> "the disadvantages of noise and distraction associated with open office plans outweighed anticipated, but still unproven, benefits " [0] I'd say that the CFO

> "the disadvantages of noise and distraction associated with open office plans outweighed anticipated, but still unproven, benefits " [0] I'd say that the CFOs of the world are a bit selectively biased when it comes to analysis of employee satisfaction and productivity of open office vs. private space offices. Other studies discussed on HN have pointed to the importance of a space you can personalize as well, so even shared private spaces may not be optimal. [1] Prime office space in SV (Palo Alto) is currently going for $100/sq ft per year [2]. So an 8'x10' private space would cost $8,000/yr. at premium rates. If a company is paying $200,000 for a fully burdened engineer, as many do in SV, it seems a relatively small investment (4% of cost to employ said engineers) to offer them private offices as an option. Other functional positions pay nearly as well, so really, at least giving the employees the option of private vs. open office should be considered. Outside of Palo Alto, it would probably make even more financial sense. [0] Previously discussed at some length: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13373526 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13373526 [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13668762 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13668762 [2] http://www.cityfeet.com/cont/ca/palo-alto-office-space# http://www.cityfeet.com/cont/ca/palo-alto-office-space#