The open-plan office is a terrible, horrible, no good, very bad idea(m.signalvnoise.com)
m.signalvnoise.com
The open-plan office is a terrible, horrible, no good, very bad idea
https://m.signalvnoise.com/the-open-plan-office-is-a-terrible-horrible-no-good-very-bad-idea-42bd9cd294e3
447 comments
> And for what? Because a minority of people kinda like that configuration? Because it’ll look good in a few photos? Because it’ll impress strangers who visit the office?
Somehow the author missed the primary reason for the open office configuration: "Because it cuts the costs of office space by a HUGE amount (certainly more than half)."
I suppose "Because it makes it easier for managers to keep an eye on their employees and see when they are slacking off." figures in also. Although it's probably a sign of poor management.
Somehow the author missed the primary reason for the open office configuration: "Because it cuts the costs of office space by a HUGE amount (certainly more than half)."
I suppose "Because it makes it easier for managers to keep an eye on their employees and see when they are slacking off." figures in also. Although it's probably a sign of poor management.
To throw some more anecdotes in with the rest of the comments, I love open offices.
I've had my own office and found it lonely and boring. I never got less work done than at that job. Everything took longer because I had to stand up and walk to talk to my team. Instant messaging sort of worked, but if they didn't respond immediately, you didn't know if it was because they missed the message or they weren't actually in their office.
Because I hardly ever talked to my team members I never felt any real friendship or camaraderie with them. That made it harder to get help when I needed it and made my day a lot less enjoyable.
I find that I thrive in open offices. I don't even need headphones to concentrate. Everyone is different I guess.
I've had my own office and found it lonely and boring. I never got less work done than at that job. Everything took longer because I had to stand up and walk to talk to my team. Instant messaging sort of worked, but if they didn't respond immediately, you didn't know if it was because they missed the message or they weren't actually in their office.
Because I hardly ever talked to my team members I never felt any real friendship or camaraderie with them. That made it harder to get help when I needed it and made my day a lot less enjoyable.
I find that I thrive in open offices. I don't even need headphones to concentrate. Everyone is different I guess.
The best office environment I was ever in, in 30 years of working in software development, was on Apple's Newton team in the Bubb Road building in Cupertino.
Everyone in the building I was in had a private office with floor-to-ceiling exterior windows and a door that closed.
Groups of offices shared a larger open common room with sofas and comfy chairs and coffee tables conveniently arranged for sitting around talking. There were white boards in the offices and on several walls of the common areas.
You need to concentrate? Go in your office and close the door. Feeling amenable to visits from colleagues? Open the door. Feel the need for free-form conversation with one or more colleagues? Plop onto the couch and talk things over.
NeXT was laid out somewhat similarly, but with less convenient common areas.
At various times I've experienced wall-to-wall private offices, giant open rooms with everyone side-by-side on long tables, and everything in between. For my money, the Newton office was the best. Privacy and camaraderie were available to us at all times in whatever measure suited each of us.
Everyone in the building I was in had a private office with floor-to-ceiling exterior windows and a door that closed.
Groups of offices shared a larger open common room with sofas and comfy chairs and coffee tables conveniently arranged for sitting around talking. There were white boards in the offices and on several walls of the common areas.
You need to concentrate? Go in your office and close the door. Feeling amenable to visits from colleagues? Open the door. Feel the need for free-form conversation with one or more colleagues? Plop onto the couch and talk things over.
NeXT was laid out somewhat similarly, but with less convenient common areas.
At various times I've experienced wall-to-wall private offices, giant open rooms with everyone side-by-side on long tables, and everything in between. For my money, the Newton office was the best. Privacy and camaraderie were available to us at all times in whatever measure suited each of us.
Companies treat programmers as costs that should be minimized. They manage programmers like children (toys and treats) or stenographers(typing pools) because it is cheap.
Whereas, lawyers in law firms are considered revenue generators and they are treated that way.
When I switched from programming to lawyering, one of the biggest differences I noticed was how the law firm staff and office manager were always trying to make it easier for me to generate billable hours. Years later it still feels weird having "staff" that take of care you and work hard to remove obstacles that may interfere with your work. I can't even make my own copies w/o a staff person offering to do that for me. Staff that catch me refilling the coffee pot will offer to do it for me.
And, the million dollar view from my high-rise office still takes my breath away.
Now instead of feeling like a tool/plebe I feel like a milk cow. The law firm's entire setup is to keep me working efficiently (not that its perfect but they try).
Whereas, lawyers in law firms are considered revenue generators and they are treated that way.
When I switched from programming to lawyering, one of the biggest differences I noticed was how the law firm staff and office manager were always trying to make it easier for me to generate billable hours. Years later it still feels weird having "staff" that take of care you and work hard to remove obstacles that may interfere with your work. I can't even make my own copies w/o a staff person offering to do that for me. Staff that catch me refilling the coffee pot will offer to do it for me.
And, the million dollar view from my high-rise office still takes my breath away.
Now instead of feeling like a tool/plebe I feel like a milk cow. The law firm's entire setup is to keep me working efficiently (not that its perfect but they try).
Here's what I posted three years ago on the topic:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9760414
Is it time to get depressed yet? This has been a topic for such a long time. It was in peopleware in 1987. I thought I discovered the topic when Joel (On Sofware) wrote about it in 2000. While a few people seem to enjoy open offices, the overwhelming majority of developers I know, or who chime in on HN, value a quiet place to work and dislike open offices.
And yet, not only has nothing changed, it seems to be getting worse. It couldn't be more clear to me that developers, at least on this issue, simply have no clout as a profession. There may be a few individuals who can make demands, but on the balance, these are decisions imposed on us, as a group, and we are apparently unable to do anything about it.
The really sad thing is, this isn't a situation where we're asking to fly first class, or for more vacation. We're talking about asking for something that will make us more productive and increase the value we largely hand over to our employers, simply because it's depressing to not be able to do a good job due to distractions. So yeah, I'm depressed about it.
There was a time when I read these essays and felt a bit more charged up, like people were starting to understand something important and that things would change. Well, now we have open offices.
I'll finish with another variant on my broken record: the industry talks constant about the critical shortage of software engineers, but it won't give them a quiet place to work. Actually, that last sentence is too optimistic - it won't allow them a quiet place to work. Those places exist, but companies often demand that their programmers spend 8 hours a day in places that are too noisy for focus.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9760414
Is it time to get depressed yet? This has been a topic for such a long time. It was in peopleware in 1987. I thought I discovered the topic when Joel (On Sofware) wrote about it in 2000. While a few people seem to enjoy open offices, the overwhelming majority of developers I know, or who chime in on HN, value a quiet place to work and dislike open offices.
And yet, not only has nothing changed, it seems to be getting worse. It couldn't be more clear to me that developers, at least on this issue, simply have no clout as a profession. There may be a few individuals who can make demands, but on the balance, these are decisions imposed on us, as a group, and we are apparently unable to do anything about it.
The really sad thing is, this isn't a situation where we're asking to fly first class, or for more vacation. We're talking about asking for something that will make us more productive and increase the value we largely hand over to our employers, simply because it's depressing to not be able to do a good job due to distractions. So yeah, I'm depressed about it.
There was a time when I read these essays and felt a bit more charged up, like people were starting to understand something important and that things would change. Well, now we have open offices.
I'll finish with another variant on my broken record: the industry talks constant about the critical shortage of software engineers, but it won't give them a quiet place to work. Actually, that last sentence is too optimistic - it won't allow them a quiet place to work. Those places exist, but companies often demand that their programmers spend 8 hours a day in places that are too noisy for focus.
I'm sure this is just anecdotal, but we all kind of like our open office layout. We're not just at desks sitting shoulder to shoulder. They're more of these horseshoe-esque things, and you have plenty of room between you and the next person. We have an open ceiling, so the A/C provides some good, loud background noise to drown out conversations. And lastly, we're pretty strict about having people IM you before they come to your desk, so interruptions aren't as intrusive.
I really think open office layouts can be implemented correctly, it's just that managers don't take the time to really tailor them for their development teams. We all wanted the lights off to work in? Lights are off. We wanted standing desks? We got standing desks. We wanted 2 monitors? We got 2 monitors that have adjustable heights. I think the problem with open offices is that managers are just using them as a way to save money on office space. If you really want a good office area for your developers, I think you can accomplish that with an open office layout if you really try.
I really think open office layouts can be implemented correctly, it's just that managers don't take the time to really tailor them for their development teams. We all wanted the lights off to work in? Lights are off. We wanted standing desks? We got standing desks. We wanted 2 monitors? We got 2 monitors that have adjustable heights. I think the problem with open offices is that managers are just using them as a way to save money on office space. If you really want a good office area for your developers, I think you can accomplish that with an open office layout if you really try.
My biggest issue with my open floor office is that it seems like everyone just takes calls at their seats. We have private spaces and enclaves for that, but I am just bombarded with 4 people within 10 feet of my workspace on their phone. To counteract I throw on some Ambient music on my headphones, which sort of works but I still find I prefer to work in silence.
Does it not seem like open-office etiquette to take a phone call in a private space when other people are trying to work?
Does it not seem like open-office etiquette to take a phone call in a private space when other people are trying to work?
I think what's a terrible idea is pegging people to specific locations. That used to be necessary to find someone in the office but nowadays we have other tools to discover each other's locations.
Instead of binding people to locations, I'd much rather bind activities/moods to locations, e.g.
- the studious space: hushed atmosphere like a library, NO TALKING, for people actively working on brain problems
- the collaboration space: when you need to huddle with a few other people and solve a problem out loud
- the audio privacy space: small rooms for remote conferences where you're the only participant
- etc.
What's important is to have extra monitors in all these spaces, so a decent work setup can be had anywhere.
As a compromise, what's been working in our own office is that the open plan is—with rare exceptions—the "Library": very quiet talking, if any. For the super quiet, that's the Home Office. And for all the rest, we have conference rooms which are all equiped with very large screen telepresence equipment and which supports wireless screen sharing. So anytime we need to make noise, we have what we need. And for those who need some momentary privacy on their own, we have Audio Privacy Rooms with are set up with 1 armchair, small table and video phone. (Disclaimer: I work for the Collaboration group at Cisco so we're eating our own dog food and have easy access to it; I do realize these things do have a cost.)
Instead of binding people to locations, I'd much rather bind activities/moods to locations, e.g.
- the studious space: hushed atmosphere like a library, NO TALKING, for people actively working on brain problems
- the collaboration space: when you need to huddle with a few other people and solve a problem out loud
- the audio privacy space: small rooms for remote conferences where you're the only participant
- etc.
What's important is to have extra monitors in all these spaces, so a decent work setup can be had anywhere.
As a compromise, what's been working in our own office is that the open plan is—with rare exceptions—the "Library": very quiet talking, if any. For the super quiet, that's the Home Office. And for all the rest, we have conference rooms which are all equiped with very large screen telepresence equipment and which supports wireless screen sharing. So anytime we need to make noise, we have what we need. And for those who need some momentary privacy on their own, we have Audio Privacy Rooms with are set up with 1 armchair, small table and video phone. (Disclaimer: I work for the Collaboration group at Cisco so we're eating our own dog food and have easy access to it; I do realize these things do have a cost.)
Open plan offices have been known to be bad since at least 1987, when the first edition of Peopleware was published. A good portion of the book discusses issues with employee distraction and its inverse relationship to productivity. They use evidence from the field to discuss office layout, and also other issues like office wide paging systems (that used to be a thing!), phone calls, and email.
I’ve built software for the facilities industry so could see the move to open offices from the inside.
The single most important motivation for open offices is cost. The facilities department inside almost every company is viewed as a cost, and managers of departments viewed as a cost have only one way to make a bonus: cut costs. Most of the facilities costs are a multiple of the square meters (rent, cleaning, heating, ...), so to cut costs you cut square meters. How do you do this most easily? Get rid of walls first (open office), get rid of fixed desks second (flexdesk / hot desk), then keep reducing the ratio of desks to staff and push people to work from starbucks. Of course, it’s always packaged up as an enabling story, creating better workplaces, but in almost all cases that I saw the core driver was cost.
To get back to private offices the facilities department needs to be seen as an investment, with higher productivity as ROI. The trick is proving that with numbers. Reducing square meters is so much easier.
The single most important motivation for open offices is cost. The facilities department inside almost every company is viewed as a cost, and managers of departments viewed as a cost have only one way to make a bonus: cut costs. Most of the facilities costs are a multiple of the square meters (rent, cleaning, heating, ...), so to cut costs you cut square meters. How do you do this most easily? Get rid of walls first (open office), get rid of fixed desks second (flexdesk / hot desk), then keep reducing the ratio of desks to staff and push people to work from starbucks. Of course, it’s always packaged up as an enabling story, creating better workplaces, but in almost all cases that I saw the core driver was cost.
To get back to private offices the facilities department needs to be seen as an investment, with higher productivity as ROI. The trick is proving that with numbers. Reducing square meters is so much easier.
At a previous office we did a survey regarding our open office space.
The answers were extremely polarized, with about half the office loving them and half the office hating them.
The separation was pretty clean: people whose jobs involved focusing for extended periods of time hated it. People whose jobs were mundane/mindless/entry level, people whose jobs involved multitasking across a lot of things, and people whose jobs involved constant interruptions, loved it.
This is broadly consistent with the thesis "open plan offices are very bad for focus and concentration"
The answers were extremely polarized, with about half the office loving them and half the office hating them.
The separation was pretty clean: people whose jobs involved focusing for extended periods of time hated it. People whose jobs were mundane/mindless/entry level, people whose jobs involved multitasking across a lot of things, and people whose jobs involved constant interruptions, loved it.
This is broadly consistent with the thesis "open plan offices are very bad for focus and concentration"
--> Few managers have a schedule that allows, or even requires, long hours of uninterrupted time dedicated to a single creative pursuit.
As a manager in an open plan office, I will say this is categorically untrue. I have twelve people interupting me constantly, and I need to stay late or start early regularly so that I can get some uninterrupted work time. It also tends to work against self sufficiency. Rather than learn how to do something (or find out how to find out), it's too easy to ask someone (like me).
I do have a lot of meetings, but I also have work. I need to read specs, for example, and understand all the implications. I need to plan projects with complicated circular dependencies. These are "load lots of stuff into memory" jobs. It's impossible to do in 20 minutes stretches.
I'm also a sprint-and-rest type of personality. I get a lot done I. My most productive stretch of the week. Knocking me out of a productive roll can be real costly in time.
It also makes me a worse/lazier manager. Rather than make sure people are working on a nice big chunk of something, and have everything they need to get the job done, I can trickle information in as we go. That's invariably worse, but less work upfront.
There are definitely upsides too. You get a lot of cohesion for free, especially at a company in the 50-250 people range.
As a manager in an open plan office, I will say this is categorically untrue. I have twelve people interupting me constantly, and I need to stay late or start early regularly so that I can get some uninterrupted work time. It also tends to work against self sufficiency. Rather than learn how to do something (or find out how to find out), it's too easy to ask someone (like me).
I do have a lot of meetings, but I also have work. I need to read specs, for example, and understand all the implications. I need to plan projects with complicated circular dependencies. These are "load lots of stuff into memory" jobs. It's impossible to do in 20 minutes stretches.
I'm also a sprint-and-rest type of personality. I get a lot done I. My most productive stretch of the week. Knocking me out of a productive roll can be real costly in time.
It also makes me a worse/lazier manager. Rather than make sure people are working on a nice big chunk of something, and have everything they need to get the job done, I can trickle information in as we go. That's invariably worse, but less work upfront.
There are definitely upsides too. You get a lot of cohesion for free, especially at a company in the 50-250 people range.
I wish everyone would give up on the "increases collaboration" thing and just admit that open-plan offices are about shoving as many people as possible into a given space
> Few managers have a schedule that allows, or even requires, long hours of uninterrupted time dedicated to a single creative pursuit.
More on that in Paul Graham's Essay: http://paulgraham.com/makersschedule.html
More on that in Paul Graham's Essay: http://paulgraham.com/makersschedule.html
It is very interesting indeed that tech companies who proud themselves in making decisions that are purely "Data Driven" completely ignores data in this case. Majority of developers hate Open Office and study after study shows that its bad. Yet they can't make decision to have offices. Very strange.
I used to stay later and use the hours from 17h onwards where there was more peace to get productive work done, as it was impossible during the day with all the interruptions and standups (plus headphones all day non-stop).
Only 1.5h hours lost hours a day? Try 3h or so at least LOL
Working from home, it feels like time is elastic at least the first few times, then you get used to it. You start working, get what it feels like half a day of work done and look at the clock: it's still 11 AM.
Only 1.5h hours lost hours a day? Try 3h or so at least LOL
Working from home, it feels like time is elastic at least the first few times, then you get used to it. You start working, get what it feels like half a day of work done and look at the clock: it's still 11 AM.
Anyone else find themselves assessing office space when on interviews? Not things like looking for the pool table or seeing what craft beer they have on tap, or how fancy the giant wallboard behind reception is. I'm talking about going into an interview, taking a look at the space and asking yourself "Could I really stand working in this configuration for more than a month?".
I ask, having gone into interview after interview in the last few years and just seeing ikea tables lined up with an equally absurd line of monitors and tiny 4x4 foot spaces, desperately decorated so workers can come in and quickly spot their little section of the subdivision, and ultimately deciding "No. I'm not gonna work like this".
Just wondering.
I ask, having gone into interview after interview in the last few years and just seeing ikea tables lined up with an equally absurd line of monitors and tiny 4x4 foot spaces, desperately decorated so workers can come in and quickly spot their little section of the subdivision, and ultimately deciding "No. I'm not gonna work like this".
Just wondering.
I mention this every time open offices come up, but it bears repeating. The "collaboration" excuse is nonsense. Companies choose open offices because they're cheaper. You can fit more people in less square feet which means cheaper rent.
I'm pretty damn sure that if private offices were somehow cheaper they would do that instead and figure out some other way to handle collaboration.
I'm pretty damn sure that if private offices were somehow cheaper they would do that instead and figure out some other way to handle collaboration.
My open office of about 15 people per 350 square feet, row after row after row, is silent and without interaction almost completely. It makes me crawl out of my skin to wanting to leave. I can typically spend no more than about 5 hours there before I escape to home where I can actually get work done. I'd love my job if I didn't have to go to that place.
I absolutely agree with this, I see such a loss in moral and productivity where I work. What is funny though, is that the management has walled offices. I wonder why.
The OP point of an office being used to impress visitors is on point. Since we're all remote we resorted to building a TV wall of 6 screens of 65 inch each that features a team map of 300 people all around the world. Visitors love it and I don't distract my fellow team members by showing it.
Open office is "anti-focus" imo. It's crazy how it even became a thing.
Cubicles use up the same amount of space and at least you have some privacy.
Cubicles use up the same amount of space and at least you have some privacy.
I don't know. I was in open offices thrice in 2.5 years before joining a cubical cult for nearly three more years now.
I literally jumped at the opportunity to move my cube to share a window, and an entrance.
Give me remote; or give me death at this point.
There's not much natural light and a set of nice headphones can't overshadow.
I literally jumped at the opportunity to move my cube to share a window, and an entrance.
Give me remote; or give me death at this point.
There's not much natural light and a set of nice headphones can't overshadow.
Ever time this gets brought up, everyone agrees with this, but, yet, no matter what, damn near every -- and I mean EVERY -- employer I've worked at, and even interviewed for since -- probably 2002 has gone to open plan offices.
I can look at the engineering area at any given day and see every member of the engineering team with headphones/earbuds on. Slack/IRC/Skype for Business gets ignored...why? It allows us to focus on the task at hand, without the noise of the office around us.
One of the best startups that I've worked at -- culture wise -- had a policy of two days a week, there would be no meetings, chatter around the office, or loud noises in the afternoon, and they'd play something that was rather chill/relaxing that everyone would agree on...and it really helped with productivity: the number of commits went up on Tuesdays and Thursdays because we were able to get things done without the hassle of anyone bothering us but the tasks at hand.
If open plan offices were designed with sound masking/dampening, the correct number of bathrooms per person (because, they were originally designed for cubes, not open seating, there are never enough bathrooms, it seems), the correct network planning (limiting your DevOps guys to one network drop always sucks when we're the ones pushing around gb+ images), and parking (because open plan seating usually implies that they're trying to stuff more people into a smaller space, so, there's never usually enough parking for the area) I would not really have an issue with open plan offices. I have a great pair of noise cancelling headphones and they work well for me.
I can look at the engineering area at any given day and see every member of the engineering team with headphones/earbuds on. Slack/IRC/Skype for Business gets ignored...why? It allows us to focus on the task at hand, without the noise of the office around us.
One of the best startups that I've worked at -- culture wise -- had a policy of two days a week, there would be no meetings, chatter around the office, or loud noises in the afternoon, and they'd play something that was rather chill/relaxing that everyone would agree on...and it really helped with productivity: the number of commits went up on Tuesdays and Thursdays because we were able to get things done without the hassle of anyone bothering us but the tasks at hand.
If open plan offices were designed with sound masking/dampening, the correct number of bathrooms per person (because, they were originally designed for cubes, not open seating, there are never enough bathrooms, it seems), the correct network planning (limiting your DevOps guys to one network drop always sucks when we're the ones pushing around gb+ images), and parking (because open plan seating usually implies that they're trying to stuff more people into a smaller space, so, there's never usually enough parking for the area) I would not really have an issue with open plan offices. I have a great pair of noise cancelling headphones and they work well for me.
These articles keep being written, I guess as individuals each eventually discover this for themselves -- is it having any positive effect as far as any HNers can tell?
Open offices would probably work a hell of a lot better if people paid any attention whatsoever to acoustics. Put up thick carpeting over the floor, noise reducing curtains over the windows, and tile the walls + ceiling with acoustical panels. Basically you want the reflected noise of conversations to be minimal - that way, people don't increase their speaking volume to be heard over ambient noise, and the room ends up a hell of a lot quieter.
I am a full time remote worker, but I have survived the tyranny of an open office in the past. I dislike the open office format.
A lot of the time companies don't "choose" an open office, it chooses them.
If you are working at a small or mid-sized company, building out rented office space you will probably outgrow in a year or two is a crappy investment.
The alternative? Buy the desks, throw them into a room, expect people to be quiet and respectful.
A lot of the time companies don't "choose" an open office, it chooses them.
If you are working at a small or mid-sized company, building out rented office space you will probably outgrow in a year or two is a crappy investment.
The alternative? Buy the desks, throw them into a room, expect people to be quiet and respectful.
I am going to be the contrarian here. I think open office plan does work well. But given these caveats:
- Give enough desk space: i.e, 2 monitor, laptop, enough space for a few books and papers, and 2 feet of space to move my chair in each direction.
- No people making calls. Have sound-insulated single person, non-bookable, meeting rooms/call booths for calls. Also anyone playing anything on their computer without headphones must be prohibited. Basically no one should be hearing any one-way conversations.
- Strict rules on two-way conversations. Anything that's taking more than 5 mins to discuss and does not involve the whole area should go to a meeting room.
With this arrangement, open office has worked for me. I am able to provide solutions when I hear something about which I know something, other people are able to provide me solutions, I get to hear about stuff that effects me sooner (e.g, hey the commits aren't going through due to test failures). I have found that the number of noises that bother me is actually very few in reality, and I have my trusty insulated headphones for that.
- Give enough desk space: i.e, 2 monitor, laptop, enough space for a few books and papers, and 2 feet of space to move my chair in each direction.
- No people making calls. Have sound-insulated single person, non-bookable, meeting rooms/call booths for calls. Also anyone playing anything on their computer without headphones must be prohibited. Basically no one should be hearing any one-way conversations.
- Strict rules on two-way conversations. Anything that's taking more than 5 mins to discuss and does not involve the whole area should go to a meeting room.
With this arrangement, open office has worked for me. I am able to provide solutions when I hear something about which I know something, other people are able to provide me solutions, I get to hear about stuff that effects me sooner (e.g, hey the commits aren't going through due to test failures). I have found that the number of noises that bother me is actually very few in reality, and I have my trusty insulated headphones for that.
Every time I read these threads against the open-plan office, I think back to two arguments that an old boss put forth for them that I haven't been able to find a good answer for:
1) If it works for some of the most successful tech companies on the planet (Google / Facebook / Amazon,) why can't it work for us?
2) Prove to me that the loss in productivity is higher than the cost / investment necessary to build everyone an office (or a semi-isolated cube) + value gained from collaboration.
I hear lots of hearsay and opinions, but if folks have good research or articles to point to, I'd love to have them in my back pocket for the next time I have this argument.
1) If it works for some of the most successful tech companies on the planet (Google / Facebook / Amazon,) why can't it work for us?
2) Prove to me that the loss in productivity is higher than the cost / investment necessary to build everyone an office (or a semi-isolated cube) + value gained from collaboration.
I hear lots of hearsay and opinions, but if folks have good research or articles to point to, I'd love to have them in my back pocket for the next time I have this argument.
Even when soccer is over, you have to contend with people playing grab-ass all over the office, or jerks (like me) with annoyingly loud keyboards. The modicum of utility of me "jumping into a conversation" really goes out the window when I'm forced to wear headphones all day.
I really don't have a good way of measuring or fully quantifying how much less productive I am personally, but haven't there been a ton of studies that indicate anywhere between 1-1.5 hours a day is wasted per employee due to the open office? I assume that labor is the most expensive part of any big-ish company, so it feels like the "offices are cheaper" argument shouldn't work.