Physical conditions of work remain a hidden dimension of organizational life (Hall, 1966). Historically, physical conditions of work have received relatively little notice in the study of organizations, at least since the Hawthorne Studies appeared to suggest that the manipulation of objective factors was less consequential than the impact of social relations in work settings. Organizational ecology (Steele, 1986), the patterns of reciprocal relationships between individuals and features of their work surroundings, is not well understood. Contemporary interest in the influence of physical settings is on the rise. This is partly because "sick buildings" are common and cause employees to experience chronic fatigue, headaches, dizziness, cardiovascular problems, cancer, and Legionnaires' disease. Sick buildings can injure and kill. The quality of work environments also influences employee morale, productivity, and turnover. It is important for employees and organizational administrators who have to deal with the productive and legal consequences of the neglect of this issue. Recently, Charles Goodsell (1990) categorized physical settings issues as administrative ethnography and identified this as an important emerging area of research in the field of public administration. More research in this area would contribute to greater understanding of the dynamics of administrative life, the influences of organizational cultures within bureaucracy, and the development of crucial work attitudes. What follows is an empirical test of a theory of how person-environment relations work in organizations. The study explores how workers make sense of their surroundings and relates that sense to overall job satisfaction. This research tests two hypotheses. First, employees judge physical work factors based on assessments of a work setting's adequacy, arrangement, and symbolic features and of how much power they feel they have concerning their design and use. Second, employee evaluations of these elements result in an overall
[1]
E. Hall,et al.
The Hidden Dimension
,
1970
.
[2]
Eric Sundstrom,et al.
Status Demarcation in the Office
,
1982
.
[3]
Fritz Steele,et al.
Making and Managing High-Quality Workplaces: An Organizational Ecology
,
1986
.
[4]
W. E. Holland,et al.
Changes in social density: relationships with functional interaction and perceptions of job characteristics, role stress, and work satisfaction.
,
1980,
The Journal of applied psychology.
[5]
Eric Sundstrom,et al.
Work Places: The Psychology of the Physical Environment in Offices and Factories
,
1986
.
[6]
C. Mills,et al.
The Theory of Social and Economic Organization
,
1948
.
[7]
C. Goodsell.
Bureaucratic Manipulation of Physical Symbols: An Empirical Study
,
1977
.
[8]
C. Hood.
EMERGING ISSUES IN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
,
1995
.
[9]
David G. Carnevale.
Physical Settings of Work: A Theory of the Effects of Environmental Form
,
1992
.
[10]
Alan Hedge,et al.
The Open-Plan Office
,
1982
.
[11]
F. Steele,et al.
Physical settings and organization development
,
1973
.
[12]
D. Kolb,et al.
Planning in the Face of Power.
,
1988
.
[13]
Fritz Steele,et al.
The sense of place
,
1981
.
[14]
Tim R. V. Davis,et al.
The Influence of the Physical Environment in Offices
,
1984
.
[15]
John Archea,et al.
The Place of Architectural Factors in Behavioral Theories of Privacy
,
1977
.
[16]
H. Osmond,et al.
Function as the Basis of Psychiatric Ward Design
,
1957
.
[17]
C. Goodsell.
The Social Meaning of Civic Space: Studying Political Authority Through Architecture
,
1988
.