I have argued in the past that there are a lot of evidence-based disadvantages to working in an open office, as there are many more interruptions, distractions, and other stressors --- and of course less privacy. And there are quite a few studies that show when people move from closed to open office designs, they don't like it all and their productivity sometimes drops. I had an experience a few weeks back, however, that has me questioning the limits of this research -- and believing that if an organization has the right norms, leadership, and especially collective trust (and have the right people and right skills to truly do cooperative work), that open offices can be a splendid thing.
This all struck me a few weeks back when I went to visit David Kelley at IDEO to chat about some ideas we were hatching for the Stanford d.school (which David, a Stanford professor, co-founded along with IDEO... David was the strongest driving force behind both ventures). I had the usual delightful conversation with IDEO's receptionist (Joanie was working that afternoon) and went upstairs to what is best described as IDEO's "management floor," where IDEO's CFO, head of marketing, Chairman (David Kelley), General Manager (Tom Kelley), and CEO (Tim Brown) all work. As I turned the corner to the main floor, sitting right where the receptionist on the floor would sit (if they had one, they don't) was none other than CEO Tim Brown. I frankly took a double-take, as (in many organizations) he was sitting in just the place that would be reserved for an assistant, and frankly, would be seen as one of the lowest status places to sit because of the constant interruptions and because there was no gatekeeper to keep colleagues and random visitors like me from walking-up and talking to him. I assumed this was a mistake or something, but became more puzzled when I realized that there was some stray group (including Chris Flink, head of IDEO's New York office) in what I thought was Tim's office. After I met with David (who was charming and fun as always), I saw that Tim was still there, and I asked him why he wasn't in his office. He said it wasn't his office any longer and that he had moved to what I would call the "receptionist's position," which made him -- as he later explained it -- "the most public person on the floor."
I called him a week or so later to ask more about this approach. He told me that most of IDEO's senior people had moved out of their offices and now when there was a need for more private conversations, there were a lot of small conference available (i.e., their old offices) that everyone could use. He then explained that after working for IDEO for many years -- including as head of their London and San Francisco offices -- after he became CEO five or six years ago and was given his own office (albeit a pretty small one with glass that limited his privacy) he found it "vaguely embarrassing and frustrating to be in an office." After awhile, he and others moved to a different approach, where they were out in the open and there was more casual and exchange and fewer barriers. I also asked Tim what happens when visits IDEO's other offices -- at places like London, Chicago, New York, Shanghai, and San Francisco. He said that -- although he spends time in conference rooms in meetings with IDEO people and clients (especially when confidential matters are discussed), he takes a desk in the middle of the action because "When I am there to visit and get to know the people and how they work, I can't learn much sitting in a private office."
We also had a conversation about what he does when he needs a quite place to work, after all, he did write a great book last year called Change By Design. He said that he has plenty of quiet time to think, especially when he travels, and that to write a book, well that was something that he did at home on nights and weekends!
To me, the upshot of all this is NOT everyone should move to an open office and every CEO should be in the middle of the social swarm like Tim. Rather, the lesson is that what Tim and other senior people at IDEO do works when you have the right kind of culture and leadership, when the work requires interdependence and knowledge sharing, and people have developed the right skills and routines to work effectively when they are out in the open and on display to everyone else. I think it is especially important to develop strong norms around courtesy, about how loud to talk, when to avoid interrupting others, and so on, and to make it safe for anyone in the setting to gently remind others when they are violating such norms. I have noticed, for example, that it took some years to develop these kinds of norms at the Stanford d.school (the one "open place" that I work at a fair amount), and we are now -- on the whole -- quite considerate and respectful. The great thing about IDEO, of course, is that they have the kind of culture and skilled people who can make openness work.
P.S. In fact, if you are interested in Tim's perspective on the kind of people they strive to hire and develop, check out this recent interview that Morten Hansen (of Collaboration fame) did with Tim Brown on "T-Shaped People."
I'm still with your original stance on office spaces. I work out of my house with a door that closes and that's when I feel most productive.
Posted by: davidburkus | February 09, 2010 at 11:58 AM
At the Lean Enterprise Insitute (LEI), we live in an open environment. Overall, it has worked well and has taken us a few years to develop our norms. Even folks who used to live in offices now believe that open is the best. Anyone intersted in seeing how it all works is invited to visit us in Cambridge, MA.
Posted by: Helen | February 09, 2010 at 11:49 AM
The problem with the open office approach for many companies is they do not have the right culture and leadership as you clearly pointed out. They may a greater focus on service in customer contact departments than they have in the accounts payable department. Companies that have individual departments or groups within their orgaizations where the culture and leadership does exist have an open office approach in those departments. I think having a different open office approach by department within a comapany mixes the 2 office types and works well. In a service industry where it is vaulable for a manager to observe customer service, the open office approach works the best.
Posted by: ecartlidge | February 08, 2010 at 03:46 PM
The problem with the open office approach for many companies is they do not have the right culture and leadership as you clearly point out. Developing the right culture does not happen overnight. Some companies may have individual departments or groups within their organization where the culture and leadership does exists. I think there is value in allowing a different open office approach by department within a company. In a service industry where it is valuable for a manager to observe customer service, the open office approach works the best.
Posted by: ecartlidge | February 08, 2010 at 12:09 PM
NYC Mayor Mike Bloomberg has turned the working area in City Hall into a trading floor, an open bullpen as they call it there, with him right in the middle. The level of engagement among the people who make things happen in the city is unparalleled. Moving from an office to open space can be unsettling, but habit forming. Moving back to an office feels both pretentious and isolating.
Posted by: Joe_marchese | February 05, 2010 at 11:40 AM
Thank you for the insight on the advantages of an open office. I had the experience yesterday of eating lunch with my boss in his open office and watching the atmosphere become energized--though borderline chaotic--as several people interupted us with various small crises. I joked with him that if I was him, I would lock that door, and he just laughed. Now I have a new perspective as to why he doesn't--his finger is never off the pulse and he is always accessible to the team.
Posted by: Stephanie Cowan | February 05, 2010 at 08:54 AM
I work in a space that's about 100' x 60' with 50 people in it. There no walls except the exterior ones and no windows.
If there was any sense of courtesy it might make it bearable. There isn't, though, so the noise level makes productivity impossible.
Distractions are nonstop, from everyone's cell phones to people calling each other on speakerphone to people walking up and interrupting whenever it's convenient for them. Several people have no concept of an "inside voice", others get combative when asked to not use their speakerphone to call the person sitting 10 feet away.
Our CEO and a few other people have offices in another building and are sequestered out of sight. They say they couldn't work in our open environment and joke about some of the more obnoxious disruptive people. The rest of us don't find it very funny.
Posted by: Charles Robinson | February 05, 2010 at 06:15 AM
I have worked in both open and closed offices, and when a company has both a flat hierarchy and collaborative culture , I found it much more powerful to be open than closed. To come into work everyday and see the CEO working alongside me was inspiring.
I have also been at companies where open offices would never work. On the one hand, people clung to their status symbols, and on the other, the work was more individualistic. I personally preferred the open environment, but I recognize it does not work for all companies.
Posted by: Stu Stein | February 04, 2010 at 08:48 PM
For me, at Mozilla, I have a very similar perspective to Tim's. I try to put my desk in the open in a high traffic area -- in general, I find that getting information to flow freely throughout the organization, and to the CEO in particular, is tough -- so making it as easy as possible for someone to drop by, make a passing comment, or just see me available and working.
In fact, I've recently added a standing desk that I try to work at for good parts of the day -- has increased the flow of people coming by to talk.
For our own situation, information flow is about the most important thing, and I view dealing with interruptions *as* the basic CEO job, not *from* the job.
Posted by: John Lilly | February 04, 2010 at 02:08 PM
I agree with Tim about open offices . If you have to innovate with a group of people, then open offices is the way to go since collaboration is most efficient when people are co-located.
Group creativity also takes flight in the open not behind office doors. Offices just closes down communication channels.
This does not mean you don't need quite time but that's what conference rooms and working from home is for.
Posted by: Jarie Bolander | February 04, 2010 at 02:01 PM