Bane & Norrin

The idea of biohacking isn’t new. People have changed their diet to optimise their lifestyle, they started going to the gym, not just to put on muscle, but to improve their sleep. Intermittent fasting, mediation and mindfulness, the list goes on. These are all lifestyle changes that people can individually implement, and it’s a level of control they have over their own health. A part of life that an individual doesn’t always have control over is their work lifestyle. Cramped desks, harsh lighting, lack of sunlight, set lunch and break times, these are all factors that can contribute to a declining quality of health. Can the shift from these conditions to a circadian synced workspace environment improve the health of employees, and in doing so, allow employers to reap the rewards of increased productivity? Offices are moving beyond standing desks to circadian lighting and temperature based workspaces that mimics the suns natural path and can boost immunity and sleep quality. During the COVID era, so many people ended up folding their home lifestyle into their work lifestyle and were able to exert control over how they function, even during work hours. A study carried out by ECB shows that while hours worked declined by around 5-7%, when comparing pre-pandemic and post-pandemic numbers, productivity rose by 2%. As unemployment rates are on the rise, there’s an ongoing need for productivity optimisation to occur within workspaces, and these small changes are a smart approach to passively meet the unknown needs of the body. A 2015 Harvard study published in Environmental Health Perspectives looked into the direct impact that indoor environmental quality impacts cognitive performance. In low VOC, well-ventilated spaces, a +61% score was marked, and for the “Green+” buildings with enhanced ventilation, a 101% higher score was recorded, when compared to standard, conventional office buildings. There are many factors that go into transforming the workspace into a space for optimisation. Traditionally, offices have been designed based on industrial era principles, that prioritised supervision, hierarchical structures, maximising space efficiency and featured rigid, partitioned and predicable layouts. When we focus on user-centric design, rather than organisational efficiency, the governing principles that drive the design of these spaces change. We go from fluorescent lights to SAD lamps and circadian lighting. The grey and beige base now has biophilic principle, with plants and tactile materials. We live in a time where organisations are all about optimisation, getting the most juice for their squeeze. Why not try and get the most out of the workspace too? While this is a nice idea, the practicality of it can vary, Companies don’t always have control over their workspace conditions. Enacting change at this level requires investment and a lot of thought behind making direct improvements that lead to real tangible changes, instead of workplace gimmicks. We also enter that catch-22 of businesses – up and coming businesses that require increased productivity don’t have the funds to enact these changes, whereas established businesses that have the wealth to make these changes often have the confidence and security that this isn’t a “must-need” change. The future of workspaces can go either way. We can see a return to structure and cost efficiency, or workspaces can lean towards the idea that improved conditions is a worthy investment with very tangible benefits. Ultimately, the "future of workspaces" likely won’t be a one-size-fits-all revolution, but a gradual shift driven by data. As the link between environment and employee retention becomes harder to ignore, the businesses that thrive will be those that view workspace quality not as a luxury or a "gimmick," but as a fundamental pillar of their operational strategy. The choice is no longer just about aesthetics; it’s about whether a company is willing to pay for progress now or pay the price of stagnation later.