10 ms·

Having worked as researcher/dev in both private office and open space setup, I am absolutely convinced that private offices are way more productive than open of

by option 12y ago

Having worked as researcher/dev in both private office and open space setup, I am absolutely convinced that private offices are way more productive than open office setup for researchers and developers. Most, if not all, of my colleagues feel the same. In fact, I don't think I will ever accept an offer from a mature company (not startup) which houses its developers in open space.

Swizec 12y ago
The only redeeming feature of open plan comes from Hamming's essay, you and your research: Another trait, it took me a while to notice. I noticed the following facts about people who work with the door open or the door closed. I notice that if you have the door to your office closed, you get more work ✥ done today and tomorrow, and you are more productive than most. But 10 years later somehow you don't ✥ know quite know what problems are worth working on; all the hard work you do is sort of tangential in ✱ importance. He who works with the door open gets all kinds of interruptions, but he also occasionally gets clues as to what the world is and what might be important. Now I cannot prove the cause and effect ✞ sequence because you might say, ``The closed door is symbolic of a closed mind.'' I don't know. But I can ✝ say there is a pretty good correlation between those who work with the doors open and those who ✝ ultimately do important things, although people who work with doors closed often work harder. Somehow ✲ they seem to work on slightly the wrong thing - not much, but enough that they miss fame.
- nostrademons 12y ago
  I think Hamming's quote pretty much sums up my personal experience with both open and closed offices. In a private office, your personal productivity is maximized; you get the most lines of code written, the most research done, the hardest problems solved. And yet the cumulative effect of that productivity seems to be much less than that of peers who write little, endure distractions, but are always in tune with which problems people are interested in.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  - Swizec 12y ago
    I think the real problem is one of aligning incentives. I would welcome open plan offices much more if I was incentivized for team performance. Instead I get forced into open collaboration-enhancing offices with the idea of increasing team productivity. But on scrums and all other things I am judged on the merits of personal productivity (tickets closed, issues resolved, whatever). This leaves me disgruntled because I have no way of showing to project managers that I've helped N people with their issues. They only care how many issues I closed. This then shapes my personal values and how I judge myself as well. Which in turn makes me shun the open plan office. Which in turn ultimately makes me a worse engineer a few years down the line. This is a problem.
    - geofft 12y ago
      We, as an industry, need to start pushing employers to make job posts talk more about "Management measures your value to the company in these ways, and rewards them in these ways" and less about "We've got a kegerator and a ball pit."
- kevinskii 12y ago
  Sitting in an office with the door open to welcome impromptu conversation is very different from, and much preferable to, sitting in an open floor plan with no privacy whatsoever. Hamming's essay doesn't redeem the open plan at all.
- romland 12y ago
  I sort of half concluded that people with closed doors are more likely to be introverts and thus less likely to look for fame. :) I'm not saying that you are saying the opposite, I'm just saying that the cause/effect is very much up in the air. I never thought it was as straight forward as asking "what is better?" (as he rightly asks too) Personally, I never looked for fame (and I'm old enough to say that I likely never will look for it). In the end, what I want is: to be right. Even if it takes 100 wrongs to get there. With that in mind, I would be better off if I was an extrovert as I'd probably get through the wrongs quicker than if I preferred my solitude. But as it stands, I like to be able to stare absentmindedly in a random direction without the risk of accidentally glancing at someone's new hat or haircut. I don't know if I am slower or slightly wrong. I would not rule it out, though. :)
  - markeroon 12y ago
    N=1, sure, but I'm very extroverted and I strongly prefer a closed, single occupancy office. There's nothing about being extroverted that makes you like concentrating less. ;)
- conitpicker 12y ago
  I had a single office at my last job. I'm in a shared office today. At my current job I feel much less aware of what's going on around me because I spend all my time with headphones on.
- legohead 12y ago
  The key takeaway from that to me is to at least have an office. Keep it open most of the time for communication, close it when you need privacy. The whole "easier to collaborate with others" with an open floor plan is just excuse. I communicate better over text chat anyway.
  - PMan74 12y ago
    > I communicate better over text chat anyway. I don't know you of course but I really doubt that text chat would ever surpass the effectiveness of face to face communication.
    - TillE 12y ago
      Text makes it much easier to share a link, refer to something in the code, etc. It's not ideal for in-depth discussions, but it can often be better for handling typical questions.
threeseed 12y ago
The trend in most modern workspaces is to have mixed use. Generally open plan for most day-to-day work and then a variety of private areas. For example offices and cubicles that are shared. Development is always tricky because often you need clear air to solve problems but then occasionally collaboration is required.
- MCRed 12y ago
  It's not really that tricky- there are many tools for collaboration including IRC. And you can always go to another developers office, in the ideal one developer-per office situation.
- patmcc 12y ago
  I think everyone agrees that you need both options, but there's still the question of which is better: 1. Open plan for day-to-day with some private rooms. 2. Private rooms for day-to-day with lots of breakout rooms (or similar). I think the first is cheaper (lower square footage), but I'd much rather work in the second.
- Devthrowaway80 12y ago
  It'd be helpful if there was some way for people to collaborate using computers, or if facetime is what you want, some sort of shared room where you can talk without disturbing others who are working. Technology might get us there someday.
noddingham 12y ago
You and all the research seems to agree. Of course, the anecdotal evidence outliers will disagree, but I don't see how there's a debate anymore when you look at productivity.
- threeseed 12y ago
  I don't know if the research is that crystal clear right now. I have no doubt that developers will write more code whilst in offices free of distraction. But the question is do they miss out on key business knowledge by not being around other people. Especially if they are in Agile feature teams.
  - vonmoltke 12y ago
    > But the question is do they miss out on key business knowledge by not being around other people. Considering the amount of money and effort engineers put into blocking distractions in open-plan offices, it is probably about the same.
    - threeseed 12y ago
      Again the trend seems to be mixed plan. Open plan offices with private areas. In which case you can not argue that there is significant money/effort involved. It's either the cost of headphones and the effort of walking tens of metres. Developers are going to need better arguments than that to convince HR/Management that this is not a trend worth doing.
      - thrownaway2424 12y ago
        If I have to walk tens of meters to meet in a private space with anyone I want to talk to, then 1) the supposed serendipitous transfer of knowledge does not happen, and 2) we could just as easily have had this encounter in my or their private office space.
      - vonmoltke 12y ago
        > Again the trend seems to be mixed plan. Open plan offices with private areas. What do you mean, "again"? This statement is the first mention of such in this sub-discussion. Also, I'm not going on a tangent about the joke that the "private areas" in such offices turn into or how infeasible this design is for many lines of business. > In which case you can not argue that there is significant money/effort involved. "Significant money and effort" as in the sum total devoted to finding solutions to the problem of distracting, sub-optimal environments being foisted upon engineers, not the cost to a single hypothetical engineer. > It's either the cost of headphones and the effort of walking tens of metres. That statement presumes: a) headphones are allowed; b) headphones work for everyone; c) people have work they can pick up and move; d) that private areas actually exist in sufficient quantity for those who want them; e) that private areas are not appropriated permanently by people up the political food chain. > Developers are going to need better arguments than that to convince HR/Management that this is not a trend worth doing. That statement assumes HR and Management care about any argument besides cost. Also, you completely ignored the point I was actually making, which is that throwing engineers together into a giant room does not give you the cross-pollination that so many management consultants claim you get.
vlunkr 12y ago
For me, open office + headphones = private office. At a vastly reduced cost. I know that doesn't work for everyone though.
- option 12y ago
  Yes, that's what many devs do. That is of varied efficiency to different people. In laboratory settings, noise has been repeatedly tied to reduced cognitive performance [1]. Also, what happens during flu season? How many people are gone and how often vs private office setting? I'd love to see a study on this. [1] http://eab.sagepub.com/content/40/2/151.abstract http://eab.sagepub.com/content/40/2/151.abstract
- EC1 12y ago
  I've tried to make myself believe that I'm more productive with headphones. Unfortunately the truth is I work best in terrifying silence.
- afandian 12y ago
  + hearing damage in a couple of decades
  - tedunangst 12y ago
    How loud is your open office?
    - praneshp 12y ago
      It's as a result of prolonged headphone use, not loudness.
      - jack-r-abbit 12y ago
        I guess I'm screwed either way. I have an office currently but I still use my headphones as much as when I didn't have one.
      - wishinghand 12y ago
pan69 12y ago
I think that there are pros and cons with both, however, I believe that a developer should have at least a "choice". With this I mean, for some of the work I do I can sit in a noisy environment and get stuff done, take e.g. doing some HTML or something else mostly "visual", however, when I need to focus and I am going to be juggling loads of tiny details in short term memory I want an environment that is quiet so I can focus. The problem with a noisy open space environment is that my environment is going to decide when I can do work. When I have the inspiration to fix a problem and I need to be able to focus, this has to be on "my terms", not that of my environment.

by option 12y ago

Swizec 12y ago

The only redeeming feature of open plan comes from Hamming's essay, you and your research: Another trait, it took me a while to notice. I noticed the following facts about people who work with the door open or the door closed. I notice that if you have the door to your office closed, you get more work ✥ done today and tomorrow, and you are more productive than most. But 10 years later somehow you don't ✥ know quite know what problems are worth working on; all the hard work you do is sort of tangential in ✱ importance. He who works with the door open gets all kinds of interruptions, but he also occasionally gets clues as to what the world is and what might be important. Now I cannot prove the cause and effect ✞ sequence because you might say, ``The closed door is symbolic of a closed mind.'' I don't know. But I can ✝ say there is a pretty good correlation between those who work with the doors open and those who ✝ ultimately do important things, although people who work with doors closed often work harder. Somehow ✲ they seem to work on slightly the wrong thing - not much, but enough that they miss fame.

nostrademons 12y ago
I think Hamming's quote pretty much sums up my personal experience with both open and closed offices. In a private office, your personal productivity is maximized; you get the most lines of code written, the most research done, the hardest problems solved. And yet the cumulative effect of that productivity seems to be much less than that of peers who write little, endure distractions, but are always in tune with which problems people are interested in.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- Swizec 12y ago
  I think the real problem is one of aligning incentives. I would welcome open plan offices much more if I was incentivized for team performance. Instead I get forced into open collaboration-enhancing offices with the idea of increasing team productivity. But on scrums and all other things I am judged on the merits of personal productivity (tickets closed, issues resolved, whatever). This leaves me disgruntled because I have no way of showing to project managers that I've helped N people with their issues. They only care how many issues I closed. This then shapes my personal values and how I judge myself as well. Which in turn makes me shun the open plan office. Which in turn ultimately makes me a worse engineer a few years down the line. This is a problem.
  - geofft 12y ago
    We, as an industry, need to start pushing employers to make job posts talk more about "Management measures your value to the company in these ways, and rewards them in these ways" and less about "We've got a kegerator and a ball pit."
kevinskii 12y ago
Sitting in an office with the door open to welcome impromptu conversation is very different from, and much preferable to, sitting in an open floor plan with no privacy whatsoever. Hamming's essay doesn't redeem the open plan at all.
romland 12y ago
I sort of half concluded that people with closed doors are more likely to be introverts and thus less likely to look for fame. :) I'm not saying that you are saying the opposite, I'm just saying that the cause/effect is very much up in the air. I never thought it was as straight forward as asking "what is better?" (as he rightly asks too) Personally, I never looked for fame (and I'm old enough to say that I likely never will look for it). In the end, what I want is: to be right. Even if it takes 100 wrongs to get there. With that in mind, I would be better off if I was an extrovert as I'd probably get through the wrongs quicker than if I preferred my solitude. But as it stands, I like to be able to stare absentmindedly in a random direction without the risk of accidentally glancing at someone's new hat or haircut. I don't know if I am slower or slightly wrong. I would not rule it out, though. :)
- markeroon 12y ago
  N=1, sure, but I'm very extroverted and I strongly prefer a closed, single occupancy office. There's nothing about being extroverted that makes you like concentrating less. ;)
conitpicker 12y ago
I had a single office at my last job. I'm in a shared office today. At my current job I feel much less aware of what's going on around me because I spend all my time with headphones on.
legohead 12y ago
The key takeaway from that to me is to at least have an office. Keep it open most of the time for communication, close it when you need privacy. The whole "easier to collaborate with others" with an open floor plan is just excuse. I communicate better over text chat anyway.
- PMan74 12y ago
  > I communicate better over text chat anyway. I don't know you of course but I really doubt that text chat would ever surpass the effectiveness of face to face communication.
  - TillE 12y ago
    Text makes it much easier to share a link, refer to something in the code, etc. It's not ideal for in-depth discussions, but it can often be better for handling typical questions.

threeseed 12y ago

The trend in most modern workspaces is to have mixed use. Generally open plan for most day-to-day work and then a variety of private areas. For example offices and cubicles that are shared. Development is always tricky because often you need clear air to solve problems but then occasionally collaboration is required.

MCRed 12y ago
It's not really that tricky- there are many tools for collaboration including IRC. And you can always go to another developers office, in the ideal one developer-per office situation.
patmcc 12y ago
I think everyone agrees that you need both options, but there's still the question of which is better: 1. Open plan for day-to-day with some private rooms. 2. Private rooms for day-to-day with lots of breakout rooms (or similar). I think the first is cheaper (lower square footage), but I'd much rather work in the second.
Devthrowaway80 12y ago
It'd be helpful if there was some way for people to collaborate using computers, or if facetime is what you want, some sort of shared room where you can talk without disturbing others who are working. Technology might get us there someday.

noddingham 12y ago

You and all the research seems to agree. Of course, the anecdotal evidence outliers will disagree, but I don't see how there's a debate anymore when you look at productivity.

threeseed 12y ago
I don't know if the research is that crystal clear right now. I have no doubt that developers will write more code whilst in offices free of distraction. But the question is do they miss out on key business knowledge by not being around other people. Especially if they are in Agile feature teams.
- vonmoltke 12y ago
  > But the question is do they miss out on key business knowledge by not being around other people. Considering the amount of money and effort engineers put into blocking distractions in open-plan offices, it is probably about the same.
  - threeseed 12y ago
    Again the trend seems to be mixed plan. Open plan offices with private areas. In which case you can not argue that there is significant money/effort involved. It's either the cost of headphones and the effort of walking tens of metres. Developers are going to need better arguments than that to convince HR/Management that this is not a trend worth doing.
    - thrownaway2424 12y ago
      If I have to walk tens of meters to meet in a private space with anyone I want to talk to, then 1) the supposed serendipitous transfer of knowledge does not happen, and 2) we could just as easily have had this encounter in my or their private office space.
    - vonmoltke 12y ago
      > Again the trend seems to be mixed plan. Open plan offices with private areas. What do you mean, "again"? This statement is the first mention of such in this sub-discussion. Also, I'm not going on a tangent about the joke that the "private areas" in such offices turn into or how infeasible this design is for many lines of business. > In which case you can not argue that there is significant money/effort involved. "Significant money and effort" as in the sum total devoted to finding solutions to the problem of distracting, sub-optimal environments being foisted upon engineers, not the cost to a single hypothetical engineer. > It's either the cost of headphones and the effort of walking tens of metres. That statement presumes: a) headphones are allowed; b) headphones work for everyone; c) people have work they can pick up and move; d) that private areas actually exist in sufficient quantity for those who want them; e) that private areas are not appropriated permanently by people up the political food chain. > Developers are going to need better arguments than that to convince HR/Management that this is not a trend worth doing. That statement assumes HR and Management care about any argument besides cost. Also, you completely ignored the point I was actually making, which is that throwing engineers together into a giant room does not give you the cross-pollination that so many management consultants claim you get.

vlunkr 12y ago

For me, open office + headphones = private office. At a vastly reduced cost. I know that doesn't work for everyone though.

option 12y ago
Yes, that's what many devs do. That is of varied efficiency to different people. In laboratory settings, noise has been repeatedly tied to reduced cognitive performance [1]. Also, what happens during flu season? How many people are gone and how often vs private office setting? I'd love to see a study on this. [1] http://eab.sagepub.com/content/40/2/151.abstract http://eab.sagepub.com/content/40/2/151.abstract
EC1 12y ago
I've tried to make myself believe that I'm more productive with headphones. Unfortunately the truth is I work best in terrifying silence.
afandian 12y ago
+ hearing damage in a couple of decades
- tedunangst 12y ago
  How loud is your open office?
  - praneshp 12y ago
    It's as a result of prolonged headphone use, not loudness.
    - jack-r-abbit 12y ago
      I guess I'm screwed either way. I have an office currently but I still use my headphones as much as when I didn't have one.
    - wishinghand 12y ago

pan69 12y ago

I think that there are pros and cons with both, however, I believe that a developer should have at least a "choice". With this I mean, for some of the work I do I can sit in a noisy environment and get stuff done, take e.g. doing some HTML or something else mostly "visual", however, when I need to focus and I am going to be juggling loads of tiny details in short term memory I want an environment that is quiet so I can focus. The problem with a noisy open space environment is that my environment is going to decide when I can do work. When I have the inspiration to fix a problem and I need to be able to focus, this has to be on "my terms", not that of my environment.