September 12, 2008: Knock, knock
Category: Administration - operations
Posted by: David M Patt
Some people feel that design determines the level of communication that exists in association offices. Open space, rather than private offices, they say, enhances communication. But it also deprives employees of necessary privacy and may lead to lower employee satisfaction.
In small association offices, people can just walk a few steps to someone's desk, poke their heads into someone's office (including the CEO), or even call across a room to obtain or share information or to convene a quickie meeting.
At the American College of Psychiatrists, short, stand-up gatherings are held by staff on the "dance floor," a small, open area once thought of as wasted space but now serving a useful, meeting function.
Leaving doors open (except when privacy is required) signals that staff are always available to talk. Important issues don't have to wait for staff meetings or other formal settings.
One association is seeking to do away with private offices because employees always keep their doors closed - an apparent signal they don't wan't to be disturbed.
However, these employees meet for 1 1/2 hour weekly staff meetings PLUS individual, weekly meetings with the CEO. Maybe they keep their doors closed because they have too much face-to-face time and want to get their work done.
In another small association, a new CEO insisted that all contact with her be conducted through e-mail desipte all five staff working within 25 feet of each other. Relationships swiftly cooled in this environment.
Management style, more than physical design, determines the quality of staff communication. An approachable CEO who encourages staff-to-staff conversation, and doesn't hover over everybody, is likely to generate quality communication, even when everybody has private offices.
In small association offices, people can just walk a few steps to someone's desk, poke their heads into someone's office (including the CEO), or even call across a room to obtain or share information or to convene a quickie meeting.
At the American College of Psychiatrists, short, stand-up gatherings are held by staff on the "dance floor," a small, open area once thought of as wasted space but now serving a useful, meeting function.
Leaving doors open (except when privacy is required) signals that staff are always available to talk. Important issues don't have to wait for staff meetings or other formal settings.
One association is seeking to do away with private offices because employees always keep their doors closed - an apparent signal they don't wan't to be disturbed.
However, these employees meet for 1 1/2 hour weekly staff meetings PLUS individual, weekly meetings with the CEO. Maybe they keep their doors closed because they have too much face-to-face time and want to get their work done.
In another small association, a new CEO insisted that all contact with her be conducted through e-mail desipte all five staff working within 25 feet of each other. Relationships swiftly cooled in this environment.
Management style, more than physical design, determines the quality of staff communication. An approachable CEO who encourages staff-to-staff conversation, and doesn't hover over everybody, is likely to generate quality communication, even when everybody has private offices.
anonymous wrote:
Starting from the CEO barging into directors' offices -- or wherever the poor directors may be found -- and interrupting them to discuss their latest thought or idea. This also occurs with staff members and managers interrupting staff members working at their cubicles. Even if cubicles don't have doors, or directors are expected to work to matching schedules to those of the CEOs, sometimes these people take it too far. Do we want to be efficient, or just available to entertain whims as they occur?