تأثیر محیط کالبدی و اجتماعی کار بر خلاقیت کارکنان (مطالعه موردی: پارک علم و فناوری خراسان) | ||
| فصلنامه علمی توسعه پایدار محیط جغرافیایی | ||
| مقاله 7، دوره 7، شماره 15، دی 1404، صفحه 69-86 اصل مقاله (2.08 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: علمی - پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.48308/sdge.2025.240661.1269 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| محمدباقر فراحی؛ سارا دادپور* | ||
| گروه مهندسی معماری و شهرسازی، دانشکده معماری و شهرسازی، دانشگاه صنعتی شاهرود، شاهرود، ایران | ||
| چکیده | ||
| مقدمه: امروزه سازمانها و شرکتها همچون موجودات زنده، به تطبیقپذیری و مبارزه با فضای پرچالش کاری نیاز دارند. نیاز به اصلاح روندهای بروکراتیک، حفظ مزایای رقابتی و توان تولید محصولات و ایدههای نو، در سطح خرد یا کلان توجه به حضور نیروی انسانی کارآمد و خلاق را هرروز بیشتر میکند. خلاقیت در معنای پتانسیلی برای ایجاد روندهای نو و اصلاح روندهای موجود، میتواند از مهمترین شایستگیهای کارکنان باشد. از طرفی خلاقیت کارکنان تحت تأثیر مجموعهای از عوامل مختلف کالبدی، اجتماعی و فردی است. از این بین خلاقیت فردی مرتبط با محیط کالبدی کار، درک هنری و معمارانه افراد از فضا و تولید ایدهها است. عوامل مرتبط با معماری و طراحی محیط کار، اهمیت بالایی در تأثیرگذاری بر خلاقیت فردی دارند و در این تأثیرگذاری، با عوامل اجتماعی و فردی نیز برهمکنش دارند. لذا هدف اصلی پژوهش تحلیل تأثیر محیط کالبدی کار بر خلاقیت فردی کارکنان است. اهداف دیگر پژوهش شامل بررسی نقش میانجی محیط اجتماعی و نقش تعدیلگر عوامل فردی در مدل تأثیر محیط کالبدی بر خلاقیت میگردد. مواد و روشها: رویکرد پژوهش کمی، راهبرد پژوهش پیمایش مقطعی و نوع تحقیق، کاربردی است. با استفاده از تحلیل محتوای مقالات مرتبط، چارچوب مفهومی پژوهش تدوین شد. جمعآوری دادههای کمی بهوسیلهی پرسشنامه خوداظهاری تکبرگی انجام گردید. پایایی اولیه پرسشنامه با ضریب آلفای کرونباخ (921/0 = α) و روایی صوری پرسشنامه نیز توسط تعدادی از اساتید دانشگاه تأیید گردید. حجم نمونه به روش «دانیل سوپر» تعیین گردید و حجم نهایی نمونه شامل 285 نفر پاسخدهنده بود که از بین کارکنان شرکتهای دانشبنیان پارک علم و فناوری خراسان رضوی به صورت در دسترس انتخاب شدند. پارکهای علم و فناوری به نوعی شتابدهنده و گسترشدهنده رابطه علم و صنعت و محیطی برای پرداخت هر چه بیشتر به خلاقیت است. تحلیل دادههای کمی با نرمافزار SPSS26 برای غربالگری و پیشپردازش دادهها، تحلیل عامل اکتشافی و استخراج عوامل و Amos24 برای تحلیل عامل تأییدی، مدلسازی معادلات ساختاریِ کامل و آزمون فرضیات انجام شد. در تحلیل عامل اکتشافی، از روش استخراج مؤلفههای اصلی و چرخش پرومکس استفاده گردید. آزمون نقش میانجی عوامل اجتماعی در تأثیر محیط کالبدی بر خلاقیت، با روش بوتاسترپینگ و آزمون تعدیلگری عوامل فردی شامل سن، تجربه کاری و میزان برونگرایی با روش چندگروهی صورت گرفت. نتایج و بحث: در تحلیل مؤلفههای اصلی، سه مؤلفه محیط اجتماعی، خلاقیت فردی و محیط کالبدی در مجموع 44/56 درصد از واریانس را تبیین کردند. با توجه به یافتههای پژوهش، تأثیر محیط کالبدی کار بر محیط اجتماعی (672/ 0= β و 001/0 = p-value) معنادار بود. اگرچه تأثیر مستقیم محیط کالبدی بر خلاقیت فردی معنادار نشد (179/ 0= β و 096/0 = p-value) ولی تأثیر کامل آن بر خلاقیت (506/ 0= β و 000/0 = p-value) و تأثیر غیرمستقیم آن از طریق میانجی کامل محیط اجتماعی (319/ 0= β و 001/0 = p-value) معنادار بود. مدل پژوهش 37% تغییرات خلاقیت فردی و 45% تغییرات محیط اجتماعی را توضیح داد. همچنین، کارکنان با تجربه (818/ 0= β) به نسبت کارکنان تازهکار (478/0 = β)، جو اجتماعی محیط کار را بیشتر تحت تأثیر خصوصیات کالبدی شرکت درک کرده بودند (035/0 = p-value). نتیجهگیری: عوامل کالبدی محیط کار با میانجیگری محیط اجتماعی و تعدیلگری تجربه کاری بر خلاقیت فردی کارکنان تأثیرگذارند. راهبردهای متعدد در جهت افزایش خلاقیت فردی پیشنهاد شده است. راهبردهای اجتماعی شامل خلق محیطهای پویاتر، با احساس آزادی بیشتر، ایجاد فرصت بحث و تسهیل ارتباطات مورد نیاز میگردند. راهبردهای کالبدی شامل داشتن فضای کاری دارای بخشهای دکوری و تزئینی، محیط رنگارنگ بسته به مخاطب و کاربری آن و مشارکت کارکنان در انتخاب چیدمان و وسایل محیط کار میشوند. | ||
| کلیدواژهها | ||
| خلاقیت کارکنان؛ محیط کالبدی کار؛ محیط اجتماعی؛ مدلسازی معادلات ساختاری | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| Impact of Physical and Social Work Environment on Employees’ Creativity (Case study: Khorasan Science and Technology Park) | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Mohammad Bagher Farahi؛ Sara Dadpour | ||
| Department of Architectural Engineering and Urbanism, Faculty of Architectural Engineering and Urbanism, Shahrood University of Technology (SUT), Shahrood, Iran. | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Introduction: Today, organizations and companies, like living organisms, need to adapt to and cope with challenging work environments. The need to reform bureaucratic processes, maintain competitive advantages, and produce new products and ideas, at both the micro and macro levels, has increased attention toward the need for efficient and creative human resources. Creativity, defined as the potential to develop new processes and modify existing ones, can be one of the most important employee competencies. On the other hand, employee creativity is influenced by a set of different physical, social, and individual factors. Among these, individual creativity is associated with the physical work environment and individuals’ spatial and architectural perception, and the production of ideas. Factors related to the architecture and design of the work environment are of great importance in influencing individual creativity. These factors interact with social and individual dimensions in shaping creativity. Therefore, this study aims to analyze the physical work environment's effect on the individual creativity of employees. Other goals of the research are to examine the mediating role of the social environment and the moderating role of individual factors in the impact of the physical environment on the creativity model. Materials and Methods: The research approach is quantitative, the research strategy is a cross-sectional survey, and the study is applied in nature. Using content analysis of related articles, the research conceptual framework was developed. Quantitative data were gathered using a self-report questionnaire. The initial reliability of the questionnaire was confirmed by Cronbach's alpha coefficient (α = 0.921), and several academic experts approved the questionnaire's face validity. The sample size was determined by the "Daniel Super" method, and the final sample size included 285 respondents who were selected from the employees of knowledge-based companies in the Khorasan Science and Technology Park through convenience sampling. Science and technology parks are a kind of accelerator and expander of the relationship between science, industry, and the environment to pay more attention to creativity. Quantitative data analysis was performed using SPSS 26 software for data screening and preprocessing, exploratory factor analysis and factor extraction, and Amos 24 for confirmatory factor analysis, full structural equation modeling, and hypothesis testing. In exploratory factor analysis, the principal component extraction method and Promax rotation were used. The mediating role of social factors in the effect of physical environment on creativity was tested using the bootstrapping method, and the moderation test of individual factors, including age, work experience, and extraversion, was performed using the multigroup method. Results and Discussion: In the principal component analysis, the three components of social environment, individual creativity, and physical environmentexplained 56.44% of the total variance. According to the research findings, the effect of the physical work environment on the social environment was significant (β = 0.672, p-value = 0.001). Although the direct effect of the physical environment on individual creativity was not significant (β = 0.179, p-value = 0.096), its total effect on creativity (β = 0.506, p-value = 0.000) and its indirect effect through the full mediation of the social environment (β = 0.319, p-value = 0.001) were significant. The research model explained 37% of the changes in individual creativity and 45% of the changes in the social environment. Also, experienced employees (β = 0.818) perceived the workplace social atmosphere as more strongly influenced (p-value = 0.035) by the physical characteristics of the company than novice employees (β = 0.478). Conclusion: Physical workplace factors influence the individual creativity of employees through the mediation of the social environment and by moderating the work experience. Several strategies have been proposed to increase individual creativity. Social strategies include creating more dynamic environments with a greater sense of freedom, creating opportunities for discussion, and facilitating the necessary communication. Physical strategies include having a workspace with decorative and ornamental sections, color-responsive workspace design tailored to user needs, and employees’ participation in choosing the layout and equipment of the workplace. | ||
| کلیدواژهها [English] | ||
| Employee Creativity, Physical Work Environment, Social Environment, SEM | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
Ajis, A. M., & Naka, R., 2015. Spatial configuration based on amount of communication for organizational creativity in interior design firms. Journal of Sustainable Development, 8(8), 285. https://doi.org/10.5539/jsd.v8n8p285
Amabile, T.M., Conti, R., Coon, H., Lazenby, J. and Herron, M., 1996. Assessing the work environment for creativity. Academy of management journal, 39(5), pp.1154-1184. https://doi.org/10.5465/256995
Argote, L. and Todorova, G., 2007. Organizational learning: review and future directions, in Hodgkinson, G.P. and Ford, J.K. (Eds), International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 22, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, 193-234. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470753378
Azadegan, A., Bush, D. and Dooley, K., 2008. Design creativity: static or dynamic capability? International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 28(7), 636-662. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443570810881794
Bentley, I., McGlynn, S., Smith, G., Alcock, A. and Murrain, P., 2013. Responsive environments. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780080516172
Blomberg, A. J. and Kallio, T. J., 2021. A review of the physical context of creativity: A three-dimensional framework for investigating the physical context of creativity. International Journal of Management Reviews 24(3): 433-451. https://doi.org/10.24840/2183-0606_005.001_0007
Ceylan, C., Dul, J. and Aytac, S., 2008. Can the office environment stimulate a manager's creativity? Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing 18(6): 589-602. https://doi.org/10.1002/hfm.20128
Chi, N.W., Liao, H.H. and Chien, W.L., 2021. Having a creative day: a daily diary study of the interplay between daily activating moods and physical work environment on daily creativity. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 55(3), pp.752-768. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.488
Chuan, C. L., & Penyelidikan, J., 2006. Sample size estimation using Krejcie and Morgan and Cohen statistical power analysis: A comparison. Jurnal Penyelidikan IPBL, 7(1), 78-86. https://www.academia.edu/8303970/sample_size_estimation_using_krejcie_and_morgan_and_cohen_statistical_power_analysis_a_comparison
Cohen, J., 1992. Quantitative methods in psychology: A power primer. Psychol. Bull., 112, 1155-1159. https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-2909.112.1.155
Collier, J. E., 2020. Applied Structural Equation Modeling Using AMOS. Applied Structural Equation Modeling Using AMOS. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003018414
Cui, L., Wang, J., & Liu, M. J., 2022. Does Ageing Limit Employees’ Creativity? A Brief Review of Research on Ageing and Creativity BT - Responsible Innovation Management. In H. K. Chan, M. J. Liu, J. Wang, & T. Zhang (Eds.) (pp. 95–118). Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-4480-2_6
Dadpour, S., 2012. Attracting Creative Class to Tehran City. Soffeh, 21(4), 51-66. https://dor.isc.ac/dor/20.1001.1.1683870.1390.21.4.5.9 (In Persian)
Dul, J., Ceylan, C. and Jaspers, F., 2011. Knowledge workers' creativity and the role of the physical work environment. Human Resource Management 50(6): 715-734. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.20454
Field, A. P., 2009. Discovering statistics using SPSS: and sex and drugs and rock “n” roll (3rd Edition). https://books.google.com/books/about/Discovering_Statistics_Using_SPSS.html?id=IY61Ddqnm6IC
Frosch, K. H. (2011). Workforce age and innovation: a literature survey. International Journal of Management Reviews, 13(4), 414–430. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2011.00298.x
Gamarra-Moncayo, J., & Prada-Chapoñán, R., 2025. Sample, sample size and sampling: a review of current recommendations José. Interacciones Revista de Avances en Psicología, 11, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.24016/2025.v11.447
Ganji, K., Taghavi, S. and Azimi, F., 2015. The Meta-Analysis of variables associated with creativity. Innovation & creativity in human science, 4(4),1-49. https://sanad.iau.ir/fa/Article/930767 (In Persian)
Gaskin, J. & Lim, J., 2016. "Model Fit Measures", AMOS Plugin. Gaskination's StatWiki. http://statwiki.gaskination.com
Gocłowska, M.A., Ritter, S.M., Elliot, A.J. and Baas, M., 2019. Novelty seeking is linked to openness and extraversion, and can lead to greater creative performance. Journal of Personality, 87(2), pp.252-266. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12387
Ghosh, K. 2015. Developing organizational creativity and innovation, Management Research Review, 38(11): 1126 – 1148. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/MRR-01-2014-0017
Growe, A. and Mager, C., 2018. Changing workplaces in the creative process in creative industries – The case of advertising and music. Erdkunde 72(4): 259-271. https://doi.org/10.3112/erdkunde.2018.04.01
Hadi, N.U., Abdullah, N. and Sentosa, I., 2016. An easy approach to exploratory factor analysis: Marketing perspective. Journal of Educational and social research, 6(1), pp.215-223. https://doi.org/10.5901/jesr.2016.v6n1p215
Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., & Anderson, R.E. 2019. Multivariate data analysis, Cengage Learning EMEA, UK. https://www.cengage.uk/c/multivariate-data-analysis-8e-hair-babin-anderson-black/9781473756540/
Hatch, M. J., 2013. The Symbolics of Office Design: An Empirical Exploration. Symbols and Artifacts, De Gruyter: 129-146. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110874143.129
Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M., 1999. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural equation modeling: a multidisciplinary journal, 6(1), 1-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
Huang, Y., Ferreira, F. A. F. and He, Z., 2021. Impact of workspace environment on creativity and innovation: empirical evidence from a makerspace in China. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12504
Iranian Research Organization for Science & Technology, https://irost.org/en (In Persian)
Jung, J. H., Lee, Y., & Karsten, R., 2011. The Moderating Effect of Extraversion–Introversion Differences on Group Idea Generation Performance. Small Group Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496411422130
Kafashpour, A., Gharibpour, M. 2016. The Relationship between Physical Workplace Attributes and Organizational Creativity, Case Study: Knowledge-based Companies, Armanshahr Architecture & Urban Development, 9(16), 105-114. https://www.armanshahrjournal.com/article_33278.html?lang=en
Khorasan Science & Technology Park, 2025. https://www.Kstp.ir (In Persian)
Kiani, B., Dadpour, S., & Rabiei, M., 2024. A Study on the Effects of Public Space Quality on Tourists’ Loyalty with the Moderating Role of Gender. Tourism and Leisure Time Journal, 9(18), 1-32. https://doi.org/10.22133/tlj.2024.452471.1167 (In Persian)
Korpela, K., Bloom, J. D., Sianoja, M., Pasanen, T. and Kiannunen, U., 2017. Nature at home and at work: Naturally good? Links between window views, indoor plants, outdoor activities and employee well-being over one year. Landscape and Urban Planning 160: 38-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.12.005
Madjar, N., 2005. The contributions of different groups of individuals to employees’ creativity, Advances in Developing Human Resources, 7(2), 182-206. https://doi.org/10.1177/1523422305274525
McCoy, J. M., & Evans, G. W. 2002. The Potential Role of the Physical Environment in Fostering Creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 14(3–4), 409–426. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326934CRJ1434_11
Mojdeh, S., Head, M. and Shamy, N.E., 2018. Knowledge sharing in social networking sites: how context impacts individuals’ social and intrinsic motivation to contribute in online communities, Transactions on Human-Computer Interaction, 10(2), 82-104. https://doi.org/10.17705/1thci.00105
Moradi, B., 2015. Science and Technology Park in Iran, the basics of physical design and planning, Hormozgan University, Bandar Abbas, Iran. https://www.gisoom.com/book/11178072 (In Persian)
Nisula, A.-M., Olander, H., 2021. The role of creativity in knowledge workers’ entrepreneurial intentions: The moderating effect of general self-efficacy. Journal of Small Business Management. https://doi.org/10.1080/00472778.2021.1989593
Pahlevan sharif, S. and Sharif nia, S. H., 2022. Factor Analysis and Structural Equation Modeling With SPSS and AMOS From Zero to Hero. Tehran: Jame-e-Negar (3rd Edition). https://jph.ir (In Persian)
Rahman, M.K.U., Hussain, A., Khan, M.H. and Usman, M., 2024. Moderation role of Extraversion and Conscientiousness on the Relationship Between Stressors and Creativity in the Private Sector Universities of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Journal of Business and Management Research, 3(3), 972–991. https://jbmr.com.pk/index.php/Journal/article/view/328
Sailer, K., 2011. Creativity as social and spatial process. Facilities 29(1): 6-18. https://doi.org/10.1108/02632771111101296
Samani, S.A. and Alavi, S.M.S.Z., 2020. Does the design of the workplace affect individual creativity. Performance Improvement, 59(5), 6-16. https://https://doi.org/10.1002/pfi.21917
Samani, S.A., Rasid, S.Z.A. and Sofian, S., 2017. The influence of personal control and environmental distraction in open‐plan offices on creative outcome. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 30(1), pp.5-28. https://doi.org/10.1002/piq.21239
Sheykhan, A. and Saghaee, A., 2011. How physical and non-physical working environment affects creativity: An empirical study. Management Science Letters: 335-340. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2011.03.001
Sicotte, H., De Serres, A., Delerue, H. and Menard, V., 2019. Open creative workspaces impacts for new product development team creativity and effectiveness. Journal of Corporate Real Estate 21(4): 290-306. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCRE-10-2017-0039
Slater, S. F., Hult, G. T. M. and Olson, E. M., 2010. Factors influencing the relative importance of marketing strategy creativity and marketing strategy implementation effectiveness. Industrial Marketing Management 39(4): 551-559. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2008.03.007
Soper, D. (2024), https://danielsoper.com
Sundstrom, E., Herbert, R. K. and Brown, D.W., 1982. Privacy and communication in an open-plan office: A Case Study. Environment and Behavior 14(3): 379-392. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916582143007
Tahmasbnia, Z., Dehghanmongabadi, A., Dadpour, S. 2025. Explaining the effect of the physical environment quality on walking and social interactions in urban streets (Case study: Shariati Street, Babol). Urban Social Geography, 12(1), 237-260. http//doi.org/10.22103/JUSG.2025.2154
Thoring, K., Mueller, R. M., Pieter, D. and Badke-Schaub, P., 2020. Spatial design factors associated with creative work: A systematic literature review. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing: AIEDAM, Cambridge University Press. 34: 300-314. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0890060420000232
Tien, H., Chang, B., & Kuo, Y., 2018. Does experience stimulate or stifle creativity? European Journal of Innovation Management. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-02-2018-0042
Vischer, J.C., 2007. The concept of environmental comfort in workplace performance. Ambiente Construido, Porto Alegre, 7(1), 21-34. https://seer.ufrgs.br/index.php/ambienteconstruido/article/view/3726
Wagner, M. and Growe, A. 2019. Creativity-enhancing work environments: Eventisation through an inspiring work atmosphere in temporary proximity. Raumforschung und Raumordnung 78(1): 53-70. https://doi.org/10.2478/rara-2019-0039
Yuan, F. and Woodman, R.W., 2010. Innovative behavior in the workplace: The role of performance and image outcome expectations. Academy of management journal, 53(2), pp.323-342. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.49388995 | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 334 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 90 |
||