teams and ties. workflow, organisational cultures and the role of workplace design

Teams and Ties April 2016

Teams and Ties

Workflow, Organisational Cultures and the Role of

Workplace Design

Dr Kerstin Sailer

Space Syntax Laboratory, Bartlett School of Architecture, University College London, UK

Director of Research and Innovation, Spacelab, UK

XXXVI Sunbelt Conference of the International Network for Social Network Analysis, Newport Beach, 5-10 April 2016

@kerstinsailer


Workflow, Organisational Cultures and the Role of

Workplace Design


The Role of Workplace Design

FACE TO FACE

INTERACTION

NETWORKS

construct affects

Layout of office building as affordance to face-to-face interaction networks


The Role of Workplace Design

Propinquity effect:

Co-workers with desks located closer to each other have a higher probability of

frequent face-to-face communication (Allen and Fustfeld 1976)

Including walking distance between desks improved models of interaction network

structures while controlling for network structural effects, team affiliation and perceived

usefulness between actors (Sailer and McCulloh 2012)

Floors as barriers:

Being located on different floors of an office building forms a significant barrier to

frequent face-to-face communication (Allen and Fustfeld 1976) → E-I index analysis shows

interaction internal to a floor can be as high as 91% of all interaction ties (Sailer 2010)


Introduction

Advertising Agency, Frankfurt

Very frequent face-to-face encounter

(several times a week)

Colour of nodes: Departments

Shape of nodes: Floor

What drives face-to-face

interaction within and across

departments in organisations?

What is the role of workplace

layout?


Types of Ties

Advertising Agency, Frankfurt

Very frequent face-to-face encounter

(several times a week)

Colour of nodes: Departments

Shape of nodes: Floor

Same dep,

same floor

Diff dep,

diff floor


Types of Ties

Tie: frequent face-to-face interaction → capacity for interaction limited due to cost;

Four types of ties between individuals (aggregated count by department):

SDSF – same department, same floor

organisational and spatial closeness, i.e.

localised patterns of interaction

DDSF – different department, same floor

spatial closeness, i.e. proximity /

watercooler effect

SDDF – same department, different floor

organisational closeness (distributed

department, matrix organisation)

DDDF – different department, different floor

no closeness, i.e. global interaction

Incr

easi

ng in

tera

ctio

n co

st


Types of Ties – Comparative Data Set

23 different organisations, 10414 staff members in total, organised in 578 departments

(mean size = 18.0) and distributed across 131 different floors (mean size = 945 sqm)

72% same dep ↔ 28% different dep

86% same floor ↔ 14% different floor


Methodology

SNA:

Online survey of each organisation; survey

distributed to all staff members; return quote: 49%

(lowest) to 90% (highest);

Asked each participant to name top 25 contacts and

indicate frequency of face-to-face encounter;

Analysis of network of strong ties (daily encounter);

Network attributes: departmental affiliation & floor

where desk is (information provided by org);

calculating proportions of ties in each category

(same/same, same/diff, diff/same, diff/diff)

Spatial Analysis:

Anaysis of spatial configuration using VGA on eye

level (visibility) [connectivity, average mean depth];


Results – Exploring the Impact of Cultures

Analysis of variance for % DDDF and industry (R2=0.11**, p<0.0001); for % SDSF and

department task (R2=0.32**, p<0.0001) and for % DDDF and organisation (R2=0.22**,

p<0.0001)

→ Importance of industry cultures, professional

cultures and organisational cultures

Industry

Dep Task

Org


Results – Exploring the Impact of Spatial Structure

Correlation between % DDDF (diff dep, diff floor) and average size of floor plate (R2=0.24*,

p<0.0239)

→ In buildings with smaller sized floor plates, people tend to interact more with those

outside of their own department and own floor


Results – Exploring the Impact of Spatial Structure

Correlation between % DDDF and average connectivity of

spaces (R2=0.28*, p<0.0227)

Law

firm

–lo

cal v

isib

ility

in o

ffice

(de

gree

cen

tral

ity)

→ In buildings with smaller sized spaces on average,

people tend to interact more with those outside of their

own department and own floor Integrated Segregated


Results – Summary

Ties spanning the boundaries of organisation (departmental affiliation) and space (floor

assignment), tend to occur more frequently for:

• Certain industries (architecture, creative agencies, finance, public sector)

• Certain roles (admin, facilities, senior management)

• Certain organisations due to their organisational and spatial cultures

• Organisations with smaller floor plates

• Organisations with more partitions and smaller spaces on average

→ Importance of % DDDF:

Bringing the whole organisationtogether

cohesion


Results – Summary

Two mechanisms for social cohesion between people (Hillier and Hanson 1984):

1. Sharing same local world and coming together in physical space (spatial solidarity);

2. Shared interests or goals, which may overcome / transverse boundaries of physical

space (transpatial solidarity → ‘homophily’);

Spatial Solidarity: ‘WHERE WE ARE’ Transpatial Solidarities: ‘WHO WE ARE’

The Guildhall, City of London


Results – Summary

Do spatial and transpatial solidarities correspond? (Hillier and Hanson 1984)

Non-

Correspondence

Model

Correspondence

Model

Spatial and transpatial solidarities

do not correspond

Openness, equality, inclusivity and

global strength


correspond

Locally strong, exclusive and

hierarchical with pronounced boundaries

→ Strength of weak ties(Granovetter 1973)


Results – Summary

Non-

Correspondence

Model


do not correspond

Openness, equality, inclusivity and

global strength

Counterintuitively, less open and smaller floor plates create higher

affordances for organisational cohesion and overall social strength

(Granovetter 1973)

→ Strength of weak ties


Conclusions and Further Research

Aim to unravel the subtle impact of the spatial layout of an office for organisational

behaviours and network structures (beyond the level of the individual)

Problem of signal and noise in large comparative data sets

Further research

Multiple regression models and deeper statistical analysis including other intervening

variables, e.g. location, size and type of shared facilities (such as canteen or on-site café)

Further focus on embeddedness of ties rather than departments as unit of analysis

Exploring organisational and spatial cultures more deeply, i.e. the way an

organisation performs collectively through norms and rituals shared by its members


Dr Kerstin Sailer

Lecturer in Complex Buildings

Bartlett School of Architecture

University College London

140 Hampstead Road

London NW1 2BX

United Kingdom

Thank you!

[email protected]

@kerstinsailer

http://spaceandorganisation.org/

teams and ties. workflow, organisational cultures and the role of workplace design

Data & Analytics