Home-Offices: Dream, Reality, and In-Between Cheuk F. Ng, Athabasca University, Canada A presentation at the 37 th Conference of the Environmental Design.

Home-Offices: Dream, Reality, and In-Between

Cheuk F. Ng, Athabasca University, Canada

A presentation at the 37th Conference of the Environmental Design Research Association, Sacramento, California, June 3, 2007

Content Outline

• Teleworking Overview

• Home-Office

• Home

• Office

• Home/Office Intersection: Space and Time

• Conclusion and Future Research

Teleworking

• Definitions (Nilles;1975; Kurland and Bailey, 1999)

• Popularity (Nilles, 2007)

• Empirical research methodology (cf. Bailey & Kurland, 2002; McCloskey & Igbaria, 1998).

• Potential benefits and drawbacks claims-- organizations-- society-- employees

(e.g., reviews by Bailey & Kurland, 2002; Pinsonneault & Boisvert, 2001)

Teleworking: for Employees

• Potential benefits

1. Greater autonomy, more flexibility in work schedule

2. Better balance between personal, family, and work life

3. Higher perceived productivity and quality of work

4. Comfortable work environment at home

• Potential drawbacks

1. Increased family-work role conflicts

2. 2. Lower perceived personal growth and career advancement, particularly among new employees

3. Professional and social isolation; lower collegiality and sense of belonging

4. Over-working because of lack of separation between work and family domains

5. Inadequate work environment at home; occupational and health issues; costs in running home office

References: reviews by Bailey & Kurland, 2002; Pinsonneault & Boisvert, 2001)

Source: Farmanfarmaian, R. (1989, November). Worksteading: The new lifestyle frontier. Psychology Today, 23(1), 37-38, p. 41.

Source: Farmanfarmaian, R. (1989, November). Worksteading: The new lifestyle frontier. Psychology Today, 23(1), 37-38, p. 43.

Source: Magee, J. L. (2000). Home as an alternative workplace: Negotiating the spatial and behavioral boundaries between home and work. Journal of Interior Design, 26(1), p. 42.

Home-Office: Reality

Reality: Do not live and work as envisioned by writers in the popular press.

• separate vs. shared workspace: % varies widely among studies

(Karnowski & White, 2002; Gurstein, 1995; Magee, 2000) • Location: basement, spare room, main floor (Gurstein,1995); spare bedroom, office,

basement (Magee, 2000) • median size: 13.4 sq. m. (Gurstein,1995)

• Major problems: lack of storage space; workplace too small, poor lighting; too few phone lines (Gurstein, 1995)

• Costs: equipment, utilities, renovation (Salaff, 2002)• Home modifications required for many (Gurstein, 1995)

Home-Office: DreamDream: Popular business magazines give the image of an idyllic home

office. (Gurstein, 2001)-- Their ‘ideal’ environments vastly different from what designers are

contemplating.-- no one ideal environment for homework: varies with needs, occupation, sex.

-- natural lighting and ventilation, visual and acoustic privacy, and adequate storage and electrical amperage and outlets.

-- a separate room for their workplace -- larger workspace (at least 200 sq. ft.)-- furniture and equipment ergonomically designed and adjustable

(Magee, 2000)-- separate phone line; more storage space; outside views; better furniture;

separate office space; pre-wired computer connections

Home• A house is not a home: “an emotional based relationship with the dwelling place”

(Relph, 1976; Tuan, 1980; Horwitz & Tognoli, 1982; Dovey, 1985; Casey, 1993; Hollander, 1993) (as cited in Moore, 2000)

• Meaning of home• a social and cultural unit (family, social networks), self-identity, privacy, continuity,

personalization, behaviour, physical structure (dwelling, territory, locus in place) and the childhood home (Hayward, 1975; 1977)

• psychological comfort, social needs as well as physiological needs (Appleyard, 1979)

• personal, social and physical constituents of home (Sixsmith, 1986)

• cultural, socio-demographic, social, and psychological dimensions (Lawrence, 1987)

• centrality; continuity; privacy; self expression, and personal identity; and social relationships. centrality; (Tognoli, 1987)

• Activities: The refuge, a place for relaxation and entertainment for the whole

family, or its residents (Gifford, 2002).

OfficeReviews: The layout and design of conventional office

environment associated with various work behaviors, job satisfaction, and wellbeing

• Influences of ambient features, spatial arrangements, self-identity and status, communication, privacy on performance and job

satisfaction (Sundstrom, 1987)

• Interact with the physical environment: Control; Functional opportunities; Non-verbal expression

Respond to spatial organization, architectonic details, views, resources, ambient properties (McCoy, 2002)

• “Space Does Matter”: Performance, comfort, territory (Vischer, 2002)

Home-Office Intersection

• Teleworker: Boundary issues-- spatial: territory -- temporal: schedule-- behavioral:-- social: (Ahrentzen,1990)Plus psychological (Altman, 1975)

• strategies range from segmentation to integration (Ammons & Markham, 2004)

• Impact on household members: territory; public vs. private space (Ammons & Markham, 2004; Sullivan, 2000)

• With community: intrusions; use of resources (Gurstein, 1995; 2001; Ahrentzen, 1987)

A typology of 4 live/work space configurations

Work dominates

Live/work blended

Example:

Home in studio workspace

Example:

Office in home in close proximity to domestic activities

A Typology of Live/Work Space Configurations (Cont’d)

Live/work separated

Work shared

Example:

Vertical separation of home and work areas

Example:

Clustering of homes, work and recreation

Adapted from Gurstein, P. (2001). Wired to the world, chained to the home: Telework in daily life. Vancouver, BC: University of British Columbus Press. (Figure 6.3)

A Proposed Framework for Home/workspace Analysis

Work at Home is Seen as

Non-work at home seen as

Mono-chronic & Linear-separate Time Style

Dovetailed Time-Style

Poly-chronic Time Style

Mono-chronic & Linear-separable time style

A. Mono-chronic linear-separable household

D. Integrated work style

G. Interrupting work style

Dovetailed time style

B. Integrated home style

E. Dovetailed household

H. Juggling work style

Poly-chronic time style

C. Interrupting home style

F. Juggling home style

I. Poly-chronic household

Source: Adapted from Kaufman-Scarborough, C. (2006). Time use and the impact of technology. Time and Society, 15(1), 57-80. Table 2 (p. 71).

Conclusions

• Current homeworkers live and work in spaces designed for home activities. Activity conflicts have implications for design of homes (Gurstein, 2001).

• Telework (and homeworking) is not a panacea for ensuring work-life balance/quality of life (Moore, 2006)

• Better social and physical support to telework (and homeworkers) to enhance success

Future Research

• Finer distinctions between groups of homeworkers? Re. Job type, full/part-time, gender, family type, life stage, meetings with clients etc.

• Negotiation and decision-making process within the family of the teleworker (Ahrentzen, 1987; Moore, 2001)

• Innovative planning and design of homes to suit teleworkers’ needs (Gurstein, 2001)