Addressing the Dilema Between Collaboration and Privacy in Coworking Spaces

Document Type: Review paper


Department of Architecture, Faculty of Architecture, Naresuan University, Phitsanulok, Thailand


This paper aims to inform design strategies for regulating privacy in coworking spaces. Coworking spaces are growing at a high rate, yet studies related to the social, psychological, behavioral and physical needs associated with these environments are limited. The growth of coworking spaces is in greater part facilitated by a drive towards greater interaction and collaboration among the workforce. With this apparent intent to promote collaboration and interaction, this study argues that there is need to focus on the conflict between interaction and privacy in coworking spaces. The paper synthesizes extensive environment and behavior literature and extends a conceptual argument of privacy regulation in coworking spaces. The article focuses on privacy regulation through the physical environment and behavioral mediums. The findings demonstrate that features of the physical environment comprising of barriers and fields are powerful tools that can be used to regulate users’ privacy within coworking spaces. The findings also show that understanding behavioral mediums such as personal space and territoriality and their conscious consideration in the design of coworking spaces may allow supportive working environments that respond to a wider range of users’ privacy needs. The ideas discussed in this paper seek to provide architects and interior designers with a guide to address numerous privacy issues, not only in coworking spaces but also other comparable innovation centers that may emerge in future economies.


Main Subjects

Altman, I. (1975). The environment and social behavior: privacy, personal space, territory, crowding. Monterey, California: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.

Altman, I. (1977). Privacy Regulation: Culturally Universal or Culturally Specific? Journal of Social Issues, 33(3), 66-84. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.1977.tb01883.x

Altman, I., & Chemers, M. M. (1980). Culture and Environment. Monterey, California: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.

Archea, J. (1977). The Place of Architectural Factors in Behavioral Theories of Privacy. Journal of Social Issues, 33(3), 116-137. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.1977.tb01886.x

Bencivenga, D. (1998). A humanistic approach to space. HR Magazine, 68-78.

Brill, M., Margulis, S. T., Konar, E., & BOSTI. (1985). Using office design to increase productivity. Buffalo, N.Y: Workplace Design and Productivity, Inc.

Brill, M., Weidemann, S., & BOSTI. (2001). Disproving widespread myths about workplace design. Buffalo, NY: Kimball International.

Capdevila, I. (2013). Knowledge dynamics in localized communities: Coworking spaces as microclusters. SSRN Electronic Journal, 1-30. doi:10.2139/ssrn.2414121

Fayard, A. L., & Weeks, J. (2011). Who Moved My Cube? Creating workspaces that actually foster collaboration. Harvard Business Review, 89, 103-110.

Fuzi, A. (2015). Co-working spaces for promoting entrepreneurship in sparse regions: the case of South Wales. Regional Studies, Regional Science, 2(1), 462-469. doi:10.1080/21681376.2015.1072053

Gerdenitsch, C., Scheel, T. E., Andorfer, J., & Korunka, C. (2016). Coworking Spaces: A Source of Social Support for Independent Professionals. Front Psychol, 7, 581. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00581

Goffman, E. (2009). Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity. New York: Touchstone.

Goodrich, R. (1982). Seven Office Evaluations. Environment and Behavior, 14(3), 353-378. doi:doi:10.1177/0013916582143006

Haapakangas, A., & Hongisto, V. (2008). Effect of sound masking on workers in an open office. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 123(5), 2971. doi:10.1121/1.2932454

Hall, E. T. (1973). The Silent Language. Garden City, NY: Anchor Press.

Kleeman, W. (1981). The Challenge of Interior Design: CBI Publishing Company.

Kupritz, V. W. (1998). PRIVACY IN THE WORK PLACE: THE IMPACT OF BUILDING DESIGN. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 18(4), 341-356. doi:

Lang, J. (1987). Privacy, Territoriality and Personal Space – Proxemic Thoery. Creating Architectural Theory: The role of the behavioral sciences in design. (pp. 145-156). New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.

Moore, G. T., & Golledge, R. G. (1976). Environmental Knowing: Theories, Research, and Methods: Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross.

Robson, S. K. A. (2008). Scenes From a Restaurant : Privacy Regulation in Stressful Situations. Journal of Environmental Psychology., 28, 373-378.  Retrieved from

Schwartz, B. (1968). The social psychology of privacy. AJS, 73(6), 741-752.  Retrieved from

Sommer, R. (1969). Personal space : the behavioral basis of design. Englewood Cliffs: prentic-Hall.

Spinuzzi, C. (2012). Working Alone Together. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 26(4), 399-441. doi:doi:10.1177/1050651912444070

Spreitzer, G., Bacevice, P., & Garrett, L. (2015). Why People Thrive in Coworking Spaces.   Retrieved from

Sundstrom, E. (1985). Theories on the Impact of the Physical Working Environment: Analytic Framework and Selective Review. In M. E. Dolden & R. Ward (Eds.), The Architectural Research Centers Consortium Workshop on the Impact of the Work Environment on Productivity (pp. 173-195). Washington, DC: ARCC.

Sundstrom, E., Burt, R. E., & Kamp, D. (1980). Privacy at Work: Architectural Correlates of Job Satisfaction and Job Performance. The Academy of Management Journal 23(1), 101-117.  Retrieved from

Sundstrom, E., & Sundstrom, M. G. (1986). Work Places: The Psychology of the Physical Environment in Offices and Factories: Cambridge University Press.

Wollman, N., Kelly, B. M., & Bordens, K. S. (1994). Environmental and Intrapersonal Predictors of Reactions to Potential Territorial Intrusions in the Workplace. Environment and Behavior, 26(2), 179-194. doi:doi:10.1177/001391659402600203

Zeisel, J. (1984). Inquiry by Design: Tools for Environment-Behaviour Research. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

1.        Byrne, J., & Wolch, J. (2009). Nature, race, and parks: past research and future directions for geographic research. Progress in Human Geography, 33(6), 743-765.

2.        Brander, L. M., & Koetse, M. J. (2011). The value of urban open space: Meta-analyses of contingent valuation and hedonic pricing results. Journal of environmental management, 92(10), 2763-2773.

3.        Byomkesh, T., Nakagoshi, N., & Dewan, A. M. (2012). Urbanization and green space dynamics in Greater Dhaka, Bangladesh. Landscape and Ecological Engineering, 8(1), 45-58.

4.        Chowdhury, A. (2004). Parks in the urban environment an analytical study with reference to urban parks of Dhaka. Unpublished MURP thesis, Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology, Dhaka.

5.        Cohen, D. A., McKenzie, T. L., Sehgal, A., Williamson, S., Golinelli, D., & Lurie, N. (2007). Contribution of public parks to physical activity. American journal of public health, 97(3), 509-514.

6.        Dooling, S., Simon, G., & Yocom, K. (2006). Place-based urban ecology: a century of park planning in Seattle. Urban Ecosystems, 9(4), 299-321.

7.        Escobedo, F. J., Kroeger, T., & Wagner, J. E. (2011). Urban forests and pollution mitigation: Analyzing ecosystem services and disservices. Environmental pollution, 159(8-9), 2078-2087.

8.        Gobster, P. H. (2002). Managing urban parks for a racially and ethnically diverse clientele. Leisure sciences, 24(2), 143-159.

9.        Groenewegen, P. P., Van den Berg, A. E., De Vries, S., & Verheij, R. A. (2006). Vitamin G: effects of green space on health, well-being, and social safety. BMC public health, 6(1), 149.

10.     Grove, J. M., Troy, A. R., O’Neil-Dunne, J. P., Burch, W. R., Cadenasso, M. L., & Pickett, S. T. A. (2006). Characterization of households and its implications for the vegetation of urban ecosystems. Ecosystems, 9(4), 578-597.

11.     Harnik, P., & Welle, B. J. (2009). Measuring the economic value of a city park system. Trust for Public Land.


12.     Hayward, D. G., & Weitzer, W. H. (1984). The public's image of urban parks: Past amenity, present ambivalance, uncertain future. Urban Ecology, 8(3), 243-268.

13.     Islam, M. M., Kawsar, M. A., & Ahmed, R. U. (2002). Open space in Dhaka city: A study on use of parks in Dhaka city corporation area. Unpublished BURP thesis, Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology, Dhaka.

14.     Jay, M., & Schraml, U. (2009). Understanding the role of urban forests for migrants–uses, perception and integrative potential. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 8(4), 283-294.

15.     Jilcott, S. B., Evenson, K. R., Laraia, B. A., & Ammerman, A. S. (2007). Association Between Physical Activity and Proximity to Physical Activity Resources Among Low-Income, Midlife Women. Preventing chronic disease, 4(1), 1-16.

16.     Kearney, A. R. (2006). Residential development patterns and neighborhood satisfaction: Impacts of density and nearby nature. Environment and behavior, 38(1), 112-139.

17.     Keniger, L. E., Gaston, K. J., Irvine, K. N., & Fuller, R. A. (2013). What are the benefits of interacting with nature?. International journal of environmental research and public health, 10(3), 913-935.

18.     Lin, B. B., Fuller, R. A., Bush, R., Gaston, K. J., & Shanahan, D. F. (2014). Opportunity or orientation? Who uses urban parks and why. PLoS one, 9(1), e87422.

19.     Lo, A. Y., & Jim, C. Y. (2010). Differential community effects on perception and use of urban greenspaces. Cities27(6), 430-442.

20.     Mishu, M. R., Barua, U., & Stoican, I. A. (2014). The changing nature of urban public places in Dhaka City. Urbanism. Arhitectura. Constructii5(4), 5.

21.     Mowen, A., Orsega-Smith, E., Payne, L., Ainsworth, B., & Godbey, G. (2007). The role of park proximity and social support in shaping park visitation, physical activity, and perceived health among older adults. Journal of Physical Activity and Health, 4(2), 167-179.

22.     Nehrin, K., Quamruzzaman, J. M., & Khan, M. S. (2004). Status of Parks and Garden in old Dhaka. Unpublished BURP thesis, Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology, Dhaka.

23.     Neema, M. N., Hossain, M. R., Haque, A. M., & Farhan, M. H. M. (2014). Multi-Criteria Evaluation of Quality of Exisiting Urban Parks in Dhaka City-Towards Achieving Livable City. International Journal of Environment, 3(3), 1-15.

24.     Oguz, D. (2000). User surveys of Ankara’s urban parks. Landscape and urban planning, 52(2-3), 165-171.

25.     Rahman, M., Zaman, K. B., & Hafiz, R. (2016). Translating text into space for mapping the past territory of a city: a study on spatial development of Dhaka during Mughal period. City, Territory and Architecture, 3(1), 7.

26.     Sacker, A., & Cable, N. (2005). Do adolescent leisure-time physical activities foster health and well-being in adulthood? Evidence from two British birth cohorts. The European Journal of Public Health, 16(3), 331-335.

27.     Siddiqui, M. M. R. (1990). Recreational Facilities in Dhaka City: a study of existing parks and open spaces. Unpublished MURP thesis, Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology, Dhaka.

28.     Tinsley, H. E., Tinsley, D. J., & Croskeys, C. E. (2002). Park usage, social milieu, and psychosocial benefits of park use reported by older urban park users from four ethnic groups. Leisure Sciences, 24(2), 199-218.

29.     Yanez, E., & Muzzy, W. (2005). Healthy parks, healthy communities: Addressing health disparities and park inequities through public financing of parks, playgrounds, and other physical activity settings. San Francisco, CA: The Trust for Public Land.