Slashdot Mirror


America's Cubicles Are Shrinking

Hugh Pickens writes "In the 1970s, American corporations typically thought they needed 500 to 700 square feet per employee to build an effective office, but the LA Times reports that today's average is a little more than 200 square feet per person, and the space allocation could hit a mere 50 square feet by 2015. 'We're at a very interesting inflection point in real estate history,' says Peter Miscovich, who studies workplace trends. 'The next 10 years will be very different than the last 30.' Although cubicles have shrunk from an average of 64 feet to 49 feet in recent years, companies are looking for more ways to compress their real estate footprint with offices that squeeze together workstations while setting aside a few rooms where employees can conduct meetings or have private phone conversations. 'Younger workers' lives are all integrated, not segregated,' says Larry Rivard. 'They have learned to work anywhere — at a kitchen table or wherever.'"

39 of 484 comments (clear)

  1. Causality by Kev+Vance · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Younger workers' lives are all integrated, not segregated," says Larry Rivard. "They have learned to work anywhere — at a kitchen table or wherever."

    Could that be because their office space has become so worthless that anywhere else is preferable?

    --
    F0 07 C7 C8
    1. Re:Causality by JeffSpudrinski · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Amazing how corporations will justify whatever they want.

      Because people are not given a choice but to work in less space, they therefore say that they don't need it or want it.

      Question: did they ask the workers (really ask them...anonymously)? .02

      -JJS

    2. Re:Causality by dintech · · Score: 5, Funny

      "They have learned to work anywhere — at a kitchen table or wherever."

      I think it's more accruate that we don't work anywhere. So why should the office be any different. :)

    3. Re:Causality by skids · · Score: 5, Funny

      In other news, factory farm operators claim that today's livestock has, over time, come to crave the experience of being squeezed shoulder to shoulder.

      (Just kidding.... I think....)

    4. Re:Causality by cbiltcliffe · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Definitely agree.

      And to me "they've learned to work at a kitchen table or wherever" is only a small step away from "they're all on call 24/7, because they can work wherever they happen to be."

      --
      "City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
    5. Re:Causality by commodore64_love · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I have (or had) a small cubicle which squeezed a computer, chair, and closet (for coat) in a space barely large enough to lay down.

      BUT the company compensated for that small space by replacing the 4th wall with a window which gave the impression of more space, plus other benefits like being able to wear jeans everyday (nice jeans not wholey jeans), a free lunch, unlimited access to the internet to hear the radio/watch hulu, and so on. Making the cube small doesn't matter if the workers are treated with respect.

      In contrast my new job has no cubes and open space, but you're free to do nothing (no radio, no eating lunch at your desk, no privacy). I don't hate it but I don't like it either. I'd rather have liberty even if it meant my cube was the size of my old dormroom's desk.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    6. Re:Causality by Moryath · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Shocker of shockers... no, not really.

      Once upon a time, workers had to deal with crap working conditions in which getting killed was commonplace. In shitass countries like India, or Malaysia, or China where all the manufacturing has been "outsourced" to for slave-labor wages, this is still true.

      Today, the US has laws and agencies that are supposed to prevent this. But companies run by the soulless, inhuman "I have an MBA and never did a fucking day of real honest work in my life" types will try to get around it however they can.

      OSHA says you have to have an office where phone calls can be private? Fine, we'll give you one "private phone room" for 20 employees. OSHA says you have to have a 30 minute lunch break? Fine, but we'll stick the kitchen in another building 10 minutes walk away, good luck getting there and back and still managing to do anything but bolt your lunch at choking-hazard speeds, sucker, or you can take a bag lunch in and keep it in your desk and you might as well work while eating anyways.

      What we need to do is bust up the megacorporations and get rid of the top-level leech class that don't produce anything. But good luck seeing that happen any time soon. Those tax-evading assholes have too much media control to get the word out about them.

    7. Re:Causality by ebh · · Score: 5, Informative

      I'm autistic, and yes, I occasionally need full-body pressure to calm down, but I also need quiet and space to think. I sure as hell don't want to work cheek-by-jowl with a bunch of people I know only by what went into them at lunch and is coming out of them in the afternoon.

    8. Re:Causality by Gordonjcp · · Score: 5, Informative

      That is actually somewhat true - we got a dozen hens from a deep-litter farm. Now, in a deep-litter environment the hens are allowed to wander around a big shed with nesting boxes in aisles and a deep layer of straw on the floor. They're fed, they've got room to move and crucially - unlike true "free-range" - they're unlikely to be ripped in half by foxes. It's a pretty good environment for them, really. If you take them out of a deep-litter farm (like when they start to get old, they lay eggs less frequently and become less cost-effective but perfectly okay if you're not looking for an egg every day from each hen) and chuck them into a big field - after you've carefully shot all the foxes, otherwise they won't be there in the morning - then they will instinctively huddle together even closer than they were in the shed. They're really kind of agoraphobic. If you build a small shed for them they'll run inside and won't leave until they get *really* hungry.

      Strange, but true. At least, I think it's strange and you'll have to take my word for it that it's true.

    9. Re:Causality by Cryacin · · Score: 5, Funny

      Have you considered a career in management?

      --
      Science advances one funeral at a time- Max Planck
    10. Re:Causality by swb · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Executive offices are fairly astonishing in size. Part of it is due to tabulatory gigantism -- the need to have the largest possible desk, despite the fact that many don't even "work at a desk". This latter aspect drives a lot of the large executive office syndrome; they "don't work at a desk" therefore they need the space for a living room setup, complete with a big leather couch, designer table, and a couple of chairs and a large flat screen TV & entertainment setup.

      They also need a kitchenette setup (Keurig coffee machine, fridge for beer/pop, liquor, glasses, ice) and in many cases a private bathroom, because they want to be able to offer refreshments and a restroom for them and their guests.

      One of the major ironies about all this space being devoted to them is that it stands empty much of the time due to their extensive travel requirements (cf. justification for Netjets/company airplane).

      I sometimes wonder why they don't skip all the executive suites and instead build a small hotel on corporate campuses and hire a hotel company to manage it. The executives could be given a generic "large" office (of the type generally assigned to on-site senior working managers; large enough for a desk, conference table and four chairs, but not the big suites) and a group of suites in the hotel could be set aside for executives involved in meetings for which their "living room" setup would be required; the hotel's concierge and other staff could be used for food/beverage and other conveniences.

      The side benefit would be a functional hotel that could be used for out of town employees, vendors and others needing accommodations and working on campus.

    11. Re:Causality by Endo13 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Not necessarily. I know for myself, I have a much harder time staying focused and getting work done at home than when I'm "on the job" somewhere. To give you an idea how drastic it is, when I'm trying to "work from home" I barely get anything worthwhile done. When I'm "on the job", I'm one of the best, most efficient guys on the team. I get twice as much done as some of the other guys.

      I really wish that weren't the case, because I'd much prefer working from home.

      --
      There is no -1 Disagree mod. Slashdot.org/faq defines mod options. USE IT.
    12. Re:Causality by markov_chain · · Score: 4, Funny

      You're not alone, I'm the same way. It is so bad that I'm seriously considering building some timed interlock system where I would push a button and have the Internet down for X minutes, or a timed door lock that would keep me in a distraction-free room for enough time to get useful work done.

      The irony is I'm supposed to be doing work, and here I am designing a timed lock...

      --
      Tsunami -- You can't bring a good wave down!
    13. Re:Causality by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Try that with programmers and watch your productivity go down the loo.

      I was once working as the head of a team with a rather big company I'd rather not name. Let's say it was a German company, known for its big S and its bananaware. We took over a huge internal project. To explain: Internal projects are gold mines. You can charge what you want and the other departments have to pay it because there is simply no other place to get it from. You DO NOT WANT to lose an internal project. For no reason whatsoever. Why? Because even if your cost rises, you just add it to the price tag and they HAVE to pay it. You need money to cross-finance other projects? Jack up the price! It's the (internal) license for money printing.

      So we snatched that project from another department that failed to deliver. That's the only threat there is: Not delivering.

      So what would be the sensible thing to do? Stuff your best and brightest into that project, of course! You MUST NOT lose that project! You can basically hang your whole department onto it and it will hold! The rest of the company MUST pay you!

      What was offered to me? Temp workers. Yes. You heard me. Temps. Not REALLY the most motivated people there are, right? Especially, have you ever hired programmers on a temp worker base?

      Most of you will know, it takes a while 'til a programmer gets productive. Especially when you take over a HUGE project that consists of VERY crappy code that you yourself are still busy digging into. They're basically, at best, useless the first month. If, and only if, they're able to learn by themselves, which most temp proggers are. Because if they were any GOOD proggers, they wouldn't be forced to suffer a temp agency.

      And while they're with you, they spend more time studying the classifieds than the code. Because who in their sane mind wants to work for a temp agency? It's not like programmers are bricklayers or plumbers. There are not THAT many. So even the mediocre ones get permanent jobs easily. In short, no programmer stayed longer than 3 months.

      Eventually, after half a year and a pretty much stalled project I put my foot down and declared that either I get to hire programmers on a perm base or I quit.

      I found a new job pretty soon. In the words I gave my superior back then: "More money, less you".

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    14. Re:Causality by Moryath · · Score: 4, Interesting

      shitass countries.

      "The law does not provide workers with the right to remove themselves from work situations that endanger health and safety without jeopardizing their continued employment."

      "State governments were responsible for enforcement of the Factories Act. However, the large number of industries covered by a small number of factory inspectors and the inspectors' limited training and susceptibility to bribery resulted in lax enforcement.

      The enforcement of safety and health standards also was poor."

      I'll say it again. Shitass countries.

    15. Re:Causality by DrgnDancer · · Score: 4, Informative

      I think you're misunderstanding the OP's (admittedly colorful and not entirely well explained) point about what constitutes a "shitass" country. He isn't trying to say that the people in the country are bad, or that there aren't intelligent and successful people within them, but rather that these countries treat their workers, especially working class factory workers, like shit. Unsafe conditions, exceptionally poor pay, and long hours are the rule in most developing countries, and the ones he lists are particularly well known for them. His point (again, colorfully expressed) is that most companies will treat people as poorly as they can get away with. Here in the US (and even more so in Europe and some other countries) we have laws and some level of enforcement to ensure that there is a reasonable bottom limit to how badly you can be treated. In most "shitass" countries it's even worse.

      --
      I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.
    16. Re:Causality by RapmasterT · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Amazing how corporations will justify whatever they want.

      Because people are not given a choice but to work in less space, they therefore say that they don't need it or want it.

      Question: did they ask the workers (really ask them...anonymously)? .02

      -JJS

      This is strikingly similar to the attitude a previous CTO of mine expressed when we were remodeling workspaces (yes, the CTO got involved in cubicle design). His idea was "big open room, no walls, no cubicles...to foster a 'collaborative working environment'".

      I tried til I was blue in the face to explain to him we don't have a business that benefits from collaboration...individuals work on individual projects mostly. He wouldn't listen.

      After the remodel, and the office sounded like a bus station caffeteria from people talking, using the phone, typing, meetings (nope, no meeting rooms either), etc, most people you'd see would have headphones on to block out the noise. The CTO, he just went into his office and kept the door closed.

  2. I have no idea.... by Haedrian · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Why people still like cubicles.

    The place I worked had an open plane. My team members had connecting desks to each other. If I needed anything (since I worked in ICT - needing someone else is common) - all I had to do it talk, or move my chair a bit. I think cubicles aren't very good for morale anyway.

    1. Re:I have no idea.... by nblender · · Score: 5, Insightful

      yeah; not so much.. As you get older and gain more experience (while doing everything possible to prevent being moved into a management track), you value your privacy... During the work day, I have to deal with personal matters (calls from the boy's school, wife, accountant, etc) and having a cow-orker 3 feet away pretending not to listen is not optimal... In an open plan, people have to get up, transfer the call to some meeting room and take it there, while running across the office with paperwork or what have you. Then there's the little mental breaks you take throughout the day to let your mind stew on a hard problem; you don't want someone staring at your monitor from behind you... Don't get me wrong, my employer gets plenty of work out of me and they're very happy with my performance and my pay is commensurate with that assertion..

      Currently, I have a cubicle somewhere in the building... I don't know where it is; I've never seen it. I assume it's like all the other cubicles in the building.. I work in a lab primarily because I need access to hardware and test equipment... The lab is somewhat open-plan but I have a private little corner that I've managed to arrange by moving benches around... It's noisy enough in the lab that I can keep from getting distracted by people milling about or make my phone calls without anyone listening in... I can focus for long periods when I need to and the restricted access to the lab prevents a lot of people from just wandering in for a visit...

      When I need to communicate with my cow-orkers, we all use Jabber.. If you're focused, you can hide your jabber window and not be disturbed... I get to choose when distraction is permissible or unwanted.

    2. Re:I have no idea.... by hosecoat · · Score: 4, Funny

      Why people still like cubicles.

      The cubicle wall provides a place to hide when a button-down, Oxford-cloth psycho who is sick of working in a cubicle snaps, and then stalk the office with an Armalite AR-10 carbine gas-powered semi-automatic weapon, pumping round after round into colleagues and co-workers.

    3. Re:I have no idea.... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Informative

      The recommendation in Peopleware (which my father's company used, independently) is to buy a load of tall and thick cubicle dividers, leave them in the corner of the office, and let your employees arrange the office to suit themselves. This generally ends up with teams that need to work together joining their desks and using the dividers to make sure that they can talk without interrupting anyone else (and vice versa).

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    4. Re:I have no idea.... by Creepy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Companies like cubicles because they are a vastly cheaper way to convert warehouse type space to office like space, and while they don't completely block out noise, they divert it enough so that while one worker is on the phone with a customer, that customer hears you, not the person sitting next to you talking about her cat.

      Having worked in call centers with cubicles and without, I vastly prefer cubicles, though I'd prefer never to work in a call center again (both of those were college temp jobs).

      I do some telecommuting, but having moved to an Agile team at work makes that a bit more difficult (we don't follow Agile exactly because employees are strewn across about 6 sites, but we do use a lot of collaboration tech to work around that, like virtual teleconferencing and netmeeting-like desktop sharing).

    5. Re:I have no idea.... by mcmonkey · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The place I worked had an open plane. My team members had connecting desks to each other. If I needed anything (since I worked in ICT - needing someone else is common) - all I had to do it talk, or move my chair a bit.

      I would love to go back to a cubicle.

      I am the guy stuck sitting next to you. While you get your quick response by leaning over, I get my train of thought derailed.

      And most of the time, you're bugging me for something you should be able to find for yourself in the documentation or something you should be doing yourself.

      The rest of the office does not exist to do your bidding. Maybe having your own space is bad for your morale, because then you'd have to do your own work, but for me, having my own defined space where I can concentrate without interruption, increases my morale by about 1000%.

    6. Re:I have no idea.... by Chemisor · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I have no idea how the whole country has become so oversocialized. Privacy is important to be an individual. How can you know who you are if you have never been alone? Without working alone, how can you realize that it is the individual that does the work, not the collective? How can you get any work done at all when you are constantly distracted (and spied on) by other people? Forcing "togetherness" was a great socialist tool back in the Soviet times, to ensure that you never imagine yourself as an individual, that you never have unapproved thoughts, and that if you do either of those things you can get ratted out and sent to Siberia.

  3. If anybody needs me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'll be in the basement, clutching my red stapler.

  4. Worldwide translation by Errol+backfiring · · Score: 4, Funny

    In the USA, office employees are kept in a sort of shoe-box with a size that, for understandable reasons, is measured in feet. Those boxes have shrunk.

    --
    Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
  5. Brazil by fussy_radical · · Score: 3, Informative

    Next they'll expect us to share a desk too:

    http://movieclips.com/Mkivg-brazil-movie-the-moving-desk/

    I'm sitting in about 64 ft^2. It sucks but I like making money too.

  6. Maybe it's not the cubicles getting smaller by petes_PoV · · Score: 5, Funny

    maybe it's the occupants getting larger.

    --
    politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
  7. It's not driven by real estate prices by Wansu · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In most areas, commercial real estate is going empty.

    This is being driven by a desire to control employees. They want to huddle them close together so they are easier to watch and they tend to police each other.

    --
    Wansu, th' chinese sailor
    1. Re:It's not driven by real estate prices by jimicus · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I don't know how it works in the US, but if the UK is anything to go by your view is probably wrong.

      Commercial landlords - indeed, the entire commercial letting industry - is a law unto itself. My own employer moved offices when our previous landlord would not reduce the rent (even though the going rate was dropping as offices were becoming empty). They were told clearly, in simple terms: rent goes down or we go out. Rent did not go down. We left a couple of months after a number of other tenants in that building did. I wouldn't be surprised if that building is 70 or 80% empty today.

      There's all sorts of other things you can get in commercial leases which anyone who didn't know the industry would think absurd. "Repairing leases" (where you have to carry out any repairs to the fabric of the building - all the responsibilities of ownership, none of the benefits!) aren't that uncommon, and if you happen to take on a building which requires a lot of repair work - tough. You can actually be forced to return the building to the landlord in a better state to how you took it on.

      Another one I've heard of is where the landlord charges you £X/square foot then includes things like staircases and toilets in their calculation of how large the office is. (You don't normally include these things when you do this arithmetic - £X/square foot usually means £x/useful square foot, not including staircases, kitchen areas etc). Next thing you know you've accidentally signed yourself to a contract paying double the going rate, you can't get out of it and you can't sub-let it without losing money unless you can find someone equally stupid. For bonus points, the landlord has demanded that the director of the business acts as a personal guarantor - only way out of the contract then is to declare yourself bankrupt.

      Faced with an industry full of sharks like that, anyone with any sense will do everything in their power to minimise their exposure.

  8. Sq F by FrostedWheat · · Score: 4, Funny

    American corporations typically thought they needed 500 to 700 square feet per employee

    Who's running these corporations? Millipedes?

  9. Re:Working from Home? by alcourt · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I work from home and have done so for over ten years now. I've made it work successfully. I will very openly state that many of my coworkers cannot effectively work from home.

    The reasons that work from home isn't always a good idea vary. Some people require the human face to face contact. Others require the firmer separation, the act of actually going to another building to put them in the work mindset. Some do not have a home situation amenable to working from home. Some are just in jobs that require too much interaction with the rest of the team or just cannot be done remotely. (People who's job requires physical access to specific hardware without waiting an hour for the person to get there.)

    Even many of my coworkers who do work from home make excuses to go into the office periodically to meet with peers for lunch. This helps smooth over issues so that work is done more smoothly.

    --
    "I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend unto the death your right to say it." -- Voltaire
  10. Desk Space has become irrelevant by kellyb9 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think the reason for cubicle shrinkage has more to do with how irrelevant desk space has become over the past 30 or 40 years. Everyone works off of computers and doesn't need a large amount of desk space - at least not as large as they had in the past. I have very little on my desk, mostly personal items (pictures, cell phone, MP3 player, etc.). 30 years ago desks would have to accomodate stacks of paper and notepads, and they would also need the ability to spread these items out.

    1. Re:Desk Space has become irrelevant by DerekLyons · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That was my first though when I read the summary too... "duh, how obvious" - as we move closer and closer to being truly paperless, officer workers need less and less space to spread out papers or to store files.
       
      I hate to invoke 'kids these days' - but it really does apply here. Anyone under thirty or so has almost certainly never experienced an 'old style' office - when PC's became ubiquitous in the 90's, things changed radically.
       
      My wife is an accountant and CFO for a local business and keeps a set of the ledgers from the 1980's in her office - they fill a shelf three feet long. (She says when she's frustrated because the server is slow or down, looking at that shelf reminds her of how good she actually has it.) She also points out all she has is the ledgers, the ancillary material like invoices, timesheets, sales tickets, etc... would take up even more space. If she wasn't required to keep a physical paper trail of some things for legal and tax reasons, she wouldn't even have a filing cabinet in her office. The old storage room for such stuff is now an employee break room. The refrigerator in the break room is bigger than the annual amount of paper she has to store nowadays.
       
      She also points out that in the 1980's the business required an accountant, two full time bookkeepers, and a full time filing clerk. Today, despite the business being ten times larger, there's just her and a full time data entry clerk. The phone girl files in her spare time.
       
      For another example: In my book collection, I have a book on office organization intended for professional engineers, draftsmen, and architects from the 1950's - it dedicates three entire chapters (almost half the book) to the theory and practice of laying out work spaces for engineers and draftsmen. You lay it out one way for buildings, another for ships, a different way for airplanes... All trying to solve the problem of mapping a 3D physical object onto/into a 2D drafting room such that guys (and it was all guys back then) working on adjacent parts/rooms/spaces/systems were close enough to each other to collaborate. (When something like the working drawings for the engine room of a ship could stretch thirty feet or an entire deck could stretch a hundred or more if laid end-to-end this was a real problem.) The offices were open plan because they had to be, because there was no other way to collaborate but to physically transport yourself or the drawing to the individual(s) you needed to communicate with.

  11. Hear hear by tygerstripes · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I currently work in an open-plan environment. My job requires some significant coding work (requiring total focus for long periods of time) while all of my colleagues are involved in much more piecemeal work. They have absolutely no comprehension of how frustrating and damaging it is to my productivity to be subjected to their distracted working pattern all day.

    There are definite benefits to working open-plan, but for some tasks it is simply inappropriate and detrimental.

    --
    Meta will eat itself
    1. Re:Hear hear by GeckoAddict · · Score: 3, Interesting

      This is why I like to argue for a two-location approach. There are times, especially during a design phase, that collaboration and communication greatly improve my productivity. Then there are times where I have a defined coding task, where putting on my headphones and disappearing into my cube is the best choice for my productivity (working at home is even better, because people can't stop by my desk every 3 minutes there). I think the best approach is to have a shared team area that the team can use anytime (preferably with large whiteboards, a projector, etc), but a private cube/office as well. Having instant messaging (and actually using the away/available statuses) helps keep distractions down at the office as well.

  12. Re:Working from Home? by nblender · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I don't like working from home but for a different reason. As a contractor, paid by the hour, I can get 8.5 hours worth of on-site work done in about 4 hours at home... If I'm on-site, I can bill for 8.5 hours. If I'm at home, I can bill for 4 hours. Since my employer (my customer, technically) would prefer I work on-site instead of shelling in remotely, I oblige them by coming in, dealing with distractions and beauracracy, in exchange for billing higher... They're still happy with the quantity of work that gets done and continue to pay me well and renew my contract, year after year.

  13. Effective office? Prove it! by lwriemen · · Score: 4, Informative

    "effective office" cubicle is an oxymoron. There have been many studies over the years that show that open office spaces are counter-productive. The book, Peopleware, by DeMarco and Lister covers this and other topics, related to the management of knowledge workers. At the time Peopleware was written, DeMarco and Lister couldn't find a single productivity study that supported the installation of cubicles.

    People not found at their desks are often practicing the productivity enhancement called, "hiding from the boss". It is often the only way to get work done around a micro-manager.

  14. Re:new by Lilith's+Heart-shape · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Bring a personal music player and two sets of headphones. Your first set should be a lightweight, open air design. Wear those when you're willing to tolerate interruptions. Your second set should be a big set of noise-reducing headphones that look like something a record producer would wear in a studio. Those are your "Fuck off and let me work!" headphones.