Purpose: This paper aims to explore the relationship between satisfaction with buildings, facilities and services and perceived productivity support and to test whether the findings from a similar study of Batenburg and Van der Voordt (2008) are confirmed in a repeat study after 10 years with more recent data. Design/methodology/approach: Data were traced from a database with data on user satisfaction and perceived productivity support. These data were collected through the work environment diagnostic tool WODI light. The data include responses from 25,947 respondents and 191 organisations that have been analysed by stepwise multiple-regression analyses. Findings: In total 38% of the variation of office employees’ satisfaction with support of productivity can be explained by employee satisfaction with facilities, the organisation, current work processes and personal- and job-related characteristics. The most important predictor of self-assessed support of productivity is employee satisfaction with facilities. In particular, psychological aspects, i.e. opportunities to concentrate and to communicate, privacy, level of openness, and functionality, comfort and diversity of the workplaces are very important. The findings confirm that employee satisfaction with facilities correlates significantly with perceived productivity support. Other factors that are not included in the data set, such as intrinsic motivation, labour circumstances and human resource management may have an impact as well. Originality/value: This research provides a clear insight in the relation between employee satisfaction with facilities and the perceived support of productivity, based on survey data collected over almost 10 years in 191 organisations.@en

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to analyse how the concept of 'healthy offices' features in Facility Management (FM) research and practice, and to what extent facility management journals contain academic (research) papers that show that FM can indeed make the office a healthier place to work. Design/methodology/approach: This paper is based on a systematic literature review among Facilities, Journal of Facilities Management, and Journal of Corporate Real estate over the period 2007-2017. Findings are compared to the WELL-Building Standards and recent reports published by practitioners. The papers and reports are first scanned for relevance; relevant papers are analysed by three independent researchers, using content analysis. Findings are compared and synthesis is made. Findings: Based on the literature study, we conclude that current literature primarily supports the absence of unhealthy aspects, like for example air quality and indoor environmental quality. Sustainability and plants are part of this topic. Furthermore, we ascertain that FM suppliers focus on office design that supports employees' health, and on influencing people’s behaviour, whereas academic papers hardly pay attention to these topics. The results of the analysis show a need for academic research on 'healthy offices'. Practical implications: The research focuses on those elements of healthy offices that may be influenced by facility management. Originality/value: Although the topic ‘healthy office’ is currently a trend, research on the topic is largely focussed on indoor air quality and indoor environmental quality, with a focus on the effects on productivity, not so much on health of employees. @en