3 ms·

There are actually a large number of these studies of which the one you linked is...one. Your logic as to why management makes these choices suggests you think

There are actually a large number of these studies of which the one you linked is...one. Your logic as to why management makes these choices suggests you think organizations operate on logic vs institutional habits, trends and intra organization conflict. Citation needed ;). Your survey of sentiment of the comments here (or the thousands made in similar posts) doesn't seem particular rich or nuanced, perhaps you are working deliberately with a supposition that your current situation is "just fine"?

abalone 12y ago
Open plan is a relatively recent trend[1], ergo it cannot reflect an "institutional habit". Again with the poor reasoning. One thing the Cornell study highlights is how engineers have a class bias in favor of maximum individual productivity. That is how they are rewarded. It would follow that there would be many "thousands" of comments in favor of private offices. Where these seem to fall flat is in explaining why management nonetheless build open plan offices that optimize for team collaboration, e.g. ascribing it to "greed" or "habit" or "architecture firm conspiracy" -- that is where the logic errors arise. [1] It is also a very old trend historically, but in the tech sector it is a recent trend following cubes and offices.
- zzalpha 12y ago
  Recent? Cubicle farms have been around for 30 years, now. We're simply at the truly extreme end of a very long term trend. As for why, the answers there are fairly simple: cost and snake oil. 30 years ago open plans and cubicles were pitched as a way to increase "collaboration", with no corroborating evidence that showed a commensurate increase in overall productivity. It was, to put it plainly, salesmanship and BS. I'd strongly recommend a pass through Peopleware for a more thorough treatment on the topic.
  - abalone 12y ago
    Open plan is a distinctly different approach than cubicles.
    - zzalpha 12y ago
      True. It seems cubicles were an attempt to undo some of the damage of open plan architecture, which goes back even further than I thought: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-origin-of-cubicles-an/ http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-origin-of-cubi... Damn you, Frank Lloyd Wright!

abalone 12y ago

Open plan is a relatively recent trend[1], ergo it cannot reflect an "institutional habit". Again with the poor reasoning. One thing the Cornell study highlights is how engineers have a class bias in favor of maximum individual productivity. That is how they are rewarded. It would follow that there would be many "thousands" of comments in favor of private offices. Where these seem to fall flat is in explaining why management nonetheless build open plan offices that optimize for team collaboration, e.g. ascribing it to "greed" or "habit" or "architecture firm conspiracy" -- that is where the logic errors arise. [1] It is also a very old trend historically, but in the tech sector it is a recent trend following cubes and offices.

zzalpha 12y ago
Recent? Cubicle farms have been around for 30 years, now. We're simply at the truly extreme end of a very long term trend. As for why, the answers there are fairly simple: cost and snake oil. 30 years ago open plans and cubicles were pitched as a way to increase "collaboration", with no corroborating evidence that showed a commensurate increase in overall productivity. It was, to put it plainly, salesmanship and BS. I'd strongly recommend a pass through Peopleware for a more thorough treatment on the topic.
- abalone 12y ago
  Open plan is a distinctly different approach than cubicles.
  - zzalpha 12y ago
    True. It seems cubicles were an attempt to undo some of the damage of open plan architecture, which goes back even further than I thought: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-origin-of-cubicles-an/ http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-origin-of-cubi... Damn you, Frank Lloyd Wright!