View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.

uk brought to you by CORE

provided by Elsevier - Publisher Connector

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

Procedia
Engineering
ProcediaProcedia
Engineering 00 (2011)
Engineering 000–000
20 (2011) 262 – 268
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

The 2nd International Building Control Conference 2011

An Overview of the Influence of Physical Office

Environments towards Employees
N. Kamarulzaman, A. A. Saleh, S. Z. Hashim, H. Hashim, A. A. Abdul-Ghani*

Faculty of Architecture, Planning and Surveying,

Universiti Teknologi MARA Perak

Abstract

Office employees spend a lot of their time inside a building, where the physical environments influence their well-
being and directly influence their work performance and productivity. In the workplace, it is often assumed that
employees who are more satisfied with the physical environment are more likely to produce better work outcomes.
Temperature, air quality, lighting and noise conditions in the office affect the work concentration and productivity.
Numerous studies have consistently demonstrated that characteristics of the physical office environment can have a
significant effect on behaviour, perceptions and productivity of employees. Most of the previous researchers in their
studies are more focused on a single factor that could give an effect on employee‘s performance at work. However,
no study was done to examine the relationships between the whole factors of physical office environment and
employees‘ performance. Therefore this paper presents a literature review of several environmental factors which
directly or indirectly affect employees work performance. Several factors of environments such as the effects of
workplace design, indoor temperature, colour, noise and also interior plants towards employees well-being and
performance have been discussed.

© 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license.

Selection and/or peer-review under responsibility of Universiti Teknologi MARA Perak and
Institution of Surveyors Malaysia (ISM)

Keywords : satisfaction; office environments

1. Introduction

Office employees spend most of their time inside the buildings in which they work in, therefore the
physical environment of an office or workplace is important to develop a good and healthy working

______________

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +605-3742014; fax: +605-7342244.

E-mail address: aidaa017@perak.uitm.edu.my

1877-7058 © 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license.
doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2011.11.164
 N. Kamarulzaman
N. Kamarulzaman, A. A. Saleh, S. Z. Hashim,etH.
al.Hashim,
/ Procedia
A. Engineering 20 (2011)
A. Abdul-Ghani/ 262Engineering
Procedia – 268 00 (2011) 000–000 263

environment. According to Denyer (1969), an office is a place where the clerical operations are
conducted [1]. While S.P Arora (1980), states that ‗office can be described as any place where
information on paper and information is documented converges, preserved and used for current
operations of the businesses [2]. Besides, Audrey Kaplan & Stan Aronoff (1996), stated that "there is a
common understanding of an office building as a workplace is held that the information and knowledge
processing activities of an organization, including filing, planning, designing, supervising, analyzing,
deciding and communicating. Office buildings developed from the need to plan, co-ordinate and
administer these activities"[3]
Research has consistently demonstrated that characteristics of the office environment can have a
significant effect on behaviour, perceptions, and productivity of workers [4]. Dole and Schroeder (2001),
stated that in the workplace, it is often assumed that employees who are more satisfied with the physical
environment are more likely to produce better work outcomes [5]. User satisfaction is recognized as an
important factor in the success of an organization and is regarded as a key indicator of performance. This
is based on the rationale that higher levels of satisfaction improve morale and reduce voluntary turnover.
Other researchers found that employees‘ satisfaction with their work environment is directly related to
their job satisfaction and indirectly related to organizational commitment and turnover intention.
In general, studies of the ambient features in office environments—including noise, lighting,
temperature, existence of windows and others; suggest that such elements of the physical environment
influence employees‘ attitudes, behaviours, satisfaction and performance [6]. In his 1995 paper, Andrian
Laeman stated that "people who are unhappy with temperature, water quality, lighting and noise
conditions in their offices are more likely to say that this affects their concentration at work" [7].
Although some researchers have found significant effects of physical environment features on job
satisfaction, behaviour, performance and indirectly affect work concentration and productivity, other
studies have failed to confirm a direct relationship between these variables. Therefore, this paper presents
the literature reviews on a study of the influence of physical office environments towards employees. Six
factors of environments such as the effects of workplace design, indoor temperature, lighting and
ventilation, colour, noise and also interior plants towards employees‘ well-being and performance are
discussed.

1.1 Effect of physical workplace design.

A fundamental aspect of the workplace environment that contributes to such employee behaviour is
the layout of office space. Conventional workplace designs tend to provide closed private offices for
employees. In contrast, the more contemporary open-plan design is characterized by an absence of floor
to ceiling walls and internal boundaries, as illustrated by cubicles or partitioned workspaces [8]. Due to
lower costs and convenience, the concept of open-plan office use continues to increase. As mentioned by
Smith-Jackson, & Klein (2008), open-plan designs refer to offices with individual workstations placed
within an open space; sometimes divided by panels, but also include conventional shared offices with
several workers in an office space [9]. When introduced, open office plans were presumed to provide an
environment that would increase work efficiency and facilitate communication, while reducing
construction and equipment costs.
Meanwhile, according to Brennan, Chugh, & Kline (2002) and Zeitlin, (1969), proponents of the
open-plan office suggest that the open plan creates flexible space, allowing for a reduction in set-up and
renovation times [10,11]. It also enables the accommodation of greater numbers of employees in reduced
amounts of space. As a result the total office space required is reduced and organizations save on air
conditioning, maintenance and building costs. Supporters of the open-plan design also claim that the
design facilitates communication and increases interaction between employees, and as a result improves
employees‘ satisfaction, morale and productivity [12]. Indeed, some evidence exists to support these
positive effects. Open-plan offices have led to increased communication among co-workers, higher
aesthetic judgments, and more group sociability than more conventional designs [13,14,15].
264 N. Kamarulzaman, A. A. Saleh,N.S.Kamarulzaman
Z. Hashim, H. et al. / Procedia
Hashim, Engineering Procedia
A. A. Abdul-Ghani/ 20 (2011)Engineering
262 – 268 00 (2011) 000–000

Although physical cost has proven to be lower than the more complex designs requiring separate
offices, the predictions of increased efficiency and better communication have yet to be fulfilled. The
lack of positive outcomes for workers and productivity may very well negate the savings introduced by a
less expensive physical design. Noise is one factor that may undermine the expected efficiency and
productivity gains [9]. Moreover, researchers have also reported problems with open offices from the
perspective of occupants such as noise, lack of privacy and other distractions [16,17]. According to Hall
(1966), individuals have their own personal space which, when violated, lead them to feel crowded and
uncomfortable [18]. Thus, when infringements on personal space intrinsic to the open-plan design exceed
employees‘ comfort levels, feelings of crowdedness and loss of privacy are likely to emerge. These
feelings of crowdedness and loss of privacy then result in the dissatisfaction and negative reactions
displayed by employees working in open-plan workspaces [19]. Chan in his 1999 paper, stated that two
common factors affecting privacy are limited personal space and excessive unwanted interaction [20].
Several studies have found evidence that open-plan offices are related to decreased job satisfaction,
reduced motivation, and lower perceived privacy [21]. Other studies examining subjective reports of
employees in open-plan offices have identified irrelevant speech as a factor linked to negative
perceptions of the workplace, lower productivity, and stress (Becker, Bield, Gaylin, & Sayer, 1983;
Kupritz, 1998; Nemecek & Grandjean, 1973; Rivlin & Weinstein, 1984; Sundstrom, Town, Rice,
Osborn, & Brill, 1994) [22, 23,24,25,17]. Workers in open-plan offices have reported that conditions are
stressful and further examinations of these environments have found some support for a relationship
between open-plan designs and fatigue, irritation, generalized distress, and health complaints, i.e.
headaches and respiratory infections [26].
Open plan design and space of the workplace are not the only factor that contributes to employees‘
work disruption. Myriam B.C. Aries et.all (2010) states that the physical arrangement of the office
environment influences the level and type of social interaction between employees [27]. According to
Vischer & Jacqueline (1989), the good of physical office arrangement is important to [28]:
Helps workers perform their tasks more quickly, easily and efficiently.
The planned layout also allows more space to maximum use and economy.
Supervision and monitoring of workers becomes easier.
Communication system becomes easier and faster.
It provides comfort as well affect the behavior and employees‘ works.
While Nur Adibah Matharuddin (2003), suggests five aspects to be considered in physical office
arrangement:
The smoothness of work among officers and employees.
Work efficiency among officers and workers as well as conditioning of the work area workers who
have the same characteristics must be considered.
Equipment and forms - should be placed and arranged systematically.
References files - must be made available easily.
Light like source of electricity, artificial light etc - must be sufficient.
Air circulation – has to be adequate.

1.2 Effect of indoor temperatures on performance

Numerous studies have shown that indoor climate impacts both health and performance, which in turn
affect productivity. Discomfort factors can decrease employees‘ focus on their works. However,
employees can focus more when high temperature is reduced by the use of air conditioning equipment.
Several studies conducted by Lorsch and Abdou (1994), "shows that when the air-conditioning system
was introduced, employees feel that their work space becomes more comfortable and the productivity
tends to increase by 5-15 percent because they can concentrate on their work [28]. This statement
explains that when an employee feels comfortable with the workplace environment, things that can
distract their work can be reduced and they can perform better.
Hence, from the literature review by other researchers indicate that productivity decreases by 2% per
each degree over 25oC and presented the link between a decrement in productivity and high indoor
 N. Kamarulzaman
N. Kamarulzaman, A. A. Saleh, S. Z. Hashim,etH.
al.Hashim,
/ Procedia
A. Engineering 20 (2011)
A. Abdul-Ghani/ 262Engineering
Procedia – 268 00 (2011) 000–000 265

temperature. Heat can cause lethargy which not only increases the rate of accidents but can also seriously
affect productivity. Therefore as a conclusion it is indirectly explained that the office environment would
influence the actions of an employee. Cramped, disorganized, dirty and dusty work space could also give
pressure to employees and this could affect their work.

1.3 Influence of colour in office environment

Colour is a visual phenomenon triggered by the response to the stimulation of light. It pervades every
aspect of our lives, embellishes the ordinary and gives beauty and drama to everyday objects [30].
Colours in the office workplaces are very important to ensure efficiency in the working environment.
Each colour has different effects on the human body. Everyone experiences colour in their own personal
way. People‘s are reactions to different colour schemes depend on their culture, education, genetics and
socio-economic level. As a result, behavior and productivity in the workplace are heavily influenced by
space, structure, colour, lighting and activity.
Garris and Monroe (2005) state that colour influences not only mood but also wellness and
productivity [31]. As mentioned by Syahrul Nizam & Emma Marinie (2010), colours also affect
psychological aspects of the building‘s occupants. Some colours provide calmness, some provide
comfort, some are stimulating and many others have an impact in different ways [32]. This means that
colour will affect the mood of the occupant of the space. So, appropriate colour should be chosen to
ensure the mood of the employees is good in order to encourage productivity. Productivity is rarely
correlated with colour. However, the colour scheme does play an important role in the working
environment.
According to Farshchi and Fisher (1997), the character of space affects human emotions and
behaviour. In space configuration or arrangement, colour also plays an important role in influencing
either large or small areas [33]. For instance, a long, narrow room can be made to seem more normal if
the end walls are painted in warm, deep and intense colours, while the side walls are painted in lighter,
less saturated colours. A low ceiling will seem less oppressive if its colour is light while a high ceiling
can be made to seem lower by a dark blue, grey or black [34]. Comparison of the same size of two
room‘s results that room with the darker colour scheme will appear to be smaller than the other room
with a lighter colour scheme.
Jobs that require great concentration require a neutral colour scheme, jobs like those of accountants
and attorneys require a stronger a colour scheme, while journalists would perform best in exciting and
energetic colours with great contrast value. Meanwhile, O‘Brien (2007), suggest that a blue office is ideal
for someone who must focus and concentrate on numbers, green is a great choice for a management
office as it has a balancing effect, and yellow is suitable for sales offices [35]. Therefore, the colour
scheme chosen for a workplace or an office must be made with proper consideration to produce better
quality of work. If unsuitable colours were chosen, employees might be subject to negative psychological
impacts such as stress, depression, dullness or boredom.
As a conclusion, it is clear that colour assists in creating attention. This is crucial for workers
especially in work performance. Without concentration and attention, the work done will be low in
quality and productivity. Therefore, consideration of colour to improve productivity should be made with
proper guidance.

1.4 Noise as a psychosocial stress

Sound or noise problem in an office is something that could not be avoided. Studies have shown that
when sound is turned off, errors in work are reduced and productivity increases. Sundstrom, Town, Rice,
Osborn, and Brill (1994) identified noise as an ambient stressor relating to job satisfaction in the work
environment [17]. According to Loewen and Suedfeld in their 1992 paper, mentioned that noise not only
containing speech, but sound produced by phone, copier, and keyboard. The disruption in performance
cannot be attributed to the presence of speech alone [36].
Smith (1989) reviewed the effects of noise on performance. Despite an extensive review, Smith
concluded that noise effects are still unclear, and that beyond intensity issues, researchers need to analyze
the questions of what type of noise at what intensity affects which type of task performance [37]. Other
266 N. Kamarulzaman, A. A. Saleh,N.S.Kamarulzaman
Z. Hashim, H. et al. / Procedia
Hashim, Engineering Procedia
A. A. Abdul-Ghani/ 20 (2011)Engineering
262 – 268 00 (2011) 000–000

studies have found that open office noise can be stressful and demotivating [38]. As jobs become more
technologically complex, the frequency of stress-related disorders in work environments increases [39].
Office workers, in particular, consistently report ‗‗the ability to concentrate without noise and other
distractions‘‘ to be one of the most important aspects of the work environment [40].
According to Denyer J.C (1969) there are several steps that can be implemented by management to
reduce noise levels in an office such as [1]:
Install a sound absorbent material on the ceiling, walls and floors of the office. Sound absorbent
screens' can also be installed for office space that uses landscape concept. In addition, the use of thick
curtains on the windows can also reduce unwanted noise.
Install 'felt pads' on typewriters and other machines that produce sound to reduce noise.
Changing the ringing phone to the 'buzzers' system, 'light indicators' or 'bleeps' to reduce noise.
If necessary, a small room in an office can be provided for the purpose of discussion or an
appointment of personnel to avoid interference from outside.
Noise impacts can be reduced by installing a floor covering such as carpet and so on.
The facility manager or management must ensure that employees who interact with a tone so as not to
disturb the focus of the work of others. Although this is somewhat trivial, but it is practical to reduce
noise in the office.

1.5 Influence of interior plants on employees

Interior plants are common in many homes, work places, and commercial settings. According to
Sundstrom, E. (1986), in the 1960s, the open-plan 'office landscape,' characterized by the abundant use of
large potted plants to separate work spaces, was popular [17]. Sethi, A.S et. all, (1987) agreed that
although the office environment has changed over time, interior plants continue to be used in work spaces
[41]. Relf. D. (1990) reports that interaction with plants, both passive and active can change human
attitudes, behaviors, and physiological responses [42]. The stress-reducing benefits of passively viewing
plants in natural settings are well documented [43]. Therefore as mentioned by Relf D (1990), the need for a
thorough understanding of the relationship between plants and human well-being is increasingly
important [42].
A few studies done by researchers indicates that office workers are reported to be less tired when they
have access to plants or window views, and prefer work environments with living plants and window
views . Furthermore, he also reported that natural environments can have a restorative effect on attention.

Conclusion

From the literature reviews, it is very clear that indoor environments in an office has a great influence
on employees‘ attitudes, behaviours, satisfaction and works performance. As stated by Andrian Laeman
(1995) in his research, "people who are unhappy with temperature, water quality, lighting and noise
conditions in their offices are more likely to say that this affects their concentration at work" [7]. Others
research have also shown that productivity bears a close relationship to the indoor environment quality.
However, how to assess the effect of indoor environment quality on productivity remains to be the major
challenge.
Therefore, it can be concluded that not only temperature, water quality, lighting and noise should be
taken into consideration, but also the indoor air quality, thermal comfort, layout of individual workspaces,
workplace colour schemes, interior plants, dust levels and biological contaminants, indoor carbon dioxide
concentration and many other factors should be considered by the top management of organizations. For
future research is great if researchers could investigate on the relationship between productivity of office
workers and their indoor office environments. The studies perhaps could be compared between
government office environments and private sectors.
Finally, a comfortable working environment is important to enable employees to focus and do their
job perfectly. This will ensure the quality of life at work as well as performance of office workers for
better organizational performance.
 N. Kamarulzaman
N. Kamarulzaman, A. A. Saleh, S. Z. Hashim,etH.
al.Hashim,
/ Procedia
A. Engineering 20 (2011)
A. Abdul-Ghani/ 262Engineering
Procedia – 268 00 (2011) 000–000 267

References

[1] Denyer, J.C. (1969), ― Office Management‖, The English Language Book Society And Mcdonald And Evans Ltd. London
[2] Arora, S.P. (1980), ―Office Organization And Management‖, Vikas Publishing House PVT LTD
[3] Audrey Kaplan, Stan Aronoff, (1996) "Productivity paradox: work settings for knowledge work", Facilities, Vol. 14 Iss: 3/4,
pp.6 - 14
[4] Altman, I., & Lett, E. E. (1969). The ecology of interpersonal relationships: A classification system and conceptual model. In J.
E. McGrathe (Ed.), Social and psychological factors in stress. New York: Holt Rinehart.
[5] Dole, C. and Schroeder, R.G. (2001), ―The impact of various factors on the personality, job satisfaction and turnover intentions
of professional accountants‖, Managerial Auditing Journal, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 234-45.
[6] Crouch, A., & Nimran, U. (1989). Perceived facilitators and inhibitors of work performance in an office environment.
Environment and Behavior, 21, 206–226
[7] Adrian Leaman, (1995) "Dissatisfaction and office productivity", Facilities, Vol. 13 Iss: 2, pp.13 - 19
[8] Zalesny, M., & Farace, R. (1987). Traditional versus open offices: a comparison of socio technical, social relations, and
symbolic meaning perspectives. Academy of Management Journal, 30(2), 240–259.
[9] Tonya L. smith-jackson.,& Katherine W. klein (2008), ―open-plan offices: task performance and mental workload‖. Journal of
environmental Psychology, 29, 279-289.
[10] Brennan, A., Chugh, J., & Kline, T. (2002). Traditional versus open office design: A longitudinal field study. Environment and
Behavior, 34, 279–299.
[11] Zeitlin, L.R. (1969). A comparison of employee attitudes toward the conventional office and the landscaped office. Technical
report, Port of New York Authority.
[12]Bach, F. W. (1965). The whys and wherefores of the open-plan office. Kommunikation, 1, 103–106.
[13]Allen, T. J., & Gerstberger, P. G. (1973). A field experiment to improve communications in a product engineering department:
The nonterritorial office. Human Factors, 15, 488–498
[14] Hundert, A.J., Greenfield, N. (1969). Physical space and organizational behaviour: A study of an office landscape. Proceedings
of the 77th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association (Vol. 1, pp. 601–602).
[15]Brookes, M. J., & Kaplan, A. (1972). The office environment: Space planning and affective behavior. Human factors, 14(5),
373–391.
[16] Evans, G. W., & Johnson, D. (2000). Stress and open-office noise. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 779–783.
[17] Sundstrom, E., Town, J., Rice, R., Osborn, D., & Brill, M. (1994). Office noise, satisfaction, and performance. Environment
and Behavior, 26(2), 195–222.
[18] Hall, E. T. (1966). The hidden dimension. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.
[19]Oldham, G. R., & Rotchford, N. L. (1983). Relationships between office characteristics and employee reactions: A study of the
physical environment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28, 542–556.
[20]Chan, Y.-K. (1999). Density, crowding, and factors intervening in their relationship: Evidence from a hyper-dense metropolis.
Social Indicators Research, 48, 103–124.
[21] Mital, A., McGlothlin, J. D., & Faard, H. F. (1992). Noise in multiple-workstation open-plan computer rooms: measurements
and annoyance. Journal of Human Ergology, 21, 69–82.
[22] Becker, F., Bield, B., Gaylin, K., & Sayer, S. (1983). Office design in a community college: effect on work and
communication patterns. Environment and Behavior, 15(6), 699–726.
[23] Kupritz, V. W. (1998). Privacy in the workplace: the impact of building design. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 18,
341–356.
[24] Nemecek, J., & Grandjean, E. (1973). Results of an ergonomic investigation of large space offices. Human Factors, 15(2),
111–124.
[25] Rivlin, L., & Weinstein, C. (1984). Educational issues, school settings, and environmental psychology. Journal of
Environmental Psychology, 4, 347–364.
[26]Hedge, A. (1982). The open-plan office, a systematic investigation of employee reaction to their work environment.
Environment and Behavior, 14(5), 519–542.
[27] Myriam B.C. Aries., Jennifer A. Veitch., & Guy.R.Newsham (2010), ―windows, view and office characteristics predict
physical and psychological discomfort‖. Journal of Environmental psychology, 30 : 533-541.
[28]Vischer & Jacqueline (1989), ― Environmental quality in offices‖. Van nostrand neinhold. New York
[29]Lorsch, H.G., Ossama, A.A., (1994), ―The impact of the building indoor environment on occupant productivity-part 1: recent
studies, measures, and costs.‖ ASHRAE Trans. 100 (2), 741-749.
268 N. Kamarulzaman, A. A. Saleh,N.S.Kamarulzaman et al. / Procedia
Z. Hashim, H. Hashim, EngineeringProcedia
A. A. Abdul-Ghani/ 20 (2011)Engineering
262 – 268 00 (2011) 000–000

[30]Holtzschue, L. (2002). Understanding Color, 2nd Edition, New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
[31] Garris, L.B. & Monroe, L.K. (2005). The Color Factor. Journal of Buildings, 99 (10), 72 – 73.
[32] Syahrul Nizam Kamaruzzaman & Emma Marinie (2010), ―Influence of employees‘ perception of colour preferences on
productivity in Malaysia office buildings, Journal Of Sustainable Development, 3(3), 283-287.
[33] Farshchi, M. & Fisher, G.N. (1997). The emotional content of the physical space, in Proceeding COBRA 97 Conference,
Portsmouth, 10 – 12 September
[34] Pile, J.F. (1997). Color in Interior Design, New York: Mc Graw Hill.
[35]O‘Brien, S. (2007). Color Theory, [online] Available: http://www.colourtheory.net/articles/colour_psychology.htm, retrieved in
(January 10, 2008)Bette, L. (1996). Color Your World. Journal of Business Mexico, 6 (2), 20 – 22.
[36]Loewen, L., & Suedfeld, P. (1992). Cognitive and arousal effects of masking office noise. Environment and Behavior, 24(3),
381–395.
[37]Smith, A. (1989). A review of the effects of noise on human performance. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 30, 185–206.
[38]Evans, G. W., & Johnson, D. (2000). Stress and open-office noise. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 779–783.
[39]Conklin, E. 1978). Interiorlandscaping. 1. Arboriculture 4: 73-79
[40] Louis Harris & Associates, Inc. (1980). The steelcase national study of office.
[41]Sethi, A.S., D.H.J. Caro. and R.S. Schuler. 1987. Conclusion: Towards technological renaissance. p. 383-386In: Strategic
management of teehnostress in an information society. C.J. Hogrefe. Inc., Lewiston, NY.
[42]Relf. D. 1990. Psychological and sociological response to plants: Implications for horticulture. HortScience 25: 11-13.
[43] Honeyman. M.K. 1992. Vegetation and stress: A comparison study of varying amounts of vegetation in countryside and urban
scenes. p. 143-145 In: D. Relf (Ed.). The Role of Horticulture in Human Well-Being and Social Development: A National
Symposium. Timber Press, Portland, OR.