Knowledge sharing during unplanned face-to-face meetings between employees is indispensable for innovation-based organizations. Spatial design of office buildings has been proven to influence the number of meetings dyads have at work, but research on the behavior during such meetings remains scarce. This article analyzes how several spatial variables relate to employee behavior during such meetings (joint activities, location, intentionality, and issues addressed). A 1-week diary of 138 employees from one research organization provided data on 918 knowledge-sharing meetings. Analysis of the building layout showed that behavior is particularly different at a very local level within the building. Chi-square tests showed that inter-visibility and proximity are most strongly associated with where knowledge was shared, while sharing a room and overhearing related significantly to how knowledge was shared.
AdegokeO. (2007). Innovation types and innovation management practices in service companies. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 27, 564-587.
2.
AllenT. J. (1977). Managing the flow of technology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
3.
AllenT. J.FustfeldA. R. (1975). Research laboratory architecture and the structuring of communications. R&D Management, 5, 153-164. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9310.1975.tb01230.x
4.
AllenT. J.HennG. W. (2007). The organization and architecture of innovation: Managing the flow of technology. Burlington, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann.
5.
Appel-MeulenbroekH. A. J. A. (2010). Knowledge sharing through co-presence. Facilities, 28, 189-205. doi:10.1108/02632771011023140
6.
BeckerF.SimsW. (2001). Offices that work: Balancing communication, flexibility and cost. Ithaca, NY: International Workplace Studies Program, Cornell University.
7.
BellS. M.AndersonM. (1998). Workplace solutions. Journal of Corporate Real Estate, 1, 349-360. doi:10.1108/14630019910811132
8.
BenediktM.L. (1979). To take hold of space: Isovists and isovist fields. Environment and Planning B, 6, 47-65. doi: 10.1068/b060047
9.
BerendsH. (2005). Exploring knowledge sharing: Moves, problem solving and justification. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 3, 97-105. doi:10.1057/palgrave.kmrp.8500056
10.
BerendsH.GarudR.DebackereK.WeggemanM. (2011). Thinking along: A process for tapping into knowledge across boundaries. International Journal of Technology Management, 53, 69-88. doi:10.1504/IJTM.2011.037238
11.
BerendsJ. J. (2003). Knowledge sharing in industrial research (Doctoral dissertation). Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands.
12.
BlakstadS. H.HatlingM.BygdåsA. L. (2009). The knowledge workplace: Searching for data on use of open plan offices. In Proceedings EFMC 2009 research symposium (pp. 1-14). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Euroforum.
13.
BolgerN.DavisA.RafaeliE. (2003). Diary methods: Capturing life as it is lived. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 579-616. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145030
14.
BoutellierR.UllmanF.SchreiberJ.NaelR. (2008). Impact of office layout on communication in a science-driven business. Research & Development Management, 38, 372-391. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9310.2008.00524.x
15.
BrownM. G. (2008). Proximity and collaboration: Measuring workplace configuration. Journal of Corporate Real Estate, 10, 5-26.
16.
CollinsA.BrownJ. S.NewmanS. (1989). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the craft of reading, writing and mathematics. In ResnickL. (Ed.), Knowing, learning and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 453-494). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
17.
CoradiA.HeinzenM.BoutellierR. (2015). A longitudinal study of workspace design for knowledge exploration and exploitation in the research and development process. Creativity and Innovation Management, 24, 55-71. doi:10.1111/caim.12099
18.
CoviL. M.OlsonJ. S.RoccoE. (1998). A room of your own: What do we learn about support of teamwork from assessing teams in dedicated project rooms? In StreitzN.KonomiS.BurkhardtH. J. (Eds.), Cooperative buildings (pp. 53-65). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Springer-Verlag.
19.
CriscuoloP.SalterA.Ter WalA. (2010). The role of proximity in shaping knowledge sharing in professional services firms. In Opening up innovation: Strategy, organization and technology (pp. 1-27). London, England: Imperial College Business School.
20.
DulJ.CeylanC. (2006). Enhancing organizational creativity from an ergonomics perspective: The Creativity Development model. In KoningsveldE. (Ed.), Proceedings of the 16th world congress of the International Ergonomics Association (pp. 667-672). Maastricht, the Netherlands: Elsevier Science Inc.
21.
FranzG.Von der HeydeM.BülthoffH. H. (2005). Predicting experiential qualities of architecture by its spatial properties. In MartensB.KeulA. G. (Eds.), Designing social innovation: planning, building, evaluating, proceedings IAPS 18 (pp. 157-166), Michigan, USA: Hogrefe & Huber publishers.
22.
FranzG.WienerJ. M. (2008). From space syntax to space semantics: A behaviorally and perceptually oriented methodology for the efficient description of the geometry and topology of environments. Environment and Planning B, 35, 574-592. doi:10.1068/b33050
23.
GiblerK. M.LindholmA.-L. (2012). A test of corporate real estate strategies and operating decisions in support of core business strategies. Journal of Property Research, 29, 25-48. doi:10.1080/09599916.2011.608470
24.
GolemanD.BoyatzisR. (2008, September). Social intelligence and the biology of leadership. Harvard Business Review, pp. 1-9.
25.
GrajewskiT. R. (1992). Spatial configurations and interaction patterns within office buildings (Master thesis). University College London, England.
26.
GreenbergB. S.EastinM. S.SkalskiP.CooperL.LevyM.LachlanK. (2005). Comparing survey and diary measures of Internet and traditional media use. Communication Reports, 18, 1-8. doi:10.1080/08934210500084164
27.
HeerwagenJ. H.KampschroerK.PowellK. M.LoftnessV. (2004). Collaborative knowledge work environments. Building Research & Information, 32, 510-528. doi:10.1080/09613210412331313025
28.
HoeglM.ProserpioL. (2004). Team member proximity and teamwork in innovative projects. Research Policy, 33, 1153-1165. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2004.06.005
29.
HuaY.LoftnessV.HeerwagenJ. H.PowellK. M. (2011). Relationship between workplace spatial settings and occupant-perceived support for collaboration. Environment and Behavior, 43, 807-826. doi:10.1177/0013916510364465
30.
HuaY.LoftnessV.KrautR.PowellK. M. (2010). Workplace collaborative space layout typology and occupant perception of collaboration environment. Environment and Planning B, 37, 429-448. doi:10.1068/b35011
31.
JassawallaA. R.SashittalH. C. (1998). An examination of collaboration in high-technology new product development processes. The Journal of Product Innovation Management, 15, 237-254. doi:10.1016/S0737-6782(97)00080-5
32.
KaboF.HwangY.LevensteinM.Owen-SmithJ. (2015). Shared paths to the lab: A sociospatial network analysis of collaboration. Environment and Behavior, 47, 57-84. doi:10.1177/0013916513493909
33.
KahnK. B. (1996). Interdepartmental integration: A definition with implications for product development performance. The Journal of Product Innovation Management, 13, 137-151. doi:10.1016/0737-6782(95)00110-7
34.
KahnK. B.McDonoughE. F. I. (1997). An empirical study of the relationships among co-location, integration, performance, and satisfaction. The Journal of Product Innovation Management, 14, 161-178. doi:10.1016/S0737-6782(97)00006-4
35.
KeränenJ.VirjonenP.HongistoV. (2008). Characterization of acoustics in open offices: Four case studies. In Proceedings of the international congress on acoustics (pp. 549-554). Paris, France: DC/ConfOrg.
36.
KochD.SteenJ. (2012). Decomposing programmes: Re-coding hospital work with spatially syntactic information. In GreeneM.ReyesJ.CastroA. (Eds.), 8th space syntax symposium (pp. 8145:1-20). Santiago de Chile, Chile: PUC.
37.
MarkhedeH.KochD. (2007). Positioning analysis: Social structures in configurative modelling. In KubatA. S.ErtekinO.GüneyY. I.EyübogluE. (Eds.), 6th space syntax symposium (pp. 069:1-9). Istanbul, Turkey: ITU Faculty of architecture.
38.
MartensY. (2011). Creative workplace: Instrumental and symbolic support for creativity. Facilities, 29, 63-79. doi:10.1108/02632771111101331
39.
NenonenS. (2005). The nature of the workplace for knowledge creation (Doctoral dissertation). Helsinki University of Technology, Finland.
40.
NonakaI.KonnoN. (1998). The concept of “Ba”: Building a foundation for knowledge creation. California Management Review, 40(3), 40-54. doi:10.2307/41165942
41.
NonakaI.TakeuchiH. (1995). The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
42.
NonakaI.ToyamaRKonnoN. (2000). SECI, ba and leadership: A unified model of dynamic knowledge creation. Longe Range Planning, 33(1), 5-34. doi: 10.1016/S0024-6301(99)00115-6
43.
PeponisJ.BafnaS.BajajR.BrombergJ.CongdonC.RashidM.. . . ZimringC. (2007). Designing space to support knowledge work. Environment and Behavior, 39, 815-840. doi:10.1177/0013916506297216
RashidM.KampschroerK.WinemanJ.ZimringC. (2006). Spatial layout and face-to-face interaction in offices: A study of the mechanisms of spatial effects on face-to-face interaction. Environment and Planning B, 33, 825-844. doi:10.1068/b31123
46.
RashidM.ZimringC.WinemanJ.FlanigamT.NubaniL.HammashR. (2005). The effects of spatial behaviours and layout attributes on individual’s perception of psychosocial constructs in offices. In van NesA. (Ed.), 5th space syntax symposium (pp. 71-88). Delft, The Netherlands: Techne Press.
47.
SailerK. (2007). Movement in workplace environments: Configurational or programmed? In KubatA. S.ErtekinÖ.GüneyY. I.EyübogluE. (Eds.), 6th space syntax symposium (pp. 1-14). Istanbul, Turkey: ITÜ Faculty of Architecture.
48.
SailerK.BudgenA.LonsdaleN.TurnerA.PennA. (2007). Effective workplaces: Bridging the gap between architectural research and design practice. In KubatA. S.ErtekinO.GüneyY. I.EyübogluE. (Eds.), 6th space syntax symposium (pp. 1-6). Istanbul, Turkey: ITU Faculty of architecture.
49.
SailerK.McCullohI. (2012). Social networks and spatial configuration: How office layouts drive social interaction. Social Networks, 34, 47-58. doi:10.1016/j.socnet.2011.05.005
50.
SailerK.PennA. (2009). Spatiality and transpatiality in workplace environments. In KochD.MarcusL.SteenJ. (Eds.), 7th space syntax symposium (pp. 1-11). Stockholm, Sweden: TRITA-ARK- Forskningspublikation.
51.
SerratoM.WinemanJ. (1999). In HolandaF. (Ed.), 2nd space syntax symposium (pp. 11.1-11.8). Brasilia, Brazil: University of Brasilia.
52.
ShpuzaE. (2006). Floorplate shapes and office layouts: A model of the effect of floorplate shape on circulation integration (Doctoral dissertation). Georgia Institute of Technology, USA.
53.
SongM.BerendsH.Van der BijH.WeggemanM. (2007). The effect of IT and co-location on knowledge dissemination. The Journal of Product Innovation Management, 24, 52-68. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5885.2006.00232.x
54.
SpiliopoulouG.PennA. (1999). Organisations as multi-layered networks: Face to face, email and telephone interaction in the workplace. In HolandaF. (Ed.), 2nd space syntax symposium (pp. A1.1-A1.24). Brasilia, Brazil: University of Brasilia.
55.
SteenekenH. J. M. (1998). Personal active noise reduction with integrated speech communication devices: Development and assessment. Noise & Health, 1, 64-75.
56.
TanA. A. W. (2003). The reliability and validity of interactive virtual reality computer experiments (Doctoral dissertation). Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands.
57.
ThompsonB. (2008). Computing and interpreting effect sizes, confidence intervals, and confidence intervals for effect sizes. In OsborneJ. W. (Ed.), Best practices in quantitative methods (pp. 246-262). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
58.
TokerU.GrayD. O. (2008). Innovation spaces: Workspace planning and innovation in U.S. university research centers. Research Policy, 37, 309-329. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2007.09.006
59.
TurnerA. (2001). Depthmap: A program to perform visibility graph analysis. In PeponisJ.WinemanJ.BafnaS. (Eds.), 3rd space syntax symposium (pp. 31.1-31.9). Atlanta, GA: Georgia Tech.
60.
TurnerA.DoxaM.O’SullivanD.PennA. (2001). From isovists to visibility graphs: A methodology for the analysis of architectural space. Environment and Planning B, 28, 103-121. doi:10.1068/b2684
61.
VandeSandeL. (2012). Creativity and place: Does where you are impact on how or what you think?Work & Place, 1, 14-17.
62.
WangZ.WangN. (2012). Knowledge sharing, innovation and firm performance. Expert Systems With Applications, 39, 8899-8908.
63.
WardV.HolthamC. (2000). The role of private and public spaces in knowledge management. In Proceedings of the Knowledge management conference. Coventry, UK: University of Warwick.
64.
WenmaekersR. H. C.Van HoutN. H. A. M.HakC. C. J. M.Van LuxemburgR. C. J. (2009). The effect of room acoustics on the measured speech privacy in two typical European open plan offices. In BoltonJ. S.GoverB.BurroughsC. (Eds.), Proceedings Inter-noise, 2009 (pp. 74-79). Ottawa, Canada: Curran Associates, Inc.
65.
WinemanJ. D.AdhyaA. (2007). Enhancing workspace performance: Predicting the influence of spatial and psychosocial factors on job satisfaction. In KochD.MarcusL.SteenJ. (Eds.), 7th space syntax symposium (pp. 1-16). Stockholm, Sweden: TRITA-ARK- Forskningspublikation.
66.
WinemanJ. D.KaboF. W.DavisG. F. (2009). Spatial and social networks in organizational innovation. Environment and Behavior, 41, 427-442. doi:10.1177/0013916508314854
67.
WinemanJ. D.HwangY.KaboF.Owen-SmithJ.DavisG. F. (2014). Spatial layout, social structure, and innovation in organizations. Environment and Planning B, 41, 1100-1112. doi:10.1068/b130074p
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
