DESIGN OF OFFICE BUILDINGS AND IT'S EFFECTS ON WORKERS' INTERACTION

Abstract

Human interaction is one of the aspects that need not to be ignored when designing office buildings because man is a social animal. The designers have to ensure that the aspect of interaction of the occupants is incorporated into the office building designs designs. Interaction is so important as it mortivates the workers and also reduces on stress. This research finds out the different building designs and how they influence the workers’ interactions with the case study being offices located along Lumumba Avenue road in Kampala. Data was collected using observations and questionnaires and from the literature review, factors that influence workers’ interaction were identified and places where they interact from. This research will find out how the situation is for the case of Uganda taking offices Lumumba Avenue road as case studies. Later on it was analysed by categorizing it then drawing different graphs which later on helped in coming up with the conclusions. The research showed that in all buildings, interaction of workers takes place. It also found out that all buildings have at least one design feature that allows workers interact with one another. However NDA’s level of interaction was low due to the policy which management passed that restricts interaction of workers during office hours. G4S was found to have a high level of interaction that is mostly attributed to the density of workers it has, and the open space that provided an environment for interaction.

Full text

MAKERERE UNIVERSITY
COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, DESIGN, ART AND TECHNOLOGY
SCHOOL OF BUILT ENVIRONMENT
DEPARTMENT OF CONSTRUCTION ECONOMICS AND
MANAGEMENT
FINAL YEAR PROJECT REPORT
“DESIGN OF OFFICE BUILDINGS AND IT’S EFFECTS ON WORKERS’
INTERACTION”
A research report submitted to the department of Construction
Economics and Management, Makerere University for the award of the
degree of;
Bachelor of Science In Quantity Surveying
Candidate: AYEBALE JOSEPH
Reg No: 12/U/161
Name of the supervisor: SSALI FRANCIS

i
Declaration
I Ayebale Joseph, hereby declare that this proposal does not contain without acknowledgement,
material published or submitted for a degree or diploma in any university to the best of my
knowledge except where due reference is made to the text.
SUPERVISOR
Name: Ssali Francis
Signature………………………
Date:………………………….
STUDENT
Name: Ayebale Joseph
Signature………………………
Date:………………………….

ii
Acknowledgement
I would like to acknowledge the following people who have been there for me throughout this
time, more especially at this crucial time of carrying out this research.
My supervisor Mr. Ssali Francis Pyrrh
My parents; Mr. &Mrs. Joseph and Judith Nyakoojo
My siblings; Mrs. Muhuruzi Resty Ateenyi, Mrs. Kusiima Syphrose Amooti, Miss. Kiiza Joseline
Amooti, Mrs. Kato Immaculate Abwooli, Mrs. Bagire Sylivia Amooti, Miss. Nyamahunge
Chrispine Akiiki, Miss. Kiiza Sophia Amooti, Miss Atuhairwe Prisca Abwooli and Mr. Ayesiga
Andrea Kaahwa Ateenyi.
My friends, group mates, room mates
Director, Human resource manager and employees of G4S,
Executive Director, Human resource manager and employees of NDA Head office.
Executive secretary, human resource manager and employees of UHRC Head office
Executive director, human resource manager and employees of UIA
The Human resource manager and employees of UWEAL
The Human resource manager and employees of Enterprise Uganda.
May the good Lord bless you all in abundance.

iii
Dedication
This report is dedicated to all people who take tough decisions of not aborting their children and
those who keep virginity for their future spouses.

iv
Abstract
Human interaction is one of the aspects that need not to be ignored when designing office buildings
because man is a social animal. The designers have to ensure that the aspect of interaction of the
occupants is incorporated into the office building designs designs. Interaction is so important as it
mortivates the workers and also reduces on stress. This research finds out the different building
designs and how they influence the workers’ interactions with the case study being offices located
along Lumumba Avenue road in Kampala. Data was collected using observations and
questionnaires and from the literature review, factors that influence workers’ interaction were
identified and places where they interact from. This research will find out how the situation is for
the case of Uganda taking offices Lumumba Avenue road as case studies. Later on it was analysed
by categorizing it then drawing different graphs which later on helped in coming up with the
conclusions. The research showed that in all buildings, interaction of workers takes place. It also
found out that all buildings have at least one design feature that allows workers interact with one
another. However NDA’s level of interaction was low due to the policy which management passed
that restricts interaction of workers during office hours. G4S was found to have a high level of
interaction that is mostly attributed to the density of workers it has, and the open space that
provided an environment for interaction.

v
Table of Contents
Declaration ....................................................................................................................................... i
Acknowledgement .......................................................................................................................... ii
Dedication ...................................................................................................................................... iii
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iv
Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................ v
List of figures ................................................................................................................................. ix
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. xi
List of acronyms ........................................................................................................................... xii
1.0 CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................... 13
1.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 13
1.2 Background of the study ......................................................................................................... 13
1.3 Problem statement ................................................................................................................... 14
1.4 Justification of the study ......................................................................................................... 14
1.5 Research Questions ................................................................................................................. 15
1.6 Research objectives ................................................................................................................. 15
1.6.1 Main Objective..................................................................................................................... 15
1.6.2 Specific Objectives .............................................................................................................. 15
1.7 Scope of the study ................................................................................................................... 15
1.7.1 Geographical Scope ............................................................................................................. 15
1.7.2 Academic Scope................................................................................................................... 16

vi
1.7.3TimeScope ............................................................................................................................ 16
2.0 CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW ......................................................................... 17
2.1 Theoretical Framework ........................................................................................................... 17
2.1.1 Behavior settings .................................................................................................................. 17
2.1.2 Mood .................................................................................................................................... 18
2.1.3 Human Distances ................................................................................................................. 18
2.1.4 Density ................................................................................................................................. 19
2.2 Interaction and Mobility ......................................................................................................... 19
2.3The role of informal communication ....................................................................................... 20
3.0 CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY ............................................................................... 22
3.1 Type of research ...................................................................................................................... 22
3.2 Research Methods ................................................................................................................... 22
3.2.1 Questionnaire design ............................................................................................................ 22
3.2.2 Pilot studies .......................................................................................................................... 22
3.2.3 Sample Selection .................................................................................................................. 23
3.3 Research Methodology ........................................................................................................... 23
3.4 Data analysis ........................................................................................................................... 23
CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS .................................................................................................... 25
3.1 Cases of study ......................................................................................................................... 25
3.2 G4S Building .......................................................................................................................... 25
3.2.1 Location ............................................................................................................................... 25

vii
3.2.2 Desgn ................................................................................................................................... 26
3.2.3 Interactive spaces ................................................................................................................. 27
3.2.4 Workers perceptions ............................................................................................................ 28
3.3 National Drug Authority ......................................................................................................... 29
3.3.1 Location ............................................................................................................................... 29
3.3.2 Design .................................................................................................................................. 30
3.3.3 Interactive Spaces ................................................................................................................ 31
3.3.4 Workers perceptions ............................................................................................................ 32
3.4 Twed Plaza .............................................................................................................................. 33
3.4.1 Location ............................................................................................................................... 33
3.4.2 Design .................................................................................................................................. 35
3.4.3 Interactive Spaces ................................................................................................................ 37
3.4.4 Workers’ perception at UHRC............................................................................................. 43
3.4.5 Workers’ perception at UIA................................................................................................. 44
3.5 Enterprise Uganda ................................................................................................................... 45
3.5.1 Location ............................................................................................................................... 45
3.5.2 Design .................................................................................................................................. 46
3.5.3 Interactive Spaces ................................................................................................................ 47
3.5.4 Workers’Perception ............................................................................................................. 50
3.6 UWEAL .................................................................................................................................. 51
3.6.1 Location ............................................................................................................................... 51
3.6.2 Design .................................................................................................................................. 51
3.6.3 Interactive spaces ................................................................................................................. 52
3.6.4 Worker’s perception............................................................................................................. 55
3.7 General findings ...................................................................................................................... 56

viii
3.7.1 Comparative study of Blocks layouts of different offices ................................................... 56
3.7.2 Workers’ perceptions ........................................................................................................... 59
3.7.2.2 Interaction with neighbors ................................................................................................ 62
3.7.3 Places of interaction identified ............................................................................................. 72
CHAPTER FOUR: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMEDATIONS .......................................... 73
4.1 General conclusions ................................................................................................................ 73
4.2 Specific conclusions................................................................................................................ 73
4.2.1 Mood .................................................................................................................................... 73
4.2.2 Human distances .................................................................................................................. 73
4.2.3 Density ................................................................................................................................. 74
4.2.4 Mobility................................................................................................................................ 74
4.2.5 Informal communication ...................................................................................................... 74
4.3 Recommendations ................................................................................................................... 75
4.3.1 To the designers/ Architects................................................................................................. 75
4.2.3 To quantity surveyors .......................................................................................................... 75
4.2.4 To business organizations .................................................................................................... 75
Bibliography ................................................................................................................................. 76
APPENDICES .............................................................................................................................. 78

ix
List of figures
Figure 1: Location of Lumumba Avenue...................................................................................... 16
Figure 2: G4S Building ................................................................................................................. 26
Figure 3: Lay out of G4S .............................................................................................................. 27
Figure 4: A graph showing G4S's places of interaction ................................................................ 29
Figure 5: Lay out of NDA ............................................................................................................. 31
Figure 6: Graph showing NDA's places of interaction ................................................................. 32
Figure 7: Twed Plaza .................................................................................................................... 34
Figure 8: Second floor , UIA office layout ................................................................................... 36
Figure 9: Corridor at UHRC ......................................................................................................... 37
Figure 10: Basement Parking Yard at Twed Plaza ....................................................................... 39
Figure 11: Parking in front of Twed Plaza .................................................................................... 40
Figure 12: Design of UHRC fourth floor offices .......................................................................... 42
Figure 13: A graph showing places where UHRC workers interact from .................................... 43
Figure 14: A graph showing places of interaction of UIA workers .............................................. 45
Figure 15: Design of Enterprise Uganda ...................................................................................... 47
Figure 16: The parking yard at Enterprise Uganda and UWEAL ................................................ 48
Figure 17: The corridor at Enterprise Uganda .............................................................................. 49
Figure 18: A graph showing Enterprise Uganda's places of interaction ....................................... 50
Figure 19: Design of UWEAL offices .......................................................................................... 52
Figure 20: Workers interacting in an office .................................................................................. 54
Figure 21: A graph showing UWEAL's places of interaction ...................................................... 55
Figure 22: A pie-chart showing how NDA's workers interact with office mates ......................... 60
Figure 23: A pie-chart showing how UHRC workers interact with officemates .......................... 60
Figure 24: A pie-chart showing how UIA workers interact with friends ..................................... 61
Figure 25: A pie-chart showing Enterprise Uganda's interaction with office mates .................... 61
Figure 26: A pie-chart showing how UWEAL's workers interact with office mates .................. 62
Figure 27: A pie-chart showing how G4S workers interact with neigbours ................................. 62
Figure 28: A pie-chart showing how NDA's workers interact with neigbours ............................. 63
Figure 29: A pie-chart showing how UHRC workers interact with neigbours ............................. 63
Figure 30: A pie chart showing how UIA workers interact with neighbours ............................... 63

x
Figure 31: A pie-chart showing how Enterprise Uganda's workers interact with neigbours........ 64
Figure 32: UWEAL's interaction with neigbiours ........................................................................ 65
Figure 33: A pie-chart showing how G4S workers interact with friends ..................................... 65
Figure 34: A pie-chart showing how NDA's workers interact with friends ................................. 66
Figure 35: A pie-chart showing how UHRC workers interact with friends ................................. 66
Figure 36: A pie-chart showing how UIA workers interact with friends ..................................... 67
Figure 37: A pie-chart showing how Enterprise Uganda workers interact with friends .............. 67
Figure 38: A pie-chart showing how UWEAL's interact with friends ......................................... 68
Figure 39: A pie-chart showing how G4S workers interact with others ....................................... 68
Figure 40: A pie-chart showing how NDA's workers interact with others ................................... 69
Figure 41: A pie-chart showing how UHRC workers interact with others................................... 69
Figure 42: A pie-chart showing how UIA workers interact with others ....................................... 70
Figure 43: A pie-chart showing how Enterprise Uganda's workers interact with others.............. 70
Figure 44: A pie-chart showing how workers of UWEAL's interact with others ......................... 71

xi
List of Tables
Table 1: How G4S workers interact .............................................................................................. 28
Table 2: Places where interaction takes place ............................................................................... 28
Table 3: Measure of Preference of the place of interaction .......................................................... 29
Table 4: How NDA workers interact ............................................................................................ 32
Table 5: Places of interaction ........................................................................................................ 32
Table 6: Measure of preference of places of interaction ............................................................... 33
Table 7: How UHRC workers interact.......................................................................................... 43
Table 8: Places of interaction for UHRC ...................................................................................... 43
Table 9: Measure of preference of places of interaction for UHRC ............................................. 44
Table 10: How UIA workers interact ............................................................................................ 44
Table 11: Places of interaction ...................................................................................................... 44
Table 12: Measure of preference of the place of interaction ........................................................ 45
Table 13: How workers at Enterprise Uganda interact ................................................................. 50
Table 14: Places of interaction ...................................................................................................... 50
Table 15: Measure of preference of the place of interaction ........................................................ 51
Table 16: How workers at UWEAL interact ................................................................................ 55
Table 17: Interaction places for UWEAL workers ....................................................................... 55
Table 18: Degree of preference of the places of interaction ......................................................... 56
Table 19: Comparative study of blocks layouts of different offices ............................................. 56
Table 20: Table showing measure of preference .......................................................................... 71

xii
List of acronyms
NDA…………………………………….National Drug Authority
UHRC…………………………………..Uganda Human Rights Commission
UWEAL..……………………………… Uganda Women Entrepreneurs Association Limited
TV………………………………………Television

13
1.0 CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Introduction
The built environment provides a number of significant roles in the daily lives of human beings
with building construction providing mainly shelter from weather elements and security. It also
provides identity since the prehistoric age, cultures, and religious beliefs. But most critically,
buildings provide the setting that we need to carry out different activities that make up the
livelihood so much so that it has been considered to influence the behaviours of their users.
1.2 Background of the study
Understanding human behaviour is so hard and complex, because every time one aspect comes
into play. However one aspect of social behavior is the strong desire to communicate and
interact because man just like bees is a social animal.
Michael, (1978) points out several motivational sources of interpersonal behavior which
include the following; Nonsocial drives which can produce social interaction, for example,
biological drive such as need for food may lead to various kinds of interaction, Dependency,
Affiliation, Dominance, Sex, Aggression, And self esteem
On the other hand, Ingrid, (1998) gives her views on human motivation in communication
which includes; Physiological needs such as sleep, rest, food, drink, hygiene, sex, light, air, sun
etc. Safety needs such as general house safety, safety precautions and Psychological needs such
as contact and privacy.
The two lists above actually emphasize the fact that communication is an important means in
fulfilling some of the inartistic needs of human beings and to promote cultural evolution.
People interact in order to find out what is happening in the world, to exchange information,
to access the attitudes of others and to express thoughts and feelings. Much of the
communication today take place inform of media such as newspapers, radios, televisions,
internet connections and telephone.
In spite of the advancement of technology in the above modes of communication, no technique
or machine can beat the accuracy of face-to-face interaction.

14
In addition to the use of languages, people communicate in a variety of ways such as voice
intonations, facial expressions, posture, and gesture. These supplementary elements can each
be viewed as separate elements capable of conveying a message by itself. They thus make
effective means of interaction.
The office environment can be one of the causes of stress according to (Garry, 1984). These
factors include; spatial arrangement, dimensions, and furnishing of the workplace; ambient
conditions, artificial and natural lighting, view of the outside, visual and acoustical privacy
etc. while other causes of stress are psychological factors that include social interaction,
symbolic identification etc. ibid, (1984)
1.3 Problem statement
The design of office buildings has been for a long time been centered around the structure
integrity of the building and its aesthetics with complete neglect or minimal consideration of
its effects on interaction of the occupants. According to Demkim,2013 , the major factors
considered in the design of office buildings include; the client, community concerns, codes and
regulations, context and climate, site, building technology and sustainability. It is clear that
communication of would be occupants is rather a secondary aspect considered. It is worth to
note that execution of almost all tasks assigned to workers is directly dependent on their intra
and extra interactions as communication is a key aspect moreover. It is imperative therefore
that a relationship between design of office buildings and the social interaction of workers be
established so as to safeguard against the negative consequences.
1.4 Justification of the study
Communication in an organisation is very important for transfering of information between
supervisors and juniors and vice versa. Apart from using the new technology ways of
communication, interpersonal communication is key as it motivates the workers. The high
degree of motivation through interaction can be achieved through using the appropriate space
within the building and this space has an impact on the cost of the structure which is of an
interest to the construction quantity surveyor. This cost can be both at construction stage and
also maintenance stage of the building. The construction quantity surveyor should be so much
interested in the optimization of space for maximum interaction of the workers in the office

15
buildings. And after this study, quantity surveyors on the design team will give appropriate
advice to the clients and designers (architects) in coming up with the best design.
1.5 Research Questions
During this research, the following questions will be asked;
a) What is the nature of interaction in these offices?
b) What are the design characteristics of these offices?
c) What is the relationship between design and nature of interaction?
d) How can design enhance workers’ interaction and its cost implications?
1.6 Research objectives
1.6.1 Main Objective
The main objective of this research is to assess the effects of office designs on workers’
interaction.
1.6.2 Specific Objectives
The specific objectives include;
a) To identify interactive spaces within the office building
b) To establish the nature of workers’ interaction
c) To establish the relationship between the nature of workers’ interaction and the office
design of the office buildings.
1.7 Scope of the study
1.7.1 Geographical Scope
The geographical scope of this research shall be office buildings within Kampala City taking
Lumumba avenue offices as a case study.

16
Location of Lumumba Avenue (photo credit: Google Maps) on 11th January, 2016
1.7.2 Academic Scope
The academic scope of the study will cover the literature. The literature will be used to make
the necessary information and the conclusions.
1.7.3TimeScope
The time scope for this study is eight months stating from early September and ending in late
May.
Figure 1: Location of Lumumba Avenue

17
2.0 CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Theoretical Framework
2.1.1 Behavior settings
Understanding the effect of design on workers, interaction needs to first understand the concept
of behavior settings.
“Behavior settings can be viewed as a small scale social systems comprising of people and
inanimate component.” Baker, (1968).
According to Benchtel, (1982), behavior settings can be associated with particular patterns and
behaviors as a result of constant person-environment interaction. Hence behavior settings is
basically an environment in which people conduct themselves in particular ways to the
influence of the components within the surrounding in a given time.
The concept that the environment has the ability to cause or determine behavior has three
perspectives as discussed below:
a) Determinism
Is the perspective that holds that, built environment directly shapes the behavior of people
within it.
b) Possibilism
Is the perspective that holds that, environment presents us with opportunities as well as setting
potential limits on behavior. According to this concept, people’s outcomes are jointly
determined by the environment and the choices made.
c) Probabilism
It holds that there are probabilities associated with specific instances of design and behavior.
Certain behaviors are more likely to occur than others in a given setting. This implies that there
should be congruence in the design of office buildings. Congruence refers to the degree of ‘fit’
between user needs and preferences and the design features of a given setting. The emphasis
here is on the match between form and function. If they match well, the design supports or

18
facilitates the behaviors necessary for the function of space and positive outcomes typically
occur.
2.1.2 Mood
Mood is an internal factor that that determines the way in which people may interact with each
other.
“Good moods that are associated with pleasant environments seem to increase peoples’
willingness to help each other.” Sherrod, (1977)
Mood is determined by different factors as follows;
a) Aesthetics
Research has indicated that the aesthetic quality of a room, the extent to which it is pleasant or
attractive may affect the nature of interactions.
“Attractive environments make people feel good. Decorated spaces make people feel more
comfortable than those that are not decorated.”Campbell, (1979).
The furniture and its arrangements plus other aspects of interior environment are also
determinants of social interaction.
“The refurbishment included bringing in new furniture, repainting, and creating different types
space. These improvements in the quality of the environment led to the increase in the social
activity on the word and demonstrated that the quality of an environment can influence mood
and behavior. “Paul et al, (1984)
b) Illumination
Different lighting conditions have some effects on the interaction and mood. According to Paul
et al, (1984) studies have shown that brightly lit rooms stimulated general communication.
2.1.3 Human Distances
The primary requisite of human interaction is contact between any given parties. This contact
can be visual, physical or can be as a result of proximity between the participants. People can
see, hear, smell, and touch people in that order.

19
According to Edward, (1992), there is a taxonomy of human distances in space namely;
intimate, personal, social, public distance which all present different levels of interaction.
Therefore Gad’s design should facilitate all kinds of relationships without putting any on stress.
2.1.4 Density
According to Paul et al, (1984) high density environments discourage social interaction. He
noted that people are willing to discuss intimate topics under low density conditions. People
interact less frequently as room density increases. This all goes to show that pro-social behavior
amongst people is encouraged in low spatial densities.
2.2 Interaction and Mobility
According to Keith & Llfryn, (2012), the concept of office worker interaction and mobility has
to be incorporated into the office building design. One way of understanding how interactions
happen in a work place would be through the consideration of office worker movement and
according to Greene et al (2011), mobility can be used to categorise the different workers.
There are basically three types of mobility that are used to classify office worker activity. And
these are;
Low level mobility:
This is where workers stay at their desk majority of the working day. The type of interaction
that happen between such workers is majorly social interaction or work interaction and
according to Haynes, 2007, it depends on the personal characteristics of the worker or the
authority in an organization.
Medium level mobility:
This type of office worker has got a higher degree of flexibility than the low-level mobility
worker. The movement of this type of workers will be dependent on the type of attractors in
the office and the building, Greene et al (2011).The attractors cause people to move around the
building and these attractors can be people, places, or activity.

20
People attractors: This is where workers are attracted to fellow people and this can either be
in two forms, that is work related that helps to share knowledge about work or social interaction
which may not be related to work at all, but may act as a basic of future work collaboration
according to Gensler, (2008).
Work place attractors: These relate to office facilities that draw people together such as
places of inconvenience, rest rooms, resource centers, breakout area, café bar, restaurants,
printer/photocopier room etc.
Activity attractors: With this, it will be an activity that will attract the different workers
together for example departmental meetings, informal get-togethers etc. according to Allen,
(1977), the frequency of interaction will be dependent on the distance travelled to facilitate the
interaction, meaning that the location of office workers (co-presence) can have an impact on
the amount and frequency of the knowledge sharing, ibid (1997).
High level mobility:
The high level worker will spend most of his or her day outside the office. This type of worker
can be said to be one who visits the office rather than the worker who is constantly in office.
Greene et al (2011).
According to Keith & Llfryn, (2012), environment plays a vital role in enhancing face-to-face
interaction through mobility. Informal interactions help in cross fertilization of ideas and a way
of encouraging informal interactions is through the mobility of the workers and the office work
place or office building. And this can be incorporated through the appropriate design of office
buildings that enables workers to move more constantly. The design will in turn have an effect
on the cost of an entire building, right from construction to maintenance.
2.3The role of informal communication
In the modern technology world, organizations tend to neglect the role of informal
communication but instead focus on the formal means of communication. According to streitz
el al.,1998, informal communication commonly known as gossip and the way people exchange
social facts influences the general climate and atmosphere of the corporate culture.
Effective workplace communication is a key to cultivation of success and professionalism
(Canadian Centre for Communication, 2003). A company that communicates throughout the

21
workplace in an effective manner is more likely to avoid problems with completing the daily
procedures, and less likely to have a problem with improper occurrence and will generate a
stronger morale and a more positive attitude towards work. When employees communicate
effectively with each other, productivity will increase because effective communication means
less complains and more work getting done (Quilan, 2001). It removes confusion and frees up
wasted time that would have been otherwise spent on explanation or argument (Fleming &
Larder, 1999). It makes workplace more enjoyable, less anxiety among co-workers which in
turn means positive attitude towards work and increased productivity (Makin, 2006; Taylerson,
2012). Furthermore, another aspect of communication that affects productivity is noise level.
Noise has negative influence on communication, frustration levels increase while productivity
decreases in relation to persistence and loudness of noise. A reason adduced for this is that
spoken communication becomes progressively more difficult as noise levels increase.

22
3.0 CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
3.1 Type of research
The type of research to be carried out will be empirical research that will include use of
interviews and observations from the different offices sampled, with both quantitative and
qualitative approaches used, whereby inferential will be used for quantitative approach in order
to get the characteristics of the samples from the survey data obtained, and for qualitative
research shall be used to determine the behavior of workers.
3.2 Research Methods
R & Liu, (2003) highlights five research styles that are experiment, survey, action research,
ethnographic research, and case study. Surveys are one of the most frequently used methods of
data gathering in social research. The survey protocol of random sampling procedures allows
a small number of people to represent a much larger population (Ferber, 1980)
3.2.1 Questionnaire design
This research shall be carried out using questionnaires given to the workers and use of
observations. Observations shall be applied by the researcher when he goes to office and sees
how the workers are interacting, while the questionnaire shall be used to get information from
workers direct.
Places for interaction in offices have been identified basing on the literature of the previous
research. A total number of 7 places have been identified and workers are required to rate these
places. The places are; parking yard, offices, corridors, entrance, rest rooms, restaurant and
balconies. Also workers will be required to reveal those activities during interaction.
3.2.2 Pilot studies
Pilot studies to ensure the clarity of the questionnaire and its relevance will be carried out. In
the first instance, it will be given to five workers of two randomly sampled offices and they
will be required to give their suggestions to the questionnaire. While in the second instance it
will be given to the supervisor of this proposed research and thereafter amendments shall be
made to it such that it’s relevant. In short the questionnaire will be validated so as to provide
improved opportunities before launching the main survey.

23
3.2.3 Sample Selection
The survey will gather data from different office workers from selected office buildings around
Kampala City, using office buildings along Lumumba Avenue road as case studies. A total of
13 office buildings have been identified to be along Lumumba Avenue and six out of thirteen
will be used for this study. A total of 30 employees from each of the selected offices will be
interviewed, making a total of 180 interviewed employees.
3.3 Research Methodology
This study will comprise the following principle tasks;
a) Deciding on and going to the office, on a particular day.
b) Observing the situation/ level of interaction in these offices. This will go hand in hand
with giving questionnaire sheets to workers, and the workers answer them.
c) Collecting the sheets and the information from the observation and taken for analysis.
d) Making conclusions and recommendations depending on the observations obtained.
3.4 Data analysis
The following procedure will be used to analyse data as given by Dey, 1993.
a) Finding a focus: this will include identifying from literature those activities done during
interaction, the places of interaction, and the ways workers do interact as stipulated in the
questionnaire.
b) Managing data: in order to minimize or avoid loss of data collected before it being analysed,
data will be jealously kept in different office file folders for different office building.
c) Reading and annotating: after getting data, it will be read through over and over again, then
summarized in order to stick in the mind of the researcher then after making notes out of
them.
d) Categorizing data: after thorough reading and annotating of the data, it will be categorized
in the different categories found in the questionnaire. That is places of interaction, ways of
interaction, and attributes. These categories will then be splint as given in the questionnaire.
e) Linking data: this will involve linking the data to the different categories.
f) Using matrices, graphs: this will entail drawing up matrices, bar graphs and pie chats for
the different linked data.

24
g) Corroborating evidence: from the graphs and matrices, the evidence or truth shall be
corroborated.
h) Producing an account: after all that, an account will be produced or given out.
An analytical study of the aspects of design of the different buildings was done. The aspects
included the following;
 Entry and exit points of offices commonly known as the receptions and their architectural
and physical layout
 Quality of the open spaces and their locations for example the parking yard and the court
yard. This was useful in assessing ambience and feel of these areas as an impact on
workers’ interaction.
 Organization layouts of different offices.
 Workers’ offices layouts and how they affect how they interact.
Questionnaires were given out and filled by workers of these respective office building. A
comparative study of the design of different offices verses their reluctant workers interaction
was done.

25
CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS
3.1 Cases of study
The cases of study were relevant to the research because they represented varied design
scenarios for a significant comparative study. The study revealed the strengths and weaknesses
of each case study in enhancing workers’ interactions. The study also revealed the best and
worst designs in enhancing workers’ interactions. It should be noted that some of the case
studies have different organizations while others have only one organization. Those with one
organization are buildings housing G4S, NDA, and UWEAL and Enterprise Uganda. While
the one with multiple organizations is Twed Plaza.
3.2 G4S Building
3.2.1 Location
G4s is located on plot 53 Lumumba Avenue, Nakasero. It is an organization that deals in
provision of private security services according to the information on their website
http://www.g4s.ug/.
With so many employees who are paid on an hourly basis and deployed to offer security
services to different organizations around Kampala and beyond, the employees experience a
high level mobility. Most workers are deployed in the field and others who are not on duty are
at the organization waiting to be deployed. These workers are not office based and therefore
their mobility is high.
However the organization has gotten other workers who are full time and office based. These
workers include; the receptionist(s), managers of different departments, cleaners and others.

26
Figure 2: G4S Building
Photo by the researcher
3.2.2 Desgn
The design of the organisation’s office consists of one central courtyard, a building behind it
and a parking lot adjacent to it.
The parking yard is mostly for vistors, office workers and the organisation’s vehicles. The
courtyard is simply for workers who are not deployed at that particular time to sit and wait for
to be called upon for deployment. The courtyard is composed of trees which provide shade
from the scorching afternoon sun. it also has short walls where workers can sit and relax from.
The building is a single storey structure. The offices are separated by strong brick walls with
the corridor for passage. There is a reception room with a receptionist.

27
Figure 3: Lay out of G4S
Sketch by the researcher
3.2.3 Interactive spaces
The following are the interactive spaces identified; Courtyard, park yard, entrance and
corridors.
The courtyard is found to be the most interactive space because its arresting point for most of
the workers who are not deployed at a particular time but await deployment. Since these
workers have no offices where to sit, they opt to use the courtyard, and in the meantime, interact
with each other from there.
The park yard is also used for interaction by the roaming workers who await deployment. When
they have not settled somewhere in the yard, they keep roaming around and one of the places
they roam from is the parking yard.

28
The entrance is also used for interaction by mostly the office workers. The entrance is
accompanied by a reception and the office workers sometimes meet from there by coincidence
mostly.
The corridors just like the entrance is a passage and some office workers et from there by
coincidence and interact with each other.
3.2.4 Workers perceptions
According to the workers’ responses to the questionnaire, the following was obtained.
Table 1: How G4S workers interact
Office mates
Neighbors
Friends
Others
Excellent
6
10
3
Good
6
12
9
8
Fair
10
9
12
Poor
6
Table 2: Places where interaction takes place
Office mates
Neighbors
Friends
Others
Park yard/courtyard
17
20
22
Offices
6
5
2
3
Corridor
2
5
2
1
Entrance
4
1
5

29
Figure 4: A graph showing G4S's places of interaction
According to the workers, the parking yard is the place where most interactions take place.
Table 3: Measure of Preference of the place of interaction
favorite
Least favorite
Park yard/courtyard
22
2
Offices
4
17
Corridor
8
Entrance
3
2
3.3 National Drug Authority
3.3.1 Location
National drug Authority (N.D.A) head offices are located on plot 46/48 Lumumba Avenue.
The building is a single storey structure with some offices divided by brick walls while others
by curtain walls.
According to their website, (http://www.nda.or.ug)
“The National Drug Authority (NDA) was established in 1993 by the National Drug Policy and
Authority Statute which in 2000 became the National Drug Policy and Authority (NDP/A) Act,
Cap. 206 of the Laws of Uganda (2000 Edition). The Act established a National Drug Policy
0
5
10
15
20
25
Office mates Neighbors Friends Others
Park yard/courtyard
Offices
Corridor
Entrance

30
and National Drug Authority to ensure the availability, at all times, of essential, efficacious
and cost-effective drugs to the entire population of Uganda as a means of providing
satisfactory healthcare and safeguarding the appropriate use of drugs”
At the beginning of the year 2016, management of N.D.A decided to put a rule of no noise
making during working for the workers and so most workers were observed communicating to
one another using gestures and/or using a low tone.
3.3.2 Design
The design of NDA premises in such a way that it has a parking lot for vistors in front and
some parking for workers behind the building. In the parking yard, there is hardly seen any
interaction during day time except during the arrivals in the mornings and departure in the
evenings. There is also some interaction observed at the entrance/reception where some
workers meet from.
The design of the building has brick walls and curtain walls on the upper floor. The ground
floor has only brick walls. With curtain walling, some workers are noticed interacting with
each other in the near nonverbal ways. Some workers are observed moving from office to office
for formal interaction.

31
Figure 5: Lay out of NDA
3.3.3 Interactive Spaces
Interactive spaces available are the parking yard, entrance/reception, board room and offices.
The policy of the organization to keep silent while in office incapacitates the workers to interact
freely while they are at work.
Therefore even though the curtain walled offices allows interaction, the workers do not freely
interact. The place for interaction becomes the boardroom and this is so only when there are
organization reception because it is the meeting place of workers from different direction/
offices.

32
Another interactive space is the park yard though it is well designed and good for interaction,
there is little time to interact from there as most time is spent in offices.
3.3.4 Workers perceptions
Fromm the questionnaires given out to workers, the following results were obtained
Table 4: How NDA workers interact
Office mates
Neighbors
Friends
Others
Excellent
4
3
10
2
Good
13
13
6
12
Fair
1
1
3
Poor
Table 5: Places of interaction
Office mates
Neighbors
Friends
Others
Park yard/courtyard
3
6
Offices
15
5
4
1
Corridor
3
2
1
Entrance
1
4
2
2
Balconies
1
5
Figure 6: Graph showing NDA's places of interaction
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Office mates Neighbors Friends Others
Park yard/courtyard
Offices
Corridor
Entrance
Balconies

33
From the graph, the offices are the most places used for interaction followed by the parking
yard and then the entrance.
Table 6: Measure of preference of places of interaction
favorite
Least favorite
Park yard/courtyard
3
2
Offices
9
3
Corridor
1
5
Entrance
1
5
Balconies
3
2
3.4 Twed Plaza
3.4.1 Location
Twed Plaza is located on plot 22 Lumumba Avenue Kampala. It houses two big organizations
that are Uganda Human Rights Commission (UHRC) and Uganda Investments Authority
(UIA). The building is owned by Twed group that has so many office buildings around
Kampala.
UHRC is a government institution/ organization that has its roots fro the Human Rights Act. It
has so many workers at their head office and there is a lot of work handled by the organization
I the course of the working day.
UHRC rents two floors that is the third floor and the fourth floor of the building. It being a
government institution, some workers are observed being on and off attending meetings with
personnel from the other government institutions.
According to their website, (http://www.ugandainvest.go.ug)
“Uganda Investment Authority (UIA) is a semi-autonomous government agency which drives
national economic growth and development in partnership with the private sector. As an
Investment Promotion Agency, UIA mainly: markets investment opportunities; promotes
packaged investment projects; ensures local and foreign investors have access to information,
especially about the business environment so as to make more informed business decisions;
and offers business support, advisory and advocacy services.”

34
UIA is also a government institution with roots from Uganda Investments Act. It rents the
second floor and most workers are office based and therefore they do most of the activities
within the office.
Figure 7: Twed Plaza
Photo by the reseacher

35
3.4.2 Design
The design of Twed Plaza is in such a way that it has two gates one for pedisteraneans and
another for vehicles. The vehicles have their packing at the basement, while some vehicles for
clients and visitors pack in front of the other entrance for the pedisteranans.
The building was constructed in open space style where by opportunity was left to these
organizations renting to partition it. Solid brick/block walls were constructed around
lavalatories, lift, staircases and the whole building.
The first floor is un occupied and left open. Though it would be a good place for interaction,
there is hardly observed any interaction taking place from there.
The second floor houses UIA and their partitions are wooden walls up to a height of about 1.4m
and then curtain walling upwards. Some offices are left as big spaces, not partitioned with so
many workers occupying them.

36
Figure 8: Second floor, UIA office layout
Sketch by the reseacher
The third and fourth floor houses the offices of UHRC. They are also divided using partitions
composing of about 1.4m high of wooden soft wood and the rest being glass. The fourth floor
has a corridor while the third floor just has a passage. Offices of top managers of UHRC have
curtains to cover up the glass of the curtain walling. There are two office spaces that are not

37
partitioned and they have so many workers, one on the third floor and another on the fourth
floor.
Twed Plaza has a lift which assists in transportation of workers from floor to floor in addition
to stairs. There is an emergency staircase but it is not always used. Instead it was observed that
this staircase is used by people/ workers making or receiving private phone calls.
3.4.3 Interactive Spaces
The following interactive spaces were identifies for UHRC offices; the lift, corridors, parking
yard, offices, reception and stairs.
The lift that is designed to carry 10 people at ago is normally very busy with workers during
the mornings, lunch times and in the evenings. The only problem of the lift is that it doesn’t
function all the time. Sometimes it is down and therefore unable to carry out its functions.
Corridors: The corridor at the fourth floor is spacious enough and people meet and talk/chat
from there without taking the jazz to their offices on order to not inconvenience other workers.
There are also minor corridors. These ones do not favor interaction because of their spacing.
Little interaction is observed in these corridors.
Figure 9: Corridor at UHRC
Photo by the researcher

38
Parking yard: The parking yard is always busy with cars coming in while others leaving. This
is due to the fact that these two organizations at Twed Plaza are government organizations and
some of the workers are always in and out for meetings with other government organizations.
However the parking yard is always more busy during the times or arrival in the mornings,
lunch time and departure in the evenings. The congestion at the parking yard enables the
workers to park near each other and during those busy times, workers are observed interaction
with each other.

39
Figure 10: Basement Parking Yard at Twed Plaza
Photo by the reseacher

40
Figure 11: Parking in front of Twed Plaza
Photo by the reseacher

41
Offices: Since offices are divided using wood and curtain walls, and there are on average three
employees/workers in one room, this enables workers to interact freely with each other. The
wooden walls create a bit of privacy as workers cannot see what is happening in the neighbor’s
office unless standing up, while curtain walls enable the workers interact with each other even
without moving from office to office. Neighboring office workers were also observed
interacting with each other across the curtain walls minus moving from office to office.
There is observed formal communication during the morning hours as workers are moving
from office to office interacting about organization issues. However in the afternoons, the
workers have little work to do and they are observed chatting with one another in an office for
office mates, some move from one office to another (especially ladies) to interact with other
fellow workers.
There was also some observed mobility of few workers moving from the third floor to fourth
floor and vice versa for informal interactions.
Stairs: Stairs are wide enough about 2m wide and workers normally meet from there by
coincidence. This happens when the lift is not in use or when they have opted to use the stairs.
The emergency stairs are not always in use but some workers were observed to be using them
to receive/make private phone calls.

42
Figure 12: Design of UHRC fourth floor offices
The following interactive spaces were observed for UIA; reception, corridors, offices, offices,
lift and parking yard.
Reception: the reception is a sizable room with seats and a TV screen. The reception was
observed to be of the most interactive places because it is a meeting point for all the workers
who thereafter take different directions to their offices. In the course of the day, these workers
could easily meet from there by coincidence. Also the presence of a TV screen though is anon
design feature brings bored workers from their offices to the receition to watch and also relax
their minds. In the end interaction between them takes place.

43
The corridors, offices, lift and parking yard of UIA are like those of UHRC in the design and
the way they affect the way workers interact with each other when in their vicinity.
3.4.4 Workers’ perception at UHRC
Table 7: How UHRC workers interact
Office mates
Neighbors
Friends
Others
Excellent
7
4
7
2
Good
5
4
4
4
Fair
2
1
6
Poor
2
Table 8: Places of interaction for UHRC
Office mates
Neighbors
Friends
Others
Park yard/courtyard
1
3
1
3
Offices
9
6
8
3
Corridor
1
2
2
2
Entrance
1
1
Boardroom
1
4
Figure 13: A graph showing places where UHRC workers interact from
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Office mates Neighbors Friends Others
Park yard/courtyard
Offices
Corridor
Entrance
Boardroom

44
Table 9: Measure of preference of places of interaction for UHRC
Favorite
Least favorite
Park yard/courtyard
1
10
Offices
6
1
Corridor
2
Entrance
1
Boardroom
3
3.4.5 Workers’ perception at UIA
Table 10: How UIA workers interact
Office mates
Neighbors
Friends
Others
Excellent
5
1
3
Good
1
5
3
3
Fair
3
Poor
Table 11: Places of interaction
Office mates
Neighbors
Friends
Others
Park yard/courtyard
1
2
1
2
Offices
5
1
4
1
Corridor
1
1
Entrance
2
1
Boardroom
2

45
Figure 14: A graph showing places of interaction of UIA workers
Table 12: Measure of preference of the place of interaction
Favorite
Least favorite
Park yard/courtyard
1
3
Offices
2
1
Corridor
Entrance
2
2
Boardroom
1
3.5 Enterprise Uganda
3.5.1 Location
Enterprise Uganda is located on plot 38 along Lumumba Avenue. It is in its own building which
is just neighboring that of UWEAL. The building is a one storey and Enterprise Uganda has
offices on the upper floor.
According to their website, (http://enterprise.co.ug/), Enterprise Uganda deals in provision of
three services that are; training, business advisory and mentoring. Under training they do
entrepreneurship training workshops, financial literacy and business start up tool.
Under business advisory, they deal in business health check (diagnostic studies), business
opportunity identification, business plan preparation and credit facilities. Under mentoring,
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Office mates Neighbors Friends Others
Park yard/courtyard
Offices
Corridor
Entrance
Boardroom

46
they have become role models to businesses by becoming mentors or mentees and also
inspiring others through growing the movement.
The workers of enterprise Uganda are not so many and by that the interaction is also limited to
the few workers and with the clients.
3.5.2 Design
The design of the building is in such a way that, it has a parking yard on the eastern side which
is shared with UWEAL and it has stairs that lead to the upper floor. At the upper floor, where
the offices are, the office is portioned by brick walls while some are separated by curtain
walling. There is a corridor that enables movement of workers from office to office.

47
Figure 15: Design of Enterprise Uganda
Sketch by the reseacher
3.5.3 Interactive Spaces
The interactive spaces identified for workers at Enterprise Uganda are; the parking yard,
corridor, and offices. The stairs were observed not having any interaction.
The parking yard, is in such a way that it is spacious and that it can allow passage of workers
as they move to their building. This spacious parking yard and the fact that it is shared with
workers of UWEAL, there is no much interaction observed taking place.

48
Figure 16: The parking yard at Enterprise Uganda and UWEAL
Photo by the reseacher
The corridor is spacious but the building is small, which makes the corridor not long. With this
type of corridor, it becomes inconvenient to interact from the corridor. There was little
interaction observed and most of this interaction was not intended. Workers bumped into each
other and in the end they were interacting though the interaction observed could not take long.

49
Figure 17: The corridor at Enterprise Uganda
Photo by the reseacher

50
3.5.4 Workers’Perception
Table 13: How workers at Enterprise Uganda interact
Office mates
Neighbors
Friends
Others
Excellent
5
2
6
4
Good
4
6
3
4
Fair
1
1
Poor
Table 14: Places of interaction
Office mates
Neighbors
Friends
Others
Park yard/courtyard
3
2
3
6
Offices
7
3
2
2
Corridor
2
2
Entrance
1
2
1
Figure 18: A graph showing Enterprise Uganda's places of interaction
From the graph, it is evident that the offices and the parking yard are the most places workers
do interact from.
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Office mates Neighbors Friends Others
Park yard/courtyard
Offices
Corridor
Entrance

51
Table 15: Measure of preference of the place of interaction
favorite
Least favorite
Park yard/courtyard
3
1
Offices
4
2
Corridor
1
1
Entrance
1
5
3.6 UWEAL
3.6.1 Location
UWEAL is located on plot 38 Lumumba Avenue and occupys the first building in front just
adjacent to the parking yard. Behind it there is another building housing enterprise Uganda.
The building housing UWEAL is a bungalow and as such only the ground floor is available
and used.
According to their website, (http://www.uweal.co.ug/), UWEAL is an organization whose
main objective is to support women entrepreneurs through the provision of Business
Development Services and Advocating for enabling environments that meet the specific needs
of women in Uganda.
3.6.2 Design
The building housing UWEAL is adjacent to a parking yard that workers share with enterprise
Uganda. The building is a bungalow with space divided accordingly with no partion walls while
some offices of the top workers are divided using brick walls. There is a corridor that takes
workers through going to the top managers of the company. Next to it there is a tent where
workers can go and refresh their minds, or for break tea and sometimes simple workshops.

52
Figure 19: Design of UWEAL offices
Sketch by the reseacher
3.6.3 Interactive spaces
The interactive spaces observed were the parking yard, the offices themselves and the corridors.
The tent next to the building though forms no part of the building is also one of the interactive
spaces available.
The parking yard, it being shared and spacious is normally used for interaction during the
arrival and departure times. Some interactions were observed but these interactions mostly
involved an office employee and the gate man.

53
The workers were observed being busy during office hours and as such some would move from
one table (with in the same office) to another to consult about different issues hence interacting.
This interaction was between the lower level employees themselves.
Corridors were not as busy but some interactions were observed to take place in them. These
interactions however were not intended and workers would just bump into one another ithun
the corridors.
The tent next/adjacent to the building was also observed to be a place for interaction. However
this may not be taken as a daily place for interaction but interaction takes place when there are
meetings.

54
Figure 20: Workers interacting in an office
Photo by the reseacher

55
3.6.4 Worker’s perception
Table 16: How workers at UWEAL interact
Office mates
Neighbors
Friends
Others
Excellent
2
2
5
3
Good
3
4
1
2
Fair
1
1
Poor
Table 17: Interaction places for UWEAL workers
Office mates
Neighbors
Friends
Others
Park yard/courtyard
1
1
1
Offices
5
5
4
3
Corridor
1
1
2
Entrance
Figure 21: A graph showing UWEAL's places of interaction
From the graph, it is clear that most interactions take place inside the offices, and then followed
by the corridors.
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Office mates Neighbors Friends Others
Park yard/courtyard
Offices
Corridor

56
Table 18: Degree of preference of the places of interaction
favorite
Least favorite
Park yard/courtyard
3
Offices
5
1
Corridor
1
1
Entrance
1
3.7 General findings
3.7.1 Comparative study of Blocks layouts of different offices
Table 19: Comparative study of blocks layouts of different offices
Office
Illustration
Remarks
G4S
The following remarks can be adduced:
 the layout allows interaction for those
not in office
 The reception/entrance is large
enough with seats.
 The courtyard with short walls allows
workers to sit and relax while
interacting
 The corridor is narrow and does not
favor interaction of workers
 The block/brick wall dividing walls
allows privacy of the office
occupants hence discouraging
informal communication

57
NDA
The following remarks can be adduced to
NDA Head offices
 The lay out allows interaction of
workers
 The parking yard is one of the
places for interaction, it being
located outside the offices
 The entrance/reception is spacious
with seats which are mostly for
clients but workers are observed
interacting from there.
 The corridor and stairs are not
wide enough. Hence they do not
favor interaction of workers.
 The offices are spacious with a
capacity of average three workers.
Twed
Plaza
UHRC Layout
The following can be adduced for UHRC
lay out:
 The office layout generally allows and
favors interaction of workers
 The entrance/reception at the third
floor office is spacious with seats and
workers are observed interacting from
there.
 The corridor is spacious and it allows
two people to interact or stand there as
others are passing by. In other words
it does not interrupt the free movement
of other people
 The offices are so spacious with on
average three workers per office while

58
other offices are open spaces with
about five to eight workers in one.
 The parking yard located at the
basement only allows interaction
during the arrival and departure times.
 The lift is one of those places for
interaction, inside and outside while
waiting.
UIA Layout
The following can be adduced to the
layout of UIA:
 The layout allows interaction of
workers.
 The reception/entrance is spacious
with seats and a TV. Workers can
sit and relax their minds.
 The corridor is wide enough and as
such it allows workers to interact
from there.
 The offices are spacious with on
average three workers per office
 For the lift and parking yard, the
attributes mentioned for UHRC
apply for UIA.
UWEAL
The following can be adduced for
UWEAL:
 The layout generally allows workers
to interact with one another.
 The reception/entrance is not
spacious as such but the open space
office next to it allows interaction to
take place.

59
 The corridor is not wide as such but
because of few people who use it, it
becomes a place for interaction.
 The offices are spacious, but there is
one person per office on average.
 The parking yard is also a place for
interaction, like any other parking
yard.
Enterprise
Uganda
The following can be adduced for
Enterprise Uganda:
 The entrance/reception is spacious
also with seats like other
receptions.
 Its location in the middle of offices
makes it unsuitable for some
workers in the offices before the
reception to link up with others
from the reception.
 The offices are spacious with on
average two workers per office
room.
 The attributes of the parking yard
are similar to those of UWEAL.
3.7.2 Workers’ perceptions
Workers in these offices were provided with a questionnaire to access their satisfaction of the
design of buildings in influencing their interaction. Questions were composed by the researcher
and workers answered them. The objective of the study fulfilled is:
a) To identify interactive spaces within the office building
b) To establish the nature of workers’ interaction

60
c) To establish the relationship between the nature of workers’ interaction and the office
design of the office buildings.
3.7.2.1 Interaction with office mates
G4S workers interaction with office mates have 100% good.
Figure 22: A pie-chart showing how NDA's workers interact with office mates
Figure 23: A pie-chart showing how UHRC workers interact with officemates
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor

61
Figure 24: A pie-chart showing how UIA workers interact with friends
Figure 25: A pie-chart showing Enterprise Uganda's interaction with office mates
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor

62
Figure 26: A pie-chart showing how UWEAL's workers interact with office mates
3.7.2.2 Interaction with neighbors
Figure 27: A pie-chart showing how G4S workers interact with neigbours
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor

63
Figure 28: A pie-chart showing how NDA's workers interact with neigbours
Figure 29: A pie-chart showing how UHRC workers interact with neigbours
Figure 30: A pie chart showing how UIA workers interact with neighbours
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor

64
Figure 31: A pie-chart showing how Enterprise Uganda's workers interact with neigbours
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor

65
Figure 32: UWEAL's interaction with neighbours
3.7.2.3 Interaction with friends
Figure 33: A pie-chart showing how G4S workers interact with friends
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor

66
Figure 34: A pie-chart showing how NDA's workers interact with friends
Figure 35: A pie-chart showing how UHRC workers interact with friends
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor

67
Figure 36: A pie-chart showing how UIA workers interact with friends
Figure 37: A pie-chart showing how Enterprise Uganda workers interact with friends
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor

68
Figure 38: A pie-chart showing how UWEAL's interact with friends
3.7.2.4 Interaction with others
Figure 39: A pie-chart showing how G4S workers interact with others
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor

69
Figure 40: A pie-chart showing how NDA's workers interact with others
Figure 41: A pie-chart showing how UHRC workers interact with others
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor

70
Figure 42: A pie-chart showing how UIA workers interact with others
Figure 43: A pie-chart showing how Enterprise Uganda's workers interact with others
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor

71
Figure 44: A pie-chart showing how workers of UWEAL's interact with others
3.7.2.5 Measure of preference
Table 20: Table showing measure of preference
Measure
Place
Reason
Favorite
Office
 One can sit as interaction goes on
 One can openly express him or herself openly
without interaction from the outsiders.
 Provide a conducive place for idea sharing.
 They are secure.
 They are spacious and have a good environment.
 No security threats. They are safe.
Favorite
Parking
yard
 there you can meet every one during the time for
arrivals and departure
Favourite
Boardroom
The organizations with the boardroom attribute it to the
fact that;
 The boardroom is quite place and it acts as a
place of relaxation (rest place) because it is not
always in use.
 It is in the boardroom during meetings where
one can interact with other people whom one is
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor

72
unable to interact with from other places during
other days.
Favourite
Corridor
 The corridor was chosen to be favourute
because it is spacious
 Some busy (mobile) workers can be found there
by coincidence
Favourite
Entrance/
Reception
It was chosen as favourite becaause of;
 It has seats with a TV, one can relax from there
 It is spacious
Least Favourite
Office
The following were highlighted;
 (For G4S workers), they are not always in office
 The ofices are small
 There is overcrowding
 Not allowed to interact from offices
 Offices are for work no need to be disturbed
Least Favourite
Parking
yard
The following were highlighted;
 lack of privacy
 It is very far (at the basement)
Least Favourite
Corridor
The following were highlighted for the corridor
 The corridor is not so wide
 Crowded most times with other workers and
clients
Least favourite
Balconies
 Not accessible to all
Least Favourite
Entrance/
Reception
The following were highlighted for the reception
 Always overcrowded
 It is on another floor
3.7.3 Places of interaction identified
The interactive spaces that have been identified both in the literature review and the data
collected are; the parking yard, the office, the entrance/ reception, corridors, lifts, boardroom.

73
The parking yard: the parking yard was observed to be one of the places for interaction, in fact
a busy place during the morning hours, lunch hours and evening hours. The interaction that
takes place from the parking yard is mostly informal. All the office buildings had the parking
yard
CHAPTER FOUR: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMEDATIONS
4.1 General conclusions
It is concluded that G4S has the highest level of interaction because of the space provided
outside for workers who await deployment. However those who work in offices have low level
interaction due to the fact that the walls separating the offices are opaque and they are only
high level employees.
The building with the least level of interaction is that housing NDA. This is attributed to the
fact that there is a law by the top management prohibiting noise and unnecessary interaction.
But this observation is not attributed to the design of the building in any way.
4.2 Specific conclusions
An overview of the cases of the study revealed that their designs enhanced workers’ interaction
even though they lacked some of the places, but specifically they encouraged interactions. This
can be revealed in the following ways;
4.2.1 Mood
The mood of workers in all the organizations was good. Most design factors that affect the
mood of workers were catered for. Factors such as aesthetics and illumination were all good
for all the organizations’ offices. Therefore this factor of mood cannot be used to compare the
way workers interact.
4.2.2 Human distances
A human distance is a factor that plays a vital role in influencing social interaction as discussed
in the previous chapters. This distance strongly relates to the way we are aware of others in

74
space. Workers sitting in the same office were observed to have a high interaction as compared
to those sit alone in their offices.
4.2.3 Density
The research shows that G4S has so many workers hence high density. With this, workers are
always. Most of these workers are deployed while those who are not deployed while those who
are not deployed at a particular time interact from the courtyard.
There is a high level of interaction even though the density of workers is high. In consistency
with Paul et al (1984), the low density workers in UWEAL and Enterprise Uganda have a high
level of interaction.
4.2.4 Mobility
G4S workers are highly mobile, falling under the high level mobility workers. They just visit
the office rather stay in office. The design of the whole premises including the open spaces
allow for interaction of the high mobile workers. This explains why most of the interaction
takes place from the courtyard.
While for government parastatals such as UIA and UHRC have all kinds of mobility workers.
With this, those workers who fall under low mobility, experience a high level of interaction
and their preference is seen in choosing the offices.
4.2.5 Informal communication
Informal communication also has a way to do with interaction. The urge to have informal
communication with fellow workers leads to interaction. During afternoons, workers in the
offices of UIA and UHRC were observed chatting with one another (communicating
informally). This is normally attributed to the workers and organization like UIA and UHRC
workers have little or nothing to do in the afternoons hence increasing on the interaction. This
explains the observed interaction in those offices. While for other offices such as UWEAL and
Enterprise Uganda and NDA, the interaction that takes place is not due to the urge of informal
communication.

75
4.3 Recommendations
4.3.1 To the designers/ Architects
From the study, it is concluded that the design of a building has a great effect on the way
workers do interact. Things such as aesthetics of a room affect the mood of people, the size of
the office, the width of corridors and staircase have a great impact on the way workers in any
organization do interact. It is therefore on this note that designers/architects should incorporate
these attributes such that workers can interact freely from those places.
With the case of workers who are not office based, a courtyard can be provided outside the
building with some attributes such as seats and shades where non office based can interact
from.
Ti the design of the reception should be large enough to cater for clients and workers who may
not want to relax from there.
4.2.3 To quantity surveyors
Quantity surveyors, by the fact that they are on the design team, have a responsibility of
advising the designers/ architects in order to come up with a cost effective design. Sometimes
the design should be in such a way that two or more workers share an office room or agitate
for an open space with about ten workers in one room.
Also using curtain walling to enable workers interacts with each other in neighboring offices
without a hustle. The above not only reduce the cost but also allow workers to interact.
4.2.4 To business organizations
Directors and managers of different organizations should allow their workers to interact freely.
It should be noted that, informal interactions most times end up being the basis of for the formal
interaction, inartistic satisfaction and later on motivation of workers.
They should not pass ambiguous policies that affect the way workers do interact. From that is
recommended to the management of NDA, that the policy that prohibits the way workers
interact should be dropped because man is a social animal.

76
Bibliography
(n.d.). Retrieved April 13th, 2016, from http://www.nda.or.ug:
http://www.nda.or.ug/ug/smenu/19/About-NDA.html
(n.d.). Retrieved April 13th, 2016, from http://www.ugandainvest.go.ug:
http://www.ugandainvest.go.ug/vision/
(n.d.). Retrieved April 13th, 2016, from http://enterprise.co.ug/: http://enterprise.co.ug/our-
services/
(n.d.). Retrieved April 13th, 2016, from http://www.uweal.co.ug/:
http://www.uweal.co.ug/index.php/about-uweal/who-we-are
Baker, R. G. (1968). Ecological Psychology: Concepts and Methods for Studying the
Environment of Human Behaviour. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Benchetel, R. B., & Churchman, A. (2002). Handbook of Environmental Psychology.
Newyork: John Wiley and Sons.
Benchtel, R. (1982). Contribuions of Ecological Psychology to the Evaluation of the
Environment. International Review of Applied Psychology , 31, 153-156.
Bryan, L. (2001). The Language of Space. London: Architectural Press.
Davis, H. (2006). The Culture of Buildings. Newyork: Oxford University Press.
Edwards, D., & Potter, J. (1992). Discursive Psychology. London: Sage Publications.
Ferber. (1980). Readings in the Analysis of Survey Data. New York: American Marketic Assoc.
Garry, E. W. (1984). Environmental Stress. Newyork: Cambrigde University Press.
Gensler. (2009).
http://www.gensler.com/uploads/document/126/file/2008_Gensler_Workplace_Survey_US_0
9_30_2009.pdf. Retrieved October 28th, 2015, from www.gensler.com.
Greene, L., Myerson, J., & Amanda, C. L. (2010). Journal of the Experimental Analysis of
Behaviour.

77
Ingrid, B. (1998). Human Ressource Management in Western Europe. Strasbourg, France:
University Robert Schuman.
Joseph, D. A. (2001). The Archtect's Handbook of Proffessional Practice, 13th Edition. New
York: John Wiley &Sons, Inc.
Keith, A., & Iifryn, P. (2012). Managing Organisational Ecologies: Space Management and
Organisations. New York: Routledge.
Paul, A. B., Fisher, D., & Thomas, E. (1984). Environmental Pshychology. Florida, USA:
Sanders College Publishing.
Psychology of Interpersonal behaviour1978Penguin, United KingdomHarmondsworth
R, F., & Liu, A. (2003). Research Methods for Construction, 2nd Edition. Oxford: Black well
Science.
Raph, A. E., Irl, C., & Gary, L. R. (2009). A Social Systems Approach, 5th Edition. New
Brunswick: Aldine Transaction.
Robert, G. (2009). People and Buildings. New Brundrick: Transaction Publishers.
Saleebey, D. (2001). Human Behaviour And Social Environment: A Biopsychosocial
Approach. Columbia: Columbia University Press.
Shawn, L. (2012). Virtual Work and Human Interaction Reserch. North Carolina: Information
Science Reference.
Sherrod, O. R., Hage, J. N., Halpern, P. L., & Moore, B. S. (1977). Effects of Personal
Causation And Perceived Control on Responses to an Aversive Environment: The More The
Control, The Better. . Journal of Experimental Psychology , 13, 14-27.
Thomas, C., & Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design and Analysis Issues
for Feld Settings. Chicago: Rand Mc Nelly.
Wells, B. (n.d.). The Psycho-Social Influence Of Building Environments: Socialmetric
findings in Large and Small office spaces.
Wes, M., & Danny, S.-S. (2003). Facilities Management and The bussiness of Space. London:
Butterworth-Helnemann.

78
APPENDICES
APPENDIX 1: QUESTIONAIRE
I am Ayebale Joseph, a fourth year student pursuing a bachelor’s degree in quantity surveying
at Makerere University, College Of Engineering, Design, Art and Technology. Am carrying
out a survey for my research project entitled ‘Design of office buildings and its effects on
workers’ interaction’? Your experience and general opinion are vital to help me understand the
problem. All responses given will be treated with utmost confidentiality and will be used for
the purpose of this study only. Your cooperation will be highly appreciated.
Questions for discussion
1. How do you describe the way in which you interact with the following subjects within your
organization? (tick the appropriate)
a) Office mates
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
b) Neigbours
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
c) Friends within the organization
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
d) Other workers in the organization
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor

2. Where in the office building do you usually interact with the following people?
a) Office mates
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
b) Neigbours
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
c) Friends within the organization
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
d) Other workers in the organization
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
3. Which of the following areas in your office building (if they exist), do you favour while
interacting with the workers accordingly
Mark [1] Favorite [2] Fairly favorite [3] Least favorite
Parking yard
Offices
Corridors
Entrance
Rest rooms
Restaurant
Balconies
Computer room
What attributes about the chosen area make it your least favourite as the place to interact and why?
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………
What attributes about the chosen area make it your favourite place to interact, and why?
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………

APPENDIX 2: INTRODUCTION LETTER
P.O. Box 7062 Kampala Uganda
Cabl es : “ M a k u n i k a ”
DEPARTMENT OF CONSTRUCTION ECONOMICS AND MANAGEMENT
Your ref
Our ref
RE: RESEARCH PROJECT FOR AYEBALE JOSEPH
This is to introduce to you the above named person, registration number 12/U/161 who is
undertaking his final year academic research in the effects of building design on workers’
interaction and has chosen your office to carry out his research.
Any assistance accorded to him will be highly appreciated
Yours
.............................
Assoc. Prof. Dr. A.G Kerali
Head of department
CEM
Telephone: 256- 41-4545029
Fax : 256- 41-4530686
Email :
agkerali@cedat.mak.ac.ug
Date: 1st December, 2015
TO:
....................................................
....................................................
....................................................
....................................................
....................................................
........
UNIVERSITY
MAKERERE
E