Comments
Are Cubicles Killing Us?
Threaded  |  Newest First  |  Oldest First
SZEPEDA100
50%
50%
SZEPEDA100,
User Rank: Apprentice
8/4/2011 | 12:09:09 AM
re: Are Cubicles Killing Us?
please note that as a specialist in Interior environments Architect, we are following the trends our clients are pursuing: less rentable space (non duplicating corridors, eliminate door swing space, etc.), eliminate non full-time usable space (through sharing spaces), cutting operating costs (eliminating HVAC zones, cover more illumination with less fixtures, etc.), all this and improving productivity through improving the space/environmental quality. I agree that not all companies work the same way, maybe we should promote user priority design decisions, as opposed to bottom line priority, the way norther europe does it.
Deb Donston-Miller
50%
50%
Deb Donston-Miller,
User Rank: Apprentice
8/4/2011 | 1:36:20 AM
re: Are Cubicles Killing Us?
It would be nice if it weren't one extreme or the other. (I, for one, am far too easily distracted for an open environment--physically or virtually.) Maybe employees should be given a Myers Briggs test and placed accordingly :)

Deb Donston-Miller
Contributing Editor, The BrainYard
dankeldsen
50%
50%
dankeldsen,
User Rank: Apprentice
8/7/2011 | 5:03:25 AM
re: Are Cubicles Killing Us?
Deb - absolutely - in the ideal world, why shouldn't you have an environment that makes YOU as comfortable and productive as possible? Of course you CAN work in an open environment, but the longer and more often you do, the more it wears on you. It's not that it's impossible to work in one environment or the other, but that working in an environment that is opposite to your normal inclination, is very destructive to piece of mind.

Incidentally, happy to offer a trial of the VIEW assessment to you, to illustrate the differences of VIEW vs. Myers-Briggs (or Kiersey). VIEW is much more focused on problem solving, innovation and decision-making vs. personality. Can be a subtle difference to understand until you can see/feel it for yourself.

More details at:
http://www.informationarchitec...

But feel free to contact me directly, and I can provide information for taking the VIEW.

Best,
Dan
dankeldsen
50%
50%
dankeldsen,
User Rank: Apprentice
8/7/2011 | 4:57:24 AM
re: Are Cubicles Killing Us?
Great points - and as a "Distantly Danish" guy (I have ancestors from a few generations ago from Denmark), I have to say I really admire the Danish approach to work environments. From information I've seen in the past, Danish buildings are not supposed to be taller than 4 floors (by government enforcement), and personnel are required to be able to see daylight from wherever they sit most of the time, while working.

Workplace design, like many design/engineering approaches has gone through an "over-complicating" phase, driven by office furniture makers whose bottom line is driven by (wait for it...) selling more and more furniture, instead of furniture and environments that support a constantly changing set of needs.

Workers should have far more say in the work environment than choosing what motivational (or de-motivational) posters, Dilbert cartoons, etc., they can decorate their cell (whoops!), or cubical.

Flexible space is far less expensive, and much more suited to handle growth, temporary temp creation, large-scale meetings, and more.

Simpler is better in many ways, which ironically is hard for many office planners to understand.
DANDERSON9486
50%
50%
DANDERSON9486,
User Rank: Apprentice
10/3/2011 | 6:29:35 PM
re: Are Cubicles Killing Us?
Dan;

We definitely agree that workplaces (and work practices) are not one size fits all. Not only are there distinctly different work styles and personality traits but when you get right down to it the kinds of 'work' we do is dynamic. Mobility and a multi-generational workforce increases this complexity and requires a better understanding of the wide range of activities, behaviors and settings (physical, remote, and virtual) that together comprise 'work'. As you note collaboration is one one end of the spectrum and focused individual work on the other.

Our thinking suggests that successful workplaces need to have a coordinated platform - spaces, technologies, and organizational policies - that identifies and supports effective work activities, behaviors and settings. Such platforms must be created specifically with those performing the work to both improve their personal effectiveness and further the goals of the organization.

Although the physical design of workplaces affects us significantly, it should not be thought of in isolation from the social and technologically mediated aspects of our work life. Effective workplaces need to provide the right balance and be flexible enough to respond to changes in work and how we work.

This concept of workplace requires a multi-disciplinary approach. How does this play from the information innovation side? Thoughts from business process and change management perspectives would be appreciated.

Dan Anderson

AndersonPorterDesign



IT's Reputation: What the Data Says
IT's Reputation: What the Data Says
InformationWeek's IT Perception Survey seeks to quantify how IT thinks it's doing versus how the business really views IT's performance in delivering services - and, more important, powering innovation. Our results suggest IT leaders should worry less about whether they're getting enough resources and more about the relationships they have with business unit peers.
Register for InformationWeek Newsletters
White Papers
Current Issue
InformationWeek Tech Digest September 24, 2014
Start improving branch office support by tapping public and private cloud resources to boost performance, increase worker productivity, and cut costs.
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
InformationWeek Radio
Sponsored Live Streaming Video
Everything You've Been Told About Mobility Is Wrong
Attend this video symposium with Sean Wisdom, Global Director of Mobility Solutions, and learn about how you can harness powerful new products to mobilize your business potential.