ABSTRACT. Purpose – Academics can be defined as knowledge workers, but not all knowledge workers are academics. Academia is considered a conservative industry and are often considered to have a high degree of resistance to change, but still there is little research done specifically on what they do in the workplace and how they conduct their work. This paper aims to investigate if academic work is something completely different from what literature defines as knowledge work and identify similarities and distinctive features between the two. It will seek to find if their ways of working are completely different, or if it is two sides of the same coin to help understanding academics needs when planning workplaces for academics in the future. Design/methodology/approach – The data collection for this paper is done through a literature review investigating knowledge workers and academics. The findings for academics and academic work are supplemented with findings from fifteen semi-structured in-depth interviews with academic staff from different professional disciplines at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, as well as a document study of documents from the Campus Development Project at NTNU. Findings – The findings shows that there are both expected similarities, but also some larger variations between knowledge workers and academics. The most important difference between knowledge work and academic work are identified as the constant alternation between guiding students, deep concentration work and the need for access to sources such as books and archives. Research Implications – The findings in this paper offer practical possibilities in the studies of workplace management, facilities management, real estate development, campus development and other studies of the built environment.

ABSTRACT. As higher educational facilities face the challenge of digital transformation in teaching methodologies due to the pandemic emergency, recognizing the role of space in addition to the introduction of the new technological innovations, also contemporary trends in academic workplaces rethinking have undergone a significant push as the result of the remote work, persisting also after the lockdown periods. The ongoing debate in workspaces design arguing the advantages of open space against individual rooms has shifted to a balance, acknowledging that a flexible mix of spaces for individual focus, informal communication, accidental collision, and collaboration provides a more effective and satisfying environment. However, although the design of activity-based areas in the commercial sectors has become a solution to simultaneously respond to physical and social requirements, affecting workers’ productivity and health, academia still strongly opposes the abandonment of the cellular office due to hierarchical structures, the status of private space size and the functional obsolescence of the outdated albeit representative existing facilities. Further drives to embrace a renovation of research facilities design models arise from the issue of operational and maintenance costs threatening the tight budgets of public universities and the emerging trends in education highlighting the importance of a shared learning experience and blurring the boundaries between didactic and research spaces. This paper presents the case study of the brief and meta-design definition for the new scientific university campus in the Mind district, introducing the issue of specialized high-tech laboratories and ancillary spaces as places for collaborative working to the quantitative and qualitative layout setting of the new facility. Accordingly, the meta-design methodology is reported comprehending a literature review, the collection of best practices, the setting of requirements also following a thorough co-design process, finally allowing for the development of guidelines for the design of spatial flexibility for multidisciplinary research activities.

ABSTRACT. Planning workplaces for universities is a complex matter because it concerns the regulatory framework within which each university operates. For instance, the European Union provides specific guidelines on how to deal with safety, security, HVAC, the size of space, health and wellbeing of users, etc. Then, each State is responsible for implementing these guidelines, depending on the context and users’ specific needs. In other contexts, such as the African one, there isn’t a regulatory framework on the subject matter. Therefore, the process of sizing on-campus administrative spaces and workplaces (for example the offices for professors) becomes even more complex. The paper presents the experience of the authors while supporting the Somali National University of Mogadishu in developing their new campus. The methodology entailed a questionnaire that was administered to the Rector and the members of eight faculties to gather information on the number of people and type of activities that the campus should have hosted. The questionnaire results allowed a preliminary analysis of the quality and amount of space necessary for administrative and didactic research activities and helped solve the lack of African laws on the subject matter. In conclusion, the paper shows how Italian laws and European standards and regulations were used to estimate the need for on-campus spaces and define some benchmarks. This contribution reflects on the need for flexible enough regulations that allow decisions tailored to each specific case in order to better address different users’ needs.

ABSTRACT. Transformation of the workplace is now emerging as one of the most globalized cities phenomena we are currently experiencing, with very substantial local and regional impacts. Growing presence of co-working spaces is noticed in a variety of urban locations, including the post-socialist metropolis of Warsaw. The article focuses on the determination of spatial patterns of coworking spaces on the national scale and intra-city scale based on the example of the capital city of Warsaw. Following a comprehensive literature review and spatial analysis, the researchers attempted to determine the most crucial locational factors relevant to the analyzed spaces. Included in the analysis was a residential urban concept, the 15-minute city, which determines the spheres of accomplishing the needs of residents Analysis was based on an up-to-date database of coworking spaces situated in Poland and conducted interviews with users. Findings indicate a tendency for coworking spaces to be located in large cities and metropolitan areas. Peripheral areas have a negligible share of coworking spaces. On a national scale, the capital is strongly dominant as the center with the largest share of analyzed spaces. In addition, the presence of coworking spaces in major metropolitan nodes is also noticeable. Contrary to other European cities, where major location factors are urbanization advantages and social factors, in Warsaw traditional location assets, such as accessibility and proximity of public transport, tend to be more prominent. Multifunctionality of the areas was also included among the significant pull factors.

ABSTRACT. Besides the digitalization especially the change of work and living behavior require new concepts and strategies to satisfy the new demand. This change is taking place from the classic flat preferably in the city center, to flexible work and living concepts in more rural areas. This change is being enormously amplified by the current pandemic situation, as home offices are becoming more and more important and many people are relying on a workplace outside the office. Firstly, the own home is converted into a workplace, but especially in cramped conditions, this cannot be a permanent solution. Therefore, detached workplaces such as Coworking spaces near to home are getting more important and could reveal unexpected potentials or issues for the rural regions or the residence of the housing areas. Hence, a literature review is elaborated to identify the current state of science and technology regarding the implementation of Coworking spaces in residential areas. Further possible effects of Coworking spaces on the residential area or region are deducted by a qualitative analysis of the identified literature. Findings show on the one hand correlations between the implementation of a Coworking space and socio-cultural factors such as the well-being of the residents. On the other hand, economic effects on region can be identified, as the potential of start-ups is growing, the commuting would be reduced and therefore residents would stay for a longer period of time in the direct neighborhood and consume more goods there. The line of discussion is focused on the possibility of the implementation of Coworking spaces in existing residential buildings and the effects on the residential area or region.

ABSTRACT. During the Covid-19 pandemic, many public and private employees and highly skilled professionals started working remotely for significant periods (remote working/teleworking). As a result, there has been a new demand for publicly owned new working spaces in Italy, following northern European countries' case (Bellandi et al., 2021; Mariotti et al., 2021). Within this context, in Italy a key role is played by the Associazione di Promozione Sociale “South Working – Lavorare dal Sud” (SW-LdS, www.southworking.org), which promotes the idea that people in teleworking will be able to live, although for limited periods, in the South of Italy and the Italian inner areas, working in coworking spaces, called “presìdi di comunità” (Militello and Mirabile, 2020). This strategy aims to positively impact territorial cohesion to reduce economic, social, and territorial divergencies. After describing the location of these coworking spaces, the paper presents the case of several coworking spaces settled in the South of Italy, with attention to peripheral areas. It describes the rationale behind their opening, their business strategy, the supplied services, the type of users, and the direct (on the users) and indirect effects (local context) they have had or aim to achieve.

References Bellandi M., Mariotti I., Nisticò R. (2021), a cura di, Città nel Covid. Centri urbani, periferie e territori alle prese con la pandemia, Donzelli Editore, Rome. Mariotti I., Di Marino M., Akhavan M. (2021), “The emergence of coworking models in the face of pandemic”, In Bryson J.R., Lauren A., Reardon L., Ersoy A., eds., Living with Pandemics: People, Place and Policy, Edward Elgar, pp. 129-139. Militello E., Mirabile M. (2020), Focus - Il progetto «South working» – Lavorare dal Sud, in SVIMEZ, Rapporto SVIMEZ 2020. L'economia e la società del Mezzogiorno, Bologna, Il Mulino, pp. 223-234.

ABSTRACT. The responsible workplace for knowledge work is multifaced phenomena. It is an attractor and value-statement for individual employee. It is part of the sustainability agenda of the employer.

So far there are identified sustainability-related practices in light of working environments connected to ecological, economical and social factors. In terms of ecological sustainability energy efficiency is much used sustainability indicator. It is also a known fact that an organization can decrease a large part of their emissions by improving their methods of business travel. Space use efficiency can be identified as economical sustainability factor as occupying less space usually means smaller rental cost. There are different environmental tools to develop green practices connected to working environment.

All United Nations members adopted the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development in 2015. In the core of the agenda are 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Since, many organizations, public or private, in different countries are committed to these SDGs. However, how these SDGs are practiced in knowledge work and in workplace management is not investigated thoroughly. Therefore, the indicator framework for SDGs needs more intense conceptual and methodological considerations to support the development of sustainable work environments in knowledge work. The goal of this paper is to connect SDGs and sustainable practices of knowledge work environments.

The research question asked is: What are the potential SDGs to indicate the responsibility of knowledge workplace? How these SDGs can be practiced and measured?

The method to study this research question is focus group interviews. The focus group will consist of workplace management practioners in Finland. The qualitative and explanatory approach opens up the insights to adaptation of SDGs in workplace management. The result of this study is a workplace management SDG framework for knowledge work.

ABSTRACT. Humans, and not buildings, are responsible for environmental degradation. Even if the in-use phase of buildings is the most resource-consumers, the Architecture-Engineering-Construction-Operation industry (AECO) has principally focused on the design and construction stages to measure environmental impacts. Few studies on office buildings did focus on energy evaluation, but energy consumption is just one component. Moreover, many efforts to improve the environmental sustainability of offices have been focusing on technologies. However, the long-term effectiveness of technologies depends on user behaviour. Therefore, the sustainability science needs a solution-oriented approach to evaluate the complex human-nature interaction in the built environment during the in-use stage of office buildings. To overcome this missing link, the present research proposes to assess the users’ influence in the office building footprint by developing a multi-method approach, based on a sustainability index, namely the Ecological Footprint (EF), and to test it on real cases. The method entails a calculation based on nine addenda: Built-up, Energy Consumption, Water Consumption, Material Consumption, Food & Drink, Mobility, Waste Generation, Recycle Potential, and Occupant that identify the environmental impact of office buildings during their in-use stage. The Occupant addendum aims to represent the relevance of user behaviour in the estimation of sustainability performance. To test the model, the author interviewed the facility managers of four companies and collected data from 2020 on the nine addenda in each company. The comparison across companies demonstrates the importance of monitoring user behaviour to minimize office buildings footprints. In all case studies the Food & Drink addendum represents a high percentage of the total footprint.

ABSTRACT. The Advancement of society towards new technologies poses demand for higher and increasing energy requirements. This increased energy consumption emphasizes the importance of advanced, responsive, and energy-efficient building facades to provide interior comfort of a building with lesser energy consumption. Building facades act as a barrier between the interior and the exterior of a building, and perform multiple functions which eventually, affect the building performance. Smart and Interactive facades can offer higher efficiency and better performance compared to conventional construction. This paper addresses new smart technologies that can be used, or that are being used in the construction industry to analyze the application of connectivity, intelligence, flexibility, and efficiency of building façade systems. To accomplish these goals, a literature review was conducted, which resulted in the identification of a set of 50 research papers with innovative ideas, techniques, and inventions for building façade systems. These new ideas and inventions can provide increased level of building sustainability, energy-efficient systems, and eco-friendly buildings. The findings can help design, construction, and facility management professionals develop more, easier, and cheaper ways to produce and to practice Smart Building Envelopes for the generations to come.

ABSTRACT. Modern business organisations rely on knowledge and its management as a key asset. It should, therefore, be expected that the workplaces in organisations follow the models of the workplaces at universities. The COVID-19 pandemic made universities introduce online work and education or take advantage of the hybrid mode combining in-person and e-work offering another approach to the concept of workplace. A lot of research has been done with a focus on the strengths and weaknesses of traditional, online and hybrid modes in an academic environment. With this regard, the authors made a survey on the attitudes of students, faculty and administrative staff. It was aimed at establishing how based on the university development strategy of the largest economic university in South-Eastern Europe recommendations could be made in terms of costs and work schedule optimisation. The optimisation is analysed with regard to the increased student attendance and engagement, enhanced faculty research and development activities and greater effectiveness of administrative staff taking into account the change in the conventional workplace. Furthermore, another survey is being carried out focused on students’ views and perceptions related to the workplace of the future. Modern generations are “digital natives”. They spend more of their time in the virtual reality rather than in real life and it is, therefore, reasonable to study how they see the workplace that will contribute to their full-fledged participation in knowledge acquisition and career realisation. Thus, having discussed the results and findings from both surveys we would be able to suggest a rational model of the academic and business workplace of the future. It could be assumed that the offices of the future would have to ensure employees conditions for work in real, in-person, environment and cloud environment for distance working.

ABSTRACT. Background: An identified need to promote hybrid practices in education puts pressure on transforming university learning environments. Current teaching and learning models and approaches include e.g. hybrid and blended learning, flexible scheduling, and attendance, and the learning environments are changing accordingly. To manage these requirements and processes, siloed practices must be overcome, and this requires the engagement of stakeholders such as faculty and facilities management as well as end-users. Goal: The goal of this paper is to understand the transformation processes of hybrid learning environments in universities. Method: The method is cross-case analysis. 6 learning environment transformation-to-hybrid cases are analyzed. The case studies are conducted in three Finnish universities in 2018-2020. Results: The results indicate that there are three critical factors in the successful transformations towards technology enriched learning environments: 1. The participatory design process which is integrating the digital and physical architecture to serve user needs 2. The training of users to new learning environments 3. Management of support in the use phase. Practical contribution: The research provides practical examples and process descriptions of transformation towards hybrid learning environments for the user-centric design experts, facilities managers, and education designers. Academic contribution: The research contributes to user-centric design theories as well as learning environment research. Future studies can be conducted by gathering user experiences of hybrid learning processes in new hybrid learning environments and the challenges residing in them.

ABSTRACT. In recent years – especially in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic – work and learning have radically changed to support community-focused, inter-professional, and inter-disciplinary engagements. In response, companies and public administrations have been developing networked and dispersed workspaces to grant people access to a variety of places tailored to their needs. University campuses have been evolving in the same direction. Aiming to expand into the whole city, universities have been activating off-campus facilities that enact the university mission of sustainable development, integration, and social inclusion. However, the phenomenon is still poorly developed even though evidence exists that students and young researchers (a) do not have access to enough supply of both on-campus and off-campus spaces due to the high demand; (b) suffer from relative isolation from other social groups; and (c) experience a disconnection between their studies and the world of work. For these reasons, they are in severe need of space for studying, working, and engaging with the broader community and society. This study analyses the phenomenon of University Hubs by distinguishing it from other similar phenomena and by discussing it in the context of hybridization of spaces for study and work. By analyzing a preliminary case study the paper reflects on the opportunities that University Hubs present for students and young researchers to pursue knowledge creation and sharing with diverse communities outside the campus boundaries while enhancing the university visibility in different places.

ABSTRACT. The development of hybrid constructions, intended as a combination of different functions into the same building, is an increasing phenomenon in contemporary architecture. The evolution of more flexible and adaptable buildings designed for modern needs, users, and activities represent one of the most compelling challenges of the 21st Century that the field need to address. In the last decade, the student accommodation market has been involved in significant functional, spatial, and usage transformations due to university internationalization, increased student mobility, and the digitalization of learning and working activities across the world. As a result, new typological solutions become necessary to meet the "live, learn, work, and connect" needs of a growing community of students, young professionals, digital nomads, and travelers. New hybrid buildings, which include options like coliving, coworking, start-up incubators, and community network organization, offer a precious platform to experiment these concepts contributing to the improvement of innovative student housing models. This essay investigates the potential of hybrid student accommodation including coworking spaces through an international case studies analysis and a literature review and explores its innovative functions, spaces, and activities. The analysis also identifies potential project categories to guide the future development of workplaces inside these structures. The paper contributes to investigate this new architectural trend which is still a low-investigated topic in the literature. In the light of the ongoing demographic and social changes, especially in university cities, it aims to identify and highlight the slow but meaningful transformations of student hospitality into more inclusive, articulate, and connected places. Finally, some key factors to reflect about the progress of these facilities to help build well-connected communities are discussed to address potential actions and opportunities for the city and university community.  

ABSTRACT. In the present research we aim to investigate managerial challenges within what Ivaldi et. al (2018) described as “welfare coworking”. For this purpose, we propose an exploratory qualitative multiple case study within 3 Italian welfare collaborative workspace (CW). Adopting a Work and Organizational Psychology (WOP) perspective we consider managers as relational, ethical and reflective agents (Cunliffe, 2014) contributing together with others (mainly Coworkers and Stakeholders) in the construction of these organizational realities and defining their social purposes. Our research questions are the following: What’s the role of management in a welfare CW? How do they navigate nuanced organizational boundaries? How do they manage sustainability issues? How do a management based on care and solidarity can be performed? Semi-structured interview has been used for two targets: Managers and Coworkers. In the discussion we’ll critically discuss results in terms of good practices and indicators of managerial actions for the development of caring communities.

ABSTRACT. In May 2020, the Mayor of London publicly declared that 'social infrastructure is key to supporting inclusive and thriving neighbourhoods’. Several scholars define the concept of social infrastructure as a way to research and value some spaces with a collective public character, which is the key dimension of a good city (Latham & Layton, 2019). Klinenberg (2018) defined community organisations as social infrastructures when they have an established physical space where people can assemble and mix with others with whom they share their neighbourhoods. In developing the term social infrastructure, Ray Oldenburg's work on 'Third Place' diverts the focus on "inclusively sociable" spaces like cafes, hair salons, and community spaces to build trust and new workspaces (Oldenburg, 1989). Social infrastructure links with the concept of new workspaces, especially with those that emerged with the intent to benefit the local area and are deeply entangled with the neighbourhood. Many of them pair with charities, local associations, or cooperatives – often economically funded by local authorities, even if privately owned – aiming at supporting the local community. Beside the increasing of entrepreneur-led workspaces, some scholars argue that those community-driven should be considered mutual survival platforms of precarious employment and community development, managing social relationships and playing a broader social role in the local area (Avdikos & Merkel, 2020). The study aims to define community-driven coworking spaces as places of social infrastructure acting for the ‘community good’ (Avdikos & Merkel, 2020) by assessing the users' degree of interaction, perception, and integration with the neighbourhood. A pilot study was carried out for three months in 2021 in the Work Heights coworking space in Crown Heights North (Brooklyn, NY), applying the perception questionnaire to ethnographic methodology.

ABSTRACT. Co-working, as an activity, is a way of working with small-scale entrepreneurs, freelancers and organisation members, and other types of independent workers with different jobs that allow for informal communication and knowledge-sharing in a shared physical workspace (Yang, Bisson, and Sanborn, 2019). The move from traditional closed-off office space to open plan and more informal, co-working space has been inspired by numerous factors such as the new ways of working that have opened because of the introduction and global use of information and communication technology (ICT) (Kojo and Nenonen, 2017). Modern shared workspaces, also known as co-working spaces, were designed to encourage collaboration and knowledge sharing among independent workers who are usually a part of the growing knowledge economy (Orel and Almeida, 2019). As such, co-working spaces are usually seen as centres of innovation (Ross and Ressia, 2015), creativity (Farina et al., 2018), and area of concentrated human talent (Kubatova, 2016). The limited amount of significant research on how adequate co-working space encourages collaboration among independent workers in South Africa has hindered co-working space from being explored as a viable alternative to traditional office space. This paper makes use of in-depth semi-structured interviews with built environment professionals in Johannesburg. Preliminary findings show that co-working space encourages collaboration between coworkers, which leads to the establishment of professional relationships. The findings also revealed how idea-sharing and productivity increased because of effective collaboration in co-working spaces.

ABSTRACT. This paper reflects on a roundtable consisting of 30 CEOs from various industries with a focus on the real estate sector, which was academically accompanied by professors from the fields of real estate, digitalisation, HR, and ethics. The impetus came from the practitioners asking for guidance on how organisations should adequately deal with the changes brought about by increasing digitalisation changing the work environments without letting the social aspects fall behind the functional and technical orientation of an organisation.

The paper thus explores the question of what "human" digitalisation can look like. It focuses on the tasks and opportunities of leadership: How can leaders balance the opportunities and possibilities of digitalisation with the individual needs and social relationships of people in organisations in such a way that people feel good, stay healthy, are innovative and work productively?

The motivation of the authors and two non-profit organisations in the working group "Digital Leadership" was to compile recommendations in the areas of leadership, digitalisation, corporate culture, and work environment that impact employee health, innovation, and performance to support anyone who leads people and organisations. Thus, this is a practice-oriented research paper that addresses a broad spectrum of leadership issues in the context of digitalisation through a combination of focus groups and a Delphi study.

The paper highlights key aspects of successful transdisciplinary collaboration, and summarises the most important findings of the working group. In addition to the effective methodology used, the key finding is that a balance should be maintained between digital work on the one hand, and physical, functional and interpersonal requirements on the other. Well-considered leadership and a variety of organisation-specific measures are critical success-factors. Instead of "radical renewal", the digitalisation of workplaces requires a continuous improvement process in consultation with all stakeholders and with special consideration of environmental factors.

ABSTRACT. Assolombarda, as an entrepreneurial association, has been working for some time on the topic of organizational transformations, smart working policies and their effects on the spatial arrangement of companies. Assolombarda has been doing it both by analyzing its member companies’ activities and by providing training, support, and advice. The Covid-19 pandemic, by increasing the intensity and the extensivity of the adoption of remote working, led many more companies to question their organizational models and the rationales of their territorial presence. Over the course of 2021, Assolombarda held panel discussions with some of its members in order to examine the complexity of the phenomenon of organizational and spatial changes, identify major trends, and build a set of guidelines to be provided to companies interested in redefining their workplace settings. At the beginning of 2022, once new strategies will have settled within organizations, we will go back to those companies, with the aim of monitoring new decisions and analyzing their effects. In this work, starting from the presentation of data on the context and the adoption of smart working policies among Assolombarda member companies during the pandemic, we will discuss major trends identified through the interaction with firms, within three main topics: the linkages between organizational changes and new approaches on companies’ headquarters; the process behind the transformation of workplaces; the opportunities for a new relationship between companies’ locations and the surrounding areas.

ABSTRACT. The development of the knowledge economy and the growing use of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) are transforming office work in many ways, including from a spatial perspective. Workplaces are becoming multi-locational, and workspaces located in company premises include a growing proportion of collaborative and shared spaces (open spaces, flexi offices, collective workstation). There is a growing literature on the issues arising from the current reorganisations of workplaces and workspaces, with an additional focus since the start of the pandemic, which has favored the adoption of remote working, especially home-based teleworking, and its spread to new economic sectors and fields of activity. However, there is a scarcity of data about these questions, which are the subject of this article. It investigates companies’ policies about the links betweenremote work, workplaces and workspaces in the Paris Region (France), with specific attention to the impacts of the pandemic. It offers an analytical framework based on a literature review, and some preliminary findings drawn from 20 stakeholder interviews and the first analysis of questionnaires (200) in an ongoing online survey of company head offices. The findings suggest first that previous trends in workplace diversification, such as the regular practice of homeworking have received a boost from the pandemic. Emerging trends were also confirmed, like the use of coworking spaces or satellite offices. In addition, the spread of regular telework has prompted an expansion of the labor market area within and outside the Region. Second, while our survey does not show a clear link between remote working and increased workspace flexibilisation, some interviews suggest that multi-locational working, and in particular regular remote working, could constitute a management tool with the effects of making open-space and flexible offices more acceptable to employees. These ideas will be tested during the next phase of this ongoing research project.

ABSTRACT. Purpose: Through benchmarking, organizations can discover business insights and turn data into actionable outcomes to increase business performance. This study looks into the experience of corporate real estate (CRE) organizations with workplace benchmarking, aiming to better understand the current benchmarking practice and the benchmarking demands of organizations with large corporate real estate portfolios.

Research Design: In this qualitative explorative study, we conducted 10 semi-structured interviews with CRE and workplace managers, and one group interview with four CRE and workplace management consultants from Switzerland and Germany. Most participants work in large national organizations (n=2) or at multinationals (n=8) and represent various industries, including pharmaceuticals, consulting, software, telecommunications, transportation, banking and insurance. Data was analysed through thematic coding.

Findings: We uncovered some underlying themes that describe the current practice and the demands for workplace benchmarking of CRE organizations. We identified three key aspects: 1) added value of benchmarking (“workplace benchmarking: part of the raison d'être of CREM”), 2) barriers for benchmarking implementation (“lack of systematic methods”, “missing standardization, comparability, uniformity”, “different standards for data quality”, “measuring remains a challenge”, “passive use of data”), and 3) benchmarking demands (“need for holistic benchmarking”).

This study showed that although it is recognized that benchmarking is valuable to give insights into the effectiveness of the strategy, organizations struggle with the implementation, due to missing standardization and the lack of systematic methods.

Research implications: These findings can inform the development of CRE benchmarking solutions regarding industry demands, especially for the creation of workplace benchmarking tools.

Originality: This study investigated the benchmarking practice and demands of CRE organizations during the transition from “home-office mandates” to “return to the office”, triggered by the COVID pandemic around summer 2021, giving insights into how CRE organizations have been using data and benchmarking to support the decision to optimize their workplace strategies.

ABSTRACT. The prolonged working from home during the pandemic has increased awareness of the social function of the office. During the lockdowns, main reasons indicated for wanting to return to the office were informal social interaction with co-workers, face-to-face meetings, and spontaneous encounters. Meanwhile, new employees had difficulties getting to know the organisational culture. If hybrid working will continue, one of the main functions of the physical office will be to support face-to-face interaction and social bonding, to increase well-being and organisational commitment.

This short paper explores how workplace design could support social well-being of its users based on published studies and theories. First, individual social well-being at work and affordances are defined. Next, several theories on social interaction or belongingness are analysed for their application to workplace design, such as Space syntax theory, Privacy regulation theory, Behavior setting theory, and the social component of Place attachment theory. Additionally, examples of empirical research relating locations within offices and design features to social well-being aspects are presented.

From this literature, three categories of workplace design features which could support social well-being are induced: interaction affordances, privacy affordances and community affordances. A conceptual framework is proposed that connects these workplace affordances to three dimensions of social wellbeing: social interactions, relationships and embeddedness. This framework can serve as a basis for deduction of specific social affordances from design practice and development of design strategies for enhancing social well-being in offices.

ABSTRACT. The distribution of work has been evolving, especially after the COVID-19 pandemic. Activity-based and multi-located approaches date back to the 1990s, entailing people not to perform all their tasks at the same desk all day long but moving around the office and the territory at large, as their tasks change. This has both advantages and disadvantages. However, in the wake of the pandemic, more and more companies have allowed their employees to work from home or other places for multiple days a week, especially for concentrative work, while they are redesigning the company office as mainly a place for networking and collaboration. The leading assumption is that employees who are granted the freedom to choose where and when to work are happier and, therefore, more productive. A question arises though regarding the future of work: are we going back to a spatial model that suggests a tayloristic approach to the organization of work? Or is this differentiation of spaces a way to grant employees more freedom of choice? This paper discusses the changing structure of the spatial experience of work and how this depends and, in turn, reflects on alienating dynamics and individuals’ autonomy. It presents a brief history of the evolution of workplaces and the meaning of work from both a spatial and a philosophical point of view. After an overview of the initiatives undertaken during the emergency phase of the pandemic, changing working methods and spaces, it presents the case of a multinational telecommunications company as an example of how workplace strategies and workspaces are being reorganized. The paper concludes by proposing a few directions to ensure that the new working arrangements following the pandemic do not create further alienating dynamics, but rather better meet workers’ needs and autonomy of choice.

ABSTRACT. Neuroscience studies indicate that when workplace design recognizes, reflects, and respects both users’ national and organizational cultures performance soars (see, for example, Veitch, 2012), but national and organizational culture are generally separately considered. The reported project integrates neuroscience research related to organizational culture, national culture, and workplace design to develop a straightforward framework that can be used in practice to create work environments that support employees as they work to their full potential. The system presented has been extensively tested and refined in practice. The tool developed is based fundamentally in the national culture research of Hofstede and also the organizational culture research of Cameron and Quinn. Hofstede, Hofstede, and Minkov (2010) identify 6 factors that describe national culture: individualism-collectivism, power distance, masculine-feminism, tolerance of uncertainty, long-term or short-term orientation, and indulgent-restrained. Hofstede’s system’s relevance to design decision-making has been supported, for example, by Zhang, Feick, and Price (2006). Cameron and Quinn’s (2006) classification system, which identifies four organizational culture types (hierarchy, market, clan, adhocracy) also has clear design implications, as identified, for example, by Zerella and colleagues (2017). The Hofstede and Cameron and Quinn systems identify key cultural dimensions at two different scales Three factors identified by Hofstede are particularly relevant to workplace design (individualism-collectivism, power distance, masculine-feminine) (Augustin, 2018) and a synthesis of research related to these factors indicates that there are four major classes of optimal workplaces, (Augustin, 2018). Analyses focused on integrating Augustin’s national culture design system with Cameron and Quinn’s organizational culture types results in 16 separate organizational/national culture workplace design scenarios and specific, practical office design recommendations to effectively utilize available resources, human, financial, and otherwise. The model established can be used by workplace design practitioners to develop workplaces that boost wellbeing and professional performance and by researchers doing more conceptual studies.

ABSTRACT. In the last few years, workplaces have been experiencing huge changes, due to the globalization of work, as well as to the spread of Covid-19. In this scenario, coworking spaces are facing interesting transformations. Even before the pandemic, there were early signs that indicated major companies all over the world were moving their workforce into coworking spaces. In Italy, most coworkings have thus experienced an increase of employees from public and private sectors. Today, unless the world gradually returns to the office, both large and small firms are finding that by using coworkings they can save money, develop connections, and gain access to new professional communities. Through a qualitative study based in Italy, the present contribution provides a first exploratory analysis of how companies’ and coworking spaces’ management and coworkers are experiencing this phenomenon. More specifically, the aims of the study have been to explore which meanings and possible challenges the “coworking experience” has for companies and their employees; which psychosocial and organizational impact this phenomenon has on employees’ and HR management practices; how such “corporate coworking” approach relates to the broader changes workplaces are facing nowadays. To address these aims, interpretive semi-structured interviews have been conducted with 10 coworking managers (from different coworking companies); 9 HR managers (from companies already using coworking), and 11 coworkers belonging to private enterprises. Results show several challenges and even contradictions related to corporate coworking. On the one hand, managers and employees declare interest and openness to the idea, while appreciating coworkings’ utilities more than the opportunities of developing new communities and collaborative networks. On the other hand, concerns related to “cultural losses” and to a possible decrease of employees’ commitment have been shown. Implications for research and practice are therefore discussed and critically posed.

ABSTRACT. Since the mid-2000s, a considerable number of coworking spaces have been created throughout the world, representing a new way of organizing work based on the sharing of a workspace and a network of workers that encourages collaboration (Gandini, 2015). The creation of coworking spaces has been disrupted by the COVID-19 crisis due to coworking space’s shutdown, the instructions to telework from home and the social and spatial distancing measures. Today coworking spaces have reopened and, despite difficulties, their creation could be fostered by the widespread adoption of remote working during the COVID-19 crisis and the companies’ will to reduce their real estate costs. This paper focuses on coworking spaces’ creators before and after the COVID-19 crisis. The results presented are based on a four years’ research, named COWORKWORLDS (Lejoux et al., 2019), conducted in the Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes region of France (metropolitan areas, medium-sized cities, small cities, rural areas). In a first part, we will present the results of a qualitative survey conducted amongst coworking spaces creators before the COVID-19 crisis. We have established a typology of coworking spaces’ creators based on their rationales and motives to create coworking spaces. In the second part, we will present the results of an ongoing quantitative survey sent to all coworking spaces’ creators in the Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes region of France. Its aim is to know, on the one hand, how they have got through this crisis (duration of the closure, evolution of coworkers’s number and profile, etc.) and, on the other hand, their point of view on the sustainability of their businesses in the short and mid-terms.

ABSTRACT. The organisational models orchestrated by Management Science for tertiary work and the spatial typologies in which it was carried out have been definitively challenged by the recent pandemic. From the pyramidal hierarchy that prevailed during the 20th century (Fontana 1981), we have moved to matrix-type and network-based management (Allen and Henn 2007). Since the end of the 19th century, offices have seen a proliferation of environments such as the cellular office, the open space, the Büroladschaft, the combi-office and the networking office (Forino 2011): each of these has proved revolutionary in its way, but none has become overriding the others. The most recent transformations of the workplace, accelerated by the pandemic, date back to the financial crisis of 2008, as well as to the use of information technology (Forino 2013), which opened up new scenarios permeated by spatial and digital delocalisation. It is now necessary to investigate the new diffuse geography of workspaces: from traditional offices reconfigured to meet different spatial and organisational needs to co-working offices, from bars, hotel rooms, co-living spaces, waiting rooms to the private home. In this extended vision, terms such as territory and community return to the centre are understood as places of affirmation of the individual's existence, of everyday life and of economic and public interests (Bonomi 2021a; 2021b). Another "worksphere" (Antonelli 2001) seems no longer defined only by the physical office but expressed by the set of social, psychological and economic conditions, the technological tools, and the places in which people work. This geography of spaces finds its raison d'être in the vision of a city of proximity (Manzini 2021), where workplaces seek to maximise relationships between colleagues and enhance the workplace within (Butera 2020). Architects and office designers have the task of creating inclusive frames for the post-pandemic workplace.

ABSTRACT. Biophilic design aims to create places where occupants connect with the natural environment. In the context of workplaces, there has been growing interest in these design strategies as they have been demonstrated to have a strong association with employees’ wellbeing. Extensive research has shown its restorative and stimulating effects on people's emotions and life satisfaction, however, biophilic design is still being seen as an expenditure rather than an investment. Evidencing good quality spatial and environmental design with a tangible financial proxy can become a driver to aid commercial decision-making. This paper explores ways to link the economic value to the benefits of biophilic design. Although this conference paper is not able to provide a detailed account of how the valuation is developed and calculated, it presents the steps to generate monetised value from a real-world study and discusses the challenges and opportunities for future studies.

Using a case study approach, this paper presents how spatial designers can evidence and communicate the benefits of biophilia. This pilot study is part of a doctoral research project at Loughborough University. An adapted version of the Flourish Framework is used to demonstrate the value of Well-being by design through data collected from interviews, questionnaires, and various sensors at the PLP Studio, London. The results agree with previous research that biophilic scenarios, both subjective and objective, improve well-being compared to a non-biophilic workplace setting. The research further investigated how Well-being Value can be informed by questionnaires and the potential of real-time sensor measurements. Applying Well-being Valuation demonstrates that indoor greenery and views out may have boosted positive emotions and yielded a higher Well-being Value. Qualitative data further revealed the positive emotions of the visual connections with plants have on the participants and this indicates why multi-sensory design is so important.

ABSTRACT. Purpose. Satisfaction with indoor environmental quality (IEQ) factors is one measure of office environments’ functioning. This study examined satisfaction with IEQ factors with a large global dataset. The aim was to examine which IEQ factors caused the most dissatisfaction in general and in different office types. In addition, differences between continents in satisfaction with IEQ factors were examined. Methodology. The respondents (N=85 194) were from all over the world from 68 different countries. The key IEQ factors which satisfaction was examined were thermal conditions, noise, air quality, natural light, and office lighting. The examined office types were private office, assigned workstation in open office, and flex office. Responses from three continents (Asia, Europe, and North America) were examined for differences. Findings. The proportion of dissatisfied respondents was the highest with thermal conditions (30.6 %) and noise (27.8%). The most important IEQ factor causing dissatisfaction in all office types was thermal conditions. However, office type had the clearest influence on dissatisfaction with noise, where flex office had the highest proportion of dissatisfied respondents (35%) and private office the lowest (15%). The differences between the continents were clear: respondents from Asia were less dissatisfied with all IEQ factors compared to respondents from Europe and North America. Value. This study examined IEQ satisfaction with a large global dataset. Especially, the differences between the continents in IEQ satisfaction are underexamined and the reasons behind these differences need more research. Thermal conditions and noise require special attention in offices. In flex and open offices, special care should be paid to noise control.

ABSTRACT. Purpose: This study aimed to get insights in salutogenic workplace characteristics that affect employees’ workplace preference, while considering their mental health. Theory: Workplaces have been designed to improve employees’ workplace experience and well-being. Until today, research mainly focused on the influence of indoor environmental quality (IEQ) on well-being, while ‘tacit’/ salutogenic aspects have been considered less frequently. Such characteristics (e.g. wall colours and views outside) were found to contribute to positive workplace experience and well-being too. Methods: A virtual open-plan office was designed, with variations in six attributes (screens between desks, occupancy rate, window-to-wall ratio, views outside, colour palette, and plants). In an online survey, employees were asked to choose between two of these office designs, based on where they would be able to work most productively or concentrated, feel least stressed, most relaxed, and happy. A fractional factorial design, consisting of 27 unique profiles, allowed the identification of main effects. By using a multinomial logit model, the part-worth utility values of these attributes were revealed, based on employees’ trade-offs. Findings: Plants had the highest positive effect on employees’ mental health. A window-to-wall ratio (WWR) of 60%, an occupancy rate of 25%, and a natural view outside also had a positive effect on employees’ mental health. Screens between desks were only preferred for employees’ concentration. Last, a red/warm colour palette had a positive effect on all mental health states, except for concentration and productivity. Originality: The novelty is the use of a virtually designed office workplace, combined with a stated-choice experiment. Instead of focussing on IEQ aspects, this method allows to focus on tacit workplace characteristics, which are difficult to estimate in living-lab experiments. Insights can be used by workplace managers to optimize workplace designs while possibly also increasing employees’ well-being.