If you want to make this kind of comparison, better approach would be to compare modern offices to zoos. "Here we have Karl. His predecessors roamed the flatlands of lower caucasus as hunters gatherers. Long domesticated, Karl kicks the 3D printer out of frustration of not being able to negotiate complex technology. Karl want's to cry, but can not do so in open concept office. LEED mandated lactation station is a perfect place to cry, but there is already someone in there crying. Karl waits for his turn while pretending to fix a Keurig coffee machine problem".

You can totally run with this idea because it's a conversation starter. It's also a lot of wasted effort on learning about big cats. I would recommend doing a study on human behavior insead. What kind of environments make people antisocial? Or super social! Go from there. STAY AWAY from topic of office layouts. It's a dead horse still receiving daily beatings. 

I see where you're coming from, but can't really tell where you're taking this. So you're going to argue that closed-off office spaces promote a better chance of survival? That open offices will encourage dialogue and interaction?

Ecology is at the forefront of architecture... I'm not quite sure how humans working in an office and big cats surviving will link up in this study, unless you're just into big ol murder mittens (I wouldn't blame you) and picked offices because they're an easy target. Maybe the cats can serve as a metaphor if needed but it feels a bit forced. If you're determined to stick with this office and animal theme, maybe study behavior in offices of various or specific types, then consider what animals will tell the story.

Better yet... Ecology is a fascinating topic, and you could do your project a disservice by boiling it down to big cats and office spaces; maybe consider expanding this study out to a broader picture. How are larger networks of organisms intertwined via Habitats? Infrastructure? Work? Play? Survival?