Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Because that would prevent HR from the creepy surveillance techniques these open offices are designed to facilitate.
Part of the reason the open office was brought about as a good idea is that as mobile devices became more powerful, it became impossible to stop people from bringing their own device to work. Then companies started realizing the younger crowd was spending all day on Facebook, online dating apps and what not, so they felt the need to put them in a chicken farm where they could be closely watched.
Not saying this is how it necessarily happens everywhere, just saying it's one of the goals of the office design.
Personal devices are not frowned upon where I work (very large RTP employer), nor are the wearing of headphones. Some of the most successful people I've worked with here have their phones out all day and are routinely checking in on social media. But they get their work done and management is pleased with their performance, not the appearance of their performing.
I don't get all this complaining about the office culture, it's a job. Someone is paying you for your time and if you don't feel that the compensation is worth the hassle of how they treat you, find another job. If you want to feel like you company loves and cares about you, go work for SAS.
Personal devices are not frowned upon where I work (very large RTP employer), nor are the wearing of headphones. Some of the most successful people I've worked with here have their phones out all day and are routinely checking in on social media. But they get their work done and management is pleased with their performance, not the appearance of their performing.
I don't get all this complaining about the office culture, it's a job. Someone is paying you for your time and if you don't feel that the compensation is worth the hassle of how they treat you, find another job. If you want to feel like you company loves and cares about you, go work for SAS.
I have to say that I really enjoy the corporate culture in my office.
But, really.
No doubt, spending time measuring and rewarding actual performance is a much more effective management technique than spending time trying to redesign office spaces such that they attempt to correct under performing employee habits.
But let's face it, furniture shopping and moving things around is a lot less effort than learning how to properly manage, and the reality is that there are not many HR people on this planet that have the skill required to measure the performance of an engineer or other technical worker. By and large, they don't even really have a good grasp of what it is those workers do.
Whether or not the technical employees are performing is left up to the judgment of the most technical manager in charge, and they may or may not have the skills and background to understand how to measure productivity of, for example, source code production (i.e. not all managers are technical enough to have that level of clue).
So, is the human resource department to openly admit that they are largely unqualified to gauge how much or little a technical employee is actually contributing to the bottom line? It sort of puts them on the spot, they need to engage in a deflective activity to call attention away from this fact, so they start making radical floor plan design changes.
However, since I have a background in the design and creation of solutions that HELP the HR departments rather than call out their shortcomings, when I look at this whole thing impartially, I do understand why there is a need to curtail abuse of company time in certain organizations.
If an employee is using company resources (computers, internet bandwidth) to surf Facebook or Youtube recreationally, they are using paid resources whether they realize it or not. The bandwidth they are using could be slowing down some other network related long-running process in the company, and time is money (not to mention the cost of the bandwidth itself). Too much recreational video streaming can even impact VOIP call quality and make it harder for the company to support their customers, costing them business. If recreational use of resources results in malware or viruses that the IT dept has to deal with, that's another labor cost the company eats because little Johnny or Sally abused company time.
Where the line gets a bit more blurry is with personal devices. Mobile devices mean the employee doesn't necessarily need to use corporate wi-fi or hardware to waste company time, they may be doing so using their own data plan. What's more, they might even have corporate assets (documents, etc) floating around on those devices that were never intended to stray outside company boundaries, via the co-mingling of cloud storage services, messaging tools, email etc.
So there is a loss of control issue there the company needs to deal with, and I do understand this. So not all HR people are evil, nor are their intentions.
Basically if someone is using Facebook or other social media for non-company business during company time and not on their own break or flex time, it's no different than if they go and sit in the parking lot and watch a Netflix movie or play a video game while being paid by the hour of the company to do so. That of course is not the same as saying "never uses Facebook" as you said, but it highlights the opportunities for abuse.
For many times of job roles, if an employee is stopping to chat on some instant messenger every 2 minutes for non work related conversations, they are breaking their focus such that for a given 8 hour period, they are contributing less of their time to the organization than if they put the phone away and used their spare brain cycles to think about how they could be improving the company or doing their job better.
As you pointed out, time in the cubicle is not necessarily the same as overall contribution to the company. It's just that overall contribution is harder to measure and most HR departments are not up to the task so they choose the easier option.
This is why I find working remote so much better. If I need a break, I just stream video right here in my house.
It may seem weird to watch a few video clips during the work day, but come on... how many offices have you been in where people got up and down dozens of times every day and went to stand by someone else's cubicle or office door and chit chat?
That old "water cooler" conversation concept existed for a reason. People cannot be ON all day long. Most people do not get 8 actual hours of work done each day. Hell, it's more like half that. We all need breaks.
Says me, as I take one right after finishing up a WebEx.
__________________
When in doubt, check it out: FAQ
Personal devices are not frowned upon where I work (very large RTP employer), nor are the wearing of headphones. Some of the most successful people I've worked with here have their phones out all day and are routinely checking in on social media. But they get their work done and management is pleased with their performance, not the appearance of their performing.
I don't get all this complaining about the office culture, it's a job. Someone is paying you for your time and if you don't feel that the compensation is worth the hassle of how they treat you, find another job. If you want to feel like you company loves and cares about you, go work for SAS.
Personal devices are pretty much a fact of life, I doubt employers would be able to get away with banning mobile phones in this day and age. So they seek out alternative control measures, that was really my point.
I'm glad you're happy with your job. If you're in employment bliss, it would be hard for you to walk in the shoes of people who work in open office environments only to their productivity detriment. That was the only issue I was trying to address in this thread, that open offices are a bad idea for jobs requiring concentration. It's not about employee rights or satisfaction, because the open offices harm both employer and employee in that particular case.
Your comments and opinions aren't going unheard, but they tap into a lot of issues regarding employer/employee rights, job dissatisfaction strategies that may work in good economic times and not so much in others, for some in certain age demographics and maybe not so much in others, etc. and I think that could be a topic in itself so I'm not going to go there in detail, and keep my focus here on open offices and the reasons why.
This is why I find working remote so much better. If I need a break, I just stream video right here in my house.
It may seem weird to watch a few video clips during the work day, but come on... how many offices have you been in where people got up and down dozens of times every day and went to stand by someone else's cubicle or office door and chit chat?
That old "water cooler" conversation concept existed for a reason. People cannot be ON all day long. Most people do not get 8 actual hours of work done each day. Hell, it's more like half that. We all need breaks.
Says me, as I take one right after finishing up a WebEx.
Autonomy is great and is why I own my own company now as opposed to being an employee somewhere else. And most of the jobs that are hindered by open office plans probably benefit from a working from home plan.
So with that in mind, it seems even harder to fathom why a competent company would spend more money redesigning office space when that money could be better allocated to telecommuting support and work / life balance. The reason is the bean counters are generally just not smart enough to figure that out.
Personal devices are pretty much a fact of life, I doubt employers would be able to get away with banning mobile phones in this day and age. So they seek out alternative control measures, that was really my point.
I'm glad you're happy with your job. If you're in employment bliss, it would be hard for you to walk in the shoes of people who work in open office environments only to their productivity detriment. That was the only issue I was trying to address in this thread, that open offices are a bad idea for jobs requiring concentration. It's not about employee rights or satisfaction, because the open offices harm both employer and employee in that particular case.
Your comments and opinions aren't going unheard, but they tap into a lot of issues regarding employer/employee rights, job dissatisfaction strategies that may work in good economic times and not so much in others, for some in certain age demographics and maybe not so much in others, etc. and I think that could be a topic in itself so I'm not going to go there in detail, and keep my focus here on open offices and the reasons why.
Ah, but I do work in an open office environment. Generally it's a productivity inhibitor though management looks past that to the perceived benefits. This is the Agile generation we're living in where everyone collaborates with everyone on everything. But every day I come into the office and look past the disadvantages of an open office format and see the work I enjoy, colleagues whose company creates a positive environment and remind myself there are way, way worse ways to make money.
I read an interesting book focused on the strengths, weaknesses and challenges introverts face and part of the book dissects the dynamics of the open office concept and how it impacts productivity. Essentially it establishes that while it can be beneficial to make collaborative spaces readily available, the perceived value is only realized when also providing quiet spaces with limited distractions where people can focus on getting their own work done. Perhaps that will be the next stage in the workplace evolution.
Ah, but I do work in an open office environment. Generally it's a productivity inhibitor though management looks past that to the perceived benefits. This is the Agile generation we're living in where everyone collaborates with everyone on everything. But every day I come into the office and look past the disadvantages of an open office format and see the work I enjoy, colleagues whose company creates a positive environment and remind myself there are way, way worse ways to make money.
I read an interesting book focused on the strengths, weaknesses and challenges introverts face and part of the book dissects the dynamics of the open office concept and how it impacts productivity. Essentially it establishes that while it can be beneficial to make collaborative spaces readily available, the perceived value is only realized when also providing quiet spaces with limited distractions where people can focus on getting their own work done. Perhaps that will be the next stage in the workplace evolution.
It sounds like you're only partially negatively impacted by the open office environment. Does your job role consist largely of writing and analyzing mathematical algorithms/equations, creating and debugging code at ridiculous levels of detail, solving complex analytical problems or similar for many hours or days at a time? That's the group I'm talking about that is the most injured by open offices -- and in many companies they are the ones creating the product that is the reason the company exists at all. As I mentioned, tolerance to noise and distraction levels varies greatly among job roles.
I didn't see what industry OP Is in, but it is very industry-dependent, not RTP-dependent. I actually had read many times on here that many people from the NE think NC folks have a *lazier* work ethic, though that could come from the frenzied rat-race of trying to keep up with higher costs-of-living and horrid commutes in some places.
I really had thought that the "Millennial" generation was causing breakthroughs in the "workday culture", first and foremost flexible scheduling, telecommuting, putting in extra hours some days so you can take shorter days other days, etc. Certainly all of the companies that get on the "best places to work" take those kinds of perks (for me, they aren't even perks, they're just practical business sense). Sad if some places still adhere to rigid "Everyone will be at their desks from precisely 8:00:00 AM until 5:00:00 PM and will all take lunch from 12:00:00 to 1:00:00" rules. My first job out of grad school was with a "(small, family-owned, which I NEVER advise) company like that and I was ready to quit the second day (DID quit the second week--with more than 50% of the [non-family] staff leaving right behind me). And that was 20 years ago--I bet even THEY have gotten a little flexible now that the economy is vibrant and people mostly don't have to take whatever job they can manage to get.
And "open office plans"? That might be a "Millennial" invention (I am not dissing people of a certain generation, just using the term in quotes to describe the general stereotype of younger people accustomed to a much more individualized life on their terms with fewer rigid rules and more flexibility), but it seems like it's going backwards, to me as an office worker. Who wants to hear their coworkers on the phone all day, or chatting? Or feel like someone is watching over your shoulder every time you pop over to a personal website for a break?
Last time I was interviewing, one of the recruiters sent me to a place with a very open plan, where most of the (I presume low-level) workers were not only out in the open, but at roughly circular desks so everybody was facing outwards in a slightly different direction; the managers had glass offices surrounding the place and I swear it looked like "floor supervisors" were roaming the floor just spying on everybody's (very large) screens to make sure nobody stopped for a moment. I didn't get the offer, but would not have wanted it anyway, in a place like that. Where I am, I have an officemate, which is fine (especially since she WFH a lot) and one of the chief admins said "we'll get you all individual offices once there is room" which I didn't even expect (a year later, still no room, but they're building a new building). I am a coder, so I cannot fathom being able to concentrate in a "bullpen" atmosphere and would think most technical jobs would be the same. Maybe open plans work for marketing or sales, but it seems to be the tech companies who are adapting them.
And then there's "hot-desking", where you just grab whatever space is available? So no personal effects at all to remind you there is a life other than work? Who could have thought this would make people more productive? I like having people around, and leave my office door open (except when the loud lady across the hall is on the phone) but when I'm on calls, generally want my door closed and presume nobody wants to hear them, either.
OP, maybe a different industry would be best for you, because whatever field you're in, it sounds like everywhere you go, they have unpleasant setups.
Autonomy is great and is why I own my own company now as opposed to being an employee somewhere else. And most of the jobs that are hindered by open office plans probably benefit from a working from home plan.
So with that in mind, it seems even harder to fathom why a competent company would spend more money redesigning office space when that money could be better allocated to telecommuting support and work / life balance. The reason is the bean counters are generally just not smart enough to figure that out.
I actually had read many times on here that many people from the NE think NC folks have a *lazier* work ethic, though that could come from the frenzied rat-race of trying to keep up with higher costs-of-living and horrid commutes in some places.
(
Having lived in both the NE and the SE, I actually find NC to be a very interesting mix. Some companies seem to have a great, laid back culture - others much less so. Duke works me to the bone (like the NE), but overall provides a much more positive, pleasant and friendly environment than I experienced up there. My wife is IT (ish) at several companies and has had mixed experiences. The difference seems to depend in part on the level we are talking about. Certainly at the lower-levels, I see a much more laid-back approach to work (won't call it lazy) than I saw in the NE. At the upper levels (highly educated sectors, management), the culture is closer to the NE than the SE. Just the like the NE though, there are still pockets that differ and in part it just depends on where you want to draw boundaries and what kind of position you are in to do that.
My goal has always been to have enough high-quality output that no one cares to ask questions. Sometimes I can't focus and end up screwing around online or chatting with colleagues for a couple hours, have a flash of brilliance and get two weeks worth of work done by the end of the day. There are times I put in 20+ hours Saturday & Sunday to get something done. I can understand why businesses might take a different approach for cogs in an "assembly line" (literal or figurative), but for anyone whose job is as much about thinking as doing, I think its a big mistake to go to extremes to keep employees from checking facebook, watching cat videos on youtube or whatever else needs to happen.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
