Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

America's Cubicles Are Shrinking

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the everyone-moo-together dept.

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.'"

13 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....)

      --
      Someone had to do it.
    4. 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.

    5. 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.

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

      Have you considered a career in management?

      --
      Science advances one funeral at a time- Max Planck
    7. 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.

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

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

  3. 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
  4. 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.

  5. 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.

  6. 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%.