New ways of working (NWW): work space and cultural change in virtualizing organizations

References

• Akrich, M. 1992. “The De-scription of Technical Objects.” In Shaping Technology/Building Society, edited by W. E. Bijker and T. Pinch, 205–224. Cambridge: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Arnold, M. 2003. “On the Phenomenology of Technology: The “Janus-faces” of Mobile Phones.” Information and Organization 13: 231–256. doi: 10.1016/S1471-7727(03)00013-7
   Google Scholar
• Baane, Ruurd, Patrick Houtkamp, and Marcel Knotter. 2011. Het nieuwe werken ontrafeld. Over Bricks, Bytes & Behavior. Assen: Van Gorcum.
   Google Scholar
• Baldry, Chris, and Alison Barnes. 2012. “The Open-plan Academy: Space, Control and the Undermining of Professional Identity.” Work, Employment and Society 26 (2): 228–245. doi: 10.1177/0950017011432917
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bernard, H. R. 2002. Research Methods in Anthropology: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. New York: AltaMira.
   Google Scholar
• Beyes, Timon, and Chris Steyaert. 2012. “Spacing Organization: Non-representational Theory and Performing Organizational Space.” Organization 19 (1): 45–61. doi: 10.1177/1350508411401946
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bijl, Dik. 2007. Het nieuwe werken. Op weg naar een productieve kenniseconomie. Den Haag: ICT-bibliotheek.
   Google Scholar
• Blok, Merle M., Liesbeth Groenesteijn, Roos Schelvis, and Peter Vink. 2012. “New Ways of Working: Does Flexibility in Time and Location of Work Change Work Behavior and Affect Business Outcomes?” Work 41: 2605–2610.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Boell, Sebastian K., Dubravka Cecez-Kecmanovic, and John Campbell. 2016. “Telework Paradoxes and Practices: The Importance of the Nature of Work.” New Technology, Work and Employment 31 (2): 114–131. doi: 10.1111/ntwe.12063
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boersma, Kees, and Sytze Kingma. 2005. “From Means to Ends: The Transformation of ERP in a Manufacturing Company.” The Journal of Strategic Information Systems 14 (2): 197–219. doi: 10.1016/j.jsis.2005.04.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bosch-Sijtsema, Petra M., Virpi Ruhomäki, and Matti Vartiainen. 2010. “Multi-location Knowledge Workers in the Office: Navigation, Disturbances and Effectiveness.” New Technology, Work and Employment 25 (3): 183–195. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-005X.2010.00247.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown, Barry, and Kenton O'Hara. 2003. “Place as a Practical Concern of Mobile Workers.” Environment and Planning A 35: 1565–1587. doi: 10.1068/a34231
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brunia, S., I. de Been, and T. J. M. van der Voordt. 2016. “Accommodating New Ways of Working: Lessons from Best Practices and Worst Cases.” Journal of Corporate Real Estate 18 (1): 30–47. doi: 10.1108/JCRE-10-2015-0028
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Castells, Manuel. 1996. The Information Age: Economy, Society and Culture. 2nd ed. 2 vols. Vol. 1. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd. Original edition. Reprint, 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Castells, M. 2001. The Internet Galaxy. Reflexions on the Internet, Business and Society. New York: Oxford Univeristy Press.
   Google Scholar
• Chen, Leida, and Ravi Nath. 2005. “Nomadic Culture: Cultural Support for Working Anytime, Anywhere.” Information Systems Management 22 (4): 56–64. doi: 10.1201/1078.10580530/45520.22.4.20050901/90030.6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooper, Cecily D., and Nancy B. Kurland. 2002. “Telecommuting, Professional Isolation, and Employee Development in Public and Private Organizations.” Journal of Organizational Behavior 23 (4): 511–532. doi: 10.1002/job.145
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dale, Karen, and Gibson Burrell. 2008. The Spaces of Organisation & the Organisation of Space. Power, Identity & Materiality at Work. New York: Palgrave.
   Google Scholar
• de Leede, J., and J. Kraijenbrink. 2014. “The Mediating Role of Trust and Social Cohesion in the Effects of New Ways of Working: A Dutch Case Study.” Human Resource Management, Social Innovation and Technology 14: 3–20. doi: 10.1108/S1877-636120140000014006
   Google Scholar
• Derix, Govert. 2003. Interpolis. Een revolutie in twee bedrijven [Interpolis. A Revolution in Two Companies]. Tilburg: Interpolis, Veldhoen+Company.
   Google Scholar
• Duffy, F. 1997. The New Office. London: Conran Octopus Limited.
   Google Scholar
• Duffy, F. 2000. “Design and Facilities Management in a Time of Change.” Facilities 18 (10/11/12): 371–375. doi: 10.1108/02632770010349592
   Google Scholar
• Elden, Stuart. 2004. Understanding Henri Lefebvre - Theory and the Possible. London: Continuum.
   Google Scholar
• Felstead, A, N. Jewson, and S. Walters. 2005. Changing Places of Work. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.
   Google Scholar
• Fleming, Peter, and Andre Spicer. 2004. “‘You Can Checkout Anytime, But You Can Never Leave’: Spatial Boundaries in a High Commitment Organization.” Human Relations 57 (1): 75–94. doi: 10.1177/0018726704042715
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flyvbjerg, Bent. 2006. “Five Misunderstandings about Case-study Research.” Qualitative Inquiry 12 (2): 219–245. doi: 10.1177/1077800405284363
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glaser, B. G, and A. L. Strauss. 1964. “Awareness Contexts and Social Interaction.” American Sociological Review 29: 669–679. doi: 10.2307/2091417
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goonewardena, Kanishka, Stefan Kipfer, Richard Milgrom, and Christian Schmid. 2008. Space, Difference, Everyday Life. Reading Henri Lefebvre. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Gorgievski, Marjan J., T. J. M. van der Voordt, Sanne G. A. van Herpen, and Sophie van Akkeren. 2010. “After the Fire. New Ways of Working in an Academic Setting.” Facilities 28 (3/4): 206–224. doi: 10.1108/02632771011023159
   Google Scholar
• Hancock, P. H., and Andre Spicer. 2011. “Academic Architecture and the Constitution of the New Model Worker.” Culture and Organization 17 (2): 91–105. doi: 10.1080/14759551.2011.544885
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harrison, Andrew, Paul Wheeler, and Carolyn Whitehead. 2004. The Distributed Workplace. London: Spon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hirst, Alison. 2011. “Settlers, Vagrants and Mutual Indifference: Unintended Consequences of Hot-Desking.” Journal of Organizational Change Management 24 (6): 767–788. doi: 10.1108/09534811111175742
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hislop, Donald, and Caroline Axtell. 2009. “To Infinity and Beyond?: Workspace and the Multi-location Worker.” New Technology, Work and Employment 24 (1): 60–75. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-005X.2008.00218.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoendervanger, J. G., I. de Been, W. N. van Yperen, M. P. Mobach, and C. J. Albers. 2016. “Flexibility in Use. Switching Behaviour and Satisfaction in Activity-Based Work Environments.” Journal of Corporate Real Estate 18 (1): 48–62. doi: 10.1108/JCRE-10-2015-0033
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaplan, Robert S., and David P. Norton. 2006. “How to Implement a New Strategy Without Disrupting Your Organization.” Harvard Business Review 84, March: 100–109.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kingma, Sytze F. 2008. “Dutch Casino Space or the Spatial Organization of Entertainment.” Culture and Organization 14 (1): 31–48. doi: 10.1080/14759550701863324
   Google Scholar
• Kingma, Sytze F. 2016. “The Constitution of ‘Third Workspaces’ in Between the Home and the Corporate Office.” New Technology, Work and Employment 31 (2): 176–193. doi: 10.1111/ntwe.12068
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kornberger, Martin, and Stuwart Clegg. 2004. “Bringing Space Back in: Organizing the Generative Building.” Organization Studies 25 (7): 1095–1114. doi: 10.1177/0170840604046312
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lefebvre, H. (1974) 1991. The Production of Space. Oxford: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Lefebvre, H. (1982) 2003. “Twelve Theses on Logic and Dialectic.” In Henri Lefebvre. Key Writings, edited by Stuart Elden, Elizabeth Lebas, and Eleonore Kofman, 63–68. London: Bloomsbury.
   Google Scholar
• Leonardi, Paul M., and Stephen R. Barley. 2008. “Materiality and Change: Challenges to Building Better Theory about Technology and Organizing.” Information and Organization 18: 159–176. doi: 10.1016/j.infoandorg.2008.03.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mazmanian, M., W. J. Orlikowski, and J. Yates. 2013. “The Autonomy Paradox: The Implications of Mobile Email Devices for Knowledge Professionals.” Organisation Science 24 (5): 1337–1357. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1120.0806
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meyer, J. W., and P. Bromley. 2013. “The Worldwide Expansion of ‘Organization’.” Sociological Theory 31 (4): 366–389. doi: 10.1177/0735275113513264
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mitchell, W. J. 2000. E-topia. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Neyland, Daniel. 2008. Organizational Ethnography. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Orlikowski, W. J. 2000. “Using Technology and Constituting Structures: A Practice Lens for Studying Technology in Organizations.” Organization Science 11 (4): 404–428. doi: 10.1287/orsc.11.4.404.14600
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Orlikowski, Wanda J., and Susan V. Scott. 2008. “Sociomateriality: Challenging the Separation of Technology, Work and Organization.” The Academy of Management Annals 2 (1): 433–474. doi: 10.1080/19416520802211644
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peltonen, Tuomo. 2011. “Multiple Architectures and the Production of Organizational Space in a Finnish University.” Journal of Organizational Change Management 24 (6): 806–821. doi: 10.1108/09534811111175760
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peters, Pascale, and Stefan Heusinkveld. 2010. “Institutional Explanations for Managers’ Attitudes Towards Telehomeworking.” Human Relations 63 (1): 107–135. doi: 10.1177/0018726709336025
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ritchie, J., and J. Lewis. 2003. Qualitative Research Practice. A Guide for Social Science Students and Researchers. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Sellen, A., and R. Harper. 2002. The Myth of the Paperless Office. Cambridge: MIT press.
   Google Scholar
• Senge, P., A. Kleiner, C. Roberts, R. Ross, G. Roth, and B. Smith. 1999. The Dance of Change: The Challenges of Sustaining Momentum in Learning Organizations. New York: Doubleday/Currency.
   Google Scholar
• Sewell, Graham, and Laurent Taskin. 2015. “Out of Sight, Out of Mind in a New World of Work? Autonomy, Control, and Spatiotemporal Scaling in Telework.” Organizaton Studies 36 (11): 1507–1529. doi: 10.1177/0170840615593587
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shields, Rob. 1999. Lefebvre, Love & Struggle. Spatial Dialectics. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Shields, Rob. 2003. The Virtual. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Sotto, R. 1997. “The Virtual Organization.” Accounting, Management and Information Technologies 7 (1): 37–51. doi: 10.1016/S0959-8022(97)00003-9
   Google Scholar
• Strauss, A. L., and J. M. Corbin. 1998. Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Suchman, L. A. 2007. Human-Machine Reconfigurations: Plans and Situated Actions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Suddaby, R. 2006. “What Grounded Theory Is Not.” Academy of Management Journal 49 (4): 633–642. doi: 10.5465/amj.2006.22083020
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor, Scott, and Andre Spicer. 2007. “Time for Space: A Narrative Review of Research on Organizational Spaces.” International Journal of Management Reviews 9 (4): 325–346. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2370.2007.00214.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uolamo, Niina, and Arja Ropo. 2015. “Leading Employee Wellbeing by Workspace Experiences.” In Leadership in Spaces and Places, edited by Arja Ropo, Perttu Salovaara, Erika Sauer, and Donatella De Paoli, 87–105. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• van Meel, J. 2011. “The Origins of New Ways of Working. Office Concepts in the 1970s.” Facilities 29 (9/10): 357–367. doi: 10.1108/02632771111146297
   Google Scholar
• Veldhoen, Erik. 2005. “The Art of Working”. De integrale betekenis van onze virtuele, fysieke en mentale werkomgevingen [The Integral Meaning of Our Virtual, Physical and Mental Work Environments]. Den Haag: Academic Service.
   Google Scholar
• Wainwright, Edward. 2010. “The Office is Always on: DEGW, Lefebvre and the Wireless City.” The Journal of Architecture 15 (2): 209–218. doi: 10.1080/13602361003791069
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wajcman, Judy, and Emily Rose. 2011. “Constant Connectivity: Rethinking Interruptions at Work.” Organization Studies 32 (7): 941–961. doi: 10.1177/0170840611410829
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wapshott, Robert, and Oliver Mallett. 2012. “The Spatial Implications of Homeworking: A Lefebvrian Approach to the Rewards and Challenges of Home-Based Work.” Organization 19 (1): 63–79. doi: 10.1177/1350508411405376
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wasserman, Varda, and Michal Frenkel. 2011. “Organizational Aesthetics: Caught Between Identity Regulation and Culture Jamming.” Organization Science 22 (2): 503–521. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1100.0583
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Watkins, Ceri. 2005. “Representations of Space, Spatial Practices and Spaces of Representation: An Application of Lefebvre's Spatial Triad.” Culture and Organization 11 (3): 209–220. doi: 10.1080/14759550500203318
   Google Scholar
• White, M. 2004. “Content Management Software.” Business Information Review 21 (1): 36–43. doi: 10.1177/0266382104043599
   Google Scholar
• Zhang, Zhongyuan. 2006. “What is Lived Space.” Ephemera. Theory & Politics in Organization 6 (2): 219–223.
   Google Scholar
• Zhang, Zhongyuan P., H. Hancock, and Andre Spicer. 2008. “Hyper-Organizational Space in the Work of J. G. Ballard.” Organization 13 (4): 549–567.
   Google Scholar