Abstract
The implementation of multi-space concepts in office buildings is a challenge for architects in early design phases. Activity-based work programmes require a user-specific demand analysis of the company based on employee profiles in order to be able to determine zone relationships, areas and other requirements. The multitude of factors results in complex demand programmes, which in turn, lead to difficulties in translating them into a design.
The main objective of this paper is to reveal these difficulties for an essential parameter for efficient work, which is the interaction between employees within the company. This interaction is highly dependent on the spatial relation between the different zones in the building. A digital, grid-based model is used for quantifying zone relations in office building designs. The required zone connections are translated to the analysis model. For analysing zone connectivity, the parameters path length (metric shortest paths) and path complexity (visually shortest paths) are used.
In this paper, we investigate two design projects for multi-space office buildings with 9300 m2 and 3600 m2. The results of the floor plan analysis are evaluated and compared to the demand requirements.
Conspicuous deviations of the design from the demand are then discussed through expert interviews with the designing architects. The paper presents new findings on analysing path relationships in terms of the demand programme. It identifies factors that challenge the fulfilment of demanded zone connections, summarises the results and points out improvements to floor plan evaluation as well as optimisation potentials in the demand planning process.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Allen, T.J.: Managing the Flow of Technology: Technology Transfer and the Dissemination of Technological Information Within the R&D Organization. MIT Press, Cambridge (1977)
Hillier, B., Penn, A.: Visible colleges: structure and randomness in the place of discovery. Sci. Context 4(1), 23–50 (1991)
Hodgson, C., et al.: COVID-19 – Global Real Estate Implications Paper II, JLL Research (2020)
Jurecic, M., Rief, S., Stolze, D., Bauer, W. (Hg.): Office analytics - success factors for designing a work type-based working environment. Fraunhofer IRB-Verlag (2018)
Lee, J.K., Eastman, C.M., Lee, J., Kannala, M., Jeong, Y.S.: Computing walking distances within buildings using the universal circulation network. Environ. Plann. B. Plann. Des. 37(4), 628–645 (2010)
Lund, S., et al.: The future of work after COVID-19. McKinsey Global Institute (2021)
Lund, B., Smith, J.W.: A Multi-Stage CUDA Kernel for Floyd-Warshall (2010). CoRR, abs/1001.4108
McElhaney, B.: Avancing Collaboration Between Joint Terrorism Task Forces and Fusion Centers. Doctoral dissertation, University of Southern California. ProQuest LLC (2019)
Penn, A., Desyllas, J., Vaughan, L.: The space of innovation: interaction and communication in the work environment. Environ. Plan. 26(2), 193–218 (1999)
Peponis, J., et al.: Designing space to support knowledge work. Environ. Behav. 39(6), 815–840 (2007)
Sadalla, E.K., Magel, S.G.: The perception of traversed distance. Environ. Behav. 12(1), 65–79 (1980)
Sadalla, E.K., Burroughs, W.J., Staplin, L.J.: Reference points in spatial cognition. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Learn. Memory 6(5), 516–528 (1980)
Sailer, K., McCulloh, I.: Social networks and spatial configuration—how office layouts drive social interaction. Soc. Netw. 34(1), 47–58 (2012)
Sailer, K., Penn, A.: Spatiality and transpatiality in workplace environments. In: 7th International Space Syntax Symposium, Stockholm, Sweden (2009)
Spath, D., Kern, P., Bauer, W. (Hg.): Office 21 - push for the future - better performance in innovative working environments. Fraunhofer-IAO (2003)
Stryker, J., Santoro, M.: Facilitating face-to-face communication in high-tech teams. Res. Technol. Manag. 55(1), 51–56 (2012)
Turner, A., Doxa, M., O’Sullivan, D., Penn, A.: From isovists to visibility graphs. a methodology for the analysis of architectural space. Environ. Plan. 28(1), 103–121 (2001)
Waber, B., Magnolfi, J., Lindsay, G.: Workspaces that move people. Harv. Bus. Rev. 92(10), 68–77 (2014)
Wineman, J., Hwang, Y., Kabo, F., Owen-Smith, J., Davis, G.F.: Spatial layout, social structure, and innovation in organizations. Environ. Plan. B Plan. Des. 41(6), 1100–1112 (2014)
Analysis of spatial relations Space Syntax (2023). https://www.spacesyntax.online/overview-2/analysis-of-spatial-relations/. Accessed 01 Mar 2023
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Mack, A., Fuchkina, E., Schneider, S. (2023). Demand vs Design – Comparing Design Proposals to “New Work” – Based Spatial Requirements. In: Turrin, M., Andriotis, C., Rafiee, A. (eds) Computer-Aided Architectural Design. INTERCONNECTIONS: Co-computing Beyond Boundaries. CAAD Futures 2023. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 1819. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-37189-9_42
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-37189-9_42
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-37188-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-37189-9
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)