1 / 12

Issues and Methods in Studying Territoriality and Physical Workplace

Montreal, 2010. Issues and Methods in Studying Territoriality and Physical Workplace. Oluremi B. Ayoko Neal M. Ashkanasy UQ Business School The University of Queensland, Australia Karen A. Jehn Melbourne Business School The University of Melbourne, Australia. Presentation Overview.

stella
Download Presentation

Issues and Methods in Studying Territoriality and Physical Workplace

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Montreal, 2010 Issues and Methods in Studying Territoriality and Physical Workplace Oluremi B. Ayoko Neal M. Ashkanasy UQ Business School The University of Queensland, Australia Karen A. Jehn Melbourne Business School The University of Melbourne, Australia

  2. Presentation Overview Introduction Literature Review & Research Aims Issues and Methods Implications

  3. Introduction Researchers are increasingly paying more attention to the impact of physical environment on human behavior (Brennan et al., 2002; Elsbach, 2003) However, much of the studies are outside OB and management (Brown & colleagues, 2005) The impact of the work physical environment on human behaviors has highlighted paradoxes and tensions (Elsbach & Bechky, 2007) while there are difficulties in locating valid instruments to measure territoriality (except for Brown, 2009)

  4. Workspaces, Territoriality & Affectivity: A Paradox Open space offices reduce costs, improve communication and foster relationships (Chigot, 2003; Chilton & Baldry, 2002; Ettorrre, 1995) Similarly, open-plan offices lead to poor employees’ satisfaction and motivation (Oldham & Brass, 1979) Office size and features drive employees’ territoriality of marking and defending (Brown & Colleagues, 2005) Open workspace has a potential to increase noise, loss of privacy leading to inefficiency (Ettorre, 1995)and increased turnover

  5. Workspaces, Territoriality & Affectivity: A Paradox Territoriality is linked with increased communication while enhancing people’s sense of control over their own environment and others’ behaviors (Kelly & Brodens,1994) However, territoriality can trigger conflict, frustration and employees’ negative emotional responses (Ayoko & Härtel, 2003) Additionally, workplace physical aesthetic features affect employees’ mood and behaviors (Rafaeli & Vilnai-Yavetz, 2004) Interaction between noise & light is linked with the recall of negative emotional words (Hygge & Knex, 2001) while team composition causes emotional responses(Lovaglia & Houser, 2009)

  6. Research Aims • To date, the impact of workspaces on territoriality and affectivity has been overlooked in OB research (Ayoko, Ashkanasy & Jehn, 2009) and so has its measurement • Aim: • To suggest ways of reconciling the mixed findings and paradoxes especially in research on physical workspace & territoriality • To address methodological issues surrounding our suggestions

  7. Reconciling Paradoxes: Propositions Exploring physical workspaces, territoriality/affectivity in teams and promoting positive employee affective consequences First, time is crucial; the same territorial behaviors initially provoking conflict may later reduce conflict because of more defined boundaries & norms (See Zaheer & colleagues, 1999) Second, team composition (e.g. age, gender & ethnicity) should moderate overtime the impact of territorial affective products (conflict, emotions) on team outcomes (See Jones et al., 2007; Kaya & Weber, 2003)

  8. Methodological Issues • Multi-method Design • Experience Sampling Method (Fisher, 2008; Larson & Csikszentmihalyi, 1983) • Surveys • Physiological Data (Jehn, Rispens & Thatcher, 2009)

  9. Potential Results • Furthering our understanding of the role of time and team composition in the association between workspace territoriality affectivity • Reconciliation of the current paradoxes highlighted by studies on physical workspaces, emotions and territoriality • Improvement of managers’ territorial and affect management skills

  10. Conclusion • Our proposals and methodological approaches should assist researchers in advancing both theoretical and empirical research in physical workspace and territoriality especially in organizational behavior

  11. Implications • Theory • Extension of literature on work physical environment, territoriality & affectivity • Methodology • Proposed ESM and Physiological measurements • Practice • Managers awareness of the need to manage territoriality & affective responses • Training in managing employees’ territoriality

  12. Thank Your.ayoko@business.uq.edu.au

More Related