Skip to main content



Incubate | Workplace

application

Workplace design depends on Incubate as a transitory, shared space for collaborative work sessions or meetings. In corporate offices, Incubate has little or no aesthetic connection to the larger environment it inhabits. 

research

In the workplace Incubate fulfills the need to provide "some small, closed door private rooms not assigned to any individual, but available to anyone as needed" for productivity and teamwork.1  The space is typically fully or primarily enclosed and may be constructed from a variety of materials, often taking on a range of shapes and sizes. Depending on the desired amount of enclosure, both visually and acoustically, materials range from a textile stretched on a wire frame, an all glass box, or common sheetrock walls. The shape of the volume itself may be orthogonal or round and may appear freestanding or fixed to the floor plane, depending on the desired sense of permanence.

Effect
In a large open planned office, Incubate is a necessary intervention in order to provide "special spaces for conferences and meetings".2 Rather than meeting at desks or cubicles where privacy is minimal, Incubate provides a dedicated space for work and collaboration where people converge. Incubate is flexible and can be tailored to a particular office's needs. These spaces are located in areas where a large number of people may access them and share the spaces as needed.3 Since Incubate has little aesthetic connection to the larger space it inhabits, its visual prominence within an environment draws attention to it, increasing people's awareness of its presence and, ultimately, promotes more frequent usage.4  

Incubate finds it origins in the office landscapes of the 1950s and 1960s in which the solution to conference room needs were met by piecing together curved acoustical panels to create enclosures for semi-private spaces.5 These acoustical panels proved to be insufficient as they did not provide enough privacy to users. The inherent flexibility of the roll-away panels' design was criticized as impractical and underutilized.

As it is implemented today, Incubate provides open plan offices with the enclosed teamwork spaces they demand, while leaving the level of privacy under the control of the designer and client. Often, Incubate may be found in several locations within a single workplace, each varying in size and degree of enclosure, to best suit the variety of meeting needs. For spaces which require privacy for noisy or sensitive subject meetings, a more substantial design, typically of drywall with a user-controlled door, is ideal. In these instances, Incubate may be affixed to the floor or ceiling plane, but as it is not adjacent to any other rooms within the office, appears to be freestanding and independent. For a more casual solution, fabric "pods", glass panels or curtains are commonly utilized materials and levels of enclosure may vary as well.

Chronological Sequence
The first attempts at creating an independent enclosed space was with the development of office landscapes in which acoustical panels played a large role in the creation of semi-private spaces within the open landscape of the office. The panels would be rolled into position with their curved design enabling circular enclosures to be easily formed. In 1963 SOM designed an open office plan for the Weyerhaeuser Company and used the panels.6 A photograph taken from a ladder illustrated a visual cacophony of workstations with the intrusion of the circular cells. The panels failed to provide adequate acoustical privacy, and the uniform appearance of the panels did not effectively differentiate one space from another. The panels also created difficulties in wayfinding. They were not well liked by employees for shared meeting spaces, resulting in their underuse.

Early examples of the evolution of Incubate may be found in the 1970 decade, when acoustical panels were abandoned in favor of more permanent solutions. In the ASID (American Society of Interior Designers) office renovation of 1975.7 Incubate dominated a large portion of the small space. Placed in the center of the space, it became a focal point. In plan, it appears to overwhelm the space, but a photograph illustrates that two planes consisted of full-height glass walls. The other two sides consisted of wood paneled walls. The enclosed space was brightly lit from recessed lights in the ceiling, making it glow in relation to the remaining space. Its effect was similar to the archetypical practice Scene Seen, a condition of a glass box in which the artificially lit interior becomes a scene for outsiders to view. Acoustical privacy was probably not ideal; although the space consisted of four full-height walls and a door, all the surfaces were hard. Nevertheless, SOM's design for the ASID office certainly would have garnered attention, perhaps welcoming personnel to engage in the activities occurring within.

In the 1980 decade, developments in technology and more advanced methods of construction allowed for cheaper means of producing curved panels of glass to be used as interior walls. Echoing the circular spaces formed by the acoustical panels of the 1950s and 1960s, Incubate in this time period took on a circular footprint, creating a space that could be viewed from any angle. Placed strategically in an area where circulation paths met, these glass-enclosed examples of Incubate attracted attention to the interior of the space. An exemplar is the 1982 Bank of America offices by Robinson Mills & Williams office in San Francisco.8 Incubate was strategically located to be visible from the lobby area, as well as the employee workstations, perhaps emphasizing the importance of collaboration within the workplace.

While the circular footprint of Incubate was common in the 1980 decade, levels of transparency varied from case to case. In the example of Solomon Equities (1986), designed by Henry Smith-Miller, Incubate provided a private workspace where employees could to work alone or in a small group.9 Its circular shape also comprised a focal point, attracting the attention of passers-by and alerting them to the presence of an alternative work area. Its painted-white gypsum construction provided visual and acoustical privacy.

Examples of Incubate in the 1990 decade reflected "efforts in enhancing dynamic architectural forms in minimalist interiors"10  through the integration of architectural space with color lighting effects. In the offices of the marketing and sales research company A.C. Nielsen (1991), Incubate was a glass box that was flooded from the inside with color light, a new means of calling attention to its significance in the context of the office's White Box interior.11 This transformation of an interior by manipulating and varying colored light over time on a single plane or incorporated throughout the entire spatial envelope is named Chameleon, an archetypical practice in transformative interiors.12 When Incubate in the A.C. Nielsen office was uninhabited, it became an object of light art effects.13

In the late 1990s, organizational psychologist Jonathan Ryburg documented a broad movement in "restructuring American businesses toward a high-context work culture of frequent meetings, greater socialization, and lowered hierarchies."14 Business owners wanted environments that provided adequate conference spaces that would not be perceived as intimidating or formal, but rather projected a casual work culture of collaboration and creative thinking. The offices of Smith New Court (1994) featured an example of Incubate as both a functional meeting room, as well as a sculptural object in space.15 Architect Alan Gaynor introduced saturated and contrasting colors in Smith New Court's Incubate in order to break away from the sterility of uniformly painted white walls. He also introduced curved planes back in the office to contrast the sharp right angles.

The 2000 decade witnessed the greatest increase in the use of Incubate in workplace environments. Popular across offices of all disciplines, Incubate enabled designers to create unique and truly "designed" moments within a larger space. While most office settings could not avoid the use of standardized workstations and finishes to optimize economy and efficiency, the integration of Incubate provided an opportunity for intervention in terms of colors, materials, and lighting effects. Large, tubular structures were popular, such as Inside.com's office (2001) designed by Specht Harpman.16 The designers created a blue room sphere constructed of drywall paneling. A sliding door allowed for privacy, and a single globe illuminated the structure from within. Like the vast majority of examples of Incubate, the structure seemed permanent, but its removal could be accomplished quickly, with minimal indication of its prior existence left within the space.

Incubate could be integrated into the architecture of a space at various levels of immovability. While many extended from floor to ceiling, physically anchored to the space, there are some instances of Incubate that were placed on a plinth or platform.  The Valentine Group (2001) in New York City moved its headquarters to a 6,000 square foot former factory building. The client envisioned a space that would retain the "raw and industrial"17 integrity of the factory while creating flexible areas that would meet the small company's needs. With the entire office laid out in distinct "zones" of activity, Incubate became a space within a space, an intervention for the adaptive use project that defined the area dedicated to conferences and meetings. Elevated slightly from the ground, Incubate allowed the original architecture of the building to retain its integrity while meeting the functional needs of the company.  

Similarly, in the offices of Grip Limited in Toronto, architect Johnson Chou elevated Incubate from the floor, incorporating a Light Seam in the gap the elevation created. The impression is that the Incubate unit hovered above the floor like a space ship. In this case, Incubate constituted a singular semi-transparent White Box with bright lighting, furnished with a round conference table and white Panton Chairs (1960). Two of Incubate's sides were glass, the internal one, and an external one.

The use of soft materials as cladding for Incubate became increasingly more popular in the 2000 to 2010 period.  As demonstrated in the offices of Grip Limited (2006) and Team Detroit (2008), textile provided a lightweight space perceptually and physically.18 Stretch (an Intype) is a tensile structure made from stretched fabric, spandex or lycra, with reinforced edges and fastened with hooks, cables, and anchors provided a malleable construction method, particularly for organic forms. Moreover, Stretch in lycra, provides, depending on lighting conditions, either a transparent and translucent wall. In effect, Incubate became a Soft Room, another Intype, a space enclosed on two or more of its sides with soft hanging materials, typically draped textile, instead of solid walls.19

end notes

  1. 1) John Pile, Open Office Planning (New York: Watson-Guptill Publications, 1978), 135.
  2. 2) Pile, Open Office Planning, 135.
  3. 3) Pile, Open Office Planning, 29.
  4. 4) Inside.com [2001] Specht Harpman; New York City in Henry Urbach, "Outside.in," Interior Design 72, no. 3 (May 2001): 133; PhotoCrd: Michael Moran.
  5. 5) Pile, Open Office Planning, 173.
  6. 6) Weyerhaeuser Company Office [1963] SOM, Tacoma, WA in Pile, Open Office Planning, 135; PhotoCrd: Anonymous.
  7. 7) ASID Office [1975] Mary Jean Kamin and Michael Gohmin, Chicago, IL in Anonymous, , "Large Demands, Small Space," Interior Design 46, no. 12 (Nov. 1975): 109; PhotoCrd: Hedrich-Blessing.
  8. 8) Bank of America Headquarters [1982] Robinson Mills & Williams, San Francisco, CA in R.P., "Permanent Flexibility," Interior Design 53, no. 3 (Mar. 1982):185; PhotoCrd: Charles White.
  9. 9) Solomon Equities [1986] Henry Smith-Miller, New York, NY in Jerry Cooper, "Solomon Equities," Interior Design 57, no. 5 (May 1986): 232; PhotoCrd: Hedrich-Blessing.
  10. 10) Joanne Pui Yuk Kwan, "Theory Studies: Archetypical Artificial Lighting Practices in Contemporary Interior Design" (MA Thesis, Cornell University, 2010), 161.
  11. 11) A.C. Nielsen Office [1991] GHK, Banonockburn, IL in Andrea Loukin, "A.C. Nielsen," Interior Design 62, no. 11 (Aug. 1991): 107; PhotoCrd: Marco Lorenzetti/Hedrich-Blessing.
  12. 12) Erin Lee, "Theory Studies: Contemporary Archetypical Practices of Transformative Interior Design," (M.A. Thesis, Cornell University, 2011), n.p. 
  13. 13) Gregor Janson and Peter Weibel, eds. Light Art from Artificial Light: Light as a Medium in 20th and 21 Century Art (Ostfildern, Deutschland, Hatje Cantz, 2006), 26.
  14. 14) James S. Russell, excerpt from Form Follows Fad in On the Job: Design and the American Office, ed. Donald Albrecht (New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 2000), 66.
  15. 15) Smith New Court [1994] Alan Gaynor, New York City in Monica Geran, "Alan Gaynor," Interior Design 65, no. 7 (Jul. 1994): 136; PhotoCrd: Paul Warchol.
  16. 16) Inside.com Office [2001] Specht Harpman; New York, NY in Henry Urbach, "Outside.In," Interior Design 72, no. 3 (May 2001): 133; PhotoCrd: Michael Moran.
  17. 17) Valentine Group [2001] MR Architecture + Decor; New York, NY in Julia Lewis, "Art & Industry," Interior Design 72, no. 3 (May 2001): 148; PhotoCrd: Martyn Thompson.
  18. 18) Grip Limited [2006] Johnson Chou; Toronto, Canada in Tim Mckeough, "Inspiration on Tap," Interior Design 77, no. 12 (Dec. 2006): 252; PhotoCrd: Tom Arban;Team Detroit [2008] Gensler; Detroit, Michigan in C.C. Sullivan, "Big Bang Theory," Interior Design 79, no. 7 (May 2008): 308; PhotoCrd: Christopher Barrett/Hedrich-Blessing.
  19. 19) Evidence for the archetypical use and the chronological sequence of Incubate in workplace design was developed from the following primary sources: 1960 Weyerhaeuser Company Office [1963] SOM, Tacoma, WA in John Pile, Open Office Planning, (New York: Watson-Guptill Publications, 1978):135; PhotoCrd: Anonymous /  1970 ASID Office [1975] Mary Jean Kamin and Michael Gohmin, Chicago, IL in Anonymous, , "Large Demands, Small Space," Interior Design 46, no. 12 (Nov. 1975):109; PhotoCrd: Hedrich-Blessing / 1980 Bank of America Headquarters [1982] Robinson Mills & Williams, San Francisco, CA in R.P., "Permanent Flexibility," Interior Design 53, no. 3 (Mar. 1982):185; PhotoCrd: Charles White; Solomon Equities [1986] Henry Smith-Miller, New York, NY in Jerry Cooper, "Solomon Equities," Interior Design 57, no. 5 (May 1986): 232; PhotoCrd: Hedrich-Blessing / 1990 A.C. Nielsen Office [1991] GHK, Banonockburn, IL in Andrea Loukin, "A.C. Nielsen," Interior Design 62, no. 11 (Aug. 1991): 107; PhotoCrd: Marco Lorenzetti/Hedrich-Blessing; Smith New Court [1994] Alan Gaynor, New York City in Monica Geran, "Alan Gaynor," Interior Design 65, no. 7 (Jul. 1994): 136; PhotoCrd: Paul Warchol / 2000 Inside.com Office [2001] Specht Harpman; New York, NY in Henry Urbach, "Outside.In," Interior Design 72, no. 3 (May 2001): 133; PhotoCrd: Michael Moran; Valentine Group [2001] MR Architecture + Decor; New York, NY in Julia Lewis, "Art & Industry," Interior Design 72, no. 3 (May 2001): 148; PhotoCrd: Martyn Thompson; Grip Limited [2006] Johnson Chou; Toronto, Canada in Tim Mckeough, "Inspiration on Tap," Interior Design 77, no. 12 (Dec. 2006): 252; PhotoCrd: Tom Arban;Team Detroit [2008] Gensler; Detroit, Michigan in C.C. Sullivan, "Big Bang Theory," Interior Design 79, no. 7 (May 2008): 308; PhotoCrd: Christopher Barrett/Hedrich-Blessing.

bibliographic citations

1) The Interior Archetypes Research and Teaching Project, Cornell University, www.intypes.cornell.edu (accessed month & date, year).

2) Yin, Shuqing. "Theory Studies: Archetypical Workplace Practices in Contemporary Interior Design." M.A. Thesis, Cornell University, 2011, 160-75.