A different office working life Christina Bodin Danielsson
CONTRIBUTORS Author and researcher: Christina Bodin Danielsson, Associate Professor in Architecture, (Human-Environment Interaction), Master of Architecture SAR/MSA Email: chrdan@kth.se alt. christinabodan@gmail.com Mobile: +46-73-255 78 58 Project manager and co-writer: Anna-Karin Franzén, Amazilia Kommunikation. Illustrations: Anna-Karin Wetzig Design: Milla Ottosson Sippola, Rosalii Kommunikation COPYRIGHT Areim owns the copyright to the study and its results. You are welcome to use the study results in a text or oral presentation, provided that you refer to Areim and the study’s author, Christina Bodin Danielsson. REFERENCE Bodin Danielsson, C. (2024). A different office working life. Areim report: “A different office life - a study about the changed office landscape”. https://www.areim.se/a-different-office-life-a-study-about-the-changed-office-landscape/
Contents ABOUT THE STUDY 3 Purpose Methodology Sample and dropout rate WHAT´S THE PURPOSE OF THE OFFICE? 4 A balancing act between different needs INTERNAL NEEDS MATTER MOST 5 HOW OFTEN ARE WE ACTUALLY AT THE OFFICE? 6 HOME IS BEST 7 ME, MYSELF AND I 8 OFFICE STRATEGIES – DESIGN APPROACHES, LOCATION AND COMMUNITY 10 CARROT OR STICK? 11 ORGANISATIONAL CULTURE AND LEADERSHIP 12 SMALL, MEDIUM OR LARGE? 14 A BALANCING ACT BETWEEN DIFFERENT NEEDS 15 WE NEED TO COME TOGETHER 16 GAZING INTO THE CRYSTAL BALL… 17 The office remains important Third place breeds new ideas Culture and the office Atmosphere and variation is a dealbreaker Flexibility and greater autonomy require good self-leadership An adaptable office in a changing world The risks of a decentralised office The role of the office in city planning Shared office resources – sustainable and economic The predominant trend Ears to the ground REFERENCES 24
Listening to our office customers here at Areim, we detect a certain sense of being lost – especially since the pandemic. Half-empty offices naturally raise both questions and a degree of concern among organisations. We too need to understand what’s going on. For that reason, we decided to dive deeper into how the pandemic has affected the office needs of several large private and public organisations which are active in the Stockholm area. We would like to extend a huge thanks to the organisations that have participated in the study. The overarching ambition of the study is to help clear a path through the unknown territory of this new normal we now find ourselves in. We have looked at how organisations relate to the changes that have taken place and what strategies they are adopting. The focus has been on overarching premises strategies which span everything from office location, size, interior design and architecture through to how work is organised. If you have questions about any of these office related issues, we are happy to be your partner and sounding board. Please feel very welcome to get in touch. Per Sallmén, Areim AB Tel: 070 607 12 00
3 About the study Areim conducted this study in collaboration with researcher Christina Bodin Danielsson, Associate Professor in Architecture at the Royal Institute of Technology (KTH), spring 2023. Purpose The study looks at how larger organisations relate to the new era of office working life following a rise in remote working after the pandemic. Its focus rests on strategic, office-related matters linked to the so-called hybrid office. On this basis, we approached facility managers who work specifically in this area in various different roles, in contrast to other studies which have addressed the topic from a management or employee perspective. Our ambition with this report is to establish more clarity around whether the increase in remote working represents a structural change or if it is simply a residual effect of the pandemic. We hope that it will assist companies in their solutions and decisions on office-related matters. Perhaps it may inspire property owners, architects and even city planners to adopt innovative approaches to the future role of the office in order to promote sustainable working lives and societies. Methodology The study is anonymised and based on a survey and in-depth interviews conducted in spring 2023 (March–April), over one year after pandemic restrictions were repealed (February 2023). The participating organisations thus have good first-hand experience of the return to the office, and the opportunity to test out various strategies. We opted for a strategic sample (rather than a randomized) in that we approached large national and international organisations in the Stockholm area with more than 500 employees. There is just one exception to this – one organisation turned out to only have 30 employees, but they are part of a group with more than 500 members of staff. Some of the organisations are divided across multiple offices. The offices in our study are located centrally within the inner city, semi-centrally within the neighbouring areas, and in suburbs on the fringes of the city. The report is written based on scientific methodology, where our results are also linked to existing research and a market analysis of the office situation as of autumn 2023. The report develops its argument by combining both results and analyses to put the issue of the post-pandemic office into a wider perspective. The quotes in the report are taken from in-depth interviews and free-text responses in the survey. Our predictions for the future in the last chapter are based on the study and our analysis of the office situation in autumn 2023, but also on the experience of Christina Bodin Danielsson as an office specialist who has worked both nationally and internationally. It is written from a first-person perspective as Christina expands on her own thoughts around the hybrid office of the future. Sample and dropout rate Following the initial stages and dropout, we were left with a final analytical sample of 62 facility managers from 53 different organisations. Of those organisations that took part, 70% were private and 30% were public. Nine of the organisations put forward two respondents, and because their responses were so different from one another, it was not possible to let just one of them represent the organisation. We therefore decided to keep both. In addition to our analytical selection of facility managers, we also had a smaller group of eight individuals with HR roles. We analysed these individuals separately due to their occupational focus. Dropout rate: We contacted 81 organisations and the dropout rate was 35%. The reasons given by those who declined to take part were that they already had a good handle on their office needs post-pandemic and did not need more insights into this, or that they do not participate in studies initiated by private actors (in this case, Areim AB). Others stated that, although they were interested, they did not have the time to participate due to heavy workloads.
4 What´s the purpose of the office? Change is the only constant. Even before the pandemic, many organisations had begun to change their office set-ups in response to increased digitisation and new ways of working. Then came the pandemic. Working life as we know it today has been changed down to its foundations, and we have a new normal in terms of how and where we work. However, the high degree of remote working since the pandemic has also caused great uncertainty among organisations as to the role of the office: What is the office for? What roles should it play? What will be the consequences of remodelling, refurnishing, downsizing, condensing or moving? And how should employees communicate; effective work processes be maintained; community and job satisfaction be created – all while knowledge development and innovation are able to flourish? Starting with the physical environment, we investigate how things stand as of spring 2023 and the thoughts, approaches and strategies of organisations to handle the changes that have taken place in the wake of the pandemic. The primary focus of the study is thus office and premises strategy. We are not primarily concerned with issues of organisation, management, staff and health, but because these matters are related to the way in which the office is design- ed, we have also included them to a certain extent in our report. As is well known, all of these factors are interconnected. A balancing act between different needs Today, organisations have an even greater need than before to balance the various wishes and needs of employees against those of the organisation (see footnote Media1). The study shows this to be a real challenge, not least because competition for talent has intensified and many organisations have been contending with recruitment and staffing problems for several years now. The quality of the office environment has become an issue for management as a result. This is not just about getting employees to be productive or to make sure they are satisfied and likely to remain with the company. The big question today is how organisations can get their employees to return to the office. We have summarised our key findings of relevance to organisation office strategies over ten chapters, the last of which looks towards the future. 1 Stockholm Chamber of Commerce: Future of Work – Spaningar om kontorets betydelse [Reflections on the Importance of the Office]. Link: https://stockholmshandelskammare.se/rapporter/rapport-future-work/
5 Internal needs matter most The most important role of the office is to satisfy internal needs and, above all, to function as a space for interaction and meetings. This according to 53% of our respondents when asked about what they believe or know their employees to think. From a management perspective, the figure was 63%. Secondly, the office also needs to fulfil work-specific needs that are more difficult to accommodate from an external workspace, such as tasks that require special technical equipment, software and good ergonomics (39% from an employee perspective, 26% from a management perspective). In other words, employees feel that it is the ability to perform their duties that matters the most. When comparing public and private organisations, we can see that the private sector attributes greater importance to the office as a place for internal meetings. Public organisations instead emphasis the role of the office in satisfying specific work-related needs. The role of the office as a place for external meetings with customers, partners and suppliers is viewed as being less important both from an employee perspective and a management perspective. That the role of the office as a venue for external meetings is seen as secondary could be interpreted as meaning that the role of the office as a tool for external brand-building has faded somewhat in the wake of the pandemic, with focus shifting more towards internal needs. This may mean that organisations now need to strengthen their position by promoting internal collaboration, innovation and productivity to a greater extent than before the pandemic. Based on this hypothesis, we can say that office-focus has shifted more towards the internal needs of an organisation at both the individual and group levels. Our study reveals a change in how organisations view the office whereby its role in meeting external needs and brand-building has taken a backseat in favour of more internal functions, with focus now placed instead on internal branding, enabling the work of the organisation and promoting internal collaboration, innovation and productivity. “We have a whole new office landscape and a new way of working based on operational needs combined with the needs of the individual. We want our premises to encourage attendance rather than remote working.” One conclusion that can be drawn from the survey and interview responses is that many want the office to be a fixed base and a gathering space for the organisation – a concrete location for added value where collaboration and knowledge development occur, and which both symbolically and physically shows that: “this is where it’s all happening”.
6 How often are we actually at the office? Low office attendance worries organisations. All of the respondents in our study – with the exception of one – reported that they have some form of policy or rules around remote working. The most common policy was that 50% or more of working time must be spent at the office. Many reported a 3–2 rule, meaning employees are in the office three out of every five days. In our study, around 40% of both private and public organisations reported that 60% or more of the work is undertaken from outside the office. Half of the organisations (51%) do not manage to achieve an attendance rate of 40%, which is considerably less than what their policies allow (at least 51% of working hours to be worked from the office). This means that the majority of the organisations are failing to comply with their own attendance policies. 35% of the organisations report an attendance rate of 50–80%. These companies tend to be more centrally located and they are more often private organisations than public ones. The group of organisations with the highest level of office attendance in the study, with an attendance rate of 60–80%, is comprised entirely of private organisations. Office attendance also varies across the working week. More employees are on site in the middle of the week, meaning it can be more difficult to access meeting rooms on these days. If we compare actual attendance rates with the policies in place, it becomes clear that aspirations to have the majority of the work undertaken from the office are not being achieved. The study shows that there exists a great deal of uncertainty among organisations as to what actually applies in relation to remote working. Respondents feel unsure about what management actually thinks and wants in regard to hybrid working, in part because ignoring attendance policies does not result in any consequences. “People largely do what they want to. It says 50% in the contract, but people work from home more and managers don’t follow up on it.” The organisations are generally good at keeping track of office attendance. Just over 60% monitor employee attendance at the office and the majority do this digitally in one way or another. Attendance is monitored at the overall or group/ department level rather than individually. A small number monitor attendance manually at the office during the working day.
7 Home is best When work is done remotely, it is done almost entirely from the home (98 %). More than half of the respondents also work remotely from their holiday homes. Remote working from satellite offices or hubs, on the other hand, is rare, and very few organisations offer this as an option. The majority of the organisations that participated in the study are primarily active within the Stockholm area, and they do not feel they have a need for hubs as most of their staff live relatively close to their head office. The benefits of hubs are not considered great enough to justify the cost, and so employees can instead choose between working at the office or working remotely on their own terms. In those cases where employees do work from office hubs or satellite offices, this is on the initiative of the employees themselves. Extra services related to the remote workplace are not offered post-pandemic to any great extent either. Only 15% offer this, in the form of equipment for a home office. “... the majority still use their home as their primary workplace. This was not the case pre-pandemic.” So the question, then, is, wherein lies the appeal of the external workplace? Reasons given by employees for their reluctance to return to the office include a lack of suitable spaces for concentration or where they can participate on Teams meetings without the risk of being disturbed or overheard. Silent spaces are therefore used as one way of attracting employees back to the office, and many organisations report that they need more focus rooms alongside open-plan areas. Specialists, meanwhile, emphasise that absolute proximity to their personal work materials is important to them, and this is better facilitated at home than at the office. There is also a great deal of freedom in working remotely. Being able to choose an optimal environment, to recuperate and access fresh air and green spaces on breaks in the park, nature or in the garden, plus less time spent commuting and greater flexibility between work and life commitments, are all appreciated factors. “The older you are, the more complex the projects you are likely to be on, and so it makes sense to be at home undisturbed where you can really get stuck in. Without the disruptions of being in the office, like when a colleague swings by and says: ‘Hey, how was such and such?” The organisations hope that the office will become a place where employees have more energy and drive, where community is fostered, knowledge developed and information shared. However, it is clear from both the in-depth answers and free-text survey responses that the organisations feel it is not enough to offer a good ergonomic work environment, good coffee, fruit and leisure spaces or new furnishings and decor. In reality, many respondents feel that they lack the tools to compete with the level of well-being and personal control over both the work environment and daily life that working externally tends to afford. “As soon as the option arises, people leave the office ...”
8 Me, Myself and I A clear shift from the interests of the group to the interests of the individual can be seen from the study. For many, home is the primary workspace and the organisation’s attendance policy is considered solely to be a recommendation. Many employees refuse to come back in accordance with the rules that apply. The organisations describe how a more ego-centric approach has taken hold, with employees focusing more on their own interests than on seeing themselves as a part of a whole. This self-centred approach also spills over into the realms of remote working. Research shows that remote working leads employees to give higher priority to their own needs and interests than to those of the collective (see fact box). “... I’ve heard from HR that many younger colleagues in particular want their contracts to say they have the option to work 100% remotely.” Our study shows that many organisations are reluctant to introduce rules on office attendance for fear of losing talent. This is likely something that can change to a certain extent in times of economic downturn, as employees may want to be more visible within the organisation. But competition from the external workplace is tough. All organisations report they are working to boost the appeal of the office, and this will become more important as remote working grows more widespread. Some take a more passive approach, while others actively offer ‘carrots’ to lure people in. According to the organisations, the challenge in this lies in understanding precisely what employees need from the office. Another factor is that different needs exist within the organisations, and these are not always expressed or even investigated. These needs can also diverge at the individual and group levels. “A lot of people today only consider their own needs: What is good for me? What works for me? This is very prevalent at our organisation.” “We need to meet, but we hear employees complain about having to come into the office. Oh no, I have to go into the office today ...” According to our study, different employee groups have somewhat differing needs and reasons for wanting to go into the office. It is therefore important in the interests of interdisciplinary collaboration that organisations identify what makes an attractive office for different groups and how their needs can be met. FACTS: According to a study published recently, employees who work remotely tend to prioritise their own interests above those of the collective. Reference: Espersson, Lidén, & Westrup, 2023
9 “We have employees who we pay a good salary to do a job that they are skilled and qualified to do. But we also want them to share their expertise with others.” Beyond the differences between professional groups, we can also observe certain differences depending on age. Younger employees often want face-time with senior colleagues who hold expert knowledge and many years of professional experience. However, this group tends to prefer working in peace and quiet away from the office and is not always available to answer quick questions or to give an explanation. And it may feel out of proportion to book a Teams meeting for this kind of interaction. At the same time, many younger employees also prefer to work from home as a result of their family or living situation. According to our respondents, it is not uncommon for either younger or more senior staff to want it stipulated in their contract that they may work a large part of the time from home. Given the prevailing skills shortages, this is something that many organisations need to address. “New employees are around in the early stages, when they have a need to be on site. Then they just disappear!” “ ... senior staff need to help new employees to learn the ropes. It is a challenge to meet the needs that younger employees have for mentorship. How do we get this to line up with senior team members to get them to come into the office?”
10 Office strategies – design approaches, location and community Different organisations apply different strategies to create an attractive office that supports the various different needs of hybrid working. There is a general desire for the office to be a place that stimulates meetings, community and knowledge transfer. At the same time, companies do not want offices that are too large and left half-empty over large swathes of the week. This is both expensive and not conducive to ensuring everyone is visible and able to contribute when at the office. Not all organisations provide quiet or secluded spaces for concentration at the office as a matter of course. A lack of private or quiet spaces can lead employees to avoid the office, and they may use this as justification for working remotely. A number of organisations place focus on the social role that the office plays in a hybrid set-up, and so they expect focused work to be done externally and for staff to plan their work to reduce the need for privacy at the office. Others opt for a middle-way approach by facilitating both quiet work and meetings/interactions. Open-plan spaces are reduced and smaller spatialities are deployed instead. The reclaimed space is turned into smaller rooms for work requiring concentration and digital meetings, as well as flexible project spaces as a complement to open-plan parts of the office. The location of the office can also affect its attractiveness with more central locations tending to hold greater appeal for several reasons. There is a difference in office location between private and public organisations in our study. Fewer than half of the organisations in our sample (44%) are located in the suburbs or in neighbouring municipalities of Stockholm, with Solna being the most common such location. Of these less central offices, more than half belong to public organisations (56%). The majority of private organisations, on the other hand, are located more centrally – either in the city centre or the immediate suburbs (60% and 66% respectively). Among large companies, particularly those in the IT sector, there is a tendency towards a phenomenon known as Disneyficiation, which first took root in the early 2000s. This involves making the office more enjoyable and attractive by introducing creative, fun and entertaining elements into the office environment, such as pingpong tables or a slide instead of stairs.
11 FACTS: Social health is all about our relationships to other people. It is important to our well-being that we feel connected, that we receive acknowledgement and that we belong to a community. Meeting and interacting with others is crucial to our sense of social community at the workplace, and this also has other benefits beyond good social health. Research shows, among other things, that social support and community have a positive effect on our health – and especially our mental health. In addition to building social community, interacting with others also promotes the transfer of knowledge and information, and it fosters both creativity and innovation. References: Cohen & Syme, 1985; Sailer, K., & McCulloh, I. ,2012; Wineman, J. D. et al., 2009 The strategies used to boost the appeal of the office vary greatly between the organisations. Now that many of us have grown comfortable working from home, it is difficult to turn back the clock. There is therefore a need for various different carrots to lure people back to the office. While many are quite inventive, there is also a level of frustration and uncertainty around how this should be done. The circumstances vary as well. Coercive measures (sticks) are not typically used. The most successful organisations have attendance rates of 60–80% and actively deploy different strategies, primarily within three areas: (a) organisation culture, (b) social activities and (c) the physical office environment. The office is described as central to the future-proofing of the organisation culture – which is something that is formed and nurtured through human encounters within an organisation. All employees form part of a psychosocial work climate and the office plays an important role here in terms of being the place where ‘real’ meetings between people take place. A number of organisations in the study have tried a slightly different approach by boosting the well-being factor and thus the office’s appeal via events, lectures, seminars and get-togethers. One organisation even introduced a position for this which they call their ‘office mood manager’. Others offer better quality and healthier food at the office, and some subsidise lunches, buy in fruit juice or have a barista at the office. Promoting good health is also important. The organisations take different approaches towards this. The most active deploy both social and health-promoting activities in order to strengthen the organisation culture and sense of community, and they link this to the appeal of the office (see fact box). Carrot or stick?
12 Organisational culture and leadership Strengthening organisation culture is a strategic focus area for attracting employees back to the office. Many even report that a good organisation culture is the single most important factor in attaining success. The hybrid-office concept, by its nature, poses a challenge in terms of building up a shared culture. The office is losing its position as a common arena that can bring everyone together, and this is leading many employees to choose to work elsewhere more often. Office attendance is a critical factor when it comes to building up a shared culture, according to many of the respondents, and this is especially true when it comes to people in managerial positions or other key roles at the office. It is the companies which declare themselves to have a strong culture that are most convinced of this among the respondents. They feel that declining office attendance has had a negative impact on collaboration and sense of community. Some also mention an impaired ability to look at things holistically within the organisations. In their in-depth interviews, all respondents emphasise the importance of a cohesive organisation culture for making employees feel part of the organisation and thus wanting to come into the office. Reducing office size can also constitute a risk to culture-building efforts, as such measures may lead employees to avoid the office if they feel it is too difficult to find a suitable work environment once there. When this happens, the office is unable to function as the important gathering arena for organisation culture that it needs to be. “Proactive management is a challenge when employees are working remotely. Less physical availability places new demands on communicative departments and entirely new ones on managerial qualities.”
13 Proactive management and employeeship are also seen as central to hybrid working with trust and contact between the employer and the staff figuring as part of the equation. The dilemma faced by middle managers is also clear in our study. Several respondents feel that managers have lost control over staff who are not at the office, and they do not know how much work they are actually doing, what support they need or how they are coping. “Uncertainty and lack of clarity breed confusion. Requirements for managerial skills are now more important than before”. Problems and shortcomings of leadership, especially at management level, are also mentioned in connection with hybrid working. The respondents mention lack of clarity and uncertainty within the organisation around what actually goes for remote working, despite the fact that there is a policy in place. Many also state that a ‘sluggishness’ has taken root within their organisation since the onset of hybrid working, with requests now taking longer to carry out than before (see fact box). According to the organisations’ in-house employee surveys, levels of dissatisfaction with management and information have grown since the pandemic, and our respondents emphasise the importance of leadership for attracting employees back. “It can take days to get a reply to an email from people who work from home. That gets peoples’ backs up. It sometimes takes days before you get a reply.” FACTS: A study conducted after the pandemic showed that productivity is down by as much as 18%. Reference: Atkin, D., Schoar, A., & Shinde, S. (2023).
14 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 To attract new employees and retain existing talent To encourage existing employees to work from the office To better adapt to a new work set-up Have not and do not plan on remodelling our premises Another reason Due to a reorganisation Tired and fading or unsuitable premises 40% 38% 54% 24% 37% 10% 17% Drivers and strategies for changing/remodelling the office Small, medium or large? Half of the organisations in the study have downsized and half have kept their offices the same size. Those who downsized did so primarily for cost reasons but also to make the office feel more energised and stimulating. They did not want their office to feel desolate – it should be a place where colleagues can meet. Those who decided to retain their premises report that they are locked into long contracts (70%). Another reason is that they have taken account of their employees’ desire to be able to meet, both socially and in connection with their work. Many have used excess space to create rooms for digital meetings and project/meeting rooms. Some also state they want to remain flexible in the face of any future organisational changes. Has hybrid working also had an effect on office architecture? And if so – what are the factors driving changes to the office environment? The most heavily weighted factor for the majority of the organisations (54%) is a wish to adapt the office to the needs of a new work set-up – i.e. reorganising and utilising the premises differently and adapting to greater digitalisation. Another heavily weighted reason for changing the office is a desire to attract and retain employees, with 40% of respondents citing this as a primary driver for office transformations. Other reasons include tighter requirements around security and IT security – which is itself an important consideration when deciding on remote working policies, in terms of the extent to which it should be permitted and in what forms. Many of the organisations had already remodelled their offices either before or during the pandemic. Despite this, a large majority (77%) have either already investigated or plan to investigate how their operations and office environment need to be adapted to the new post-pandemic set-up in terms of their design/layout, surface area, equipment, choice of location and so on. The fact that even those organisations which have already made changes are amongst those planning to carry out future investigations into their office space and the new post-pandemic landscape shows that this is a continuous process. “Our employee surveys show a greater need for small spaces and call booths as staff have got used to working from a quieter environment while at home.”
15 A balancing act between different needs Another thing that has become clear since the pandemic is that a good work environment is increasingly important for getting people to choose the office. The objective here is to accommodate two partially conflicting needs – the need for meetings and interactions and the need for focus and concentration alone or in groups. Several organisations in the study have reported that, since the pandemic, there is a pent-up demand for interaction and community between colleagues that digital meetings cannot provide. Organisations that allow a high level of remote working therefore need to consciously work to promote visual and physical proximity in their office architecture. However, this requires something of a balancing act in the design of the hybrid office. Proximity to others can result in unwanted stimuli and a feeling of being crowded. These are known as environmental stressors. With that being said, many of the respondents also state that a vibrant environment is important and that an overly spacious office can feel desolate, draining and outright unstimulating. “We need to forget about having tech developers in the physical office and find new ways to collaborate with them, which is absolutely something that can be done. We simply need to let them work remotely while the rest of us are on site.” The view of the respondents is that success will require greater focus to be placed on the needs of the different professional groups. IT developers and specialists are particularly difficult to draw back to the office. Their main reason for avoiding the office is that they have difficulties concentrating and work less efficiently at the office. Silence and focus, as well as opportunities for recovery, are thus the environmental factors that the office needs to offer here in order to compete with the home work environment. Besides the problem described above, there is also a catch-22 when it comes to hybrid working and office size which is related to both organisation culture and development. Organisations that reduce their office size need to consider that employees may avoid the office if this change impairs the office environment. The opportunity for spontaneous activities and encounters is thus diminished as a result. These encounters not only constitute an important organisational lubricant, but they can also be necessary to the organisation’s development and, in some cases, its survival.
16 We need to come together FACTS: The importance of the office to people’s social lives and friendships is related to the fact that the office is a space for spontaneous interaction, encounters and knowledge transfer. Its ability to play this role hinges on architectural factors such as office type, layout (how functions are divided and how communication and concentration are facilitated), aesthetics and the choice of materials. References: Bodin Danielsson, 2015, 2019; Brunia, De Been, & Van der Voordt, 2016; Sailer, K., & McCulloh, I., 2012 The office remains a factor for success. When we ask our respondents whether they see the office as a site of knowledge transfer, innovation and creativity, the majority respond that the office still retains a central role. Everyone contributes in their own ways, but when it comes to employees with specialist skills and competencies, we can see that their knowledge and experience are especially important to the organisations, particularly with regard to younger and newly recruited staff. Encounters and interactions with colleagues are also what the employees themselves report that they miss the most, according to surveys conducted by the participating organisations. Our study shows that many of the respondents are conscious of the risks involved in failing to sustain this, and a lot of brainpower has been dedicated to these questions, and to the office set-up. Some of the organisations have downsized their premises as a result of low attendance – in part to cut costs and in part to stop the office from feeling desolate and empty. Others have chosen not to cut their surface area but instead to establish different types of meeting and collaboration spaces to draw staff back to the office. We can see that this is something both private and public organisations are battling with, and in principle all participants report that they are working actively to make the office a more attractive prospect. “Organisational culture emerges from encounters between people.” It is through physical encounters at the office that informal bonds are forged, and these in turn foster increased understanding and tolerance. Employees enter into a psycho-social work climate which is closely linked to the organisation culture that is formed and sustained by encounters between people. It is at the office that the ‘real’ meetings take place – i.e, meetings where we can use all of our senses to pick up on subtle signals loaded with important information and which allow us to think big and outside the confines of the highly regimented meetings that take place online. This is likely one of several reasons why the participating organisations feel that the office is central to future- proofing their businesses (see fact box). We quite simply need the office in order to come together.
17 Gazing into the crystal ball… The future of office life is generally quite difficult to predict. What’s more, the complex and unstable state of global affairs further clouds our ability to see clearly in regard to working life and the future of the office. There is much to suggest that remote working will continue to a large extent, with the home remaining a solid competitor to the office. A better question to ask is perhaps how we should best approach this new age of office working life? Change has come thick and fast and we still do not know how remote working will affect things such as goal attainment, productivity, innovation and health in the long term. Its negative and positive consequences will not likely become clear for a few years yet. But we can also see that there is much for organisations to address already. At the same time, many organisations are somewhat hesitant and often too passive before these questions, despite their pervasiveness. There is also a large sense of powerlessness and frustration over how to get employees back to the office voluntarily, and there are many questions about what this means for the future. “I’m curbing my expectations for how we believe or hope this is going to go. Because we just don’t know. We have no clue what the situation will be in six months or in two years’ time. It is still so uncertain.”
18 The office remains important The office is central to the future-proofing of organisation culture. It remains an important place for ‘real’ meetings of all sizes between people. What I mean by this is meetings where we can use our senses to perceive subtle signals and thus collect more information. All employees form part of a psycho-social work climate which is in turn linked to the organisation culture that is formed and sustained through encounters between people in the organisation. Many organisations have observed how the glue that holds the organisation together lost some of its stick during the pandemic, and that there is a need to invest more energy into strengthening organisation culture in all ways imaginable, both now and going forward. Collaboration, job satisfaction and knowledge development are all factors that influence our desire to come into the office. Our analysis shows a shift in focus when it comes to the most important job of the office – from an external focus to a more internal one. The goal here revolves partly around supporting the employees and their work and partly around strengthening the organisation’s identity among employees to make them feel part of a greater whole. I believe that we will see this shift reflected in the future designs and premises strategies that organisations adopt. “Culture does not come about by itself; we need to come together and reflect on how we meet and work. For us, having a strong culture is super important. If that’s not something you want, then you should apply elsewhere.” Third place breeds new ideas The sociologist Ray Oldenburg (Oldenburg & Brisset, 1982) coined the term ‘the third place’, which can also refer to a workplace. This is the place where unplanned and spontaneous meetings and discussions occur. It is within this third place that we can have conversations around thoughts and ideas in a relaxed manner without the pressure to come up with anything or stick to an agenda. Sometimes we need to talk about how things work or solve smaller problems, and sometimes we need a fresh perspective or support and encouragement. These chance meetings represent a valuable opportunity for problem-solving, creativity and understanding. A great example of this is an encounter beside a photocopier at the University of Pennsylvania between two researchers. Katalin Karikó began talking about her latest discovery, mRNA, to Drew Weissman, who came from a completely different field of research. This casual conversa- tion was the beginning of a multi-year research collaboration which led to a completely new method of vaccination against Covid-19 and a Nobel Prize in Medicine 2023. Culture and the office Something else which emerges as increasingly important in the future is the need to merge the office with its various functions via the help of organisation culture. Instead of making surface- level changes, it is necessary to examine the needs of employees and professional groups in conjunction with one another so that this intel can guide office design. The hybrid office set-up has taught us that the various different needs of the workplace sometimes conflict with one another. While some people only come to the office reluctantly, arguing that they work better from home, others want nothing more than to meet, exchange ideas and collaborate with their colleagues. The needs of the organisation can also sometimes conflict with the work-environment needs of individuals and work groups. This balancing act is a challenge that the hybrid office throws into sharp relief and which must be addressed in the offices of tomorrow. Workplace needs must be identified, and they need to be balanced against one another. The desire of one group to meet with their colleagues – potentially resulting in greater satisfaction and higher levels of productivity for them – needs to be weighed against the overall productivity of the organisation as a whole. The organisation’s needs for synergies and future development also need to be factored into the equation. This may mean that we need to recognise that certain groups may not actually come back to the office to the same
19 degree as before. This may be the case for workers within the IT sector, for example – a group that receives a great deal of consideration and attention due to the high levels of competition for this profession. Effectively what this means, then, is that, going forward, it might not be possible to gather all professional groups in-person in the same way as before. Atmosphere and variation is a dealbreaker Beyond shedding light on the different workplace needs of different professional groups, remote working has also led employees to place greater demands on their work environment. In order to break this perception among employees of the home office as the primary work- place, I believe that organisations will need to provide the same type of work environment at the office going forward, with all the same aspects and elements that employees appreciate. In addition to good ergonomics and height-adjustable desks, a good hybrid office work environment should also encompass qualities such as visibility, stimulation and ability for recovery. The office’s primary competitive advantage over the external workplace thus becomes the atmosphere it offers in combination with proximity to colleagues and social coherence of the workplace. As a result of the different work-environment needs of different groups, I also believe that the office of the future will accommodate a greater diversity of work environments, and this poses yet another challenge going forward. Allowing employees to incorporate variation into their work can be one way to both ‘compete’ with the work environment at home and also to strengthen their link to the organisation. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and so the appeal of an office lies largely in the eye of the employees. Flexibility and greater autonomy require good self-leadership Remote working during the pandemic gave employees greater autonomy, but it also placed demands on their abilities for self-leadership. It is difficult to wind back the clock so long as performance levels are being maintained. It is therefore likely that the matter of the work environment will revolve much more around self-control in the future, meaning flexibility and independence at both the employee and professional group levels. In the former case, this might mean having a private room and independent work materials, while in the latter case, it could be a functional project space. Some of the respondents feel that a successful hybrid work set-up requires organisations to take a flexible and less bureaucratic approach in order to avoid talent flight.
20 The pandemic showed that the flexibility we were forced into should be affirmed in the future world of work, as it enables freedom to act and new ways of thinking at both the organisational and employee level. If this prediction is correct, the need for active leadership and culture-building efforts will rise within the organisations. An adaptable office in a changing world As the world around us grows more complex, coupled with internal complexities such as competing needs at work and potentially greater work-environment demands, I believe that the office will increasingly come to play a leading role in terms of holding the organisation together. To succeed, it is important to emphasise the role of the office as an aid to the business and an entity in service of the organisation’s culture. There will be more than one answer to the question of what makes an attractive office. I believe that the overarching task of the office of the future will be to unite the organisation in an adaptable way, while simultaneously creating the right conditions for synergies and greater innovation and productivity. Of course, that may be easier said than done. But in order for the office to take on the central role required for the best possible hybrid set-up, we need to both adopt new ways of thinking and test out a range of different office solutions. In addition, we also need to apply a premises strategy for hybrid working that does not compromise on the rigour or courage to think differently in the best interests of the organisation while recognising the different work-environment needs of different groups. This might mean having to humble ourselves in certain cases – for example, by giving private spaces to specialists who won’t otherwise return to the office (despite the risk of friction with different groups that this may entail). Or it might also be meeting the needs of a specific professional group for focused and creative teamwork by isolating them from managers and other colleagues via the project-office concept (see fact box). These groups can meet for brainstorming sessions during project periods at a special project office, which can be located either at the central office or elsewhere. The objective is to get groups such as sales staff and IT developers who work remotely to work here one or two days a week to then go back to their usual workplaces at the office or at home. In this future scenario, the organisation is seen as a living organism whose needs diverge and converge, and so the premises strategy needs to relate to this in an organic way. One respondent made the comparison of the various professional groups functioning like an orchestra playing together, with different participants and different repertoires. The risks of a decentralised office Another future scenario is one in which the organisation has several different offices within a single geographical area which function as hubs/co-working spaces for specific professional groups. Staff work periodically from their tailored hub environment and periodically from the main office where they can meet other colleagues and complete tasks that are best suited to this environment. The tailored hub spaces could also be located in the same place as the main office, so long as they are separate from the wider organisation and the sense of being off-site is retained. However, a decentralised office set-up with dispersed offices also entails a risk of operational fragmentation and may hamper culture-building efforts. As mentioned earlier, the antidote to this is conscious efforts to boost organisation culture. FACTS: The project office concept has arisen out of a greater need for project work within organisations and working life. What it means is that for so long as the project is ongoing, employees move into one or several project rooms set up especially for this purpose. This is a tailored and creative environment that they can bed into and make their own. Advantages include being able to leave work materials sitting out, physical proximity to colleagues (which in turn means better communication and sense of community) and privacy without outside scrutiny. This method has been shown to boost creativity which otherwise risks being stifled in more open workplaces. (References: Bodin Danielsson. C., 2014; Mitchell McCoy, J. 2000)
21 The role of the office in city planning The importance of the office to sustainable urban planning is highly relevant and has a direct bearing on both the design and the joint utilisation of resources, among other things. There are two potential models here which are of particular interest – one is a dispersed office solution and the other is the location/design of office districts. In the interests of sustainability, urban planning today places much greater focus on the principle of proximity – and this can create the right conditions for a decentralised office, with office hubs and co-working spaces in the neighbourhood (see footnote Media2). A decentralised office set-up can also facilitate recruitment in organisations that choose this office solution while also reducing their exposure to risk. In contrast to the proximity principle of urban planning, we have the office district concept in which workplaces are gathered together on the fringes of the city. These districts are comprised primarily of office buildings with some restaurants and shops and only the occasional residential property. In some cases, these areas are adjacent to out-of-town shopping centres. One prediction for the future is that organisations located in office districts are going to find it difficult to attract employees to their offices as they can scarcely compete with the qualities offered by remote workplaces. Longer commutes by car, bus or train are perceived as negative, especially by employees who do not live on the same side of town. The inclusion of some housing to break the monotony of these districts can reduce the risk of the district going dead after six o´clock and may generate life and activity, potentially making the place more attractive. Shared office resources – sustainable and economic Issues of sustainability largely come down to the joint utilisation of resources – something which is also financially sustainable. Today, many lounge spaces, meeting and conference rooms go unused at our offices. These areas and their facilities can be shared with other organisations and groups, and even with individuals. This can occur outside of office hours – for example, they can be used as venues for courses much like how school classrooms, arts-andcrafts rooms and home-economics labs are used externally after school hours. Naturally the issue of security must be addressed here – and this is something that has become increasingly important in recent years. In our study, some organisations have begun to share resources in this way, and the potential is huge. Some also talk about remodelling and condensing existing meeting spaces in order to instead use resources in the city centre for larger meetings. “I believe in fewer resources and more sharing of what’s already there ... We have loads of meeting rooms, social spaces, cafeterias and break rooms that we can share without issue.” The predominant trend Despite efforts to outline future scenarios from a range of perspectives, I can confidently say that there is really only one clear trend in our study – that the future of working life will be characterised by an increased degree of remote working. This is a narrative we’ve been hearing since the pandemic restrictions were first repealed, but it is also what we can see from both our own data and that of others. Remote working will be high on the agenda when developing the offices of tomorrow. For even if many organisations may hope that remote working will prove a blip – at least to the extent it has a negative impact on the business – the reality is that remote working cannot be ignored. The reason for this, in my view, is that we have a general shortage of talent in the services sector, especially within professional domains such as engineering and IT development. It is also hard to roll benefits like remote working back once they have become established in society. It is for this reason I believe organisations will need to get on board and adapt to the new normal. It is better to embrace the reality and view it as an opportunity for greater flexibility in a changing world. For example, 2 Håkansson, J. (2023). Vägen mot en hållbar arbetsplats [The road to a sustainable workplace]. Nacka Kommun, https://www.foretagartraffen.se/vagen-mot-en-hallbar-arbetsplats.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=