This paper explores the impact of the physical and social dimensions of the work environment on satisfaction and perceived productivity of knowledge workers in Dutch universities of applied sciences. The approach took the form of a literature review, multiple case study of six research centres using interviews and logbook analysis, and web-based survey (N = 188). Optimally facilitating knowledge production requires both space for concentration (to support internalisation of knowledge) and space for interaction (to support externalisation of knowledge). None of the work environments involved in the study adequately supported all the phases of knowledge development adequately. Cellular offices with personal desks are preferred for solo work and, whereas new workplace designs with a focus on the office as a meeting place support interaction and collaboration. Spatial layout and interaction have a stronger impact than comfort and absence of distraction. The spatial layout should support both in-depth concentration and communication, fit the internalisation/externalisation ratio of activities, and accommodate the proximity essential for collaborative knowledge development. Being able to choose is the key to success. In terms of research limitations, knowledge workers’ productivity was measured by self-assessment, but only a limited number of diaries were collected. The lessons learned can be used as inputs to decision-making processes regarding the design, implementation and management of working environments in higher education settings. Few studies have been conducted concerning the spatial preferences and needs of knowledge workers in universities of applied sciences. The results show that the physical dimension (comfort and layout) is more important for collective productivity, whereas individual productivity is more strongly influenced by the social dimension (interaction and distraction).
MULTIFILE
This paper explores the impact of the physical and social dimensions of the work environment on satisfaction and perceived productivity of knowledge workers in Dutch universities of applied sciences. The approach took the form of a literature review, multiple case study of six research centres using interviews and logbook analysis, and web-based survey (N = 188). Optimally facilitating knowledge production requires both space for concentration (to support internalisation of knowledge) and space for interaction (to support externalisation of knowledge). None of the work environments involved in the study adequately supported all the phases of knowledge development adequately. Cellular offices with personal desks are preferred for solo work and, whereas new workplace designs with a focus on the office as a meeting place support interaction and collaboration. Spatial layout and interaction have a stronger impact than comfort and absence of distraction. The spatial layout should support both in-depth concentration and communication, fit the internalisation/externalization ratio of activities, and accommodate the proximity essential for collaborative knowledge development. Being able to choose is the key to success. In terms of research limitations, knowledge workers’ productivity was measured by self-assessment, but only a limited number of diaries were collected. The lessons learned can be used as inputs to decision-making processes regarding the design, implementation and management of workingenvironments in higher education settings. Few studies have been conducted concerning the spatial preferences and needs of knowledge workers in universities of applied sciences. The results show that the physical dimension (comfort and layout) is more important for collective productivity, whereas individual productivity is more strongly influenced by the social dimension (interaction and distraction).
MULTIFILE
Now, that the European cities are overcoming the recent economic challenges, they accelerate the development of major housingschemes to accommodate their growing urban population. Amsterdam for instance, sets out to construct 50,000 new homes by 2025. Parallel to this, the City Council presented a new regeneration and urban optimisationprogram in 2017, to reinforce existingneighbourhoods with relatively weak socio-economic status. If these housing policies are to maximise on opportunities, they need to anticipate the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the Paris Climate Agreement, and local socio-environmental challenges, into a single cohesive, sustainable solution. Currently, literature indicates that large scale spatial developments, have a tendency to move away from social and ecological ambitions during the course of the planning process. Moreover, ambitions tend to be short term “fixes” where they could be striving for long-term systemic solutions. What is needed, are practice proven comprehensive development strategies tosecure pathways for inclusive and integrated development. Those strategies are spatial and programmatic governance arrangements. Employing a comparative analysis method, we follow and compare the redevelopment of three deprived boroughs across Amsterdam. In collaboration with communities, we are able to construct a “Design Thinking” approach for urban spatial development, using different types of arrangements. This is in reflection and collaboration with the municipality of Amsterdam and a wide variety of skilled experts. The arrangements are tested in practice, following a plan-do-check-act cycle. The research project takes an in-depth look at the Amsterdam case and presents the first set of arrangements for planning more cohesive, urban spatial development and the preliminary strategies we see emerging.
The objective of DIGIREAL-XL is to build a Research, Development & Innovation (RD&I) Center (SPRONG GROUP, level 4) on Digital Realities (DR) for Societal-Economic Impact. DR are intelligent, interactive, and immersive digital environments that seamlessly integrate Data, Artificial Intelligence/Machine Learning, Modelling-Simulation, and Visualization by using Game and Media Technologies (Game platforms/VR/AR/MR). Examples of these DR disruptive innovations can be seen in many domains, such as in the entertainment and service industries (Digital Humans); in the entertainment, leisure, learning, and culture domain (Virtual Museums and Music festivals) and within the decision making and spatial planning domain (Digital Twins). There are many well-recognized innovations in each of the enabling technologies (Data, AI,V/AR). However, DIGIREAL-XL goes beyond these disconnected state-of-the-art developments and technologies in its focus on DR as an integrated socio-technical concept. This requires pre-commercial, interdisciplinary RD&I, in cross-sectoral and inter-organizational networks. There is a need for integrating theories, methodologies, smart tools, and cross-disciplinary field labs for the effective and efficient design and production of DR. In doing so, DIGIREAL-XL addresses the challenges formulated under the KIA-Enabling Technologies / Key Methodologies for sectoral and societal transformation. BUas (lead partner) and FONTYS built a SPRONG group level 4 based on four pillars: RD&I-Program, Field Labs, Lab-Infrastructure, and Organizational Excellence Program. This provides a solid foundation to initiate and execute challenging, externally funded RD&I projects with partners in SPRONG stage one ('21-'25) and beyond (until' 29). DIGIREAL-XL is organized in a coherent set of Work Packages with clear objectives, tasks, deliverables, and milestones. The SPRONG group is well-positioned within the emerging MINDLABS Interactive Technologies eco-system and strengthens the regional (North-Brabant) digitalization agenda. Field labs on DR work with support and co-funding by many network organizations such as Digishape and Chronosphere and public, private, and societal organizations.
The objective of DIGIREAL-XL is to build a Research, Development & Innovation (RD&I) Center (SPRONG GROUP, level 4) onDigital Realities (DR) for Societal-Economic Impact. DR are intelligent, interactive, and immersive digital environments thatseamlessly integrate Data, Artificial Intelligence/Machine Learning, Modelling-Simulation, and Visualization by using Gameand Media Technologies (Game platforms/VR/AR/MR). Examples of these DR disruptive innovations can be seen in manydomains, such as in the entertainment and service industries (Digital Humans); in the entertainment, leisure, learning, andculture domain (Virtual Museums and Music festivals) and within the decision making and spatial planning domain (DigitalTwins). There are many well-recognized innovations in each of the enabling technologies (Data, AI,V/AR). However, DIGIREAL-XL goes beyond these disconnected state-of-the-art developments and technologies in its focus on DR as an integrated socio-technical concept. This requires pre-commercial, interdisciplinary RD&I, in cross-sectoral andinter-organizational networks. There is a need for integrating theories, methodologies, smart tools, and cross-disciplinaryfield labs for the effective and efficient design and production of DR. In doing so, DIGIREAL-XL addresses the challengesformulated under the KIA-Enabling Technologies / Key Methodologies for sectoral and societal transformation. BUas (lead partner) and FONTYS built a SPRONG group level 4 based on four pillars: RD&I-Program, Field Labs, Lab-Infrastructure, and Organizational Excellence Program. This provides a solid foundation to initiate and execute challenging, externally funded RD&I projects with partners in SPRONG stage one ('21-'25) and beyond (until' 29). DIGIREAL-XL is organized in a coherent set of Work Packages with clear objectives, tasks, deliverables, and milestones. The SPRONG group is well-positioned within the emerging MINDLABS Interactive Technologies eco-system and strengthens the regional (North-Brabant) digitalization agenda. Field labs on DR work with support and co-funding by many network organizations such as Digishape and Chronosphere and public, private, and societal organizations
