Evaluating Factors Affecting Interior Architectural Space Quality to Enhance Spatial Resilience and Human Productivity: An Application of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs

Subject Areas : Human resources management)

Moharam Ghahremani Drvish ¹ , Farhang Mozafar ² , Ceyed bagher Hoseini ³ , Fateme Mahdizadeye seraj ⁴

1 - Ph.D. Candidate, Department of Business management, Semnan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Semnan, Iran
2 - Associate Prof. at the Department of Architecture and Environmental Design, Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran
3 - Associate Prof. at the Department of Architecture and Environmental Design, Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran
4 - Prof. at the Department of Architecture and Environmental Design, Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran

Received: 2024-08-04 Accepted : 2025-01-05 Published : 2025-06-22

Keywords: &quot, interior architecture&quot, , &quot, quality of space&quot, , &quot, resilience&quot, , &quot, productivity of human resources&quot, .,

Abstract :

Abstract

The aim of the current research is to investigate the relationship between the architectural quality of the interior organizational space and spatial resilience and its impact on employee productivity. This research adopts a qualitative, exploratory approach, is practical in its intended application, and employs qualitative data collection techniques. Data collection procedure in this study involved studying documents, conducting in-depth semi-structured interviews and forming a focus group of experts in related fields. The statistical population of this research included 12 experts from the three fields of architecture, psychology and management. In this study, the qualitative content analysis method was employed for the data analysis, triangulating the findings from the focus group discussions, with previous researches in the field of resilience and spatial quality. The results were then mapped onto Abraham Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. In the current research, the central role of employee productivity has been considered as an influential variable in connecting all components. The results of the research led to a model whose main axes, that is, biological and psychological factors, satisfaction and sustainability factors, and social, cultural and economic factors, interact with each other in a triangular cycle. By increasing the productivity, it is possible to develop the third axis of social, cultural and economic, the output of which can lead to the development of the quality of the space and the continuity of the flow.

Key Words: interior architecture, quality of space, resilience, productivity of human resources.

 

1.Introduction

The aim of the current research is to investigate the relationship between the architectural quality of the interior organizational space and spatial resilience and its impact on employee productivity. This research adopts a qualitative, exploratory approach, is practical in its intended application, and employs qualitative data collection techniques. Data collection procedure in this study involved studying documents, conducting in-depth semi-structured interviews and forming a focus group of experts in related fields. The statistical population of this research included 12 experts from the three fields of architecture, psychology and management. In this study, the qualitative content analysis method was employed for the data analysis, triangulating the findings from the focus group discussions, with previous researches in the field of resilience and spatial quality. The results were then mapped onto Abraham Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. In the current research, the central role of employee productivity has been considered as an influential variable in connecting all components. The results of the research led to a model whose main axes, that is, biological and psychological factors, satisfaction and sustainability factors, and social, cultural and economic factors, interact with each other in a triangular cycle.

2.Literature Review

Human perception of the environment is one of the most central categories in environmental psychology and the process of acquiring information from the human environment. It can be said that human perception is at the center of any environmental behavior because it is the source of all environmental information. Resilience is the ability to bounce back, endure hardship, cope well, hang on to a lifeline, survive well, recover well, show strength, endure hardship (without breaking), be resourceful, and keep moving forward despite setbacks. Determinants of resilience include a set of biological, psychological, social, and cultural factors that interact to determine how an individual responds to stressful experiences (Southwick et al., 2014). Maslow's hierarchy of needs divides human needs into five categories from low to high, namely physiological needs, safety needs, belongingness, esteem and self-actualization. In the course of the "cause and effect" interaction of the main axes of the subject, productivity plays the role of completing a continuous cycle in which the level of non-physical qualities of the space can develop the social, cultural and economic flow through the persuasion of the sense of place (Spitels, 2015). A place is considered a positive emotional connection between a person and a place, and as a result of this cycle, concepts such as the meaning of a place, human interpretations of it, attachments and positive emotions, as well as cultural links between a person and a place are intangible non-physical factors affecting the quality of space. are considered (Haidari & others, 2013). that along this cycle, the productivity of human resources is improved exponentially and continuously.

Methodology.3

In the present study, the data and information was collected through document analysis, in-depth semi-structured interviews and formation of a focus group. The sample selection was done using snowball sampling method. Accordingly, semi-structured interviews were conducted with a number of experts in the field of architecture, environmental psychology and management. Data collection continued until the point of data saturation, at which no new theme was identified. To conduct the interview, a clear and uniform protocol was developed and used. In addition, the interviewees represented a diverse range of experts, including architects specializing in general, landscape, energy, and acoustic design, psychologists with cross-cultural, clinical, cognitive, and biological expertise as well as management specialists with backgrounds in public administration and business, technology and human resources to minimize the possible bias of the interviewees. To ensure the validity of the findings, the classification of the basic categories based on which the interview questions were explained was examined by three of the interviewees. In addition, the findings were obtained from the analysis of the semi-structured interviews and focus groups.

4. 4.Results

The frequency of propositions reflects the degree of concentration of a particular factor within the group, as assessed by expert opinion. A total of 244 propositions were generated through focused group activities, and the frequency of these propositions within each qualitative component of the space is illustrated in the bar diagram shown in Figure 4. According to the average number of propositions in total, which is 7, the conclusion is that the items that are below the average number are less important and the items or components that are above the average line are of high importance. Therefore, visibility and view, temperature comfort, air quality, light quantity, light quality, acoustic comfort, physical privacy, ease of physical interaction, visual comfort, and ambient noise level, respectively, have the highest effect in providing space resilience, and protection from psychological threats, density of work space, ease of visual interaction, visual privacy, audio privacy and layout have medium and medium to high impact on spatial resilience. A little reflection on the components of the first group, which have the greatest effect on strengthening resilience and long-term and better quality, leads us to the conclusion that satisfying biological and psychological needs have the leading influence on spatial resilience, and that most of these components are included in the scope of functional requirements.

5. 5.Discussion

According to the summary of the research results, the research problem centers on three basic axes which include the quality of space, spatial resilience and the productivity of human resources. These three axes are interconnected, forming a repetitive dynamic cycle in which they continuously interact, promote and degrade each other. Therefore, we have achieved a model where the main axes of the research interact with each other in the form of a triangular cycle in which each of them is conceptualized in interaction with the other at the vertices of a triangle. The difference of our proposed model compared to the latest scientific findings is that in previous researches, the continuity of the relationship between productivity and other factors that provide resilience is considered, for example, in the research of Naziachal et al. (2008) which is one of the best examples of research conducted in this field, on the one hand, the role of biological needs as the basic axis of creating physical health has not been addressed, and on the other hand, productivity is only referred to as the output of one-way communication of environmental factors in providing productivity, and naturally, the feedback of productivity in improving the environment has been neglected. On the contrary, in our proposed model, the development of biological and psychological factors that are in accordance with the functional needs is the cause of ensuring the quality of the space, and the response to the mentioned needs through the realization of the quality components of the space, fulfills the resilience in the space. Additionally, in the second core of the model, with the realization of spatial resilience, the development of factors of greater satisfaction and permanence in the space is achieved, and consequently, the possibility of a longer and better quality stay in the space is achieved for the employees and the productivity of the employees has improved. Finally, in the third hub of the model, through increasing productivity, it is possible to develop social, cultural and economic factors.

6. Conclusion.6

Developing the productivity of human resources as the main goal of this research is the result of the previous axis of the model cycle. On the other hand, the quality of the space can improve or degrade the resilience of the environment in the workplace; a resilient environment from this point of view is considered to be an environment that has acceptable architectural space quality. According to the results of matching the subject literature with field research, three main levels of the hierarchy of needs in Maslow's theory have been obtained according to the model diagram. Therefore, the results can be summarized as follows:

1. The classification of Maslow's hierarchy of needs is completely consistent with the triangle (cycle) and confirms it.
2. The beginning of the cycle occurs from a set of biological-psychological factors related to resilience in accordance with the functional needs of Maslow's theory, and their development depends on the degree and quality of the fulfillment of each of the subsequent points, and the continuation of the cycle depends on the speed and quality of the factors that form each side of the triangle.
3. It was found that among the environmental factors contributing to resilience, biological and psychological factors hold the highest priority for initiating the process. If these factors are not provided, the model as a cycle will have no significance.
4. Increasing the level of productivity of human resources has a direct significant relationship with the factors that develop satisfaction and permanence in the space and the quality of presence in the space. Hence, the most important factors, as identified by the experts and supported by the comparison of the findings with other research sources, ranked in the order of the effectiveness are view, temperature comfort, air quality, light quantity, light quality, acoustic comfort, physical privacy, ease of physical interaction, visual comfort, and ambient noise level.
5. The development of productivity will cause the growth of cultural, economic and social factors and will directly lead to an increase in the quality of the space. Therefore, it is of central importance in improving the organization and human resources.

Conflict of interest: none

 

 

 

 

References:

Abbaszadeh, S., Zagreus, L., Lehrer, D., & Huizenga, C. (2006). Occupant satisfaction with indoor environmental quality in green buildings, 3, 365-370.
Abi-Hashem, N. (2011). On cultural resiliency. The Australian Community Psychologist, 23(2), 23-31.
Al Horr, Y., Arif, M., Kaushik, A., Mazroei, A., Katafygiotou, M., & Elsarrag, E. (2016). Occupant productivity and office indoor environment quality: A review of the literature. Building and environment, 105, 369-389. doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2016.06.001
Ali El-Zeiny Rasha Mahmoud, The Interior Design of Workplace and its Impact on Employees' Performance: A Case Study of the Private Sector Corporations in Egypt, Social and Behavioral Sciences 35 (2012) 746 – 756. doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.02.145
Astolfi, A., & Pellerey, F. (2008). Subjective and objective assessment of acoustical and overall environmental quality in secondary school classrooms. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 123(1), 163-173. doi.org/10.1121/1.2816563
Becker, F.D.(1981). Workspace: Creating environments in organizations,1-225.
Bluyssen, P. M., Aries, M., & van Dommelen, P. (2011). Comfort of workers in office buildings: The European HOPE project. Building and Environment, 46(1), 280-288. doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2010.07.024
Bridle, J., & van Rensburg, A. (2020). Discovering the limits of ecological resilience. Science, 367(6478), 626-627. DOI: 10.1126/science.aba6432
Danaee Fard, H., & Kazemi, S. H. (2010). Promoting Interpretive Research in Organization: Overview of Philosophical Foundations and Conduction Process of Phenomenography. Management Studies in Development and Evolution, 20(61), 121-147. Doi: 20.1001.1.22518037.1389.20.61.5.1
D'Oca, S., Corgnati, S., Pisello, A. L., & Hong, T. (2016). Introduction to an occupant behavior motivation survey framework, 1-10. Doi: escholarship.org/uc/item/8td7p9x1
Elos. & Kynga¨sh. The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of Advanced Nursing 62(1), 2008: 107–115. doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x
El-Zeiny, R. M. A. (2012). The interior design of workplace and its impact on employees’ performance: A case study of the private sector corporations in Egypt. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 35, 746-756. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.02.145
Esfandiari, M., Zaid, S. M., Ismail, M. A., & Aflaki, A. (2017). Influence of indoor environmental quality on work productivity in green office buildings: A review. Chemical Engineering Transactions, 56, 385-390. DOI:10.3303/CET1756065
Frontczak, M., & Wargocki, P. (2011). Literature survey on how different factors influence human comfort in indoor environments. Building and environment, 46(4), 922-937. doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2010.10.021
Grundy, W. M., Bird, M. K., Britt, D. T., Cook, J. C., Cruikshank, D. P., Howett, C. J. A., ... & Zangari, A. M. (2020). Color, composition, and thermal environment of Kuiper Belt object (486958) Arrokoth. Science, 367(6481), eaay3705. DOI: 10.1126/science.aay3705
Flick, U. (1956). Designing qualitative research. Sage. ISBN: 9781529766943, 152976694X
Godish Thad; Indoor Environmental Quality; 2001 by CRC Press LLC. ISBN: 9781420056747, 1420056743
Holl, Steven. "Architecture spoken." (2007). lccn.loc.gov/2006931174
Heidari, A. A., Motalebi, G., & Nekoeimehr, F. (2014). Finding Relationship between Sense of Place and Place Attachment in Student Dormitory. Journal of Fine Arts: Architecture & Urban Planning, 19(1), 15-22. doi: 10.22059/jfaup.2014.55372. doi:10.22059/jfaup.2014.55372
Johnson, T. P. (2014). Snowball sampling: introduction. Wiley StatsRef: Statistics Reference Online.doi.org/10.1002/9781118445112.stat05720
Jafari, S. (2023). Developing Productivity Indices for Administrative System of Executive Organs in Semnan Province. The Journal of Productivity Management,17(66),295-263.doi:10.30495/qjopm.2022.1965319.3425.
Kim, J., & De Dear, R. (2012). Nonlinear relationships between individual IEQ factors and overall workspace satisfaction. Building and Environment, 49, 33-40. doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2011.09.022
Kim, J., & De Dear, R. (2013). Workspace satisfaction: The privacy-communication trade-off in open-plan offices. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 36, 18-26. doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2013.06.007
Knasko, S. C. (1992). Ambient odor's effect on creativity, mood, and perceived health. Chemical senses, 17(1), 27-35. doi.org/10.1093/chemse/17.1.27
Kirsten, W. (2010). Making the link between health and productivity at the workplace―A global perspective. Industrial health, 48(3), 251-255. doi.org/10.2486/indhealth.48.251
Kirsten, W. (2010). Making the link between health and productivity at the workplace―A global perspective. Industrial health, 48(3), 251-255. doi.org/10.2486/indhealth.48.251
khormaee, F. (2007). Focus Groups. Methodology of Social Sciences and Humanities, 13(52), 67-81.
Leaman, A., & Bordass, B. (1993). Building design, complexity and manageability. Facilities, 11(9), 16-27. doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000002256
Luppi, A. I., Mediano, P. A., Rosas, F. E., Allanson, J., Pickard, J. D., Carhart-Harris, R. L., ... & Stamatakis, E. A. (2020). A synergistic workspace for human consciousness revealed by integrated information decomposition. BioRxiv, 2020-11. doi.org/10.1101/2020.11.25.398081
Lee, J. J., & Ok, C. (2012). Reducing burnout and enhancing job satisfaction: Critical role of hotel employees’ emotional intelligence and emotional labor. International Journal of hospitality management, 31(4), 1101-1112. doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2012.01.007
Luthar, S. S., Cicchetti, D., & Becker, B. (2000). Research on resilience: Response to commentaries. Child development, 71(3), 573-575. doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00168
Marans, R. W., & Yan, X. Y. (1989). Lighting quality and environmental satisfaction in open and enclosed offices. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 118-131.
Naziatul Syima Mahbob, Nizam Kamaruzzaman Syahrul, Salleh Naziah, Sulaiman Raha; A Correlation Studies of Indoor Environmental Quality(IEQ) Towards Productive Workplace; 2nd International Conference on Environmental Science and Technology; 2011 (ICEST 2011)
Oldham, G. R., & Rotchford, N. L. (1983). Relationships between office characteristics and employee reactions: A study of the physical environment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 542-556. doi.org/10.2307/2393008
Osemeke Monday, Critical Review and Comparism between Maslow, Herzberg and McClelland's Theory of Needs, BUSINESS AND FINANCE (FUJABF) Vol. 1. N0. 1. 2017. Pp 161-173. Maiden Edition
Rath, T., & Harter, J. K. (2010). Wellbeing: The five essential elements. Simon and Schuster, 1-227. ISBN: 9781595620408, 1595620400
Shahbaz, Sima. Qualitative content analysis of books on research methods in humanities and social sciences published in 1380-1391, Khwarazmi University, Tehran: Master's thesis.
Southwick, S. M., Bonanno, G. A., Masten, A. S., Panter-Brick, C., & Yehuda, R. (2014). Resilience definitions, theory, and challenges: interdisciplinary perspectives. European journal of psychotraumatology, 5(1), 25338. doi.org/10.3402/ejpt.v5.25338
Spittles, B. (2015). Making sense of a sense of place. Colloquy, (30), 103-140. Doi: 30, Nov 2015: [103]-[140]
Sharifzadeh, M., & Almaraz, J. (2014). Happiness and Productivity in the Workplace. American Journal of Management, 14(4), 1-8.
Schweitzer, M., Gilpin, L., & Frampton, S. (2004). Healing spaces: elements of environmental design that make an impact on health. Journal of Alternative & Complementary Medicine, 10(Supplement 1), S-71-83. doi.org/10.1089/acm.2004.10.S-71
Southwick, S. M., & Charney, D. S. (2018). Resilience: The science of mastering life's greatest challenges. Cambridge University Press, 1-240. ISBN: 9781108441667, 1108441661
Uyaroğlu, İ. D. (2021). Resilience in interior architecture education: Distance universal design learning in the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Design for Resilience in Architecture and Planning, 2(2), 234-249. doi.org/10.47818/DRArch.2021.v2i2022
Uzee, J. (1999). The inclusive approach: creating a place where people want to work. Facility Management Journal of the International Facility Management Association, 1999, 26-30.
Uyaroğlu, İ. D. (2021). Resilience in interior architecture education: Distance universal design learning in the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Design for Resilience in Architecture and Planning, 2(2), 234-249. doi.org/10.47818/DRArch.2021.v2i2022
Verschaffel, B. (2017). The interior as architectural principle. Palgrave Communications, 3(1), 1-8. DOI: 10.1057/palcomms.2017.38
Vischer, J. C. (2007). The concept of workplace performance and its value to managers. California management review, 49(2), 62-79. doi.org/10.2307/41166383
Veitch, J. A., Charles, K. E., Farley, K. M., & Newsham, G. R. (2007). A model of satisfaction with open-plan office conditions: COPE field findings. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27(3), 177-189. doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2007.04.002
Vischer, J. C. (2008). Towards a user-centred theory of the built environment. Building research & information, 36(3), 231-240. doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2007.04.002
Wu Zezhou, Liu Lei, Shenghan Li and Wang Hao. (2020), Investigating the Crucial Aspects of Developing a Healthy Dormitory based on Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs—A Case Study of Shenzhen, Environ. Res. Public Health, 17(5), Doi: 10.3390/ijerph17051565
Wolkoff, P., Knudsen, H. N., Clausen, P. A., Wilkins, C. K., & Shibuya, H. (2005). The impact of information on perceived air quality–“organic” versus “synthetic” building materials. Proceedings of Indoor Air, 17(2):130-134.
Yildirim, K., Akalin-Baskaya, A., & Celebi, M. (2007). The effects of window proximity, partition height, and gender on perceptions of open-plan offices. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27(2), 154-165. doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2007.01.004