A Startup That Designed Its Office to Confuse Workers(wired.com)
wired.com
A Startup That Designed Its Office to Confuse Workers
http://www.wired.com/2015/06/procore-office-disorienting-enriched-environment/
26 comments
People have forgotten that attention is transitive: you pay attention to something. If you're paying attention to the environment, what is your attention being diverted from?
I'm in the middle of reading Thinking, Fast And Slow and at least some of the research that he talks about in there suggests that this isn't always how the brain actually works. By forcing people to concentrate on one thing, it can (at least in some circumstances) increase how much they concentrate on other things.
The example he used was the sort of problem where there's a obvious, but wrong, answer to a problem (e.g. "If a bat and ball cost £1.10, and the bat is £1 more than the ball, how much does the ball cost", to which a lot of people instinctively answer 10p - using what he refers to as "System 1 thinking"). These sorts of question were presented to two groups of people, one with the questions clearly printed and one with the questions badly printed in very light colours, requiring the readers to concentrate to be able to even read the questions.
The surprising result was that people in the latter group did significantly better on average than those in the former, suggesting that because they are forced to start using the more conscious, and more conscientious, "System 2 thinking" to be able to read the questions, they are primed to use that sort of thinking on actually answering the question.
This isn't always true though - if you're already concentrating heavily on something, then introducing another problem that requires a lot of concentration, you will stop concentrating on the first issue.
So, introducing something that forces your brain into a low-level System 2 mindset (such as slightly wonky offices) might be a good way of reducing the number of "obvious but wrong" decisions being made, but wouldn't be a good way of improving problem solving for tasks where people are already concentrating on the problem.
The example he used was the sort of problem where there's a obvious, but wrong, answer to a problem (e.g. "If a bat and ball cost £1.10, and the bat is £1 more than the ball, how much does the ball cost", to which a lot of people instinctively answer 10p - using what he refers to as "System 1 thinking"). These sorts of question were presented to two groups of people, one with the questions clearly printed and one with the questions badly printed in very light colours, requiring the readers to concentrate to be able to even read the questions.
The surprising result was that people in the latter group did significantly better on average than those in the former, suggesting that because they are forced to start using the more conscious, and more conscientious, "System 2 thinking" to be able to read the questions, they are primed to use that sort of thinking on actually answering the question.
This isn't always true though - if you're already concentrating heavily on something, then introducing another problem that requires a lot of concentration, you will stop concentrating on the first issue.
So, introducing something that forces your brain into a low-level System 2 mindset (such as slightly wonky offices) might be a good way of reducing the number of "obvious but wrong" decisions being made, but wouldn't be a good way of improving problem solving for tasks where people are already concentrating on the problem.
My point exactly.
For those unaware, I recommend reading up on "inattentional blindness". Attention is a very valuable resource.
For those unaware, I recommend reading up on "inattentional blindness". Attention is a very valuable resource.
Anecdotally, I have found that my focus welcomes slight distraction, in various forms - tv show I already know by heart, stupid silly shows, instrumental repetitive music, music I'm extremely familiar already...
Basically, when I'm at risk to lose focus from task at hand, this steals it, and it's rather boring compared to what would most likely be highly abstract contemplations, totally new ideas and so on, so your focus returns to original task since immediate alternative provided is dull affair.
It somehow "eats up" part of my nature that nudges me to lose focus. It's maybe analogous to how rain noise gobbles up various distracting sounds.
Basically, when I'm at risk to lose focus from task at hand, this steals it, and it's rather boring compared to what would most likely be highly abstract contemplations, totally new ideas and so on, so your focus returns to original task since immediate alternative provided is dull affair.
It somehow "eats up" part of my nature that nudges me to lose focus. It's maybe analogous to how rain noise gobbles up various distracting sounds.
Taking breaks is clearly a good thing, but being externally distracted is not. If you're thinking about where you're going, you're not thinking about how you're going to present your work at the meeting.
I suppose that's why I'm on HN while waiting for builds.
I wonder if it's equivalent to the distraction of an open office?
Maybe they should add some tigers roaming around the office to keep the workers extra alert?
Our CI server monitor has 3 modes: Red, Green, and Tiger Cage Released.
Future iterations will involve individual angry badgers in climbing harnesses located above each developer's desk. `git blame' will identify the build-breaking commit and react accordingly.
Future iterations will involve individual angry badgers in climbing harnesses located above each developer's desk. `git blame' will identify the build-breaking commit and react accordingly.
I think the point is more to train employees to be effective operating in a more "unexpected" or "uncomfortable" environment similar to the way boot camp is supposed to train recruits to be more effective operating in a stressful environment. Performing skilled labor in close proximity to heavy machinery or some other dangerous environment is another example. People in those environments don't do the greatest work on day 1, but after they've become accustomed to performing their trade in a loud/busy/distracting environment that ability to focus on a detail intensive task while not tuning out the background (e.g. that skid steer driving behind you with a poorly loaded pallet balancing on the bucket forks).
I believe the often used idiom is "eyes in the back of one's head."
Back in the white collar world, if there's a business problem that makes the "uncomfortableness" or increases the number of moving parts in the environment increase by 10 the people who operate daily at 5 are better prepared than those that operate at 2 (200% increase vs 500% increase).
I think it would be interesting to apply a practice like this to IT (and other support service) operations. If day to day operations can be made to have a similar work flow as a crisis, people will be better prepared to deal with a crisis when things like remembering that "X casually mentioned configuring something oddly in Y manner because of Z at lunch" and deciding "we need to ask X about Y before we do something to Z" while trying to resolve the crisis because those little domino can have a huge effect if you don't prevent them from cascading.
I'll venture a guess that the odd floor plan keeps people on their toes, increasing alertness and the overall overlaps with what would result from increased attentiveness. The question is whether or not the overhead and inefficiency will pay off and how it affects people in the long run. I suspect this model doesn't scale well.
Back in the white collar world, if there's a business problem that makes the "uncomfortableness" or increases the number of moving parts in the environment increase by 10 the people who operate daily at 5 are better prepared than those that operate at 2 (200% increase vs 500% increase).
I think it would be interesting to apply a practice like this to IT (and other support service) operations. If day to day operations can be made to have a similar work flow as a crisis, people will be better prepared to deal with a crisis when things like remembering that "X casually mentioned configuring something oddly in Y manner because of Z at lunch" and deciding "we need to ask X about Y before we do something to Z" while trying to resolve the crisis because those little domino can have a huge effect if you don't prevent them from cascading.
I'll venture a guess that the odd floor plan keeps people on their toes, increasing alertness and the overall overlaps with what would result from increased attentiveness. The question is whether or not the overhead and inefficiency will pay off and how it affects people in the long run. I suspect this model doesn't scale well.
I wonder if it would remain distracting for long - as someone who has worked in some very large buildings that would seem more confusing than what's shown in the pictures here, after a week I tend to have memorised most of the layout I need and it becomes more or less second-nature. If they were moving the walls regularly, that would be a different matter...
If anything I'd say the odd-angled rooms and visually "rich" environment give more navigational affordances than relatively featureless, repetitive structures like straight hallways and rows of doors: "Go straight until the ceiling turns blue, bear left and turn right at the yellow wall." I think I'd be far more likely to get lost in a place like this:
http://c1038.r38.cf3.rackcdn.com/group1/building3277/media/5...
If anything I'd say the odd-angled rooms and visually "rich" environment give more navigational affordances than relatively featureless, repetitive structures like straight hallways and rows of doors: "Go straight until the ceiling turns blue, bear left and turn right at the yellow wall." I think I'd be far more likely to get lost in a place like this:
http://c1038.r38.cf3.rackcdn.com/group1/building3277/media/5...
When I travel somewhere for say a week, I notice the place usually seems a lot bigger the first day or two when I don't know my way around. After a week you realize it isn't often so big.
I think some wild animals on variable length leashes and random screaming sounds pumped through the PA might have similar effect. That's way cheaper than moving to a fancy office space.
Time to start up MY startup, Rent-A-Tiger. We prey on bad productivity.
Time to start up MY startup, Rent-A-Tiger. We prey on bad productivity.
> random screaming sounds pumped through the PA
At my first job 20 years ago this would actually happen: occasionally the PA would emit loud shrieking sounds for 15-20 seconds. It turns out that the PA could be accessed by dialing a specific two-digit code from any internal phone. Occasionally when someone would attempt to send a fax they would forget to add a "9" for an external line; if the first two digits of the telephone number were the same as the two-digit PA access code, the fax machine's handshake sound would be broadcast over the PA.
At my first job 20 years ago this would actually happen: occasionally the PA would emit loud shrieking sounds for 15-20 seconds. It turns out that the PA could be accessed by dialing a specific two-digit code from any internal phone. Occasionally when someone would attempt to send a fax they would forget to add a "9" for an external line; if the first two digits of the telephone number were the same as the two-digit PA access code, the fax machine's handshake sound would be broadcast over the PA.
> Time to start up MY startup, Rent-A-Tiger
This reminds me of something said in the introduction to the Head First book series. The human brain hasn't really caught up with technological developments; it has a hard time looking at "boring" things like text/data and paying attention and retaining information, but it is really good at identifying threats (like, say, a tiger).
If you could find a way to trigger tiger cues whenever something important has to be remembered maybe you could actually boost productivity with Rent-A-Tiger :p
This reminds me of something said in the introduction to the Head First book series. The human brain hasn't really caught up with technological developments; it has a hard time looking at "boring" things like text/data and paying attention and retaining information, but it is really good at identifying threats (like, say, a tiger).
If you could find a way to trigger tiger cues whenever something important has to be remembered maybe you could actually boost productivity with Rent-A-Tiger :p
Don't forget the movable walls. Finding your desk should be the first adventure of the day. Include randomly missing floor tiles behind some doors if your wallets are deep.
Sounds like IKEA or any department store. Designed to be a maze to trap you in so you spend more.
Steve Jobs designed Pixar's office with only one set of toilets so people would collaborate more: http://uk.businessinsider.com/steve-jobs-designing-pixar-off...
Steve Jobs designed Pixar's office with only one set of toilets so people would collaborate more: http://uk.businessinsider.com/steve-jobs-designing-pixar-off...
Catmull shows in his book Creativity Inc, how happy he was to prevent that idea from happening.
I love this idea -- as an experiment. The trick, I think, would be the difference between "how it affects employees the first week or two" and "how it affects employees over several months or years" Of course, as a marketing move, it's brilliant. Here we all are talking about it.
Good teams are both able to spin off into fun and distraction mode -- and dive deep into concentration mode. There's an edge of chaos thing going on. If the place sounds as quiet as a library all day, we mix it up. If the nerf gun battles go on all afternoon, we tone it down. There is an ebb and flow to these things. Things tend towards a line, with variations from time to time. Groups of humans working socially remind me a lot of chaotic systems.
When the disruptions are constant, like working next to a large industrial plant that makes noises, it doesn't all come together. When the disruptions are responsive, like working in one room with 6 or 7 other guys, it's much more unpredictable.
Since this sounds predictable over time, I'd suspect that the affect wears off rather quickly.
But all of that is just unsupported speculation. I've found with things like this, it's much more important to let folks try things and then observe how it turns out. Interesting stuff.
Good teams are both able to spin off into fun and distraction mode -- and dive deep into concentration mode. There's an edge of chaos thing going on. If the place sounds as quiet as a library all day, we mix it up. If the nerf gun battles go on all afternoon, we tone it down. There is an ebb and flow to these things. Things tend towards a line, with variations from time to time. Groups of humans working socially remind me a lot of chaotic systems.
When the disruptions are constant, like working next to a large industrial plant that makes noises, it doesn't all come together. When the disruptions are responsive, like working in one room with 6 or 7 other guys, it's much more unpredictable.
Since this sounds predictable over time, I'd suspect that the affect wears off rather quickly.
But all of that is just unsupported speculation. I've found with things like this, it's much more important to let folks try things and then observe how it turns out. Interesting stuff.
246 employees with a swanky office is not a startup.
If you are hiring a firm to design your office, you are no longer a startup.
Image there is a fire and everyone is confused how to get out....
>"The software firm opened shop in 2002 with six employees. It now has 246. "
Surely that is not really a startup?
Surely that is not really a startup?
What's troubling to me is that the objections being raised here are all about how they went about it, not that the whole idea of social engineering is somewhat problematic in the first place, condescendingly paternalistic and robbing ourselves of moral independence and autonomy, etc.
I'd love to work in a place like that - I feel very uncomfortable in an ordered environment where row upon row of offices is filled with a placid set of cubicles, all the same shape, color, and design. Visual noise definitely helps me focus - some of my best work has been done in a coffeeshop environment during prime time, headphones on, in the zone, lots of chaos and motion going on around me - and some of my worst work experiences have been while sitting in a row, upon rows, of static desks all looking the same. Conformity may be good for the bean counters, but a lot of us can't get ourselves seeded and primed without a sip from /dev/random first, it seems.
Sure.
But my company has literally paid me over $1,000 in the past year to look up, awkwardly make eye contact, look around a moment, blink a few times, and look back at my screen because it draws my attention when people cross in front of my desk, and we have an open office design. (That cost is literally just the 15 seconds of looking around, the number of times I did so today, and my pay rate.)
I hope they're getting their money's worth for my time, but I'm not sure they are -- or that they're not taking it out on me through externals, such as expecting me to make up that lost time in "crunch time" or extra hours or something.
I feel like a lot of these plans are feel good pop science that just externalize the costs of what the executive wanted to do for pet reasons.
But my company has literally paid me over $1,000 in the past year to look up, awkwardly make eye contact, look around a moment, blink a few times, and look back at my screen because it draws my attention when people cross in front of my desk, and we have an open office design. (That cost is literally just the 15 seconds of looking around, the number of times I did so today, and my pay rate.)
I hope they're getting their money's worth for my time, but I'm not sure they are -- or that they're not taking it out on me through externals, such as expecting me to make up that lost time in "crunch time" or extra hours or something.
I feel like a lot of these plans are feel good pop science that just externalize the costs of what the executive wanted to do for pet reasons.
I don't really see the point.
Aren't everyone working there will know the office by heart after 2 weeks?
It looks good though.
It looks good though.
> It’s designed expressly to make workers get and feel lost, because, as neuroscience shows, disorientation keeps people alert and expecting the unexpected.
This is an example of taking the science out of context. I think it's pretty obvious that this type of disorientation applies in a new environment. The employees who work there every day? Pretty quickly you'll learn the in and outs of your own workplace.
Without this premise as the reasoning for the architecture, to me it just seems like another tech firm eager to spend its money.
This is an example of taking the science out of context. I think it's pretty obvious that this type of disorientation applies in a new environment. The employees who work there every day? Pretty quickly you'll learn the in and outs of your own workplace.
Without this premise as the reasoning for the architecture, to me it just seems like another tech firm eager to spend its money.
I did my studies in a university that was sharing some offices with the French office of statistics - called INSEE. The building was shaped as a combination of triangle (the INSEE, not my university, which was in a separate but nearby building), and I remember that whenever I had to go there - the administration had its office there - it felt so disorientating and I would get lost.
I believe it was a modern architecture, and the feeling of confusion was not on purpose. The first picture reminded me that building. I would hate to work in such a maze. Wasting time getting lost going to a meeting room, or looking for the desk of someone not in my closed quarters, would be very annoying.
Below a link to a picture of the building:
http://www.pss-archi.eu/photos/photo-14209.html
I believe it was a modern architecture, and the feeling of confusion was not on purpose. The first picture reminded me that building. I would hate to work in such a maze. Wasting time getting lost going to a meeting room, or looking for the desk of someone not in my closed quarters, would be very annoying.
Below a link to a picture of the building:
http://www.pss-archi.eu/photos/photo-14209.html
An even greatest example of such architecture are the older buildings (also called the brown buildings) of the Technical University of Crete (Greece).
They are full of various shaped classes, most are in a free polygon form. It is not unusual for a large cylindrical pillar to be in the middle of a small-ish class, obscuring view to the blackboard, or for a seat to be one meter to the front, 3-5 meters to the side of the board.
The shape and placement of buildings confuses the first year students, many of whom don't feel at ease until the second or third year. We used to joke that they would make a great Doom level.
Despite the university being in a remote area with great weather, windows frequently are absent, or small and placed high.
They are full of various shaped classes, most are in a free polygon form. It is not unusual for a large cylindrical pillar to be in the middle of a small-ish class, obscuring view to the blackboard, or for a seat to be one meter to the front, 3-5 meters to the side of the board.
The shape and placement of buildings confuses the first year students, many of whom don't feel at ease until the second or third year. We used to joke that they would make a great Doom level.
Despite the university being in a remote area with great weather, windows frequently are absent, or small and placed high.
>> “The way we live life is very diverse … I have some of my best ideas in random places—the car, the shower—so we developed a space that is highly diverse,” Corbett says.
People justifying their stupidity...
People justifying their stupidity...
The communications department in my old college campus was in a building designed to be deliberately confusing -- you had to go upstairs to get into the basement, hallways changed direction unexpectedly, etc -- with the idea that that'd get the students to communicate with each other because get it we're lost and have to ask each other directions and it's the communications dept see we're communicating get it get it huh do you get the joke hilarious
yeah they tore that sucker down a couple years ago apparently
yeah they tore that sucker down a couple years ago apparently
In other words, they put themselves in a boring industrial terrain in a boring suburb, just like any other boring company, and then try to recreate the creative impulses you get if you would live and work in a lively city.
What they cite is their motivation is exactly why I live and work in an urban environment, but the office is supposed to be the place where I can focus in turning that input into productive results.
What they cite is their motivation is exactly why I live and work in an urban environment, but the office is supposed to be the place where I can focus in turning that input into productive results.
I'd have thought they'd want to spend their employees' finite daily decision making and problem solving skills on their business.
This seems kinda stupid, but I'd welcome some explanation as to why it makes any sense
> According to research in neuroscience, this kind of visual chaos can help workers stay more alert, by asking them to constantly reengage with their environment.
I didn't read the article, but the text for image 5/8 said this.
I didn't read the article, but the text for image 5/8 said this.
I tore an entire doorframe out and rehung it once because the slight but obvious angle between it and the low ceiling in the room made me crazy. I obsessed about it even when I wasn't in the house!
This might not be the best place for me to work....
This might not be the best place for me to work....
Wow... what a stupid idea. But hey, it's cheap PR!
He could get a good placebo effect with this if he communicate well :) That s the only thing that i could imagine as a good effect
Surely the disorientation would only last a few weeks at the most, so any benefit would quickly disappear.
... this feels beyond absurd.
Attention and focus is important. Sounds like start-up kool-aid to me.
Attention and focus is important. Sounds like start-up kool-aid to me.
[deleted]
It honestly doesn't look THAT confusing in the pics.
Oh my. Good luck with that, gentlemen.
>According to research in neuroscience, this kind of visual chaos can help workers stay more alert, by asking them to constantly reengage with their environment.
Alert != attentive.