The Psychological Effects of Rearranging Furniture in the Workplace: 

Workplace design shapes not only how an office looks but also how it feels and functions. While large-scale refurbishments can be transformative, research shows that even small interventions—such as rearranging desks, meeting tables, and breakout furniture—can have measurable effects on wellbeing, collaboration, and productivity (Vischer, 2007; Elsbach & Pratt, 2007).
At Forster Inc, we take an evidence-informed approach to design. By understanding the psychological mechanisms behind spatial change, businesses can make strategic adjustments that improve performance without the cost or environmental impact of a full redesign.

1. Cognitive Stimulation and “Fresh Eyes”
Environmental psychology research suggests that environmental novelty stimulates cognitive engagement (Kaplan & Kaplan, 1989). In practical terms, changing an office layout interrupts the “fixed” sensory map employees carry in their minds, prompting them to perceive their surroundings more actively. This can reduce feelings of monotony, boost creative thinking, and re-energise teams (Berto, 2014). Even small changes, such as reorienting desks to face natural light or moving collaborative areas to new locations, can help reframe mental patterns.

2. Perceived Control and Employee Wellbeing
The Job Demand–Control model (Karasek, 1979) emphasises the importance of autonomy in reducing workplace stress. Spatial autonomy—having influence over where and how one works—is a form of environmental control that correlates with job satisfaction and lower burnout risk (Vischer, 2007). Inviting employees to participate in furniture rearrangement decisions can strengthen this sense of agency, creating a shared ownership of the environment and fostering positive organisational culture.

3. Movement Flow and Social Interaction
Space syntax studies have shown that layout affects patterns of movement and social contact in the workplace (Penn et al., 1999). Poor circulation—caused by obstructed walkways, awkward desk clusters, or poorly positioned meeting points—can limit communication and contribute to daily frustration. Strategic rearrangement can:

• Reduce “travel time” between frequently interacting teams

• Increase incidental contact that fosters informal collaboration (Allen & Henn, 2007)

• Improve visibility, which is linked to faster problem-solving and greater team cohesion

4. Environmental Cues and Behavioural Change
The built environment sends subtle behavioural cues, guiding how people use space (Gifford, 2014). Moving quiet workstations away from high-traffic areas reduces distraction, while placing collaboration zones near project teams can increase spontaneous problem-solving. This principle, known as behavioural setting theory (Barker, 1968), highlights that spatial arrangements both enable and constrain workplace behaviours.

5. Sustainability Through Spatial Renewal
Reconfiguring existing furniture is not only cost-effective—it aligns with principles of sustainable design by extending product life cycles and reducing embodied carbon (Cabeza et al., 2014). For businesses aiming to improve environmental performance, rearrangement offers a low-impact yet high-return intervention. At Forster Inc, we often achieve major shifts in functionality and atmosphere without purchasing new items, minimising waste while maximising adaptability.

6. Practical Recommendations from Research
Based on findings from environmental and organisational psychology, businesses can approach rearrangement strategically by:

• Prioritising daylight access: Desks positioned near windows have been linked to improved sleep quality, physical health, and job performance (Boubekri et al., 2014).

• Creating functional zoning: Separate high-focus, collaborative, and social areas to reduce “function bleed” (Kim & de Dear, 2013).

• Prototyping layouts: Pilot new arrangements for two to three weeks and gather feedback before committing.

• Respecting movement thresholds: Maintain at least 1.2m circulation width for shared office pathways (BS 8300-2:2018).

In conclusion
Rearranging furniture is not merely a matter of aesthetics—it is a powerful organisational tool supported by decades of research in environmental psychology. By refreshing layouts, businesses can subtly influence employee wellbeing, productivity, and collaboration without major expense or environmental cost.

At Forster Inc, we believe workplaces should evolve with the people who inhabit them. Sometimes, all it takes to unlock that evolution is a new perspective—quite literally, by moving the furniture.

References

• Allen, T.J., & Henn, G.W. (2007). The Organization and Architecture of Innovation. Elsevier.

• Barker, R.G. (1968). Ecological Psychology. Stanford University Press.

• Berto, R. (2014). The role of nature in coping with psycho-physiological stress: A literature review on restorativeness. Behavioral Sciences, 4(4), 394–409.

• Boubekri, M., Cheung, I.N., Reid, K.J., Wang, C.H., & Zee, P.C. (2014). Impact of windows and daylight exposure on overall health and sleep quality of office workers. Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine, 10(6), 603–609.

• Cabeza, L.F., et al. (2014). Life cycle assessment of building materials: Overview and trends. Energy and Buildings, 73, 1–9.

• Elsbach, K.D., & Pratt, M.G. (2007). The physical environment in organizations. Academy of Management Annals, 1(1), 181–224.

• Gifford, R. (2014). Environmental Psychology: Principles and Practice (5th ed.). Optimal Books.

• Kaplan, R., & Kaplan, S. (1989). The Experience of Nature: A Psychological Perspective. Cambridge University Press.

• Karasek, R.A. (1979). Job demands, job decision latitude, and mental strain: Implications for job redesign. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24(2), 285–308.

• Kim, J., & de Dear, R. (2013). Workspace satisfaction: The privacy–communication trade-off in open-plan offices. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 36, 18–26.

• Penn, A., Desyllas, J., & Vaughan, L. (1999). The space of innovation: Interaction and communication in the work environment. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 26(2), 193–218.

• Vischer, J.C. (2007). The effects of the physical environment on job performance: Towards a theoretical model of workspace stress. Stress and Health, 23(3), 175–184.

Please get in touch to arrange a meeting to review your office.

Back to Stories