Evaluates circulation effectiveness in ICT complexes, suggesting design improvements for user experience.
Circulation is one of the vital processes of users navigating through buildings. It is pertinent to note that many public Information and Communication Technology (ICT) complexes have inefficiently designed circulations. This makes users' movements ineffective, inaccessible, and uncomfortable. This paper discusses the design and effectiveness of circulations with emphasis on vertical circulations and signs. This is because signs and vertical circulations form vital parameters in user satisfaction. A methodological community-based survey was adopted with structured questionnaires administered to 147 users across three chosen ICT complexes. These include Awolowo Glass House Complex, Adewale Complex, and Assets Corp. Complex. Secondary information was obtained through academic internet-based libraries such as Google Scholar, Scopus, and ResearchGate. Descriptive statistical methods interpreted users' feedback on whether or not the designated horizontal and vertical circulations, such as corridors, ramps, staircases/lifts, and signs, were functional. The results established that 68% of the respondents rated corridors as functional. Notwithstanding this, 34% rated lifts and ramps as functional. Conversely, 72% of respondents agreed that signs were inadequate. This resulted in users finding it difficult to navigate their way through, especially first-timers and disabled users. It is apparent that inefficient signs and vertical circulations form vital barriers to comfortable navigation for users in public ICT complexes. This paper proposes that designing circulations with emphasis on users forms critical imperatives to develop functional spaces. It is hoped that upgrading directional signs, improving lifts and ramps, or designing dynamic spaces would achieve such objectives. This proposed action will align with obtaining Sustainable Development Goals 9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure) and 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities) to develop inclusive and sustainable spaces.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Owoseni et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: