Health is a trending topic in the office market, yet scientific research on healthy offices is scattered. This study undertakes a systematic literature review on the relationship between the interior space of offices and physical, psychological and social well-being. The review identifies the characteristics of interior office space that have been studied in relation to employee health, and outlines the empirical evidence. Of 2816 papers in the database, 50 addressed the relationship between interior office space and health and did so based on six features: layout, furniture, light, greenery, controls and noise. Evidence on the relationship between interior space and health has accumulated only within a few topics. On the one hand, open-plan offices, shared rooms and higher background noise are negatively related to health. On the other hand, positive relationships are found between physical well-being and aspects that encourage physical activity; between physical/psychological well-being and (day)light, individual control and real/ artificial greenery; and between social well-being and small shared rooms. In measuring health, physical well-being is predominant. Similarly, studies have predominantly aimed to prevent health problems rather than enhance health. Overall, the related research is in a nascent stage. Further research is required to verify claims about healthy offices.

Purpose This paper aims to explore the impact of workplaces, which support concentration and communication, and self-management practices on individual and team productivity. The underlying hypothesis is that the impact of these variables on the two levels of productivity (individual and team) and the two dimensions of productivity (quantity and quality) may be different. Design/methodology/approach The paper is based on survey data from 998 Finnish knowledge workers. Factor analysis was used to test the dimensions of the conceptual model. Insights into the impact of workplaces for concentration and communications and self-management practices on productivity were obtained by multiple-regression analyses. Findings The findings show that self-management practices have a larger impact on the quality and quantity of individual output and the quantity of team output than workplaces for communication and concentration. Improving self-management skills is key to increase all productivity dimensions and in particular the quality of the output. Practical implications This paper contributes to a better understanding of the impact of workplace characteristics and self-management practices on different levels and dimensions of productivity. It offers valuable lessons for managers, as they are able to recognize how productivity can be approached from several perspectives. Different dimensions can be enhanced using different workplace settings. For example, the quantitative output of employees can be increased by adding more space for concentration, while quantitative team productivity can be increased by providing appropriate space for collaboration. An important means to enhance a higher quality of the output is to improve self-management skills. The findings also suggest that collaboration between different disciplines – corporate management, corporate real estate management, human resource management and IT – is needed to optimize individual and team productivity. Originality/value This paper explores work environment experiences of Finnish office workers and connects both workplace appraisal and work practices to perceived productivity support, on individual level and team level. It also adds insights into the different impacts on quantity and quality.

The increasing competitive pressures and dynamic user preferences have resulted in a fast-paced and uncertain business environment. In the face of these circumstances, organizations are looking into alternatives to incorporate flexibility to become more adaptive and responsive to change. In this line, co-working, typically associated with freelancers, entrepreneurs, and startups, has become a particularly interesting alternative in the market that has caught the attention of corporate occupiers. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to identify co-working strategies that can be implemented as part of the corporate real estate portfolio, in alignment with the flexibility demands of the organization. This nascent research topic is studied through 5 qualitative case studies including in-depth, semi-structured interviews with corporate real estate managers and related case documentation. The results evidence the different motivations that the organizations have when incorporating co-working in their property portfolio. As seen across the cases, organizations in different stages of maturity are implementing co-working as the main office location or as a temporary or complementary space solution, through six different strategies: (1) Swing Space, (2) Expansion Space, (3) Core and Flex, (4) Touchdown Space, (5) Testing Market, and (6) Temporary Projects and Staff. This research evidences that each strategy plays a specific role in the corporate real estate portfolio and implies different sources of flexibility that support the physical, functional, and financial flexibility demands of the organization.

Purpose Triggered by public concerns over office workplace safety during the COVID-19 pandemic, this study sheds light on the office workplace environment and aims to investigate how organisations respond to forces from the external environment (impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic) and how they modify their office workplace management strategically and operationally to suit the stakeholders’ needs and future development in the post COVID-19 period. Design/methodology/approach A desktop study was conducted to provide the framework for the in-depth interviews with five corporate real estate (CRE) managers and three workplace consultants. Thematic analysis including coding technique was adopted to analyse the qualitative data. Findings The findings show that during the COVID-19 pandemic, most of the intended and implemented office workplace modifications are mainly related to two types of risk control: administrative control and personal protection. At a strategic level, organisations react to the external forces by re-modelling their businesses and working towards re-orienting their CRE strategies, such as portfolio transformation, agile portfolio strategies and redesign of the office workplace, etc. Originality/value This is a topical and timely study that presents the general practice of office workplace modification during the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as the related CRE management (CREM) strategies developed for the new normal. The findings obtained through in-depth interviews have well supported the CREM strategic alignment theory. It is foreseen that office workplace management will encounter other challenges due to uncertainties of the COVID-19 pandemic. The findings of this study provide a practical lens to look at the future changes of office workplace environment.

PurposeAdaptability is an inherent quality in building circularity, as adaptability can physically facilitate the reversibility of materials in a closed-reversible chain, also called “loops”. Nevertheless, positioning adaptability in circularity-oriented models could overlook some of the contextual considerations that contribute to the utility for the built environment. This paper reconceptualises building adaptability to incorporate circularity, in order to facilitate for the resource loops whilst preserving the long-lasting functionality in buildings.Design/methodology/approachAn integrative literature review on adaptability and circularity of buildings was conducted using systematic search approach. From the initial database of 4631 publications, 104 publications were included for the final analysis. A comparative analysis of definitions and determinants of both concepts was conducted to reconceptualise circular building adaptability.FindingsThe findings of the literature study show that incorporating circularity and adaptability is possible through 10 design and operation determinants, namely configuration flexibility, product dismantlability, asset multi-usability, design regularity, functional convertibility, material reversibility, building maintainability, resource recovery, volume scalability, and asset refit-ability. The study concludes that considering the defined determinants in a holistic manner could simultaneously facilitate: building resilience to contextual changes, creation of asset value, and elimination of waste generation.Originality/valueThis paper expands the relevant bodies of literature by providing a novel way of perceiving building adaptability, incorporating circularity. The practical value of this paper lies in the discussion of potential strategies that can be proactively or reactively employed to operationalise circular building adaptability.