5 ms·

I've worked from home since 2001, except for a brief 2 year stint at Google. I think I'm far more productive at home because I have: - An office, with a door I

I've worked from home since 2001, except for a brief 2 year stint at Google. I think I'm far more productive at home because I have: - An office, with a door I can close This was going to be a big list, but I actually think that just about sums it up. The cube environment at Google was utterly intolerable, and made it hard to concentrate. It didn't help that the guys in another group next to us had a game where they flew rc drones around for fun, or the folks on the other side of my group that were always discussing food, or the loud door to a lab behind my desk that was constantly slamming, etc, or just the constant stream of people walking by my cube. At home I have a door that I can close. I can think. So I get a lot more done. I'm not saying all office environments were terrible. Before 2001, I worked doing research at a University and I had a fantastic office with a door. I think I was just as productive there as I was at home. Because, again, distractions were minimal.

MivLives 7y ago
What I wouldn't give for a cube. To my left and right in our open office are engineers who are normally quiet. The row in front of are all business strategy people. They never stop talking. They're on the phone, they're having meetings, they're casually chatting. There's nothing at all to block the sound or the sight of them grouping up in 2s and 6s at each others desk. One even has a rare sight in the office, a desktop phone.
- drewg123 7y ago
  The "cube" I had was a mega-cube with 6 people. Our group was spread among 2 adjacent mega cubes, so the divider was eventually removed, making a 12-person cube. I had an end spot, and I had a portable whiteboard shoved between me and my neighbor to separate us, and I built a wall of empty Hint bottles around my desk to isolate me from the aisle. That removed a lot of visual distractions, but it was still quite noisy. Speaking of this, one guy in a building across the street basically built himself a hut out of cardboard boxes glued together. It was amazing.
  - MivLives 7y ago
    I've actually been in a similar situation except it was a former stationary closet that they had put counters around and there was five to six people in there. It actually wasn't that bad as we all face away from each other, and everyone was quiet. It was only 5-6 people of noise instead of the entire floor's.
- ghaff 7y ago
  Companies need to try to separate functions as much as possible. It's reasonable for people to find an empty office or conference room for occasional impromptu meetings or calls. But some jobs--recruiting, biz dev, etc.--basically live on the phone. It's not realistic for them either to shut up or find a room every time they're on a call.
dathinab 7y ago
> An office, with a door I can close Honestly IMHO having office rooms with ~4 (in exceptions 5 or 6) people is the bottom line for allowing productive work for any job needing concentration (and it's healthier either way). I never understood how some companies promoted the mass offices as a good solution for the employee, sure it's maybe cheaper for the employer but that normally the wrong end to save money. I've worked in a large loft with ~10 people, a 4 person room a 5 person room and a pseudo single room (it didn't had doors and was ineffective 3 person room). My experience: - The more people in the room the less the productivity even if it's a large loft. - But if having to share a room with someone who is chatting all the time is even worse even if its a 2 person room.
- Dumblydorr 7y ago
  I'd prefer my own office. I worked with 3 others in a room and it was still distracting. I got much more focused and less self conscious if no one was there. I turned the lighting, climate, and windows just how I liked, and boom, productivity increase.
SloopJon 7y ago
I have an office with a door, and I generally prefer to go into the office, but the company is converting to cubicles, one floor at a time. When my floor gets the ax, I will probably transition to 100% WFH. This experience has shown me that I can do it.
mark_l_watson 7y ago
I also worked at Google after almost 20 years of working at home. I didn’t mind the cube environment because I worked from about 6am to 3pm, giving me a few hours of quiet heads down time every day. My last job before retiring at Capital One was the same, I started work early in the morning for heads down work time, was available for brainstorming, etc., then knocked off work mid afternoon. I really recommend time shifting for people having problems concentrating in a cube environment.
- papito 7y ago
  YES. Early morning time is the most productive time for many people. It's all downhill after lunch. The problem is, many companies are more hip about WFH than hour shifting. It's not a thing. If you start coming into work early to get more done, you will get the looks if you don't stay in the office until 6:00PM, just like everyone. That is not sustainable. However, if you are a European or Indian offshore, then hour shifting is built in. Onshore, night owls are hard-working, and early birds are slackers - because no one can see them work. What I am saying is, a lot of office work is optics. Being there and within line of sight of everyone counts more than being productive and in the zone. It's dumb as fuck.
  - mschuster91 7y ago
    > YES. Early morning time is the most productive time for many people. It's all downhill after lunch. For me and many others it's right the other way around. The single way you can kill my productivity is to force me to get up earlier than 8. Now with Corona lockdowns, I can get up at 9 (!) and actually feel rested!
    - papito 7y ago
      Yes, and if we work the same amount of hours, but I leave at 4PM, you will be perceived as doing more work.
- drewg123 7y ago
  I did the same thing. I would get to the office before 6 and have 2-3 hours of quiet time. That was the only way that I was able to get anything done. The bad thing is that, almost 5 years later, my sleep schedule is still screwed up because of this. I have a really hard time sleeping past 5:30am, and I'm afraid its damaged my health.

MivLives 7y ago

What I wouldn't give for a cube. To my left and right in our open office are engineers who are normally quiet. The row in front of are all business strategy people. They never stop talking. They're on the phone, they're having meetings, they're casually chatting. There's nothing at all to block the sound or the sight of them grouping up in 2s and 6s at each others desk. One even has a rare sight in the office, a desktop phone.

drewg123 7y ago
The "cube" I had was a mega-cube with 6 people. Our group was spread among 2 adjacent mega cubes, so the divider was eventually removed, making a 12-person cube. I had an end spot, and I had a portable whiteboard shoved between me and my neighbor to separate us, and I built a wall of empty Hint bottles around my desk to isolate me from the aisle. That removed a lot of visual distractions, but it was still quite noisy. Speaking of this, one guy in a building across the street basically built himself a hut out of cardboard boxes glued together. It was amazing.
- MivLives 7y ago
  I've actually been in a similar situation except it was a former stationary closet that they had put counters around and there was five to six people in there. It actually wasn't that bad as we all face away from each other, and everyone was quiet. It was only 5-6 people of noise instead of the entire floor's.
ghaff 7y ago
Companies need to try to separate functions as much as possible. It's reasonable for people to find an empty office or conference room for occasional impromptu meetings or calls. But some jobs--recruiting, biz dev, etc.--basically live on the phone. It's not realistic for them either to shut up or find a room every time they're on a call.

dathinab 7y ago

> An office, with a door I can close Honestly IMHO having office rooms with ~4 (in exceptions 5 or 6) people is the bottom line for allowing productive work for any job needing concentration (and it's healthier either way). I never understood how some companies promoted the mass offices as a good solution for the employee, sure it's maybe cheaper for the employer but that normally the wrong end to save money. I've worked in a large loft with ~10 people, a 4 person room a 5 person room and a pseudo single room (it didn't had doors and was ineffective 3 person room). My experience: - The more people in the room the less the productivity even if it's a large loft. - But if having to share a room with someone who is chatting all the time is even worse even if its a 2 person room.

Dumblydorr 7y ago
I'd prefer my own office. I worked with 3 others in a room and it was still distracting. I got much more focused and less self conscious if no one was there. I turned the lighting, climate, and windows just how I liked, and boom, productivity increase.

SloopJon 7y ago

I have an office with a door, and I generally prefer to go into the office, but the company is converting to cubicles, one floor at a time. When my floor gets the ax, I will probably transition to 100% WFH. This experience has shown me that I can do it.

mark_l_watson 7y ago

I also worked at Google after almost 20 years of working at home. I didn’t mind the cube environment because I worked from about 6am to 3pm, giving me a few hours of quiet heads down time every day. My last job before retiring at Capital One was the same, I started work early in the morning for heads down work time, was available for brainstorming, etc., then knocked off work mid afternoon. I really recommend time shifting for people having problems concentrating in a cube environment.

papito 7y ago
YES. Early morning time is the most productive time for many people. It's all downhill after lunch. The problem is, many companies are more hip about WFH than hour shifting. It's not a thing. If you start coming into work early to get more done, you will get the looks if you don't stay in the office until 6:00PM, just like everyone. That is not sustainable. However, if you are a European or Indian offshore, then hour shifting is built in. Onshore, night owls are hard-working, and early birds are slackers - because no one can see them work. What I am saying is, a lot of office work is optics. Being there and within line of sight of everyone counts more than being productive and in the zone. It's dumb as fuck.
- mschuster91 7y ago
  > YES. Early morning time is the most productive time for many people. It's all downhill after lunch. For me and many others it's right the other way around. The single way you can kill my productivity is to force me to get up earlier than 8. Now with Corona lockdowns, I can get up at 9 (!) and actually feel rested!
  - papito 7y ago
    Yes, and if we work the same amount of hours, but I leave at 4PM, you will be perceived as doing more work.
drewg123 7y ago
I did the same thing. I would get to the office before 6 and have 2-3 hours of quiet time. That was the only way that I was able to get anything done. The bad thing is that, almost 5 years later, my sleep schedule is still screwed up because of this. I have a really hard time sleeping past 5:30am, and I'm afraid its damaged my health.