5 ms·

The Open-Office Trap (2014)

79 points by cebert 1y ago

cebert 1y ago
https://archive.ph/ccDMc https://archive.ph/ccDMc
troupo 1y ago
[2014] but it's evergreen
WillAdams 1y ago
Note that this is the architectural style, not the integrated application software suite.
- tux3 1y ago
  (The last release of which was in 2023. The Apache Open Office fiasco truly has no end.)
  - qalmakka 1y ago
    It's ironic how cannily it applies to OpenOffice too. Current OpenOffice IS a trap; you almost definitely wanted to install LibreOffice instead, but most people don't know the difference. I can't count the number of people I've seen using ancient OO instead of LO only because they didn't know that LibreOffice was the better version
  - einpoklum 1y ago
    And that's barely a "release". Essentially stagnant since 2014, and many commits which just fiddle with spaces and spelling of comments. Plus, there are apparently known, and unremedied, security vulnerabilities: https://externer-datenschutzbeauftragter-dresden.de/en/data-protection/libreoffice-warns-openoffice-use-is-a-security-risk/ https://externer-datenschutzbeauftragter-dresden.de/en/data-...
sevensor 1y ago
What amazes me about this phenomenon and so many others is just how long the executive class are willing to stick with a counterproductive trend. RTO, open offices, development methodologies that disempower the developers, devops without people who understand ops, databases without dbas, Business Intelligence in basically every flavor. The unoriginality and lack of independent thought are striking. It’s as if they would rather fail doing the conventional thing than risk failure by doing something different.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- vjvjvjvjghv 1y ago
  “ It’s as if they would rather fail doing the conventional thing than risk failure by doing something different.” There is the old saying “nobody ever got fired for buying Microsoft/IBM”. Most people, including executives, are just following the accepted wisdom with some slight variations.
- triknomeister 1y ago
  You misunderstand their purpose. They would rather be in power in a failed company than see a company succeed without them having power.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  - alexeiz 1y ago
    This reminds me something. Ah yes, Congress. They'd rather be in power in a failed country.
- happymellon 1y ago
  > executive class are willing to stick with a counterproductive trend. RTO, open offices, What makes you think they actually care about productivity? It's pure narcissistic traits, they want to be able to easily waltz in and watch their wage slaves. > development methodologies that disempower the developers, devops without people who understand ops, databases without dbas, Business Intelligence in basically every flavor. Again, it's control. Us, with our MBAs will make far more than you, even though we contribute less than an LLM You, with your decades of learning that we've demanded, are expendable and honestly we don't need anyone with skill doing your job. > It’s as if they would rather fail doing the conventional thing than risk failure by doing something different. The business just wasn't ready for their radical idea. See Adam Neumann. The difference between you and them, is that you are looking at this as work. A way to make money. For most of these folks, they already have money. This is a game, a gamble, a way to pass the time, and to gain influence. If the company fails it's not good, but it's not the end of the world. They don't have to work and when they are bored then they can always start a new business.
oddthink 1y ago
Does the "standard office" even exist? I have never seen one in my working years. I don't even know what to imagine. The closest I got was a shared office in grad school in the late 90s, but after that it's been cubes at best, long slabs of desk in an open room at worst.
- rco8786 1y ago
  I worked in one in 2008-09. Reception area and then a bunch of hallways with 20-30 individual offices and conference rooms. It was nice.
- bluGill 1y ago
  I've seen them, but they were rare already by late 1990s when I started work. I recall my dad having on in the 1970s, and I remember when I started they were tearing some out to put in cubes. Back then they told me offices were cheaper than cube (cube walls need to be stronger than regular walls because they cannot tie into the ceiling for support thus increasing costs), but they believed in the cube plan and so were willing to pay that price.
  - jon-wood 1y ago
    Cube walls are one off expense, while office square footage is a monthly expense, so if you can fit more people in the same size office by putting up some cubes it makes sense (so long as you ignore the lost productivity).
    - bluGill 1y ago
      An office or a cube takes up similar amounts of floor space - you have a lot of options for both. My current building is an open office plan which gives everybody more square footage than any cube or office walls plan I've seen. Building walls are a one-off expense just like installing cubes.
- assimpleaspossi 1y ago
  One place I worked, till 1992 at least, had offices with doors for all the engineers. I loved it but, if I kept my door closed for too long, I often felt others thought I was hiding or goofing off. If I kept my door open, I would still get distracted by people walking by. Even if they didn't say anything, they'd look in which would catch my eye.
rco8786 1y ago
Ah nice. This whole debate died with Covid but I guess there’s enough RTO happening to re ignite it.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
llm_nerd 1y ago
A lot of discussions around open offices is induced compliance/conformance. Years back I was one of the decision makers for an office move for a mid-sized engineering company. I'm a big believer in private spaces such as offices, but where that isn't possible at least sound and visual distraction blocking cubicle designs. I was treated like an obsolete relic that wasn't onboard with the whole mega teamwork, super-social open office trend. Was I anti-social? Don't I understand collaboration? Regardless, I made my case and have a lot of pull, so we compromised and made two separate classes of work spaces. An open concept "bullpen" type design, and then a cloistered section of high-walled cubicles (all areas had loads of light, windows, and all other amenities, awesome desks and shelving, etc). Everyone got to choose which area they wanted to work in. 100% of those not given private offices chose the private cubicles. Not 99%, but to a woman it was the universal choice, including among the moralizing, very outspoken "team work" open office advocates. Because they didn't believe a word of what they were saying. It was just patter to convey their great team bonafides.
nimbius 1y ago
anecdotal experience with the "open" office. When i was apprenticing long ago on my way to master mechanic, I worked for a luxury dealership in the midwest. The manager was the owners son (as per tradition) and he had just graduated with a business degree. We had a good system of 3 closed office areas, one for sales, one for service, and one for management. In the managers wisdom, we should combine all 3 into an open office format. this lasted nearly a year and was pretty similar to a nightmare-mode run in Doom. Customers eager to buy a vehicle would be immediately exposed to the masses of howling and screaming customers who couldnt fathom a $7500 suspension service as they barely made payments on their suburban assault tank. mechanics would routinely wander into the office to talk to the shop service lead, tracking all sorts of fluids onto sales floor carpets, and leaving greasy handprints on all the desks. the entire office usually smelled like burnt oil or gas (combined with the one peach air freshener the admin assistant bought.) finally management was becoming way too distracted with the heretical temptation to micromanage anything and everything. i was once pulled off the shop floor to clean carpets for 20 minutes, and another time i was tasked to restock and clean the customer lounge. 40 minutes of shop time (not cheap) to sit in the AC and munch on doritos while i watered plants and changed out the water cooler bottle. all the while the 3 impact printers for invoices were wailing away in the center of the "open office" making casual conversation pretty challenging.
danielb123 1y ago
I have worked in so many open office environments. 100% of the time the senior executives will have designated open office seats to make it look like they are one of the gang but will actually be fortified up in a fancy office like they are marines in Baghdad.
einpoklum 1y ago
"Open" office space is very often an excuse for reducing the area size per employee in a company's offices. They can't get away with squeezing people into offices of 1.8 x 1.5, which is a not-atypical personal cubicle space area for a single employee, or even 2x2 - it is too oppressive. Even with two-person offices - more space is needed that 2 cubicle seats. So, cost saving => ideology which extolls the merits of this choice, in spite of any evidence to the contrary.
GloriousMEEPT 1y ago
Many of the executives I've been around are extroverts with ADD. They love open offices.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- wazoox 1y ago
  Exactly this. Modern capitalism is under the control of a minority of extroverts, psychopaths and control freaks, who are also constantly proposed as role models. They all love open offices, to the detriment of everyone else.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

79 points by cebert 1y ago

cebert 1y ago

https://archive.ph/ccDMc https://archive.ph/ccDMc

troupo 1y ago

[2014] but it's evergreen

WillAdams 1y ago

Note that this is the architectural style, not the integrated application software suite.

tux3 1y ago
(The last release of which was in 2023. The Apache Open Office fiasco truly has no end.)
- qalmakka 1y ago
  It's ironic how cannily it applies to OpenOffice too. Current OpenOffice IS a trap; you almost definitely wanted to install LibreOffice instead, but most people don't know the difference. I can't count the number of people I've seen using ancient OO instead of LO only because they didn't know that LibreOffice was the better version
- einpoklum 1y ago
  And that's barely a "release". Essentially stagnant since 2014, and many commits which just fiddle with spaces and spelling of comments. Plus, there are apparently known, and unremedied, security vulnerabilities: https://externer-datenschutzbeauftragter-dresden.de/en/data-protection/libreoffice-warns-openoffice-use-is-a-security-risk/ https://externer-datenschutzbeauftragter-dresden.de/en/data-...

sevensor 1y ago

What amazes me about this phenomenon and so many others is just how long the executive class are willing to stick with a counterproductive trend. RTO, open offices, development methodologies that disempower the developers, devops without people who understand ops, databases without dbas, Business Intelligence in basically every flavor. The unoriginality and lack of independent thought are striking. It’s as if they would rather fail doing the conventional thing than risk failure by doing something different.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
vjvjvjvjghv 1y ago
“ It’s as if they would rather fail doing the conventional thing than risk failure by doing something different.” There is the old saying “nobody ever got fired for buying Microsoft/IBM”. Most people, including executives, are just following the accepted wisdom with some slight variations.
triknomeister 1y ago
You misunderstand their purpose. They would rather be in power in a failed company than see a company succeed without them having power.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- alexeiz 1y ago
  This reminds me something. Ah yes, Congress. They'd rather be in power in a failed country.
happymellon 1y ago
> executive class are willing to stick with a counterproductive trend. RTO, open offices, What makes you think they actually care about productivity? It's pure narcissistic traits, they want to be able to easily waltz in and watch their wage slaves. > development methodologies that disempower the developers, devops without people who understand ops, databases without dbas, Business Intelligence in basically every flavor. Again, it's control. Us, with our MBAs will make far more than you, even though we contribute less than an LLM You, with your decades of learning that we've demanded, are expendable and honestly we don't need anyone with skill doing your job. > It’s as if they would rather fail doing the conventional thing than risk failure by doing something different. The business just wasn't ready for their radical idea. See Adam Neumann. The difference between you and them, is that you are looking at this as work. A way to make money. For most of these folks, they already have money. This is a game, a gamble, a way to pass the time, and to gain influence. If the company fails it's not good, but it's not the end of the world. They don't have to work and when they are bored then they can always start a new business.

oddthink 1y ago

Does the "standard office" even exist? I have never seen one in my working years. I don't even know what to imagine. The closest I got was a shared office in grad school in the late 90s, but after that it's been cubes at best, long slabs of desk in an open room at worst.

rco8786 1y ago
I worked in one in 2008-09. Reception area and then a bunch of hallways with 20-30 individual offices and conference rooms. It was nice.
bluGill 1y ago
I've seen them, but they were rare already by late 1990s when I started work. I recall my dad having on in the 1970s, and I remember when I started they were tearing some out to put in cubes. Back then they told me offices were cheaper than cube (cube walls need to be stronger than regular walls because they cannot tie into the ceiling for support thus increasing costs), but they believed in the cube plan and so were willing to pay that price.
- jon-wood 1y ago
  Cube walls are one off expense, while office square footage is a monthly expense, so if you can fit more people in the same size office by putting up some cubes it makes sense (so long as you ignore the lost productivity).
  - bluGill 1y ago
    An office or a cube takes up similar amounts of floor space - you have a lot of options for both. My current building is an open office plan which gives everybody more square footage than any cube or office walls plan I've seen. Building walls are a one-off expense just like installing cubes.
assimpleaspossi 1y ago
One place I worked, till 1992 at least, had offices with doors for all the engineers. I loved it but, if I kept my door closed for too long, I often felt others thought I was hiding or goofing off. If I kept my door open, I would still get distracted by people walking by. Even if they didn't say anything, they'd look in which would catch my eye.

rco8786 1y ago

Ah nice. This whole debate died with Covid but I guess there’s enough RTO happening to re ignite it.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

llm_nerd 1y ago

A lot of discussions around open offices is induced compliance/conformance. Years back I was one of the decision makers for an office move for a mid-sized engineering company. I'm a big believer in private spaces such as offices, but where that isn't possible at least sound and visual distraction blocking cubicle designs. I was treated like an obsolete relic that wasn't onboard with the whole mega teamwork, super-social open office trend. Was I anti-social? Don't I understand collaboration? Regardless, I made my case and have a lot of pull, so we compromised and made two separate classes of work spaces. An open concept "bullpen" type design, and then a cloistered section of high-walled cubicles (all areas had loads of light, windows, and all other amenities, awesome desks and shelving, etc). Everyone got to choose which area they wanted to work in. 100% of those not given private offices chose the private cubicles. Not 99%, but to a woman it was the universal choice, including among the moralizing, very outspoken "team work" open office advocates. Because they didn't believe a word of what they were saying. It was just patter to convey their great team bonafides.

nimbius 1y ago

anecdotal experience with the "open" office. When i was apprenticing long ago on my way to master mechanic, I worked for a luxury dealership in the midwest. The manager was the owners son (as per tradition) and he had just graduated with a business degree. We had a good system of 3 closed office areas, one for sales, one for service, and one for management. In the managers wisdom, we should combine all 3 into an open office format. this lasted nearly a year and was pretty similar to a nightmare-mode run in Doom. Customers eager to buy a vehicle would be immediately exposed to the masses of howling and screaming customers who couldnt fathom a $7500 suspension service as they barely made payments on their suburban assault tank. mechanics would routinely wander into the office to talk to the shop service lead, tracking all sorts of fluids onto sales floor carpets, and leaving greasy handprints on all the desks. the entire office usually smelled like burnt oil or gas (combined with the one peach air freshener the admin assistant bought.) finally management was becoming way too distracted with the heretical temptation to micromanage anything and everything. i was once pulled off the shop floor to clean carpets for 20 minutes, and another time i was tasked to restock and clean the customer lounge. 40 minutes of shop time (not cheap) to sit in the AC and munch on doritos while i watered plants and changed out the water cooler bottle. all the while the 3 impact printers for invoices were wailing away in the center of the "open office" making casual conversation pretty challenging.

danielb123 1y ago

I have worked in so many open office environments. 100% of the time the senior executives will have designated open office seats to make it look like they are one of the gang but will actually be fortified up in a fancy office like they are marines in Baghdad.

einpoklum 1y ago

"Open" office space is very often an excuse for reducing the area size per employee in a company's offices. They can't get away with squeezing people into offices of 1.8 x 1.5, which is a not-atypical personal cubicle space area for a single employee, or even 2x2 - it is too oppressive. Even with two-person offices - more space is needed that 2 cubicle seats. So, cost saving => ideology which extolls the merits of this choice, in spite of any evidence to the contrary.

GloriousMEEPT 1y ago

Many of the executives I've been around are extroverts with ADD. They love open offices.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
wazoox 1y ago
Exactly this. Modern capitalism is under the control of a minority of extroverts, psychopaths and control freaks, who are also constantly proposed as role models. They all love open offices, to the detriment of everyone else.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]