Conference 7.286::digital

    "Office of the future" was implemented in the Southern Area last
    year.  They carried it a step further, however, in that there were
    fewer desks than people.  In other words, people share desks.  The
    theory is that they should be out of the office calling on customers
    most of the time anyway, so sharing desks shouldn't be a big problem.
    Unit managers were moved into cubicles also.
    
    There was a great deal of wailing and moaning and gnashing of teeth.
    I was among the wailers.
    
    In reality, it turned out to be a nightmare in some situations and
    an improvement in others.  The decision for managers to have cubicles
    has since been changed, and offices will be provided as they were
    before.  The worst scenario was where salespeople were sharing desks
    and telephones.  That turned out to be almost totally unworkable.
    Situations where expansion space was provided for and therefore
    no desk-sharing occurred worked out quite well.  In fact, once the
    new facility was built and people moved in, they seemed to rather
    like it.
    
    Bottom line seemed to be that the desk-sharing was what made it
    unworkable.  Situations where individuals still had a desk to call
    their own turned out to be quite workable, and employees seemed
    to be more or less satisfied.
    
    							Pat

The joke in our district (suburban NY) goes something like:

	"One company, one message, one architecture, one office."

I have always regarded cubes, no matter how efficient and cost effective they
are, as one of the most oppresive work environments.  I work in SWS.  Been 
on the same residency for almost 5 years.  One of the reasons I have not
actively pursued career moves which would bring me back into the office (and
up until now, this has fortunately not hindered me), is the fact that I would 
have to work in that environment.  I mean, at the customer site where I am, 
I have a private office with a door, 12x16 with a real desk, conference table, 
credenza for my terminal, bookcase, AND A WINDOW!  Hell, in DEC, those are 
almost V.P. accomodations!

I guess the bullpen idea goes along just dandy with the fine VT100's some
specialists are lucky to have sole possession of.  Of course, in our office,
you can't fit a VT100 on the your desk and use it at the same time, so
no one is missing anything! :-):-):-)
				   :-)
				    :-)
				     :-) <- dripping with sarcasm... 

        I think that in the enthusiasm to have "The Office of the future",
        a number of our management structure have forgotten a few things.
        
        Any real working "future offices" have a few other considerations,
        such as recreational areas, seperate and adequate support
        facilities, access to resources that have been removed from
        the desktop and so on.


                                                       
        q
        

The "Office of the Future" may make sense when most people are out most of
the time -- so I'd say you SWS folks may just have to live with it, since
your job is to be at customer sites.

If you're working on a project, you should have the same accomodations we have
in Engineering (or better):

  10x10 office, three full desk-size tables, bookshelves all around (big enough
  to hold the equivalent of at least three-four VMS doc sets), full size four
  drawer filing cabinet, terminal, telephone, chair, and guest chair.

BTW, this is basically what everyone in engineering has -- VPs don't necessarily
have any more space than secretaries (although their bookcases and filing cabs
might be in the secretary's office making their office a bit roomier).

/john

    RE: .4
    
    	That what people in Engineering should have John. Reality is
    that NAC is growing so fast that "real" offices are hard to come
    by. Here in LKG, many people have doubled up waiting for LKG2 to
    come on line.. I suspect that not too soon after that happens we'll
    be doubling up again..
    
    							mike
    
    A former owner of a 5x7 office.

    re .4
    
>    the time -- so I'd say you SWS folks may just have to live with it, since
>your job is to be at customer sites.

    SAY WHAT?
    
    Haven't I been hearing for the last 2 years how some large percent
    of our software business is SUPPOSED TO BE PROJECTS?  
    
    We haven't been attacked by the bullpen mentality here in MPO. Yet!
    I had the misfortune to be in Kansas City for a project where they
    used "The Project Room".  This was an incredibly oppressive room
    where they interned the project team.  No walls, no cubes, NO privacy,
    smokers fouling the air, conversations disrupting everyone, etc.
    SUCKED!
    
    When you ask about "real offices" the answer is "You want walls
    or a bigger raise"?  I HATE cubes, but I hate this bullpen crap
    a whole lot more.

>    If you're working on a project, you should have the same accomodations we have
>in Engineering (or better):
>
>  10x10 office, three full desk-size tables, bookshelves all around (big enough
>  to hold the equivalent of at least three-four VMS doc sets), full size four
>  drawer filing cabinet, terminal, telephone, chair, and guest chair.

    Nice dream!  Can I have a job with you?  What we have are 8X8 foot (OR
    SMALLER) cubes, tables (you're kidding -- where would you put them),
    maybe a doc set (if you yell enough to get one, and your mean enough to
    keep it), filing cabinet (if you find one to steal), etc.  And I
    suspect ours are some of the better accomodations.
    
    D 

    Guess this all depends what kind a job you do AND what kind a PERSON
    you are. The first might be easy to define and to defend. The latter
    however might not always get due consideration by the planners.
    Since my many years with DEC I have mostly lived in open space type
    environment (when I had residential type jobs, otherwise I couldn't
    care less where I would fill in my expense claim on). I really like
    it, cause it facilitates communication, teamwork etc... On the other
    hand some people really prefered offices, mainly in engineering
    because of noise etc... Finally I still stick to open space with
    cubicles for some minimal privacy. In case you need to isolate
    from time to time, you would use one of the conference rooms or
    a vacant manager's office. I have seen in one case, where everybody
    was confined into closed offices, that the "ambiance" and style
    of work (poor communications, poor teamwork) sufferd from this
    arrangement in the long run. I understand however that managers
    do mostly require closed offices due to obvious confidential
    conversations: JPR's, interviews....
    However over here (Valbonne) it is an unwritten rule that a manager
    leaves his/her door wide open when not doing "confidentials".
    RE: .0 I sure would hate to be in a corner, facing a wall and
    turning my back to my co-workers ! Who's invented that arrangement
    should deserve working in it !!
    Fred

>>        I understand however that managers
>>    do mostly require closed offices due to obvious confidential
>>    conversations: JPR's, interviews....

    This is not true everywhere - on my floor in the mill the only
    doors exist on conference rooms (which is where we do the
    'confidential' activities).  Managers/supervisors have basically
    the same office arrangement as everyone else.

    As in all things DEC from DEC is different. I personally
    prefer a private office but haven't had one since my first
    job at DEC. 
    
    I do not believe that bullpens are condusive to creativity,
    learning,or anything. I also think they are stressful.
    
    As for "private" managers offices how about a manager that
    gives JPR etc in the middle of a bullpen in full sound of
    different groups?
    
    I do believe that since people have to be at their job a 
    significant part of their lives they shoudl have so some
    control over it. I for one would trade my Panda/microvax etc
    for an office that had walls and doors thus reducing the decibel
    level by around 50db. By the end of the day my teeth hurt
    from the noise. That can't be productive!
    

>    As for "private" managers offices how about a manager that
>    gives JPR etc in the middle of a bullpen in full sound of
>    different groups?

That's what conference rooms are for.  Any manager who would give an employee
a JPR where it can be overheard is a jerk -- even if it's a good review.  The
employee should have the opportunity to say what he wants to say.

I think the best way to handle a JPR is to meet the employee in a conference
room, present the JPR and then leave for a while to give the employee time to
read it with no pressure to rush, then come back to discuss it.

/john

Re: John's comments on facilities for project people

	I wish someone from engineering would talk to the folks laying out the 
Southern Area SIC Delivery center.  There the Project Managers are in a 
bullpen!

    "office of the future" reminds me of a currently ongoing
    discussion in the Vogon News about euphamisms...
    Personally, I am in the Western area SWS (Santa Clara).
    I am a resident, and have never had a desk, much less
    an office at any DEC facility.  The customer has graciously
    given us desk space here (there are about 30 DEC residents here)
    this consists of: 2 to 4 specialists per cubicle (not office).
    one desk, one table, one phone, and one terminal per person. 
    One conference room (equipped with real doors!) for the building
    (and usually booked solid).  Privacy is accomplished with
    ear-plugs or walkmen.  This is a fairly large project.
    I believe that the facilities needed to be productive depend
    not only on the job being performed, but on the person.  I can 
    "tune out" the rest of the world fairly well, but some folks
    here give up and work very late hours just to get some quiet...
    
    The conditions described by John Covert sound like heaven...
    if only I wouldn't have to leave California...

    re:.12

>    The conditions described by John Covert sound like heaven...
>    if only I wouldn't have to leave California...

    Actually, I know of a DEC facility in CA (not far from you) with
    full-height window offices, balconies for some, and open halls
    where you hang around and chat (but big enough for cubes).
    
    Good work if you can get it... but they might shoot me if I let on.
    (And it's not easy work to get!)

    I remember a few years ago this so-called "architect" was rearanging
    the area that I and several other programmers worked in. He wanted
    to remove the cube walls and just have half-wall dividers. He felt
    that this would "improve communication between members of the team".
    I was adament that I wanted walls because I felt that the
    "communication" that he was trying to foster was really a distraction
    from someone that needed to concentrate (ever tried reading a crash
    dump with a dozen people "communicating" within earshot?) Exasperated,
    he finally said to me, "I just don't understand you software types; the
    guy I carpool just like that. Why, he even drags his fileing cabinet
    in front of his office. Just what is it that you people do that needs
    so much concentration?" I asked him how he could possibly design
    work areas for people whose job needs he didn't understand. I got
    my walls.
    
    Deb
    

    
    Are there any internal rules on how an office should look like ?
    
    What some of you describe are unworkable conditions, that would
    simply be illegal in most European countries.
    
    If I get the French labour laws right, one must have at least 7
    sq. meters space and a window ( that is for a 'cadre' and all 
    soft people are 'cadre').
    Any Swede or German knownig the rules ?

    Besides the legal requirenments, the argument I heard in Sweden
    was, "salaries are THE cost these days ( it used to be computers)
    of running any computer operation ( software house or consulting
    bureau) so, in order to get higher productivity, working conditions
    must be good. Having good working conditions for well paid programmers,
    consultants simply makes sens."
    
    The major problem of software houses ( SWAS ) is to keep people.
    Good working conditions are one of the prerequisites of it.

    DEC has an honorable ambition ( at least in Europe ) to be ahead
    of the market place as far as emploee relations are concerned.
    These are not empty words , I've seen several good examples of it.
    All new DEC facilities I've seen ( Stockholm, Gotheborg, Utrecht,
    Munich, Valbonne, Paris ) are as good as John Covert's office or
    far better.
    
    			We don't have swiming pool, yet....

    There is a common theme in all the problems described here. The people
    charged with laying out office space simply don't bother to ask
    the occupant what sort of office they want or need!
    
    The attitude seems to be "I'm the facilities expert. I'll TELL you
    what you really need." Implied also is that, given the chance, we'd
    all opt for ridiculous luxuries.
    
    

    20 years ago I was in the "office of the future". I shared it with
    4 others. It was the most common configuration at the time. I guess
    we just didn't realize how futuristic we were at the time!
    
    /tb/
    

    The problem is that after 15 years of experience with offices for
    Software Specialists that still need to get those so-called experts
    involved and then refuse to expose the floor plan until its too late to
    change. 
    
    Aren't there any real models to follow?
    
    The 8th floor of Penn Plaza was worked out with plenty of participation
    from those who'd be living with it.  It's close to perfect.
    
    More than anything else, having five foot partitions enclosing an area
    of no more than four people is the key. 

    Down here in Charlotte, SWS/E (E stands for engineering) lives in
    a facility hosted by the Charlotte District.  The building is called
    WAREHOUSE grade space.  We have a group of people numbering about
    40 normally that work generally full days in the office, only
    occasional trips. We currently work in an area with NO windows in
    the working area, only some front building windows for the entrance
    area (one secretary's area, a conference room, and a training
    room/large conference room area.
    
    We went through this "office of the future" bit with a local design
    firm over a year ago as part of the district's plans to move to
    quarters that were more OFFICE than WAREHOUSE in nature. We worked
    diligently with the designers to try to get our requirements into
    the plan as best we could. The plan produced seemed to be a reasonably
    acceptable plan.
    
    However, we were told to project our growth and build that into
    the plan.  We did, and have in this last year already exceeded our
    growth estimates. What this seems to have done is increase our "burden"
    to the plan by increaseing the amount of SQ FT needed, and the higher
    costs of OFFICE space vs WAREHOUSE space are now coming into play.
    It does not look like we get to move.
    
    Part of the problem that got highlighted in this process was the
    fact that someone is not able to come to grips with the fact that
    there are organizations growing up in the field with "engineering"
    type environment requirements while the rest of the field continues
    thinking in terms of "sales/support" type environment requirments.
    So we end up getting shortchanged in space and equipment. From what
    I have seen, "office of the future" is only a "front office" concept
    and not to be applied to the "back room."

    Jack

>    If I get the French labour laws right, one must have at least 7
>    sq. meters space and a window ( that is for a 'cadre' and all 
>    soft people are 'cadre').
>    Any Swede or German knownig the rules ?

I don't think we have any Swedes or Germans regularly reading this file, but
maybe when Ora (who is from Finland but works in Munich) gets back he can be
more specific:

In Germany it *appears* that the law is that you cannot be more than one desk
away from a window.  Every German office building I've ever been in seems to
implement this.

/john

    As a writer/course developer, I also have an "ideal office".  Desk,
    counter and table, 5 bookshelves, bookcase, file cabinet, and terminal
    stand.  No window, though.
    
    When I first came to this group, however, I was doubled up with
    someone until a cube opened up.  I divided the cube with  2 tall
    file cabinets.  When sitting at my desk, I had to assume a complicated
    acrobatic position to be able to open my file drawers since I only
    had enough room for my chair to swivel.  No one could sit and talk
    with me very easily.  However...I much preferred the visual privacy
    to physical comfort.  I told my manager that I would be happier
    sitting in a closet than being visually distracted by even one other
    person.  And much, much more productive.   
    
    Why don't planners ask employees what they want?  People are different,
    and there are many cost effective ways to arrange space.  Some people
    thrive in a bull pen while others would wither and die of
    non-productivity and overstimulation.  I would be doing all my work
    at home on my own time and putting in my hours in the bull pen in
    order to qualify for the paycheck.
    
    If I were ever in a situation where I were asked to sit in open,
    communal work space, and was not allowed to subdivide it for visual
    privacy, I would leave DEC.
    
    (Related issue - has anyone ever done anything in a private cube
    which they would not feel comfortable doing in public?  I'm thinking
    of things like adjusting stockings, using a toothpick or dental
    floss, taking medication, and a few other things.  If I ran to the
    rest room every time I did something like that, it would also
    affect my productivity.)
                              
    Holly

    
    Office of the future  ==>  Frustrations of the Future
         
    # Dealing with a death in the family or telling your loved one
      something especial would demand a private place; Office of the
      future has no private places. Unless DEC constructs a "private
      booth (enclosed box like a telephone booth) where we like our
      great predessor Clark Kent (Superman) could dash into the booth,
      take care of internal things and come out a better person.
    
    # To complement the changing environment, I feel that we should
      be trained to work 'closely together'.  Ever tried to take a 
      yard dog and have it into a house pet???
    
    # The term "working together" will take on a whole new meaning.
      Jean-Paul Sarte has a book (play) called "NO EXIT". The setting
      of the play sounds very much like Office of the Future. Sarte's
      conclusion is that (I quote) 'People are hell'.
    
      rob
    
    

>
>    This plan is bothering us because there is no visual privacy.
>    We have 5 1/2' high cubes now and more shelf space.  They do
>    not seem to like this in St. Louis, but I should not speak
>    for them.
>
>    Is this configuration being implemented in other places than
>    the central area?  What kind of space do other SWS and SWE
>    people have?  And what would you think if the office of the
>    future would come to your site?


      I know  that  this is an old note, but it will serve its purpose to
   get it off my chest....

      Yes, here in  Salem  we  have  the  "office  of  the  Future".  The
   planners went out and  bought  lots  of carpets (no padding) and about
   50% fewer cubicles than what were  needed.  What happened?  Seems like
   file  cabinets  and  bookcases  proliferated  as people  attempted  to
   re-create the walls that they had lost. 

      Time went on and in true Manufacturing spirit,  people  had  to  be
   moved out of one place and into another, sort  of  like  the Army.  My
   office  soon soon had another occupant, who had equally, if  not  more
   manuals  than  I  had.    In our 10x10 office (maybe 10x10 -  we  have
   "stretched" the walls) , we have:

      o Two uVax workstations on vt220 stands and printer 
      o Two phones
      o Two desks
      o Two file cabinets
      o 4 chairs
      o a  single  folding  table  set  up in the middle, and another one
        against a wall ( give it away and you lose it)
      o TONS of manuals

      It doesn't take much effort to realize that this leaves very little
   room for human occupants.  We decided to maximize the space inside the
   office, by leaving a  very small doorway.  People over 200 pounds need
   not even try to enter. 

      What makes matters worse is that  there are offices within the area
   that are completely empty - "turf wars"  prevent  us  from getting any
   more space, even though our group has more than doubled in size in two
   years.  To add insult to injury, there are offices within the facility
   that  have  the most beautiful, color-coordinated walls, drop ceilings
   and luxurious  conference  rooms.  However, even though they share the
   same roof, they  report  to  different management, so they get to play
   under different rules.

      I'd like to hear  from  a facilities planner on this situation.  Is
   this just another way save  money  by buying fewer walls?  Does anyone
   have any FACTUAL studies that show  that PERFORMANCE, and PRODUCTIVITY
   INCREASE in "bull-pen" workplaces AND that STRESS DECREASES?


      Thanks for the time to get on a soapbox...

      Rick Beldin

re Note 362.23 by SEDJAR::BELDIN:

>    Does anyone
>    have any FACTUAL studies that show  that PERFORMANCE, and PRODUCTIVITY
>    INCREASE in "bull-pen" workplaces AND that STRESS DECREASES?

If your work output remains approximately constant as the cost of providing
your work space decreases, then by definition the productivity of the capital
invested in the work space has increased.

You ARE producing as much output as before, right?

Bob

>    To add insult to injury, there are offices within the facility
>   that  have  the most beautiful, color-coordinated walls, drop ceilings
>   and luxurious  conference  rooms.  However, even though they share the
>   same roof, they  report  to  different management, so they get to play
>   under different rules.

    This is one of the difference between Manufacturing and Engineering
    management. The groups with the nice offices are engineering groups.
    The rules are the same though. You get what you pay for. Engineering
    paid big bucks for the 'pink palace' because they felt that that's
    what it takes to get high quality people/work.

>   I'd like to hear  from  a facilities planner on this situation.  Is
>   this just another way save  money  by buying fewer walls?  

    You don't need to hear from a facilities planner. Ask your cost
    center manager why you've got cheap crowded offices. Space wars
    are won by people willing to pay for the space. Ash him/her why
    they or their management are unwilling to spend money taking care
    of their people.
    
    			Alfred