ABW does not improve communication by default

Activity-based working is still often sold through a simple promise: more choice will naturally lead to better interaction.

The controlled study by Haapakangas and colleagues points to a less comfortable but far more useful conclusion. Communication satisfaction and sense of community can weaken after a move to activity-based working (ABW) if the transition is not properly supported.

This article explains why that finding should be treated as an implementation lesson for workplace strategists rather than as a narrow pro- or anti-ABW argument.

Why this controlled study matters

The study is unusually useful because it follows actual relocations over time instead of relying only on one-off perceptions across different office types. Employees were followed after three and twelve months, and the design included a control office that did not move.

That does not remove every limitation, but it gives workplace strategists something much better than a concept pitch. It shows what can happen after a real transition, not only how a finished workplace looks in a brochure.

That distinction matters because workplace strategy is about implementation conditions, not only design intent.

Better collaboration is not an automatic outcome of ABW

The paper found lower satisfaction with communication and lower sense of community after the move into activity-based workplaces. That should make strategists more precise in how they talk about ABW.

The finding does not prove that activity-based working always fails. It proves that improved collaboration cannot simply be assumed because the workplace offers more variety or more movement.

This is exactly why concept-led claims are too weak. If communication quality is part of the business case, it has to be explicitly designed for, supported and measured.

For a broader implementation lens on design, behaviour and technology, see open-plan ABW across sectors.

Coordination and findability shape communication quality

One of the paper's most practical implications is that organisations should address the difficulty of locating colleagues and support workers who are adapting to the new model, especially those coming from private offices.

That is a crucial workplace strategy point.

Many ABW programmes spend too much energy on destinations, desk rules and mobility rhetoric, and too little on the coordination system underneath the concept. Can people find each other? Do they know where different tasks belong? Are the behavioural expectations visible enough to reduce friction?

If the answer is no, then a workplace intended to increase interaction may instead produce searching, uncertainty and reduced community.

What organisations still get wrong about ABW transitions

The most common mistake is treating adaptation as a short launch phase rather than as a structured capability-building process.

This study suggests that negative effects can remain visible well beyond move-in. That means organisations should stop assuming that a few weeks of communication, signage and etiquette reminders are enough.

They also need to stop using openness as a proxy for communication quality. Better communication depends on trust, behavioural clarity, findability and shared norms, not only on a more fluid floorplan.

This is one of the places where AI workplace strategy also intersects with workplace behaviour and trust. The common issue is not the label. It is whether the support system around the work model is real.

What a better ABW brief looks like

A stronger ABW brief should include:

1. an assessment of which groups are most exposed to transition risk
2. a plan for how colleagues locate each other and coordinate work
3. explicit norms for presence, availability and etiquette
4. measures for communication quality, community and perceived support
5. a support model that continues after move-in rather than ending at launch

That is a stronger strategic approach than asking only whether the office has enough variety.

For teams that need a broader structure for turning evidence into workplace decisions, see a workplace strategy framework based on EWCS 2024.

Why this belongs in workplace strategy capability building

ABW evidence like this should not sit in a reading list and then be ignored when projects start.

Teams need the capability to translate research into better workplace briefs, better change support and better post-occupancy evaluation. Without that capability, organisations keep repeating the same mistake: using evidence to decorate a concept instead of using it to sharpen implementation.

Conclusion: communication is a workplace variable, not a concept promise

This paper is valuable because it forces a more disciplined reading of activity-based working.

The strategic lesson is not that ABW is good or bad in itself. The lesson is that communication, community and support have to be designed into the workplace system if collaboration is part of the promised outcome.

That is exactly the kind of evidence Workplace Strategist should carry forward.

Source: Journal of Environmental Psychology, The effects of moving into an activity-based office on communication, social relations and work demands – A controlled intervention with repeated follow-up, published 2019-12.