3 ms·
It has to be a mix. Fully open isn’t great because you can’t make your space your own. You have to consider the entire rest of the floor or building. Give every
by ljm 7y ago
It has to be a mix. Fully open isn’t great because you can’t make your space your own. You have to consider the entire rest of the floor or building. Give everyone private rooms and everyone works in isolation. This might look productive but I would argue it’s not: everyone has a physical barrier around themselves, they don’t even need to set boundaries any more.
But if you can give your teams a group space to themselves, they get the benefit of an open collaborative space between them without polluting the dynamics of other teams.
Rather than one open space, create that hotdesking area, then your large team rooms, and then scatter your generic meeting rooms and video call booths around so you can still opt for privacy.
This takes more effort but it is worth it. Your teams will generate subcultures of their own to make it easier (and more enjoyable) to work together. Give them that space.
- zapzupnz 7y agoWhat teams? The article is about homes.
- gerbilly 7y agoMaybe the dude is onto something. In the future we won't think of families as families, but as teams, all highly engaged and aligned on a single strategic goal.
- ljm 7y agoMy mistake... I made the classic mistake of reading the headline, the parent comment, and not the content. This is usually called a conversation. Enjoy your free downvotes down the thread.
- mynameisvlad 7y ago> This is usually called a conversation. You didn't even reply to said parent comment, so I don't see how "conversation" is your excuse. Maybe next time you're proven wrong, you don't dig with renewed fervor and snark and instead only humbly admit your mistakes.
- zapzupnz 7y ago> My mistake. /EOF ftfy
- opmac 7y agoFound the guy who didn't read the article, not even the first paragraph.