It’s established to the point of cliché, but as with almost any product, the successful design of work environment hangs on getting the details right. 

A good example of this is impact of furniture on the way a building is used – even carefully planned, high budget environments can be scuppered by furniture that is uncomfortable to use.  Whilst we wouldn’t want to imply that office design can be reduced to a question of whether or not the chairs are comfy, it is nonetheless an issue worthy of careful consideration.

A case in point is the Nexus areas in the Open University’s Jennie Lee building , which were designed to foster interaction, and include space for informal meetings as well as kitchen facilities.  However, occupants of the Jennie Lee report that the Nexus areas aren’t particularly good places to hold discussions – a key reason being that the chairs in the space are uncomfortable and too heavy to rearrange to suit their requirements. 

Similarly, sharp contrast may be drawn between the breakout areas at BK City , which positively entice occupants to sit and talk, with the ergonomically displeasing chairs in the underused breakout spaces at NTU’s Chaucer refurbishment.

So, how to avoid getting it wrong?

It’s not exactly a ground-breaking idea, but for informing decisions about details such as furniture a really useful activity is to obtain some samples and get as many people as possible to try them out. 

The NTU team leading the Newton-Arkwright refurbishment did this recently:  in addition to consulting with key FM personnel on the cleaning and storage implications of different furniture options, they invited the entire university to come and try them out too.   They set up a room with all the different examples of furniture they were considering for the meeting rooms, breakout areas, workstations, teaching spaces and café area, and emailed everyone inviting them to come and try them. 

This ‘showroom’ was open over the course of four weeks, and a smaller selection of furniture was also set up in the library foyer to boost student engagement. A very simple questionnaire was used to capture feedback – this asked the participants to indicate whether they liked the furniture, and to specify up to three good and three bad things about it. 

Not only did this activity capture useful data on the aesthetics, comfort, flexibility of use and the predicted endurance of the furniture, it was also an effective way of engaging users in the build project, and raising interest and excitement about its progress.