Open space gained popularity as the dominant office model in the 1990s. The promise was simple: more collaboration, better information flow, lower rental costs. The first studies seemed to confirm these assumptions, at least in creative and design environments.
The problem is that over the decades the same concept began to be applied uncritically everywhere: in call centres, law firms, marketing agencies and finance departments. Meanwhile, research from 2010–2020 produced ambiguous results, often contradicting the original promise.
A study published in Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B (Bernstein and Turban, 2018) showed that switching to open space reduced direct face-to-face interactions by 70%, replacing them with electronic communication. People in open spaces spoke spontaneously less often because they felt observed.
Finnish research (Haapakangas et al., 2014) showed that distracting speech noise in an open space increases errors in reading and writing tests by 66%, and subjective discomfort rises in proportion to RT60.
On the other hand, a meta-analysis by CBRE (2022) found that employees who can choose where to work during the day report higher satisfaction than those assigned to a fixed office or a fixed desk in an open space.
The conclusion: it is not about open space vs. separate offices. It is about control over the environment.
The currently dominant model of office design is ABW (Activity-Based Working): no assigned desks, but instead various zones optimised for different types of activity.
- Deep work — workstations with high screens or individual booths for focused work
- Collaboration — workshop tables, mobile whiteboards, open space without screens
- Communication — phone and video calls in small booths or separated zones
- Socialisation — kitchen, coffee area, sofas, non-standardised seating
The key is variety: an employee should be able to choose the type of space appropriate to the task.
Partitions do not have to define permanent rooms. They serve several functions in a hybrid model. They separate zones without building walls: the boundary is visible but can be repositioned within a few hours. They absorb sound at the source, reducing background noise in concentration zones. They create a sense of place and psychological privacy, even if they do not provide full acoustic insulation.
Research by Johnson Controls showed that using partitions (System 20) combined with an acoustic ceiling reduces the subjective perception of noise by 40–55% without removing the element of "openness".
Before deciding whether to divide the space, answer these questions: what is the main type of work? (creative, administrative, customer service), how many workstations require focused work for more than 2 hours a day?, what is the current RT60 and how many complaints concern noise?
If more than 40% of employees perform work requiring concentration and the RT60 exceeds 0.7 s, separating zones with partitions and/or booths will bring a measurable improvement in productivity. If the work is mainly design and collaborative, the money is better invested in absorption (ceiling, carpets, wall panels) than in separation.