Are workspaces gender neutral? A literature review and a research agenda

Migliore, A; Rossi-Lamastra, C and Tagliaro, C (2022) Are workspaces gender neutral? A literature review and a research agenda. Building Research & Information, 50(8), pp. 924-948. ISSN 0961-3218

Abstract

This study undertakes a systematic literature review (SLR) on how the workspace influences female workers and, more generally, gender equality. Within the broader context of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DE&I) matters, gender issues have attracted ample attention from scholars and policymakers. However, research on the specific topic of this SLR is sparse and fragmented, especially for what concerns the implications on workplace design and management. This paper systematizes the actual knowledge on the subject by reviewing 68 articles published in the last 10 years. Authors critically analyze these articles according to two vital spatial elements: workspace typologies and workspace interiors. The reviewed articles document a general convincement shared by different scientific fields that the workspace affects women and men differently. The results show that space is a crucial element for enhancing gender equality in the workplace. Although the reviewed articles cover multiple disciplines, an interdisciplinary approach is still missing. The concluding section proposes a future research agenda, novel theoretical approaches and methodological advancements, while highlighting practical implications.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: equality; gender; office; women; workspace
Index terms: gender equality, gender issue, women, workspace, workplace design, literature review, research agenda, systematic literature review
Subjects: data analysis and analytics, sociology, research management, management, social justice, research evaluation and metrics, design practice
Topics: Stakeholder Management, Design Practice, Research Practice, Ethics
Descriptive scope: 5 PCTEA

N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here