Buildings can be too quiet. Speech privacy is a top priority for employees and a legal stipulation in some environments. Biophilic soundscapes can improve speech privacy with equal or greater success to conventional masking, with additional wellbeing benefits.

Speech privacy is an increasingly important priority for modern buildings:¹ 53% of employees report having overheard confidential company information at their workplace.² Employees and visitors must be able to have confidential conversations while not disturbing others. In some spaces, such as healthcare, defence facilities, and legal workspaces, speech privacy is a legal requirement.

Better speech privacy has also been recognised for contributing to productivity (overheard conversations are the number one cause of workplace distractions)^{3, 4, 5} and employee job satisfaction.⁶

Biophilic sound masking

Biophilic soundscapes are a verified alternative to traditional sound masking. In 2011 a comparison of five masking conditions, which included filtered pink noise, showed that the sound of natural spring water was the optimal speech masker based on both task performance and subjective preference.⁷ Further research has since reinforced this finding.⁸

__________

References

1. 1. Kim, J., de Dear, R. (2013) Workspace satisfaction: the privacy-communication trade-off in open-plan offices.J Environ Psychol, 36, 18–26.

‍2. CareerBuilder (2015) Majority of Support Staff Workers Have Overheard Confidential Conversations at Work.‍

‍3. Herman Miller. (2015). It’s a Matter of Balance: New Understandings in Open-Plan Acoustics.

‍4. Udemy Research. (2018). 2018 workplace distraction report.

‍5. Salter, C., Powell, K., Begault, D., & Alvarado, R. (2003). Case studies of a method for predicting speech privacy in the contemporary workplace. UC Berkeley: Center for the Built Environment.‍

‍6. Lee, P. J., Lee, B. K., Jeon, J. Y., Zhang, M., & Kang, J. (2016). Impact of noise on self-rated job satisfaction and health in open-plan offices: a structural equation modelling approach.Ergonomics, 59(2), 222–234.

‍7. 4. Haapakangas, A., Kankkunen, E., Hongisto, V., Virjonen, P., Oliva, D., & Keskinen, E. (2011). Effects of five speech masking sounds on performance and acoustic satisfaction. Implications for open-plan offices.Acta Acustica United with Acustica.‍

‍8. DeLoach, A. G., Carter, J. P., & Braasch, J. (2015). Tuning the cognitive environment: Sound masking with “natural” sounds in open-plan offices.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

‍