This is a very programmer-y piece to write, because it examines open offices from a completed systemic and mechanistic viewpoint, even though the reason open offices are so prevalent really has nothing to do with any factor cited in the article.
First, the notion should be dispelled that companies care primarily about productivity and profit. No one in the company cares primarily about either of these things, except perhaps the CFO. Doubtful even in that case.
Most managers and executives care foremost about control and obeisance*. Productivity is tertiary if even in the top 10. Often it is not. The behavior and preferences of managers and executives is the primary shaper of an organizations culture and characteristics. Worker preferences do not really matter much. Hence the observed and realized “preference” for open plan offices.
And this is the culture of the vast, vast majority of places I’ve worked and is probably embedded in human nature. Many maladaptive tendencies in fact are, contra current (mostly) liberal beliefs.
In short, some study of sociology and history would do the article writer well for understanding the ascendancy of open plan offices. As workers have lost power, open plan offices have dominated despite being clearly contrary to worker preferences and also harmful to nearly any measure of productivity.
Attempting to understand the rise of these productivity-destroying offices from the perspective of the worker is like attempting to understand the operations of an oil rig from examining a single bolt. It makes no sense. One must look at what the supervisor mandates and prefers. And they prefer being able to see everyone, to have their minions laid bare before them and easily viewable and interruptible. On display for themselves, and for others.
Such is the case here. As I always stress, a little study of sociology, anthropology and history goes a very long way.
All that said, anyone have any good 300-level anthro or sociology textbooks to recommend? I’ve read many (most?) of the ones below that level used in the US. But want to get back into those areas of study again.
*If you doubt this, just try doing something that clearly increases the productivity and profit of the company but is implicitly or explicitly against management wishes. 99% chance you will be fired, so I don’t actually recommend trying it.
First, the notion should be dispelled that companies care primarily about productivity and profit. No one in the company cares primarily about either of these things, except perhaps the CFO. Doubtful even in that case.
Here perhaps, I’m confusing productivity and profit with return on stock and what stockholders want to see from quarter to quarter (increasing returns on stock from quarter to quarter). Obviously, most companies are not publicly traded. But the ones who have stock offerings have HR and beancounters and all of those people to quantify the “savings” of removing walls vs cost.
And they prefer being able to see everyone, to have their minions laid bare before them and easily viewable and interruptible. On display for themselves, and for others.
That seems really odd, especially since there are so many ways to monitor and interrupt what the minions (workers, potato, potata) do absent an old school Panopticon floor plan. And it’s more efficient for those purposes too.
And this doesn’t really explain the current vogue for open style floor plans in houses. I see house after house with giant master bedrooms, itty bitty ancillary bedrooms ones and less rooms. You can make spaces multipurpose only up to a certain point before cacophony and annoyance sets in. It’s immensely weird because these floor plans exist in neighborhoods with gated communities and buildings with elevator fob entries — which are a huge sign that the people living in those areas do not want any unplanned interruptions. Plus people who buy these giant homes clearly aren’t worried about such trivial things such as the cost of an extra wall or two. Does it matter if these interruptions/displays occur inside the home or outside? I can hardly imagine a bunch of extroverts who are only extroverted with their own family.
Even though there are indeed better surveillance technologies than open plan offices that execs and managers could use, part of the attraction to the executive class is that they can be seen seeing — that is, it is obvious what is their demesne and what is not. A bumptious row of programmers or accountants (if they are ever bumptious) is far more impressive to other semi-sociopathic extroverts than some boring chat logs or WebSense spying. This display is very, very important for status with other managers and with visiting VIPs.
About the openness of house plans, there are a few reasons for this, some related to the trend towards open plan offices and some not.
Housing is a different beast than offices, of course. A lot of the trend towards more open houses is working- and middle-class pushback against Victorian/Gilded Age upper-class houses with many ornate, closed-off rooms. It is an architectural statement against an era that became default and then continued because it is cheaper and happened at the right time where most people were able to buy homes so it became normalized. Partially historical accident, here. It is not and was not directly cost-related but rather a turning against of the opulence and cloistered nature of a preceding era that became just “how a house should be” due to economics and demographics.
Also, the trend towards greater surveillance and the expectation of increased surveillance plays a part in both trends.
There are other factors, but those are two large ones.