User-Centered Design for Coworking Space Interiors
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15320/ICONARP.2025.341Keywords:
Coworking spaces, Interior design, Post-occupancy evaluation, User-centered design, Work environmentsAbstract
Coworking spaces, beyond being a physical space, represent a new organizational form and a new living style. Although coworking spaces have been widely studied by human sciences and managerial disciplines, academic studies on their spatial characteristics are limited and they are focused on some specific areas. This paper draws a multi-dimensional framework for spatial characteristics that play an important role in users' satisfaction and preference for a coworking space. In this context the paper aims to determine the user-centered spatial characteristics constituting a guide for interior design of coworking spaces and to introduce design considerations based on the research findings. The spatial characteristics are reclassified under technical, functional and behavioural characteristics (Post-Occupancy Evaluation method); an "user-centered design research for coworking spaces" structured with these characteristics is conducted, and design considerations based on research findings are introduced. The research reveals satisfaction and importance levels of spatial characteristics in coworking spaces; identifies the spatial characteristics with low performance that need to be improved; confirms the importance of spatial characteristics in users' preference for a coworking space and reveals that spatial characteristic preferences differ for users with different characteristics. The key findings regarding the user-centered spatial characteristics are “to consider the spatial configuration of noisy and quiet spaces according to the levels of interaction and privacy for users having different work motivations”, “to provide the arrangement of activity spaces, gathering spaces and workspaces (collaboration spaces and private spaces) allowing flexibility and individual control possibility” and “to create a cozy interior atmosphere with a strong IT infrastructure”. As a practical contribution, this paper provides useful information for owners, managers and designers of coworking space, in the process of renovating or establishing a coworking space.
References
Aabø, S., Audunson, R. and Vårheim, A. (2010). How do public libraries function as meeting places?. Library and Information Science Research, 32(1), 16–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2009.07.008
Augustin, S. (2014). Designing for collaboration and collaborating for design. Journal of Interior Design, 39(1), 9–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/joid.12020
Bilandzic, M. and Foth, M. (2013). Libraries as coworking spaces: Understanding user motivations and perceived barriers to social learning. Library Hi Tech, 31(2), 254–273. https://doi.org/10.1108/07378831311329040
Kojo, I. and Nenonen, S. (2016). Typologies for co-working spaces in Finland–what and how?. Facilities, 34(5/6), 302–313. https://doi.org/10.1108/F-08-2014-0066
Leclercq-Vandelannoitte A. and Isaac, H. (2016). The new office: how coworking changes the work concept. Journal of Business Strategy, 37(6), 3–9. https://doi.org/10.1108/JBS-10-2015-0105
Lee, S. S. (2018). Third places to work in the digital age: implications from coworking space users' motivations and preferred environmental features. MSc Thesis, Cornell University.
Lutzkendorf, T. and Speer, T. (2005). Alleviating asymmetric information in property markets: building performance and product quality as signals for consumers. Building Research and Information, 33(2), 182–195. https://doi.org/10.1080/0961321042000323815
Mariotti, I., Pacchi, C. and Di Vita, S. (2017). Coworking spaces in Milan: location patterns and urban effects. Journal of Urban Technology, 24(3), 47–66. https://doi.org/10.1080/10630732.2017.1311556
Meinel, M., Maier, L., Wagner, T., and Voigt, K. I. (2017). Designing creativity-enhancing workspaces: A critical look at empirical evidence. Journal of Technology and Innovation Management, 1 (1), 1–12.
Moriset, B. (2013). Building new places of the creative economy. The rise of coworking spaces. Territoire en Mouvement, 10.4000/tem.3868.
Oldenburg, R. (1999). The Great Good Place: Cafés, Coffee Shops, Bookstores, Bars, Hair Salons, and Other Hangouts at the Heart of a Community. Marlowe, USA.
Ondia, E. P., Hengrasmee S. and Chansomsak, S. (2019). Addressing the dilema between collaboration and privacy in coworking spaces. International Journal of Architecture and Urban Development, 9(3), 5–10.
Orel, M. and Almeida, M. D. M. A. (2019). The ambience of collaboration in coworking environments. Journal of Corporate Real Estate, 21(4), 273–289. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCRE-12-2018-0050
Preiser, W. F. E., Rabinowitz, H. Z. and White, E.T. (1988). Post-Occupancy Evaluation. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.
Preiser, W.F.E. and Vischer, J.C. (eds). (2005). Assessing Building Performance. Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford.
Remøy, H. and Van der Voordt, T. J. M. (2014). Priorities in accommodating office user preferences: Impact on office users decision to stay or go. Journal of Corporate Real Estate, 16(2), 140–154. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCRE-09-2013-0029
Sanoff, H. (1977). Methods of Architectural Programming. Hutchinson and Ross Inc., Dowden.
Sayers, J.G. (2009). Flat whites: how and why people work in cafes. New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 34(2), 77–86.
Schmidt, S., Brinks, V. and Brinkhoff, S. (2014). Innovation and creativity labs in Berlin. Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsgeographie, 58(1), 232–247. https://doi.org/10.1515/zfw.2014.0016
Schopfel, J., Roche, J. and Hubert, G. (2015). Co-working and innovation: new concepts for academic libraries and learning centres. New Library World, 116(1/2), 67–78. https://doi.org/10.1108/NLW-06-2014-0072
Stryker J. B. and Santoro M. D. (2012). Facilitating face-to-face communication in high-tech teams. Research- Technology Management, 55(1), 51–56. https://doi.org/10.5437/08956308X5501013
Tuğlu Karslı, U. (2020). Design for the future of work: a theoretical framework for coworking space design. In Y. Blount and M. Gloet (Eds.), Anywhere working and the future of Work (pp.163–189). IGI Global, Hershey, USA. https://dx.doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-4159-3.ch007
Van de Koevering, J. (2017). The preferred characteristics of coworking spaces. MSc Thesis, Eindhoven University of Technology.
Vischer, J. C. (2008a). Towards a user-centred theory of the built environment. Building Research and Information, 36(3), 231–240. https://doi.org/10.1080/09613210801936472
Vischer, J. C. (2008b). Towards an environmental psychology of workspace: how people are affected by environments for work. Architectural Science Review, 51(2), 97–108. https://doi.org/10.3763/asre.2008.5114
Waxman, L. (2006). The coffee shop: social and physical factors influencing place attachment. Journal of Interior Design, 31(3), 35–53. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1939-1668.2006.tb00530.x
Weijs-Perrée, M., Van de Koevering, J., Appel-Meulenbroek, R., and Arentze, T. (2019). Analysing user preferences for co-working space characteristics. Building Research and Information, 47(5), 534–548. https://doi.org/10.1080/09613218.2018.1463750
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 ICONARP International Journal of Architecture and Planning
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
COPYRIGHT POLICY
1. The International Journal of Architecture and Planning (ICONARP) open access articles are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDeriatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). This license lets the author to share (copy and redistribute) his/her article in any medium or format.
2. ICONARP cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms. Under the following terms:
The author must give appropriate credit, provide a link to ICONARP, and indicate if changes were made on the article. The author may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the ICONARP endorses the author or his/her use.
The author may not use the article for commercial purposes.
If the author remix, transform, or build upon the article, s/he may not distribute the modified material.
The author may share print or electronic copies of the Article with colleagues.
The author may use the Article within his/her employer’s institution or company for educational or research purposes, including use in course packs.
3. The author authorizes the International Journal of Architecture and Planning (ICONARP) to exclusively publish online his/her Article, and to post his/her biography at the end of the article, and to use the articles.
4. The author agrees to the International Journal of Architecture and Planning (ICONARP) using any images from the Article on the cover of the Journal, and in any marketing material.
5. As the author, copyright in the Article remains in his/her name.
6. All papers should be submitted electronically. All submitted manuscripts must be original work that is not under submission at another journal or under consideration for publication in another form, such as a monograph or chapter of a book. Authors of submitted papers are obligated not to submit their paper for publication elsewhere until an editorial decision is rendered on their submission. Further, authors of accepted papers are prohibited from publishing the results in other publications that appear before the paper is published in the Journal.
ICONARP International Journal of Architecture and Planning is an OAJ supported by 