Open Offices: Not a Behavior Fix

Evidence note: The strongest evidence uses objective interaction measurement before/after open-plan adoption.

BS-0076

Key Result (field study): Face-to-face interaction decreased by ~70% after moving to an open office, while email and IM increased.

BS-0076

Case snapshot (schema) 

context: "Open offices often reduce face‑to‑face interaction because they ignore the underlying behavior people are optimizing for: focused work and privacy."
company: "Industry-wide"
industry: "Workplace Design"
confidence: "validated"
population: "Knowledge workers in open-plan workplaces"
target_behavior: "Spontaneously collaborate more face‑to‑face"
constraints:
  - "Identity: often low for knowledge workers who identify with focused individual output."
  - "Capability: deep work is harder with constant interruption (capability for focus declines)."
  - "Context: visibility increases social risk and reduces privacy, pushing communication into digital channels."
measurement:
  denominator: "employees in open-plan vs prior office"
  window: "before/after open-plan adoption"
  metrics:
    key_metric: "Face-to-face interaction decreased by ~70% after moving to an open office, while email and IM increased."
results: "Observed: face-to-face interaction decreased by ~70% after moving to open plan, while email/IM increased; mitigate with focus rooms, noise control, and privacy options."
limitations:
  - "Effects depend on job type and the degree of openness; some collaboration gains may occur in specific contexts."
sources:
  - "See Sources section"
evidence_ids:
  - BS-0076

Summary

Open offices are a canonical example of mistaking environment configuration for behavior change. The intervention changes the physical layout, but the target behavior (collaboration) does not automatically appear because the underlying behavior people are optimizing for (focus + privacy) conflicts with the environment.

Target behavior (operational)

  • Population: Knowledge workers in open-plan workplaces
  • Behavior: Spontaneously collaborate more face‑to‑face
  • Context: (see case narrative)
  • Window: daily work communication (meetings, ad hoc interactions)

Constraints (behavioral)

  • Identity: often low for knowledge workers who identify with focused individual output.
  • Capability: deep work is harder with constant interruption (capability for focus declines).
  • Context: visibility increases social risk and reduces privacy, pushing communication into digital channels.

Fit narrative (Problem → Behavior → Solution → Product)

  • Problem Market Fit: Organizations want more collaboration and knowledge sharing.
  • Behavior Market Fit: Low if “collaborate more in person” conflicts with worker identity, capabilities (deep work), and context (constant interruption).
  • Solution Market Fit: Removing walls increases exposure but doesn’t create collaborative behavior.
  • Product Market Fit: Teams adapt by shifting to other channels (email, messaging, avoidance behaviors).

Behavior Fit Assessment (example)

Target behavior: “Spontaneously collaborate more face‑to‑face.”

  • Identity Fit: often low for knowledge workers who identify with focused individual output.
  • Capability Fit: deep work is harder with constant interruption (capability for focus declines).
  • Context Fit: visibility increases social risk and reduces privacy, pushing communication into digital channels.

What this illustrates

  • Design must match behavior, not wishful outcomes. Changing layout doesn’t change what people are trying to accomplish.
  • Behavior adapts. If you remove privacy, people seek it elsewhere (headphones, remote work, messaging).

Measurement (window/denominator stated)

  • Window: before/after open-plan adoption
  • Denominator: employees in open-plan vs prior office
  • Observed behavior change: face-to-face interactions decreased sharply; digital messaging increased.

BS-0076

Results

  • Observed outcome: face-to-face interaction decreased by ~70% after moving to an open office, while email and IM increased.

BS-0076

  • Practical mitigations: add private focus rooms, reduce noise, and offer privacy/hybrid options so the environment matches focused-work behavior.

Limitations and confounders

  • Metrics may be company- or press-reported; isolate the target behavior and window where possible.
  • Effects are context-dependent; avoid generalizing beyond the population and constraints described.

Sources

BS-0076

See also