3 ms·

That's gotta be a 2x real estate overhead for current headcount. If they did that, they'd probably rather just go remote.

rightbyte 4y ago
Is 2x really the case? I got a feeling the number is way lower, maybe 10% - 20% space savings for open plans, compared to if you make people share offices. Also the need for meeting rooms is lower with offices.
- whateveracct 4y ago
  I think an office is 2 open office spaces easily
  - rightbyte 4y ago
    Sure, but if you wanna pack tight you can put two workers in a reasonably sized by old standards office room.
- omnibrain 4y ago
  I worked in a company with 2-3 person offices. And I think 2 persons was the best. You could stick two people together that needed to cooperate a lot anyway, or a senior with a (very) junior. We practically never needed meeting rooms, except for team/project meetings, because whenerver 2 -4 people needed to discuss something they just met up in one of their offices.
lrem 4y ago
2-3 person offices require actually less space than open plan + meeting rooms. That's because you don't need separate rooms for small meetings. Only the couple big ones.
- zo1 4y ago
  Is there some sort of definitive, or at least thorough analysis on this? With actual calculations and references to studies.
  - lrem 4y ago
    Possibly. I'm just comparing the experiences I had.
DrBazza 4y ago
I don't buy that at all. A reasonable sized cubicle has a wide desk and space to move you chair in and out of, plus a 'corridor' between all the cubicles. Change cubicle walls to office walls and have doors open into the existing corridor, and it's no different in size. Building codes might require some changes but I don't think it will be as much as 2x. The literature (Spolsky lists it one of his articles) implies that increased productivity of the existing employees in their own offices more than compensates for the slight decrease in the number of people you can pack into a fixed area.

rightbyte 4y ago

Is 2x really the case? I got a feeling the number is way lower, maybe 10% - 20% space savings for open plans, compared to if you make people share offices. Also the need for meeting rooms is lower with offices.

whateveracct 4y ago
I think an office is 2 open office spaces easily
- rightbyte 4y ago
  Sure, but if you wanna pack tight you can put two workers in a reasonably sized by old standards office room.
omnibrain 4y ago
I worked in a company with 2-3 person offices. And I think 2 persons was the best. You could stick two people together that needed to cooperate a lot anyway, or a senior with a (very) junior. We practically never needed meeting rooms, except for team/project meetings, because whenerver 2 -4 people needed to discuss something they just met up in one of their offices.

lrem 4y ago

2-3 person offices require actually less space than open plan + meeting rooms. That's because you don't need separate rooms for small meetings. Only the couple big ones.

zo1 4y ago
Is there some sort of definitive, or at least thorough analysis on this? With actual calculations and references to studies.
- lrem 4y ago
  Possibly. I'm just comparing the experiences I had.

DrBazza 4y ago

I don't buy that at all. A reasonable sized cubicle has a wide desk and space to move you chair in and out of, plus a 'corridor' between all the cubicles. Change cubicle walls to office walls and have doors open into the existing corridor, and it's no different in size. Building codes might require some changes but I don't think it will be as much as 2x. The literature (Spolsky lists it one of his articles) implies that increased productivity of the existing employees in their own offices more than compensates for the slight decrease in the number of people you can pack into a fixed area.