Over the next year or so, Google will try out new office designs(nytimes.com)
nytimes.com
Over the next year or so, Google will try out new office designs
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/30/technology/google-back-to-office-workers.html
188 コメント
I’ll take a regular cubicle at this point. The thought of returning to long rows of desks crammed right next to each other is causing some real psychological dread.
Funny how things change. Cubicles were the poster child for dystopian corporate office environments in the 90s. And "office landscapes" were a know humanistic take on open plan developed in 50s and 60s as a response to rows of desks in the open plan offices of the pre-war period [1].
I quite like the idea of the library model - all communal space is quiet by default with many small rooms for and hoc discussion. It would take serious will to introduce it in most offices though.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_landscape
I quite like the idea of the library model - all communal space is quiet by default with many small rooms for and hoc discussion. It would take serious will to introduce it in most offices though.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_landscape
It's sure is a sign of the horrors of open offices when cubicles, the original terrible workplace, is now the good old times we miss!
But, agreed. Even cubicles (with at least 5ft walls), while terrible, are 1000x better than the dreadful open office.
But, agreed. Even cubicles (with at least 5ft walls), while terrible, are 1000x better than the dreadful open office.
not only are they half-assed incomplete attempts to solve problems solved by private offices, they ignore the excellent solution to the problem open-plan offices were meant to solve: using a small office space for a large staff.
if you let people work from home if they want to, you need far less office space. so instead of trying to cram in a ton of workspaces, just let people who want to work from home do that, and use the space that frees up to give private offices to the people who want to work at the office.
if you let people work from home if they want to, you need far less office space. so instead of trying to cram in a ton of workspaces, just let people who want to work from home do that, and use the space that frees up to give private offices to the people who want to work at the office.
> if you let people work from home if they want to, you need far less office space.
Some companies made investments in properties, or signed multiyear leases, before the pandemic happened. I know of a couple that are itching to get people back to work in-person.
Some companies made investments in properties, or signed multiyear leases, before the pandemic happened. I know of a couple that are itching to get people back to work in-person.
> Some companies made investments in properties, or signed multiyear leases, before the pandemic happened.
That was unfortunate, but incidental. Larger companies certainly can do the cost-benefit analysis that cancels out those losses if they plan on being around in 10 years.
That was unfortunate, but incidental. Larger companies certainly can do the cost-benefit analysis that cancels out those losses if they plan on being around in 10 years.
I do not care that the company invested in office spaces. I’m paid to do work, and if I do worse work from an open plan office then demanding that I return to it because some executive is suffering from a sunk cost problem is genuinely stupid. That executive can mourn their losses privately and leave me alone do to the work I’m actually paid to do, thankyouverymuch.
> I do not care that the company invested in office spaces
Trust me, I do not care either. I'm just explaining the motivation some smaller employers have for getting employees back to the office, and hopefully those employees can see through it and advocate for their wellbeing.
Trust me, I do not care either. I'm just explaining the motivation some smaller employers have for getting employees back to the office, and hopefully those employees can see through it and advocate for their wellbeing.
yeah, i get that companies have space and want to make use of it. but that's my point - they can still make use of that space, and give everybody working on-site a better experience, by simply allowing people to work at home if they want to.
There's plenty of people who actually do want to work from an office. it's not like offices will be empty if you simply let people work from home. especially if you stop forcing people to work in a fishbowl and make the office an actual productive place where people can get focused work done.
There's plenty of people who actually do want to work from an office. it's not like offices will be empty if you simply let people work from home. especially if you stop forcing people to work in a fishbowl and make the office an actual productive place where people can get focused work done.
At least hoteling spaces of some sort for people. Combined with conference spaces for when people want to come into the office to meet and work together.
> All of these are just half-assed, incomplete attempts to solve problems that were already solved by private offices.
That's it right there. First 15+ years of my career always had private office. It's the perfect solution to everything you list and more.
The last decade has been a nightmare of wandering around the buildings trying to find somewhere to work that doesn't have all the problems you list, occasionally succeeding mostly failing. Failing means I've had to work my full workday in the evening at home, since couldn't get anything done during the day in the cursed open office. Effectively working two jobs, getting paid once.
In this respect the pandemic has been a blessing. Finally back to a private office, away from the physical office. The level of relief is life-changing.
That's it right there. First 15+ years of my career always had private office. It's the perfect solution to everything you list and more.
The last decade has been a nightmare of wandering around the buildings trying to find somewhere to work that doesn't have all the problems you list, occasionally succeeding mostly failing. Failing means I've had to work my full workday in the evening at home, since couldn't get anything done during the day in the cursed open office. Effectively working two jobs, getting paid once.
In this respect the pandemic has been a blessing. Finally back to a private office, away from the physical office. The level of relief is life-changing.
> But, it's not like Google couldn't afford private offices if they wanted to.
Google employs in some of the most expensive real-estate in the world. It's hard and takes years to build more, larger office buildings.
Google employs in some of the most expensive real-estate in the world. It's hard and takes years to build more, larger office buildings.
The point is that they could move toward a system with private offices if they wanted to. Sure, it might be hard and take years to make progress, but they do hard things all the time and are an established and rich-beyond-compare company with plenty of time and money -- and yet they haven't gone that route.
Instead they're announcing their plans to use shared desks, chairs with built-in white-noise speakers, and balloon walls for office spaces as people return from working at home. Perhaps this is Phase I of their super-secret long-term plan to transition to private offices, but I somehow doubt it.
Instead they're announcing their plans to use shared desks, chairs with built-in white-noise speakers, and balloon walls for office spaces as people return from working at home. Perhaps this is Phase I of their super-secret long-term plan to transition to private offices, but I somehow doubt it.
They don't need to build brand new office buildings from the ground up. They can renovate existing spaces, lease new space and renovate. That could be done in 6 months, tops, if they really wanted to.
AFAIK, it's what they're already doing; Google is one of the largest real estate purchaser in the bay area, consistently spending billions of dollars each year on office spaces. The problem is their growth of workforce has been consistently outpacing their real estate expansion. Probably Google can simply slowdown their speed of hiring, but this might be a deal breaker; office space already has been a major constraint for many team's headcount pre-COVID.
A lot of office space has just opened up because of covid, it's a great opportunity to snatch it up.
> They don't need to build brand new office buildings from the ground up.
Some (many? most?) of those buildings were private offices back in the day anyway, so definitely no new buildings needed.
Some (many? most?) of those buildings were private offices back in the day anyway, so definitely no new buildings needed.
I'd love to see giving employees an option for either permanent WFH or a private office, with the reduced in-office headcount being leveraged to make room for private offices.
They could not do that.
Wonderful comment! And all this is nothing new. It was already described in 1987 in Tom deMarcos famous book https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peopleware:_Productive_Project..., see also https://github.com/arkon108/book-reviews/blob/master/summari... This book is a mandatory read for everyone in IT.
Also, if you’re trying to have half (or fewer) people at the office, you can have the same office assigned to two people, making it just as efficient as an open-office.
My first job had the best office arrangement of any company I have seen: two people offices.
We were a strategy consulting firm. Everyone had the same skills (in theory), just different levels of experience. The office seating plan paired up a junior consultant with an experienced project leader. You'd both be at your own clients half the time. So in practice you mostly had a private office. But the other person was there enough of the time that:
(a) you wouldn't get lonely;
(b) you'd learn a lot about being an effective consultant by seeing how they worked and hearing their phone calls with clients (of course, treated as strictly confidential between the two of you); and
(c) you'd get to know each other well and you'd feel comfortable asking dumb questions despite the hierarchy difference.
(d) And also every 6 months, there was an "office move" where everyone except the partners (who had sole offices) got paired up with someone else and assigned a new two-person office. This was aligned with promotions and graduate intakes, rebalancing the junior/senior mix. (The office move also encouraged everyone to archive/throwaway notes from old projects, keeping the office tidy).
The same thing would work in software development etc.
I don't know why so many companies went to full-on open plan rather than this kind of half-way house. You get some of the space savings and none of the open plan or hot-desking disadvantages.
We were a strategy consulting firm. Everyone had the same skills (in theory), just different levels of experience. The office seating plan paired up a junior consultant with an experienced project leader. You'd both be at your own clients half the time. So in practice you mostly had a private office. But the other person was there enough of the time that:
(a) you wouldn't get lonely;
(b) you'd learn a lot about being an effective consultant by seeing how they worked and hearing their phone calls with clients (of course, treated as strictly confidential between the two of you); and
(c) you'd get to know each other well and you'd feel comfortable asking dumb questions despite the hierarchy difference.
(d) And also every 6 months, there was an "office move" where everyone except the partners (who had sole offices) got paired up with someone else and assigned a new two-person office. This was aligned with promotions and graduate intakes, rebalancing the junior/senior mix. (The office move also encouraged everyone to archive/throwaway notes from old projects, keeping the office tidy).
The same thing would work in software development etc.
I don't know why so many companies went to full-on open plan rather than this kind of half-way house. You get some of the space savings and none of the open plan or hot-desking disadvantages.
I suspect that would devolve into endless fights over cleanliness and storage of personal items.
No doubt it would be a pain point
Well you clearly identified the issue boiling down to cost but you keep insisting that the solution must still be private offices. If a private office costs 10x more would an employee’s increased contribution due to their surroundings also move up by 10x? I highly doubt it.
Where does this 10x figure come from?
Obviously there's a point where it wouldn't be worth it, but there's also a point where the contortions you go through to not have private offices cost more than just having private offices. How much does it cost to design and develop, then build and maintain moveable wall robots? How much does it cost to employ a team of people to sit around and dream this stuff up? It's not cheap, I'm sure.
It's not like private offices are some new, untested technology. Law firms, investment banks, hospitals, universities, all manage to give private offices to a majority of their professional level staff. It's clearly possible to do and it is not a 10x factor compared to open offices.
It's not like private offices are some new, untested technology. Law firms, investment banks, hospitals, universities, all manage to give private offices to a majority of their professional level staff. It's clearly possible to do and it is not a 10x factor compared to open offices.
[deleted]
One of the major drawbacks to going back to the office is dealing with the dreaded open office plan. If Google popularizes a new office style that discourages the bullpen feel of open offices, it would be a welcome relief.
> when the company asked a diverse group of consultants — including sociologists who study “Generation Z” and how junior high students socialize and learn — to imagine what future workers would want.
Danger Will Robinson Danger!
Why would anyone try and make decisions based on the preference of jr. High students. Making decisions based on youth in the most unstable period of their life when they are incredibly hormonal and still not all that logical seems like a recipe for disaster.
I don't know about you but my jr. High self was an idiot and nothing he said or did was a good idea.
Or is the idea that we don't want to have the next gen adapt to a new way of socializing and interacting in a professional workplace? That too seems like a bad move.
Danger Will Robinson Danger!
Why would anyone try and make decisions based on the preference of jr. High students. Making decisions based on youth in the most unstable period of their life when they are incredibly hormonal and still not all that logical seems like a recipe for disaster.
I don't know about you but my jr. High self was an idiot and nothing he said or did was a good idea.
Or is the idea that we don't want to have the next gen adapt to a new way of socializing and interacting in a professional workplace? That too seems like a bad move.
It's not that they only consulted them, it's that they included them. That seems entirely reasonable - these people are going to be entering the workforce. Google wants to be attractive to them, or at the very least prevent being actively unattractive.
Additionally, gen Z is growing up with technology in a way that surpasses even millennials. They may have deep expectations about how technology should work in ways that older people don't.
Additionally, gen Z is growing up with technology in a way that surpasses even millennials. They may have deep expectations about how technology should work in ways that older people don't.
Sure, but the grandparent alludes to the fact that what they think of as great now can easily change by the time they enter the workforce - and, given that we're talking about engineering jobs that usually require a degree, it will take some time.
Additionally, these people don't have much work experience. A lot of ideas - such as open offices, work from home or skipping documentation - feel fine until you've worked with them and found their drawbacks. It might work for some, but it does not for a lot of others.
Additionally, these people don't have much work experience. A lot of ideas - such as open offices, work from home or skipping documentation - feel fine until you've worked with them and found their drawbacks. It might work for some, but it does not for a lot of others.
I agree. I think as a society, we need to stop fetishizing youth. Not contempt - but tone it down a bit. Kids today have wanton access to internet and technology but aren't any smarter or better at making decisions. One might make an argument that they may be worse. Certainly more prone to group think than generations previous which is good and terrible at the same time.
> Kids today have wanton access to internet and technology but aren't any smarter or better at making decisions.
Citation needed, I guess? Teen pregnancies are way down, for example.
Citation needed, I guess? Teen pregnancies are way down, for example.
That could have as much to do with the contemporary social environment as it does with actual decisionmaking. Sex among youth is down overall - even pre-pandemic, iirc.
You don’t need to be extra smart to use a condom, just not being extra dumb. That’s a very low bar isn’t it?
Why anyone would ask sociologists about how tech work should be done is absolutely beyond me.
Think of it as a specialized systems engineering process, but with people. Sociologists are good at that.
In 7 years their L3 engineers are going to be those jr. high gen Z kids, and in real estate, your office furniture and space plans need to last at least 10-20 years.
It's funny that there are a lot of stories lately which contain googla and privacy in the same sentence. It is like they realized that they have an image problem and are doing something about it.
If the shuttle buses are to be suspended, but they still expect people to come to work, it is a recipe for disaster. When I still worked there, about 60% of my co-workers took the shuttle from San Francisco. About 90% of those who did, did not own a car. Telling them they have to come to the office or quit is equivalent to firing them. I doubt anybody is going to buy a car AND sit an hour in traffic in the morning and an hour and traffic in the evening, to keep a particular job. Xooglers generally have no trouble finding jobs, just having that on their resume.
Of course, the vast majority of employees in the tech sector manage to get by without shuttle buses, free cafeterias, etc.
Note that the buses are a key part of the offices' parking plans. Some of the garages were already valet double parked in the beforetimes.
the sillicon valley bubble of HN is sometimes hilarious.
the concept of a company providing shuttle bus service instead of just having proper public transport to bussiness parks is very weird when one thinks about it.
the concept of a company providing shuttle bus service instead of just having proper public transport to bussiness parks is very weird when one thinks about it.
Public transit, e.g. commuter rail, works well into a city with a public transit system. It works far less well into a distributed set of suburban/ex-urban industrial parks.
I can get into our small city office with a short drive and a longish train trip. I pretty much have to drive to our suburban office.
I can get into our small city office with a short drive and a longish train trip. I pretty much have to drive to our suburban office.
It is not Google's job to fix public transit in the Bay area. But given the lack of transit, if they don't provide shuttle service, many of their workers cannot work from the office. So not really a bubble as much as stating the fact.
It is a bubble, but I get it because the default infrastructure is so bad. Everybody hopping in a car is just not a good solution.
[deleted]
my commute was already 1hr 30 minutes each way with the bus. sometimes 2hrs. its not a practical commute without a bus. Too much traffic.
Xoogler or not, you still have to go through the leetcode gauntlet, and a bunch of places that would pay you the same are all asking to 'go into the office'. FB, Apple, etc.
I thought FB went permanent remote option. Did that change?
You may be thinking of Twitter.
Not as extreme as Twitter but Facebook has definitely indicated they'll be increasingly open to remote work:
https://www.theverge.com/facebook/2020/5/21/21265699/faceboo...
https://www.theverge.com/facebook/2020/5/21/21265699/faceboo...
Am I the only one that doesn't really want to live in any version of the future as imagined by Google?
The article's baity title is not the article. Please let's react to the latter, not the former.
It can be helpful to remember that at big media sites, headlines get written by headline specialists. It's their job to sex up the title, and the rest of our job (the rest of us's job?) not to take the bait. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...
I've replaced the title with a suitably neutral, representative sentence from the article body. There nearly always is one.
It can be helpful to remember that at big media sites, headlines get written by headline specialists. It's their job to sex up the title, and the rest of our job (the rest of us's job?) not to take the bait. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...
I've replaced the title with a suitably neutral, representative sentence from the article body. There nearly always is one.
Definitely not,
all of these ideas horrified me.
Why should I even go into the office during a pandemic, it just does not make sense.
Why should I even go into the office during a pandemic, it just does not make sense.
[deleted]
One wonders about the higher level cognitive abilities of someone dedicating much of their waking, productive hours to the service of making the staff and contractors of a giant ad surveillance company more comfortable and efficient.
It seems so insanely thoughtless to me.
Like, is that really the world you want? Gmail surveillance already took over everyone's email, same for maps and apps and YouTube. Anyone with a clue is trying to roll this worldwide trend backward, not make the Google advertising machine more efficient and effective at ingesting every single last molecule your private data and personal activities.
It seems so insanely thoughtless to me.
Like, is that really the world you want? Gmail surveillance already took over everyone's email, same for maps and apps and YouTube. Anyone with a clue is trying to roll this worldwide trend backward, not make the Google advertising machine more efficient and effective at ingesting every single last molecule your private data and personal activities.
There's a good alternative to the open floor plans everyone is building: noise insulated "pods" with 10~12 devs and a meeting room.
In my experience meeting rooms are always fully booked months in advance by the sort of people who have meetings for a living. Rather than having a constant flow of these people in and out of the pod, leave the meeting room outside the pod.
If the main things is meetings, I wonder if you couldn't just kit up a cargo van with an office and work in the parking lot.
If I need to wear a mask, I don't need to be in an office. This is horrifying.
Seriously, this piece is so bizarre.
> Employees can return to their permanent desks on a rotation schedule that assigns people to come into the office on a specific day to ensure that no one is there on the same day as their immediate desk neighbors.
Why does it matter if I'm wearing a mask or sitting next to someone in an "office of the future" where the pandemic has already abated?
> Employees can return to their permanent desks on a rotation schedule that assigns people to come into the office on a specific day to ensure that no one is there on the same day as their immediate desk neighbors.
Why does it matter if I'm wearing a mask or sitting next to someone in an "office of the future" where the pandemic has already abated?
[deleted]
As a Googler, I'm pretty disappointed with this plan and I think many colleagues are as well. The office that's being pitched right now has no resemblance whatsoever to the one we left. I just don't see why someone would go through 1+hr commute just to social distance/wear masks, use balloon walls and hotdesk. By now, many of us have gotten a good setup at home and are pretty productive.
Even the hybrid model isn't ideal, because you still need to be within commuting distance of the office, if it was something like 2 weeks onsite every 2-3 months, it'd be much more doable imo.
For the ones who really miss the office, they should be able to go, but mandatory return-to-office seems far from ideal until mask mandate is over at the very least.
Even the hybrid model isn't ideal, because you still need to be within commuting distance of the office, if it was something like 2 weeks onsite every 2-3 months, it'd be much more doable imo.
For the ones who really miss the office, they should be able to go, but mandatory return-to-office seems far from ideal until mask mandate is over at the very least.
Fully agree with return to office in line with mask mandate. I’m not sure if you tried talking to someone over hangouts/zoom/teams while they where a mask. It’s next to impossible to understand what they are saying with it on. If we are looking at hybrid most chances someone will be remote.
Next marketable item is masks with Bluetooth microphones I guess…
I am so glad I found a new fully remote job to skip going back to the office.
Next marketable item is masks with Bluetooth microphones I guess…
I am so glad I found a new fully remote job to skip going back to the office.
I haven't admitted this publically, but I am actually really looking forward to Project Hazel masks [0] which look like a crazy futuristic n-95, but have microphones and clear portions to help with communication.
[0]https://www.razer.com/concepts/razer-project-hazel
ps. They have been approved from concept phase, so they are being built as we speak
[0]https://www.razer.com/concepts/razer-project-hazel
ps. They have been approved from concept phase, so they are being built as we speak
What a hideous mask. I find it hard enough communicating via mask with strangers on the street. There's an anxious feeling that goes with the proximity and the infractions of social distancing. Now imagine all that while looking like Scorpion from mortal kombat.
I am in the same boat as you and I agree with all you say here.
I have a lot opinions on this and continue to say them internally. I encourage you to say this internally as well.
I have a lot opinions on this and continue to say them internally. I encourage you to say this internally as well.
I've been meme-ing about it, but I don't think leadership cares anymore. Instead, I just told my manager that there's 99% chance I'm leaving over the summer, it's a good excuse to take some time off after this crazy year anyways.
Yeah I'm never returning to the office. VP exception or bust. I'm frankly stunned that the company seems to be completely okay with the attrition they are going to see in September.
the company doesn’t care about employees below a certain level. there’s hundreds of thousands of them and many more clamoring to get in. i still haven’t forgiven them for cancelling promos a year ago
I'm an L6. I know a handful of L7s who are looking at remote options. Attrition won't just be among junior engineers.
Did you get promoted in the fall? Between backfilled raises and manager discretion comp, my experience has been that the cancelled perf ended up working out alright for most people, except those with failed promos who needed to respond to committee feedback.
Did you get promoted in the fall? Between backfilled raises and manager discretion comp, my experience has been that the cancelled perf ended up working out alright for most people, except those with failed promos who needed to respond to committee feedback.
i left for another company where i got a raise and promotion. the stock has proceeded to 4x at my new company and now i’m making more than my skip manager was at G. but wouldn’t have left if they hadn’t cancelled
while I was there I detested the open plan cube farm horror of their offices (at least the SF ones) they weren't even full cubes, being only half height so constant visual distraction, and they didn't completely surround you so you had people always moving around behind you.
Changing how the open plan is arranged is just pointless, accept that you have made an unpleasant work environment and leave it alone so at least people don't have to track whatever new fad you're on. Hotseating makes it even worse, so I can't see why anyone who respected their employees would consider it.
Changing how the open plan is arranged is just pointless, accept that you have made an unpleasant work environment and leave it alone so at least people don't have to track whatever new fad you're on. Hotseating makes it even worse, so I can't see why anyone who respected their employees would consider it.
We were all nostalgic for the half-height cubes of Google SF after it was all converted to no-height non-cubes, just desks on the floor (and they kept making the desks narrower, an inch at a time!).
https://youtu.be/tSY1VnNUJzQ?t=110 may be better for folks who can't view this video in their geography.
(I, for one, can't see it, but I reckon it's the fight over the desk in Brazil.)
(I, for one, can't see it, but I reckon it's the fight over the desk in Brazil.)
> By now, many of us have gotten a good setup at home and are pretty productive.
It might be okay for people who've been at Google for a while, but it's really not a very good experience for a Noogler.
Google's infrastructure, while amazing, is also one-of-a-kind, which means that you need a lot of internal resources to get up to speed on things, which would go much faster from a face to face interaction. It's nightmare dealing with all this when the only folk with the required know how are some rather unfriendly folk in MTV (who I find are always rather disinterested with us plebs in "shit-hole" India).
It might be okay for people who've been at Google for a while, but it's really not a very good experience for a Noogler.
Google's infrastructure, while amazing, is also one-of-a-kind, which means that you need a lot of internal resources to get up to speed on things, which would go much faster from a face to face interaction. It's nightmare dealing with all this when the only folk with the required know how are some rather unfriendly folk in MTV (who I find are always rather disinterested with us plebs in "shit-hole" India).
Fair enough, I can see why it would be beneficial for a noogler, but everyone struggles initially, no matter how much face to face interaction you have. It took me 6+ months before I felt comfortable enough with the internal tools and I'm still learning lots of new things today, despite being 6+ years at the company.
The other thing is, even if we went to the office, we won't necessarily be able to have the same face-to-face experience until the mask and social distancing mandates are done with imo.
I also felt people disinterested on collaborations, everyone has their own goals, I wouldn't attribute it to your country per say.
The other thing is, even if we went to the office, we won't necessarily be able to have the same face-to-face experience until the mask and social distancing mandates are done with imo.
I also felt people disinterested on collaborations, everyone has their own goals, I wouldn't attribute it to your country per say.
I think every company struggles with collaboration in general. People have their "day jobs" so asking them to do something they don't really get "credit" for can be tough.
It's easier in-person because you're harder to ignore than an email is. But it can be hard to get support especially from other groups.
It's easier in-person because you're harder to ignore than an email is. But it can be hard to get support especially from other groups.
I joined Google in February and I love working remote. Definitely not excited about the prospect of sitting in traffic for 2 hours a day just to wear a mask at work.
I don't work from India, but haven't had much issue with onboarding or access to things.
I don't work from India, but haven't had much issue with onboarding or access to things.
908B64B197(1)
> who I find are always rather disinterested with us plebs in "shit-hole" India
I can empathize with the problems of remote work across national and cultural divides, but please don't toss flamebait like this into HN threads. It leads to flamewars, which we're trying to avoid here.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
I can empathize with the problems of remote work across national and cultural divides, but please don't toss flamebait like this into HN threads. It leads to flamewars, which we're trying to avoid here.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
> (who I find are always rather disinterested with us plebs in "shit-hole" India)
It probably doesn't make you feel any better, but I ran into this attitude frequently when working from a satellite office in the US.
Teams worked in constant fear of a defrag (read: their jobs got impactful enough to pull the work into MTV), and we regularly referred to ourselves as a "vassal" office. Teams in the vassal would get assigned sustaining engineering work on systems that the MTV folks didn't want to maintain any more, or product development support work for low-end gear. I was told by a PM once, "how can your team contribute if you aren't in MTV?". There were too many examples to count, and enumerating them all would just turn into a grouch-fest. It also certainly isn't everyone on the campus, but incidents happened often enough to be a sore point.
So, yeah. They don't look down on you for being from India. They look down on you because you aren't in MTV.
It probably doesn't make you feel any better, but I ran into this attitude frequently when working from a satellite office in the US.
Teams worked in constant fear of a defrag (read: their jobs got impactful enough to pull the work into MTV), and we regularly referred to ourselves as a "vassal" office. Teams in the vassal would get assigned sustaining engineering work on systems that the MTV folks didn't want to maintain any more, or product development support work for low-end gear. I was told by a PM once, "how can your team contribute if you aren't in MTV?". There were too many examples to count, and enumerating them all would just turn into a grouch-fest. It also certainly isn't everyone on the campus, but incidents happened often enough to be a sore point.
So, yeah. They don't look down on you for being from India. They look down on you because you aren't in MTV.
Do you know whether people based out of the Cambridge/Boston site would be considered second-class citizens today?
And if there is a second-class dynamic, would it be in a way that adversely affected the work, directly, or the impact was more about individual treatment?
(For example of affecting the work... when collaboration across sites is needed, for the benefit of the org, would there be difficulty getting it to happen, because some were second-class... such as not being taken as seriously, or working with second-class didn't fit well with promotion strategies, etc.)
And if there is a second-class dynamic, would it be in a way that adversely affected the work, directly, or the impact was more about individual treatment?
(For example of affecting the work... when collaboration across sites is needed, for the benefit of the org, would there be difficulty getting it to happen, because some were second-class... such as not being taken as seriously, or working with second-class didn't fit well with promotion strategies, etc.)
I have never particularly felt second class in the Cambridge office. Nor heard anyone complain of being such.
There have been a few defrags, but there is a wide array of impactful projects.
There have been a few defrags, but there is a wide array of impactful projects.
Why would I want to come back into the office if I have to wear a mask?
I'd like to think that the masks are just because they had to film these now, and that the actual plan for when people return doesn't include them.
As soon as a coronavirus vaccine gets full FDA approval (expected soon for Moderna and Pfizer), companies should require immunization for employees. Then they can stop requiring masks.
Every vaccine that has ever had serious side-effect problems has shown them in the first few months.[1] The FDA requires six months of data for full approval. Those six months have passed.
[1] https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/concerns-history....
Every vaccine that has ever had serious side-effect problems has shown them in the first few months.[1] The FDA requires six months of data for full approval. Those six months have passed.
[1] https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/concerns-history....
While that's long been common in some situations (schools, military, healthcare, certain limited international travel), it hasn't been the case generally in the past. Put such a requirement in, with appropriate medical exceptions, and expect to fire a non-trivial portion of your workforce who can't work from home and/or need to physically meet with other employees/customers/partners. Not making a judgment but just observing the reality.
I doubt that high of a percentage is so paranoid or stubborn that they would quit over it. My guess is almost everyone will either get vaccinated or a medical exception, and then just complain about it in the office.
This is what the Cal State and University Of California are systems are waiting for:
https://csusystem.edu/csu-system-announces-covid-vaccine-req...
Colorado, but yes. There's no reason to think that there won't be widespread vaccination requirements on campuses as there are today.
Each move like this creates more anti-vaxxers, but at this point I'm starting to think people are aiming for that.
I have concerns with employers requiring a vaccine to allow you to return to work because of the dangerous precedent it can set that employers have some valid need to suddenly start knowing your medical status, and once they get their foot in the door I don't see them quietly giving up that power.
Employers have always had a right to know communicable disease status (when it could be communicated feasibly at work, not for something like HIV/AIDS or other STDs). Vaccination status to such a disease is just a stochastic level above that and has been required in college dorms, etc. already before the pandemic.
Flu vaccines are often required for certain medical and elder care workers as well.
Since vaccinated people are told they still need to wear masks, why will this change if the vaccine is formally approved by the FDA? It's the same vaccine.
> Why would I want
You don’t want, they tell you to. It’s like this in most companies now.
You don’t want, they tell you to. It’s like this in most companies now.
[deleted]
Those balloon walls seems the worst possible solution. Noisy, obnoxious, slow, fragile and doesn't create any sound privacy from whatever you will be talking about.
And makes it blatantly obvious that you're setting up to talk about things in private...
Seriously, just have some rooms with doors. Even if that's not the majority of the space.
Seriously, just have some rooms with doors. Even if that's not the majority of the space.
I know cubicles were previously mocked but a private space with walls where I'm not distracted by people walking all around me doesn't sound too bad.
Right, the cube farm of "The Matrix" was supposed to be a dystopian horror that only a heartless machine would invent, but two decades later we'd all kill to have a cube.
The cube farm was a slightly exaggerated depiction of reality, though. That's how offices were set up.
Is the need for ad-hoc, purely visual (not auditory) privacy even a common scenario? If so, how about some curtains? In the 90s, Twin Peaks taught me that drapes can be made whisper silent, unlike an electric air pump and possibly crinkling cellophane.
Curtains are actually growing in popularity though not specifically for individual workstation privacy.
Examples:
https://officesnapshots.com/photos/164814/
https://officesnapshots.com/photos/150191/
There are also existing solutions for temporary privacy that range from moveable/accordion walls to rolling felt / fabric partitions:
https://www.buzzi.space/acoustic-solutions/buzzishield-free
https://www.darran.com/product/screens/room-divider
The inflatable concept in the article definitely seems more concept that practical solution.
Examples:
https://officesnapshots.com/photos/164814/
https://officesnapshots.com/photos/150191/
There are also existing solutions for temporary privacy that range from moveable/accordion walls to rolling felt / fabric partitions:
https://www.buzzi.space/acoustic-solutions/buzzishield-free
https://www.darran.com/product/screens/room-divider
The inflatable concept in the article definitely seems more concept that practical solution.
This has to be a joke!
What the hell?!
Give. Developers. Offices. With. Doors.
It's conceptually simple, and will probably cost less than this novelty shit in the long run.
Give. Developers. Offices. With. Doors.
It's conceptually simple, and will probably cost less than this novelty shit in the long run.
Microsoft once ran ads for programmers, offering an office with a door.
My experience over the past 6 years with offices at MS was being doubled up in an office meant for one person, then moving to team rooms where we're at the fire safety limit for number of occupants.
If there's one thing I've learned in the tech industry it's that no matter how much you think your work is worth, real estate is worth more.
We're not getting private offices any more than we're getting family homes. Both are understandable expectations given our nominal wages, but they are also gross misapprehensions of our place in the pecking order. You may be able to afford all the cars and iPhones and vacations in the world, but that will never hold a candle to land. Land owns you.
We're not getting private offices any more than we're getting family homes. Both are understandable expectations given our nominal wages, but they are also gross misapprehensions of our place in the pecking order. You may be able to afford all the cars and iPhones and vacations in the world, but that will never hold a candle to land. Land owns you.
Some people like that, some people don't.
The worst physical office environment I've ever worked in was one where I had an individual office with a door. It was an interior office with no windows, effectively a large closet, and it was pretty depressing and alienating.
Maybe you could argue that you should give all developers offices with doors and exterior windows. But the dimensions of most buildings don't make that practical.
The worst physical office environment I've ever worked in was one where I had an individual office with a door. It was an interior office with no windows, effectively a large closet, and it was pretty depressing and alienating.
Maybe you could argue that you should give all developers offices with doors and exterior windows. But the dimensions of most buildings don't make that practical.
There's definitely a culture associated with offices. I worked at a place for over a decade that had offices (for some) and the norm was doors open unless there was some reason doors weren't open. So you were free to drop in if the door was open and not so if the door wasn't. And doors were usually open.
If I recall correctly, the unusual cross shaped design of Microsoft's earliest office buildings (1-10, recently demolished) was to maximize the number of offices with windows. It did make them somewhat confusing to navigate though.
My worst work environment was also my own office with a door, in a former HP building with no windows, and I hadn't learned about vitamin D supplements yet.
Of course, the main problem was the thermostat was in the empty office next door so I couldn't close the door without it getting hot.
Of course, the main problem was the thermostat was in the empty office next door so I couldn't close the door without it getting hot.
That doesn't make the engineers feel clever, though.
Not everyone want that, if I need my own private space I don't need to go to office.
The reason I may want to go to office is to see my coworkers.
Doors/private cubicle defeat the purpose.
The reason I may want to go to office is to see my coworkers.
Doors/private cubicle defeat the purpose.
Not everyone wants a loud, bustling bullpen where you can barely hear yourself think and your productivity is crippled as a consequence.
But yet that's what most everybody in our field gets.
But yet that's what most everybody in our field gets.
Nothing about having a private office precludes seeing coworkers. In the heady days of my long-lost youth when I still had an office, I stepped outside of it when I wanted to see my coworkers and went back inside and locked the door when I didn't.
And you were likely much less efficient because of less interaction with your more knowledgeable colleagues. You don't know what you don't know.
Efficiency is an attribute of doing the work. If you're always interacting then you're never doing the work; neither efficiency nor inefficiency can exist at all.
What's unclear from that article is what timeframes are being discussed here. It's one thing is they're talking about all these changes through, say, the end of the year. It's something else if it's a long-term new normal which would presumably make working at Google much less attractive than in the past.
I want to see what statistics management are looking at where going into an office is better than the current WFH arraignment. Tech stocks are at all time highs with the current work situation. I'm personally never working full time in an office again. I can only see an office being good for junior engineers.
> "Tech stocks are at all time highs with the current work situation."
The logical conclusion to draw from tech stocks being at all time highs is "the general public being isolated at home forced a huge increase in tech usage and purchases", not "WFH is great for tech companies".
The logical conclusion to draw from tech stocks being at all time highs is "the general public being isolated at home forced a huge increase in tech usage and purchases", not "WFH is great for tech companies".
To be fair, some of that growth for those tech companies comes from WFHers (like people buying on Amazon more), but I get what you mean.
Real estate prices, probably. I remember google has something like 100B in assets. If it's necessary to make employees suffer to keep the RE prices up, they will.
Yep. The entire article can be summarized as "SUNK COSTS!" and all the balloons and "gen-z friendly" office layouts are just them putting on a show.
This kind of requires everyone else to play along, otherwise the winner is the big, real-estate heavy corporations that keep doing their core business without bringing people back on campus, and convert surplus real estate to some other profit making venture (whether they run it themselves, or spin/sell it off.) As first mover advantage would be an issue here, it would be a pretty big gamble for Google to try to signal the rest of the market on this the way you suggest.
Those giant offices are often built in downtown areas next to shopping, eating and renting places that will all go bankrupt if nobody comes to the offices. I can totally see how the top brass at google owns a part of that commerce and that there are contracts with deadlines there, so if they don't bring employees on time, they'll suffer massive personal losses.
> google has something like 100B in assets
I'm confused, are these assets their offices or...real estate investments that they own for some reason? If these assets are just offices, what is the value to Google if those offices are worth more or less as real estate? It's hard to imagine that the market for a giant complex of offices is super liquid?
I'm confused, are these assets their offices or...real estate investments that they own for some reason? If these assets are just offices, what is the value to Google if those offices are worth more or less as real estate? It's hard to imagine that the market for a giant complex of offices is super liquid?
If top tech companies want to keep attracting top talent, they will have to let people choose where they want to work from. That means being open to remote.
Instead of forcing hybrid models - invest in tools and processes that make working from everywhere more productive.
> If top tech companies want to keep attracting top talent, they will have to let people choose where they want to work from.
That’s what people said right up until the last time top tech management culture turned away from remote work.
That’s what people said right up until the last time top tech management culture turned away from remote work.
Exactly, a truly innovative company would be working on a way to make WFH as immersive, productive and social as an office rather than trying to make the office function during a pandemic.
The Campfire meeting room seems interesting.
Giving remote participants a proportionate physical presence should help equal the playing field.
I think it hinges on how easy it is to set up the call, so that each face is on a separate screen.
Giving remote participants a proportionate physical presence should help equal the playing field.
I think it hinges on how easy it is to set up the call, so that each face is on a separate screen.
Or, you know, have everyone "dial in" from their own computer. That was how a number of teams I work with were pre-pandemic. If anyone's remote, everyone calls in separately. Otherwise the remote experience is inherently going to be worse than the in-person one.
That's been one mildly positive aspect of the pandemic. I'm no longer dialing into calls where there are a bunch of people in a conference room and then there's everyone else.
That's been one mildly positive aspect of the pandemic. I'm no longer dialing into calls where there are a bunch of people in a conference room and then there's everyone else.
You need private offices or the feedback gets really bad really quick.
People wear headsets. There are a lot of office jobs where people spend a lot of the day on the phone anyway talking to external people, people in other offices/remote, etc.
With headsets that works.
I do think that having them centered in the group makes it easier to be inclusive to remote participants. GVC has been great for years, so I expect the tech to work flawlessly.
But everything else looks horrible. Hard surfaces. Completely vertical seatbacks that only go up to your lower back. Little sound isolation. Teeny tiny spaces to put a laptop. Limited surfaces to put a cup of coffee.
But everything else looks horrible. Hard surfaces. Completely vertical seatbacks that only go up to your lower back. Little sound isolation. Teeny tiny spaces to put a laptop. Limited surfaces to put a cup of coffee.
> The displays show the faces of people dialing in by videoconference so virtual participants are on the same footing as those physically present.
Actually they’re looming over them with heads 2x the size like Big Brother.
Actually they’re looming over them with heads 2x the size like Big Brother.
One of the good ideas there is video conferencing screens so large that each remote person has their own, and the heads of the remote people are as big as the heads of the onside people.
Big flat screens are so cheap now.
Big flat screens are so cheap now.
Sure, but what the remote people is able to see? Does those screens have extra-wide-angle cameras mounted on top?
> The company will encourage — but not mandate — that employees be vaccinated
I wouldn't want to spend a good part of the day indoors with people who aren't vaccinated
I wouldn't want to spend a good part of the day indoors with people who aren't vaccinated
I'm sure a lot of companies are thinking about it. The question is how many employees you lose based on what you decide--and what your policies around exemptions are (which you need to have).
Certainly the path of least resistance is to encourage but not require because that way someone who doesn't like that policy can just quit rather than require the company to fire people who don't have the right docs (or submit fake ones).
Certainly the path of least resistance is to encourage but not require because that way someone who doesn't like that policy can just quit rather than require the company to fire people who don't have the right docs (or submit fake ones).
If you're vaccinated, why not?
if unvaccinated people get infected, they are more likely than vaccinated people to have the virus replicate at an accelerating rate before they show any symptoms. This large surge in replication means they will be spreading it and this may pose a danger to me. The vaccines are not %100 effective and I have several factors that would make it dangerous for me to get sick. I won't knowingly hang out with potential spreaders.
It is 100% effective against severe disease as far as I know.
Decent change of picking up an asymptomatic infection and carrying it home to your children, who will remain unvaccinated for the foreseeable future.
stevenicr(1)
A balloon wall? Hahahahaha, is this an episode of Silicon Valley? Forcing people to commute in order to wear masks at their hot desk? Google needs to admit reality that WFH is a reality, rather than trying to lever people into the office.
Amazon came up with a similar technology first, I believe. They have been including it in my shipments for years.
Reading between the lines of the article, I suspect most of these things will never be put into serious use at google, nor does anyone there expect them to. These are solutions looking for problems. My money is on office work looking much as it did before the pandemic, but a smaller percentage of work hours being spent in offices. It’s hard to imagine anyone preferring to work in the way the article describes compared to either full time in office or full time remote.
There also appear to have been consultants looking for work.
Where you find consultants, you find solutions to imagined problems...only a consultant can really tell you what those damnable zoomers are thinking, they are basically Martians. Every company must have a zoomer-friendly office.
Where you find consultants, you find solutions to imagined problems...only a consultant can really tell you what those damnable zoomers are thinking, they are basically Martians. Every company must have a zoomer-friendly office.
most of my peers seem to want to do a mix of both office work aswell as remote work. Mainly because wfh allows for deep focus without distraction, while working from the office is far easier in terms of collaboration.
Despite all the funny ideas, I am happy to see that people are actively thinking about some radical changes in how a tech company office should look like in future. Some ideas won’t work, but some will stay.
>The company that helped popularize open office plans and lavish employee perks
somehow our BigCo got only open offices with the lavish perks lost in translation.
Anyway, it seems that Google is bringing cubicles (and even offices with the "focused work" pods - implicit recognition that "focused work" (is where other than focused work in programming?) is impacted by the open space office) while avoiding the cu-word and, God-forbid, the o-word.
somehow our BigCo got only open offices with the lavish perks lost in translation.
Anyway, it seems that Google is bringing cubicles (and even offices with the "focused work" pods - implicit recognition that "focused work" (is where other than focused work in programming?) is impacted by the open space office) while avoiding the cu-word and, God-forbid, the o-word.
> Google is trying to get a handle on how employees will react to so-called hybrid work. In July, the company asked workers how many days a week they would need to come to the office to be effective. The answers were divided evenly in a range of zero to five days a week.
"My responses are limited; you must ask the right questions." What getting your whole team together for 1-2 weeks per quarter? I hear some teams travelled that way in the before time.
> The majority of Google employees are in no hurry to return.… 70% said they had a “favorable” view about working from home compared with 15% who had an “unfavorable” opinion [and 15% neutral].… The company appears to be realizing its employees may not be so willing to go back to the old life.
Will be interesting to see if people actually leave or if it's just bluster.
> “No company at our scale has ever created a fully hybrid work force model,” [Google's CEO] wrote in an email a few weeks later announcing the flexible workweek.
Like communism: maybe nobody's implemented it correctly before, or maybe it's a bad idea.
"My responses are limited; you must ask the right questions." What getting your whole team together for 1-2 weeks per quarter? I hear some teams travelled that way in the before time.
> The majority of Google employees are in no hurry to return.… 70% said they had a “favorable” view about working from home compared with 15% who had an “unfavorable” opinion [and 15% neutral].… The company appears to be realizing its employees may not be so willing to go back to the old life.
Will be interesting to see if people actually leave or if it's just bluster.
> “No company at our scale has ever created a fully hybrid work force model,” [Google's CEO] wrote in an email a few weeks later announcing the flexible workweek.
Like communism: maybe nobody's implemented it correctly before, or maybe it's a bad idea.
Now I want to see that creative design bubble wall snap up instantly, like Zodiac inflatable commando boats do in action movies.
Though the pacing of the bubble wall does have great comedic potential for holding attention awkwardly, as you're signalling you suddenly want a barrier between you and a coworker. Optional is to also maintain intense eye contact, as they can see the barrier rise between you, initially in their peripheral vision. For the labor-saving eyes-free option, maybe accompany inflation with some milquetoast elevator music.
(If one could move to Google without months of test-prep, someday I'd be happy to share additional perspectives on technology and office dynamics.)
Though the pacing of the bubble wall does have great comedic potential for holding attention awkwardly, as you're signalling you suddenly want a barrier between you and a coworker. Optional is to also maintain intense eye contact, as they can see the barrier rise between you, initially in their peripheral vision. For the labor-saving eyes-free option, maybe accompany inflation with some milquetoast elevator music.
(If one could move to Google without months of test-prep, someday I'd be happy to share additional perspectives on technology and office dynamics.)
No thanks. Masks indoors are a no go. I find them inconvenient and stifling, and am eager to rid them from my routine entirely. Beyond a certain point either the risk is low enough and we ditch masks or we just ditch offices permanently. I’m not sure who these designs are for.
lol. It's brilliant.
https://www.seattletimes.com/business/the-googleplex-of-the-...
Maybe a whole grid of inflated condoms in jolly colors is just the ticket.
Really, I wonder how much better telepresence needs to be before there's really no point. Low latency, full duplex audio, largish monitors. The Veldt doesn't seem like much of a stretch.
https://www.seattletimes.com/business/the-googleplex-of-the-...
Maybe a whole grid of inflated condoms in jolly colors is just the ticket.
Really, I wonder how much better telepresence needs to be before there's really no point. Low latency, full duplex audio, largish monitors. The Veldt doesn't seem like much of a stretch.
> the company asked a diverse group of consultants — including sociologists who study “Generation Z” and how junior high students socialize and learn
I don’t want to start Google-bashing here, but I have no idea why Google is investing in Gen Z offices. I’m a Gen Z, and I can tell you that none of these changes would make us any more productive, and for the anxious among us (a scary amount) would probably hurt. I think Gen Z would appreciate WFH and private offices best.
I don’t want to start Google-bashing here, but I have no idea why Google is investing in Gen Z offices. I’m a Gen Z, and I can tell you that none of these changes would make us any more productive, and for the anxious among us (a scary amount) would probably hurt. I think Gen Z would appreciate WFH and private offices best.
That all looks horrifying to me. Why do SF tech companies so love to treat their employees like children? I would not like to commute two hours a day to sit in a balloon pod or go to team camp "s'mores". I just want to focus on my work please.
You would have thought with Microsoft running in tech industry for so long, newer companies would have learned from their mistakes.
You would have thought with Steve Jobs's Apple running in the opposite end of spectrum showing casing everything about Tech and Human interaction. All the changes that happened right in front of your face, People will learn something from it.
But No. Google managed to outdone everyone again. The absolute genius of Google managed to be even worst than Microsoft.
I have also noticed the PR of Google has been way worst for the past 5-6 years. I also notice the change in tone with Apple's PR tactics in the past 5-6 years. I wonder if those that used to work for Google's PR went to work with Apple.
You would have thought with Steve Jobs's Apple running in the opposite end of spectrum showing casing everything about Tech and Human interaction. All the changes that happened right in front of your face, People will learn something from it.
But No. Google managed to outdone everyone again. The absolute genius of Google managed to be even worst than Microsoft.
I have also noticed the PR of Google has been way worst for the past 5-6 years. I also notice the change in tone with Apple's PR tactics in the past 5-6 years. I wonder if those that used to work for Google's PR went to work with Apple.
> Google is also trying to end the fight over the office temperature. This system allows every seat to have its own air diffuser to control the direction or amount of air blowing on them.
That just shows how clueless they are. There will always be somebody that will be unhappy somebodys cold air spills over their desk. Air temperature difference in openspace necessarily generates drafts which inevitably irritate some people.
There is a simple existing solution and it is to remove any control over temperature in the office from employees and set it to one predictable setting.
For the past two decades I worked in two dozen offices and every single time I worked in an office with controls in the rooms there were always some people fighting over temperature setting.
But whenever there is no setting available to employees everybody just adjusts and puts on clothes that are suitable to predictable temperature you know you will find when you arrive at the office.
It is my observation that people are clueless about office temperature and given choice will set temperature lower in the summer than in the winter! Which doesn't make any sense, because one part of the discomfort is the temperature difference between outside an inside. It just doesn't make any sense to be cold in the office in summer and hot in winter.
**
I have once arrived at a rather large open space in summer where somebody increased temperature on one side over the weekend. That was presumably because the rest of the office was fricking freezing but the person was too lazy to set the temperature for entire office.
When I came in I thought there was a lot of noise and a small tornado as one side of the office was trying to heat up the air while other was trying to cool it down.
When different parts of a large open space have different temperature it means that the AC will be doing overtime trying to cool the air in some parts and heat it up in other parts.
That just shows how clueless they are. There will always be somebody that will be unhappy somebodys cold air spills over their desk. Air temperature difference in openspace necessarily generates drafts which inevitably irritate some people.
There is a simple existing solution and it is to remove any control over temperature in the office from employees and set it to one predictable setting.
For the past two decades I worked in two dozen offices and every single time I worked in an office with controls in the rooms there were always some people fighting over temperature setting.
But whenever there is no setting available to employees everybody just adjusts and puts on clothes that are suitable to predictable temperature you know you will find when you arrive at the office.
It is my observation that people are clueless about office temperature and given choice will set temperature lower in the summer than in the winter! Which doesn't make any sense, because one part of the discomfort is the temperature difference between outside an inside. It just doesn't make any sense to be cold in the office in summer and hot in winter.
**
I have once arrived at a rather large open space in summer where somebody increased temperature on one side over the weekend. That was presumably because the rest of the office was fricking freezing but the person was too lazy to set the temperature for entire office.
When I came in I thought there was a lot of noise and a small tornado as one side of the office was trying to heat up the air while other was trying to cool it down.
When different parts of a large open space have different temperature it means that the AC will be doing overtime trying to cool the air in some parts and heat it up in other parts.
The outside "office" is pretty much the only good idea in this plan.
Hey, I need to fire Tom, can you roll out the balloon privacy wall and blow it up? This is completely dissociated from reality, and shows what the hell they're doing instead of innovating.
You don't have to worry about a sick person sitting 3 feet away from you if you have a private office.
You don't need to wear a mask sitting at your desk all day if you have a private office.
You don't need specialized "focus rooms" if you have private offices.
You don't need specialized break-out rooms for small informal meetings if people have private offices.
You don't need to call a robot to set up a balloon wall (which won't block sound anyway) every time you want to make a phone call if you have a private office.
If you want people not to work from home, a private office gives them many of the advantages that make them more productive when working from home.
Open office was never about collaboration, it was about cramming more people into less space and the fact that furniture depreciates faster than walls. But, it's not like Google couldn't afford private offices if they wanted to.
Edit: keep adding more as I think of them.
> Google is also trying to end the fight over the office temperature. This system allows every seat to have its own air diffuser to control the direction or amount of air blowing on them.
This is insane. It's the same principle as having separate "driver" and "passenger" temperature controls in a car. You're all in the same box of air. The temperature is going to even out to the average. Maintaining comfort by constantly blowing a person's preferred temperature air on them - only to have it canceled out by the person next to them blowing a different temperature air - is an enormous waste of energy. You know what would give people actual control of the temperature in their space? You guessed it - private offices.