5 ms·

Do you have evidence that open plan spaces are actually cheaper, even just in plain real estate terms? I’ve always read that they end up being less than a few p

by mlthoughts2018 8y ago

Do you have evidence that open plan spaces are actually cheaper, even just in plain real estate terms? I’ve always read that they end up being less than a few percent cheaper per person after all is said and done. To boot, a lot of companies spend millions on stupid, opulent office features like fountains, coffee stations, roof decks, beer, etc. How do you explain that they are willing to spend so much more on that stuff instead of spending that budget on giving healthy workplace privacy? I worked for a company once that already had a huge office in Columbus, Ohio, with private offices for everyone. They had no engineering presence in that office and no plans to increase headcount in that office. It was an HR office primarily, and the workers there needed privacy everyday to be on the phone about sensitive topics like legal issues or salary. The CEO announced in a company meeting once that they would be totally remodeling that office to change it into open plan seating (we found out later it came at a cost of $14 million, purely to destroy good privacy and turn it into open plan seats, in a building the company already owned, with no need to accomodate more head count). The CEO just said, “We are an innovation company and that makes each and every one of you an innovator — and innovators love open spaces.” So I think you’re wrong. Companies don’t care about open plan offices for saving money (and they often lose money on it). It’s all about bullshit optics.

dvfjsdhgfv 8y ago
I guess we come from different backgrounds. Personally, I've never met a person who liked the idea of open-plan offices - and this includes all managers. Of course they choose the best places for themselves to keep the maximum level of privacy possible. As for the CEO - I can't imagine he could say "we're going to squeeze you all against your will to improve the bottom line." He had to say the usual bs, whether he believed it or not. As for concrete data, check any online calculator. This one [1] shows individual offices as taking 3 times as much space as open-plan offices. As personnel costs are usually one of the highest fixed costs, going open plan might be a good alternative to lowering the salary when a manager wants to improve the bottom line - or, sometimes, to save the employees in troublesome times. [1] http://officeprinciples.com/planning/space-calculator/results/ http://officeprinciples.com/planning/space-calculator/result...
- mlthoughts2018 8y ago
  Did you read my comment? How would the CEO be squeezing people for the bottom line? The company already owned the building, and even after the open plan remodel, they put the same number of workers into the same square feet of floor space. I don’t understand your comment at all. What bottom line were they improving by paying $14MM to take down pre-existing privacy features, while not increasing worker density per square foot at all? Also “look at any online calculator” is a silly response that tells me you’ve never actually looked into the data on this at all. Open plans don’t save 3x space in a vacuum, because they introduce other costs. And it still doesn’t address why a company would create gourmet coffee stations, roof decks, alcohol-focused meeting spaces, opulent fountains, huge budgets for “sleek” interior decorating, etc. If they save 3x on space, but then use that extra space anyway for a dipshit coffee station, then your point holds no credibility: they are still paying for the huge space that could have housed all the employees with private offices. They just fill it with dipshit perks and then cram people into the remaining space. Additionally, cubicles with high walls offer a lot if the privacy and noise blocking that private offices could give, but without taking any additional floor space when compared with open-plan offices. So again, the answer to this behavior simply cannot be cost savings. That is not consistent with the choices that upper management make regarding offices.
  - dvfjsdhgfv 8y ago
    Yes, I fully understand your point. Also, I worked in top- and middle-level management and one thing you can be sure is that the way you present things happening in the company is of utmost importance. And I don't know any reasonable manager who doesn't care about money. It's possible that the CEO in question was an exception but in most companies remodeling the already owned office to open plan was an excuse to squeeze in more people, introduce desk sharing and other disruptive inventions. I'm curious about the future of the company you mention. I bet that when hard times come, the fountains and the rest will go away, while the open plan is going to stay.
    - mlthoughts2018 8y ago
      > “but in most companies remodeling the already owned office to open plan was an excuse to squeeze in more people, introduce desk sharing and other disruptive inventions.” It still seems like you didn’t fully read my comment. This has not been my experience at all. Most companies choose open floor plans because they superficially look trendy and because it is a cargo cult copy of what Facebook & trendy start-ups do. They are even happy to spend more money on this type of floor plan. You keep asserting that companies are very budget conscious when it comes to real estate expenditures, but this doesn’t match reality, and you’re still not addressing the bigger point of stupid corporate spending on fountains, roof decks, parties, etc., which totally contradicts your point of view. > “the fountains and the rest will go away, while the open plan is going to stay.” This makes no sense. I’m not even sure you understand how real estate works. You don’t make money by removing a fountain or a roof deck you previously paid to install. You just lose more money if you want it removed or remodeled. If you fall on hard times, you’re absolutely not spending money to pay construction workers to remove physical features of the office. I can’t begin to describe what a naive understanding of office real estate you project. Also, any theories we might come up with about open plan office choices have to be good theories when the company has lots of money, not just when it’s having hard times, because tons of perfectly profitable companies that can easily and trivially afford to pay for whatever office space they want are still irrationally choosing open plan spaces (which destroy productivity and make workers unhappy) even when any cost savings from doing so would be entirely trivial compared with billions and billions of net income. The idea that managers in those cases are simultaneously so unconcerned about money that they will throw lavish parties, spend millions on unnecessary office decor, roof decks, etc., and yet also act deeply concerned over a few million of extra rent to get a large enough space for private offices ... it obviously refutes what you’re saying. The faux concern offer real estate cost obviously is just for show, as a pretext for the overtly political reasons to choose open plan layouts. You seem to think companies try to save money at all costs, and see open floor plans as a necessary evil to cut costs. Company spending behavior contradicts that claim. Companies clearly and obviously do not see open floor plans as a necessary evil. Not at all.

dvfjsdhgfv 8y ago

I guess we come from different backgrounds. Personally, I've never met a person who liked the idea of open-plan offices - and this includes all managers. Of course they choose the best places for themselves to keep the maximum level of privacy possible. As for the CEO - I can't imagine he could say "we're going to squeeze you all against your will to improve the bottom line." He had to say the usual bs, whether he believed it or not. As for concrete data, check any online calculator. This one [1] shows individual offices as taking 3 times as much space as open-plan offices. As personnel costs are usually one of the highest fixed costs, going open plan might be a good alternative to lowering the salary when a manager wants to improve the bottom line - or, sometimes, to save the employees in troublesome times. [1] http://officeprinciples.com/planning/space-calculator/results/ http://officeprinciples.com/planning/space-calculator/result...

mlthoughts2018 8y ago
Did you read my comment? How would the CEO be squeezing people for the bottom line? The company already owned the building, and even after the open plan remodel, they put the same number of workers into the same square feet of floor space. I don’t understand your comment at all. What bottom line were they improving by paying $14MM to take down pre-existing privacy features, while not increasing worker density per square foot at all? Also “look at any online calculator” is a silly response that tells me you’ve never actually looked into the data on this at all. Open plans don’t save 3x space in a vacuum, because they introduce other costs. And it still doesn’t address why a company would create gourmet coffee stations, roof decks, alcohol-focused meeting spaces, opulent fountains, huge budgets for “sleek” interior decorating, etc. If they save 3x on space, but then use that extra space anyway for a dipshit coffee station, then your point holds no credibility: they are still paying for the huge space that could have housed all the employees with private offices. They just fill it with dipshit perks and then cram people into the remaining space. Additionally, cubicles with high walls offer a lot if the privacy and noise blocking that private offices could give, but without taking any additional floor space when compared with open-plan offices. So again, the answer to this behavior simply cannot be cost savings. That is not consistent with the choices that upper management make regarding offices.
- dvfjsdhgfv 8y ago
  Yes, I fully understand your point. Also, I worked in top- and middle-level management and one thing you can be sure is that the way you present things happening in the company is of utmost importance. And I don't know any reasonable manager who doesn't care about money. It's possible that the CEO in question was an exception but in most companies remodeling the already owned office to open plan was an excuse to squeeze in more people, introduce desk sharing and other disruptive inventions. I'm curious about the future of the company you mention. I bet that when hard times come, the fountains and the rest will go away, while the open plan is going to stay.
  - mlthoughts2018 8y ago
    > “but in most companies remodeling the already owned office to open plan was an excuse to squeeze in more people, introduce desk sharing and other disruptive inventions.” It still seems like you didn’t fully read my comment. This has not been my experience at all. Most companies choose open floor plans because they superficially look trendy and because it is a cargo cult copy of what Facebook & trendy start-ups do. They are even happy to spend more money on this type of floor plan. You keep asserting that companies are very budget conscious when it comes to real estate expenditures, but this doesn’t match reality, and you’re still not addressing the bigger point of stupid corporate spending on fountains, roof decks, parties, etc., which totally contradicts your point of view. > “the fountains and the rest will go away, while the open plan is going to stay.” This makes no sense. I’m not even sure you understand how real estate works. You don’t make money by removing a fountain or a roof deck you previously paid to install. You just lose more money if you want it removed or remodeled. If you fall on hard times, you’re absolutely not spending money to pay construction workers to remove physical features of the office. I can’t begin to describe what a naive understanding of office real estate you project. Also, any theories we might come up with about open plan office choices have to be good theories when the company has lots of money, not just when it’s having hard times, because tons of perfectly profitable companies that can easily and trivially afford to pay for whatever office space they want are still irrationally choosing open plan spaces (which destroy productivity and make workers unhappy) even when any cost savings from doing so would be entirely trivial compared with billions and billions of net income. The idea that managers in those cases are simultaneously so unconcerned about money that they will throw lavish parties, spend millions on unnecessary office decor, roof decks, etc., and yet also act deeply concerned over a few million of extra rent to get a large enough space for private offices ... it obviously refutes what you’re saying. The faux concern offer real estate cost obviously is just for show, as a pretext for the overtly political reasons to choose open plan layouts. You seem to think companies try to save money at all costs, and see open floor plans as a necessary evil to cut costs. Company spending behavior contradicts that claim. Companies clearly and obviously do not see open floor plans as a necessary evil. Not at all.