Measuring Interaction in Workplaces

Abstract

Interactions in the workplace have long been studied by the architectural research community, however, in the past, the majority of those contributions focused on single case studies. Drawing on a much larger empirical sample of 27 offices, this chapter aims at establishing a baseline of understanding how the physical structure of office buildings shapes human behaviours of interaction. This may form a foundation for the Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) community to investigate the impact of embedded computer technology on human behaviours inside buildings. Methods of data collection included an analysis of floor plans with Space Syntax techniques and direct observations of space usage patterns. Exploring this data, different patterns emerged: interactions appeared unevenly distributed in space; interaction rates as well as preferences for locations varied by industry; spatial configuration appeared to create affordances for interaction, since unplanned interactions outside of meeting rooms tended to cluster in more visually connected areas of the office; in addition, seven different micro-behaviours of interaction were identified, each of them driven by affordances in both the built environment and the presence of other people; last but not least, locations for interactions showed clear time-space routines. The chapter closes with interpretations of the results, reflecting on the problem of predictability and how these insights could be useful for evidencebased design, but also the HCI community. It also gives an outlook on future developments regarding the constant logging of human behaviours in offices with emerging technologies.

Complexity in the Built Environment: Wayfinding Difficulties in the Modular Design of Qatar University’s Most Iconic Building

“…They also include the prescriptive effects of strong programmatic aspects (in this case, classroom location and course schedules) in causing some spaces to overperform/underperform for some types of use. Finally, there is also the importance of providing seating to facilitate the robust use of spaces, whether at the building or urban level [9,[15][16][17]. The PoE findings in the CUBE 1 project were mostly consistent with previous results of space syntax research over the last 30 years for generative layouts such as office buildings, colleges, and research laboratories.…”

“…They also include the prescriptive effects of strong programmatic aspects (in this case, classroom location and course schedules) in causing some spaces to overperform/underperform for some types of use. Finally, there is also the importance of providing seating to facilitate the robust use of spaces, whether at the building or urban level [9,[15][16][17].…”

“…The research in this paper builds on decades of space syntax research into complex buildings (e.g., non-residential buildings), including laboratories, educational facilities, and office buildings [8][9][10][11][12][13][15][16][17]. The originality of the research in the paper pertains to the new case study of the BCR Corridors at QU, not necessarily the methodological approach.…”

Analysing knowledge sharing behaviour in business centres: a mixed multinomial logit model

“…However, the workplace is still one of the main locations where adults spend most of their time (Génois et al, 2015), and is therefore an important location for interacting and knowledge sharing. It is recognised that especially face-to-face interactions are important for sharing interests, rich information exchange, socialising, productivity and knowledge sharing (Sailer, Koutsolampros, Austwick, Varoudis, & Hudson-Smith, 2016;Suckley & Dobson, 2014).…”

“…Bøllingtoft & Ulhøi, 2005;Cooper, Hamel, & Connaughton, 2012) or on the frequency of face-to-face interactions or overall knowledge sharing behaviour within a single (large) organisation (e.g. Blakstad et al, 2009;Sailer et al, 2016). Research into whether and which type of knowledge is shared, between organisations, in the context of a business centre, is still limited.…”