mcgregor@hemlock.Atherton.COM (Scott McGregor) (05/26/90)
I've commented elsewhere in this news group about our observations concerning noise and white noise masking devices. It seems this is maybe a good place to discuss our observations concerning cubicles. As noted by several people, cubicles are the subject of much religious fervor, because people care very much about their immediate work environment and because people have different working styles, some with strong habitual bases due to previous working envrionments. Some things to pay attention to with cubicles is the number of walls you have, freedom of orientation of the working area within the cubicle, and the height of the walls. While noise abatement and distraction are frequently discussed when evaluating cubicles, visual distraction is an important part of work too, and less frequently discussed. In many cubicle settings you don't have the same lighting level controls that you would have in an individual office. Typically lighting levels are chosen to make walking in the aisles safe, or to satisfy the needs for an "average lighting level". Unfortunately, computer screens are often reflective and subject to glare. Lower light levels (and recessed lights) are often preferred by many people when using a computer screen. On the other hand, considerable office work involves reading papers, and many people require a higher light level to do this well. It is often difficult to find a compromise that satisfies everyone. The number of walls and possible desk orientations are important for managing visual distractions. Movement in one's peripheral vision is often much more distracting when reading or concentrating on abstract problems that most people realize, but it can be easily discovered through tests. (The complaints noted here about people concentrating so intently that they are startled by people "sneaking up" behind them attests to the strength of these concentrated mental states of "flow". Cubicles with 4 high walls allow one to minimize visual distraction the most, especially when entrances to cubicles are staggered or otherwise visually blocked. Positioning one's working areas so that there are areas where your back is to the opening to the aisle when you need to concentrate are important, areas that are open may be good for work where you may want to invite more collaboration. Higher cubicle walls not only discourage conversation over cubicle walls, but they can block out visual distractions of people walking by or standing up in their own cubicles. Most cubicles wall heights are in multiples of 1/2 feet tall. Cubicle walls that are 5 1/2 feet tall seem to be particularly common, but there is an not well understood problem with cubicles these heights. People who choose this height often like it because it is high enough that most of the time they will not see people walking or in other cubicles if they are sitting in a cubicle, but they can stand up and (possibly on their toes) look around and see if other people are in nearby cubicles or walking around. If necessary they can stand up and lean over and talk to the person in the next cubicle. Unfortunately this actually introduces an unfortunate sexual bias. In our office study the average height of males was 5' 9", the average height of the females was 5'3". We observed that only the taller people, mainly males were able to take advantage of this ability to look around over the cubicles, and to talk over the cubicles. Unfortunately, the people who were not tall enough (mainly females) were often annoyed that these conversations over cubicle walls kept occuring since they never initiated such conversations themselves, but were regularly subjected to them. The also frequently didn't like people leaning over and looking into their cubicles, since this was something they never did. This problem did not occur in cubicles with 5 feet walls (where there was more visual distraction for everyone) or with cubicles that were 6' or 6'6" tall. Of course average heights vary not only with sex but also with racial characteristics, so this could affect the cubicle levels at which this problem is observed in different regions of the world. Our recommendation was to adopt the higher cubicle heights. Hope this was interesting info to some of you. Scott McGregor mcgregor@atherton.com
wdr@wang.com (William Ricker) (05/29/90)
A couple of points on cubicles.
See DeMarco & Lister's _Peopleware_ book for chapters describing the good
and bad points of cubicles. They site an IBM study which gives optimum cost/
benefit (or minimal for productifity) numbers of square-feet of office, linear
feet of shelf and desk/table, and cubic feet of file per office worker. They
also discuss at length the tradeoffs of different interaction modes.
Key recommendation in DeMarco & Lister is don't let the furniture police design
the cubes; instead, allocate 100sq.ft or more per s person to a group, and
let them carve it up into group and private space.
I once swore I'd never live in a cube -- I've been lucky and only once each in
ten years had more than one officemate or not had a window. However, as I've
learned to take care of my back by positioning keyboards and monitors in more
ergonomic positions, I've had to steal secretarial returns from the halls
& remove the legs (knealer chairs need lowere keyboard than even typing
returns). And only executives and draftsmen can order standing desks or
looking bookcases except by midnight requisition.
My 8x8(x5'hi) Herman Miller cube here at lovely Wang Towers has a door,
three 4x2 desk units (one at knee level and two at waist height) and
more storage than you can shake a stick at. Before I abandoned a shelf in
the last move, I had more shelving in my 64sq' cube than IBM recommended in a
100sq' cube. I'm happy. My neighbor (whose office we annoyed the furniture
police by enlarging to 8x12 during the move) and I have considered tearing
down the wall between our cubes and creating internal screens to have a
common "library" area and private spaces for a team effect.
Cubes can be a force of good.
If a hypothetical next employer expects me to live in a "real office",
they're going to have to show me an interesting furniture catlogue.
Of course, if the furniture police choose a system that the occupant can't
rearrange and do not supply sufficient shelves, cupboards, desks and most
importantly doors, things are bad, bad, bad.
Good news: corporate policy here has just changed such that there is a new
standard cube size. Anyone who doesn't rate a boss-box will in future moves
get the same size cube: 8x10, no haggling allowed. (Boss-box == window office
with real wall & door, suitable for chewing out peons in privacy, except for
the window beside the door.)
--
/bill ricker/
wdr@wang.com a/k/a wricker@northeastern.edu
*** Warning: This account not authorized to express opinions ***