Introduction

The Activity-Based Workplace (ABW) is becoming increasingly popular. It is an office design that aims to facilitate new ways of working [1,2]. ABWs are often implemented in organisations due to cost savings, more efficient use of office space and increased flexibility [1]. The ABW recognises that throughout the day, workers engage in many different activities, and to accommodate these activities they can choose various types of work settings. No fixed workstations are assigned for the employees and instead, they are expected to transit between different work areas depending on the task they will perform [3,4]. For instance, a quiet area with few distractions can be chosen if a task requires concentration. If the work task requires closeness to colleagues, an open area for communication and collaboration may be selected [3].

Research focusing on the effects of ABWs on various outcomes is growing, although the findings are still inconsistent. For instance, positive work conditions have been found in ABWs, such as increased work satisfaction due to autonomy [5], better task collaboration across teams [6], increased physical activity and less back pain [7]. Conversely, negative impacts such as a higher level of distraction and cognitive stress in ABWs compared to cellular offices [8], musculoskeletal problems [2], lack of privacy [5], lack of communication within teams [9], decreased work engagement and fatigue [10] have been found. Mache et al. [11] found that perceived occupational stress decreased and perceived workload increased after the transition to ABWs from traditional offices in a large technology company [11]. A longitudinal study found that relocating to ABWs from traditional offices in a large Swedish government agency significantly decreased employees’ perceived productivity. However, the productivity loss among employees was reduced if leadership was perceived to be change-oriented. That study highlighted the importance of leadership behaviour and actions when implementing organisational changes [1]. Although research demonstrates both positive and negative consequences of ABWs for organisations, employees, and managers, these consequences vary depending on the nature of the work [12].

The majority of research on ABWs has focused on the employees’ experiences [3,9,13] rather than on leaders [1,14], and only a limited number of studies have integrated perspectives from both groups [15]. In addition, studies on the transition and implementation processes for both groups are rare [1,11].

Research on the combination of remote work and office-based work, including models such as ABWs in public sector workplaces, remains limited, as noted by Carrasco-Garrido and De-Pablos-Heredero [16]. This gap in knowledge forms the empirical foundation for the present study. The proportion of respondents who partially or fully work from home varies significantly across European countries, ranging from approximately 20% to 80%. Sweden stands out as one of the countries with the highest prevalence of people working from home, with around 60% of workers engaging in this type of work [17], which has contributed to a greater adoption of alternative office solutions.

Public sector workplaces constitute the largest segment of the workforce in many countries. In Sweden, approximately 1.5 million individuals are employed in the public sector, out of a total workforce of around 5 million [18]. Within the Nordic countries, the adoption of new public management strategies and the reduction of available resources have been posited as contributing factors to the increased workload and reduced job control experienced in public sector environments [19]. In Swedish public sector workplaces, the psychosocial working conditions are frequently challenging, resulting in significant health issues and elevated rates of sick leave among employees [20–22]. In addition, extensive research on managers within the Swedish public sector [21,23,24] highlights that many managers face arduous working conditions, often exacerbated by a lack of adequate organisational support structures.

The concept of sense of coherence (SOC) can offer valuable insights for a better understanding of how people navigate the transition to ABWs. The SOC framework was developed by Antonovsky [25] and reflects the coping capacity of people to handle everyday life stressors. A strong SOC makes a person cognitively and emotionally capable of understanding problems and willing to face them. On the other hand, a weak SOC decreases a person’s ability to cope with difficult situations effectively. The SOC encompasses three components – comprehensibility, meaningfulness and manageability. Comprehensibility is a measure of the ability to perceive incidents and circumstances as structured and understandable. Meaningfulness is the belief that challenges and demands are worthy of investment. Manageability is the ability to cope with difficult situations and have sufficient internal and external resources to do so [25]. The term generalised resistance resources (GRR) is closely connected to the SOC and refers to the resources of a person, a group or a community that enable the individual’s abilities to cope effectively with stressors and contribute to the development of an SOC [26]. These may be resources such as knowledge, coping strategies, social support, the individual’s state of mind and material resources. It was initially believed that a person’s SOC stabilised in early adulthood, but it was later proposed that it can be further influenced by life experiences, such as the working environment [25]. Workers with a strong SOC feel confident that resources are available to cope with work demands and are more likely to adopt adaptive strategies that are suitable to the specific situation [27,28]. If adequate GRRs are present, challenges are resolved, leading to a strengthened SOC. On the other hand, if GRRs are lacking or inappropriate, challenges remain unresolved or are resolved poorly leading to a weaker SOC [29].

A large number of studies indicate that a strong SOC is associated with better health and well-being in different people and groups and that it is cross-culturally applicable [30–32]. A strong SOC is also positively related to other health resources, such as resilience, optimism and coping [30]. In the context of work, a high SOC has been associated with better self-reported health and greater work engagement among nurses [33], and an enhanced ability for managers to mobilise and generate social resources in the workplace, leading to perceptions of a supportive organisational climate [34]. Longitudinal analyses have also found that the SOC might protect against the negative effects of organisational change on mental health [35]. Furthermore, in a Finnish study, a good organisational climate and low job insecurity were related to a strong SOC, which in turn was associated with a high level of well-being in employees working in different organisations. The aforementioned study also concluded that various environmental changes may cause changes in the SOC.

In the context of ABWs, research focusing on the SOC is scarce, and to our knowledge, only one study has examined the SOC of people working in ABWs. The longitudinal study by Wijk et al. [36] found that a higher SOC was associated with better health, well-being and satisfaction during relocation to ABWs in the public sector in Sweden. In addition, the negative effects of relocation on work satisfaction were mitigated by higher levels of perceived meaningfulness. The authors recommended conducting additional studies on ABWs to address indicators of an SOC further.

In summary, there is a lack of research on the transition to ABWs that integrates perspectives from both managers and employees, concentrating on the SOC. Studying both groups is important as it may lead to a more comprehensive understanding of how people from different levels within the workplace may handle and adapt to the changes. Furthermore, it may reveal factors that can facilitate or act as barriers to a sense of coherence for both groups during an organisational change. Hence, the aim of this study is to explore how managers and employees experienced the transition period to an ABW through the lens of the SOC. Three research questions will be addressed:

1. How were comprehensibility, manageability and meaningfulness perceived by managers and employees in public sector workplaces during the transition to an ABW?
2. What are the identified barriers and facilitators during the transition to ABWs for managers and employees in public sectors seen from an SOC perspective?
3. Which practical and theoretical implications can be suggested based on the study findings?

Research setting

During the autumn of 2023, the majority of the managers and employees in a Swedish mid-sized municipality moved into a newly built office building with an activity-based workplace design. In total, 620 administrative workers (534 employees and 86 managers) moved into the new building. They represented different departments: social care, the administrative office, the city planning office and culture and leisure. The purpose of the move was to set up the municipality’s activity-based way of working, continue to gain support for this approach amongst employees, and develop a foundation to prepare the functionality of the building for an activity-based working method. One of the aims was to lay the groundwork for creating an attractive workplace with an effective way of working, supported by the building’s features and IT solutions. After the relocation, the workforce was spread over three floors containing open-plan offices, three zones (creative, middle and silent zones), conference rooms, a canteen and coffee rooms. The relocation process started in 2019 with a project including workshops with employees and managers, field trips by managers to other organisations that had implemented ABWs and training by working in open-plan offices.

Methods

Data analysis

All transcripts were coded by the first author, after which the other authors thoroughly reviewed the transcripts and codes and provided detailed feedback. Only minor changes were made to the codes based on the review. The analysis was performed deductively in several stages, in accordance with Elo and Kyngäs [37]. The interview transcripts were initially read several times to make sense of the whole. A theory-based categorisation matrix with the pre-set categories of comprehensibility, meaningfulness and manageability was then created using the NVivo software (1.4.1). Once the categorisation had been created, all the data was reviewed for content, and condensed meaning units were coded deductively in line with the categories identified. The data from the individual interviews and focus groups were coded together and differentiated by identifiers to separate insights derived from the different groups.

Meaning units from both data sets were coded into the comprehensibility category when the participants discussed if and how they made sense of information or situations regarding ABWs. Meaning units were coded into the manageability category when the participants discussed the degree to which they felt that there were resources at their disposal and how challenges were handled. When statements concerned their motivation and desire to cope with the stimuli encountered, and their experience of meaningfulness in their work, the meaning units were coded into the meaningfulness category.

The coded meaning units in each category were then grouped and categorised into sub-categories according to their meanings and similarities. The most used sub-categories were chosen for further analysis: information and preparation, clear rules, adaptability, leadership, social relations, and health and well-being (Table 1) and these were divided into facilitating factors and barriers to obtaining a SOC. Facilitators were conceptualised as factors that enhanced the components of comprehensibility, manageability, or meaningfulness, and barriers were understood as factors that hindered these components, creating challenges in adapting to ABW.

Download:

• PPT
  PowerPoint slide
• PNG
  larger image
• TIFF
  original image

Table 1. Coding framework based on the sense of coherence categories.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0320324.t001

Findings

Six sub-categories within the three main SOC categories were identified in the material and considered important to the participants during the transition to ABWs (Fig 1).

Download:

• PPT
  PowerPoint slide
• PNG
  larger image
• TIFF
  original image

Fig 1. The three SOC categories and the sub-categories obtained from the analysis.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0320324.g001

Discussion

The aim of this study was to explore how managers and employees experienced the transition period to an ABW through the lens of an SOC. This is an important research focus, as studies of ABWs often lack a health-promoting perspective.

The main finding of this study is that managers and employees reported both positive and negative experiences during the transition to an ABW, influenced by factors that acted as both facilitators and barriers to an SOC. Although both groups identified several similar facilitators and barriers, differences emerged due to their hierarchical positions. Managers generally had more opportunities to act and influence workplace conditions, directly affecting employees’ experiences of the work environment. Employees, on the other hand, had less power to influence these conditions but adapted to challenges through individual strategies.

The strength of an individual’s SOC is shaped by both negative and positive life events, as well as internal and external resources [25,44]. These findings suggest that to strengthen SOC among managers and employees during the transition to ABWs, it is important to enhance positive factors and resources while addressing the negative aspects of the work environment. Similar conclusions have been drawn in previous research on the implementation of ABWs [36]. Even if a person is exposed to stressors or new situations, a sufficient level of comprehensibility, manageability and meaningfulness may enable people to feel self-efficacious to deal with the situation and to identify resources in the environment [25,44,45].

Based on the results presented, it can be concluded that it is important for managers and employees to be provided with both theoretical and practical information to better comprehend and accept the situation when transitioning to an ABW. For the managers, receiving structured information from superior management enabled them to pass on information to the employees. Workshops, seminars and lectures facilitated the information sharing and made the processes clearer leading up to the move, which was very important for both groups. This is in line with a study by Bergsten et al. [1] which concluded that information and support is needed when relocating to ABWs to achieve employee satisfaction with the relocation. The study also found that the employees gained an increased understanding of the ABW concept when they took part in activities such as workshops and seminars surrounding the relocation.

In accordance with other studies, involvement and support from managers are important for the employees’ perception of a new intervention [1] and starting the preparations early facilitates mental preparation and acceptance of change [46]. The results reveal that when transitioning to ABWs, communication about why the change is needed is essential. Failing in this communication might decrease the comprehensibility of the situation, as emphasized by the employees in our study. Previous research has shown that clear goals for the change are important during organizational change processes related to workplaces [47,48]. Open discussion between managers and employees is needed as the latter group may resist change if the goals are not understood [48].

In terms of ABWs with clearly divided zones, the results confirmed that both managers and employees need to understand what applies in the different zones, and the managers have an important role in communicating the rules. One study found that when the rules in ABWs were explicit and clear, it resulted in a higher proportion of resources in terms of positive work conditions [49]. Furthermore, clear rules made people feel secure in their actions, while the absence of clear rules led to different interpretations of acceptable actions and rule-breaking. Another study suggested ongoing supervision on the proper use of the work environment for ensuring employees use the premises as expected [50], which was also confirmed in the interviews with the participants in our study.

Our analysis indicates that factors such as flexibility and leadership affected the managers’ and employees’ feeling of manageability. While changing workstations often in the ABW can be time-consuming, the flexible work and different zones may be beneficial as they can help people structure their work more effectively, increase autonomy, and enhance people’s work-life balance. Mache and colleagues [11] also reported that job autonomy increased after the transition to ABWs. Their analysis revealed that ABWs may be challenging for managers as it can reduce the ability to monitor, check and coordinate with their employees. As ABWs may increase freedom and autonomy for workers [11] and decrease contact between managers and employees [12], it may be important to maintain a close dialogue to make sure that there is clarity about what is needed from both parties to manage different tasks [11]. Research has pointed toward the importance of a leadership style that promotes trust between managers and employees in ABWs [12], which was also emphasised in the interviews in our study. If managers show only limited trust and try to limit the autonomy of employees, it may negatively affect employee well-being, job satisfaction and job performance [51]. Finding ways to check in on each other in a flexible work environment is important. According to Harris [52], effective communication between managers and employees is important for teamwork, the delegation process, job structure and planning. For this reason, in ABWs communication needs to be done using different channels to increase its effectiveness [53].

Social relations and health and well-being may affect the level of meaningfulness managers and employees find in an ABW. The interviews revealed that the ABW made it easier to network and have meaningful conversations with different people in the office building, but also harder to keep in touch with people in the immediate team. This is consistent with other studies that found that ABWs negatively impacted social interactions within the teams [54] and led to a decline in satisfaction with communication, and a decline in the sense of belonging post-relocation [13]. Conversely, the results are in contrast with the findings from a study by Häne and colleagues [55] where the ABW was reported to improve staff interaction, communication and collaboration. As people moved towards working more from home and in different places during the day, it seemed inevitable that fewer social interactions would occur. Finding ways to stay in touch with colleagues regularly was important to the cohesiveness of the team in our study. Given that humans derive meaning from their social relations, which is critical to their health and well-being [56,57], this is an important issue to address. Participating in parties and activities both outside and inside the immediate work circle was demonstrated to strengthen cohesion in the workplace. Social well-being in the workplace includes engaging in enjoyable activities, which can enhance meaningfulness for workers [58,59]. This may help to improve performance, form a positive job attitude and bring about proactive behaviours [60,61].

According to our analysis, the ABW led to increased physical activity, which may have a positive effect on the workers’ health and well-being, which has also been reported in other studies [7,62]. Conversely, ergonomic issues such as sitting poorly and carrying heavy equipment were reported by managers and employees alike, which is in line with other studies [2]. This in turn may lead to health issues and distract people from work [63]. The physical work environment is important for the workers’ health, well-being and job satisfaction, and is subsequently connected to meaningfulness [64]. To increase meaningfulness the management should work together with the managers and employees to create meaningful office environments where people feel valued and supported [65].

Moreover, in addition to identifying facilitators and barriers in the implementation of ABWs, the analysis can be indirectly linked to how favourable working conditions enhance productivity outcomes. A productive and sustainable work environment requires adequate access to information, clearly defined rules, flexibility, available managers, health-promoting working conditions, social activities, and a structured approach to social relations [1,66–68]. In addition, if employees experience the transition processes as satisfactory and meaningful, it increases self-rated productivity [69].

The knowledge obtained from this study may support organisations in the implementation of ABWs. Considering the identified facilitators and barriers could enhance the transition process.

Conclusions and implications

The transition to ABWs from traditional offices is a complex process and the managers and employees had both positive and negative experiences during this period. The analysis showed that they were exposed to factors which may have acted as both facilitators and barriers to an SOC. According to the analysis, the participants’ comprehensibility during the transition was affected by information, preparations and clear rules. Flexibility at the workplace and leadership appear to have affected the managers’ and employees’ feeling of manageability. Finally, the analysis indicated that social relations, health and well-being affected the managers’ and employees’ perceptions of meaningfulness.

To strengthen the SOC in managers and employees during the transition to ABWs, there needs to be a focus on increasing positive factors and resources as well as addressing the negative factors in the work environment. A sufficient level of comprehensibility, manageability and meaningfulness may enable people to feel self-efficacious enough to deal with the situation and to identify resources in the environment [44].

It is challenging to propose universally applicable strategies for transitioning to ABWs with an increased proportion of employees and managers working from home. Workplace-related ABW interventions must consider the specific context and nature of the work when implementing such strategies [70]. Nevertheless, certain recommendations can be more broadly applicable. Based on the deductive analysis using the SOC framework, the results suggest that adequate information and preparation both before and during the transition to ABWs may facilitate employees’ and managers’ experience of the process as more meaningful and comprehensible. Additionally, it is essential to establish clear guidelines for both employees and managers concerning the use of various work zones. Conducting workshops and seminars that provide practical guidance on the effective design of ABWs, address ergonomic concerns, and support the maintenance of relationships between employees and managers can enhance the sense of meaningfulness for all stakeholders involved.

A critical factor for both meaningfulness and comprehensibility is the implementation of a planning phase before the transition, which includes several mandatory activities for both employees and managers. If participation in these activities is not compulsory, there is a risk that non-participating individuals may perceive a lack of information about the transition as a significant barrier. In terms of manageability, it is essential for employees to have adequate resources to navigate the challenges, such as access to different work zones and the flexibility to alternate between working from home and the office. To promote high levels of employee meaningfulness, comprehensibility, and manageability, it is essential for managers to engage in supportive and adaptive behaviours during and after the implementation of ABWs. Furthermore, providing managers with sufficient knowledge and resources is crucial for exercising effective leadership in the context of ABWs. Lastly, to support manageability for both groups, it is important to design ABWs that uphold high standards in physical work environment factors, including well-designed workspaces, ergonomic equipment, and effective noise reduction measures.

For future research, both qualitative and quantitative studies with larger samples are required to gain a better understanding of the effects of the SOC on employees and managers when transitioning to ABWs. Studying other organisations to enhance the understanding of the SOC in different settings is important. Further research is needed to explore how the intensity and quality of preparation phases are associated with SOC outcomes for employees and managers. Additionally, future studies should examine how various types of work and individual factors, such as gender, age, and family circumstances, influence attitudes toward ABWs and how they affect health and productivity outcomes.

Strengths and limitations

Previous studies on the SOC in the workplace have mostly focused on traditional offices, whereas this study explores the SOC in the context of ABWs and provides insights into how the SOC can be affected in flexible work environments. Moreover, a strength of the study is that it included both managers and employees, which to our knowledge has not previously been done in relation to the SOC and ABWs. The extensive interviews made it possible to deepen the understanding of the participants’ experiences during the transition to ABWs. Using both individual interviews and focus group interviews acted as method triangulation and provided insights of the area from both an individual and group perspective. Further, to enhance trustworthiness, Lincoln and Guba’s approach of credibility, transferability, dependability, confirmability and authenticity was used in this study [71]. Credibility was achieved through data-source triangulation from the individual and focus group interviews. Transferability was achieved by giving a clear description of methods and participant characteristics. Dependability was achieved through transcript review and discussions in the research team. To ensure dependability and confirmability, reflective thoughts after interviews, notes on decisions taken during the research process, and research materials were saved to allow for a review of the transparency of the research path. Finally, authenticity was demonstrated through the verbatim transcriptions and inclusion of participant quotes. Reflexivity was continuous throughout the research process and encompassed the authors reflecting on their impact on the analysis and their personal biases.

Limitations of the study may be that the results reflect local conditions in Sweden that may not be representative of other cultural contexts in Europe. However, the results may be transferrable to similar Swedish public sector workplaces. Furthermore, the participants came from one organisation making it hard to generalise the findings to other workplaces. However, they represented different and common departments in municipal organisations. The participants were purposively selected, and it is possible that participants who were more positive about the transition chose to participate. The pre-defined SOC categories may have implied a potential disregard for other relevant categories. However, the categories were not used to guide data collection or probe questions during the interviews and were only applied during the analytical process. The coding process remained data-driven within the framework. The small sample size of seven managers and nine employees may also be considered a limitation. However, the material was rich [72], hence adequate [73], and was therefore deemed sufficient to answer our research questions.

Lastly, the use of both individual semi-structured interviews and focus group interviews may be seen as a limitation as individual semi-structured interviews generally offer in-depth conversations, whereas focus group interviews offer multiple perspectives at once and might be less in depth. Nevertheless, different qualitative methods within the study were used as it may enhance the analysis of a phenomenon and broaden its conceptualisation [42].

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the managers and employees who generously shared their experiences with us, and the two research assistants who conducted the individual interviews.