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

Open offices are a dead end

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 307 posts

Re: Open offices are a dead end

#241

Post by Aeolun »

nilkn wrote: post #91
ivl wrote: post #57

I think I'd have a less negative reaction to open offices if it weren't for the attempt to sell it as a productivity booster . The article even mentions how they're "sold to workers as a boon to collaboration — liberated from barriers, stuffed in like sardines, people would chat more and, supposedly, come up with lots of brilliant new ideas". Thankfully the author also quickly refuted that. Yet the insanity remains,…

I think I'd have a less negative reaction if people actually had a decent amount of personal space in these floorplans. In the photo at the top of the article, two people could scarcely yawn and stretch at the same time without making physical contact. If you're towards the end and you want to just take a bathroom break, you'd have to physically weave around people and chairs to get out. My home office that I use for…

> If this is all the space you can afford

I think, I saw in an earlier article, and after repeating the calculation myself, that just a 1 or 2% increase in productivity would save you so much salary it’s criminal not to invest in a decent working space.

Re: Open offices are a dead end

#242

Post by nemetroid »

kerkeslager wrote: post #239
nemetroid wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You said "significant portion of the population".

Yes, and?

The fact that there are people on this thread saying that they work better in open offices does not imply that such people make up a significant portion of the population.

Re: Open offices are a dead end

#243

Post by Aeolun »

toyg wrote: post #198
tempguy9999 wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed, it's just a small room with people in it. BTDT. I worked in london in an open plan office maybe 40ft wide and getting on 200 ft long. That's open plan. It's fine except for the noise. It's always the noise as the problem, all else is ok. (edit: not a single company, a collection of small and medium businesses)

> It's fine except for the noise. And the utter lack of privacy. Want to tell your colleague that Alex is a dick? Better do it in another building, or the entire office will hear it.

Don’t worry. Alex knows everyone thinks he’s a dick.

Re: Open offices are a dead end

#244

Post by BoorishBears »

pwinnski wrote: post #235
BoorishBears wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes and yes is what I got out of your answer. >When we hire people as we've been doing, we can either fit them into the existing space somehow, or... move the entire office? Yes. Exactly. My office did it with 0 days down time combining 3 separate locations spread out around a city downtown. We labeled our stuff on Friday, a company was contracted to make sure on Monday our stuff would be in a new office, and it was.…

So for every new hire at your company, you pack up on a Friday and unpack on a Monday? Do you only hire on one day a year, or sign week-long leases, rather than year-long leases? No, that's silly. You lease a building bigger than you need today, and then when you fill it up you either pause hiring or start cramming people in until your lease is up and you can move. Or, I guess you can set money on fire and break leas…

In what way is this a valid response to what I said?

We moved into a building bigger than our current size yes... so?

You don't fill up overnight.

Do you hire people on a coin flip? Or make up open positions when it tickles someone's fancy?

We were hiring at an incredible rate, but never got to the point of being actively detrimental to our space because once that was barely in sight, we started to move.

But having money afforded that option.

Hence, it's always money, not space.

Re: Open offices are a dead end

#245

Post by castwide »

hellisothers wrote: post #160
ivl wrote: post #57

I think I'd have a less negative reaction to open offices if it weren't for the attempt to sell it as a productivity booster . The article even mentions how they're "sold to workers as a boon to collaboration — liberated from barriers, stuffed in like sardines, people would chat more and, supposedly, come up with lots of brilliant new ideas". Thankfully the author also quickly refuted that. Yet the insanity remains,…

I dunno man, I (software engineer for 21 years) like the open office, at my last job we had real offices and my coworker and I cut a huge window sized hole in the drywall between our offices so we could easier communicate/chat. I can’t count how many times a random casual conversation saved the day or generated new ideas. If I need to focus I put on headphones. Logistically it seems unlikely open offices will go away…

A workspace shared between two people, or even three or four, is a little different from an open office. I've worked in rooms I shared with small groups and can definitely see the benefits. After a certain point, like maybe ten or twelve, I think it becomes too distracting.

Re: Open offices are a dead end

#247

Post by kerkeslager »

nemetroid wrote: post #242
kerkeslager wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, and?

The fact that there are people on this thread saying that they work better in open offices does not imply that such people make up a significant portion of the population.

I suppose "significant" is subjective. Is it good enough for you if I adjust my statement to simply: "some people work better in open offices"?

Is there some threshhold of significance where it becomes acceptable to force everyone into an office space that doesn't work for everyone? Or can we just agree that we don't need to force everyone to work the same way, and people should be allowed to work in the office space that works for them?

Re: Open offices are a dead end

#248

Post by pwinnski »

BoorishBears wrote: post #244
pwinnski wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So for every new hire at your company, you pack up on a Friday and unpack on a Monday? Do you only hire on one day a year, or sign week-long leases, rather than year-long leases? No, that's silly. You lease a building bigger than you need today, and then when you fill it up you either pause hiring or start cramming people in until your lease is up and you can move. Or, I guess you can set money on fire and break leas…

In what way is this a valid response to what I said? We moved into a building bigger than our current size yes... so? You don't fill up overnight. Do you hire people on a coin flip? Or make up open positions when it tickles someone's fancy? We were hiring at an incredible rate, but never got to the point of being actively detrimental to our space because once that was barely in sight, we started to move. But having m…

It's a valid response because you seem to be denying any factors other than money, which is ridiculous.

I've mentioned lease terms as one major counter-example. It is not enough to lease "larger than you need right now," but given 12-month standard lease terms, you must lease "larger than you will need one year from now," which isn't a factor of money alone.

Re: Open offices are a dead end

#249

Post by bitL »

MagnumOpus wrote: post #34
sct202 wrote: post #14

In the four years at my current company we went full cubes -> half cubes (you get like 2-3 regular walls and one baby wall) -> open office -> open office no assigned desks. I can't wait to see the next iteration on this.

Remote work with compulsory video surveillance and screen snapshot uploads?

You have that at FAANG already but without the remote part.

Re: Open offices are a dead end

#250

Post by ryandrake »

scarface74 wrote: post #187
ryandrake wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve always considered the technology treadmill to be optional. You can ride it and be successful, or you can become a good generalist on old technologies and be successful too. I’ve never even thought about messing with Rust or React or Angular or Ember or Node or Haskell. I don’t know what a Kubernet is and I think Docker is what happens when you take “it works for me” and turn it into a software deployment tool. I…

Are you willing to move "anywhere on earth" to find a job? It doesn't matter whether anyone will hire you, what matters is if anyone will hire you in a place that you are willing to move or allow you to work remotely and at the pay you want. Also how old are you? I've seen too many people in their mid 40s who couldn't get a job because they called themselves "generalists" when a company could just as easily hire some…

Good point. There is a technology treadmill and a “moving around for work” treadmill. I’m in my 40s and have been ok with the moving around treadmill all my life. Not for everyone though. Landed in SV ten years ago and haven’t run into the need to move again so far. Fingers crossed the bull market runs on...
Post reply on HN