Open space vs offices. Which one is better for a new team according to studies? [on hold]
I want to create a new workspace for a small software development team (4-15 developers).
From your experience, which type of workspaces is better: open space or small offices?
Is there any research into the topic?
startup workspace
put on hold as primarily opinion-based by Dukeling, Victor S, Seth R, Snow♦ 52 mins ago
Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
|
show 4 more comments
I want to create a new workspace for a small software development team (4-15 developers).
From your experience, which type of workspaces is better: open space or small offices?
Is there any research into the topic?
startup workspace
put on hold as primarily opinion-based by Dukeling, Victor S, Seth R, Snow♦ 52 mins ago
Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
For open / closed, you mean a completely open space with no separation between developers vs separately cubicles or offices?
– DaveG
20 hours ago
@DaveG yes I mean offices
– H. Ilyas
20 hours ago
22
"Better" in which aspect? Cost? Flexibility? Employee production? Employee happiness?
– Abigail
18 hours ago
4
Vote to close as too opinion-based, as I think we can all see from the comments here. As a software developer, who is also a huge introvert, I enjoy my open office space and would be reluctant to go back to a cubicle. Even introverts need to collaborate and the lack of high walls makes that easier. This directly contradicts several comments here. You aren't going to get a definitive answer.
– Seth R
10 hours ago
2
@SethR there have been actual objective studies of this question (see the accepted answer, for example), closing it as opinion-based is inappropriate. Downvote answers that don't include citations if you like.
– Kevin
7 hours ago
|
show 4 more comments
I want to create a new workspace for a small software development team (4-15 developers).
From your experience, which type of workspaces is better: open space or small offices?
Is there any research into the topic?
startup workspace
I want to create a new workspace for a small software development team (4-15 developers).
From your experience, which type of workspaces is better: open space or small offices?
Is there any research into the topic?
startup workspace
startup workspace
edited 5 mins ago
H. Ilyas
asked 20 hours ago
H. IlyasH. Ilyas
9022316
9022316
put on hold as primarily opinion-based by Dukeling, Victor S, Seth R, Snow♦ 52 mins ago
Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
put on hold as primarily opinion-based by Dukeling, Victor S, Seth R, Snow♦ 52 mins ago
Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
For open / closed, you mean a completely open space with no separation between developers vs separately cubicles or offices?
– DaveG
20 hours ago
@DaveG yes I mean offices
– H. Ilyas
20 hours ago
22
"Better" in which aspect? Cost? Flexibility? Employee production? Employee happiness?
– Abigail
18 hours ago
4
Vote to close as too opinion-based, as I think we can all see from the comments here. As a software developer, who is also a huge introvert, I enjoy my open office space and would be reluctant to go back to a cubicle. Even introverts need to collaborate and the lack of high walls makes that easier. This directly contradicts several comments here. You aren't going to get a definitive answer.
– Seth R
10 hours ago
2
@SethR there have been actual objective studies of this question (see the accepted answer, for example), closing it as opinion-based is inappropriate. Downvote answers that don't include citations if you like.
– Kevin
7 hours ago
|
show 4 more comments
For open / closed, you mean a completely open space with no separation between developers vs separately cubicles or offices?
– DaveG
20 hours ago
@DaveG yes I mean offices
– H. Ilyas
20 hours ago
22
"Better" in which aspect? Cost? Flexibility? Employee production? Employee happiness?
– Abigail
18 hours ago
4
Vote to close as too opinion-based, as I think we can all see from the comments here. As a software developer, who is also a huge introvert, I enjoy my open office space and would be reluctant to go back to a cubicle. Even introverts need to collaborate and the lack of high walls makes that easier. This directly contradicts several comments here. You aren't going to get a definitive answer.
– Seth R
10 hours ago
2
@SethR there have been actual objective studies of this question (see the accepted answer, for example), closing it as opinion-based is inappropriate. Downvote answers that don't include citations if you like.
– Kevin
7 hours ago
For open / closed, you mean a completely open space with no separation between developers vs separately cubicles or offices?
– DaveG
20 hours ago
For open / closed, you mean a completely open space with no separation between developers vs separately cubicles or offices?
– DaveG
20 hours ago
@DaveG yes I mean offices
– H. Ilyas
20 hours ago
@DaveG yes I mean offices
– H. Ilyas
20 hours ago
22
22
"Better" in which aspect? Cost? Flexibility? Employee production? Employee happiness?
– Abigail
18 hours ago
"Better" in which aspect? Cost? Flexibility? Employee production? Employee happiness?
– Abigail
18 hours ago
4
4
Vote to close as too opinion-based, as I think we can all see from the comments here. As a software developer, who is also a huge introvert, I enjoy my open office space and would be reluctant to go back to a cubicle. Even introverts need to collaborate and the lack of high walls makes that easier. This directly contradicts several comments here. You aren't going to get a definitive answer.
– Seth R
10 hours ago
Vote to close as too opinion-based, as I think we can all see from the comments here. As a software developer, who is also a huge introvert, I enjoy my open office space and would be reluctant to go back to a cubicle. Even introverts need to collaborate and the lack of high walls makes that easier. This directly contradicts several comments here. You aren't going to get a definitive answer.
– Seth R
10 hours ago
2
2
@SethR there have been actual objective studies of this question (see the accepted answer, for example), closing it as opinion-based is inappropriate. Downvote answers that don't include citations if you like.
– Kevin
7 hours ago
@SethR there have been actual objective studies of this question (see the accepted answer, for example), closing it as opinion-based is inappropriate. Downvote answers that don't include citations if you like.
– Kevin
7 hours ago
|
show 4 more comments
6 Answers
6
active
oldest
votes
The problem is that different people work better in different environments. What you should do is have plenty of private spaces and a few usable public spaces for groups. Your spaces will not effectively work at 15 people; try to design spaces for 6 or fewer.
I’ve worked in cubicles, a private office, a shared office, and a open area. I disliked the open area because of a lack of privacy. And basically all the open space pioneers backed away from the idea quite long ago.
EDIT; Here are some interesting reads:
Harvard Study
Chicago Tribune
Forbes
Yes, 15 is too many for an open area
– Kilisi
20 hours ago
1
worst place I worked in had an open plan office space designed for about 40 people but that due to the department growing without them getting funding for more office space now housed 80 people. I literally got ill, seriously ill, from the noise and people moving around me constantly.
– jwenting
3 hours ago
add a comment |
Contrary to the original (claimed) intentions behind the open-plan office philosophy, namely the improvement of collaboration and communication research has shown that they actually cause a significant decrease in both face to face interactions and productivity.
They also appear to lead to a negative impact on employee health, one study showing a staggering 62% increase in the number of sick days taken by employees in an open plan environment vs having closed offices.
The only real benefit to open-plan is that it allows for reduced expenditure on office space, now in some locations where space is at a premium this trade off may actually make more financial sense:
An approximation for the cost savings in using open-plan can be done:
(Square feet per person saved via open offices * # of employees * Cost/square foot of office space)
So as the number of employees goes up - so does the value of potential cost reductions.
If the lost productivity of the open-plan model results in lost revenue of less than the additional cost of having closed plan offices then it can still make sense.
5
Don't forget that "lost productivity" may also include increased turnover and potential employees turning down your job-offers, in favor of companies that offer them better (non-shared) workspace.
– SeldomNeedy
11 hours ago
1
Empirically, when someone can see what's on my screen at all times I spend so much time worrying about making sure that what's on my screen looks like work that I never get any work done.
– Wayne Werner
8 hours ago
add a comment |
4-15 developers.. that's a lot of variance, it's difficult to get something liked by everyone.
To add to what has already covered by UnhandledExcepSean's answer, I'd say, even for the same person, not everyday work requires same working condition.
Example: In a design review meeting, I'd like a open workplace where I sit face to face and discuss. Same me, would like to have a semi-private workplace when I'm trying to read, understand and debug someone else's code.
What I'd say, organize the available place into three categories
- Open working space : For collaborative works
- Head-down cubicles : Semi-private space for small period of high-focus individual work.
- AV Room (Audio-Video Privacy Room): For Conference calls.
Even if you can't get the third one, it's okay. Have spaces for both 1 and 2, and let people choose what they prefer.
2
I think #3 is quite important. In fact, it could double as #1 (open working space / design space). I'd go with #2 & #3.
– DaveG
17 hours ago
add a comment |
This is just my experience about what I found worked best.
In one company we were in an old big house. Each room was large enough for 6 people, so each team had a room to themselves. The volume and "fun" were controlled for how busy each team were.
The team members could just ask a question to the room and the correct person could now answer. Without disturbing other teams to who this question was irrelevant.
I now work in one room with the entire company, not a single sound barrier. Everyone is sat with headphones on, so nobody can add their own information which is relevant but you didn't know existed to ask about. But i guess they are cheaper for the company.
add a comment |
Anecdotally: I've worked at companies that have had shared offices (usually 2 people per office) and that have had an open office arrangement.
Ironically, I've found myself collaborating less in open office arrangements.
- To deal with the extra noise created by open office layouts, many people end up wearing headphones all the time. However, people wearing headphones provide a (possibly unintended) cue that they don't want to be disturbed. I avoid talking to them too.
- I want to avoid disturbing bystanders, so I usually avoid talking to people in general.
In contrast, with private offices:
- There is a clear visual cue whether the occupants are okay with visitors or if the occupants don't want to be disturbed: whether the door is open or closed.
- I worried less about disturbing others since if discussion in the office gets too loud, we (or the people disturbed) could close doors.
add a comment |
Open space is better in my opinion.
Offices have their risks. The enhanced privacy allows for...lower productivity.
Offices also make it harder for communication, team building and approach-ability.
Open space promotes discussion, team building, knowledge sharing. If it is easier for me to call Tim 3 desks away, I will call Tim. If I have to get up and knock on a door and open it to ask Tim for help. I will ask Google for help instead. It also helps with keeping the workplace bright, with air circulation, with standardized workplace. It also allows more room to be used (as no walls = more usable space).
Again this is opinion-based, but you can probably find studies done in the matter.
23
Have you worked in an open space? This sounds like the hype behind why the trend started. The reality is that when you turn to talk to Tim, you talk loudly past other coworkers disrupting their flow and anyone else not wearing headphones. Also, if your developers are going to other developers before using resources like the internet, they are doing it wrong.
– UnhandledExcepSean
20 hours ago
4
I agree completely with @UnhandledExcepSean , more often than less, open workspace is a problem.
– Sourav Ghosh
19 hours ago
12
If it's a question which can be answered by Google, why would distract Tim, regardless of the which space you work in?
– Abigail
18 hours ago
13
The implication of "enhanced privacy allows for...lower productivity" is that management needs to be monitoring devs constantly to make sure they are on the ball. That's a characteristic of really bad organizations.
– DaveG
17 hours ago
6
and the reaction we see here is why it's "different people need different things" is the correct answer. I would literally lose my mind if you and Tim kept having conversations that would break my focus.
– Patrice
14 hours ago
|
show 9 more comments
6 Answers
6
active
oldest
votes
6 Answers
6
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
The problem is that different people work better in different environments. What you should do is have plenty of private spaces and a few usable public spaces for groups. Your spaces will not effectively work at 15 people; try to design spaces for 6 or fewer.
I’ve worked in cubicles, a private office, a shared office, and a open area. I disliked the open area because of a lack of privacy. And basically all the open space pioneers backed away from the idea quite long ago.
EDIT; Here are some interesting reads:
Harvard Study
Chicago Tribune
Forbes
Yes, 15 is too many for an open area
– Kilisi
20 hours ago
1
worst place I worked in had an open plan office space designed for about 40 people but that due to the department growing without them getting funding for more office space now housed 80 people. I literally got ill, seriously ill, from the noise and people moving around me constantly.
– jwenting
3 hours ago
add a comment |
The problem is that different people work better in different environments. What you should do is have plenty of private spaces and a few usable public spaces for groups. Your spaces will not effectively work at 15 people; try to design spaces for 6 or fewer.
I’ve worked in cubicles, a private office, a shared office, and a open area. I disliked the open area because of a lack of privacy. And basically all the open space pioneers backed away from the idea quite long ago.
EDIT; Here are some interesting reads:
Harvard Study
Chicago Tribune
Forbes
Yes, 15 is too many for an open area
– Kilisi
20 hours ago
1
worst place I worked in had an open plan office space designed for about 40 people but that due to the department growing without them getting funding for more office space now housed 80 people. I literally got ill, seriously ill, from the noise and people moving around me constantly.
– jwenting
3 hours ago
add a comment |
The problem is that different people work better in different environments. What you should do is have plenty of private spaces and a few usable public spaces for groups. Your spaces will not effectively work at 15 people; try to design spaces for 6 or fewer.
I’ve worked in cubicles, a private office, a shared office, and a open area. I disliked the open area because of a lack of privacy. And basically all the open space pioneers backed away from the idea quite long ago.
EDIT; Here are some interesting reads:
Harvard Study
Chicago Tribune
Forbes
The problem is that different people work better in different environments. What you should do is have plenty of private spaces and a few usable public spaces for groups. Your spaces will not effectively work at 15 people; try to design spaces for 6 or fewer.
I’ve worked in cubicles, a private office, a shared office, and a open area. I disliked the open area because of a lack of privacy. And basically all the open space pioneers backed away from the idea quite long ago.
EDIT; Here are some interesting reads:
Harvard Study
Chicago Tribune
Forbes
edited 17 hours ago
answered 20 hours ago
UnhandledExcepSeanUnhandledExcepSean
2,97811323
2,97811323
Yes, 15 is too many for an open area
– Kilisi
20 hours ago
1
worst place I worked in had an open plan office space designed for about 40 people but that due to the department growing without them getting funding for more office space now housed 80 people. I literally got ill, seriously ill, from the noise and people moving around me constantly.
– jwenting
3 hours ago
add a comment |
Yes, 15 is too many for an open area
– Kilisi
20 hours ago
1
worst place I worked in had an open plan office space designed for about 40 people but that due to the department growing without them getting funding for more office space now housed 80 people. I literally got ill, seriously ill, from the noise and people moving around me constantly.
– jwenting
3 hours ago
Yes, 15 is too many for an open area
– Kilisi
20 hours ago
Yes, 15 is too many for an open area
– Kilisi
20 hours ago
1
1
worst place I worked in had an open plan office space designed for about 40 people but that due to the department growing without them getting funding for more office space now housed 80 people. I literally got ill, seriously ill, from the noise and people moving around me constantly.
– jwenting
3 hours ago
worst place I worked in had an open plan office space designed for about 40 people but that due to the department growing without them getting funding for more office space now housed 80 people. I literally got ill, seriously ill, from the noise and people moving around me constantly.
– jwenting
3 hours ago
add a comment |
Contrary to the original (claimed) intentions behind the open-plan office philosophy, namely the improvement of collaboration and communication research has shown that they actually cause a significant decrease in both face to face interactions and productivity.
They also appear to lead to a negative impact on employee health, one study showing a staggering 62% increase in the number of sick days taken by employees in an open plan environment vs having closed offices.
The only real benefit to open-plan is that it allows for reduced expenditure on office space, now in some locations where space is at a premium this trade off may actually make more financial sense:
An approximation for the cost savings in using open-plan can be done:
(Square feet per person saved via open offices * # of employees * Cost/square foot of office space)
So as the number of employees goes up - so does the value of potential cost reductions.
If the lost productivity of the open-plan model results in lost revenue of less than the additional cost of having closed plan offices then it can still make sense.
5
Don't forget that "lost productivity" may also include increased turnover and potential employees turning down your job-offers, in favor of companies that offer them better (non-shared) workspace.
– SeldomNeedy
11 hours ago
1
Empirically, when someone can see what's on my screen at all times I spend so much time worrying about making sure that what's on my screen looks like work that I never get any work done.
– Wayne Werner
8 hours ago
add a comment |
Contrary to the original (claimed) intentions behind the open-plan office philosophy, namely the improvement of collaboration and communication research has shown that they actually cause a significant decrease in both face to face interactions and productivity.
They also appear to lead to a negative impact on employee health, one study showing a staggering 62% increase in the number of sick days taken by employees in an open plan environment vs having closed offices.
The only real benefit to open-plan is that it allows for reduced expenditure on office space, now in some locations where space is at a premium this trade off may actually make more financial sense:
An approximation for the cost savings in using open-plan can be done:
(Square feet per person saved via open offices * # of employees * Cost/square foot of office space)
So as the number of employees goes up - so does the value of potential cost reductions.
If the lost productivity of the open-plan model results in lost revenue of less than the additional cost of having closed plan offices then it can still make sense.
5
Don't forget that "lost productivity" may also include increased turnover and potential employees turning down your job-offers, in favor of companies that offer them better (non-shared) workspace.
– SeldomNeedy
11 hours ago
1
Empirically, when someone can see what's on my screen at all times I spend so much time worrying about making sure that what's on my screen looks like work that I never get any work done.
– Wayne Werner
8 hours ago
add a comment |
Contrary to the original (claimed) intentions behind the open-plan office philosophy, namely the improvement of collaboration and communication research has shown that they actually cause a significant decrease in both face to face interactions and productivity.
They also appear to lead to a negative impact on employee health, one study showing a staggering 62% increase in the number of sick days taken by employees in an open plan environment vs having closed offices.
The only real benefit to open-plan is that it allows for reduced expenditure on office space, now in some locations where space is at a premium this trade off may actually make more financial sense:
An approximation for the cost savings in using open-plan can be done:
(Square feet per person saved via open offices * # of employees * Cost/square foot of office space)
So as the number of employees goes up - so does the value of potential cost reductions.
If the lost productivity of the open-plan model results in lost revenue of less than the additional cost of having closed plan offices then it can still make sense.
Contrary to the original (claimed) intentions behind the open-plan office philosophy, namely the improvement of collaboration and communication research has shown that they actually cause a significant decrease in both face to face interactions and productivity.
They also appear to lead to a negative impact on employee health, one study showing a staggering 62% increase in the number of sick days taken by employees in an open plan environment vs having closed offices.
The only real benefit to open-plan is that it allows for reduced expenditure on office space, now in some locations where space is at a premium this trade off may actually make more financial sense:
An approximation for the cost savings in using open-plan can be done:
(Square feet per person saved via open offices * # of employees * Cost/square foot of office space)
So as the number of employees goes up - so does the value of potential cost reductions.
If the lost productivity of the open-plan model results in lost revenue of less than the additional cost of having closed plan offices then it can still make sense.
answered 15 hours ago
motosubatsumotosubatsu
48.5k27130190
48.5k27130190
5
Don't forget that "lost productivity" may also include increased turnover and potential employees turning down your job-offers, in favor of companies that offer them better (non-shared) workspace.
– SeldomNeedy
11 hours ago
1
Empirically, when someone can see what's on my screen at all times I spend so much time worrying about making sure that what's on my screen looks like work that I never get any work done.
– Wayne Werner
8 hours ago
add a comment |
5
Don't forget that "lost productivity" may also include increased turnover and potential employees turning down your job-offers, in favor of companies that offer them better (non-shared) workspace.
– SeldomNeedy
11 hours ago
1
Empirically, when someone can see what's on my screen at all times I spend so much time worrying about making sure that what's on my screen looks like work that I never get any work done.
– Wayne Werner
8 hours ago
5
5
Don't forget that "lost productivity" may also include increased turnover and potential employees turning down your job-offers, in favor of companies that offer them better (non-shared) workspace.
– SeldomNeedy
11 hours ago
Don't forget that "lost productivity" may also include increased turnover and potential employees turning down your job-offers, in favor of companies that offer them better (non-shared) workspace.
– SeldomNeedy
11 hours ago
1
1
Empirically, when someone can see what's on my screen at all times I spend so much time worrying about making sure that what's on my screen looks like work that I never get any work done.
– Wayne Werner
8 hours ago
Empirically, when someone can see what's on my screen at all times I spend so much time worrying about making sure that what's on my screen looks like work that I never get any work done.
– Wayne Werner
8 hours ago
add a comment |
4-15 developers.. that's a lot of variance, it's difficult to get something liked by everyone.
To add to what has already covered by UnhandledExcepSean's answer, I'd say, even for the same person, not everyday work requires same working condition.
Example: In a design review meeting, I'd like a open workplace where I sit face to face and discuss. Same me, would like to have a semi-private workplace when I'm trying to read, understand and debug someone else's code.
What I'd say, organize the available place into three categories
- Open working space : For collaborative works
- Head-down cubicles : Semi-private space for small period of high-focus individual work.
- AV Room (Audio-Video Privacy Room): For Conference calls.
Even if you can't get the third one, it's okay. Have spaces for both 1 and 2, and let people choose what they prefer.
2
I think #3 is quite important. In fact, it could double as #1 (open working space / design space). I'd go with #2 & #3.
– DaveG
17 hours ago
add a comment |
4-15 developers.. that's a lot of variance, it's difficult to get something liked by everyone.
To add to what has already covered by UnhandledExcepSean's answer, I'd say, even for the same person, not everyday work requires same working condition.
Example: In a design review meeting, I'd like a open workplace where I sit face to face and discuss. Same me, would like to have a semi-private workplace when I'm trying to read, understand and debug someone else's code.
What I'd say, organize the available place into three categories
- Open working space : For collaborative works
- Head-down cubicles : Semi-private space for small period of high-focus individual work.
- AV Room (Audio-Video Privacy Room): For Conference calls.
Even if you can't get the third one, it's okay. Have spaces for both 1 and 2, and let people choose what they prefer.
2
I think #3 is quite important. In fact, it could double as #1 (open working space / design space). I'd go with #2 & #3.
– DaveG
17 hours ago
add a comment |
4-15 developers.. that's a lot of variance, it's difficult to get something liked by everyone.
To add to what has already covered by UnhandledExcepSean's answer, I'd say, even for the same person, not everyday work requires same working condition.
Example: In a design review meeting, I'd like a open workplace where I sit face to face and discuss. Same me, would like to have a semi-private workplace when I'm trying to read, understand and debug someone else's code.
What I'd say, organize the available place into three categories
- Open working space : For collaborative works
- Head-down cubicles : Semi-private space for small period of high-focus individual work.
- AV Room (Audio-Video Privacy Room): For Conference calls.
Even if you can't get the third one, it's okay. Have spaces for both 1 and 2, and let people choose what they prefer.
4-15 developers.. that's a lot of variance, it's difficult to get something liked by everyone.
To add to what has already covered by UnhandledExcepSean's answer, I'd say, even for the same person, not everyday work requires same working condition.
Example: In a design review meeting, I'd like a open workplace where I sit face to face and discuss. Same me, would like to have a semi-private workplace when I'm trying to read, understand and debug someone else's code.
What I'd say, organize the available place into three categories
- Open working space : For collaborative works
- Head-down cubicles : Semi-private space for small period of high-focus individual work.
- AV Room (Audio-Video Privacy Room): For Conference calls.
Even if you can't get the third one, it's okay. Have spaces for both 1 and 2, and let people choose what they prefer.
edited 19 hours ago
answered 20 hours ago
Sourav GhoshSourav Ghosh
2,48911225
2,48911225
2
I think #3 is quite important. In fact, it could double as #1 (open working space / design space). I'd go with #2 & #3.
– DaveG
17 hours ago
add a comment |
2
I think #3 is quite important. In fact, it could double as #1 (open working space / design space). I'd go with #2 & #3.
– DaveG
17 hours ago
2
2
I think #3 is quite important. In fact, it could double as #1 (open working space / design space). I'd go with #2 & #3.
– DaveG
17 hours ago
I think #3 is quite important. In fact, it could double as #1 (open working space / design space). I'd go with #2 & #3.
– DaveG
17 hours ago
add a comment |
This is just my experience about what I found worked best.
In one company we were in an old big house. Each room was large enough for 6 people, so each team had a room to themselves. The volume and "fun" were controlled for how busy each team were.
The team members could just ask a question to the room and the correct person could now answer. Without disturbing other teams to who this question was irrelevant.
I now work in one room with the entire company, not a single sound barrier. Everyone is sat with headphones on, so nobody can add their own information which is relevant but you didn't know existed to ask about. But i guess they are cheaper for the company.
add a comment |
This is just my experience about what I found worked best.
In one company we were in an old big house. Each room was large enough for 6 people, so each team had a room to themselves. The volume and "fun" were controlled for how busy each team were.
The team members could just ask a question to the room and the correct person could now answer. Without disturbing other teams to who this question was irrelevant.
I now work in one room with the entire company, not a single sound barrier. Everyone is sat with headphones on, so nobody can add their own information which is relevant but you didn't know existed to ask about. But i guess they are cheaper for the company.
add a comment |
This is just my experience about what I found worked best.
In one company we were in an old big house. Each room was large enough for 6 people, so each team had a room to themselves. The volume and "fun" were controlled for how busy each team were.
The team members could just ask a question to the room and the correct person could now answer. Without disturbing other teams to who this question was irrelevant.
I now work in one room with the entire company, not a single sound barrier. Everyone is sat with headphones on, so nobody can add their own information which is relevant but you didn't know existed to ask about. But i guess they are cheaper for the company.
This is just my experience about what I found worked best.
In one company we were in an old big house. Each room was large enough for 6 people, so each team had a room to themselves. The volume and "fun" were controlled for how busy each team were.
The team members could just ask a question to the room and the correct person could now answer. Without disturbing other teams to who this question was irrelevant.
I now work in one room with the entire company, not a single sound barrier. Everyone is sat with headphones on, so nobody can add their own information which is relevant but you didn't know existed to ask about. But i guess they are cheaper for the company.
answered 19 hours ago
WendyGWendyG
593110
593110
add a comment |
add a comment |
Anecdotally: I've worked at companies that have had shared offices (usually 2 people per office) and that have had an open office arrangement.
Ironically, I've found myself collaborating less in open office arrangements.
- To deal with the extra noise created by open office layouts, many people end up wearing headphones all the time. However, people wearing headphones provide a (possibly unintended) cue that they don't want to be disturbed. I avoid talking to them too.
- I want to avoid disturbing bystanders, so I usually avoid talking to people in general.
In contrast, with private offices:
- There is a clear visual cue whether the occupants are okay with visitors or if the occupants don't want to be disturbed: whether the door is open or closed.
- I worried less about disturbing others since if discussion in the office gets too loud, we (or the people disturbed) could close doors.
add a comment |
Anecdotally: I've worked at companies that have had shared offices (usually 2 people per office) and that have had an open office arrangement.
Ironically, I've found myself collaborating less in open office arrangements.
- To deal with the extra noise created by open office layouts, many people end up wearing headphones all the time. However, people wearing headphones provide a (possibly unintended) cue that they don't want to be disturbed. I avoid talking to them too.
- I want to avoid disturbing bystanders, so I usually avoid talking to people in general.
In contrast, with private offices:
- There is a clear visual cue whether the occupants are okay with visitors or if the occupants don't want to be disturbed: whether the door is open or closed.
- I worried less about disturbing others since if discussion in the office gets too loud, we (or the people disturbed) could close doors.
add a comment |
Anecdotally: I've worked at companies that have had shared offices (usually 2 people per office) and that have had an open office arrangement.
Ironically, I've found myself collaborating less in open office arrangements.
- To deal with the extra noise created by open office layouts, many people end up wearing headphones all the time. However, people wearing headphones provide a (possibly unintended) cue that they don't want to be disturbed. I avoid talking to them too.
- I want to avoid disturbing bystanders, so I usually avoid talking to people in general.
In contrast, with private offices:
- There is a clear visual cue whether the occupants are okay with visitors or if the occupants don't want to be disturbed: whether the door is open or closed.
- I worried less about disturbing others since if discussion in the office gets too loud, we (or the people disturbed) could close doors.
Anecdotally: I've worked at companies that have had shared offices (usually 2 people per office) and that have had an open office arrangement.
Ironically, I've found myself collaborating less in open office arrangements.
- To deal with the extra noise created by open office layouts, many people end up wearing headphones all the time. However, people wearing headphones provide a (possibly unintended) cue that they don't want to be disturbed. I avoid talking to them too.
- I want to avoid disturbing bystanders, so I usually avoid talking to people in general.
In contrast, with private offices:
- There is a clear visual cue whether the occupants are okay with visitors or if the occupants don't want to be disturbed: whether the door is open or closed.
- I worried less about disturbing others since if discussion in the office gets too loud, we (or the people disturbed) could close doors.
answered 46 mins ago
jamesdlinjamesdlin
1604
1604
add a comment |
add a comment |
Open space is better in my opinion.
Offices have their risks. The enhanced privacy allows for...lower productivity.
Offices also make it harder for communication, team building and approach-ability.
Open space promotes discussion, team building, knowledge sharing. If it is easier for me to call Tim 3 desks away, I will call Tim. If I have to get up and knock on a door and open it to ask Tim for help. I will ask Google for help instead. It also helps with keeping the workplace bright, with air circulation, with standardized workplace. It also allows more room to be used (as no walls = more usable space).
Again this is opinion-based, but you can probably find studies done in the matter.
23
Have you worked in an open space? This sounds like the hype behind why the trend started. The reality is that when you turn to talk to Tim, you talk loudly past other coworkers disrupting their flow and anyone else not wearing headphones. Also, if your developers are going to other developers before using resources like the internet, they are doing it wrong.
– UnhandledExcepSean
20 hours ago
4
I agree completely with @UnhandledExcepSean , more often than less, open workspace is a problem.
– Sourav Ghosh
19 hours ago
12
If it's a question which can be answered by Google, why would distract Tim, regardless of the which space you work in?
– Abigail
18 hours ago
13
The implication of "enhanced privacy allows for...lower productivity" is that management needs to be monitoring devs constantly to make sure they are on the ball. That's a characteristic of really bad organizations.
– DaveG
17 hours ago
6
and the reaction we see here is why it's "different people need different things" is the correct answer. I would literally lose my mind if you and Tim kept having conversations that would break my focus.
– Patrice
14 hours ago
|
show 9 more comments
Open space is better in my opinion.
Offices have their risks. The enhanced privacy allows for...lower productivity.
Offices also make it harder for communication, team building and approach-ability.
Open space promotes discussion, team building, knowledge sharing. If it is easier for me to call Tim 3 desks away, I will call Tim. If I have to get up and knock on a door and open it to ask Tim for help. I will ask Google for help instead. It also helps with keeping the workplace bright, with air circulation, with standardized workplace. It also allows more room to be used (as no walls = more usable space).
Again this is opinion-based, but you can probably find studies done in the matter.
23
Have you worked in an open space? This sounds like the hype behind why the trend started. The reality is that when you turn to talk to Tim, you talk loudly past other coworkers disrupting their flow and anyone else not wearing headphones. Also, if your developers are going to other developers before using resources like the internet, they are doing it wrong.
– UnhandledExcepSean
20 hours ago
4
I agree completely with @UnhandledExcepSean , more often than less, open workspace is a problem.
– Sourav Ghosh
19 hours ago
12
If it's a question which can be answered by Google, why would distract Tim, regardless of the which space you work in?
– Abigail
18 hours ago
13
The implication of "enhanced privacy allows for...lower productivity" is that management needs to be monitoring devs constantly to make sure they are on the ball. That's a characteristic of really bad organizations.
– DaveG
17 hours ago
6
and the reaction we see here is why it's "different people need different things" is the correct answer. I would literally lose my mind if you and Tim kept having conversations that would break my focus.
– Patrice
14 hours ago
|
show 9 more comments
Open space is better in my opinion.
Offices have their risks. The enhanced privacy allows for...lower productivity.
Offices also make it harder for communication, team building and approach-ability.
Open space promotes discussion, team building, knowledge sharing. If it is easier for me to call Tim 3 desks away, I will call Tim. If I have to get up and knock on a door and open it to ask Tim for help. I will ask Google for help instead. It also helps with keeping the workplace bright, with air circulation, with standardized workplace. It also allows more room to be used (as no walls = more usable space).
Again this is opinion-based, but you can probably find studies done in the matter.
Open space is better in my opinion.
Offices have their risks. The enhanced privacy allows for...lower productivity.
Offices also make it harder for communication, team building and approach-ability.
Open space promotes discussion, team building, knowledge sharing. If it is easier for me to call Tim 3 desks away, I will call Tim. If I have to get up and knock on a door and open it to ask Tim for help. I will ask Google for help instead. It also helps with keeping the workplace bright, with air circulation, with standardized workplace. It also allows more room to be used (as no walls = more usable space).
Again this is opinion-based, but you can probably find studies done in the matter.
answered 20 hours ago
fireshark519fireshark519
662110
662110
23
Have you worked in an open space? This sounds like the hype behind why the trend started. The reality is that when you turn to talk to Tim, you talk loudly past other coworkers disrupting their flow and anyone else not wearing headphones. Also, if your developers are going to other developers before using resources like the internet, they are doing it wrong.
– UnhandledExcepSean
20 hours ago
4
I agree completely with @UnhandledExcepSean , more often than less, open workspace is a problem.
– Sourav Ghosh
19 hours ago
12
If it's a question which can be answered by Google, why would distract Tim, regardless of the which space you work in?
– Abigail
18 hours ago
13
The implication of "enhanced privacy allows for...lower productivity" is that management needs to be monitoring devs constantly to make sure they are on the ball. That's a characteristic of really bad organizations.
– DaveG
17 hours ago
6
and the reaction we see here is why it's "different people need different things" is the correct answer. I would literally lose my mind if you and Tim kept having conversations that would break my focus.
– Patrice
14 hours ago
|
show 9 more comments
23
Have you worked in an open space? This sounds like the hype behind why the trend started. The reality is that when you turn to talk to Tim, you talk loudly past other coworkers disrupting their flow and anyone else not wearing headphones. Also, if your developers are going to other developers before using resources like the internet, they are doing it wrong.
– UnhandledExcepSean
20 hours ago
4
I agree completely with @UnhandledExcepSean , more often than less, open workspace is a problem.
– Sourav Ghosh
19 hours ago
12
If it's a question which can be answered by Google, why would distract Tim, regardless of the which space you work in?
– Abigail
18 hours ago
13
The implication of "enhanced privacy allows for...lower productivity" is that management needs to be monitoring devs constantly to make sure they are on the ball. That's a characteristic of really bad organizations.
– DaveG
17 hours ago
6
and the reaction we see here is why it's "different people need different things" is the correct answer. I would literally lose my mind if you and Tim kept having conversations that would break my focus.
– Patrice
14 hours ago
23
23
Have you worked in an open space? This sounds like the hype behind why the trend started. The reality is that when you turn to talk to Tim, you talk loudly past other coworkers disrupting their flow and anyone else not wearing headphones. Also, if your developers are going to other developers before using resources like the internet, they are doing it wrong.
– UnhandledExcepSean
20 hours ago
Have you worked in an open space? This sounds like the hype behind why the trend started. The reality is that when you turn to talk to Tim, you talk loudly past other coworkers disrupting their flow and anyone else not wearing headphones. Also, if your developers are going to other developers before using resources like the internet, they are doing it wrong.
– UnhandledExcepSean
20 hours ago
4
4
I agree completely with @UnhandledExcepSean , more often than less, open workspace is a problem.
– Sourav Ghosh
19 hours ago
I agree completely with @UnhandledExcepSean , more often than less, open workspace is a problem.
– Sourav Ghosh
19 hours ago
12
12
If it's a question which can be answered by Google, why would distract Tim, regardless of the which space you work in?
– Abigail
18 hours ago
If it's a question which can be answered by Google, why would distract Tim, regardless of the which space you work in?
– Abigail
18 hours ago
13
13
The implication of "enhanced privacy allows for...lower productivity" is that management needs to be monitoring devs constantly to make sure they are on the ball. That's a characteristic of really bad organizations.
– DaveG
17 hours ago
The implication of "enhanced privacy allows for...lower productivity" is that management needs to be monitoring devs constantly to make sure they are on the ball. That's a characteristic of really bad organizations.
– DaveG
17 hours ago
6
6
and the reaction we see here is why it's "different people need different things" is the correct answer. I would literally lose my mind if you and Tim kept having conversations that would break my focus.
– Patrice
14 hours ago
and the reaction we see here is why it's "different people need different things" is the correct answer. I would literally lose my mind if you and Tim kept having conversations that would break my focus.
– Patrice
14 hours ago
|
show 9 more comments
For open / closed, you mean a completely open space with no separation between developers vs separately cubicles or offices?
– DaveG
20 hours ago
@DaveG yes I mean offices
– H. Ilyas
20 hours ago
22
"Better" in which aspect? Cost? Flexibility? Employee production? Employee happiness?
– Abigail
18 hours ago
4
Vote to close as too opinion-based, as I think we can all see from the comments here. As a software developer, who is also a huge introvert, I enjoy my open office space and would be reluctant to go back to a cubicle. Even introverts need to collaborate and the lack of high walls makes that easier. This directly contradicts several comments here. You aren't going to get a definitive answer.
– Seth R
10 hours ago
2
@SethR there have been actual objective studies of this question (see the accepted answer, for example), closing it as opinion-based is inappropriate. Downvote answers that don't include citations if you like.
– Kevin
7 hours ago