Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The open-plan office is a terrible, horrible, no good, very bad idea

m.signalvnoise.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 461 posts

Re: The open-plan office is a terrible, horrible, no good, very bad idea

#81

Post by megaman22 »

RasputinsBro wrote: post #4

> We were already working from in open office, but at least I had a desk facing the wall behind me, so there was a modicum of privacy and psychological safety. Then management decided that it would “look better” if we went to circular desks where several of us would be sitting with our backs to the hallway, so everyone walking past would be looking at our screen as they passed. This seems dishonest to me. Can some bo…

If somebody is looking over my shoulder as I'm trying to work, my productivity goes right to zero. It doesn't matter if I'm writing code or pounding nails - I need people to leave me the hell alone and let me work, without constant feedback and micromanagement.

Re: The open-plan office is a terrible, horrible, no good, very bad idea

#83

Post by dvfjsdhgfv »

The author completely misses the point using straw man argumentation. The managers sign the leases not because the of nice-looking photos, "increased collaboration" and other ridiculous arguments, but because of the bottom line. Open-plan offices are cheaper and that's the sole reason. Whatever other reasons are communicated to employees they're just typical corporate internal PR. I haven't actually met anyone who really believed all this - everyone knows these office are much worse than separate rooms, and it's also common knowledge that they're unavoidable because of (much) lower cost.

Re: The open-plan office is a terrible, horrible, no good, very bad idea

#84

Post by mlthoughts2018 »

athenot wrote: post #77

I think what's a terrible idea is pegging people to specific locations. That used to be necessary to find someone in the office but nowadays we have other tools to discover each other's locations. Instead of binding people to locations, I'd much rather bind activities/moods to locations, e.g. - the studious space: hushed atmosphere like a library, NO TALKING, for people actively working on brain problems - the collab…

What if a worker needs personalized space, like certain lighting, ergonomic chair & keyboard, works on a special desktop station not with a portable laptop, etc.?

Also, in every job I’ve had, the tasks I am asked to complete always require absolute quiet, private concentration time, for most hours on almost all days. The same has been true for most colleagues in each of these businesses, across all different software teams.

Given this, why not make the default be dedicated private offices per person, and then have separate areas for collaboration, interview rooms, etc.?

A “Library” open plan area would simply not be good enough as a default, since it lacks dedicated privacy and lacks customizability per each individual for sound, lighting, equipment, etc.

I think the main thing is that any solution proposing to put a lot of programmers into the same shared, open room is just wrong-headed and unworkable. That’s the defining property that makes these workspaces bad.

Re: The open-plan office is a terrible, horrible, no good, very bad idea

#85

Post by scrumbledober »

watwut wrote: post #71
tombert wrote: post #6

The argument of "increased collaboration" that I keep hearing is kind of negated when people have the soccer game on and you're bombarded with constant cheering, which is my current situation. Even when soccer is over, you have to contend with people playing grab-ass all over the office, or jerks (like me) with annoyingly loud keyboards. The modicum of utility of me "jumping into a conversation" really goes out the w…

What is "grab-ass all over the office"? I tried to google it to find whether it is expression, but got tons of porn as result.

I believe he's referring to in office flirting

Re: The open-plan office is a terrible, horrible, no good, very bad idea

#86

Post by mlthoughts2018 »

wafflesraccoon wrote: post #67

Man, reading the comments makes me think I'm the only one who loves open offices. After switching from a cube I never want to go back. I found being locked in a cube all day was depressing and created a culture of working zombies. With an open office in my experience people seem much happier.

It’s funny because I’ve always noticed that coworkers seem way more depressed and zombie-like in open plan offices, because they cannot get any relief from the constant stream of distractions and focus distuptors.

Re: The open-plan office is a terrible, horrible, no good, very bad idea

#87

Post by geebee »

Here's what I posted three years ago on the topic:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9760414

Is it time to get depressed yet? This has been a topic for such a long time. It was in peopleware in 1987. I thought I discovered the topic when Joel (On Sofware) wrote about it in 2000. While a few people seem to enjoy open offices, the overwhelming majority of developers I know, or who chime in on HN, value a quiet place to work and dislike open offices.

And yet, not only has nothing changed, it seems to be getting worse. It couldn't be more clear to me that developers, at least on this issue, simply have no clout as a profession. There may be a few individuals who can make demands, but on the balance, these are decisions imposed on us, as a group, and we are apparently unable to do anything about it.

The really sad thing is, this isn't a situation where we're asking to fly first class, or for more vacation. We're talking about asking for something that will make us more productive and increase the value we largely hand over to our employers, simply because it's depressing to not be able to do a good job due to distractions. So yeah, I'm depressed about it.

There was a time when I read these essays and felt a bit more charged up, like people were starting to understand something important and that things would change. Well, now we have open offices.

I'll finish with another variant on my broken record: the industry talks constant about the critical shortage of software engineers, but it won't give them a quiet place to work. Actually, that last sentence is too optimistic - it won't allow them a quiet place to work. Those places exist, but companies often demand that their programmers spend 8 hours a day in places that are too noisy for focus.

Re: The open-plan office is a terrible, horrible, no good, very bad idea

#88

Post by sotojuan »

geebee wrote: post #87

Here's what I posted three years ago on the topic: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9760414 Is it time to get depressed yet? This has been a topic for such a long time. It was in peopleware in 1987. I thought I discovered the topic when Joel (On Sofware) wrote about it in 2000. While a few people seem to enjoy open offices, the overwhelming majority of developers I know, or who chime in on HN, value a quiet place…

Reminds me of Dan Luu's take:

> This book seemed convincing when I read it in college. It even had all sorts of studies backing up what they said. No deadlines is better than having deadlines. Offices are better than cubicles. Basically all devs I talk to agree with this stuff.

> But virtually every successful company is run the opposite way. Even Microsoft is remodeling buildings from individual offices to open plan layouts. Could it be that all of this stuff just doesn't matter that much? If it really is that important, how come companies that are true believers, like Fog Creek, aren't running roughshod over their competitors?

Re: The open-plan office is a terrible, horrible, no good, very bad idea

#89

Post by linuxftw »

mwcampbell wrote: post #75
Androider wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a penny wise, pound foolish decision though, considering engineering salaries. It's hard to quantify, and often an externalized cost to the facilities management and decision makers, but my own experience suggests open offices are incredibly expensive as a negative multiplier on the engineering output. The "actual work" starts getting done in the evenings, on planes, and on weekends, while the business hours are…

> I'm building my own company now, fully remote How do you counter the common argument that face-to-face communication is the most high-bandwidth and one shouldn't throw away that competitive advantage unnecessarily? I'm not a proponent of that position; on the contrary, I don't want to accept it. But a lot of people think that way.

I find video chat to be as productive or even moreso than face-to-face meetings for small groups of people.

In face to face meetings, many companies (like ones I have worked for) have limited meeting spaces and it's quite hard to book a conference room for more than an hour. Often times, we'd shuffle from one conference room to another.

So even in-person isn't quite as effecient and productive as it could be.

Post reply on HN