Transformation Of Office Interior Design Before and After Covid-19: A Comparative Study of Architecture and Interior Design Studios

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted established patterns of office attendance and accelerated the adoption of remote communication and hybrid work. Its longer-term significance for office design, however, extends beyond infection-control measures. It has prompted organisations to reconsider what the physical workplace should enable, how space is occupied, and how employees experience the environments in which they work. These questions are particularly important in architecture and interior design studios, where digital production coexists with activities that depend on physical resources, including material inspection, drawing reviews, model making, pin-up discussions and client presentations.

This paper examines the transformation of architecture and interior design studio environments across three periods: before, during and after the COVID-19 disruption. It adopts a qualitative, literature-based comparative approach and synthesises research on hybrid workplaces, activity-based offices, office performance, user experience and post-pandemic renovation. The review indicates that flexibility and collaboration may offer benefits, but they do not automatically improve concentration, privacy, autonomy or productivity. Consequently, the paper argues against treating shared desks or open-plan layouts as universal solutions.

To address the specific requirements of design studios, the paper proposes a Studio Activity–Space–Experience (SASE) framework. The framework links professional activities to spatial settings, user-experience criteria and operational performance measures. It considers situations such as fluctuating attendance, intensive computer-based production, physical model development, confidential client meetings, hybrid design reviews, material-library use and constrained renovation budgets. The framework is intended as a practical decision-support approach for designers, studio owners and facility managers. It can inform space planning, furniture selection, technology integration, environmental design and post-occupancy evaluation.

The paper does not claim to report completed field measurements or survey findings. Rather, it establishes a research framework that can be tested through case studies of selected studios, particularly within the Indian context. Its principal contribution is the integration of studio-specific workflows with spatial planning and user experience, offering a more focused basis for evidence-informed workplace design.