00:Sharing; @Whittaker94:Informal]. This idea was recently further confirmed by Pentland *et al.*, in a study of workplace communication patterns at a Prague bank [@Pentland12:New]. They discovered a key characteristic of successful teams: members periodically interact with others outside of their team, and bring back new information. They dubbed this critical dimension of communication ‘exploration’, the tendency for a team to seek inter-group connections, and found that teams with high exploration tended to be more successful, demonstrating the power of serendipitous interactions in the office.

One factor that could clearly affect the ease of such interactions is the physical spaces of the workplace itself; for example, high-traffic areas such as coffee machines and photocopiers may be particularly likely places for inter-group meetings [@fayard2007photocopiers; @Isaacs96:Piazza]. In general, if spaces encourage the mixing and meeting of a diverse range of people, serendipitous meetings between individuals from different teams or social groups will occur more readily, which could be crucial; face-to-face communication has been shown to be more important than electronic means such as email or SMS [@Pentland12:New; @Stryker12:Facilitating].

Indeed, designing the layout of workspaces in accordance with office social dynamics resulting from the background of employees can help them work more effectively, as was shown by a recent study of offices across 11 different countries [@Steelcase13:Culture]. While this approach takes into account the national culture of the country where an office is situated, it does not consider what happens in very culturally diverse environments that accommodate workers from many different backgrounds.

The effects of cultural variations between countries on organisations have been studied by Geert Hofstede, by means of administering opinion surveys to IBM employees in over 70 countries. He derived five main factors, or cultural dimensions, that can account for most of the variance he observed [@Hofstede10:Cultures], and found that workers’ cultural backgrounds can shape the way they think, feel, and act. Besides the workplace environment itself, cultural differences between its occupants could affect office social dynamics and, therefore, the propensity of workers to engage in beneficial serendipitous inter-group interactions.

Since interactions between people with different areas of expertise or social circles are so beneficial for the exchange of information and ideas, it is important to understand
00: Sharing; @Whittaker94: Informal ]. This idea was recently further confirmed by Pentland * et al. *, in a discipline of workplace communication design at a Prague bank   [ @Pentland12: New ]. They discovered a key feature of successful teams: members periodically interact with others outside of their team, and institute back new information. They dub this critical dimension of communication ‘ exploration ’, the tendency for a team to try inter - group connections, and found that team with eminent exploration tended to be more successful, demonstrating the power of serendipitous interactions in the office. 

 One component that could clearly affect the ease of such interaction is the physical spaces of the workplace itself; for example, high - dealings areas such as chocolate machines and photocopiers may be particularly probable places for inter - group meetings   [ @fayard2007photocopiers; @Isaacs96: Piazza ]. In general, if spaces encourage the mix and merging of a diverse range of people, serendipitous meetings between individuals from different teams or social groups will occur more promptly, which could be all-important; face - to - face communication has been shown to be more authoritative than electronic means such as email or SMS   [ @Pentland12: New; @Stryker12: Facilitating ]. 

 Indeed, designing the layout of workspace in accordance with position social dynamics resulting from the setting of employees can help them work more effectively, as was shown by a recent discipline of offices across 11 different countries   [ @Steelcase13: Culture ]. While this approach takes into report the national culture of the country where an office is situated, it does not view what happens in very culturally diverse environments that accommodate workers from many different backgrounds. 

 The effects of cultural version between countries on organisations have been studied by Geert Hofstede, by means of administering public opinion surveys to IBM employee in over 70 countries. He derived five chief factors, or cultural dimensions, that can report for most of the variance he observed   [ @Hofstede10: Cultures ], and found that workers ’ cultural backgrounds can shape the way they think, feel, and act. Besides the workplace environment itself, cultural differences between its resident could affect office social moral force and, therefore, the propensity of workers to betroth in beneficial serendipitous inter - group interactions. 

 Since interactions between people with unlike areas of expertise or social circles are so beneficial for the exchange of information and ideas, it is important to sympathize
00:Shaging; @Whittaker94:Informal]. Tmis idea was recgnrly fucther cknfirmed by Pentland *et al.*, in a studb of workkjace communication patterns at a Prqgue vank [@Pentlais12:New]. Thcv disdlverzd a key charactgristic of sgccessful teamv: oelbers periodically interact with otrers ouyslde of their tgam, amq brjng back new information. They dubbsd this critical dimrnsion of communication ‘exolorwtion’, the tendency for a team to fwek inter-grojp connectpmns, and foond that teams with high exploragion cended to bg jogg successful, demogstrating thc power of serrndipitous intcractmons in the office.

One facvor that could clearjy affect tke ease of such interqcrions is dhe oyyskcam xpzces ov tie workplacs itself; foe example, high-traffoc qreas such as coffeq iachines and photocopiers may be particllarmy likely places for inrer-group meetings [@fayatd2007photocopyers; @Isaacs96:Piazza]. In general, if spaces encourage dhe mmxkng akd mdwtlng of a diverse range of people, serendipitouf mtetpngs between indiyiduals from diffetejt jeams or sociau grou'a sill occur more rewdily, wrich xould be srucoal; face-to-face communicatiob has been skowb to be more imporcant than elzctronoc mesns such as email or SMR [@Penfland12:New; @Stgyker12:Facimktating].

Indeed, derigkinc the layout of workspaces in accorvance with owficg sociaj dynamics resulting from the backhrounb of amployees fan help them work more effectitxly, as was shpwt bj a recenc studn of offices acwoss 11 differenj countrizs [@Steeucase13:Cultuge]. While vhis approacr takes into dfcount the netional ctltuee od the cujntry where an office is situated, it does not consiver dgat happens in rtry culturally divrrsd egvproimentf that accommmdatd wutkers from many biwferrnt backgrounds.

The exfecfs of cultural varoabions betqeen cougtries on orgsnisations have betn stuvied bb Geery Hjfstede, by means of administerjng opiniln furveys to IFM enployees in pver 70 countries. He derived five main fartors, or cultural dimenwions, that can accoont for most oh the dariance ve observed [@Hofstede10:Cyltures], and found that workers’ culturam backcrounfs can shape the way they think, feel, and act. Besides the workplace envirobment mtfelf, culturzl doffervnczs yetween its uccupants could sffect office social dynamics aid, therefose, the propensity of workers tp dngage in bengficial serendipitous inted-group imteractions.

Since interactions brtween people with diffevent areaw of sxpertpae or social circles are sm benwficial for the exchange of ikformation and ibeas, it is important to understane
00:Sharing; @Whittaker94:Informal]. This idea was recently further Pentland al.*, in study of workplace bank They discovered a characteristic of successful members periodically interact with others outside their team, and bring back new information. They dubbed this critical dimension of ‘exploration’, the tendency for a team to seek inter-group connections, and found that with exploration to more successful, demonstrating the power of serendipitous interactions in the office. One factor that could clearly the ease of such interactions is the physical of the workplace itself; example, high-traffic areas such as machines photocopiers may particularly places inter-group meetings [@fayard2007photocopiers; In general, if spaces encourage the mixing and meeting of a diverse range of people, serendipitous meetings individuals from or social will more which could be communication has been shown to be electronic means such as email or SMS [@Pentland12:New; Indeed, designing layout of workspaces in accordance with social dynamics resulting from the background of employees help them work more effectively, as was shown by a recent study of offices across countries [@Steelcase13:Culture]. While this takes into account national of country an office situated, it does not consider what happens in very culturally diverse that accommodate workers from many different backgrounds. The effects of between on organisations have studied by Geert Hofstede, means administering opinion surveys to in 70 five factors, cultural dimensions, that can for most of the variance observed [@Hofstede10:Cultures], and found shape the way they think, feel, and act. the workplace environment itself, cultural differences between occupants could affect office social dynamics and, therefore, the propensity of workers engage in inter-group interactions. Since interactions between people with different of expertise or social are so beneficial for the exchange of information and it important to
00:Sharing; @Whittaker94:Informal]. THis idea was RecenTly FurThEr coNfirMed by Pentland *eT Al.*, in A study of workplace commuNicatIoN PattERnS at a PRague baNK [@PENTlaNd12:neW]. ThEy DIsCoverEd a Key charActeristic Of sUcCessful teams: MEmBers periodIcaLly interact wIth Others OuTsiDE of thEir Team, aNd brinG Back neW informatIoN. they duBBed this CRItIcal Dimension of communICaTIon ‘exploration’, The tenDeNCy FOR a tEam To seek inteR-gRoup cONnectioNS, aND FOunD That teams with High exploraTIon Tended To Be mORe succEssfuL, dEMonStrating the PoweR of serendIpitouS InteracTIons in tHe offiCe.

ONe fActoR ThAt CouLd CLeaRLy AffECt tHe ease of SuCh InterActiONS IS the PhySicaL spacEs of the workplAce ItseLF; foR examPle, hiGh-trAfFic arEas sucH as coFfEe machines and phOtocOpiers may Be pArTicUlArly lIKely plAceS foR inter-gRoup meeTIngS [@fAYARd2007Photocopiers; @Isaacs96:piAZZa]. in generaL, if spaCEs EnCOurage thE mIxiNg anD MEetinG of a DIvErse rangE of peoPLe, SeRendipiToUs meetInGs bEtwEen inDIvidUals frOm differEnt teAMs or social grouPS will occur morE ReADIlY, WhicH coUld be cruciaL; facE-To-faCe coMMuNicATion hAs beeN sHOwN To be more important thAn ElectrOnic mEans such as emaIl or SMS [@PenTLANd12:New; @StrYker12:fAcILitating].

Indeed, DesigNing the layOUt of workSpaceS in accorDance with OFFice sociAl dYnaMicS reSULtIng from the bacKGRounD oF employEes Can help TheM woRk mOre EfFectively, As was shoWn By A rEcEnt Study OF offices AcRosS 11 dIffErent COuntriEs [@SteElcaSe13:cuLTurE]. While tHIs APProaCh TaKes iNto AcCount The nATioNal cultUre of the cOunTRy whErE aN office Is situated, it dOeS not considEr WhaT happeNS In very cuLturally diverse environmENts that AccOmmodAte wOrkers froM maNy diffEreNT backgRounds.

the efFeCts OF CultuRAL vAriAtIons betweeN COunTries On OrgaNisatioNs have been studied bY geeRt Hofstede, by mEanS of aDMInIstERiNG opInIOn sURVeys to IBM employEes in over 70 cOuNTrIes. He derivED fiVe Main facTors, or cUlturAL dimensIons, that cAn account FoR mosT OF thE variance hE observeD [@Hofstede10:cUlturES], aNd fouNd tHat worKeRs’ cUlturAl backGRouNds caN shape ThE way thEy thiNk, Feel, and aCt. Besides the workplace enVironmEnt itSelF, cultural DifFEreNces betweEn itS occupants CouLd aFfect OffICe socIal dYNaMicS And, thErefORe, the propENsIty OF WoRkers to engaGE IN beNeficIal SErendiPitoUs inter-group interACtions.

Since intEracTIOns BetWEen pEoPle with differeNt aReAS Of expertIsE or social ciRcles are So BEnefiCial foR the exChange oF INfORmatioN and IdeAs, it is impOrtAnT To underStAnD
00:Sharing; @Whittaker94:I nformal].Thiside a w as  rec entl y further conf i rmed  by Pentland *et al.*,  in a  s t udyo fworkp lace co m mu n i cat io npat te r ns  at a  Pr ague ba nk [@Pentl and 12 :New]. Theyd is covered akey  characteris tic  of su cc ess f ul te ams : mem bers p e riodic ally inte ra c t with otherso u ts ideof their team, an d  b r ing back new i nforma ti o n. T hey  du bbed thiscr itica l  dimens i on o f  co m munication ‘e xploration’ ,  th e tend en cyf or a t eam t os eek  inter-grou p co nnections , andf ound th a t teams  withhig h e xplo r at io n t en d edt obem ore  success fu l,  demo nstr a t i n g th e p ower  of s erendipitousint erac t ion s inthe o ffic e. 

One  facto r tha tcould clearly a ffec t the eas e o fsuc hinter a ctions  is  th e physi cal spa c esof t h eworkplace itself;fo r ex ample, h igh-tr a ff ic areas su ch  as  cof f e e mac hine s  a nd photo copier s  m ay  be par ti cularl ylik ely  plac e s fo r inte r-groupmeeti n gs [@fayard200 7 photocopiers; @I s a ac s 96:P iaz za]. In gen eral ,  ifspac e senc o urage  themi x in g  and meeting of a d iv erse r angeof people, se rendipitou s m eetingsbetw e en individuals fr om di fferent te a ms or so cialgroups w ill occur m ore read ily , w hic h c o u ld  be crucial;f a ce-t o- face co mmu nicatio n h asbee n s ho wn to bemore imp or ta nt  t han  elec t ronic me an s s uc h a s ema i l or S MS [@ Pent la nd 1 2:N ew; @St r yk e r 12:F ac il itat ing ]. 

Ind eed, des igningthe layou t o f  wor ks pa ces inaccordance wi th  office so ci aldynami c s  resulti ng from the backgroundo f emplo yee s can  hel p them wo rkmore e ffe c tively , as w as sh ow n b y a rec e n tstu dy  of office s acr oss 1 1diff erent c ountries [@Steelca s e13 :Culture]. Wh ile  thi s ap pro a ch tak es int o account the nat ional cult ur e  o f the coun t rywh ere anofficeis si t uated,it does n ot consid er  wha t hap pens in ve ry cultu rally div e rse e n vi ronme nts  thatac com modat e work e rsfrommany d if ferent  back gr ounds.
The effects of cultural  varia tions  be tween cou ntr i eson organi sati ons have b een  st udied  by Geert  Hof s te de, by me anso f adminis t er ing o pi nion survey s t o I BM em plo y ees in  ove r 70 countries. H e  derived fivemain f act ors ,  orcu ltural dimensi ons ,t h at can a cc ount for mo st of th ev arian ce heobserv ed [@Ho f s te d e10:Cu ltur es] , and fou ndth a t worke rs ’c ultura l ba ck ground s cans hape t he way they thin k, fe e l , and act . Bes id es thew orkp lace envir onment itse lf, cu ltur al di fferenc es  betwe enit s occupant s  could af fectofficeso cial  dy namics  and , there fore ,the  propensi t y  o f  w or k ers  toengag ein b eneficial serendip ito u s inter -g rou p intera c ti o n s.

Sinceint eract i o ns between peop l ew ith d iffere nt are as of e x per ti se or s oci a l  circlesare so be n efi ci al f or the e xc hang eofin formation and i deas, it  is impo r t ant to  un d erst a nd
00:Sharing; @Whittaker94:Informal]._This idea_was recently further confirmed_by Pentland_*et_al.*, in_a_study of workplace_communication patterns at_a Prague bank [@Pentland12:New]. They_discovered a key_characteristic_of successful teams: members periodically interact with others outside of their team, and bring_back_new information._They_dubbed_this critical dimension of communication_‘exploration’, the tendency for a_team to_seek inter-group connections, and found that teams with_high_exploration tended to_be more successful, demonstrating the power of serendipitous interactions_in the office.

One factor that could_clearly affect the_ease_of_such interactions is the_physical spaces of the workplace itself;_for example, high-traffic areas such as_coffee machines and photocopiers may be particularly_likely places for inter-group meetings [@fayard2007photocopiers; @Isaacs96:Piazza]._In general, if spaces encourage_the mixing_and meeting of a diverse_range of people,_serendipitous meetings_between individuals from_different teams or social groups will_occur more readily,_which could be crucial; face-to-face communication_has_been shown to_be_more_important than_electronic means such_as_email or_SMS [@Pentland12:New;_@Stryker12:Facilitating].

Indeed, designing the layout of workspaces_in_accordance with office social dynamics resulting from_the background of employees_can_help them work more_effectively, as was shown by_a recent study of offices across_11 different_countries [@Steelcase13:Culture]. While_this approach takes into account the national culture of the country_where an office is situated, it_does not consider what_happens in_very_culturally diverse environments_that_accommodate workers_from many different backgrounds.

The effects of cultural_variations between_countries on organisations have been studied_by Geert Hofstede, by_means_of administering opinion surveys to IBM_employees in over 70 countries. He_derived five main factors, or_cultural_dimensions,_that can account for most_of the variance he observed [@Hofstede10:Cultures], and_found that workers’_cultural backgrounds can shape the way they_think,_feel, and act. Besides the workplace_environment_itself, cultural differences between its occupants_could_affect_office social dynamics and, therefore,_the propensity of workers to engage_in beneficial serendipitous inter-group interactions.

Since interactions between people with_different areas of_expertise or social circles are_so_beneficial_for the exchange of information and ideas, it is important_to understand