2 ms·
> I'd like team size cubicles. That would sound to me like a good compromise between collaboration, and deep work. I agree, but isn't that just a room? When I
by cyphar 6y ago
> I'd like team size cubicles. That would sound to me like a good compromise between collaboration, and deep work.
I agree, but isn't that just a room? When I was doing research at my university, all of the offices were laid out this way -- each group had one room where they all worked so they could discuss things (and the building is one of the older buildings in our 200-year-old university). Also (though I work from home) when we have face-to-face meetings at my employer's offices, the offices are similarly laid out (2-6 people from the same team in a room).
I knew that the open offices thing was the new fad in "efficiency improvements to the workplace which are actually just a way to save money", but is it really so common now that people feel the need to reinvent the room and call it a "team sized cubicle"?
- jlengrand 6y agoI'm not an expert on the matter, but I read that originally Bell Labs opened up those 'rooms' to create inter disciplinary collaboration. In other words, exactly a room yes, but making sure that you as as chemist run into a geologist once in a while, or a computer scientist gets to meet a biologist. It was about alleyways and corridors, rather than rooms itself. Of course, things have evolved with time and get used for other reasons (saving costs is indeed a big one) and we also tend to idealize the past so I won't make facts out of what I read but it makes sense to me.