Creating a “Third Place”
Cheap coffee, restaurant-style booths, wireless internet access, and lots and lots of books. No, I’m not talking about Borders (I said cheap coffee)- this is a new and improved university library. It looks great. The basement is a now a wide open space, comfortably furnished, and buzzing with voices as students work and converse in groups.
As renovations continue, many departments within the library have had to relocate to other parts of the building- or in the case of the library science department offices, to a different building altogether.
The Interim Office Effect
I recently had one-on-one meeting with an administrator in one of these interim offices, and when I walked into the office, I didn’t know where to sit. This soon led to a discussion with the office occupant about the arrangement of her furniture, and how because of the placement of her door, windows, and very large, long desk, sitting face to face as one might like to in a meeting was impossible. We ended up sitting rather awkwardly with her in her desk chair at the far end of her desk while I sat in a low armchair.
I felt that she and I were both aware that she was seated much higher than I behind her desk, and for me this emphasized the power discrepancies between us -she as older, a professional with a great deal of experience in her position, and in possession of the information that I needed. Conversely, because she was forced sit at the end of her desk and to turn sideways to talk to me, this caused me to view her in a more human, empathetic way, as she was clearly flustered about our awkward seating arrangement.
Organizational Theory
Hatch (2006) says that “postmodernists hold the view that [built spaces] are material expressions of the power relations embedded within them” (223). From this perspective, one could say that the administrator’s large desk is a symbol that this is her territory, and that she is the one with the power in her office. Yet, this perception of dominance is weakened by her inability to place this symbol of power prominently between herself and her visitor. For this reason, one could say she has not yet been able to fully claim the space as her own, and this may create an impression of disorganization and weakness for either herself or her visitors, or both.
In this situation, the symbolic-interpretivist view is not uncomplimentary to the postmodernist view, although they are each distinct. Hatch states that “Symbolic interpretivists look for meaning associated with the physical features of the workplace as they tend to see accessibility, privacy and proximity as expressive of organizational values and the identity and status of occupants” (p. 229). In this organization, the administrative offices were formerly quite separate from one another, whereas the interim offices are arranged together and radiate outwards from the reception area. From this view, the administrator I met with may be seen as more accessible and part of “the team” because her office is now more centralized and close to the other offices. She and most other administrators also have less privacy, and as a result, the structure of the organization has a more “flat” feel than it did previously.
How will it play out?
Many libraries are undergoing renovations or physical restructuring to create an “information commons” in which technology services and support are merged with traditional library services. It should be very interesting to see how the physical set-up of these commons will effect library staff and users and how they use and think of the library. The evolution of the library as place is very exciting, however, the interim, limbo period can be somewhat trying- and interesting- for everyone involved. Will the staff lower on the library food chain feel more connected or comfortable with their supervisors after working in an environment that was literally structured in a more “flat,” non-linear way? Or is hierarchy so ingrained in some organizations that physical structure has a minimal effect on the affective state and behavior of staff?
Reference
Hatch, M. J. (2006). Organization theory: Modern, symbolic, and postmodern perspectives. 2nd Edition. New York: Oxford University Press.
2 comments:
It is interesting that something so simple as desk and chair placement can have such an impact on communication. Having access to administrators should be a good thing, including an "open door" policy. Being a team player, or at least being seen as one is so important, especially if someone is in a strategic location. Your blog makes me think of symbolically conditioned behavior and how the normal routines of daily office life are affected by temporary office relocation. Also, there is the issue of power and siting higher or lower does make people feel uncomfortable. Status indicators within the physical building structure might also be difficult to discern as staff have been relocated. People get used to looking for status symbols in furniture and office location. Your blog is such an interesting observation of how physical changes can and do affect staff as well as others. Change can sometimes be difficult, even if it is for a good purpose.
-Kimberly Harp
I feel that you really hit the nail on the head. It was interesting to read your interpretation of how you perceived the different spaces. Both in the previous offices and now in the limbo stage in interim offices. I can almost feel how different it would be for employees to see "the boss" in the same area and it would to me a freeing feeling for me! I have to wonder though whether employees felt in the old offices if the staff attitude was that of strict hierarchy or if the staff was more mingled but making due with the space they still had. Left over from a previous time period of thought.
Post a Comment