New Ways of Working in Academia: Maneuvering in and with Ambiguity in Workspace Design Processes

Grégory Jemine; François  Pichault; Christophe  Dubois

doi:10.37725/mgmt.v25.4447

Grégory Jemine HEC – Management School, Université de Liège, Liège, Belgium
François Pichault HEC – Management School, Université de Liège, Liège, Belgium
Christophe Dubois Faculty of Social Sciences, Université de Liège, Liège, Belgium

DOI: https://doi.org/10.37725/mgmt.v25.4447

Keywords: New Ways of Working, Ambiguity, Academic workspaces, Organizational change, Workspace design

Abstract

As a result of growing financial pressures and changing space demands, universities are increasingly looking to modernize and rationalize their workspaces through projects of New Ways of Working (NWoW). So far, extant research has mostly investigated the managerial construct of NWoW and its outcomes on organizational members, leaving the design process leading NWoW to be implemented in local contexts understudied. By contrast, the present study sets out to redefine NWoW as open-ended projects of organizational change that are unavoidably ambiguous and conflictual, hence seeking to overcome the tendency to conceal tensions arising at early stages of the change process under the abstract black-box of ‘resistance to change’. It is shown that ambiguity, simultaneously understood as an organizational problem causing tensions and as a rhetorical resource enabling collective action, plays a major role in the design process of such equivocal projects. This paper further advances our understanding of ambiguity as a multifaceted concept to bridge between individual rationalities and collective decision-making in the course of complex design processes.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Aroles, J., Mitev, N. & De Vaujany, F. (2019). Mapping themes in the study of new work practices. New Technology, Work, and Employment, 34(3), 285–299. doi: 10.1111/ntwe.12146

Baane, R., Houtkamp, P. & Knotter, M. (2010). Het nieuwe werken ontrafeld. Over bricks, bytes and behavior. Koninklijke Van Gorcum.

Baldry, C. & Barnes, A. (2012). The open-plan academy: Space, control and the undermining of professional identity. Work, Employment and Society, 26(2), 228–245. doi: 10.1177/0950017011432917

Berthelsen, H., Muhonen, T. & Toivanen, S. (2018). What happens to the physical and psychosocial work environment when activity-based offices are introduced into academia? Journal of Corporate Real Estate, 20(4), 230–243. doi: 10.1108/jcre-06-2017-0017

Bijl, D. W. (2011). Journey towards the new way of working. Creating sustainable performance and joy at work. Zeewolde.

Blok, M., Groenesteijn, L., Schelvis, R. & Vink, P. (2012). New ways of working: Does flexibility in time and location of work change work behavior and affect business outcomes? Work, 41, 2605–2610. doi: 10.3233/wor-2012-1028-2605

Brunia, S., De Been, I. & Van der Voordt, T. (2016). Accommodating new ways of working: Lessons from best practices and worst cases. Journal of Corporate Real Estate, 18(1), 30–47. doi: 10.1108/jcre-10-2015-0028

Crozier, M. & Friedberg, E. (1980). Actors & systems. The politics of collective action. The University of Chicago Press.

Czarniawska, B. (2004). On time, space, and action nets. Organization, 11(6), 773–791. doi: 10.1177/1350508404047251

Czarniawska, B. (2008). Organizing: How to study it and how to write about it. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management, 3(1), 4–20. doi: 10.1108/17465640810870364

Davenport, S. & Leitch, S. (2005). Circuits of power in practice: Strategic ambiguity as delegation of authority. Organization Studies, 26(11), 1603–1623. doi: 10.1177/0170840605054627

De Leede, J. (2017). New ways of working practices: Antecedents and outcomes. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

Demerouti, E., Derks, D., Ten Brummelhuis, L. & Bakker, A. (2014). New ways of working: Impact on working conditions, work-family balance, and well-being. In C. Korunka & P. Hoonakker (Eds.), The impact of ICT on quality of working life (pp. 123–141). Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-94-017-8854-0_8

Denis, J., Dompierre, G., Langley, A. & Rouleau, L. (2011). Escalating indecision: Between reification and strategic ambiguity. Organization Science, 22(1), 225–244. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1090.0501

Eisenberg, E. (1984). Ambiguity as strategy in organizational communication. Communication Monographs, 51(3), 227–242. doi: 10.1080/03637758409390197

Engelen, L., Chau, J., Young, S., Mackey, M. et al. (2019). Is activity-based working impacting health, work performance and perceptions? A systematic review. Building Research and Information, 47(4), 468–479. doi: 10.1080/09613218.2018.1440958

Friedberg, E. (1997). Local orders: Dynamics of organized action. Jai Press.

Gerards, R., Grip, A. & Baudewijns, C. (2018). Do new ways of working increase work engagement? Personnel Review, 47(2), 517–534. doi: 10.1108/pr-02-2017-0050

Gioia, D., Nag, R. & Corley, K. (2012). Visionary ambiguity and strategic change: The virtue of vagueness in launching major organizational change. Journal of Management Inquiry, 21(4), 364–375. doi: 10.1177/1056492612447229

Giroux, H. (2006). ‘It was such a handy term’: Management fashions and pragmatic ambiguity. Journal of Management Studies, 43(6), 1227–1260. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6486.2006.00623.x

Gorgievski, M., Van der Voordt, T., Van Herpen, S. & Van Akkeren, S. (2010). After the fire: New ways of working in an academic setting. Facilities, 28(3/4), 206–224. doi: 10.1108/02632771011023159

Hällgren, M. & Maaninen-Olsson, E. (2005). Deviations, ambiguity and uncertainty in a project-intensive organization. Project Management Journal, 36(3), 17–26. doi: 10.1177/875697280503600303

Hutson, A. & McAlinden, A. (2013, September 15–18). Workshopping the workspace: Consultation in designing the shared academic workspace. In I. Dobson, R. Sharma & M. Conway (Eds.), Tertiary Education Management Conference 2013 Refeered Papers (pp. 107–125).

Jarzabkowski, P., Sillince, J. & Shaw, D. (2010). Strategic ambiguity as a rhetorical resource for enabling multiple interests. Human Relations, 63(2), 219–248. doi: 10.1177/0018726709337040

Jemine, G. (2021). Deconstructing new ways of working: A five-dimensional conceptualization proposal. In N. Mitev, J. Aroles, K. Stephenson & J. Malaurent (Eds.), New ways of working: Organizations and organizing in the digital age (pp. 453–480). Palgrave Macmillan. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-61687-8_18

Jemine, G., Dubois, C. & Pichault, F. (2020a). From a new workplace to a new way of working: Legitimizing organizational change. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management, 15(3), 257–278. doi: 10.1108/qrom-10-2018-1690

Jemine, G., Dubois, C. & Pichault, F. (2020b). When the Gallic village strikes back: The politics behind ‘new ways of working’ projects. Journal of Change Management, 20(2), 146–170. doi: 10.1080/14697017.2020.1720777

Jemine, G., Fauconneau-Dufresne, S., Pichault, F. & Rondeaux, G. (2021). Beyond flexibility: Confronting conceived and lived spaces of new ways of working. In N. Mitev, J. Aroles, K. Stephenson & J. Malaurent (Eds.), New ways of working: Organizations and organizing in the digital age (pp. 293–318). Palgrave Macmillan. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-61687-8_12

Karasti, H., Baker, K. S. & Millerand, F. (2010). Infrastructure time: Long-term matters in collaborative development. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 19(3–4), 377–415. doi: 10.1007/s10606-010-9113-z

Kingma, S. (2019). New ways of working (NWW): Work space and cultural change in virtualizing organizations. Culture and Organization, 25(5), 383–406. doi: 10.1080/14759551.2018.1427747

Kok, A. (2016). The new way of working: Bricks, bytes, and behavior. In L. Jungwoo (Ed.), The impact of ICT on work (pp. 9–40). Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-981-287-612-6_2

Kotesveld, R. & Kamperman, L. (2011). How flexible workspace strategies can be made successful at the operational level. Corporate Real Estate Journal, 1(4), 303–319.

Kuntz, A., Petrovic, J. & Ginocchio, L. (2012). A changing sense of place: A case study of academic culture and the built environment. Higher Education Policy, 25(4), 433–451. doi: 10.1057/hep.2011.29

Lai, C., Bobillier-Chaumon, M., Vacherand-Ravel, J. & Abitan A. (2021). Thinking activity-based work environment throughout situated acceptance. Journal of Workplace Learning, 33(1), 10–25. doi: 10.1108/jwl-02-2020-0027

Lancione, M. & Clegg, S. (2013). The chronotypes of change: Actor-networks in a changing business school. Journal of Change Management, 13(2), 117–142. doi: 10.1080/14697017.2012.753930

Lansdale, M., Parkin, J., Austin, S. & Baguley, T. (2011). Designing for interaction in research environments: A case study. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 31(4), 407–420. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2011.05.006

MacKay, R. & Chia, R. (2013). Choice, chance, and unintended consequences in strategic change: A process understanding of the rise and fall of Northco Automotive. Academy of Management Journal, 56(1), 208–230. doi: 10.5465/amj.2010.0734

March, J. (1978). Bounded rationality, ambiguity, and the engineering of choice. The Bell Journals of Economics, 9(2), 587–608. doi: 10.2307/3003600

March, J. & Olsen, J. (1975). The uncertainty of the past: Organizational learning under ambiguity. European Journal of Political Research, 3(2), 147–171. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6765.1975.tb00521.x

Muhonen, T. & Berthelsen, H. (2021). Activity-based work and its implications for the academic work environment. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 13(3), 889–899. doi: 10.1108/jarhe-02-2020-0046

Parkin, J., Austin, S., Pinder, J., Baguley, T. et al. (2011). Balancing collaboration and privacy in academic workspaces. Facilities, 29(1), 31–49. doi: 10.1108/02632771111101313

Peters, P. (2014). Enjoying new ways to work: An HRM-process approach to study flow. Human Resource Management, 53(2), 271–290. doi: 10.1002/hrm.21588

Pinder, J., Parkin, J., Austin, S., Duggan, F. et al. (2009). The case for new academic workspaces. Loughborough University.

Salancik, G. & Pfeffer, J. (1974). The bases and uses of power in organizational decision making: The case of a university. Administrative Science Quarterly, 19(4), 453–473. doi: 10.2307/2391803

Samson, D. (2013). From the ivory tower to activity-based workspaces. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 3(6), 624–626. doi: 10.7763/ijiet.2013.v3.349

Sillince, J., Jarzabkowski, P. & Shaw, D. (2012). Shaping strategic action through the rhetorical construction and exploitation of ambiguity. Organization Science, 23(3), 630–650. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1110.0670

Urasadettan, J. (2019). The impact of project ambiguity on the forms of cooperation developed: The merging of two hospital care units. M@n@gement, 22(1), 56–91. doi: 10.3917/mana.221.0056

Van Marrewijk, A. & Van den Ende, L. (2018). Changing academic work places: The introduction of open-plan offices in universities. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 31(5), 1119–1137. doi: 10.1108/jocm-02-2017-0039

Van Stralen, D. (2015). Ambiguity. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 23(2), 47–53. doi: 10.1111/1468-5973.12082

Veer, E. & Dobele, A. (2018). My best writing space: Understanding academics self-professed writing spaces. Higher Education, 78(2), 345–364. doi: 10.1007/s10734-018-0346-y

Veldhoen, E. (2005). The art of working. Academic Service.

Vitasovich, A., Kiroff, L. & Boon, J. (2016, July 6–8). The adoption of modern office workspaces by tertiary education institutes: A case study of Unitec. In 40th AUBEA Conference (pp. 797–807).

Weick, K. (2015). Ambiguity as grasp: The reworking of sense. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 23(2), 117–123. doi: 10.1111/1468-5973.12080

Weick, K., Sutcliffe, K. & Obstfeld, D. (2005). Organizing and the process of sensemaking. Organization Science, 16(4), 409–421. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1050.0133

Wilhoit, E., Gettings, P., Malik, P., Hearit, L. et al. (2016). STEM faculty responses to proposed workspace changes. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 29(5), 804–815. doi: 10.1108/jocm-04-2015-0064

Wyllie, T., Greene, M., Nagrath, R. & Town, A. (2012). Activity based working. Jones Lang LaSalle Report, pp. 1–16.