# Workspace and Productivity: Guidelines for Virtual Reality Workplace Design and Optimization
## 1 Introduction  
Over the past few years, substantial developments in digital technologies have encouraged a shift in the way we work and produce, from an office-based environment to remote work (also called \"virtual work\") [1], with an increased focus on how virtual reality (VR) can support and enhance work-related applications [2]. Remote work differs from traditional work in that workers are physically dispersed, communicating and working mostly via and assisted by digital technology [3], while VR enables users to experience and interact with life-like models or environments through interactive 3D visualization and graphical displays, provided through head-mounted displays and handheld, position-tracked devices with one or more position trackers [4]. VR for work has received special attention since the unprecedented outbreak of COVID-19, which required millions of workers to work from home, almost overnight [5]. In 2020, in the United Kingdom, nearly one in two employees worked remotely, acting as a catalyst for digital transformation towards work in VR. Since early 2021, sales in hardware for VR almost doubled, creating figures of units shipped in the range of millions, and success rates in the range of billions, and large enterprises have begun to engaged meeting environments for teamwork and task work [4]. For both work and VR, the environment in which work is executed can actively impact workers' workspace relationships, task performance, and overall job satisfaction [6]. To illustrate, in the context of spatial dimensions (i.e., proximity, workspace assignment, andprivacy crowding), closed offices, where employees have their own individual working areas distinctly divided either by using walls, cubicles or panels [7], have been demonstrated to increase the perception of privacy, concentration and work efficiency. However, they limited opportunities for collaboration and supervision, and if not interrupted by occasional social interactions, created a feeling of oppression [8]. Open office spaces, defined by the absence of interior partitions and rooms [7], have exhibited an increased net of usable areas and ease of re-configuration (i.e., cost reduction), as well as transparency and coordination through greater social interaction, cooperation, feedback and knowledge sharing communication. However, they reduce privacy [9], which, paired with constant background noise or poor lighting, has led to increased stress at work [10], concentration issues, and performance and productivity decrements [11]. Similarly, relationships were found between productivity and interior design, with low-quality office lighting, poor ventilation, and ambient sound levels higher than 55 decibels (dBA) creating physical and mental tiredness, and a lack of concentration and poor work performance [12]. Additionally, the ability to alter one's work position by standing or walking compared to sitting continuously at a 90-degree angle impacts work efficiency, as do adjustable tables, chairs with appropriate seat heights, pan depth, or backrests, which, alongside an appropriate utilization of information technology (e.g., computer, laptop, keyboard, and mouse shape and size), can create significant health and cost benefits if executed in accordance to the needs of the work characteristics and task details [13]. Given the close relationship between productivity and performance satisfaction in response to spatial dimensions and interior design, newer workplace models are shifting to plans that include open offices with private spaces to appeal to both the collaborative and individual needs of employees [14]. Furthermore, cultural expectations and needs are considered to have a strong influence on how the workspace is perceived and utilized effectively.