Abstract:One's colleagues can be situated in close physical proximity, yet seem quite distant. Conversely, one's colleagues can be quite far away in objective terms, yet seem quite close. In this paper, we explore this paradoxical phenomenon of feeling close to geographically distant colleagues and propose a model of perceived proximity (a dyadic and asymmetric construct which reflects one person's perception of how close or how far another person is). The model shows how communication and social identification process… Show more
“…Wilson et al (2008) argue that people may collaborate at a physical distance because they feel close to one another, but do not explain how people who are physically close are able to avoid collaboration. Furthermore, the concept of perceived proximity does not address the idea that physical environments are not open to endless interpretations, and that the physical form of work environments directs how people come to understand and use them (Gaver, 1996).…”
Section: Current Debates On Open-plan Officesmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…In the context of this debate, Wilson, O'Leary, Metiu, and Jett (2008) argue that it is not physical proximity between people, but employees' subjective feelings about the distance between people that shapes collaboration. By contrasting physical proximity with perceived proximity, they argue that individuals may feel emotionally close to people who are very far away (e.g.…”
Section: Current Debates On Open-plan Officesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…particular physical features cause particular behaviours). In seeking to overcome this problem, Wilson et al (2008) describe the difference between physical proximity, which is the objective distance between team members, and perceived proximity, which relates to how close team members feel, suggesting that the latter causes interaction. The key limitation of Wilson and colleagues' argument is that it privileges employees' perceptions of proximity over the actual physical opportunities and constraints presented by the physical work environment, and focuses on proximity over other elements of the physical context (i.e.…”
Section: Rb Explains the Solution To CL [O24]mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Pepper, 2008), or individual explanations (e.g. Wilson et al, 2008) Overall, when employees share an office with others who have similar personal characteristics (e.g. sociability) and are working on similar tasks, they are better able to empathise with each other's needs (e.g.…”
Section: Synthesis Of the Research Findingsmentioning
Many organisations have adopted open-plan offices, rooms with few barriers between desks that are shared by more than four people, to facilitate collaboration, productivity, and innovation. iii
“…Wilson et al (2008) argue that people may collaborate at a physical distance because they feel close to one another, but do not explain how people who are physically close are able to avoid collaboration. Furthermore, the concept of perceived proximity does not address the idea that physical environments are not open to endless interpretations, and that the physical form of work environments directs how people come to understand and use them (Gaver, 1996).…”
Section: Current Debates On Open-plan Officesmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…In the context of this debate, Wilson, O'Leary, Metiu, and Jett (2008) argue that it is not physical proximity between people, but employees' subjective feelings about the distance between people that shapes collaboration. By contrasting physical proximity with perceived proximity, they argue that individuals may feel emotionally close to people who are very far away (e.g.…”
Section: Current Debates On Open-plan Officesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…particular physical features cause particular behaviours). In seeking to overcome this problem, Wilson et al (2008) describe the difference between physical proximity, which is the objective distance between team members, and perceived proximity, which relates to how close team members feel, suggesting that the latter causes interaction. The key limitation of Wilson and colleagues' argument is that it privileges employees' perceptions of proximity over the actual physical opportunities and constraints presented by the physical work environment, and focuses on proximity over other elements of the physical context (i.e.…”
Section: Rb Explains the Solution To CL [O24]mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Pepper, 2008), or individual explanations (e.g. Wilson et al, 2008) Overall, when employees share an office with others who have similar personal characteristics (e.g. sociability) and are working on similar tasks, they are better able to empathise with each other's needs (e.g.…”
Section: Synthesis Of the Research Findingsmentioning
Many organisations have adopted open-plan offices, rooms with few barriers between desks that are shared by more than four people, to facilitate collaboration, productivity, and innovation. iii
“…According to Fulton (2005) spiritual quotient also lead to an enhanced ability to find joy in the small things in life and make it easier to remain focused. Employment status is a major determinant of the exchange relationship between individuals and the employing organisation (Wilson et al, 2008). The literature suggests that casual employment does not measure up well on many dimensions of security that constitute permanent employment (Paramio and Zofío, 2008).…”
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.