Anne-Laure Fayard

John Weeks

<article-ideainbrief class="article-ideainbrief">
 <h4 class="ideainbrief-title">The Idea in Brief</h4>
 <div class="ideainbrief-contents">
  <p>Casual interactions among employees promote trust, cooperation, and innovation, and companies have devised open floor plans and common areas to encourage them. But such efforts can easily backfire. Spaces, whether physical or virtual, invite interaction only if they properly balance three factors, or “affordances.”</p>
  <h2>Proximity</h2>
  <p>Designs must drive traffic to shared spaces and give people reasons to remain. Centrally located areas containing shared resources such as photocopiers and coffee machines do this well. For virtual workers, continuously open video links and instant messaging provide a sense of proximity.</p>
  <h2>Privacy</h2>
  <p>People must feel confident that they can converse without being interrupted or overheard. They must also be able to avoid interacting when they want to. Alcoves lend privacy to public spaces. Clear policies about who has access to which communications help protect privacy online.</p>
  <h2>Permission</h2>
  <p>Company leadership and culture, as well as the space itself, must convey that casual conversation is encouraged. Comfortable furniture and obviously work-related machines such as photocopiers help send that signal. In addition, leaders should model desired behaviors in both physical and virtual spaces.</p>
 </div>
</article-ideainbrief><p>Managers once discouraged, even forbade, casual interactions among employees. To many bosses, chitchat at the watercooler was just a noisy distraction from work. Today we know that chance encounters and conversations on the job promote cooperation and innovation, and companies craft their floor plans and cultures with this in mind. The results have been surprising—and often disappointing.</p>

zRpmP7RZ+s+L8vyqYX0pzrXfETEoMaor5TDowQ7hx2bj8mTjWdEsJWfJHS57WhnCeaqqvXDJZk9Tc4JseA0DTrVy/VAFa4ogbGFyY5RLNIRoZfJgJCIDjR/j24qyu/6O

<p><span class="reprint">Reprint: R1107H</span></p>
<p>Managers once discouraged casual interaction among employees, viewing it as a distraction from &#8220;real work.&#8221; Today we know that chance encounters on the job promote cooperation and innovation, and companies craft their floor plans and cultures with this in mind. So why do their careful, well-intentioned efforts often go awry?</p>
<p>Common sense, it turns out, is a poor guide when it comes to designing for interaction. Work spaces inspire informal encounters only if they properly balance three factors that have both physical and social aspects: </p>
<p><strong>Proximity.</strong> Spaces should naturally bring people together. </p>
<p><strong>Privacy.</strong> People must be able to control access to their conversations and themselves. </p>
<p><strong>Permission.</strong> The social purpose of the space needs to be evident, and the organizational culture should signal that nonwork interactions are not just sanctioned but encouraged.</p>
<p>Creating the right conditions is challenging enough in the physical world; doing it in a virtual environment is even harder. But asking employees to set Skype, IM, and other applications to indicate their availability can replicate a sense of proximity online. Setting clear policies governing access to electronic communications helps convey reassurance that privacy is protected. And leaving video links and virtual offices open promotes the feeling that geographically disparate groups are welcome to engage with one another casually, just as they might in a real-world common space.</p>
<p>There&#8217;s no simple formula for balancing proximity, privacy, and permission in either the physical or virtual spheres. Managers who grasp the fundamentals and design spaces with balance in mind, however, will be better equipped to understand and predict the effects of different spaces on interactions, and to learn from their successes and inevitable mistakes.</p>

Who Moved My Cube?

Reprint: R1107H Managers once discouraged casual interaction among employees, viewing it as a distraction from “real work.” Today we know that chance encounters on the job promote cooperation and innovation, and companies craft their floor plans and cultures with this in mind. So why do their careful, well-intentioned efforts often go awry? Common sense, it turns out, is a poor guide when it comes to designing for interaction. Work spaces inspire informal encounters only if they properly balance three factors that have both physical and social aspects: Proximity. Spaces should naturally bring people together. Privacy. People must be able to control access to their conversations and themselves. Permission. The social purpose of the space needs to be evident, and the organizational culture should signal that nonwork interactions are not just sanctioned but encouraged. Creating the right conditions is challenging enough in the physical world; doing it in a virtual environment is even harder. But asking employees to set Skype, IM, and other applications to indicate their availability can replicate a sense of proximity online. Setting clear policies governing access to electronic communications helps convey reassurance that privacy is protected. And leaving video links and virtual offices open promotes the feeling that geographically disparate groups are welcome to engage with one another casually, just as they might in a real-world common space. There’s no simple formula for balancing proximity, privacy, and permission in either the physical or virtual spheres. Managers who grasp the fundamentals and design spaces with balance in mind, however, will be better equipped to understand and predict the effects of different spaces on interactions, and to learn from their successes and inevitable mistakes.

Who Moved My Cube?

Resumo.

Partner Center