Do You Work Next to a "Toxic" Person?

Office design may seem like a superficial concern, but new research suggests it can be a powerful lever for improving performance. A report by Cornerstone OnDemand in collaboration with Harvard Business School argues that “spatial management”—the deliberate placement of employees within a workspace—can materially influence how well people work.

The core mechanism behind this effect is what the researchers call spillover: the idea that an employee’s performance is shaped by the people sitting nearby. Inspiration, peer pressure, and subtle social cues combine to make productivity contagious—both in positive and negative ways.

To quantify this effect, the researchers studied a 2,000-person technology company over a two-year period. They measured each employee’s performance while accounting for who sat nearby, calculating spillover as a weighted function of neighbors’ performance and physical distance.

Workers were grouped into three categories: productive employees (fast but lower quality), quality employees (high quality but slower), and generalists (balanced across both dimensions). The most effective seating strategy paired productive workers next to quality workers, while clustering generalists together.

This symbiotic arrangement produced striking results. Organizational performance improved by up to 15%, translating into an estimated $1 million in additional annual profit. Each worker benefited in their area of weakness without harming their area of strength.

The study also examined the darker side of spillover. So-called toxic workers—employees whose behavior was harmful enough to eventually lead to termination—had an outsized negative influence on those around them. When toxic workers were seated near one another, the probability that one would be fired increased by 27%.

Importantly, this does not suggest that toxic employees should be clustered together. Rather, it highlights how strongly environment shapes behavior and reinforces the need for thoughtful intervention. The researchers suggest placing toxic workers near stable, non-toxic generalists and using engagement data as an early warning system.

Physical space, the authors argue, is an “untapped organizational resource.” While humans have always worked in shared environments, only recently have organizations begun to think scientifically about how seating arrangements affect performance.

The findings are particularly relevant amid ongoing debates about open-office layouts. While open plans aim to foster collaboration, they often introduce distraction. Spatial management offers a more precise approach—one that preserves proximity where it matters most and avoids harmful spillover where it does not.

One important caveat: spillover effects are temporary. Once employees are separated, the performance gains typically fade within two months. Proximity works, but only while it is actively maintained.

The takeaway for leaders is clear: performance is not just about who you hire or how you train them. It is also about where you place them. When done intentionally, spatial management can deliver fast, meaningful gains at a fraction of the cost of traditional performance interventions.