ADAPTABLE WORK-SETTINGS   Akihiro Kishimoto / Institute of Office Systems, KOKUYO Co., Ltd. To achieve the flexibility to deal with organizational and technological changes-this has been one of the challenges since the birth of the modern office. It is still as important a challenge as before, but the conditions under which the challenge is to be met are different and the methods available are also different. The diversification of workstyle has made it possible to blur the relationship among organization, work and space. The inconveniences brought about by the accelerating diversification of needs can be compensated for with the freedom gained by the disappearance of physical limitations through virtualization. From this perspective, the following article will analyze the adaptability of office interior. Organizational Needs and Supportive Environment in Transformation 1. Flexible Organizational Structures Many corporations are now changing their organizational structures to flatter and more flexible ones in order to deal with today's rapidly changing business environment. The corporate organizational structure has become more fluid through such diverse strategies as the ad hoc and cross functional project team arrangement, the abolition of middle management positions, the dispersal of authority and the promotion of empowerment. Consequently the office as a physical space is forced to respond to the constantly changing needs to deal with the change in human resources allocation and worker's roles. Organizational structures will frequently change as an organization is restructured to respond to changing market needs and competition, and project teams consisting of workers from diverse fields are created or abolished. This will cause workers to be transferred from one place to another, necessitating the supportive environment to change. These changes not only occur within an organization, but also are caused by inter-organizational relations. To make it easier to enter or withdraw from a specific field to deal with the change of industrial structure, corporations acquire or affiliate with other corporations, so that it is common for the scale, structure and members of an organization to change very quickly. In such a case, too, the office space is forced to make swift and all-out responses including the change of furniture and its layout, the change of the entire size and resources distribution and even the change of location. fig.1 Members of Flexible Organizations Need to Move Frequently 2. Virtual Work Tools Today's computing technology supports various types of office work. Accounting slips and electric calculate or are now virtualized by computerized accounting systems. And CAD software has done away with architect's drafting boards and rulers. Much of office work and many work processes have been electrolyzed. As a result, many office workers, although the type of information they deal with and the skills required of them are different according to their job types, operate the same tool--the personal computer. In other words, standardization has become easier now that there is less difference in the needs for workstations for different work contents (such as the size and the shape of desk top surface) due to the virtualization of desktop functions. These information technologies allow diverse tasks to be free from spatial limitations. It is now possible to do what is called "desk work" in areas other than desk areas, because desktop functions have become portable and information can now be accessed through the network. Therefore, in order to meet these needs, even simple function areas (such as meeting spaces) are required to possess sophisticated information technology functions. fig.2 Look Alike, Doing Different 3. Complex Work Process Because the advance of information technology has improved the efficiency of routinized work, office work is now in transition towards more creative and intellectual professional work. At the same time, organizational and business structures has moved from traditional hierarchical structures to flat and flexible structures, so that now there is an increasing need to create a flexible organization suitable for ad hoc and collaborative work by professional project teams. In order to implement such a structure which can deal flexibly with the change of business environment and market needs, it is important to support a work process where there is a balance between autonomous individual work and interactive group work. In other words, the office space is now required to be flexible enough to deal with the fluid organizational structure and offer improved support functions which not only meet the needs of both individual and collaborative work but also encourage daily interactions among workers. In more concrete terms, the office will be divided into closed areas dedicated to individual work, multi-purpose areas for group work and open areas where unspecified members interact, and these diverse settings must be provided with a high degree of information technology capabilities and selectively used by workers. Such is an ideal support system. fig.3 Non-Linear Working Processes Facilitate People to Use Various Settings 4. Diversified Support Space with Upgraded Functions As the information-oriented trend continues, office work will become more efficient and less routinized, while work process will require a collaboration of sophisticated professional capabilities. And the facilities and spaces which support them will be provided with upgraded functions and become more diverse, which in turn will call for more flexibility to deal with them. First of all, supportive functions will have to be upgraded in such a way that all the areas in the office will be provided with accesses to the information networks. It is also important to provide the possibility of variation and customization where specific needs coming from small groups within an organization or from supportive functions for particular purposes will be met. Furthermore, the flexibility of redistributing spaces and changing purposes will have to he emphasized so that the boundaries for these groups and functionally divided areas will easily be shifted. On top of these, the facility for change and renewal with which these functions are upgraded, distributed and transferred, will be an important element. It is an important task for the office space to find balanced solutions to these needs and implement them at a reasonable cost. In the following sections we will consider setting to implement such adaptability. Adaptable Work Settings 5. Coexistence of Different Work Processes and Supporting Environment An organization usually comprises different groups with different roles and these groups naturally have different work processes. Therefore, the requirements for optimum supporting environment for each group are different. Fig. 4 categorizes different work processes by the extent of interaction and autonomy and shows what supporting environment is typical to each work category. The short arrows in the figure show the directions in which each work category is likely to shift. The features of each category are as follows: ÅELow Interaction/Low Autonomy: work process divided into individual portions similar to an assembly line operation. ÅELow Interaction/High Autonomy: work process completed by each individual similar to an intellectual work. ÅEHigh Interaction/Low Autonomy: group work process highly dependent to one another. ÅEHigh Interaction/High Autonomy: work process comprising both individual work and collaborative work similar to a project. In actuality, these different processes coexist in an office space. Thus, it is desirable to select and combine supporting environments optimal for a particular work process of a particular organizational unit. fig.4 Transition in Working Process and Supporting Settings 6. A Scenario for the Transition of Working Environment The work setting chosen for work process requirements for a particular organizational unit should be able to shift swiftly and flexibly in response to the changes of work process and organizational scale which occur as time goes by. If these changes are to be oriented toward a work setting which supports a collaborative work process based on high interaction and high autonomy, then such a setting will be definitely a non-territorial space divided into diverse functional areas which workers choose according to their needs. The speed and scale of these changes and transitions, however, differ according to the kind of work, the size and the management style of each group within an organization. Therefore, in an actual office space, various work settings chosen by diverse types of groups coexist and they move toward a non-territorial support space at the pace and in the scale different to each group. Namely, different areas coexist--from individually occupied spaces to functionally divided common spaces, and they constantly change their boundaries and layouts, moving toward a common space structure where the relationship between space and organizational structure is ambiguous. The transition from the spaces occupied individually or by groups into common spaces will reduce the actual space requirement and thus allow resources to be allocated according to a priority principle, which in turn contributes to the improvement of functional capabilities. Further, the ambiguous relationship between spatial and quantitative requirements and organizational structure eliminates the need to respond to the small scale change of organizational structure and staff size. This will improve the supportive function and the flexibility of spatial redistribution. However it is necessary to anticipate when functional transition will take place in each area and to allocate spaces in consideration of the functional elasticity of fixed spaces and fluid ones that are adjacent to one another. 7. Step by Step Transfer of Functions To transfer personal areas belonging to individuals to common areas shared by all individuals, it is desirable to implement the necessary changes of physical spaces step by step keeping pace with the changes in workstyle. The first step is to boost up the functions of the existing common areas by such means as adding new supportive functions such as network accessing capabilities to meeting areas. Such a measure will provide a setting where workers can work in spaces not assigned to them. It is also important for an organization to promote an active use of such spaces. Thus, users can experience non-territorial workstyle, while retaining their private workspaces, and gradually reduce the rate of territorial workstyle by choosing space which provide the functions most needed by particular work requirements. The next step is to standardize personal areas. When the provision of special functions in common areas is implemented, reducing the rate at which workers occupy their privately designated spaces, it is not difficult to standardize individual spaces whose basic needs are fairly common. Once individual spaces are standardized, users would feel that they can use any individual space, which paves the way for making all spaces common areas. The last step is to minimize the number of personal areas and to transfer the functions of the areas which will be converted into common areas. The minimum number of individual areas will be retained and the rest of the areas will be converted into common areas provided with a high level of functions. Then users can choose the area best suitable to a particular task, ultimately transforming their workstyle to a completely non-territorial one. In an actual office space, as the contents of the above steps and the speed at which each step is implemented are different to different groups, it is advisable to make a comparatively small transition at a time. Fig. 5 shows a layout simulation of the process to shift the workplace for a small group toward the autonomous and interactive space. fig.5 Transition from Settings for Individuals to Settings for a Team 8. Supportive Environment Becomes More Diversified with Higher Functions The flexibility for space redistribution is essential in dealing with changes. However, it is not easy in an existing office to change the boundary between groups and the one between the personal areas and the common areas. If an organization places an emphasis on the proximity of members, it will greatly affect spatial flexibility. For example, a traditional Japanese office layout, where clusters of two rows of desks facing each other are arranged like isolated islands, offers a working ambience of high interaction and low autonomy suitable to a work process where workers work in a group, depending highly on one another. It is not, however, adept at dealing with the need for space redistribution at the time of organizational change or the future need for functional transfer. Its parallel and clearly hierarchical positioning of desks stands in the way of flexible layouts for groups of diverse sizes. Furthermore, the low interchangeability among furniture items in different function spaces makes it difficult for personal areas to be gradually converted into common areas, each provided with a specific function. A one-module furniture system as shown in the illustration may be effective to make up for such a defect. This system, where all the furniture from desks and tables to cabinets is of one module, has an option system of small and self-standing furniture items to deal with the needs for special functions or the customized needs. In terms of layout, the system, while capable of being arranged according to the traditional module in an existing office building, offers the possibility of a layout which is not clearly hierarchical, so that boundaries of groups within an organization can be flexibly changed. Of course the system can be used in a traditional way by placing desks together in one direction. In other words, it is capable of dealing with the gradual transition from the traditional layout to the future type layout, without replacing the furniture. With respect to the furniture system, the table, which is the core unit, is of the same size with cable wiring function for networking, so that its functions can be easily be improved by adding simple desktop options or self-standing units with a low interdependence with the table. Thus, if one system can deal with different layouts for different work processes and each furniture item has a low interdependence with other items, it is easy to transfer functions on a small scale in order to implement a gradual change of supportive environment. The remaining problem is the behavior of each worker and the organizational management which regulates it. fig.6 7 Modular Layout Makes Re-allocating Spaces Easier fig.8 Functional Conversion by Standardized Modules and Options 9. Managing the Transfer Process The process of office reform should be work process oriented rather than space oriented. The spatial change which is too rapid prevents workers from adapting their workstyles to the change, bringing an overall organizational performance down. It also discourages workers to respond to changes in an active way. Changing the mode of personal behavior usually takes longer than changing the spatial environment. And it is important to manage effectively this transfer process. First of all, we must be aware that users could easily be skeptical of the direction of the reform project in its initial stage. Therefore, in order to shift from territorial behavior patterns to those requiring selective use of the space optimal for a particular work, it is advisable to start with a small pilot project allowing workers to experience the transfer on a trial basis. A secure feeling that they can always go back to the old workstyle and the fact that their work environment can be corrected through feedbacks make workers respond positively to the project. Another important thing is to initiate a movement to reform the organizational culture, which binds the behavior patterns and value judgment of office workers to a surprising degree. A certain due process is necessary to change existing interests for groups, an unnecessarily strong preoccupation with status, hierarchical decision making processes. Unless these things are changed, it is impossible to anchor down new workstyles and implement new ideas. It is only when users themselves can control the work environment according to their needs that they will be able to maintain the adaptable space. Users must become capable of understanding the relationship between the environment and their behaviors and controlling them in order for them to be able to use various functional areas selectively by making necessary adjustments. The process for these is not at all simple and cannot be completed in a short time. (an excerpt from ECIFFO 31, October 31, 1997)