Sv 
En 
Share with
Blog
By Dr. Aram Seddigh ·
Small improvements in noise absorption in open-plan offices can quickly reduce perceived distractions and cognitive stress, which makes acoustics a practical design and workplace decision.
That matters for organisations that still treat acoustics as a technical detail to be handled late in the project. Once noise, speech, and interruption problems are already visible in daily work, simple late adjustments are often not enough.
A crossover field study examined how better and worse noise absorption on two similar floors in the same open-plan office building affected employees’ ratings of disturbances, health, and performance. The result was clear: better acoustic conditions were associated with lower perceived disturbances and lower cognitive stress. At the same time, the study did not show clear effects on self-rated personal efficiency.
That makes the study useful in practice. It suggests that acoustics is not only about comfort. It directly shapes how easy it is to concentrate, make decisions, and work without unnecessary mental strain.
What did the study show about better and worse noise absorption?
The researchers compared three states: a better acoustic condition, a worse acoustic condition, and a baseline condition. The acoustic differences were measured according to ISO 3382-3 for open-plan offices, while employees completed repeated questionnaires after each change.
Under the better acoustic condition, employees reported lower levels of disturbance. They also reported lower cognitive stress, which in the study was linked to issues such as decision-making, concentration, and the feeling of mental overload.
What makes the finding especially relevant is that the effect appeared quickly. The researchers noted that the differences were visible despite short exposure times. That means acoustic improvements do not only matter over the long term. They can influence daily work experience almost immediately.
Why is this more useful than a general noise debate?
Because many office noise discussions stay too vague. People say the office is too loud, that speech is distracting, or that focus is difficult, but the issue is not translated into a concrete design and decision problem.
This study helps make that translation. It shows that even relatively small deteriorations in acoustic room properties can have noticeable negative effects on self-rated health and perceived disturbance. In other words, acoustics is not only about meeting a minimum technical requirement. It changes how the office actually works.
That matters for decision-makers. If acoustics is handled late and separately, the result can be a workplace that is technically complete but operationally distracting.
What seems to improve when the sound environment improves?
The clearest improvements in the study were lower disturbance and lower cognitive stress. That is important because those two factors are often at the core of complaints about open-plan offices, even in workplaces that otherwise look modern and well designed.
A better sound environment means fewer competing sounds demanding attention. It becomes easier to hold focus, process information, remember details, and work without spending unnecessary mental energy filtering out speech and background noise.
The study did not show a clear improvement in self-rated personal efficiency. That is an important nuance. Better acoustics does not automatically make people feel more productive in every sense, but it can reduce the conditions that undermine concentration and well-being.
Why should acoustics enter office decisions earlier?
Acoustics often arrives too late because it is treated as a fine-tuning issue after layout, density, furniture, and zoning decisions are already fixed. At that point, the room for manoeuvre is smaller and the cost of change is higher.
If noise absorption, speech propagation, and disturbance risk are considered earlier, organisations can make better decisions about where focus work should happen, how collaboration areas should be placed, and what mix of open areas, screening, and support spaces is actually needed.
This is also where workplace analysis becomes important. An organisation does not only need to know that noise is a problem. It needs to understand where distractions arise, which work tasks are most affected, and which changes are most likely to matter.
What mistakes do organisations make on acoustics?
The first mistake is assuming that acoustics can be solved entirely by one product or one late-stage technical intervention. If the overall layout still drives speech exposure, interruptions, and constant movement, the benefit will be limited.
The second mistake is relying on broad satisfaction data alone. A survey showing that the sound environment feels poor is rarely enough as a decision base. Organisations often need a more precise view of how distractions, work patterns, and physical design interact.
The third mistake is treating acoustics separately from the work itself. Different roles have different sensitivity to speech, interruption, and cognitive load. A sound environment that feels acceptable for one group may be much weaker for another.
What questions should you ask before locking acoustic solutions?
Before moving ahead, you should at least be able to answer the following:
- Where do the most disruptive sound events occur in the current office?
- Which tasks are most sensitive to speech, interruption, and cognitive load?
- Is the problem mainly noise absorption, layout, density, or activity placement?
- Which smaller acoustic improvements could create a quick effect before a larger redesign is approved?
- How will the sound environment be measured and followed up so decisions are not based only on instinct?
Those questions shift the conversation from general frustration to practical decision support.
Next step
From noise complaints to a stronger workplace decision
If you need a clearer basis for understanding how acoustics, work patterns, and office design fit together, workplace strategy consulting services are the most direct next step. That is where the acoustics issue can be translated into practical decisions about focus, collaboration, and workplace performance.
If you also want to strengthen the method behind that analysis, continue with workplace analysis and workplace insight tools, what a workplace analysis should capture, and about WeOffice.
Source
Source article: Davidsson F, Seddigh A, “Effect of variation in noise absorption in open-plan office: a field study with a cross-over design”, EuroNoise 2015.
FAQ
Does the study show that better acoustics solves every open-plan office problem?
No. The study shows that better acoustic conditions can quickly reduce perceived distractions and cognitive stress, but it does not show that every workplace problem disappears or that personal efficiency automatically increases.
What does it mean that the effect appeared quickly?
It means employees reported differences despite short exposure times after the changes. That suggests acoustic adjustments can affect daily work experience faster than many teams expect.
Is noise absorption the same thing as a good sound environment?
No. Noise absorption is important, but the quality of the sound environment also depends on layout, density, activity placement, speech propagation, and the kinds of work the office is meant to support.
Why is cognitive stress relevant in workplace decisions?
Because it affects how easy or difficult it is to concentrate, make decisions, and work without mental overload. That has clear implications for how sustainable the workplace feels over time.
When does WeOffice become relevant in this kind of issue?
WeOffice becomes relevant when an organisation needs to translate noise complaints and acoustic findings into concrete decisions about workplace analysis, layout, zoning, and support for different work patterns.
