5 ms·

People do the open office floor plan because it's efficient and economical, not because it's the the best for the workers. We designed a ton of cubbies (like i

by davidu 12y ago

People do the open office floor plan because it's efficient and economical, not because it's the the best for the workers. We designed a ton of cubbies (like in your university library), 1 person private rooms, 2 person conference rooms, etc. in our office to accommodate for the fact that many people need to more privacy and quiet than just headphones. We also break up the main open plans to help quiet the noise and distraction. We have about 45,000 sq. ft today, and will be adding another 45,000 sq. ft this year. When we do, there will be much less open floor plan. I do think there's a happy medium, with team rooms of 6 to 15 people, depending on role and requirements.

teddyh 12y ago
> it's efficient Efficient for what or who, I wonder?
- gregd 12y ago
  It's efficient for people/sq foot.
  - bixmix 12y ago
    Supposedly (and I have yet to see this consistently work in action) the efficiency comes from collaboration that naturally happens when there are no physical barriers. What I generally see is I find out more about my co-workers lives and their interests than the increase in productivity and innovation from the team.
    - taeric 12y ago
      Bear in mind that the giants of our industry are built on open floor plans. So, in "real world" numbers they do hold up fairly well. I fully accept that there are confounding variables. But, I can't help but also accept that open plans are not the doomsday device that they are often painted as. They are yet another of the many variables that go into how a company is running.
- benihana 12y ago
  Cost efficient.
wylee 12y ago
I think it's more accurate to say that it's because open office are cheap (*up front). It's pretty clear that they reduce efficiency in many, if not most, cases, which can be very expensive.
- davidu 12y ago
  Yeah, I meant in the CFO kind of way. It's now clear it's not a long-term win.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
Someone1234 12y ago
> People do the open office floor plan because it's efficient and economical, not because it's the the best for the workers. I don't buy it. They pay these people minimum $60K/year (likely closer to $85K+), there's no way they would intentionally reduce an $85K * 20 worker's productivity to save 10K on furniture like you're suggesting. Even with only a 1% productivity loss that's still 17K/year down the toilet for the team. No, the real reason people do the open plan thing is that they believe that it improves worker productivity. People are better able to "collaborate" and cannot browse non-work related things (like HK) as easily. Essentially it is another "lines of code"-style management technique that is trendy at the moment. The funny thing about MBAs are that they aren't scientists and the "facts" they study aren't science. The entire thing is a "circlejerk" of things that sound like they would be constructive but rarely stopping to actually test their assumptions (instead depending on anecdotes like singular "success stories"). Nobody has tested open plan Vs. closed plan. But then how would you do that anyway? How do you measure productivity, lines of code? So that's the rub. People believe, with little basis, that open plan helps but you cannot disprove it for the same reason they cannot prove it.
bane 12y ago
> with team rooms of 6 to 15 people, depending on role and requirements I absolutely agree. Team rooms seem to be the optimal. The room gets to set the rules. It's amazing how different team cultures grow, develop and optimize for the team composition and the work they're doing. Provide a few quiet ultra-concentration nodes that people can reserve and use and conference rooms for inter-team coordinating and you're set. You get the benefits of quick communication and collaboration, without the downsides of other people's/group's conversations disrupting what you're working on AND the ability to comfortably complain that your teammate is being disruptive...which is socially harder to do with strangers/people in other parts of the company. If your rule is "put headphones on if you want privacy" you're doing it wrong. If you need to have "flow time" in the afternoon because the warehouse you've stuffed your people into is too noisy to get any real work done (so you have to schedule time to actually concentrate) you're doing it wrong. Some places even go so far as having re-configurable team rooms, they can change size and shape to accommodate growing and shrinking teams without too much fuss.
lotharbot 12y ago
I'm curious if you have any "team rooms" with private rooms directly off of them -- such that the team can have a collaborative space and heads-down coding space.
abalone 12y ago
Source? Every company I've heard talk about their reasons for open plan trumpets collaboration, not cost.
- ulysses 12y ago
  Yes, this is known as a "lie".
- davidu 12y ago
  This is something they hope to be true, but they probably know to be false. If you already know it to be false, then it's a lie. Someone pointed out you do get to know your coworkers better, but I'd argue you just get to know them better, faster.
  - abalone 12y ago
    Again, any source for that? I get the feeling it's actually the folks speculating that it's about money who are hoping that to be true, cynically. Cornell did a study that showed that people interact less when they have offices. Their definition of "frequent interaction" dropped from several times a day ad hoc (with open plan) to several times a week in a meeting. That's some data supporting that it does in fact improve collaboration. Archive.org is down right now but I can supply a link to the study later if you want.
JabavuAdams 12y ago
I love the idea of actually having a quiet room with the sign "library rules" on the door. In the quiet room, if you make noise -- even to have a work-related conversation, you get shushed. GTFO into the open-office area. No apology needed, no excuse accepted.

by davidu 12y ago

teddyh 12y ago

> it's efficient Efficient for what or who, I wonder?

gregd 12y ago
It's efficient for people/sq foot.
- bixmix 12y ago
  Supposedly (and I have yet to see this consistently work in action) the efficiency comes from collaboration that naturally happens when there are no physical barriers. What I generally see is I find out more about my co-workers lives and their interests than the increase in productivity and innovation from the team.
  - taeric 12y ago
    Bear in mind that the giants of our industry are built on open floor plans. So, in "real world" numbers they do hold up fairly well. I fully accept that there are confounding variables. But, I can't help but also accept that open plans are not the doomsday device that they are often painted as. They are yet another of the many variables that go into how a company is running.
benihana 12y ago
Cost efficient.

wylee 12y ago

I think it's more accurate to say that it's because open office are cheap (*up front). It's pretty clear that they reduce efficiency in many, if not most, cases, which can be very expensive.

davidu 12y ago
Yeah, I meant in the CFO kind of way. It's now clear it's not a long-term win.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]

Someone1234 12y ago

> People do the open office floor plan because it's efficient and economical, not because it's the the best for the workers. I don't buy it. They pay these people minimum $60K/year (likely closer to $85K+), there's no way they would intentionally reduce an $85K * 20 worker's productivity to save 10K on furniture like you're suggesting. Even with only a 1% productivity loss that's still 17K/year down the toilet for the team. No, the real reason people do the open plan thing is that they believe that it improves worker productivity. People are better able to "collaborate" and cannot browse non-work related things (like HK) as easily. Essentially it is another "lines of code"-style management technique that is trendy at the moment. The funny thing about MBAs are that they aren't scientists and the "facts" they study aren't science. The entire thing is a "circlejerk" of things that sound like they would be constructive but rarely stopping to actually test their assumptions (instead depending on anecdotes like singular "success stories"). Nobody has tested open plan Vs. closed plan. But then how would you do that anyway? How do you measure productivity, lines of code? So that's the rub. People believe, with little basis, that open plan helps but you cannot disprove it for the same reason they cannot prove it.

bane 12y ago

> with team rooms of 6 to 15 people, depending on role and requirements I absolutely agree. Team rooms seem to be the optimal. The room gets to set the rules. It's amazing how different team cultures grow, develop and optimize for the team composition and the work they're doing. Provide a few quiet ultra-concentration nodes that people can reserve and use and conference rooms for inter-team coordinating and you're set. You get the benefits of quick communication and collaboration, without the downsides of other people's/group's conversations disrupting what you're working on AND the ability to comfortably complain that your teammate is being disruptive...which is socially harder to do with strangers/people in other parts of the company. If your rule is "put headphones on if you want privacy" you're doing it wrong. If you need to have "flow time" in the afternoon because the warehouse you've stuffed your people into is too noisy to get any real work done (so you have to schedule time to actually concentrate) you're doing it wrong. Some places even go so far as having re-configurable team rooms, they can change size and shape to accommodate growing and shrinking teams without too much fuss.

lotharbot 12y ago

I'm curious if you have any "team rooms" with private rooms directly off of them -- such that the team can have a collaborative space and heads-down coding space.

abalone 12y ago

Source? Every company I've heard talk about their reasons for open plan trumpets collaboration, not cost.

ulysses 12y ago
Yes, this is known as a "lie".
davidu 12y ago
This is something they hope to be true, but they probably know to be false. If you already know it to be false, then it's a lie. Someone pointed out you do get to know your coworkers better, but I'd argue you just get to know them better, faster.
- abalone 12y ago
  Again, any source for that? I get the feeling it's actually the folks speculating that it's about money who are hoping that to be true, cynically. Cornell did a study that showed that people interact less when they have offices. Their definition of "frequent interaction" dropped from several times a day ad hoc (with open plan) to several times a week in a meeting. That's some data supporting that it does in fact improve collaboration. Archive.org is down right now but I can supply a link to the study later if you want.

JabavuAdams 12y ago

I love the idea of actually having a quiet room with the sign "library rules" on the door. In the quiet room, if you make noise -- even to have a work-related conversation, you get shushed. GTFO into the open-office area. No apology needed, no excuse accepted.