The Hidden Anthropology of Workspaces: How Culture Shapes Where People Choose to Work

In today's world where work is being done from home and flexible hours are becoming normal working norms, it is very easy to conclude that workplace preferences have become dependent on convenience benefits such as WiFi connectivity and being closer to home. However, to digress further and understand why workers have preferences for particular types of work environments based on identity expression and social expectations rather than basic convenience, one gets to realize that work environments are not just empty spaces for workers to produce but are culturally rich spaces infused with meaning.

Studies from anthropology indicate that humans engage with space in very systematic and symbolic ways. Each workspace, whether it's a minimalist café or an open office, is infused with its own expectations for how individuals should conduct themselves, how loudly they should speak, what their relationships should be, and to what extent their work should be kept private or public. Each of these expectations is itself a kind of script for how individuals should conduct themselves in particular environments to think and create and interact optimally.

Amongst the most basic and fundamental dimensions of culture regards individualism and collectivism in workspace preferences. Independence is very highly prized in many Western cultures, especially in America and some parts of northern Europe. This means they need workspace environments accommodating their need for autonomy and areas for quiet concentration, alone or at isolated desks, without intrusion or social interaction to disturb them. A workspace is needed where one can concentrate alone without any social or unwanted interaction to disturb his or her concentration.

In cultures like those of the Middle East and Latin America, where collectivist cultures are prevalent, work is viewed as being within social webs rather than being alone at work. It is not simply “a place of labor but also one of social engagement”. One may want to have environments at work where “there is easy conversation” and “workers can just check in on each other” because it is easy to shift one's focus “from one thing to another”. A “productive” place is one which is “socially alive” rather than “isolated”.

These divergent scripts help to account for why workspace designs successful in one region may fail entirely in another. This is because the open-concept, quiet collaborative environments found in Western cities may come off as chilly or impersonal to regions where warmth is crucial to shared presence. Conversely, environments emphasizing vibrant conversation may come off as unproductive to workers for whom solitude is key to being productive.

Symptoms of Western Workplace Culture

Another aspect of workspace preference is related to the distinction between private and public realms. When individuals or communities have been socialized to project their personality or identity freely in public spaces through behavior or expressions such as clothes and communication, they may tend to favor workspace environments where they can freely engage in personal behavior without inhibitions or judgments. However, workspace environments may also take on the role of stages for displaying or downplaying one's identity.

This is most apparent in café work culture. In some urban areas, cafes are truly extensions of casual living rooms, where one lingers to socialize and work to a communal beat. This co-presence of strangers does not generate discomfort but rather atmosphere. In others, this may be more muted and utilitarian. Signaling is downplayed. Everyone is inside his or her own strict personal bubble and never really interacts with strangers for any length of time. It is simply a table, chair, and cup of coffee—but it holds widely divergent meanings based on its social context.

Another area where spatial design engages with culture is in ideas surrounding hierarchy and power. In environments where hierarchy is not favored and equality is desired, shared workspaces indicate openness and accessibility to management. This is because managers' workstations are incorporated among workers' spaces, and openness is demonstrated through spaces. However, among some cultures where hierarchy is highly valued and respected, designs such as these may seem improper or chaotic to implement. This is because private offices denote professionalism and authority derived from one's position or achievement.

Likewise, definitions of “professionalism” defy homogenous definitions among cultures. While some individuals link professionalism to simplicity: tidy desks, beige colors, and quiet spaces, others link it to hospitality and social warmth: serving cups of tea or coffee or starting a conversation or keeping a sense of shared timing. This evokes environments where one feels at home to conduct his or her tasks because what defines professionalism may come off as impersonal or aloof to others.

Another layer is added by technology: Remote collaboration software may give one the impression that physical environments have become irrelevant, but anthropology contradicts this implication. It argues instead that technology enhances one's need for significant physical environments because intangible work requires tangible environments to ground one's identity: As work becomes intangible, physical environments become forms of grounding- one's own environments to create one's own stability and one's own identity through environments that reflect one's own thinking modes or one's own desired self-image: a calm place to match one's calm thinking or social environments to match one's social self-image.

Cultural norms even finer than these, for example, perceptions of noise levels, use of eye contact, gender segregation, and use of body language- also influence workspace preferences. In some cultures, noise is a sign of belonging; in others, it implies lack of control. Workers may want to sit near windows to feel linked to the larger world or sit away from windows to reduce distractions. Seating configuration, orientation of individuals sitting at those seats, and table separation have meaning beyond their functionality and impact comfort on a subconscious level.

Ultimately, workspace preference is simply a cultural manifestation of how one thinks one should feel at work. One kind of person is attracted to spaces of solitude and control, where one can manipulate one's own thought stream predictably. Another kind is attracted to spaces of social vitality where one's own creative flash is generated out of interaction. By privacy and subtle distinction, or by community and warmth, behind each preference for workspace is a whole set of cultural assumptions learned long before one ever opened one's first Zoom meeting.

"Anthropology shows that there is no such thing as 'ideal' workspace," writes Shawn Callahan at Putting Ideas to Work. "Rather, there are culturally meaningful spaces. One that fits your values and pace." This is particularly important now because work is becoming more flexible and nomadic. "Designing or selecting spaces for work is no longer just 'logistics,'" asserts Callahan. "It's alignment."

It is crucial to understand that work occurs smoothly if it is conducted amidst an experience of what one understands to be “human” as palpable to one's own sense of it. Since all cultures have their own definitions for this experience, it is very likely for one to realize that environments where one decides to conduct their work are always indicative of not just their functions but their identity as well.