The Effects of Physical Location on
Communication Patterns (Continued)
May 5, 2007
Probability of Technical Communication as a Function of
Distance Between Work Stations
P ro b ab ility o f W eekly
Co m m u n icatio n
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
0
20
40
60
Separation Distance (Meters)
80
100
An Artifact of Organization?
• But isn’t this just a result of the way in
which we organize and locate
organizational units?
• Then let us control for organizational
affiliation and re-calculate.
The Effect of Organization I
P(C)
D = f(1/N)
DISTANCE
The Effect of Organization II
P(C)
D = f(1/N)
P = f(Iss)
DISTANCE
Probability of Communication
Departmental Size
1
Smoothed P(C)
Raw Data
Power (Raw Data)
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0
10
20
30
Size of Department
40
50
Some Obvious Points
P(C)
S < S
2
1
p < p
2
1
S
S3 < 1
p > p1
3
p3
p1
p2
S3
S2
Distance
S1
Telecommunications?
• But this is face-to-face. What about the
modern media?
– E-mail?
– Telephone?
– Video conference?
• The use of all of these is strongly
correlated with face-to-face contact.
Face-to-Face and Telephone
Communication
PROBABILITY OF TELEPHONE
COMMUNICATION
0.05
0.02
0.01
0.005
0.002
0.001
0.0005
0.0002
0.0001
0.0001
0.0002
0.0005
0.001
0.002
0.005
0.01
PROBABILITY OF FACE-TO-FACE
COMMUNICATION
0.02
0.05
‘Bandwidth’ Limitation
• More important, still, is the fact that all
of these media are ‘bandwidth limited’,
in more than the physical sense.
– It is very difficult to discuss a complex
problem or an idea by e-mail or telephone.
• We phone or e-mail to make the appointment
and then visit face-to-face.
‘Bandwidth’ Limitation
High Complexity Information
Low Complexity Information
Within a
Floor
Within a
Floor
Within a
Building
Within a
Building
Within a
Site
Within a
Site
Between
Sites
Between
Sites
0
20
40
60
80
Proportion of Contacts
Face-to-Face
Telephone
100
0
20
40
60
80
Proportion of Contacts
Face-to-Face
Telephone
100
Communication Between Floors
• Vertical separation is disastrous for
communication.
– We are captured psychologically by the
floor that we are on. That floor becomes
for us ‘the building’.
– Visual contact can offset this effect.
• Atriums
Probability of Weekly Communication Between People
Located on Different Floors in a Building
Organization/Situation
Agricultural Research
Institute (Maximum
Building 3 Floors)
Computer Company
(Maximum Building Height
6 Floors)
Decker Building, Corning
Glass Works (Building
Height 3 Floors with
atrium)
P(C)
0.04
0.01
0.14
A Building Example
• A physical structure for the product
development matrix
– Patterns physical space on the needs of
the product development matrix.
– Enables visual contact between floors.
Main Conclusion
• We must combine both organizational
structure and physical structure
(organizational location and physical
location) to create the desired
communication and support for innovative
new product development.
– We must use both in a systemic manner,
sometimes using one to offset the shortcomings
of the other.
– Neglecting either will lead to difficulties and
detract from the optimal functioning of the
innovation process.
Determining Adjacencies
Work Interdependence
Potential for Creativity
Engineer ‘B’
High
High
Engineer ‘C’
Low
High
Engineer ‘B’
Low
Low
Engineer ‘A’
High
Low
Engineer ‘C’
High
Low
Engineer ‘D’
Low
High
Engineer ‘D’
etc.
Engineer ‘B’
etc.
If these
people
aren’t near
they won’t
communic
ate and
potential
for
creativity
will be
lost.
Awareness
M e a n N u m b e r o f C o m m u n ic a tio n
P a rtn e rs p e r P e rs o n
Effect of New Steelcase Building on Breadth of Communication
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
Move to New Building
0
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Time (Weeks)
14
16
18
20
A Typical Grouping of Offices Around a Secretarial Area.
Same Area Converted to the 'Cave and Commons' Concept.
Office Configuration to Vary Privacy and Accessibility.
Exterior Wall
With
Window
Floor
to
Ceiling
Panels
Sliding Glass Panels
High Panels