This study examined the direct and interactive relationships among several elements of the physical work environment (i.e., type of office, personal computer [PC] use, and ergonomic furniture), types of work (i.e., clerical, professional, and managerial, and supervisory versus nonsupervisory), and employee attitudes (i.e., satisfaction and environmental perceptions). Two-hundred and twenty-eight employees of a large bank completed questionnaires. Analyses of variance revealed both direct and interactive effects. Differences were found across those with and without PCs and ergonomic furniture on various attitudes and perceptions. Differences were also found across office types, as were interactive effects among work types and office types. These results support the hypothesis that relationships among these variables are complex and interactive, and illustrate that perceptions of the physical environment are moderated by the job level and the type of work people perform.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Andersen, C. H. (1986). Hierarchical moderated regression analysis: A useful tool for retail management decisions. Journal of Retailing, 62, 186-203.
2.
Becker, F. D. (1981). Workspace: Creating environments in organizations. Westport, CT: Praeger.
3.
Bensen, T. E. (1990, July 16). Poor design is truly a pain. Industry Week, 239, 60, 62.
4.
Brayfield, A. H. , Wells, R. V., & Strate, M. W. (1957). Interrelationships among measures of job satisfaction and general satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 41, 201-205.
5.
Canter, D. (1983). The physical context of work. In D. J. Oborne & M. M. Gruneberg (Eds.), The physical environment at work (pp. 11-38). Chichester, England: Wiley.
6.
Carlopio, J. (1986). The development of a human factors satisfaction questionnaire. In H. W. Hendrick & O. Brown, Jr. (Eds.), Human factors in organization design and management (pp. 559-566). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
7.
Carlopio, J. (1990). Further development of the human factors satisfaction questionnaire. In W. Karwoski & M. Rahimi (Eds.), Ergonomics of hybrid automated systems II (pp. 455-462). New York: Elsevier.
8.
Carlopio, J. (1991). Construct validity of the human factors satisfaction questionnaire (Working paper 91-001, January, Australian Graduate School of Management). Manuscript submitted for publication.
9.
Catanzariti, J. (1991, March 30-31). Ignoring office safety bad for business health. The Weekend Australian, p. 53.
10.
Davis, D. D. (1986). Managing technological innovation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
11.
Ferguson, G. S. , & Weisman, G. D. (1986). Alternative approaches to the assessment of employee satisfaction with the office environment. In J. D. Wineman (Ed.), Behavioral issues in office design (pp. 85-108). New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
12.
Fernberg, P. M. (1991). You can benefit from computer support furniture. Modern Office Technology, 36, 52, 54.
13.
Goodrich, R. (1982). Seven office evaluations: A review. Environment and Behavior, 14, 353-378.
14.
Goodrich, R. (1986). The perceived office: The office environment as experienced by its users. In J. D. Wineman (Ed.), Behavioral issues in office design (pp. 109-133). New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
15.
Hedge, A. (1982). Open versus enclosed workspaces: The impact of design on employee reactions to their offices. Environment and Behavior, 14, 522-536.
16.
Housh, E. W. (1988). Office furniture's effect on employees. The Office, 107, 113.
17.
Kleeman, W. B. (1988). The office of the future. In J. D. Wineman (Ed.), Behavioral issues in office design (pp. 251-291). New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
18.
Kruk, L. B. (1989). Why consider seating last?The Office, 109, 45-50.
19.
Marans, R. W. , & Spreckelmeyer, K. F. (1982). A conceptual model for evaluating work environment. Environment and Behavior, 14, 333-351.
20.
Moos, R. H. (1973). Conceptualizations of human environments. American Psychologist, 28, 652-665.
21.
Oldham, G. R. (1988). Effects of changes in workspace partitions and spatial density on employee reactions: A quasi-experiment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 253-258.
22.
Oldham, G. R. , & Brass, D. J. (1979). Employee reactions to an open-plan office: A naturally occurring quasi-experiment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24, 267-284.
23.
Oldham, G. R. , & Rotchford, N. L. (1983). Relationships between office characteristics and employee reactions: A study of the physical environment. Administrative Science Ouarterly, 28, 542-556.
24.
Rapoport, A. (1982). The meaning of the built environment: A nonverbal communication approach. Tucson: The University of Arizona Press.
25.
Steele, F. I. (1973). Physical settings and organizational development. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
26.
Stellman, J. M. , Klitzman, S., Gordon, G. C., & Snow, B. R. (1987). Work environment and the well-being of clerical and VDT workers. Journal of Occupational Behaviour, 8, 95-114.
27.
Sundstrom, E. (1982). Privacy in the office. Environment and Behavior, 14, 382-389.
28.
Sundstrom, E. (1987). Work environments: Offices and factories. In D. Stokols & I. Altman (Eds.), Handbook of environmental psychology (pp. 733-782). New York: Wiley.
29.
Sundstrom, E. , & Sundstrom, M. G. (1986). Workplaces. New York: Cambridge University Press.
30.
Sundstrom, E. , Town, J., Brown, D., Forman, A., & McGee, C. (1982). Physical enclosure, type of job, and privacy in the office. Environment and Behavior, 14, 543-559.
31.
Weiss, D. J. , Dawis, R. V., England, G. W., & Lofquist, L. H. (1967). Manual for the Minnesota satisfaction questionnaire. Minneapolis: Industrial Relations Center, University of Minnesota.
32.
Wineman, J. D. (1986). Behavioral issues in office design. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
33.
Zalesney, M. D. , & Farace, R. V. (1987). Traditional versus open offices: A comparison of sociotechnical, social relations, and symbolic meaning perspectives. Academy of Management Journal, 30, 240-259.
34.
Zalesney, M. D. , Farace, R. V., & Kurchner-Hawkins, R. (1985). Determinants of employee work perceptions and attitudes: Perceived work environment and organizational level. Environment and Behavior, 17, 567-592.
