Satellite Office founder and CEO Anita Gödiker discusses a recent study in an interview with SAATKORN and explains why the office has lost none of its importance even in the age of hybrid working – albeit subject to one crucial condition. The focus is on productivity, concentration and the question of why tranquillity is now one of the most important factors for success in modern knowledge work. A fascinating conversation about open-plan offices, AI, hybrid working and the future of the workplace. Let’s get started: SAATKORN: Ms Gödiker, please introduce yourself and Satellite Office briefly to SAATKORN readers.
I am Anita Gödiker, founder and CEO of Satellite Office. Since the mid-1990s, when new buildings were springing up everywhere in Berlin, many companies were looking for a kind of temporary office with ready-made infrastructure. Ever since then – for almost 30 years now – I’ve been fascinated by a simple question: what kind of environment do people need to be able to do really good knowledge work?
Today, we operate 17 premium business centres in Germany, Switzerland and Italy. Our focus is not on providing as many workstations as possible, but on the quality of work – with tranquillity, privacy and architecture that promotes concentration. At the heart of this is our multi-award-winning pureSilent® room concept, most recently honoured with the ICONIC Award and the German Design Award for our Villa Sander in Frankfurt.
The office needs a new standard of quality
SAATKORN: Your study shows that, for most employees, the office remains the most important place of work. Has the debate so far been asking the wrong question? Should companies be talking much more about the quality that office work must offer, rather than just discussing attendance?
Yes, absolutely. For years, the focus was solely on one question: Does the office even have a future? That was purely a debate about attendance. Our study, however, reveals something different. For most people, the office remains the most important place to work. 37 per cent work exclusively on-site, with a further 53 per cent working in a hybrid model. The crucial question is therefore no longer whether people come into the office, but why. Anyone who experiences the same distractions there as everywhere else gains nothing. And that is precisely where the real problem lies. The office doesn’t have a problem with physical presence; it has a problem with concentration. Just under one in three people feel disturbed frequently or very frequently, whilst 38 per cent regularly struggle to find a suitable environment for focused work. As long as we merely argue about days spent in the office, we are merely treating the symptom. The real leadership question is: what quality must office work offer to make the journey to the office worthwhile at all?
SAATKORN: Many companies want to reduce office space, whilst at the same time millions are working in a hybrid model. Why should a company still be spending money on its workspaces in 2026 if employees are no longer on site every day anyway?
Precisely because they no longer come in every day. As soon as coming into the office becomes a conscious decision, every day spent there must offer something that cannot be achieved at home at the kitchen table. Focused work. Confidential discussions. Genuine interaction. This isn’t a question of cost; it’s a question of productivity. If 38 per cent regularly fail to find a suitable environment for focused tasks and just under 30 per cent cannot even work undisturbed for an hour at a time, then companies are wasting intellectual capacity there every single day. For me, therefore, the equation is not a question of square metres, but of quality. An office that offers tranquillity, a professional atmosphere and confidentiality is not a cost factor. It is a competitive advantage, both in terms of productivity and in attracting and retaining good staff. And the good news is: you no longer have to maintain this quality yourself, permanently and in its entirety. You can book it flexibly, exactly when it is needed.
Open-plan office versus focused working
SAATKORN: 75 per cent of respondents see open-plan offices as a hindrance to productivity, whilst 84 per cent would like more peace and quiet. Why does this model persist so stubbornly, and what often goes wrong with it?
The open-plan office persists for two reasons. On paper, it is cost-effective because many workstations can fit into a small space. And it has acquired the reputation of promoting collaboration. Both of these views fall short. The fallacy lies in confusing openness with communication. Open-plan spaces do encourage spontaneous interaction – that’s true. But demanding tasks require periods free from constant interruption, and these are completely lacking in such environments. Our figures are clear. Three in four employees see the open-plan office as an obstacle, and as professional experience grows, this aversion actually increases. Among 25- to 34-year-olds, 35 per cent strongly agree; among 45- to 54-year-olds, the figure rises to 58 per cent. The real problem is the ‘either/or’ logic. Good working environments do not have to choose between openness and privacy. They offer both: areas for interaction and spaces for undisturbed work. Those who focus solely on maximising open-plan space are cutting costs in the wrong place.
SAATKORN: I find it particularly interesting that almost one in three people cannot work undisturbed for a full hour at a time. What impact does this culture of constant interruption have on productivity, creativity and staff satisfaction?
The impact is significant, and it is systematically underestimated. An interruption doesn’t just cost the two minutes it takes for a phone call or a brief interjection. Far more costly is the time it takes to get back into the flow of work afterwards. Good knowledge work – a contract, an analysis, a creative concept – is produced during uninterrupted periods of concentration, not in five-minute slots between two disruptions. If more than one in four people cannot even manage that one hour at a stretch, then a large proportion of the workforce is permanently working at a superficial level. Creativity is the first to suffer, because it requires leisure. And in the long term, job satisfaction suffers too. People want to create something they can be proud of. Anyone who spends the whole day merely reacting, rather than shaping things, goes home in the evening feeling empty and dissatisfied. Peace and quiet is therefore no trivial matter. It is one of the most important resources in modern knowledge work. Anyone who works in a constant state of noise loses quality.
SAATKORN: In your study, women report interruptions significantly more frequently than men. Why is that? Is it primarily a matter of corporate culture, or do spatial factors also play a role?
It is both, and one reinforces the other. Our figures are clear. 36 per cent of women are interrupted frequently or very frequently, compared with 27 per cent of men. This is consistent with international research. Lean In and McKinsey have been showing for years that women are more frequently interrupted or overlooked in their day-to-day working lives. This is, first and foremost, a deeply ingrained cultural pattern. I have been involved in the advancement of women for many years, including as a co-founder of the Female Founders Award, and that is precisely why I find this finding so telling. But the physical space certainly plays a part. In an open-plan office with no quiet spaces, everyone is constantly available to be approached, and for those who are already affected more frequently, the impact is felt with full force. To be honest, a physical space cannot solve a cultural problem. But it can cushion the blow. Good quiet spaces democratise concentration because they give everyone the opportunity to escape constant availability. If you want to enable good work, you must create environments where people can think, make decisions and work without being disturbed. Both companies and employees benefit equally from this.
Concentration, Diversity and Corporate Culture
SAATKORN: Many companies invest substantial sums in AI and digital productivity tools. At the same time, your study shows that it is often entirely analogue factors, such as noise or a lack of quiet spaces, that are the biggest productivity killers. Do companies sometimes neglect the fundamentals of good knowledge work?
To put it bluntly: yes. And that is one of the most intriguing findings of the study. The biggest distractions are not digital, but analogue: telephone calls and video calls at 34 per cent, conversations between other people at 33 per cent, spontaneous interruptions at 28 per cent, and high noise levels at 23 per cent. Notifications and chats lag far behind. This is by no means an argument against AI, which is fundamentally changing the way we work. But it does highlight an imbalance. We’re putting a great deal of effort into optimising the digital sphere whilst simply neglecting the physical one. No tool, however good, can compensate for a room where you cannot concentrate. Even the most intelligent AI system is of little use if the person using it is pulled out of their train of thought every ten minutes. The fundamentals of good knowledge work are unspectacular: peace and quiet, focus, and a place where one can think. It is precisely these fundamentals that need to be put back at the top of the priority list.
pureSilent®: A different perspective on knowledge work
SAATKORN: With the pureSilent® concept, Satellite Office takes a different approach to traditional co-working providers. What exactly does this involve, and what experiences do your clients have with it in their day-to-day lives?
pureSilent® is our response to precisely these study findings – a spatial concept uncompromisingly geared towards concentration. It combines acoustic tranquillity with high-quality, hotel-standard interior design that appeals to all the senses and ensures mental calm. For us, silence is not just a matter of physics, but also of design. And it means that we deliberately provide both: retreats for focused work and spaces for exchange and confidential conversations. In their day-to-day work, our clients – many of whom are law firms, financial service providers and consultancies – experience one thing above all else. They regain their focus. In a quiet place, they can achieve in a few hours what would take them considerably longer in a noisy environment. That is the difference between a desk and a genuine working environment. With us, tranquillity is no accident, but a craft.
SAATKORN: Let’s look five years ahead. What will the ideal workplace for knowledge work look like in 2031? What developments do you anticipate, and what mistakes should companies avoid right now?
By 2031, the office will no longer be a place you go to because you have to, but because it’s worth it. I expect to see a clear shift towards premiumisation. Less floor space, but significantly higher quality – curated like a great venue rather than managed like a warehouse full of desks. Peace and quiet will go from being a luxury to the norm. Just as Wi-Fi is taken for granted today, it will then be an environment thoughtfully designed in terms of both acoustics and design. And we will think consistently in terms of zones: spaces for focus, spaces for interaction, spaces for privacy. There are three mistakes companies should avoid right now. Firstly, blindly cutting back on floor space without enhancing the rest. This saves money in the short term but costs productivity in the long term. Secondly, continuing to treat open-plan layouts as a panacea, even though three-quarters of employees see them as an obstacle. And thirdly, ordering people back to the office without giving them a reason. The opposite of working from home is not compulsory attendance. It is a place that is so good that people come of their own accord.
SAATKORN: Ms Gödiker, thank you very much for the interview – and we wish you continued enjoyment and success with Satellite Office!
Further links: