This article asserts that more purposely designed physical workplaces could contribute to performance improvement by leveraging human capital and management capacity in public organizations. It provides an initial survey of the literature on workplace design by introducing a synthesis of available research drawn from environmental design, organizational ecology, social psychology, architecture, political science, and business and public administration. Based on the literature review, I developed a model of organizational performance that underscores the importance of “place” variables, such as space arrangement and indoor environment. The model implies that physical workplace has a significant impact on affective, behavioral, and performance outcomes in the organization. The article concludes with implications for theory and practice in using workplace strategy for organizational excellence.
AllenT.BellA.GrahamR.HardyB.SwafferF. (2004). Working without walls: An insight into the transforming government workplace. London, England: DEGW and Office of Government Commerce.
2.
BeckerF.SteeleF. (1995). Workplace by design: Mapping the high-performance workspace. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
3.
BellA. (2000). Transforming your workplace. London, England: Institute of Personnel and Development.
4.
BergP. O.KreinerK. (1990). Corporate architecture: Turning physical settings into symbolic resources. In GagliardiP. (Ed.), Symbols and artifacts: Views of the corporate landscape (pp. 41-67). Berlin, Germany: Walter de Gruyter.
5.
BermanE. M.BowmanJ. S.WestJ. P.Van MartM. (2006). Human resource management in public service: Paradoxes, processes, and problems (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
6.
BloomM.ObenrederR. (2004). Creating the sustainable workplace (Presentation Summary). Washington, DC: The U.S. General Services Administration.
7.
BrillM.WeidemannS., & the BOSTI Associates. (1984). Using office design to increase productivity (Vols. I and II). Buffalo, NY: Workplace Design and Productivity.
8.
BrillM.WeidemannS., & the BOSTI Associates. (2001). Disproving widespread myths about workplace design. Jasper, IN: Kimball International.
9.
CampbellD. E. (1979). Interior office design and visitor response. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64, 648-653.
10.
CareyA. (1967). The Hawthorne studies: A radical criticism. American Sociological Review, 32, 403-416.
11.
CarnevaleD. G. (1992). Physical settings of work: A theory of the effects of environmental form. Public Productivity & Management Review, 15, 423-436.
12.
CarnevaleD. G.RiosJ. M. (1995). How employees assess the quality of physical work settings. Public Productivity & Management Review, 18, 221-231.
13.
Castillo, v.Case Farms of Ohio, 96 F. Supp. 2d 578, 1999.
14.
CoggburnJ. D.SchneiderS. K. (2003). The quality of management and government performance: An empirical analysis of the American states. Public Administration Review, 63, 206-213.
15.
DannaK.GriffinR. W. (1999). Health and well-being in the workplace: A review and synthesis of the literature. Journal of Management, 25, 357-384.
DruckerP. F. (1999). Managing oneself. Harvard Business Review, 83, 100-109.
18.
EhrenhaltA. (1995, April). Maricopa county, good government, bad government. Governing, 8, 18.
19.
EmeryF. E.TristE. L. (1965). The causal texture of organizational environments. Human Relations, 18, 21-32.
20.
FischerG. N.TarguinioC.VischerJ. C. (2004). Effects of the self-schema on perception of space at work. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24, 131-140.
21.
FrankR. H.KaulJ. D. (1978). The Hawthorne experiments: First statistical interpretation. American Sociological Review, 43, 623-643.
22.
FranklinB.SteeleF. (1995). Workplace by design: Mapping the high-performance workspace. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
23.
GagliardiP. (1990). Artifacts as pathways and remains of organizational life. In GagliardiP. (Ed.), Symbols and artifacts: Views of the corporate landscape (pp. 3-38). Berlin, Germany: Walter de Gruyter.
24.
GoodsellC. T. (1977). Bureaucratic manipulation of physical symbols: An empirical study. American Journal of Political Science, 21, 79-91.
25.
GoodsellC. T. (1984). Welfare waiting rooms. Urban Life, 12, 467-477.
26.
GoodsellC. T. (1988). The social meaning of civic space: Studying political authority through architecture. Lawrence: The University Press of Kansas.
27.
GoodsellC. T. (1997). Bureaucracy’s house in the polis: Seeking an appropriate presence. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 7, 393-418.
28.
GoodsellC. T. (2001). The American statehouse: Interpreting democracy’s temples. Lawrence: The University Press of Kansas.
29.
HardyB.GrahamR.StansallP.WhiteA.HarrisonA.BellA.HuttonL. (2008). Working beyond walls: The government workplace as an agent of change. London, England: DEGW and Office of Government Commerce.
30.
HartleyD. (2003, January). Taking cues from the government: Creating a world class workplace at GSA. Spaulding & Slye eReport. Available from www.spauldslye.com
31.
HatchM. J. (1990). The symbolic of office design: An empirical exploration. In GagliardiP. (Ed.), Symbols and artifacts: Views of the corporate landscape (pp. 129-146). Berlin, Germany: Walter de Gruyter.
32.
HeinrichC. J.LynnL. E. (Ed.). (2000). Governance and performance: New perspectives. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
33.
HillC. J.LynnL. E. (2005). Is hierarchical governance in decline? Evidence from empirical research. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15, 173-195.
34.
HummelR. P. (2002). Architectonics of public space [Review of the book The American statehouse: Interpreting democracy’s temples, by C. T. Goodsell]. Public Administration Review, 62, 252-254.
35.
IngrahamP. W.JoyceP. G.DonahueA. K. (2003). Government performance: Why management matters. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University.
36.
JamesK. C. (2002). A fresh start for federal pay: The case for modernization. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
37.
JoroffM. L.PorterW. L.FeinbergB.KuklaC. (2003). The agile workplace. Journal of Corporate Real Estate, 5, 293-311.
38.
JosephA. (2006). The role of the physical and social environment in promoting health, safety, and effectiveness in the healthcare workplace. Concord, CA: The Center for Health Design.
39.
KampschroerK.HeerwagenJ. (2005). The strategic workplace development and evaluation. Building Research & Information, 33, 326-337.
40.
KampschroerK.HeerwagenJ.PowellK. (2007). Creating and testing workplace strategy. California Management Review, 49, 119-137.
KaplanR. S.NortonD. P. (1992). The Balanced Scorecard—Measures that drive performance. Harvard Business Review, 70, 71-79.
43.
KenreichM. E. (2001). Physical settings and organizational success. Library Collections, Acquisitions, and Technical Services, 25, 67-79.
44.
KettlD. F. (2004). System under stress: Homeland security and American politics. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
45.
LawlerE. E. (1973). Motivation in work organizations. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
46.
LevittS. D.ListJ. A. (2009, May). Was there really a Hawthorne effect at the Hawthorne plant? An analysis of the original illumination experiments (Working Paper Series 15016). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
47.
LockeE. A. (1976). The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In DunnetteM. D. (Ed.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 1297-1349). Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
48.
McGuireM. (2006). Collaborative public management: Assessing what we know and how we know it [Special issue]. Public Administration Review, 66, 33-43.
49.
MeierK. J.O’TooleL. J. (2003). Public management and educational performance: The impact of managerial networking. Public Administration Review, 63, 689-699.
50.
MoonM. J. (2004). From e-government to m-government? Emerging practices in the use of mobile technology. Washington, DC: IBM Center for the Business of Government.
51.
NasioB.SmithC. (2005, October). Public space for the people. Washington, DC: The National Organization of Minority Architects.
52.
ObenrederR.HerzJ. (2004). Creating the sustainable workplace. Washington, DC: Office of Government Policy, The U.S. General Services Administration.
53.
OldhamG. R.BrassD. J. (1979). Employee reactions to an open-plan office: A naturally occurring quasi-experiment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24, 267-284.
54.
OldhamG. R.RotchfordN. L. (1983). Relationships between office characteristics and employee reactions: A study of the physical environment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28, 542-556.
55.
PandeyS.GarnettJ. L. (2006). Exploring public sector communication performance: Testing a model and drawing implications. Public Administration Review, 66, 37-51.
56.
Partnership for Public Service. (2010). On demand government: Deploying flexibilities to ensure service continuity. Washington, DC: Author.
57.
ProvanK. G.MilwardH. B. (1995). A preliminary theory of interorganizational effectiveness: A comparative study of four community mental health systems. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 1-33.
58.
RoelofsenP. (2002). The impact of office environments on employee performance: The design of the workplace as a strategy for productivity enhancement. Journal of Facilities Management, 1, 247-264.
59.
RomzekB. S.DubnickM. J. (1987). Accountability in the public sector: Lessons from the Challenger tragedy. Public Administration Review, 47, 227-238.
60.
RosenM.OrlikowskiW. J.SchmahmannK. S. (1990). Building buildings and living lives: A critique of bureaucracy, ideology and concrete artifacts. In GagliardiP. (Ed.), Symbols and artifacts: Views of the corporate landscape (pp. 69-84). Berlin, Germany: Walter de Gruyter.
61.
SeldenS. C. (2009). Human capital: Tools and strategies for the public sector. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
62.
SteeleF. I. (1973). Physical settings and organization development. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
63.
SteersR. M. (1981). Introduction to organizational behavior. Santa Monica, CA: Goodyear.
64.
StoneD.StoneA. (1974). The administration of chairs: Not the persons or subject, but the arrangement of chairs determines the success of a meeting. Public Administration Review, 34, 71-77.
ThompsonV. A. (1965). Bureaucracy and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 10, 1-20.
67.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2010). Indoor Air Facts No. 4 (Revised) Sick Building Syndrome. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from www.epa.gov/iaq/pubs/sbs.html
68.
U.S. General Services Administration. (2006a). Innovative workplaces: Benefits and best practices. Washington, DC: U.S. General Services Administration, Office of Governmentwide Policy.
69.
U.S. General Services Administration. (2006b). Workplace matters. Washington, DC: U.S. General Services Administration, Office of Governmentwide Policy.
70.
U.S. General Services Administration. (2009a). The new federal workplace: A report on the performance of six Workplace 20⋅20 Projects. Washington, DC: U.S. General Services Administration, Public Buildings Service.
71.
U.S. General Services Administration. (2009b). Workplace 20⋅20: A new process from the GSA Public Buildings Service for making high-performance workplaces. Washington, DC: U.S. General Services Administration, Office of Government wide Policy.
WellsM. M. (2000). Office clutter or meaningful personal displays: The role of office personalization in employee and organizational well-being. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 20, 239-255.
76.
WilliamsC.LivingstoneL. P. (1994). Another look at the relationship between performance and voluntary turnover. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 269-298.
77.
WillisM. (2001). County of Alameda Self-Sufficiency Center. In HendersonJ.GreerN. R. (Eds.), Design secrets: Architectural interiors (pp. 186-189). Gloucester, MA: Rockport.
78.
WilsonJ. Q. (1989). Bureaucracy: What government agencies do and why they do it. New York, NY: Basic Books.
79.
WinemanJ. D. (Ed.). (1986). Behavioral issues in office design. New York, NY: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
80.
WittM. T. (2005). America’s palimpsest: Ground-zero democracy and the capital mall. Public Administration Review, 65, 517-533.
81.
YanowD. (1998). Space stories: Studying museum buildings as organizational spaces while reflecting on interpretive methods and their narration. Journal of Management Inquiry, 7, 215-239.
82.
ZalesnyM. D.FaraceR. V. (1987). Traditional versus open offices: A comparison of sociotechnical, social relations, and symbolic meaning perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 30, 240-259.
