Structural Survey

The effect of physical environment comfort on employees’ performance in office

buildings: A case study of three public universities in Malaysia
Azlan Shah Ali Shirley Jin Lin Chua Melissa Ee-Ling Lim
Article information:
To cite this document:
Azlan Shah Ali Shirley Jin Lin Chua Melissa Ee-Ling Lim , (2015),"The effect of physical environment
comfort on employees’ performance in office buildings", Structural Survey, Vol. 33 Iss 4/5 pp. 294 -
308
Downloaded by UNIVERSITAET OSNABRUCK At 10:13 03 February 2016 (PT)

Permanent link to this document:

http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/SS-02-2015-0012
Downloaded on: 03 February 2016, At: 10:13 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 30 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 173 times since 2015*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Paul Roelofsen, (2002),"The impact of office environments on employee performance: The design of
the workplace as a strategy for productivity enhancement", Journal of Facilities Management, Vol. 1
Iss 3 pp. 247-264 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14725960310807944
Mohammad A. Hassanain, Ali Iftikhar, (2015),"Framework model for post-occupancy evaluation
of school facilities", Structural Survey, Vol. 33 Iss 4/5 pp. 322-336 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/
SS-06-2015-0029
Umi Kalsum Zolkafli, Zahiriah Yahya, Norhanim Zakaria, Farid Wajdi Akashah, Azlan Shah Ali,
(2015),"Restoration of historical timber building: a Malaysian case study", Structural Survey, Vol. 33
Iss 4/5 pp. 309-321 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/SS-01-2015-0004

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-
srm:203840 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald
for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission
guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as
well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and
services.
 Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for
digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of

download.
Downloaded by UNIVERSITAET OSNABRUCK At 10:13 03 February 2016 (PT)

SS
33,4/5
294
Received 19 February 2015
Revised 1 August 2015
Accepted 2 August 2015
Downloaded by UNIVERSITAET OSNABRUCK At 10:13 03 February 2016 (PT)
Structural Survey
Vol. 33 No. 4/5, 2015
pp. 294-308
© Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0263-080X
DOI 10.1108/SS-02-2015-0012
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0263-080X.htm
The effect of physical
environment comfort on
employees’ performance
in office buildings
A case study of three public universities
in Malaysia
Azlan Shah Ali, Shirley Jin Lin Chua and Melissa Ee-Ling Lim
Department of Building Surveying, University of Malaya,
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Abstract
Purpose – Maintaining a comfortable physical environment in the workplace is claimed to be vital as it
will create a “healthier” building with optimum environmental conditions, which enable employees to be
healthier and have a lower absenteeism rate, and hence be more productive. Thus, the purpose of this
paper is to deal with the importance of physical environment comfort in the office workplace. Evaluation
was made of the office workers’ performance that is mainly affected by levels of comfort in the office.
Design/methodology/approach – Three selected case studies were evaluated based on aspects of
employees’ comfort, perceived health and absenteeism rate, by considering the elements of physical
comfort that consist of room temperature, relative humidity and luminance level. The selected case
studies were the Department of Development and Estate Maintenance of three research universities in
Malaysia. Field studies were carried out using hygrometers and lux meters in measuring the said
elements as well as post-occupancy evaluation, which involved 30 respondents for each case (total 90
respondents), to determine their perception of comfort and its effect on their health and absenteeism rate.
Data collected were analysed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences.
Findings – The results suggest that employees did not find luminance level uncomfortable, when
compared with room temperature, thus proving that employees are more sensitive to room temperature
comfort. Furthermore, when the room temperature comfort was low, significant correlations were found
with health-related issues such as feeling “stuffy”, being easily tired and having difficulty concentrating.
Originality/value – This paper investigates the relationship between employee performance and a
comfortable workplace environment. It could be concluded that an uncomfortable environment in an office
workplace leads to health-related issues as well as increasing the absenteeism rate. High levels of employee
absenteeism lead to decreased employee productivity, therefore affecting their work performance.
Keywords Health, Performance, Environment comfort
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
The number of office workplaces is increasing from day to day, which has caused an
increase of between 17 and 50 per cent in the number of office workers (Margaritis and
Mararas, 2006). Additionally, the nature of the office workplace is changing from day to
day; office workplaces no longer consist of passive and fixed activities but lean towards
a more flexible environment and activities. Office employees spend a great deal of
time in buildings where the comfort level of the physical environment will influence
their work performance and help to develop a healthy working environment
(Kamalrulzaman et al., 2011). By having a better office workplace, the employees will
work better, produce better work and enhance their work performance.
 Employee’s performance can usually be used as a measure of how well a certain Effect of
organization converts its resources into services or goods, which reflects that all physical
employees’ productivity is imperative to the organization. A high level of employee
work performance is most likely to bring profitability to that organization. A survey
environment
carried out by Hughes (2007) states that workspace qualities that encompass spatial comfort
arrangement, ventilation and lighting as well as level of noise will affect the attitude of
employees. In addition, many studies have shown that the factors of spatial workplace 295
and environmental comfort consisting of office design and workstation layout,
ergonomics, indoor air quality, thermal condition, lighting and noise will have an
influence on employees’ productivity (Sullivan et al., 2013).
However, work performance itself generally covers a wide range of meanings.
It covers both task performance and contextual performance and its performance
Downloaded by UNIVERSITAET OSNABRUCK At 10:13 03 February 2016 (PT)

measurement can be carried out at the level of the organization, individual or function
(Sonnentag, 2002). This research focused on three performance measurement
methods – which are the Sink and Tuttle model, the Performance Pyramid and
Harper’s Theory – to come up with the most suitable measurement criterion, which is
productivity. However, as stated by Jaaskelainen and Laihonen (2013), it is a difficult
task to measure productivity in office buildings as there is no exact measuring method
for determining the exact figure. Despite this, a number of studies have proven that
evaluating the productivity of employees in an office building could be carried out
through individual measures by checking on their health issues, absenteeism rate and
job satisfaction (Sullivan et al., 2013). When employees absent themselves from work, a
significant amount of time is lost. It has also been proven by Mariesa and Jonah (2011)
that average productivity loss is about 10-20 per cent whenever employees absent
themselves and cause the need to find a temporary replacement. In relation to
absenteeism, the major cause behind it is due to illness among employees working in
the particular office building. Many studies show that the main reason for employees
falling sick in an office building is the environment in the building. Ho et al. (2004) have
paid attention to hygiene conditions and health problems caused by the environment in
office buildings. In addition, WHO reported that a healthy building with optimum
environmental conditions usually results in healthier and more productive occupants.
Therefore, this paper intends to further establish the relationship between
environmental comfort and employees’ productivity.

2. Performance measurement
In order to create a working measurement for an organization, performance
measurement needs to be performed. Performance measures basically act as a tool to
make a comparison between the performance of various departments, organizations,
plants, individuals and also in assessing employees (Salloum, 2010). Performance
measurements are conducted on employees to determine the particular employee’s
status and remuneration as well as the opportunities for advancement. The type of
performance measurement method used differs depending on the work environment,
type of work that the employees do and also type of business. Three types of
performance measurement consisting of the Sink and Tuttle model, the Performance
Pyramid and Harper Theory are discussed in this paper.

2.1 Sink and Tuttle model

There are seven performance criteria or measurements introduced by Sink and Tuttle
to evaluate performance at organizational level: effectiveness, efficiency, quality,
 SS productivity, quality of work life, innovation and profitability or budgetability.
33,4/5 This model is very useful as it enables the managers to clearly understand the system
as well as providing ways for improvement and performance measuring.

2.2 The performance pyramid

In the performance pyramid, a link between the performance measures at different levels
296 of hierarchy in a workplace is created. The aim of this performance measure is to ensure
that each individual group and department will own the same goal and work together to
achieve it (Tangen, 2004). The ability to assimilate the organization’s objectives with the
operational performance indicators is one of this performance measurement’s specialities.
Downloaded by UNIVERSITAET OSNABRUCK At 10:13 03 February 2016 (PT)

2.3 Harper theory

According to Harper (1984), productivity represents a vital component of measurement
in performance measurement. There are seven areas that need to be looked into when
measuring performance under this theory: productivity, unit cost, factor proportion,
cost proportion, price, product mix and input allocation.
As can be seen from the three selected performance measurement methods, all of the
measurements have their own criteria in performance measuring. However, it can be
seen that productivity is the common criterion among the three measurement methods.
Thus, in this research, the criteria used for performance measurement of the employees
working in the office will be focused on their productivity in completing their tasks.

3. Physical environmental factor in the office building

3.1 Individual productivity measures in the office building
All companies make endless efforts to improve employees’ productivity and stay
profitable. Productivity is considered as the key to success in every organization, due to
the results showing that improving work productivity will have a major impact, either
socially or economically. However, as has been discussed by previous researchers, it is
very challenging to define productivity in terms of office work ( Jaaskelainen and
Laihonen, 2013). It is a subjective issue in that there are variations of office work
and the lack of work standardization usually inhibits any attempt to produce an overall
productivity measurement.
Despite the complexity in aggregating the productivity measurement in an office
building, the individual’s productivity is measured based on the particular person’s
performance, which includes the aspects of working habits like punctuality, skills,
absenteeism and safety-rule violations. Riggs and Felix (1983) state that the
measurement of an individual’s performance must be able to enhance the employee’s
communication skills and improve work ethics, develop their confidence, raising
quality or amount of output and safety awareness at the same time as reducing waste,
rate of absenteeism and production cost. Moreover, Brinkerhoff and Dressler (1990)
highlight that there are a few elements such as absenteeism, job satisfaction and health
of the employee that can indicate and subjectively measure individual productivity.

3.2 Health issues in the office building

Commonly, sick building syndrome (SBS) studies were carried out to study building-
related illness in building occupants. SBS is a situation where building occupants face
several acute health issues after spending some time in an office building. SBS is classified
as a very subtle cause of dissatisfaction among most office employees. This is because
 SBS will not lead to any hospitalization or medical diagnosis and its actual cause is often Effect of
difficult to pinpoint. SBS is the most commonly reported issue by office workers and physical
teachers, who make up about 50 per cent of the total amount of workers (Roelofsen, 2002).
It is notorious in office buildings as well as in schools (Fisk, 2000), and is responsible for
environment
absenteeism among people who work in affected buildings. Absenteeism has a close comfort
relation to productivity as employees who absent themselves from an organization are not
going to produce any output or profit for the organization. The ratio of absenteeism over 297
the total number of working days will give an indication of the employee’s work ethic by
showing whether the employee is serious about and comfortable with his/her work.
Roelofsen (2002) conducted a study which found that an increase in productivity occurs
when employees present themselves most working days and complain less regarding the
workplace environment. Thus, a high-absenteeism rate is an indication that employees
Downloaded by UNIVERSITAET OSNABRUCK At 10:13 03 February 2016 (PT)

are disengaged from their work, as well as indicating a reduction in job satisfaction and
job productivity.
In addition, Roelofsen (2002) conducted a study of 61 office buildings, with
approximately 7,000 respondents, regarding their perception of and satisfaction
with the quality of environmental comfort in their office. The results show that most
employees are absent for 2.5 days a year following complaints that are related to
comfort in the physical environment. It shows that the absenteeism percentage for
every employee is 5 per cent of 2,000 working days.
Therefore, this leads to the conclusion that productivity will be lessened when there
are large numbers of employees experiencing signs of environmental discomfort in an
office building.

3.3 Absenteeism in the office building

Absenteeism has a close relation to productivity where employees who absent
themselves from an organization are not going to produce any output or bring any
profit to the organization. The ratio of absenteeism over the total number of working
days will give an indication of the employee’s work ethic by showing whether the
employee is serious about and comfortable with his/her work. By looking at the causes
of absenteeism among employees, it is reasonably believed that how the workplace
environment creates health-related issues among employees, leading them to absent
themselves from time to time, is a major concern. The linkage between the regularity of
health-related issues and frequency of absenteeism indirectly affects employees’ work
productivity (Danielsson and Bodin, 2008).

3.4 Physical comfort and productivity

Physical comfort in a building is about the physical environment of the building in its
totality, which can affect how a person either fits or does not fit into their particular
workplace:
(1) Correlation of lighting and productivity at work.
In a workplace, whether in an office setting or in an industrial one, lighting is needed in
order to ensure the workplace is safe and to allow all tasks to be completed on time and
effectively. Lighting standards vary with different work environments and, in order to
perform various types of work, different types of lighting are required. According
to MS1525 (2007), work requiring infrequent reading and writing only needs about 200
lux, general office work like reading and writing needs about 300 lux to 400 lux and
drawing offices need 300-400 lux.
 SS (2) Correlation of temperature and productivity at work.
33,4/5 Indoor temperature is one of the vital elements in an office building. It has various
effects on the building’s inhabitants, which include employees’ thermal comfort and
work performance; it can also be an indicator of SBS (Seppanen et al., 2006).
According to guidelines on Occupational Safety and Health in the office (OSH, 1996),
it must be possible to customize the temperature in office buildings. For instance,
298 employees who are sitting nearer to direct sunlight will feel warmer compared to
those who are sitting under the air-conditioning vent. However, advice from the
Department of Occupational Safety and Health in the Ministry of Human Resources,
Malaysia states that the temperature should be kept between 23 and 26°C
(DOSH, 2010).
Downloaded by UNIVERSITAET OSNABRUCK At 10:13 03 February 2016 (PT)

(3) Correlation of humidity and productivity at work.

Humidity means the amount of water vapour content in air. If the amount of water
vapour in the air is low, it will cause extreme dryness in the throat, nose and especially
the eyes. Referring to the Industry Code of Practice on Indoor Air Quality, for office
buildings, it can be seen that the optimum comfort range for relative humidity is
approximately from 40 to 70 per cent (DOSH, 2010).

4. Methodology
This research was carried out by using a quantitative method. According to Aliaga and
Gunderson (1999), a quantitative research approach explains phenomena by using
mathematical reasoning or numerical data that are further analysed. A quantitative
research method is useful in this research as it helps to carry out a large-scale needs
assessment. A questionnaire survey was conducted among higher-level management
employees working in the office workplace.
The office employees were selected from three office workplaces in the institutional
sector around the Klang Valley area. The selection is to ensure the nature of work for all
the respondents is similar. In addition, the respondents are selected from a particular level
of office where the organization’s main activities take place. Thus, the target group of this
research is comprised of employees working on similar tasks in the office. There are a total
of five public research universities in Malaysia. This study selected three out of these five
for the case study. The maintenance of public universities is managed and carried out by
the Department of Development and Estate Maintenance (DDEM). The respondents
were selected from DDEM University A, DDEM University B and DDEM University C.
The three selected offices have similar criteria, which include:
(1) function: used as office space where the occupants are government employees
who are involved in office functions;
(2) work type: writing and reading, computer tasks and occasional walking to
deliver documents between workstations; and
(3) floor area involved: approximately 200 square metres to 300 square metres.
Sekaran (2003) mentions that the optimum sample size for most research falls between
30 and 500 samples. There is no specific rule in determining the sample size and it all
depends on the confidence interval and level in the population group, amount of
variability, cost and time constraints and the existing population size itself. In this
study, the existing population size appeared to be small and, therefore, only a total of
90 respondents were drawn from the three cases.
 The questionnaire consisted of closed-ended questions and mostly comprised a Effect of
Likert-scale rating system with a few questions on a dichotomous scale rating system. physical
According to Sekaran (2003), closed-ended questions will be easier for both respondents
and researcher by helping the respondents to make quick decisions among the given
environment
alternatives and enabling the researcher to analyse the coded information easily. comfort
The questionnaire was divided into three main parts:
(1) Section A: socio-demographic information. 299
(2) Section B: perception of physical environment comfort in the workplace.
(3) Section C: impact of physical environment comfort on employees’ productivity.
Under Section A, five questions are asked, mainly consisting of the respondent’s
Downloaded by UNIVERSITAET OSNABRUCK At 10:13 03 February 2016 (PT)

gender, age, job title, years of work experience and also including the time spent in
the office. It is believed that asking personal information at the beginning of the
questionnaire will create a psychological commitment in the respondent to answer
the rest of the questionnaire (Sekaran, 2003).
Under Section B, the questions asked are mainly about the respondents’ perception
of the physical environment in the workplace throughout their working time. This is
then further divided into two parts consisting of the room temperature and lighting
level in the workplace. Most of the questions asked are on a Likert scale consisting of
five-point rating scales that scale the respondents’ satisfaction level regarding the
physical environment comfort.
Meanwhile, Section C is about the impact of the current level of comfort in the
physical environment, which affects the respondents’ productivity. The main purpose
of this section is to analyse how physical comfort affects a respondent’s work
productivity. Likert-scale questions are asked to discover the frequency of health issues
among the respondents. An open-ended question is asked at the end of the
questionnaire to get the respondent’s opinion regarding any improvement that could be
made to the questionnaire. All the findings from the questionnaires are analysed using
the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences.

5. Findings and discussion

In total, 30 employees at each of the three different case studies were chosen to answer
the questionnaire, making a total of 90 and all of them returned completed
questionnaires. Gillham mentions that a benchmark response rate of at least
30 per cent will show a reliable result. Thus, the overall response rate in this research is
considered to be acceptable.

5.1 Socio-demographic information

Most of the respondents from DDEM University A are aged between 31 and 40 years old,
which is 40 per cent of the University A respondents, as shown in Table I. The mean age
obtained is 2.07, which proves that most of the respondents are classified as 31-40 years
age group. The two ranges, under 30 years and 41-50 years, comprise 26.7 and 33 per cent
of respondents, respectively. In DDEM University B, none of the respondents are under the
age of 30. The ranges 31-40 years and 41-50 years each have four members (40.0 per cent).
Meanwhile, only 20 per cent of respondents are aged above 50 years. For DDEM University
C, the majority of respondents (41.7 per cent), fall under the range of above 50 years old.
This is followed by the age range of 31-40 years, with 33.3 per cent of respondents. Only
8.3 per cent fall under 30 years and 16.7 per cent between 41 and 50 years.
 SS University A University B University C
33,4/5 Category %, n ¼ 30 %, n ¼ 30 %, n ¼ 30

Age
Under 30 26.7 – 8.3
31-40 40.0 40.0 33.3
41-50 33.3 40.0 16.7
300 Above 50 – 20.0 41.7
Working position
Administrative staff 13.3 100.0 –
Managerial staff – – –
Technical staff 80.0 – 100.0
– –
Downloaded by UNIVERSITAET OSNABRUCK At 10:13 03 February 2016 (PT)

Others 6.7
Working experience (year)
o1 6.7 –
1-2 20.0 10.0 –
3-4 20.0 – 8.3
W4 53.3 90.0 91.7
Working hour
o1 – – –
1-2 – 10.0 –
3-4 – – 8.3
Table I. 5-6 13.3 – 33.3
Socio-demographic 7-8 73.3 – 58.3
data information W8 13.3 90.0 –

Table I also shows the respondents’ working position in the three respective
case studies. In DDEM University A, the majority of respondents, or 80 per cent,
work as technical staff, 13.3 per cent are administrative staff and 6.7 per cent
are classified as others. In DDEM University B, 100 per cent of the respondents are
administrative staff, while in DDEM University C, 100 per cent of the respondents
are technical staff.
As can be seen in Table I, most of the respondents in the three selected case studies
have worked for more than four years. In DDEM University A, 20.0 per cent of the
respondents have worked for one to two years and three to four years, respectively.
Only 6.7 per cent have work experience of less than a year. On the other hand, in DDEM
University B, only 10.0 per cent of the respondents have work experience of one to two
years while the majority of them (90.0 per cent) have work experience of more than
four years. The same goes for DDEM University C, whereby only 8.3 per cent have
work experience of three to four years while 91.7 per cent have more than four
years’ work experience.
It is noticeable that respondents from DDEM University B work longer hours
compared to University A and University C. Table I shows that 90.0 per cent of
respondents stated that they work for more than eight hours per day while, for
DDEM Universities A and C, the majority of them work for seven to eight hours.
In DDEM University A, 13.3 per cent of the respondents work for more than eight
hours and five to six hours. Meanwhile, in DDEM University C, 33.3 per cent work
for five to six hours and only 8.3 per cent work for three to four hours.
 5.2 Perception of physical environment comfort Effect of
The satisfaction of respondents in the three selected case studies is obtained for room physical
temperature, relative humidity, lighting level and visual comfort. The data analysis
obtained for room temperature is tabulated in Table II and for lighting level and visual
environment
comfort in Table III. comfort
5.2.1 Thermal comfort and relative humidity. The result obtained from the
respondents at DDEM University A shows that the room temperature comfort falls in 301
the comfortable zone. This is proven from the analysis obtained, where the mean score
is 3.67 with a mode of 4. In addition, Table II shows that the majority of the respondents
responded “comfortable” and “very comfortable” for thermal comfort. Since a result of
100 per cent was obtained for the ability to control the room temperature in DDEM
University A according to different departments, therefore the respondents will feel
Downloaded by UNIVERSITAET OSNABRUCK At 10:13 03 February 2016 (PT)

more comfortable regarding the room temperature. This statement is supported by

Kats (2003) in that, when employees have the ability to control the room temperature,
they will feel more comfortable and this will have a positive effect on their work.
Furthermore, the mean temperature measured in DDEM University A is 24°C, which
also complies with the DOSH (2010) optimum room temperature as well as meeting the
respondents’ ideal room temperature. As stated by DOSH (2010), most employees work
comfortably in an office at a temperature of between 23 and 26°C. The majority of
respondents stated 22-25°C as their optimum temperature, thus matching the current
room temperature in DDEM University A. For DDEM University B, the mean score
obtained is 3.00 with a mode of 3, proving that the respondents feel satisfied about the
thermal comfort in their office building. Although the temperature data measurement is
23.3°C, which also complies with the DOSH (2010) requirements and also meets the
respondents’ optimum temperature by having a mode of 3 and mean of 2.90, which
means 22-25°C. Different respondents may have a variety of perceptions. Corgnati et al.
(2009) state that every individual will have a different level of perception, and therefore
different comfort level. Hence, the respondents in DDEM University B have a higher
comfort level although all the regulatory requirements have been met.
The comfortable room temperature mean score for DDEM University C is 2.42
with a mode of 2, which means the respondents feel more uncomfortable in

DDEM, University A DDEM, University B DDEM, University C

(n ¼ 30) (n ¼ 30) (n ¼ 30)
Item Mean Mode SD Mean Mode SD Mean Mode SD Table II.
Data analysis of
Control 1.00 1 0.000 1.90 2 0.316 1.00 1 0.000 room temperature
Comfortable 3.67 4 1.234 3.00 3 0.816 2.42 2 0.996 for the three selected
Ideal 3.13 3 0.352 2.90 3 0.568 2.58 3 0.515 case studies

DDEM, University A DDEM, University B DDEM, University C

(n ¼ 30) (n ¼ 30) (n ¼ 30)
Item Mean Mode SD Mean Mode SD Mean Mode SD Table III.
Data analysis
Lighting level comfort 2.87 4 1.187 3.60 4 0.516 3.25 3 0.866 of lighting and
Visual comfort 2.93 3 0.961 3.40 3 0.516 3.25 3 0.866 visual comfort
 SS comparison with DDEM Universities A and B. Although the room temperature can be
33,4/5 controlled by the respondents, the temperature raw measurement obtained is still
25°C, which is considered to be quite high. From observation, there are alternatives
such as portable pedestal fans and desk fans used to cool the room temperature,
which supports the fact that the respondents feel very uncomfortable with the
existing thermal conditions.
302 Meanwhile, relative humidity is directly affected by surrounding room temperature.
A study by Valsson and Bharat (2011) proves that the ability of the air to retain
moisture depends on the surrounding temperature. In other words, relative humidity is
inversely proportional to surrounding temperature. By looking at the relative humidity
measured data obtained for all the three case studies, it can be seen that DDEM
University C scores the highest relative humidity. This has a close linkage with their
Downloaded by UNIVERSITAET OSNABRUCK At 10:13 03 February 2016 (PT)

thermal comfort, as they were uncomfortable with regard to this result. For DDEM
University A and DDEM University B, since their relative humidity does not exceed the
minimum requirement set by DOSH (2010) and the temperature is within the comfort
zone range, therefore the comfort levels among all the respondents will not be greatly
affected (Hensen, 1990).
5.2.2 Lighting level and visual comfort. As shown in Table III, the analysis for
comfortable lighting level at DDEM University A falls under neutral, having a mean score
of 2.87. This indicates that the majority responded with neutral. For every two rows of
luminaires, a different switch control is provided. Hence, respondents in DDEM University
A tend to have the ability to control the luminance at their work desks. Looking at the
lighting level obtained from measurements, it fluctuates from 150 to 280 lux at every
different allocated measured point, thus proving that every individual has a different
perception of the lighting yet is still able to control the lighting level for their optimum
satisfaction. For visual comfort, DDEM University A has scored a mean of 2.93 and mode
of 3, which indicates that respondents feel neutral and comfortable with regard to visual
comfort. This is supported by observing that the office has an open-plan layout, and all
the windows are always kept closed with movable vertical semi-opaque blinds to avoid
glare discomfort. According to Heschong et al. (2003), all light-coloured, semi-opaque
blinds will block 95 per cent of daylight, hence enabling employees to avoid discomfort
from glare while at the same time maintaining a filtered view.
Meanwhile, respondents in DDEM University B feel comfortable with regard to
their existing lighting level and feel neutral towards the visual comfort. The mean
scores obtained for lighting level and visual comfort are 3.60 and 3.40, respectively, as
shown in Table III. From the lighting measurements obtained, it is clear that
University B has a high-illuminance level with a lux reading of nearly 300 lux. This
exceeds the minimum requirement of having 200 lux for infrequent reading and
writing tasks, as stated by MS1525 (2007). However, referring to another requirement
from MS1525 (2007), lighting level for office work where frequent reading and writing
tasks are done, there is a requirement for approximately 300-400 lux. Therefore, it is
proven that the work tasks for employees in DDEM University B consist of more
frequent reading and writing. DDEM University B has tinted glass windows as well
as movable vertical blinds, therefore creating an environment of artificial lighting
with minimal daylight penetrating. As mentioned by Kort and Smolders (2010), an
office with artificial lighting creates a more constant and stable luminance while,
on the other hand, natural daylight varies throughout the day as it is affected by
weather and position of the sun. Hence, having both tinted glass windows and
 vertical blinds gives good coverage from excessive sunlight penetrating the building Effect of
and causing discomfort. physical
DDEM University C scored the same mean for lighting level and visual comfort of
3.25, respectively, which indicates that the respondents feel satisfied about these
environment
aspects. This is further enhanced by the reading measurement obtained, which shows comfort
that most of the points where the lighting level was measured have achieved the
MS1525 (2007) benchmark under infrequent and frequent reading and writing 303
tasks. It also can be seen that the majority of respondents either felt neutral or
comfortable regarding the lighting in the office. Furthermore, respondents in DDEM
University C shared close similarities with DDEM University B for visual comfort due
to both of the office buildings having the same window setting and characteristics.
It has been found that respondents tend to have less opportunity to experience any
Downloaded by UNIVERSITAET OSNABRUCK At 10:13 03 February 2016 (PT)

visual discomfort such as glare and reflection when facing a computer monitor
(Seppanen et al., 2006).
Chandrasekar (2011) mentions that physical environment comfort, which includes
sufficient lighting and optimum room temperature, is vital in having a positive
impact on employees’ performance. Figure 1 shows the overall environmental
comforts that are taken into consideration in the three selected case studies. The
figure shows that DDEM University A provides a more comfortable environment in
terms of room temperature but is lacking with regard to visual and lighting comfort.
In contrast, both DDEM University B and DDEM University C provide a more
comfortable environment in visual and lighting levels but are lacking in terms of
room temperature.

5.3 Impact of physical environment comfort on productivity

Based on the analysis of the overall environmental comfort, it can be seen that it has
different implications for employees’ health and, indirectly, affects their absenteeism
rate. Sullivan et al. (2013) state that the measure of absenteeism is very likely to
measure productivity, while Ronald et al. (2003) state that identifying health issues
encountered by employees helps to ascertain their absenteeism rates.
DDEM University C had the highest score for relative humidity and the least
preferable room temperature comfort, and many correlated health symptoms are
noticeable, in comparison with DDEM Universities A and B. Health symptoms such as
feeling “stuffy”, having tired or dry eyes, being easily tired, having dry skin and
difficulty in concentrating are more apparent at DDEM University C. This is
supported by the Spearman’s correlation coefficient in Table IV, which shows a highly

University A University B University C

5
4.5
4
3.5
3
Mean

2.5
2 Figure 1.
1.5
Overall
1
0.5
environmental
0
comfort in the three
Room temperature Lighting level comfort Visual comfort selected case studies
comfort
 Downloaded by UNIVERSITAET OSNABRUCK At 10:13 03 February 2016 (PT)

SS

304

analysis
33,4/5

Table IV.
Spearman rank
correlation coefficient
Spearman’s correlation coefficient (r)
DDEM University A DDEM University B DDEM University C
Room temperature Lighting Visual Room temperature Lighting Visual Room temperature Lighting Visual
Items comfort comfort comfort comfort comfort comfort comfort comfort comfort

Running nose −0.236 −0.400 −0.086 0.165 0.112 0.522 −0.420 −0.463 −0.463
Stuffy −0.215 −0.258 −0.111 0.317 0.039 0.463 −0.881** 0.002 0.002
Tired or dry eye 0.386 −0.569* −0.559* 0.000 0.074 0.148 −0.602* −0.040 −0.040
Glare 0.329 −0.611* −0.567* 0.048 0.000 0.380 −0.345 −0.437 −0.437
Blur vision 0.189 −0.784** −0.602* 0.120 0.000 0.493 −0.444 −0.320 −0.320
Easily tired 0.097 −0.785** −0.557* 0.337 −0.076 0.304 −0.815** −0.117 −0.117
Headache −0.180 −0.471 −0.318 0.195 0.193 0.424 −0.314 −0.099 −0.099
Dizzy 0.069 −0.441 −0.347 0.537 0.154 0.694* −0.403 −0.171 −0.171
Dry skin −0.304 −0.466 −0.194 0.366 −0.116 0.424 −0.756** −0.285 −0.285
Difficulty in
concentration 0.051 −0.566* −0.340 0.420 −0.221 0.295 −0.809** −0.364 −0.364
Tension or stress −0.100 −0.591 −0.292 −0.498 −0.175 0.262 −0.419 0.108 0.108
Number of days
absent 0.056 −0.802** −0.795** −0.747* −0.037 −0.332 −0.535* 0.186 0.186
Note: *,**Correlation are significant at 0.05 and 0.01 level (two-tailed), respectively
 correlated relationship for room temperature comfort and the listed health symptoms, Effect of
with the following coefficients of −0.881, −0.602, −0.815, −0.756, −0.809, respectively. physical
It is reasonable that high humidity will cause effects such as feeling stuffiness and
being easily fatigued most of the time (OSH, 1996).
environment
From the analysis made as shown Figure 1, it can be seen that DDEM University A comfort
tends to have issues relating to both lighting and visual comfort, whilst Figure 2
illustrates that issues of health such as tiring easily, blurred vision, glaring and tired 305
eyes seem to be more noticeable. This clearly indicates that the insufficient lighting
level and low-visual comfort have caused these health symptoms. This is supported
by the Spearman’s correlation coefficient, which shows that symptoms like tiring
easily and having blurred vision are significantly correlated with lighting comfort,
with coefficients of −0.785 and −0.784, respectively. Meanwhile, high correlation is
Downloaded by UNIVERSITAET OSNABRUCK At 10:13 03 February 2016 (PT)

obtained for both blurred vision and symptoms caused by glare, with coefficients of
−0.602 and −0.567, respectively, under visual comfort. Kort and Smolders (2010) state
that, under conditions of dim light, office employees tend to have higher prevalence of
symptoms such as being easily fatigued. Hence, the lighting-level measurement
obtained in DDEM University A is the lowest when compared with DDEM
Universities C and B as well as with MS1525 (2007). Thus, it proves that
DDEM University A has insufficient lighting levels, which leads to employees having
such related symptoms.
On the other hand, there is not much significant correlation obtained for DDEM
University B, as it is noticeable that most of the employees feel comfortable with the
surrounding room temperature, lighting and visual comfort. In addition, the existing
condition in DDEM University C is under the optimum level when benchmarking with
DOSH (2010) and MS1525 (2007).
The presence of frequent health symptoms has indirectly affected the absenteeism
rate among employees. It is understandable that poor workplace environmental
comfort creates health issues and causes employees to absent themselves from
work, and indirectly affects work productivity (Danielsson and Bodin, 2008). By
looking at the above analysis, it is clear that both DDEM Universities A and C have
more noticeable health symptoms in comparison with DDEM University B. It can be

Running nose
5.00
Tension or stress Stuffy
4.00

3.00
Difficulty in
concentration 2.00 Tired or dry eye

1.00

0.00
Dry skin Glare

Dizzy Blurr vision Figure 2.

Frequency of health
Headache Easily tired issues in the three
selected case studies
JPPHB UM DAAD UPM JPP UKM
 SS seen from Figure 2 that that DDEM University C obtained a frequency of more than
33,4/5 3.00 for issues like feeling “stuffy”, tension and being easily tired. Since DDEM
University A lacks good levels of lighting and visual comfort in addition to having
high levels of noticeably insufficient lighting and health symptoms related to
low-visual comfort, it is clear why the absenteeism rate, as shown in Figure 3, is 2.67
in comparison with the optimum condition in DDEM University B, which has an
306 absenteeism rate of only 2.50 over a period of six months. In addition, the analysis of
Spearman’s rank correlation shows significant correlations detected between lighting
and visual comfort with health symptoms, with correlations of −0.802 and −0.795,
respectively. Although DDEM University C has only a moderately significant
correlation of −0.535 between room temperature comfort and health symptoms, the
uncomfortable rate for room temperature is the highest, with the most noticeable
Downloaded by UNIVERSITAET OSNABRUCK At 10:13 03 February 2016 (PT)

related-health symptoms as well as with the highest absenteeism rate of 3.75 in

comparison with DDEM Universities A and B. This shows that the possibility exists
that external factors other than physical environment comfort are affecting their
absenteeism rates.

6. Conclusion
Generally, by looking into the analysis obtained, the perceptions of comfort in the
physical environment and the existing levels of comfort in the environment for DDEM
University A, DDEM University B and DDEM University C are considered as
averagely good.
However, both DDEM University A and DDEM University C have certain
minor issues relating to either room temperature or lighting and visual comfort.
For DDEM University A, although the perception of lighting and visual comfort is
neutral and comfortable, neither the existing illuminance level – from benchmarking
with the Malaysian Standard – nor the frequency of health-related symptoms reflect
the perceptions. Many health-related symptoms such as blurred vision, being
easily tired, problems caused by glare and having tired eyes are found at DDEM
University A. It is also found that the absenteeism rate is significantly higher
compared to University B.
In addition, another minor issue found is at DDEM University C, which resulted in
a significant level of discomfort with the existing room temperature. From
observation, many employees tend to plug in another external source of ventilation
such as a pedestal fan. Significant correlation with related health issues like feeling
“stuffy”, having dry eyes, difficulty in concentrating and number of days absent
is obtained.

JPPHB UM

DAAD UPM

Figure 3. JPP UKM

Average absenteeism
rate in the three 0 1 2 3 4 5
selected case studies
Absenteeism rate in 6 months (No of days)
 Therefore, the existing level of comfort in the physical environment can affect Effect of
people’s perception of their actual comfort. This will lead to related health issues physical
if physical environment comfort does not meet the minimum requirements and, at
the same time, cause an increase in the absenteeism rate and affect productivity and
environment
work performance. comfort

References
307
Aliaga, M. and Gunderson, B. (1999), Interactive Statistics, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Brinkerhoff, R.O. and Dressler, D.E. (1990), Productivity Measurement, SAGE Publication,
Thousand Oaks, CA.
Chandrasekar, K. (2011), “Workplace environment and its impact on organisational performance
Downloaded by UNIVERSITAET OSNABRUCK At 10:13 03 February 2016 (PT)

in public sector organisations”, International Journal of Enterprise Computing and Business

Systems, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 1-16.
Corgnati, S., Ansaldi, R. and Filippi, M. (2009), “Thermal comfort in Italian classrooms under free
running conditions during mid seasons: assessment through objective and subjective
approaches”, Building and Environment, Vol. 44 No. 4, pp. 785-792.
Danielsson, C.B. and Bodin, L. (2008), “Office type in relation to health, well-being, and job
satisfaction among employees”, Environment and Behavior, Vol. 40 No. 5, pp. 636-668.
DOSH (2010), Industry Code of Practice on Indoor Air Quality 2010, Department of Occupational,
Safety and Health, Ministry of Human Resources, Kuala Lumpur.
Fisk, W.J. (2000), “Health and productivity gains from better indoor environments and their
relationship with building energy efficiency”, Energy Environment, Vol. 25, pp. 537-566.
Harper, J. (1984), Measuring Business Performance, Institute of Manpower Studies, Aldershot.
Hensen, J.L.M. (1990), “Literature review on thermal comfort in transient conditions”, Building
and Environment, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 309-316.
Heschong, L., Saxena, M., Wright, R., Okura, S. and Aumann, D. (2003), “Offices, windows and
daylight: call center worker performance”, technical report for California Energy
Commission.
Ho, D.C.W., Leung, H.F., Wong, S.K., Cheung, A.K.C., Lau, S.S.Y., Wong, W.S. and Chau, K.W.
(2004), “Assessing the health and hygiene performance of apartment buildings”, Facilities,
Vol. 22 Nos 3/4, pp. 58-69.
Hughes, J. (2007), “Office design is pivotal to employee productivity”, San Diego Source The Daily
Transcript, 2 July, pp. 1-5.
Jaaskelainen, A. and Laihonen, H. (2013), “Overcoming the specific performance measurement
challenges of knowledge-intensive organizations”, International Journal of Productivity and
Performance Measurement, Vol. 64 No. 4, pp. 350-363.
Kamalrulzaman, N., Saleh, A.A., Hashim, S.Z., Hashim, H. and Ghani, A.A.A. (2011), “An overview
of the influence of physical office environments towards employees”, Procedia Engineering,
Vol. 20, pp. 262-268.
Kats, G. (2003), “The costs and financial benefits of green buildings”, research report, California’s
Sustainable Building Task Force, US Green Building Council, CA.
Kort, Y.D. and Smolders, K. (2010), “Effects of dynamic lighting on office workers: first results of
a field study with monthly alternating settings”, Lighting Res. Technol, Vol. 42 No. 3,
pp. 345-360.
Margaritis, S. and Mararas, N. (2006), “Supporting the design of office layout meeting ergonomics
requirements”, Applied Ergonomics, Vol. 38 No. 6, pp. 781-790.
 SS Mariesa, A.H. and Jonah, E.R. (2011), “Worker absence and productivity: evidence from teaching”,
Journal of Labor Economics, Vol. 29 No. 4, pp. 749-782.
33,4/5
MS1525 (2007), Code of Practice on Energy Efficiency and Use of Renewable Energy for
Non-Residential Buildings, (first revision), MS1525, Selangor.
OSH (1996), Guidelines on Occupational Safety and Health in the Office, Ministry of Human
Resources, Kuala Lumpur.
308 Riggs, J.L. and Felix, G.H. (1983), Productivity by Objectives, Prentice-Hall, Englewood, NJ.
Roelofsen, P. (2002), “The impact of office environments on employee performance: the design
of the workplace as a strategy for productivity enhancement”, Journal of Facilities
Management, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 247-264.
Ronald, C.K., Catherine, B., Arne, B., Patricia, B., Paul, D.C., David, M. and Philip, W. (2003),
“The world health organization health and work performance questionnaire (HPQ)”,
Downloaded by UNIVERSITAET OSNABRUCK At 10:13 03 February 2016 (PT)

American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Vol. 45 No. 2, pp. 156-174.
Salloum, M. (2010), “Towards dynamic performance measurement systems”, master thesis work,
Innovation and Product Realization, Acedemic for Innovation, Design and Technique,
School of Innovation, Design and Engineering, Malardalen University, Vasteras.
Sekaran, U. (2003), Research Methods for Business. A Skills Building Approach, 4th ed., Hermitage
Publishing Service, New York, NY.
Seppanen, O., Risk, W.J. and Lei, Q. (2006), “Effect of temperature on task performance in office
environment”, research report, Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory,
University of California, Berkeley, CA.
Sonnentag, S. (2002), Psychological Management of Individual Performance, John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Sullivan, J., Baird, G. and Donn, M. (2013), Measuring Productivity in the Office Workplace,
Centre for Bulding Performance Research, Victoria University of Wellington.
Tangen, S. (2004), “Performance measurement: from philosophy to practice”, International
Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 53 No. 8, pp. 726-737.
Valsson, S. and Bharat, A. (2011), “Impact of air temperature on relative humidity”,
Architecture – Time Space & People, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 38-41.

Corresponding author
Professor Azlan Shah Ali can be contacted at: asafab@um.edu.my

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com