One World Trade Center: Federal Government Agency Interior Build Out by GKV Architects

Work and Values in the Design of the Modern Office

When designing the office spaces for a Federal Government Agency at One World Trade Center, GKV collaborated with the agency to provide an office that embodied the values and vision of the organization. Several design features exemplify these values: private offices and conference rooms are placed near the core of the tower, allowing open desks to occupy the perimeter of the floor. This layout was in part steered by economics – an open plan at the perimeter allowed the FGA to allocate a large number of desks while spending little on partitions and lighting. But values beyond cost animate the layout. By allowing the greatest number of employees to enjoy the best views from the World Trade Center, the FGA used spatial planning to express the democratic ideal of equality for all its workers. Providing privileged locations for open workstations, the FGA also seeks to create a collaborative environment for its employees by integrating pantries and break spaces in the open areas of the floor, providing a continuum of work settings that range from private focused work to discussions over lunch. In the course of planning and design sessions with the FGA, the agency stressed that the office facilitate the success of each employee in all job functions, underpinning the ideals of democracy, equal opportunity for all, and transparency.

The architectural expression of these values speaks to a core impulse that has animated the development of the office and prompts the broader question how the ideals that inspire work – from the individual drive to work hard to a broader, corporate mission – are embodied in the modern office. To answer this question, this blog looks to a key thinker in the ethics of capitalism and identifies an unexpected architectural prototype that embodied these moral values.

In his 1905 book, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, the German sociologist Max Weber explored the ethical underpinnings of modern capitalism. The book began with an observation of business management in the late nineteenth century: in Germany there was a high representation of Protestants in positions of business and industry leadership relative to Catholics. The phenomenon led him to consider the theological tenets of the Protestant denominations in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries and their implications on business ethics. When describing the deeply rooted discipline of the Puritans and Calvinists, Weber observed that the goal of self discipline was to “to be able to lead an alert, intelligent life”, eliminating what he called “spontaneous, impulsive enjoyment”, and establishing the regulated conduct of the individual. For Weber, advancement and progress in business were not indicative of a Protestant enjoyment of the material fruits of one’s labor, but the product of discipline, intensive engagement in worldly activity, and a sign of the individual’s state of Grace. Weber then noted that this rigorous self-control was emphasized in the rules of Christian monasticism like the Regula of St. Benedict. For Weber, Calvinistic discipline was the application of asceticism in the world beyond the monastic enclosure.₁

Commonly seen as a practice of spiritual retreat, I will approach monasticism as a strategy for structuring meaningful activity, casting the monastery as a distant precursor to the modern office. The movement began in the world of late Imperial Rome (c. 300-700 AD) as a quest to achieve moral rectitude and eternal union with God. From Anthony abandoning the comforts of life of a prosperous landowner in third-century Egypt (251-356 AD) to Jerome’s retreat to the Syrian desert in the fourth century, the monastic movement was founded by members of the aristocracy who were disenchanted with the moral corruption of late-antique society. In uncompromising seclusion, the monks pushed themselves to the limits of physical deprivation in a constant struggle to liberate themselves from the vices of the material world and to ultimately achieve eternal union with God.₂ In the sixth century Benedict of Nursia wrote a guide, outlining precepts and virtues for emulation, for those seeking to live a life of communal monastic retreat, the Regula Sancti Benedicti (Rule of Saint Benedict).₃

Several chapters of the rule describe the spatial layout of the monastery. Conceived in its entirety, Benedict saw the monastic complex as an enclosed, independent, and self-sufficient community that could provide for all the daily needs of the monks and facilitate the quest for spiritual union. Benedict described this spiritual quest as a form of work – he characterized the attitudes of the monk as “tools of the spiritual craft” and the monastic complex was “the workshop in which we shall diligently execute all these tasks”.₄ In modern terms, Benedict gave the culture of spiritual retreat the spatial form of a workshop. His rule articulated an architectural setting for the culture of monasticism.

The components of the complex facilitated the performance of the daily tasks of the monk. Benedict outlined a tight correspondence between space and task: he included provisions for a sleeping room, an infirmary for sick brothers, a kitchen, and guest quarters. He described the prayer hall in comparably functional terms: it was a place to pray, nothing more: “Let the Oratory be what its name implies, and let nothing else be done or kept there”. The close relation of space and task generated an efficiently provisioned complex: the absence of superfluity mirrored the ascetic regime of the community.₅

The components of the complex facilitated the performance of the daily tasks of the monk. Benedict outlined a tight correspondence between space and task: he included provisions for a sleeping room, an infirmary for sick brothers, a kitchen, and guest quarters. He described the prayer hall in comparably functional terms: it was a place to pray, nothing more: “Let the Oratory be what its name implies, and let nothing else be done or kept there”. The close relation of space and task generated an efficiently provisioned complex: the absence of superfluity mirrored the ascetic regime of the community.

The correspondence of space and task, not unlike the relationship of open workstations and the pantry table at the GSA, set out a model of productivity. For Benedict, the monastery was the architectural setting of a cultural phenomenon; and by joining space and task, he sought to ensure that the monastery facilitated the productivity of both the individual monk and the community as a whole.

Architectural plans of monasteries, consequently, display a grid-like rigor with the functional spaces of the complex, including oratories, sleeping quarters for the monks, and the refectory, arranged around a central rectangular cloister. The medieval St. Gallen Plan (early 9th century), and the plan of the Monastery of San Marco in Florence (founded in the 12th century, rebuilt in the 15th century) exhibit this arrangement.

Christian monasticism assumed a variety of forms after Benedict with numerous orders espousing a model of monasticism based upon his Rule. The architectural layouts and furnishings of their complexes further explored ways to enhance the productivity of the monk and the community. In the eleventh and twelfth centuries, the monasteries of certain orders, especially the Cistercians and Carthusians, began to feature fully autonomous quarters for the individual monk. In the spirit of the Regula, the furnishings of the apartment provided for an efficient performance of the daily tasks of the monk. In Carthusian monasteries, an alcove like unit accommodated a bed and a prayer stall. A carpenter’s table, desk, and folding table sat at the opposite side of the room, which was known by the Roman name of cubiculum. The furniture of this room accommodated all the activities of monastic life – sleep, prayer, writing, manual labor, and eating. The furnishing of the monastic cell efficiency facilitated the rigorously regimented purposeful activity that characterized the ascetic lifestyle. If the monastery was the precursor to the modern office, then the efficient alcove unit anticipated the open-office work station.

Chartreuse de Neuville, Monk’s Cell, photograph by Pir6mon, Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0

In theory, the life of the monk was both a rigorous daily sequence of activities – prayer, manual labor, and study – in the service of a broader theological ideal. It responded to comparable challenges faced by the modern office – fostering daily productivity while keeping an eye on a broader corporate mission. In the following blog entry we will assess how legacy of monasticism resonates in modern management theorists as both a model of emulation and the antitype of the thriving office.

By: Nick Napoli, AIA Associate, GKV Architects

Part 2 of Designing the Modern Office from Cubiculum to Cubicle will be published soon.

¹ https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/weber/

² For more on the monastics of early Christianity, see Peter Brown, The Body and Society (New York: Columbia, 1988). https://cup.columbia.edu/book/the-body-and-society/9780231144070

³ https://www.osb.org/our-roots/the-rule/

⁴ https://www.osb.org/our-roots/the-rule/

⁵ https://www.osb.org/our-roots/the-rule/

⁶ Plan published by Hans Teubnner, “San Marco in Florenz. Umbauten vor 1500; ein Beitrag zu Werk des Michelozzo” Mitteilungen des Kunsthistorischen Institutes in Florenz 23/3 (1979) 239-272. https://journals.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/index.php/mkhi/article/view/53806/47317, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=126925618

⁷ https://www.google.com/books/edition/La_Certosa_di_S_Stefano_del_Bosco_a_Serr/BDRJAQAAIAAJ?hl=en

Modern Office Design from Cubiculum to Cubicle, Part 1

Work and Values in the Design of the Modern Office