3 ms·

Personally, I find cubicles to be the worst of both worlds: too spread out for much collaboration with neighbors, but open enough go have nearly all the noise a

by a_c_s 12y ago

Personally, I find cubicles to be the worst of both worlds: too spread out for much collaboration with neighbors, but open enough go have nearly all the noise and distraction of an open office.

michaelochurch 12y ago
Cubicles are horrible because they also don't deal with the worst aspect of these office spaces, which is visibility from behind. They typically have the worker facing a wall, not backed by a wall facing out. Cubes are to claustrophobia as open-plan spaces are to agoraphobia. That said, comparing open-plan offices to cubicles is like comparing horse shit to pig shit. They're both low-status office arrangements and it's amazing to me that programmers tolerate them. I actually don't think that open-plan offices are used because they're cheap or because they're effective (which they're clearly not). They market well. So much of the current "tech industry" is about marketing and the open-plan frat-house environment looks busy and vibrant. It just also happens to make for a terrible place to work.
toomuchtodo 12y ago
I find working from home to be the best out of all three choices. I'd never go back to working in an office, cubicles, open office space, whatever. If your business structure is so terrible that you can't manage a remote team, you're probably not that great at managing folks onsite either.
- fsloth 12y ago
  I've learned that for the kind of stuff I do face to face communication next to a whiteboard is the best place to discuss complex technical topics. Also, co-location does create serendipitous instances of sharing information. It's not a matter of management. It's about does the organization need the maximum communication bandwidth between individuals possibly from separate teams or not. If we take for granted that silos are bad, then that leads to the notion that cross-segment communications are good, and the easiest way to have those is co-locate everyone. There is something lost in organizational potential by not co-locating if the culture is open and encourages individual initiative. Working remote does have it's values as well, I grant that. I feel I'm much able better to concentrate at home. But I recognize the value face to face communication has as well.
- ant6n 11y ago
  I generally work at home before lunch, then in a (cramped) group office after lunch. This way I get to work by myself for considerable chunks, get to do all my meals at home (good for budgeting), and still get to interact/collaborate with colleagues basically every day. Once I spent a full day at the office; I was totally beat afterwards. The only problem is that it _looks_ like I only work half-days to everybody else.
mirkules 12y ago
Can you explain what collaborative benefits an open office plan brings when trying to concentrate on fixing code? Currently I work in a place with 66" high walls and I find that true collaboration happens regardless of the wall height, via instant messaging, email and walking into someone's cube. I've worked in places with low cube walls and I've absolutely hated it - I felt so uncomfortable I couldn't wait to leave by the end of the day. In the end, I feel low cube walls hurt privacy-minded people more than they help "collaborative" types.
- a_c_s 11y ago
  I work on a rather large system: it is not uncommon that when when a couple of people are talking (out loud, not digitally) about a problem, another co-worker, who wrote or otherwise has much more experience with the module we are discussing, joins the discussion and adds insight.
  - a_c_s 11y ago
    P.S. I find that there are three levels of noise: library-like silence, individual conversations and coffee-shop blur of conversation. In my experience with cubicles, the middle-level of noise was most common. Since there was often only one conversation happening in the office, it could be heard by many people and it was hard for me to tune out. (Sometimes people would be in their own offices but on the same conference call, so the only noise would be that one conversation in stereo!) However in the open-office, we often end up with enough noise to be at a coffee-shop level of noise which is easier to tune out. (My preference being Library > Coffee Shop > 1 conversation)

by a_c_s 12y ago

Personally, I find cubicles to be the worst of both worlds: too spread out for much collaboration with neighbors, but open enough go have nearly all the noise and distraction of an open office.

michaelochurch 12y ago

Cubicles are horrible because they also don't deal with the worst aspect of these office spaces, which is visibility from behind. They typically have the worker facing a wall, not backed by a wall facing out. Cubes are to claustrophobia as open-plan spaces are to agoraphobia. That said, comparing open-plan offices to cubicles is like comparing horse shit to pig shit. They're both low-status office arrangements and it's amazing to me that programmers tolerate them. I actually don't think that open-plan offices are used because they're cheap or because they're effective (which they're clearly not). They market well. So much of the current "tech industry" is about marketing and the open-plan frat-house environment looks busy and vibrant. It just also happens to make for a terrible place to work.

toomuchtodo 12y ago

I find working from home to be the best out of all three choices. I'd never go back to working in an office, cubicles, open office space, whatever. If your business structure is so terrible that you can't manage a remote team, you're probably not that great at managing folks onsite either.

fsloth 12y ago
I've learned that for the kind of stuff I do face to face communication next to a whiteboard is the best place to discuss complex technical topics. Also, co-location does create serendipitous instances of sharing information. It's not a matter of management. It's about does the organization need the maximum communication bandwidth between individuals possibly from separate teams or not. If we take for granted that silos are bad, then that leads to the notion that cross-segment communications are good, and the easiest way to have those is co-locate everyone. There is something lost in organizational potential by not co-locating if the culture is open and encourages individual initiative. Working remote does have it's values as well, I grant that. I feel I'm much able better to concentrate at home. But I recognize the value face to face communication has as well.
ant6n 11y ago
I generally work at home before lunch, then in a (cramped) group office after lunch. This way I get to work by myself for considerable chunks, get to do all my meals at home (good for budgeting), and still get to interact/collaborate with colleagues basically every day. Once I spent a full day at the office; I was totally beat afterwards. The only problem is that it _looks_ like I only work half-days to everybody else.

mirkules 12y ago

Can you explain what collaborative benefits an open office plan brings when trying to concentrate on fixing code? Currently I work in a place with 66" high walls and I find that true collaboration happens regardless of the wall height, via instant messaging, email and walking into someone's cube. I've worked in places with low cube walls and I've absolutely hated it - I felt so uncomfortable I couldn't wait to leave by the end of the day. In the end, I feel low cube walls hurt privacy-minded people more than they help "collaborative" types.

a_c_s 11y ago
I work on a rather large system: it is not uncommon that when when a couple of people are talking (out loud, not digitally) about a problem, another co-worker, who wrote or otherwise has much more experience with the module we are discussing, joins the discussion and adds insight.
- a_c_s 11y ago
  P.S. I find that there are three levels of noise: library-like silence, individual conversations and coffee-shop blur of conversation. In my experience with cubicles, the middle-level of noise was most common. Since there was often only one conversation happening in the office, it could be heard by many people and it was hard for me to tune out. (Sometimes people would be in their own offices but on the same conference call, so the only noise would be that one conversation in stereo!) However in the open-office, we often end up with enough noise to be at a coffee-shop level of noise which is easier to tune out. (My preference being Library > Coffee Shop > 1 conversation)