Open-plan offices decrease face-to-face collaboration: study • Hacker News Board

Re: Open-plan offices decrease face-to-face collaboration: study

#71

Post by debaserab2 » Thu, Feb 06, 2020, 4:51 PM UTC

dehrmann wrote: post #62

jackfoxy wrote: post #34

35+ years in the IT workforce here. Yep, dumbest idea ever. The vast majority of my office time was in cubicles, which are pretty good. Usually enough privacy to get things done. I did have a glassed-in private office for about a year at one company. That was productivity heaven. In retrospect I was dumb to leave that company when I did, but they started demolishing offices for cubicles about 2 years later. It is all…

> The vast majority of my office time was in cubicles, which are pretty good. I remember watching "Office Space" circa 2000 and it looked pretty soul crushing, and working in pre-FAANG big tech around 2006, it felt very mechanical and depressing. I get your gripes, but I think some is also rosy retrospection.

It was dull, gray, and lacking in character but it sure beats sitting elbow to elbow cafeteria style trying to get work done.

Re: Open-plan offices decrease face-to-face collaboration: study

#72

Post by bcrosby95 » Thu, Feb 06, 2020, 4:52 PM UTC

I've worked in a variety of settings, and my favorite is a small team in a conference room/tiny open office. 3-8 people.

People tend to be respectful of each other's concentration at that number of people. And since you're in the same team, most interruptions are likely to be useful to other members of the team. But if we wanted to just bother 1 specific person, we would just use instant message.

Our manager worked in the same conference room too. But he would step outside for any calls he had to make.

It also gave an exiting "small startup" feel for me, even when working for a large company.

Re: Open-plan offices decrease face-to-face collaboration: study

#73

Post by aaronharnly » Thu, Feb 06, 2020, 4:52 PM UTC

praptak wrote: post #69

LanceH wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand you're joking about Agile, but the previous holy path was waterfall, which was a hideously expensive way to get to failure.

Except that Waterfall was never really advocated: https://davesquared.net/2008/01/contentious-myth-of-waterfal... It was conceived as a straw man which was being dissed so vigorously that people started believing it was real.

I thought that was true, but I had a vendor just last week state out loud, “We use a waterfall methodology.” It is alive and well, even if the smartest thinkers in the field never subscribed to it literally.

Re: Open-plan offices decrease face-to-face collaboration: study

#74

Post by mumblemumble » Thu, Feb 06, 2020, 4:52 PM UTC

abawany wrote: post #47

I was reading "Bloomberg by Bloomberg" over the weekend and I thought his opinion on the topic was relevant since I believe Bloomberg was one of the first major workplaces that placed everyone in tight open-office type environments. My understanding of his opinion on the topic was: yes there are distractions but you also learn new things. Fundamentally I think there is considerable misunderstanding between people who…

> yes there are distractions but you also learn new things

I've found that, in open plan offices, attempting to mentor or be mentored on something is a great way to earn dirty looks from anyone who's unfortunate enough to be sitting nearby. If you do it often, people will start griping about you behind your back.

Mini meeting rooms can work, when you can find them, for about a year. After that, the company will respond to complaints that people will hang out in them for hours on end (which I could swear was the point, but I digress) by requiring them to be reserved ahead of time in Outlook. Which puts the brakes on using them for genuine collaboration, because reserving meeting rooms in Outlook is a minor hassle, especially if you're a Linux or Mac user, and it's ultimately easier and less demoralizing to just not talk to each other than it is to play a game of, "Mother may I," whenever you want to have an impromptu discussion.

Re: Open-plan offices decrease face-to-face collaboration: study

#75

Post by fernandotakai » Thu, Feb 06, 2020, 4:52 PM UTC

commandlinefan wrote: post #28

rrauenza wrote: post #4

Isn't increasing workspace density the real reason this is done with collaboration just used as the public rationale?

Constant surveillance is another part of the real reason with collaboration used as the public rationale. I mean, it doesn't make sense, but it makes them feel more like slave-owners, and that makes them happy.

>Constant surveillance is another part of the real reason with collaboration used as the public rationale

when i worked on an open plan office, that was huge. it seems like my boss' favorite hobby was checking everyone's screen to see what they were doing.

once, i was watching a yt video on a monitor while i worked on the other. normal right? nope. my boss came to my "desk" and said i had to shut it down because it was bothering people (it wasn't anything offensive. it was literally a science podcast).

Re: Open-plan offices decrease face-to-face collaboration: study

#76

Post by slumdev » Thu, Feb 06, 2020, 4:53 PM UTC

brianpayne2 wrote: post #53

Mikeb85 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty much. Real estate is expensive.

I was talking with a friend who works at a company HQ'd in NYC and he said that the average cost per person/desk was over 60k/yr. It was a lot higher than I was expecting.

I'd be surprised if this is just real estate. HR and other things get rolled into overhead cost numbers.

Re: Open-plan offices decrease face-to-face collaboration: study

#77

Post by ksd482 » Thu, Feb 06, 2020, 4:53 PM UTC

I am a millennial (born in '88) and I would LOVE to have a cubicle. My first job was at Cisco in San Jose, California which had cubicles. I was fortunate enough to be introduced to the corporate environment with cubicles.

I loved my cubicle. Like you said: just enough privacy to get things done. People would come by only if absolutely necessary otherwise they would mind their own business.

Having cubicles also prevented useless chatter.

Then I left that company and my productivity and mental peace has never been the same. Not even near.

Re: Open-plan offices decrease face-to-face collaboration: study

#78

Post by ryandrake » Thu, Feb 06, 2020, 4:53 PM UTC

bachmeier wrote: post #51

ryandrake wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just to get the alternate view out there too: I had an office once with a door that closed. As an extrovert it was awful. I felt lonely all day. The only way to get any human contact besides email and text was to leave and go walk the halls or find some common area. I ended up pretty much never using it and instead worked from the break room. From time to time they’d give me an officemate to share the office, but the…

> Just to get the alternate view out there too This always comes up in these discussions. Extroverts say they prefer the open office format because they can talk to others. That's nice and all, but shouldn't you be working rather than satisfying your desire to talk to others? (The same goes for workers not in an open office not playing on HN all day.)

Human interaction is more than just blabbering at the water cooler. It could be as little as just seeing people walking in and out, hearing them rinse out their coffee cup, overhearing nuggets about which part of the project is behind or overhearing technical discussions that might give me ideas to try. All these things are challenging to come by when you’re shut in a quiet office. To some people this stuff doesn’t matter and/or is even detrimental to concentration. I get that. To others it’s as vital as oxygen. I don’t think one preference is any more or less valid than the other.

Re: Open-plan offices decrease face-to-face collaboration: study

#79

Post by notduncansmith » Thu, Feb 06, 2020, 4:54 PM UTC

I work in an open office environment. I never thought I’d say this, but it works excellently; there’s always energy in the air, collaboration is easy, and it’s a great space to hold company all-hands meetings. I’d say there are 4 keys to making this work:

1) The founders have a great sense of aesthetic and our office is a beautiful space as a result (also stays very clean), meaning it stays less stressful and promotes a positive mood. This may not be strictly necessary but it sure helps it not feel like the hellscape that “open office” evokes.

2) There are plenty of closed-room office spaces available if you need focus time

3) Both of our open-office sections are in rooms much bigger than the rows of desks, so despite having a large number of people in one room, it never feels crowded

4) There is Sonos in both open-office areas and people are pretty good about not hogging it or playing obnoxious/too-loud music

I’ve also worked in open offices that were nightmarish, but saw these same factors (minus the aesthetic portion) make for an effective office environment elsewhere as well. Music, breakout offices, and non-desk space seem to be the musts (but do decorate nicely because it matters more than I ever would have thought before).

EDIT: I should add that it’s usually pretty quiet, and the music very low. I don’t consider it a distraction, but I also like my coworkers’ music so this may not work for everyone. Also, headphones are universally respected as a “do not disturb” signal.

Re: Open-plan offices decrease face-to-face collaboration: study

#80

Post by agentultra » Thu, Feb 06, 2020, 4:54 PM UTC

ericwood wrote: post #65

bachmeier wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Just to get the alternate view out there too This always comes up in these discussions. Extroverts say they prefer the open office format because they can talk to others. That's nice and all, but shouldn't you be working rather than satisfying your desire to talk to others? (The same goes for workers not in an open office not playing on HN all day.)

It's not necessarily just to idly chat with other people, but has more to do with where you get your energy. I find I'm most productive and energized when surrounded by other people. Conversation is a part of it, and the ability to collaborate on the fly is great. If I'm heads down on something it's fine to be isolated every so often, but if it's for more than a few days my energy level is sunk and my productivity ac…

I get it and I totally appreciate my extrovert colleagues. I think the ability to have both is good. Sometimes I do like to work with others.

It's just that often open-plan offices are an all-or-nothing affair. It's a weird way to construct a space for people to work and collaborate given how different we all are.