Supporting well-being in workplace transformations - Critical sociomaterial components and their evaluation in a knowledge-intensive organization

Activity-based office design has promised increased productivity and employee satisfaction after the workplace transformation, but to date there has been no consensus regarding how to measure the outcomes of the workplace transformation, and what are the key mechanisms that impact these outcomes. The purpose of this study is to examine how to effectively plan, implement, and evaluate workplace transformations based on sociomaterial well-being support. The research questions are as follows: What are the underlying mechanisms that drive the outcomes of workplace transformations in the context of opposed organizational change? What are the critical environmental components that support knowledge worker well-being when relocating from private rooms to an activity-based office? This is a longitudinal case study centering a knowledge-intensive organization's relocation from two separate offices dominated by private rooms to an activity-based office. The context of this research is characterized by top-down workplace change that is opposed by employees who are satisfied to begin with and do not see any need for the change. This study employs an action research approach during the transformation phase, and mixed methods to collect and analyse data. The findings build on survey data complemented by observations, interviews, and document analysis. The data is analyzed abductively from the perspectives of managers, employees, workplace experts, and the researcher. This study shows that during the preparation stage of workplace transformation, employees consider the workplace change to have a negative value; meanwhile, management and workplace experts expect positive outcomes, and the differing expectations cause tensions between the parties. This study recognized four tensions of activity-based working which — when they go unnoticed — augment the risk of workplace transformation failure; namely, cost efficiency vs. wellbeing, centralized vs. participatory decision-making, collaboration vs solo work, and change vs. stability. This study contributes to workplace research by demonstrating that three key mechanisms drive and impact employee experiences and success or failure of the entire transformation already from the preparation phase. These mechanisms are: the anticipated value of the workplace transformation, the latent tensions of activity-based working, and the sociomaterial environmental support for well-being at work. More specifically, the ability to generate desired work outcomes, a feeling of mastering the modern work environment, participation and autonomy support, and warmth of the social climate all contribute to experiences of a work environment that is supportive of well-being. This study demonstrates that elements of the material work environment can be considered a job resource.