Design workplaces to support employees, organizations, and the environment: the triple bottom line
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The global pandemic of COVID-19, according to some commentators, changes everything: Remote work forever! The death of the office! Reshape our cities! End commuting! There is no question that in the short term, many of these forces are at play; but this might not be the right set of choices for the long term. Trust, social cohesion, informal communication, and idea generation all benefit from co-location and shared experience. Many organizations will find that a physical location remains necessary. The current times do reveal the need to decrease occupant density, provide more separation between individuals, and to change building ventilation strategies to prevent disease transmission. These run counter to recent design trends and to many organizations’ and governments’ strategies to address facilities costs and reduced greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with those facilities. Our group has long argued that workplace design and building operation needs to support the needs of employees, organizations, and the environment. This means that efforts to address environmental goals such as reducing GHG emissions and achieving sustainable construction ought not to come at the expense of organizational productivity understood broadly, taking into account not only the quantity of work produced or the value of products sold, but also individuals’ job satisfaction, organizational commitment, intent to turnover, absenteeism, and overall well-being. This presentation will blend results from several streams of recent NRC research, addressing the relationships between organizational productivity and activity-based working; satisfying individuals’ needs for various building amenities; and interior environmental conditions. In parallel, our colleagues have demonstrated that connected building operations can rapidly pay back in reduced energy use, which may be the smart route to take to achieve the indoor environmental conditions in buildings that individuals need and for organizations to prosper while delivering on society’s environmental and climate-change targets.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.022 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.014 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.006 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".