How Much Do You Value Your Office Space?

reason asks: "I've heard that office space costs around $10,000 per employee, and sometimes much more. I have a great office: it's a nice size and I have a lovely view out the window. It's a good working environment, and I know I'm lucky. Still, if it came down to dollar terms, I'd be willing to share my office with a colleague or even move into a cubicle in exchange for a mere $5,000/year pay rise. Am I undervaluing what I have? If you have an office to yourself, how much would they have to pay you to make you willingly give it up? If you don't have an office, how much of a pay cut would you be prepared to take to get one?"

Comments

I'd almost forego a raise for the solitude

[Martin Blank]

Considering the distractions that I get (network operations center, so phones, various alarms, and a television tuned to one of several news stations), I'd love to get some time alone, even in a small place. I don't have a lot of paper around, so I don't need space. I just need quiet.

I'm not sure if I could put a value on it

[Neil Blender]

But shutting the door and thus muting the conversation about what is going on in the latest edition of American Idol is pretty damn valuable to me.

Being able to control the lighting is also very valuable.

Privacy too. I don't like people to hearing what I am saying unless I actually want them to overhear it regardless of what I am talking about.

Ohhh - closed door meetings - those have lots of value.

I think I'd need at least a 50% raise.

This is an interesting question

[ip_freely_2000]

Sadly, there is no one room I spend more time in than my office. I spend about 35% of my LIFE in that room.

Since I am alone in it, I have spent a couple thousand dollars in additional furnishing in it ( Lamps, artwork, stereo, TV, various knick-knacks ). I figure if I spend the time, I should make the investment to make it a comfortable room I want to be in.

I'd be hard pressed to give it up for more salary. Would I sell it for a cube? Sure -- but then I'd look for a new job.

Re:Google and Me

[AKAImBatman]

Look at Google. They have very few offices, but instead many small rooms with 4-6 people in each.

I will point out, however, that they are rooms. I imagine that background noise is minimal, and people are allowed to focus on their tasks. In comparison, I've worked in environments with tons of open cubicles. The background noise really interferes with trying to focus on what you're doing. You don't even notice it at first, but the moment you find a quiet space you suddenly notice the difference.

So in short, you need a conductive workspace, of which offices are only one type. :-)

Re:Google and Me

[pintomp3]

i think this is the most productive setup, unless you're rooming with someone you can't stand.

Re:Google and Me

[Tadrith]

The only problem with that is the problem I've had -- stupid people suddenly turn you into a walking question and answer machine.

Collaboration only works when everyone is willing to work. Otherwise you get people who are lazy, stupid, and would much rather ask you instead of figuring it out for themselves.

Re:Cost is way lower, differential cost is even le

[wtansill]

Given the obvious cost savings, why do employers hate telecommuniting so much?

There are a number of reasons, some good, some bad:

• Some managers can't get their heads around the notion that professionals are paid to "produce", not "populate". If they can't see you, you must not be working.
• Offices are already set up to provide meeting rooms and such for anything from a productive brainstorming session to a mundane "status" meeting. Trying to cope with conference calls with or without a video conference feed just adds more expense and delay to the equation.
• Politically, it's bad if you're not in the office for extended periods of time. Out of sight, out of mind, and all that. There have been studies (which of course I can't find at present) that demonstrate that a lack of "face time" lowers an employee's odds of getting recognition for achievements and/or promotions for same.

Something else to consider -- if you work from home, you are always at the office, and can be called upon at any hour to log in to the corporate network (on call -- yes, I know...). We had a problem with this 100 or so years ago with people doing "piecework" from their homes. There are laws against this for a reason. Lets not be quite so eager to give up our personal space...

Re:Cost is way lower, differential cost is even le

[wtansill]

Politically, it's bad if you're not in the office for extended periods of time. Out of sight, out of mind, and all that.

How is that bad? I don't have a manager micro-managing me, and can actually get more work done. I can work days I wouldn't other wise (sick days, etc). I can put in partial days, or even do overtime or on-call shifts a lot easier.

How is this bad?

if you work from home, you are always at the office, and can be called upon at any hour to log in to the corporate network

Great!! I'd love the overtime! And the on-call pay!! And if I didn't want to be bothered, I'd not answer the phone.

So you're an hourly worker with poor interpersonal skills and no desire for advancement! Great for you! I'm on salary and get to work all the free overtime I can stand. Not answering the phone is not an option. Enjoy your stay on those low corporate rungs...