WORKPLACE ENVIRONMENT AND EMPLOYEE PRODUCTIVITY
A Graduate Thesis
The Faculty of the Graduate School
SAN BEDA COLLEGE – ALABANG
In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree
MASTER IN BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
Kristofferson E. Cabungan
Dr. Benedict E. Razon
11 June 2018
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TOC o “1-3” u ACKNOWLEDGEMENT PAGEREF _Toc517083690 h 1
ABSTRACT PAGEREF _Toc517083691 h 1
THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND PAGEREF _Toc517083692 h 1
Introduction PAGEREF _Toc517083693 h 1
Background of the study PAGEREF _Toc517083694 h 2
Theoretical framework PAGEREF _Toc517083695 h 4
Conceptual framework PAGEREF _Toc517083696 h 6
Statement of the problem PAGEREF _Toc517083697 h 7
Statement of hypothesis PAGEREF _Toc517083698 h 7
Significance of the study PAGEREF _Toc517083699 h 8
Scope and delimitation PAGEREF _Toc517083700 h 8
Definition of Terms PAGEREF _Toc517083701 h 9
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES PAGEREF _Toc517083702 h 12
Synthesis PAGEREF _Toc517083703 h 25
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY PAGEREF _Toc517083704 h 27
Research method PAGEREF _Toc517083705 h 27
Sample and sampling technique PAGEREF _Toc517083706 h 27
Research instruments PAGEREF _Toc517083707 h 28
Data gathering procedure PAGEREF _Toc517083708 h 28
Statistical treatment of data PAGEREF _Toc517083709 h 29
PRESENTATION, INTERPRETATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA PAGEREF _Toc517083710 h 30
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS PAGEREF _Toc517083711 h 41
Summary of Findings PAGEREF _Toc517083712 h 41
Conclusion PAGEREF _Toc517083713 h 43
Recommendations PAGEREF _Toc517083714 h 43
BENEDICTINE HALLMARK: PRAYER PAGEREF _Toc517083715 h 45
BIBLIOGRAPHY PAGEREF _Toc517083716 h 46
ANNEX: SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE PAGEREF _Toc517083717 h 48
LIST OF TABLES
TOC h z c “Figure” TOC h z c “Table”
Table 1. Age of the respondents PAGEREF _Toc517084105 h 30Table 2. Gender of the respondents PAGEREF _Toc517084106 h 31Table 3. Position of the respondents PAGEREF _Toc517084107 h 31Table 4. Length of service of the respondents PAGEREF _Toc517084108 h 32Table 5. Respondents’ location in the building PAGEREF _Toc517084109 h 33Table 6. Physical work environment PAGEREF _Toc517084110 h 34Table 7. Behavioral work environment PAGEREF _Toc517084111 h 36Table 8. Productivity factors PAGEREF _Toc517084112 h 38Table 9. Relations (t-test) PAGEREF _Toc517084113 h 39
LIST OF FIGURES
TOC h z c “Figure” Figure 1: Haynes theoretical framework of office productivity PAGEREF _Toc517085557 h 5Figure 2. Research Paradigm PAGEREF _Toc517085558 h 6
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTDeepest gratitude to the Leonio Group of Companies for their advocacy on people development and passion for excellence. Thank you for all the support and encouragement.
I’m profoundly grateful to my adviser, Atty Beatriz Lampas, for her unwavering support and constant guidance. Her valuable insights and edits made this study more meaningful.
ABSTRACTSocial responsibility is the partnership of companies and communities that is geared towards creating sustainable and continuous community development. Mining companies are disparaged with issues on social responsibility and environmental protection. Earning profits or not, mining companies are mandated
THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUNDIntroductionThe average corporate employee spends more than eight hours per day dwelling in the workplace. This means that majority of their waking hours and energy is expended at the office instead of their own homes. It is therefore important for the employer to recognize this and provide a comfortable work environment to its employees CITATION The16 l 1033 (Amofa, Yawson, & Okronipa, 2016). A comfortable work environment enhances job satisfaction, which in turn impacts productivity. Consequently, the quality and quantity of work produced by the employees affects the economic well-being of the firm CITATION Sar14 l 1033 (Sarode & Shirsath, 2014).
For most companies, the second largest financial overhead is attributed to the physical workplace environment – next to human resources CITATION The16 l 1033 (Amofa, Yawson, & Okronipa, 2016). However, aside from the physical characteristics of the office environment, the behavioral features of the environment also affect office productivity. Conventionally, the office environment was largely considered to be the physical environment. But, this research also covered the behavioral environment as an integral component of office productivity. In some cases, the behavioral environment had greater impacts on office productivity than the physical aspect. This study explored the various elements of the office setting that were perceived to have positive and negative influences on self-assessed productivity CITATION Hay17 l 1033 (Haynes, Office productivity: A theoretical framework, 2017).
Background of the studyMany employers relate the productivity of employees to the bottomline of revenue generation. However, the optimal environmental working conditions, aside from remuneration and job stability, has to be sustained to keep the productivity of employees to an acceptable level, or, to keep the employees at all.
Nowadays, the number of job opportunities available for employees has been increasing in the growing local and international economy. Employers need to innovate themselves in order to cope up with the undercurrents of the corporate ecosystem. Higher salaries and compensation benefits may seem the most likely way to attract and keep employees, but, quality of the physical workplace environment also have a robust influence on a company’s ability to recruit and retain talent. The workplace environment is key to employee engagement or disengagement. Research suggests that improving the working environment reduces complaints and absenteeism while increasing productivity. Workplace satisfaction has been correlated with job satisfaction.
Over the years, employees comfort on the job, determined by workplace conditions and environment, has been recognized as an important factor for measuring their productivity. This is predominantly accurate for personnel who spend most of the day operating a computer terminal. As more and more computers were installed in workstation, an increasing number of businesses has been adopting ergonomic designs for office installations CITATION Leb13 l 1033 (Leblebici, 2013).
On the other hand, when businesses improve the work environment of their employees, they expect productivity levels to improve as well. Productivity is a performance measure incorporating both efficiency and effectiveness. Job satisfaction increases productivity by bringing high quality motivation and through increased working capabilities. There is evidence that participative climate has substantial effect on employee’s satisfaction. This means the behavioral work environment is critical for employee participation. Participation has a sturdy effect on both job satisfaction and productivity, but its effect on satisfaction is somewhat stronger than on productivity CITATION Bha17 l 1033 (Bhatti, 2017).
In the engineering and construction industry, productivity is measured through efficient project management. Managing projects is essential and inherent to the business itself, thus, the productivity of the employees is anchored on their project management knowledge and skills. Whether at the office or the project site, employees have to deliver on the project management triangle: workmanship quality, cost control, timeliness of schedule. All these factors should be in accordance to the project scope CITATION Smi15 l 1033 (Smith & Magnusson, 2015).
Since the researcher is a facility management officer of JGC Philippines, Inc., a Japan-based engineering and construction firm, this study aims to organize a systematic approach in improving the employee experience in the office workplace setting to hopefully contribute to the productivity of the workforce, particularly, the engineers. A well-maintained facility is critical to achieving this objective, especially that the office building itself is already ageing.
As the 10-storey commercial building enters its seventeenth (17th) year of existence, indicators of wear and tear are becoming more and more noticeable despite regular preventive maintenance. Hence, it is important for the researcher to approach this study in a rationalized manner. The researcher is compelled to investigate the physical and behavioural work environment trends and its impact on the productivity of employees in the company.
The employees, being mostly engineers, are especially critical about these manifestations and, are very outspoken in providing argumentative opinions about these issues. In effect, the activated anxiety stirred by such reactions may negatively affect the sense of well-being of the employees themselves. This in turn, decreases job satisfaction, thereby decreasing productivity as well.
Theoretical frameworkThe structural theory of this research is anchored on Dr. Barry P. Haynes’ theoretical framework of office productivity. Dr. Haynes is a Strategic Facilities Management Professor at Sheffield Hallam University in England.
The theory establishes that office productivity of employees is not only affected by physical environments, but also by behavioral environments.
Physical environments are divided into two (2) components: comfort and office layout. Comfort is attributed to airconditioning, ventilation, lighting, decorations, cleanliness, and physical security. Attributes of office layout includes formal and informal meeting areas, quiet areas, privacy, personal and general storage, and work area desk circulation space.
53340289560508004374515Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 1: Haynes theoretical framework of office productivityFigure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 1: Haynes theoretical framework of office productivity
174305192628Office Occupier Work Pattern
Office Occupier Work Pattern
On the other hand, behavioral environments are also divided into two (2) components: interaction and distraction. Interaction consists of social interaction, work interaction, creative physical environment, overall atmosphere, position relative to equipment, overall office layout and refreshments. Distractions are attributed to interruptions, crowding, and noise CITATION Hay17 l 1033 (Haynes, Office productivity: A theoretical framework, 2017).
Conceptual frameworkThe independent variable for this research is the work environment, divided into physical and behavioral components.
On the other hand, the dependent variable is employee productivity. The intervening variables include the demographic profile of employees as to their age, gender, education, length of service, and location in the building.
1207135249555Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 2. Research Paradigm0Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 2. Research Paradigm
– Office Layout
Length of service
Department (location in
– Office Layout
Length of service
Department (location in
Statement of the problemThis study purposes to determine the impact of the physical and behavioral work environment to the productivity of the employees in JGC Philippines, Inc. Particularly, it seeks to answer the following questions:
What is the demographic profile of the respondents in the context of:
Location in the building;
Length of service?
How do the respondents assess their workplace in terms of physical and behavioral work environments? Which one has a more significant impact?
What are the performance indicators of the respondents’ perceived productivity in terms of:
Quality of workmanship
Timeliness of delivery
Is there a significant effect of physical and behavioral work environments to the respondents’ perceived productivity?
Statement of hypothesisThe researcher has come up with the null hypothesis that the productivity of employees has no significant relationship to the work environment conditions.
Significance of the studyThe study would be beneficial to JGC Philippines, Inc. in the aspect of facility management. Top management will be provided with valuable insights for short and long term investment decisions on capital expense allocation.
Furthermore, it will improve employee relations upon understanding the root cause of complaints and knowing how to deal with them properly. In addition, improving the work environment promotes employee retention and attraction for prospective ones.
Likewise, this study can also be used as reference literature for facility management practitioners of other firms with a similar building setup. It could impart new knowledge or cross-checking of best practices. Future researchers can also expand the contents of this literature to improve its educational value.
Scope and delimitationThis study primarily covers the effect of physical and environmental workplace environment to employee productivity. In terms of respondents, the study is limited among employees of JGC Philippines, Inc., with at least one (1) year length of service in the company, using paper questionnaires.
Definition of TermsFor better understanding of the study, the following terminologies were defined by the researcher in the context of its usage to the research.
Behavioral Work Environment is the working condition of employees acting towards the self or others
Cleanliness is a state of the work environment that is free from clutter and dirt. It is also sometimes referred as “housekeeping”
Comfort refers to the physical state of an employee, free from pain and constraints
Distraction denotes activities or items that keep the employee’s full attention
Downtime refers to idle time created by equipment stoppage or waiting for an employee’s turn to use a machine or fixture
Employee productivity is an assessment of the efficiency of an employee in terms of quality output, timeliness, and cost control.
Ergonomics is the study of the relationship between employees, the equipment they use and the physical environment in which they work
Illumination simply refers to lighting at the workplace, whether natural or artificial
Interruption is the breakage of focused work due to external factors
Noise refers to undesirable sounds in the workplace
Office layout is the physical arrangement of the employee’s workstation
Physical Work Environment is the physical working condition of employees
Temperature refers to the warmness or coldness of the air condition
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIESThe review of related literature offers relevant scholarly contributions that support understanding the importance of workplace environment to the well-being of and its impact on their productivity. The literature review includes a discussion on the independent variable, workplace environment; and the dependent variable, employee productivity.
Numerous organizations are under the false impression that the level of employee performance on the job is proportional to the size of the employee’s compensation package. Although compensation itself is one of the extrinsic motivational tools in the workplace, it has a limited effect on employees’ productivity. A widely accepted hypothesis is that a good work environment motivates the workforce and in turn, produces better results. Workplace environment can be described in terms of physical and behavioral components CITATION The17 l 1033 (Massoudi & Hamdi, 2017).
Physical Workplace Environment
An office’s physical environment can affect employee behavior in the workplace. It is assessed that improvements in the physical design of the office may result to as high as 10% increase in employee productivity. Increasing the organization’s physical layout is designed around employee needs to maximize productivity as well as job satisfaction CITATION The17 l 1033 (Massoudi & Hamdi, 2017).
There are several writings that demonstrate the relationship between the physical office environment and the productivity of employees. Over the years, many companies have tried new designs to construct office buildings that can increase productivity, and attract more employees. Numerous literature have renowned that the physical layout of the workspace, along with efficient management processes, plays a major role in enhancing employees’ productivity thereby improving organizational performance CITATION The16 l 1033 (Amofa, Yawson, ; Okronipa, 2016).
For the past few years, employees comfort on the job, determined by physical workplace environment, has been renowned as an essential factor for measuring their productivity because study indicates that improving the working environment reduces grievances and absenteeism while increasing productivity.
Since workplace comfort is a relative terminology, any research method should include an “employee-centric” approach to evaluate user perceptions, together with any other observations and measurements. Taking the view of the office environment from the employees’ perspective builds appreciation of office comfort that includes health and wellness concepts CITATION Gat13 l 1033 (Haynes, The impact of office comfort on productivity, 2018).
With the tropical climate of the country, temperatures or thermal comfort play a vital role in employee productivity. Discontentment with temperature could lead to productivity loss. Temperature values between 21°C and 25°C is a stable temperature range for productivity in the office. In the range of 25°C to 30°C, there is a decrease in employee performance by 2% per 1°C increase in temperature CITATION Alh16 l 1033 (Al horr & Arif, 2016).
A comfortable workplace environment is an area in which employees can generate their work properly, with proper range of temperature, enough ventilation, and adequate humidity. Low humidity levels may causes magnetic disks to stick during process operation. On the other hand, too much humidity produces condensation on the electronic parts of equipment and causes short-circuits too CITATION Sar14 l 1033 (Sarode & Shirsath, 2014).
Ventilation is vital for the control of gases, dust, fumes, and other thermal comfort elements. Exposure to different types of dust and vapors can result to respiratory-related diseases such as asthma and lung fibrosis. Moreover, extreme heat can reduce concentration and motivation for employees, and, can cause a number of heat-related illnesses. Air circulation is also important as it can avoid people inhaling insufficient air.
Working in overly bright or dim environments can result to eyestrain and headaches that eventually leads to reduced productivity. Sources of light can create undesirable shadows, reflections, and glare that causes discomfort and distraction. This can greatly hamper with the performance of visual tasks. Meanwhile, low lighting levels can also cause depression.
A poorly lit office may diminish employee productivity, because those who read, as part of their work, may develop serious problems with their vision, which in turn may cause eyestrain. The organization should also consider the amount of light as well as lighting quality. More light, for some employees, may be useful in accomplishing their tasks. However, for the rest of them, especially those who work in front of computer monitors, excessive light may cause difficulties viewing the items on the monitor screen. Further, those employees who work in a better quality of lighting are likely to accomplish work faster with fewer errors, compared to those work in a poor lighting CITATION Sar14 l 1033 (Sarode & Shirsath, 2014).
With light being a key element of vision, and vision being accountable for 80 to 85 percent of people’s perception of the world around, it’s not difficult to see why ignoring proper lighting strategies in the office could have a significant negative impact on productivity. Harsh lighting and dim lighting are equally detrimental to the throughput of your employees, and, by opting instead for more natural lighting or other lighting systems that have been proven effective, people stand to not only save energy but also increase productivity among the business’s employees CITATION Jen18 l 1033 (Jensen, 2018).
Having a clean workplace is one of the most important elements in office productivity. The benefits of office cleaning start with improving the health of employees by diminishing the amount of time employees are out sick.
Different surfaces at the workplace can quickly be contaminated if regular cleaning is not consistently done. The average computer keyboard, for instance, has more than 7,000 bacteria on it. Aside from the various diseases that can be caused by the said bacteria, dirty workplaces can also play a significant part in triggering allergies. The amount of dust and allergens in the air are increased when filth is left to accumulate in office spaces. This can lead to and complicate asthma attacks. Such complications significantly reduce employee productivity.
Another health benefit of proper housekeeping in the office is that it lowers stress levels. Whenever clutter start to pile up on desks and workstations, it has a tendency to make employees feel fatigued. If the mess is not dealt with, it will eventually lead to increased stress levels in the workforce. Stress can lead to numerous health issues that include depression, restlessness, and fatigue. In terms of time efficiency, a disorganized workstation wastes the time of employee looking for misplaced items. Hence, a clean business is a competitive business. It encourages workplace cleanliness from all facets of the organization to maximize productivity CITATION Coo16 l 1033 (Cooper, 2016).
Office layout is an integral component of the physical office environment. The fundamental factors of the physical workplace environment are the layout of office space which generally comprises of furniture and spatial arrangements that consist of: formal and informal meeting areas, quiet areas, privacy, personal storage, general storage, work area – desk and circulation space. Also, comfort levels which entail airconditioning, ventilation, illumination, decor, cleanliness, overall comfort, and physical security CITATION The16 l 1033 (Amofa, Yawson, ; Okronipa, 2016).
Physical office arrangement and design is the way in which space is arranged to enhance efficiency. Office design integrates both ergonomics and workflow, which examine the way in which work is implemented in order to optimize the layout. Physical office arrangement is an important factor in job satisfaction as it affects the manner in which employees carry out their work.
Within the organizational context, offices have been typically described as traditional, sometimes termed as enclosed, cellular offices; or open-plan. Traditional offices house one or two employees in private rooms, enclosed by walls, usually containing the amenities required for their job. Open-plan offices are characterized by a lack of interior walls. They tend to be larger and contain greater numbers of employees, with individual workstations arranged within the office in groups. Open-plan arrangement refer to offices with individual workstations placed within an open space; sometimes divided by panels. Some studies have found indication that employees using open-plan offices have incidences of decreased job satisfaction, reduced motivation, and lower perceived privacy. Because of this, many organizations are re-evaluating their facilities to ensure productivity. It must be considered though, that employees carrying-out tough job assignments are more pleased in private offices, and also perform better, than in non-private offices. Contrariwise, employees performing simple tasks perform better in non-private settings. However, working in an open-plan office can lead to distraction and disruption, which have a negative effect on productivity CITATION The16 l 1033 (Amofa, Yawson, ; Okronipa, 2016).
Ergonomics is based upon the idea of designing items, such as office furniture, to match the individual employees who use them. In the office, this covers employee tasks and their work environment. In some job functions which involve manual lifting or moving of heavy, bulky materials, a mismatch between the normal duties of the work and the physical capabilities of the employee could result to musculoskeletal injuries or disorders.
Some of the benefits of introducing a more ergonomic working environment for the workforce include: (1) Increased employee productivity; (2) Improved work quality; (3) Better employee engagement; (4) Enhanced culture of health and safety CITATION Exp17 l 1033 (Sovereign Health Care, 2015).
Majority of employees are only concerned about the physical, aesthetic impact of color, while many of them do not pay more attention to its psychological effects. For some employees, different colors have different meanings; for instance, those who prefer red means that they have brave, energetic, aggressive outlooks. Those who prefer blue color mean that they are very loyal people in general. In the workplace environment, different colors may also have different impacts, specifically for those involved in specific rooms. Picking inadequate colors may impact on worker health, such as, eyestrain, fatigue, and headache. There are three factors which the organization needs to be aware of before choosing an appropriate color for the office environment. These are: work functions, physical location, and types of emotional desire. Different activities need different color environments. For example, activities that need more concentration, such as accounting, will be best with cool colors, such as blue and green, while some creative work, such as, advertising, software design, and fashion design, will be more effective with warm color environments. Such colors include red and orange CITATION Sar14 l 1033 (Sarode ; Shirsath, 2014).
Behavioral Workplace EnvironmentThe behavioral environment consists of components that relate to how well the employees connect with each other and the impact the office itself. Apart from the job scope, one factor that meaningfully influences how employees feel about the work is the environment. By workplace environment, it means everything that forms part of employees’ participation with the work itself, such as the relation with co-employees, organizational culture, and room for personal growth. A positive work environment makes employees feel good about coming to work CITATION The17 l 1033 (Massoudi & Hamdi, 2017).
Interaction through effective communication is pivotal in increasing productivity because it directly affects the behavior of the employees and their performance. Efficient communication which includes clear instructions, fast message delivery, and proper explanation, is the key factor to firm collaboration between employees and their superiors. It plays a profound role in getting tasks complete which ultimately increases the organization’s productivity.
On the other hand, poor communication can negatively impact work productivity because the employee might not receive sufficient information to complete an assigned task. It may start an entirely damaging chain of events because if an employee overlooks important information, it may result to delays CITATION Kij17 l 1033 (Kijko, 2017).
Social ; professional relationships
The productivity of employees is related to effective communication of work-related information to make employees aware of the work-related responsibilities and expectations. Also, for motivation by work recognition, employees are encouraged to perform consistently and put their best effort in work. Feedback and direction from superiors are also necessary to keep employees on track on job targets they have achieved. Also, encouraging expression of employee opinion imparts a sense of belongingness among employees and reinforces the employee-employer relationship. Employees feel they are an asset to the organization, thus, their voice and opinions are heard and implemented CITATION Sta17 l 1033 (Sequeira, 2015).
Creativity is innately disruptive. It is the eruption of a new idea so brilliant that it interrupts whatever an employee is doing just so it can be captured onto paper. At a glance, it also seems to be entirely opposed to productivity. However, fostering creativity in the organization can lead to productivity by getting employees emotionally invested. Employees who participate in the creative process can take ownership of an idea rather than a to-do list. When employees can own and nurture an idea from the beginning all the way to its execution, they become more passionate and emotionally capitalized and will work that much harder to see that idea into fruition.
Furthermore, encouraging creativity removes the fear of failure. A key component of fostering a creative working environment is giving employees the freedom to fail. The fear of failure cripples creative environments and hampers the flow of ideas and ultimately productivity CITATION Jon14 l 1033 (Jones, 2014).
The behavioral components of interaction and distraction appear to be having the most effect on perceived productivity. And, distraction is the constituent that has the most negative effect on perceived productivity CITATION Hay17 l 1033 (Haynes, Office productivity: A theoretical framework, 2017).
The concept “downtime” is introduced and defined as effectively time wasted due to poor arrangement and overall management of the office environment. The more time wasted due to poor office design, the more dissatisfied the employees are with their workplace environment. Some of the downtime components like waiting for elevator lifts, waiting at copier machines, could actually be opportunities for ad hoc conversations and knowledge transfer CITATION Gat13 l 1033 (Haynes, The impact of office comfort on productivity, 2018).
The average office employee is interrupted seventy-three (73) times per day. And, the average manager is interrupted every eight (8) minutes. Interruptions include telephone calls, incoming email messages, and interruptions by colleagues. Once there is an interruption, statistics indicate that it takes twenty (20) minutes to get back to the level of concentration prior to the disruption.
Most organizations recognize that social conversation in the workplace is natural and, in fact, desirable in fostering stronger ties among employees. An interruption is basically an unanticipated event. It appears in one of two forms, either in-person or over a communications medium. Like everything encountered nowadays, interruptions are both good and bad. The consequence of an interruption depends on the original task’s complexity. If the initial task before the interruption is complex, it is likely the interrupt will cause loss in concentration and time CITATION Swe13 l 1033 (Swenson, 2013).
Noise is an element of the work environment, which plays a significant role in affecting employee productivity. Excessive noise, such as sound from equipment, tools, and people’s conversation, may prevent employees from concentrating on their jobs, subsequently decreasing their productivity. However, employees cannot achieve good performance in a silent environment, because at some level, sound may generate a healthy background and can also assist employees complete their work.
Generally, noise can influence employees while doing their work and the impact can be both positive and negative. If there is soft background sound, which is coming from instrumental music, and there is an employee who has to handle claims from some customers, the background sound in turn, will be of assistance to become more relaxed in solving the customer’s issues. In contrast, if the sound background is quite hard, which may develop from the telephone ringing and loud conversation amongst employees in the same room, the situation can hinder both the employee and customers. There are several methods for controlling the noise in the office environment. Such methods include proper contraction, sound-absorbent materials, and masking CITATION Sar14 l 1033 (Sarode & Shirsath, 2014).
Employee productivityA characteristic is a striking feature that serves as a distinguishing aspect for an employee. If something is characteristic of someone, it goes to say that it is unique to that employee. It becomes a trademark for a person. A characteristic in an individual is a means to tell one apart from another, in a way that the person will be described and recognized. Employee characteristics and how they affect productivity are mostly based on demographics: age, sex, level of education, marital status, among others CITATION Muk16 l 1033 (Mukundi, 2016).
Measurement of office productivity
The central body of literature that bids to correlate office environments and productivity largely addresses the physical environment. While there does not seem to be any universally accepted means of measuring workplace productivity, there does appear to be acceptance that a self-assessed measure of productivity is better than no measure of productivity CITATION Hay18 l 1033 (Haynes, An evaluation of the impact of the office environment on productivity, 2018).
Relationship between workplace environment and productivityMany organizations in which employees come across working condition problems are related to environmental and physical factors. Although convenient workplace conditions are requirements for improving productivity and quality of outcomes, working conditions in many organizations may present lack of safety, health and comfort issues. Employees working under inconvenient conditions may end up with low performance and face occupational health issues causing high absenteeism and turnover.
The modern work physical environment is characterized by technology, computers and equipment as well as modern furnishings. To enhance employee performance therefore, it is imperative that the organization’s environment is fashioned to support employees in their quest to attain organizational goals CITATION The16 l 1033 (Amofa, Yawson, ; Okronipa, 2016).
This research is based on the impact of physical and behavioral work environment to employee productivity at JGC Philippines, Inc. The essential concerns and ideas that have been identified from the review of related literature are in accordance with the research objectives as follows:
(1) There are two major types of work environment that affect employee productivity: physical and behavioral. The physical work environment is subdivided into two major groups: office comfort (ventilation, heating, natural lighting, artificial lighting, decor, cleanliness, and physical security) and office layout (meeting areas, personal storage, and general storage. Likewise, behavioral work environment is also subdivided into two groups: interaction (social interaction, work interaction, creative physical environment, overall atmosphere, and position relative to equipment) and distraction (interruptions, crowding, and noise).
(2) There are no universal methods to accurately measure productivity in the workplace. Each organization has to device own methods of quantifying their employees’ production based on the business context. Sometimes, productivity is even interchanged with efficiency and job performance. Even if employers provide excellent work environment for employees, job satisfaction may increase, but, increased productivity is not guaranteed.
(3) Based on surveys conducted in various government office areas in the United Kingdom, it is the behavioral components of office productivity that have a greater effect on productivity than the physical components. Interaction and distraction seem to be having the most effect on perceived productivity. The results indicate that it is the interaction component that is perceived to be having the most positive effect on productivity, which supports the proposition that office environments are partly knowledge exchange centers whereas distraction is the component that has the most negative effect on perceived productivity.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGYThe methodology used to determine the relationship between the work environment and employee productivity of JGC Philippines is presented in this chapter. By outlining the procedure for data collection, describing the operationalization of variables to test the hypotheses, and describing the data analysis procedures. This chapter covers an outline of the research strategy and design and a description of the research population in the study. This also includes a description of the survey instrument used for data collection and a discussion on the appropriateness of the selected design for the study.
Research methodThe study applied descriptive survey research design to determine the effects of the workplace environment on productivity among employees of JGC Philippines, Inc. Descriptive survey is a method of collecting information by interviewing or administering a questionnaire to a sample of individuals. This design will support the researcher to gather significant information regarding the importance of occurrences and where plausible conclusions can be drawn.
Sample and sampling technique
The type of sampling technique to be used is a Purposive Sampling under Non-Probability Sampling Method. The researcher will select 100 participants based on their inclination to participate, nature of assignment, availability and location.Non-probability sampling is a sampling technique where the samples are gathered in a process that does not give all the individuals in the population equal chances of being selected.
The researcher used survey questionnaire to gather primary data. The questionnaire consists of two parts: (1) the demographic profile of the respondents; (2) the extent of the employees’ productivity level on their respective workplace environments. Further sources used in this research were books, journals, electronic sources and other related literature.
Data gathering procedureThe study is specific to the regular employees of JGC Philippines, Inc. with a minimum 1-year employment in the company. In an effort to ensure the confidentiality and anonymity of participants, no identifiable information was requested of the respondents and the identity of each respondent remained confidential. Only basic demographic information will be requested.
In this research, questionnaires will be used by the individual respondent to evaluate the given items. The response from the respondents will be collected personally and through scanned copy by e-mail over a period of one week. All the data gathered will be tallied using statistical tools.
Statistical treatment of dataThe researcher used the following statistical tools (1) Percentage; (2) Weighted Mean; and (3) Pearson Correlation Coefficient.
Percentage was used to determine the demographic profile of the respondents. Weighted Mean was used to measure the extent of comfort of employees on the workplace environment.
Pearson’s correlation coefficient is the test statistics that measures the statistical relationship, or association, between two continuous variables. It gives information about the magnitude of the association, or correlation, as well as the direction of the relationship. It is known as the best method of measuring the relationship between variables of interest because it is based on the method of covariance.
PRESENTATION, INTERPRETATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATAThis chapter includes the presentation, interpretation and analysis of data that were gathered from the survey questionnaires distributed to the respondents. The presentation of data in tabular form, along with their resultant interpretations, is also included in this chapter.
The data and information found in this study were analyzed and discussed in accordance with the Statement of the Problem and Hypothesis.
Part 1: Demographic ProfileSince there are 100 respondents to the survey questionnaire, the frequency of the demographic profile is numerically equal to the percentages.
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 1. Age of the respondentsAge Frequency Percent (%)
21 to 30 years 21 21.00
31 to 40 years 43 43.00
41 to 50 years 24 24.00
Above 50 years 12 12.17
Total 100 100.00
Majority of the respondents have ages between 31 and 40 years old at 43%. This next age group with the most respondents are the 41 to 50-year olds with 24%. This is also the group where most managers are clustered. The 21 to 30-year old age bracket have third most number of respondents at 21%. These are the most junior members of the company in which cadet engineers belong to. Lastly, the remaining 12% of respondents are those above 50 years of age. This is quite expected since the retirement age of employees at JGC Philippines Inc. is 55 years old.
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 2. Gender of the respondentsGender Frequency Percent (%)
Male 58 58.00
Female 42 42.00
Total 100 100.00
Most respondents were male employees at 58% compared to the 42% females. This was an accurate representation of the actual population of the company as majority of engineers are still dominated by men. At this day and age, the country’s engineering and construction industry as a whole consists mainly of male workforce.
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 3. Position of the respondentsPosition Frequency Percent (%)
Managerial 11 11.00
Rank ; file 89 89.00
Total 100 100.00
Out of 100 respondents, a vast 89% belonged to the rank ; file cluster as opposed to the 11% managers. In JGC Philippines Inc., there no defined supervisors in the organization. Thus, managers are supervisors themselves, and, they handle large numbers of subordinates under them.
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 4. Length of service of the respondentsLength of Service Frequency Percent (%)
1 to 5 years 22 22.00
6 to 10 years 21 21.00
11 to 15 years 29 29.00
Above 15 years 28 28.00
Total 100 100.00
For the tenure of respondents in the company, exactly 29% belonged to the 11 to 15 years cluster. 28% of respondents were already employed above 15 years. It is important to note that there were respondents who already stayed with the company for 29 years. However, the building where JGC Philippines Inc. is currently situated is only 17 years old since the original location of the company used to be in Makati before transferring to the Alabang site. For regular employees between 1 and 5 years tenure, there were 22% respondents. Lastly, the 6 to 10-year bracket wrap up the remaining 21%. The gap in the number of respondents in this is demographic profile was closely-knit compared to the other demographic profiles.
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 5. Respondents’ location in the buildingFloor Frequency Percent (%)
4th floor 18 18.00
5th floor 13 13.00
6th floor 16 16.00
7th floor 21 21.00
8th floor 14 14.00
9th floor 18 18.00
Total 100 100.00
This portion is more geographic than demographic since it tackles the location of workstations of employees inside the building. However, for the purpose of uniformity and easier statistical treatment of data, it was left in the demographic category. In terms of the building’s overall inhabitants, 4th and 6th floors have the densest population with 18% and 16% of respondents respectively. The former consists of Piping Engineering Department while the latter floor is shared by Civil and Electrical Engineering Departments. However, during the survey, 7th floor had the most respondents at 21%. Interestingly, this is the floor where the residing departments are non-engineering in nature, namely: Accounting, General Services, Overseas Assignment, and Human Resources among others. 9th floor is tied with 4th floor with 18% of the respondents. This floor is mainly composed of members of Procurement, Construction, and Project Engineering Departments. It is also notable that with the 21% non-engineering respondents, the remaining 79% are all engineering disciplined.
Part 2: Work environment factors
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 6. Physical work environmentDescriptive Statement Weighted Mean Rank Interpretation
Comfort The office temperature is conducive enough for me to work efficiently 3.91 6 Often agree
The lighting brightness at the office is favorable enough for me to work properly 4.46 1 Always agree
The office air circulation has no unpleasant odors or dust particles that affects my concentration at work 3.95 5 Often agree
The housekeeping at the work area is good enough for me to be productive at work 4.09 4 Often agree
The safety ; security controls of the company is adequate for me to work worry-free 4.28 2 Always agree
Office layout My workstation is arranged in a manner where I can move freely and comfortably 4.19 3 Often agree
There is reasonable storage space for my personal items as well as general items of the department 3.68 8 Often agree
Meeting areas are enough to conduct focused group discussions 3.79 7 Often agree
Grand Mean 4.04 Often agree
The foregoing table shows the distribution of the perception of respondents regarding their agreement or disagreement to the descriptive statements on the physical work environment in JGC Philippines, Inc. In this regard, the respondents have revealed the level of satisfaction at moderate extent based on the grand mean of 4.04. The respondent always agreed that the lighting brightness at the office is favorable enough for them to work properly with a mean of 4.46. in addition, the employees always agree that the safety and security controls of the company is adequate for them to work worry-free with a mean of 4.28.
On the “often agree” scale, employees feel that their workstations are arranged in a manner where they can move freely and comfortably with a mean of 4.19. The housekeeping at the work area is good enough for employees to be productive at work with 4.09 mean. Further, the office air circulation has no unpleasant odors or dust particles that affects employees’ concentration at work with mean of 3.95. Furthermore, a mean of 3.91 says that the office temperature is conducive enough for them to work efficiently. The lowest rated, but still acceptable factors are the meeting areas adequate enough to conduct focused group discussions at 3.79 mean, and, there is reasonable storage space for employees personal items as well as general items of the department at 3.68 mean.
All these factors are supported by the body of literature that efforts to link office environments and productivity are principally addressed by the physical environment. Whereas there seems to be no universally accepted means of measuring office productivity, there does appear to be recognition that self-assessed measures of productivity are better than no measure at all. Also, matching office environments to work processes require a better understanding of what employees actually do when in the office environment. The attempts made to link the physical environment with the productivity of its occupant’s fall into two main categories: office comfort and office layout CITATION Hay18 l 1033 (Haynes, An evaluation of the impact of the office environment on productivity, 2018).
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 7. Behavioral work environmentDescriptive Statement Weighted Mean Rank Interpretation
Interaction I have a healthy professional and personal relationship with other members of the organization 4.25 1 Always agree
The workload assigned to me is enough for me to function efficiently 3.60 7 Often agree
The organization gives me enough creative freedom to strategize my approach in tackling my assigned tasks 3.86 4 Often agree
I have access to all the necessary tools and equipment to fulfill my job functions 3.94 2 Often agree
Distraction When there is a downtime for relevant equipment, the company gives timely feedback on the restoration 3.65 6 Often agree
Whenever I’m concentrating on a task, the level of interruptions that arise is tolerable enough for me to refocus my concentration 3.74 5 Often agree
The collective noise around my workstation is acceptable enough for me to work effectively 3.87 3 Often agree
Grand Mean 3.84 Often agree
As for the behavioral work environment, the table in the previous page shows the distribution of the perception of respondents regarding their agreement or disagreement to the descriptive statements on the behavioral work environment in JGC Philippines, Inc. Hence, the respondents have revealed the level of satisfaction at moderate extent based on the grand mean of 3.84. The respondent always agreed that they have healthy professional and personal relationships with other members of the organization at 4.25 mean.
All the rest of the descriptive factors on behavioral work environment fall to the “often agree” scale. A 3.94 mean says that employees have access to all the necessary tools and equipment to fulfil job functions. Also, the collective noise around workstations are acceptable enough for them to work effectively with a mean of 3.87. a close mean of 3.86 says that the organization gives employees enough creative freedom to strategize their approach in tackling assigned tasks. Moreover, whenever employees are concentrating on a task, the level of interruptions that arise is tolerable enough for them to refocus concentration at 3.74 mean. When there is a downtime for relevant equipment, the company gives timely feedback on the restoration with a 3.65 mean. Lastly, the workload assigned to employees is enough for them to function efficiently at a mean of 3.60.
With office-based employees as mostly knowledge workers, the above results are supported by literature. There are two basic needs of knowledge workers: (1) time to work alone to think, analyze and reflect; and (2) time to interact with others so that ideas can be generated and evaluated.
The role that the behavioral environment plays in the productivity of office occupants is very much anchored to that of the employees’ perspective. The adoption of this stance shows how office personnel make sense of their work environment, and attempt to create a sense of belonging through personalization of their workstations. However, the review of the behavioral literature has suggested that this is an area that requires further research CITATION Hay15 l 1033 (Haynes, The impact of the behavioural environment on office productivity, 2015).
With the combined results of physical and behavioral work environment factors, 3 out of the top 4 factors that affect employee productivity are more physical than behavioral: (1) lighting – physical, (2) safety ; security – physical, (3) professional relationships – behavioral, and (3) workstation arrangement – physical. This is contrary to the literature that the behavioral components of office productivity have a greater effect on productivity than the physical components CITATION Hay17 l 1033 (Haynes, Office productivity: A theoretical framework, 2017). This may require further study since every industry and geographical cultures may yield different results.
Part 3: Employee productivity
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 8. Productivity factorsDescription Quality of work Cost control Schedule Average
Mean 4.1650 4.0900 4.0900 4.1150
Standard deviation 0.52731 0.68306 0.68306 0.63426
The foregoing table yields a p value = 0.629 which is ;0.05 hence there are no significant differences of the means among the three factors. However insignificant the p value may be, it still has probability that may have significance in other approaches.
After all, probability is never certainty. The statistical results are only there for aid in managing risks. Randomness can sometimes yield a reasonably high or low standard that may match circumstances. It could just as easily be overstatement, or it could expose the organization to far more risk than can be afforded CITATION Sau14 l 1033 (Sauro, 2014).
Part 4: Work environment and employee productivity
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 9. Relations (t-test)Factors Mean Std. Deviation N
Work environment 3.9228 0.52124 100
Employee productivity 4.1133 0.51347 100
**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)
The above table yielded Pearson’s Coefficient, r = 0.625. This is moderate correlation since it is between 0.40 and 0.79. However, r is significant because the p value = 0.000 which is < 0.01 (2-tailed test).
Customarily, the office environment has largely been well-thought-out to be the physical environment basically. The main physical elements consisting of office layout and office comfort. This approach tends to assume that the office occupant is a passive component of the office environment. However, the behavioral environment is also an essential component of office productivity.
The implication for building managers responsible for office environments can use the methods, and the study measures presented in this paper, to support evaluating and identifying productive office environments. The positive results can just be as important as the negative to top management, as they give an indication as to areas in the office environment that are working properly. Since survey results can differ from one office to another, a comparative approach between offices can allow best practice solutions in the future CITATION Hay17 l 1033 (Haynes, Office productivity: A theoretical framework, 2017).
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONSThis chapter presents the conclusions and recommendations drawn from the results of the findings in the previous chapter.
Supposedly, the principal purpose of this study was to determine the effect of the physical office environment to employees’ productivity in JGC Philippines, Inc. While the researcher was going over some literature, the prospect of behavioral work environment surfaced and appeared to be more impactful than its physical counterpart. A survey questionnaire was developed and distributed to the employees of the company. All respondents were asked to accomplish the questionnaire based on the 5-point Likert Scale. Through the use of the survey tool developed for this research, data were collected which addressed the research problems floated in the first chapter of this paper.
In this portion results of analysis are discussed. To check the hypothesis, Pearson correlation coefficient was used. Results are made on the basis of acceptance or rejection of hypothesis.
Summary of FindingsA total of 100 respondents participated in the survey. Majority of participants were between 31 and 40 years old at 43% of the lot. Respondents above 50 years old had the least participation at 12%
As for gender, 58% of respondents were male and 42% female
For position in the company, 89% of respondents belonged to rank and file cluster, while the remaining 11% were managers.
In terms of length of service, the largest populace was 29% of respondents. They stayed in the company between 11 and 15 years. For the least populace, 21% of respondents who were in the 6 to 10-year cluster
As for the workstation location of respondents inside the building, 21% logged the highest populace. This consists of 7th floor occupants such as Accounting, General Services, Overseas Assignment, and Human Resources. The least number of respondents were tied in 4th floor, Piping Department, and 9th floor, Civil and Electrical Departments, at 18% apiece.
The grand mean of employee approval for physical work environment in JGC Philippines, Inc. is 4.04 while the grand mean of behavioral work environment is 3.84. This means the behavioral work environment is not necessarily more impactful than physical work environment as some literatures may claim. Overall grand mean is 3.95, hence, employees often agree that the work environment is significant to their productivity.
There were no significant differences of the means among employees’ productivity with respect to quality of work, cost control, and timeliness of schedule
It was established that there is significant positive relationship between the independent and dependent variables based on the Pearson’s coefficient, r value of 0.625, therefore null hypothesis is rejected. Independent variables refer to the work environment while the dependent variable refers to employee productivity. Intervening variables are the demographic profile of respondents.
With empirical evidence, reference literature state that behavioral work environment has more impact on employees’ productivity as opposed to the physical work environment. However, based on the results of this study, physical work environment appears to be more impactful than its behavioral counterpart. Therefore, the researcher concludes that the impact of physical or behavioral work environment depends on the context of the company. In particular, geographical profile may be a factor as well as social and cultural differences. Whatever the case may be, it is the employer’s responsibility to provide a comfortable and harmonious work environment to attract and keep employees with a high level of enthusiasm and engagement for an employee to be productive.
RecommendationsJGC Philippines, Inc. has an existing Productivity Committee. They are responsible for facilitating the development of tools and software to streamline work processes. However, their productivity is fastened on technological efforts. It is recommended that they also facilitate physical and behavioral-based productivity programs based on the results found in this study.
For physical work environment, future office improvement projects such as renovations and office relocation activities should be attached to the findings of this paper.
For behavioral work environment, this area of research would benefit from further classification of the office occupants. A greater understanding of the individual could be attained if personality-type questions were included at the questionnaire stage. A standard personality test could be adopted to allow classification of respondents by personality type. Similarly, questions that recount how the individual works in groups may be encompassed, hence establishing a better understanding of group dynamics and behavior.
The implication for office designers is that they need to find the optimum balance between encouraging positive exchanges, at the same time as decreasing negative distractions.
Office environments should be designed to allow group collaborative working to complement with individual private working. This balance can be achieved if the designers can identify and quantify the impact of the behavioral environment on employees’ productivity.
BENEDICTINE HALLMARK: PRAYERThe researcher, just like everybody else, speaks to God in prayer. When speaking with God, how should one behave and act and think? Saint Benedict advocates that people should at least have mindfulness that it is God that is being spoken to. God looks at the purity of heart. Thus, one must be authentic throughout. In prayer, never say one thing and mean another. God cannot be fooled. God knows the innermost motivations. So purity of heart expresses how it is to be with God.
Furthermore, as Saint Benedict taught, the highest form of prayer is silence. God is silent. Thus, the researcher sometimes goes into solitude and engages into deep prayer wherein words are not needed. These are times when God’s divine presence is present. God listens to the cares and worries of the heart.
Overall, in silence or spoken prayer, the researcher is devoted to God. Sincere devotion is not external, but, it comes from the depths of the researcher’s being. As Saint Benedict taught the words “Vir Dei,” the researcher too, is a Man of God.
Al horr, Y., & Arif, M. (2016). Occupant productivity and office indoor environment quality: a review of the literature. University of Salford Manchester.
Amofa, A., Yawson, M. D., & Okronipa, G. (2016). The effect of the physical office environment on employee productivity. Africa Development and Resources Research Institute Journal, 25.
Bhatti, K. K. (2017). Impact of employee participation on job satisfaction, employee commitment, and productivity. International Review of Business Research Papers, 57.
Leblebici, D. (2013). Impact of workplace quality on employee’s productivity. Journal of business, economics, and finance, 38.
Massoudi, A., ; Hamdi, S. (2017). The consequence of work environment on employees productivity. IOSR Journal of Business and Management, 35-42.
Mukundi, N. (2016). Determinants of employee productivity in private limited companies in Kenya. Master of Science in Organizational.
Sarode, A., ; Shirsath, M. (2014). The factors affecting employee work environment ; it’s relation with employee productivity. International Journal of Science and Research, 2735-2737.
Sequeira, A. H. (2015, January 30). Employee relations and it’s impact on employee performance: a case study. National Institute of Technology Karnataka, 1-17.
Smith, J., ; Magnusson, F. (2015). The project management triangle: a hidden framework. Sweden: University of Gothenburg.
Cooper, D. (2016, August 27). How a clean workplace affects productivity. Retrieved from Let’s Reach Success website: https://letsreachsuccess.com/clean-workplace/
Haynes, B. P. (2015, June 23). The impact of the behavioural environment on office productivity. Retrieved from ResearchGate website: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235254949_The_Impact_of_the_Behavioural_Environment_on_Office_Productivity
Haynes, B. P. (2017, December 20). Office productivity: A theoretical framework. Retrieved from Researchgate website: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/242337580_Office_productivity_A_theoretical_framework
Haynes, B. P. (2018, January 27). An evaluation of the impact of the office environment on productivity. Retrieved from Sheffield Hallam University website: http://shura.shu.ac.uk/4591/
Haynes, B. P. (2018, January 27). The impact of office comfort on productivity. Retrieved from Sheffield Hallam University website: http://shura.shu.ac.uk/4593/
Jensen, A. (2018, February 1). How Office Lighting Affects Productivity. Retrieved from andrewjensen.net: https://www.andrewjensen.net/how-office-lighting-affects-productivity/
Jones, B. (2014, June 19). 5 Ways Creativity Leads to Productivity. Retrieved from Entrepreneur website: https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/234997
Kijko, P. (2017, May 29). Productivity in the workplace: how does communication affect it? Retrieved from Timecamp website: https://www.timecamp.com/index.php/2017/05/productivity-in-the-workplace/
Sauro, J. (2014, October 21). What does statistically significant mean? Retrieved from Measuring U: https://measuringu.com/statistically-significant/
Sovereign Health Care. (2015, July 7). How does ergonomics affect employee performance? Retrieved January 30, 2017, from Sovereign Health Care website: https://www.sovereignhealthcare.co.uk/latest/how-does-ergonomics-affect-employee-performance
Swenson, R. (2013). Social interruption and the loss of productivity. Retrieved from Interruptions website: https://interruptions.net/literature/CubeSmart-productivity-wp1.pdf
Age: ? 21~30 years ? 31~40 years Gender: ? Male
? 41~50 years ? Above 50 years ? Female
Department: Current position:
Length of service in JGC Philippines, Inc. ? 1~5 years ? 6~10 years
? 11~15 years ? Above 15 years
ANNEX A: SURVEY QUESTIONNAIREPersonal Profile. Please fill-out the spaces and put a check on the applicable boxes
Survey Questionnaire. On a 5-point scale, where 5 is the highest and 1 is the lowest; please rate the corresponding columns by putting a check to indicate the extent of your agreement with the following statements:
5 4 3 2 1
Always agree Often agree Sometimes agree Seldom agree Never agree
No. Descriptive statement Rating
5 4 3 2 1
1.1 The office temperature is conducive enough for me to work efficiently 1.2 The lighting brightness at the office is favorable enough for me to work properly 1.3 The office air circulation has no unpleasant odors or dust particles that affects my concentration at work 1.4 The housekeeping at the work area is good enough for me to be productive at work 1.5 The safety & security controls of the company is adequate for me to work worry-free No. Descriptive statement Rating
5 4 3 2 1
2 Office layout
2.1 My workstation is arranged in a manner where I can move freely and comfortably 2.2 There is reasonable storage space for my personal items as well as general items of the department 2.3 Meeting areas are enough to conduct focused group discussions 3 Interaction
5.1 I have a healthy professional and personal relationship with other members of the organization 5.2 The workload assigned to me is enough for me to function efficiently 5.3 The organization gives me enough creative freedom to strategize my approach in tackling my assigned tasks 5.4 I have access to all the necessary equipment to fulfill my job functions 4 Distraction
4.1 When there is a downtime for relevant equipment, the company gives timely feedback or the restoration 4.2 Whenever I’m concentrating on a task, the level of interruptions that arise is tolerable enough for me to refocus my concentration 4.3 The collective noise around my workstation is acceptable enough for me to work effectively
No. Descriptive statement Rating
5 4 3 2 1
5.1 Quality — I submit deliverables conforming to project or task requirements 5.2 Quality — My submitted deliverables are free from mistakes and inconsistencies 5.5 Cost — I complete tasks within budgeted man-hours 5.6 Quality — I initiate work processes improvements to save time and effort 5.7 Schedule —I submit deliverables on or before deadlines 6 Summary
5.1 The physical office environment is comfortable enough to sustain my productivity at work`
5.2 The general behavior of the members of my department is pleasant to work around with
5.3 I am satisfied with the overall physical and behavioral office environment of the company 5.4 I am satisfied with my own job performance throughout my tenure in JGC Philippines, Inc.