IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/manrev/v74y2024i2d10.1007_s11301-022-00316-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The productivity tax of new office concepts: a comparative review of open-plan offices, activity-based working, and single-office concepts

Author

Listed:
  • Andrea Gerlitz

    (Universität Witten/Herdecke)

  • Marcel Hülsbeck

    (Universität Witten/Herdecke)

Abstract

This systematic review critically analyzes the relationship between office concepts and individual and organizational performance. Based on the current literature, we identify seven key dimensions to guide our understanding: office concept, work, personality fit, satisfaction, health, control paradigm, and enabling paradigm. Our systematic search yielded 429 published papers on office concepts and performance between 2005 and 2022. Rigorous selection criteria narrowed them down to 46 empirical articles included in this analysis. The results show that activity-based working not only negatively impacts performance but also affects employee satisfaction and health. Open-plan offices can reduce real-estate costs but lead to lower performance levels, thereby imposing a tax on productivity which outweighs the initial cost savings. Activity-based working has the potential to enhance collaboration and interaction but is dependent on a professional and proactive management. In most cases, especially for knowledge workers, the single office turns out to be the environment in which employees show the best individual and organizational performance.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrea Gerlitz & Marcel Hülsbeck, 2024. "The productivity tax of new office concepts: a comparative review of open-plan offices, activity-based working, and single-office concepts," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 74(2), pages 745-775, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:manrev:v:74:y:2024:i:2:d:10.1007_s11301-022-00316-2
    DOI: 10.1007/s11301-022-00316-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11301-022-00316-2
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11301-022-00316-2?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lee D. Parker, 2016. "From scientific to activity based office management: a mirage of change," Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 12(2), pages 177-202, June.
    2. Oseland, Nigel & Hodsman, Paige, 2020. "The response to noise distraction by different personality types : An extended psychoacoustics study," Corporate Real Estate Journal, Henry Stewart Publications, vol. 9(3), pages 215-233, March.
    3. Ricarda Bouncken & Johanna Gast & Sascha Kraus & Marcel Bogers, 2015. "Coopetition: a systematic review, synthesis, and future research directions," Post-Print hal-02018068, HAL.
    4. Ricarda Bouncken & Alexander Brem & Sascha Kraus, 2016. "Multi-Cultural Teams As Sources For Creativity And Innovation: The Role Of Cultural Diversity On Team Performance," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(01), pages 1-34, January.
    5. Ricarda Bouncken & Johanna Gast & Sascha Kraus & Marcel Bogers, 2015. "Coopetition: a systematic review, synthesis, and future research directions," Post-Print hal-02945341, HAL.
    6. Yadong Luo & Ying Huang & Stephanie Lu Wang, 2012. "Guanxi and Organizational Performance: A Meta-Analysis," Management and Organization Review, The International Association for Chinese Management Research, vol. 8(1), pages 139-172, March.
    7. Sander, Elizabeth (Libby) J. & Marques, Cecelia & Birt, James & Stead, Matthew & Baumann, Oliver, 2021. "Open-plan office noise is stressful: multimodal stress detection in a simulated work environment," Journal of Management & Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 27(6), pages 1021-1037, November.
    8. Christian Fisch & Joern Block, 2018. "Six tips for your (systematic) literature review in business and management research," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 68(2), pages 103-106, April.
    9. Chandler, Gaylen N. & Hanks, Steven H., 1993. "Measuring the performance of emerging businesses: A validation study," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 8(5), pages 391-408, September.
    10. Sascha Kraus & Matthias Breier & Sonia Dasí-Rodríguez, 2020. "The art of crafting a systematic literature review in entrepreneurship research," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 1023-1042, September.
    11. Luo, Yadong & Huang, Ying & Wang, Stephanie Lu, 2012. "Guanxi and Organizational Performance: A Meta-Analysis," Management and Organization Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(1), pages 139-172, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Xie, Qiuhao & Gao, Ying & Xia, Nini & Zhang, Shuibo & Tao, Guowu, 2023. "Coopetition and organizational performance outcomes: A meta-analysis of the main and moderator effects," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    2. Sascha Kraus & Matthias Breier & Sonia Dasí-Rodríguez, 2020. "The art of crafting a systematic literature review in entrepreneurship research," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 1023-1042, September.
    3. Czakon, Wojciech & Niemand, Thomas & Gast, Johanna & Kraus, Sascha & Frühstück, Lisa, 2020. "Designing coopetition for radical innovation: An experimental study of managers' preferences for developing self-driving electric cars," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    4. Luis Javier Garcia-Martinez & Sascha Kraus & Matthias Breier & Andreas Kallmuenzer, 2023. "Untangling the relationship between small and medium-sized enterprises and growth: a review of extant literature," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 455-479, June.
    5. Lamin B. Ceesay, 2021. "Learning Beyond the Brick and Mortar: Prospects, Challenges, and Bibliometric Review of E-learning Innovation," Jindal Journal of Business Research, , vol. 10(1), pages 33-48, June.
    6. Alicia Mas-Tur & Sascha Kraus & Mario Brandtner & Ralf Ewert & Wolfgang Kürsten, 2020. "Advances in management research: a bibliometric overview of the Review of Managerial Science," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 14(5), pages 933-958, October.
    7. Kraus, Sascha & Schiavone, Francesco & Pluzhnikova, Anna & Invernizzi, Anna Chiara, 2021. "Digital transformation in healthcare: Analyzing the current state-of-research," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 557-567.
    8. Ana Joana Fernandes & Joao J. Ferreira, 2022. "Entrepreneurial ecosystems and networks: a literature review and research agenda," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 189-247, January.
    9. Yvonne Schmid & Michael Dowling, 2022. "New work: New motivation? A comprehensive literature review on the impact of workplace technologies," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 72(1), pages 59-86, February.
    10. Leonie Schulte, 2022. "Integrating immediate gains with sustainable performance: systematic review of paradox at the intersection of strategic management and innovation," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 72(4), pages 1209-1247, December.
    11. Carolina Rojas-Córdova & Amanda J. Williamson & Julio A. Pertuze & Gustavo Calvo, 2023. "Why one strategy does not fit all: a systematic review on exploration–exploitation in different organizational archetypes," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 17(7), pages 2251-2295, October.
    12. Lee, Liane W.Y. & Tang, Yiming & Yip, Leslie S.C. & Sharma, Piyush, 2018. "Managing customer relationships in the emerging markets – guanxi as a driver of Chinese customer loyalty," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 356-365.
    13. Chu, Zhaofang & Feng, Bo & Lai, Fujun, 2018. "Logistics service innovation by third party logistics providers in China: Aligning guanxi and organizational structure," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 291-307.
    14. Yang, Jie & Ma, Jieqiong & Zhang, Yong & Hong, JungHwa, 2018. "With whom should you have dinner? A multidimensional framework for understanding political ties in China," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 61(6), pages 891-898.
    15. Zhong Qin & Xin Deng, 2016. "Government and family Guanxi in Chinese private firms: perceptions and preference," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 35-60, January.
    16. Liping Fu & Fan Wu & Shan Zhang, 2022. "Evolutionary Path and Innovative Development of Pharmaceutical Industrial Cluster—A Case Study of Shijiazhuang, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(5), pages 1-18, March.
    17. Lu, Tingyu & Zhuang, Mengzhou & Zhuang, Guijun, 2021. "When does guanxi hurt interfirm cooperation? The moderating effects of institutional development and IT infrastructure capability," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 177-186.
    18. Le Roy, Frédéric & Robert, Frank & Hamouti, Rizlane, 2022. "Vertical vs horizontal coopetition and the market performance of product innovation: An empirical study of the video game industry," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    19. Al-Atwi, Amer Ali & Amankwah-Amoah, Joseph & Khan, Zaheer, 2021. "Micro-foundations of organizational design and sustainability: The mediating role of learning ambidexterity," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 30(1).
    20. João J. M. Ferreira & Cristina I. Fernandes & Sascha Kraus, 2019. "Entrepreneurship research: mapping intellectual structures and research trends," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 181-205, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:manrev:v:74:y:2024:i:2:d:10.1007_s11301-022-00316-2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.