Applied Research in Geographical Sciences

Applied Research in Geographical Sciences

Providing a conceptual model to design the municipal office space with an emphasis on the existential approach base on gegoraphical characteristic (Case study: Shahrekord city)

Authors
elham homayooni 1
elham pourmahabadian 2
sina razaghiasl 3
1 PhD student, Department of Architecture, Shahrekord Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shahrekord, Iran.
2 Assistant Professor, Department of Architecture and Urban, Central Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
3 Associate Professor, Department of Architecture, Shahrekord Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shahrekord, Iran, Faculty of Tarbiat University, Shahid Rajaee
10.61186/jgs.25.77.20
Abstract
The design of the work environment is directly linked to variations in construction performance. Factors that are not adequately considered in the design of the work environment may hinder the proper execution of administrative tasks, consequently leading to a decline in administrative productivity. The environmental characteristics of workspaces and their effects on employees are of particular significance. Furthermore, to enhance productivity within an organization, several conditions must be established, with the human factor being paramount; a motivated workforce is crucial for optimal performance. The primary objective of this research is to elucidate the optimal design model for municipal administrative spaces, with an existential approach influenced by the geography of Shahrekord. In this context, the research investigates the question of what constitutes the optimal model for designing municipal office spaces, informed by an existential perspective and geographical considerations unique to Shahrekord. The research employs a "descriptive-analytical" method for the theoretical foundation and a "survey method" for the presentation of findings. The environmental variables of office spaces, aligned with indicators of existential psychology, were assessed through a structured questionnaire. Upon completion of the questionnaires by the study participants, the collected data were analyzed using Amos and SPSS analytical software. The findings of this research regarding office buildings indicate that the most significant environmental parameters affecting human resource performance in office settings include color, lighting, noise pollution levels, visibility and scenery, indoor air quality, and thermal comfort. Additionally, factors such as design, flexibility, communication, workspace arrangement, furniture, and humidity can be categorized into two groups: psychological and physical components.
Keywords
existential
urban geography
psychology of existence
optimal design model
1. Abbaszadeh, S, L. Zagreus, D. Lehrer, and C. Huizenga (2006), “Occupant satisfaction with indoor environmental quality in green buildings”, In Proceedings of Healthy Buildings, 3, pp. 365–370.
2. Asadi-Safat, Shima, Nikpour, Mansour (2014), "Investigation of the characteristics of famous office buildings in the world in terms of architecture-structure", International Conference on Engineering and Applied Sciences, Dubai.
3. Bluyssen, P.M., Aries, M. and van Dommelen, P. (2011), “Comfort of workers in office buildings: the European HOPE project”, Building and Environment, 46, pp. 280-288.
4. Choi, J. Loftness, v. Aziz, Azizan (2012), “post-occupancy evaluation of 20 office buildings as basis for future IEQ standards and guidelines”, Energy and Buildings, 46, pp. 167–175.
5. De Carli, M. De Giuli, V, Zecchin, R. (2008), “Review on visual comfort in office buildings and influence of daylight in productivity”, Conference of Indoor air, Copenhagen, Denmark - Paper ID: 112.
6. De Dear, RJ. Akimoto, T., Arens, EA. Brager, G. Candido, C. Cheong, KWD., N Nishihara, B Li. SC Sekhar, S Tanabe, Jørn Toftum, H Zhang, Y Zhu, (2013), “Progress in thermal comfort research over the last twenty years”, Indoor air, 23, pp. 442-461.
7. Dear Manuj Yadav, Jungsoo Kim, Densil Cabrera, Richardde (2017), “Auditory distraction in open-plan office environments: The effect of multi-talker acoustics”, Applied Acoustics, Volume 126, Pp. 68-80.
8. Duval, Cara. L., Charles, Kate E., Veitch, Jennifer, A. (2002), “Open- plan Office Density and Environmental Satisfaction”, IRC Research Report RR-150.
9. Frontczak, M. and Wargocki, P. (2011), “Literature survey on how different factors influence human comfort in indoor environments”, Building and Environment, 46, pp. 922–937.
10. Henderson, Justin (2000), “Workplaces & Workspaces office Designs that work”, Rockport, Massachusetts.
11. Kateryna NM. (2020), “At Home with Nature: Effects of Greenness on Children Cognitive Functioning”, Enviro Behav, 32: 775.
12. Klitzman, Susan, Stellman, Jeanne, M. (1989), “The Impact of the Physical Environment on the Psychological Well-Being of Office Workers”, Social Science & Medicine, Vol. 29 (6), pp. 733-742.
13. Kwallek, Na. (2009), transcribed by Cecilia RiosVelasco, “Color and Visual Comfort”, in Towards Sustainable Communities & Buildings, Eds., Werner Lang and Aurora McClain, CD Rom electronic copy of a book, Center for Sustainable Design, UT, pp. 55-62.
14. Lagercrantz, L, Wistrand, M, Willén, U et al. (2000), “Negative impact of air pollution on productivity: Previous Danish findings repeated in new Swedish test room”, Proceedings of Healthy Buildings, (in press).
15. Lee, So Young, Brand, Jay, L. (2005), “Effects of Control over Office Workspaces on Perception of the Work Outcomes”, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 25, pp. 323-333.
16. Minyoung Kwon, Hilde Remøy, Maartje van den Bogaard (2019), “Influential design factors on occupant satisfaction with indoor environment in workplaces”, Building and Environment, Volume 157, Pp. 356-365.
17. Mirilia, Bonnes, Giuseppe, Carrus, (2017), “Environmental Psychology, Overview”, Reference Module in Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Psychology.
18. Nenonen, Suvi, Gersberg, Nils (2006), “Muiltidisciplinary Workplace Research”, CEM, Facility Services Research, Helsinki Universty of Technology.
19. Nenonen, W. (2010), “Human Resource Management”, Eleventh Edition, Pearson, pp. 241-245.
20. Parsons, K. (2014), “Human thermal environments: the effects of hot, moderate, and cold environments on human health, comfort, and performance”, third edition, publication: taylor and francis group.
21. Tusli, Gholam Abbas (2012) Sociology of Work and Occupation, Organization for the Study and Compilation of University Humanities Books, Semat Publishing House, Tehran.
22. Urszula, M, Tabor, S., & Kocira, S. (2015), “Productivity of resources and investments at selected fcological Farms”, Agriculture & Agricultural Science Procedia,7, pp. 158-164.
23. Wargocki, P., Lagercrantz, L., Witterseh, T., Sundell, J., Wyon, D.P. and Fanger, P.O. (2002), “Subjective perceptions, symptom intensity and performance: a comparison of two independent studies, both changing similarly the pollution load in an office”, Indoor Air, 12, pp. 74-80.
24. Xu, Wiem, Bellal, Tahar, (2020), “Evaluating the impact of mass housings' in-between spaces' spatial configuration on users' social interaction”, Frontiers of Architectural Research, Volume 9, Issue 1, March 2020, Pp. 34-53.
25. Xuemei Zhu, Aya Yoshikawa, Lingyi Qiu, Zhipeng Lu, Chanam Lee, Marcia Ory, (2020), “Healthy workplaces, active employees: A systematic literature review on impacts of workplace environments on employees’ physical activity and sedentary behavior”, Building and Environment, Volume 168.
26. Yousef, Al Horr, Mohammed, Arif, Amit, Kaushik, Ahmed, Mazroei, Martha, Katafygiotou, Esam Elsarrag (2016), “Occupant productivity and office indoor environment quality”, A review of the literature, Building and Environment, Volume 105, Pp. 369-389.