designs-trends-to-increase-your-productivity)

Grugulis, I. & Stoyanova, D. 2012 ‘Social capital and networks in film and TV: Jobs for the boys?’ Organization Studies, vol. 33, no. 10, pp. 1311-1331.

Johns, T. & Gratton, L. 2013, ‘The third wave of virtual work’, Harvard Business Review, Jan/Feb: 1-9.

Lange, B. 2011, ‘Rescaling governance in Berlin’s creative economy’, Culture Unbound, vol. 3, pp. 187-208.

Moriset, B. 2014, ‘Building new places of the creative economy. The rise of coworking spaces’, Proceedings of the 2nd Geography of Innovation, International Conference 2014, Utrecht University, Utrecht (The Netherlands).

Musterd, S. & Murie, A. (Eds.). 2011, Making competitive cities. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford.

Pratt, A. 2008, ‘Creative cities: the cultural industries and the creative class’, Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography, vol. 90, no. 2, pp. 107-117.

Reed, B. 2007, ‘Co-working: the ultimate in teleworking flexibility’, Network World. (Available at https://www.networkworld.com/news/2007/102307-coworking.html)

Reeves, G. 2016, ‘Comparative analysis between digital offices and traditional office spaces’, Propel, Dec 6. (https://propelbusinessworks.com/guest-blogs/comparative-analysis-digital-offices-traditional-office-spaces/).

Spinuzzi, C. 2012, ‘Working alone together: coworking as emergent collaborative activity’, Journal of Business and Technical Communication, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 399-441.

Waber, B., Magnolfi, J., & Lindsay, G. 2016, ‘Workspaces that move people’. In W. Lazonick, The definitive management ideas of the year from Harvard Business Review (pp.139-151). Harvard Business Review Press, Boston, Mass.

Waber, B., Magnolfi, J., Lindsay, G. 2014, ‘Workspaces that move people’, Harvard Business Review, vol. 92, no. 10, pp. 68-77.

Wagner, J. & Watch, D. (2017) ‘Innovation spaces: the new design of work’, April. (available at https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/cs_20170404_innovation_spaces_pdf.pdf)