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

Science, Superstition, and Open Plan Offices

dandreamsofcoding.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 60 posts

Re: Science, Superstition, and Open Plan Offices

#21

Post by gojomo »

wmeredith wrote: post #16
gojomo wrote: post #4

Maybe we need to re-brand the "open plan" to something else. "Open" is something many tech businesses want to be, especially internally . So an "open" layout helps people be "open" in other desirable ways, right? Well, not really. It's an unfortunate decision-scrambling word-collision. It deserve a name that's still descriptive, but of a loud, crowded place where it's hard to get work done. "Stadium plan"? "Nursery p…

Exposed office plan. Cheap office plan. I really like Cheap Office plan actually. For all the ra-ra Kumbayah BS around open office plans, the fact that they are cheaper in the short run is why Cheap Office PLans (tm) are popular with management.

Hmm. Unfortunately 'cheap' also has some positive connotations in business – and it doesn't necessarily imply productivity-damaging. "It's both 'cheap' and 'open'? Sign us up!"

But breaking down 'cheap' into more-explicit descriptions of missing-amenities could work. The "infantry barracks plan". The "shantytown plan". The "disaster shelter plan". The "resettlement camp plan". The "soup kitchen plan".

Re: Science, Superstition, and Open Plan Offices

#22

Post by skizm »

I work in an open office environment and I spend a lot of my day positioning myself so that I'm not in direct line of sight with anyone else's eyes. I hate that I can't ponder to myself without risk of accidentally making eye contact with someone.

What makes it worse is that if I sit in an upright (comfortable and ergonomic) position I am staring directly at someone. I hate it.

As a result my posture and productivity noticeably decline as the day goes on.

Re: Science, Superstition, and Open Plan Offices

#23

Post by gojomo »

jamieb wrote: post #15

Here's another quote: "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." My experience, anecdotal as it is, is that an open space per team is the most effective. This being science, when has the truth ever been precisely one end of the spectrum or the other? I'm naturally skeptical of pundits, advocating science, who point out that developers with their own office perform better than dev…

Some workplaces don't limit it to "an open space per team", but mix multiple teams, whose distractions aren't relevant to other teams, in the same big room.

Re: Science, Superstition, and Open Plan Offices

#24

Post by Spooky23 »

saryant wrote: post #19
facepalm wrote: post #13

I suppose open plan has some advantages, like it is more hip (makes for great "we are a family" pictures), and the "team building" might make people less likely to leave their jobs. Just guessing - in any case there might be effects that offset the lower productivity. Otoh I was floored to read today that Amazon apparently has lots of dogs in their offices because it is supposedly good for the atmosphere, lower stres…

My company is co-located with another company and they encourage dogs in the office. My question has always been: what if you want to hire someone with a dog allergy? Worse: what if the person isn't currently local and there aren't any dogs in the office the day they happen to come in but relocate only to find they can't possibly work in that office?

I was always kind of amazed about companies that do this. I'd love to bring my dog to the office, but when does it become not ok to cause physical harm to my co-workers?

Re: Science, Superstition, and Open Plan Offices

#25

Post by logfromblammo »

7402 wrote: post #2

I interviewed with a company and during the "cultural fit" interview with the VP of Engineering, I asked why they used an open-plan office. I mentioned that there seemed to be a lot of concern in the literature and online about developer productivity in such offices. He said he "wasn't familiar" with the discussion, but he didn't think it was a problem. I was offered a contract-to-hire situation, instead of the emplo…

I often wonder why companies offer contract-to-hire positions when so many regular employees are at-will anyway. I am especially puzzled as to why a company would offer it as an alternative to both full-time regular employment and a fixed-term contract.

It seems that mixing the two removes all benefit to the worker while reserving all benefits to the company. So why would anyone do it if they had a choice?

Re: Science, Superstition, and Open Plan Offices

#26

Post by greenyoda »

michaelochurch wrote: post #14

OP is a generally good post. Two minor comments. Open plan has the advantages of being familiar, allowing more people to fit into the same space, and being more egalitarian. I.e., since offices are viewed as status symbols, providing them to developers and not to other groups could have a significant negative impact on morale among non-developers. Open-plan seems egalitarian, but it's not. It's the opposite. If you'r…

"I worked for an R&D think-tank during a summer internship. Everyone had an office, but at 3:00 there was "tea" and people got together for snacks..."

That's also the custom in many academic departments.

Re: Science, Superstition, and Open Plan Offices

#27

Post by fooqux »

7402 wrote: post #2

I interviewed with a company and during the "cultural fit" interview with the VP of Engineering, I asked why they used an open-plan office. I mentioned that there seemed to be a lot of concern in the literature and online about developer productivity in such offices. He said he "wasn't familiar" with the discussion, but he didn't think it was a problem. I was offered a contract-to-hire situation, instead of the emplo…

You also have to consider the opposite side of the coin- you should be interviewing them as much as they are you. The VP's responses should have been a red flag to you. Not just because of the fact that he apparently hadn't heard of the debate over open floor plans over the decades, but mostly due to the fact he seemingly punished you for speaking out. Typically, not fun people to work for.

And yes I'm fully aware that sometimes you're in a positions of "I need a job and can't be too picky". I hope you were in a better position than that and had the opportunity to turn them down. If not, I'd be curious how it turned out.

Re: Science, Superstition, and Open Plan Offices

#28

Post by greenyoda »

nsxwolf wrote: post #8

2014 is the year of the war on open plan offices. Some people enjoy working in them, you know. Not everyone is interested in saying "how high" every time some grad student's study says "jump".

Peopleware was published in 1987. This body of research is not something that suddenly sprang up in 2014.

Re: Science, Superstition, and Open Plan Offices

#29

Post by pyre »

astalwick wrote: post #17
cliffcrosland wrote: post #12

On the other hand, studies also show that "radical collocation" can increase software development productivity. This study from the University of Michigan claims that productivity was doubled when developers worked together in specially designed "war rooms" that allowed for both spontaneous meetings and moments of solitude: http://www.researchgate.net/publication/220879336_How_does_r... This quote summarizes the resu…

I think that's one thing that gets missed in these discussions: software development is different from, say, accounting or administration or whatever. I get huge value out of being right beside the people that can answer the questions I have, and I know that they get value being near me. Putting walls between people and enforcing no-interruption work inhibits communication and makes it much easier to get blocked. At…

> I get huge value out of being right beside the people that can answer the questions I have

As someone who -- in my workplace -- is more often than not on the receiving end of questions or calls for help, I find it extremely distracting. There have been entire days where I wasn't able to focus on my own work because everyone else had questions to answer, or bugs that they needed help working through. I can't fault them for asking for help, but I definitely get frustrated at the situation, because sometimes at the end of the day I end up feeling like I haven't accomplished anything.

Re: Science, Superstition, and Open Plan Offices

#30

Post by notahacker »

wmeredith wrote: post #18
jamieb wrote: post #15

Here's another quote: "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." My experience, anecdotal as it is, is that an open space per team is the most effective. This being science, when has the truth ever been precisely one end of the spectrum or the other? I'm naturally skeptical of pundits, advocating science, who point out that developers with their own office perform better than dev…

The simple answer is that these office plans are cheaper. It's a common business pitfall. The cheaper short term solution wins in spite of long term health productivity and culture advantages.

That might be true in some cases but there's an entire industry built around renting open-plan workspaces to solo founders and freelancers who freely choose to spend an extra $5000 per year and an hour's commute time each day because they feel an "office environment" surrounded by other busy professionals focuses their mind better than the serene quiet of their bedside desk. Many of them are developers.
Post reply on HN