In the last decades, higher education is under the pressure to bring innovation and effective new solutions for economic growth and social cohesion. In this context, architects were called to bring their contribution to change higher education from within. The result is a predominance of learning spaces that translate the belief that new designs can stimulate collaboration, creativity and ultimately, good science.

A simple walk around modern universities reveals that architects and policy-makers think that the key to achieve this stands in the open office spaces,  a quasi ubiquitous feature in our campuses. Academics find that old private offices are put down to make space for open plan offices, where all work to advance knowledge, culture and civilisation. The main reasons to adopt this solution is advertised that open plan offices cultivate collaboration and team-spirit, hence innovation. Some academics say that this is a good solution for a culture of surveillance and distrusts and is promoted to cut costs under the imperative of ‘efficiency’. As many corporations – such as Google – adopted with enthusiasm open plan offices, academics may have reasons to accept the solution imposed by architects and designers.        

A look at what the evidence indicate is a worthwhile exercise. In April 2015, The Washington Post published an analysis with strong title: “Office designers find open-plan spaces are actually lousy for workers”. The analysis is based on sets of evidence unveiled in various studies, noting that “research piles up on how ineffective and stressful open plans can be”, and continues noting that “there’s a growing recognition that workers need some sort of refuge to concentrate at work (beyond putting on headphones and hoping for the best).”

Harvard Business Review also published materials citing research that proves that Cubicles Are the Absolute Worst. More recent studies reveal that there is a direct correlation between the size of the open-space offices and performance: the larger the office the less productive people are! There is no consistent set of evidence to support the idea that open space offices nurture collaboration, but researchers unveiled that in open space offices lead to higher levels of stress, lower motivation, and – as a study on over 42,000 employees reveal – people are more dissatisfied regarding the “ease of interaction” than those who work in private offices. In 2009, a study conducted in Sweden finds that employees working in private offices report high scores of happiness at work while those who work in open-plan offices are highly dissatisfied. A meta-analysis of over 100 research studies reveals that a lack of psychological privacy (which is specific to open space work environments) inhibits “personal or confidential discussions and work-related feedback”. Moreover, there a well documented link between the “increased background noise and detrimental task performance”. As a recent article published by The New York Times observes, architects need to acknowledge the fact that sound matters. In 2013, two researchers conclude that all sets of evidence “categorically contradict the industry-accepted wisdom that open-plan layout enhances communication between colleagues and improves occupants’ overall work environmental satisfaction.”

Adopting an appealing trend even if the evidence overwhelmingly proves that it fuels work dissatisfaction, lowers motivation, focus and productivity can have serious long-term effects on the quality of academic results. Moreover, a “one-size-fits-all’ solution in designing work spaces in universities can only hinder the academic ethos and entrench mediocrity. As Lacordaire concludes, “Nothing is achieved without solitude”. The XXth century presents many warnings of what results when privacy is suppressed. We are at a point when we need a serious consideration in design of Disraeli’s note about solitude, “the nurse of enthusiasm […] and the true parent of genius”. A balanced provision of alternative workspaces is extremely important if we aim to bring a positive change in higher education.