soft-eng@MITRE.ARPA (Alok Nigam) (08/07/88)
Soft-Eng Digest Sun, 7 Aug 88 V: Issue 24
Today's Topics:
Is it hot in here or is it me? (4 msgs)
Office architecture
Optimal environments for S/W engrs (5 msgs)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 1 Aug 88 20:23:23 GMT
From: pasteur!agate!ALFA.berkeley.edu!bks@ames.arpa (Brad Sherman)
Subject: Is it hot in here or is it me?
For those interesed in the office/cubicle debate and working conditions in
general:
"WORK PLACES, The Psychology of the physical environment in
offices and factories," Eric Sundstrom and Mary Graehl Sundstrom,
Cambridge University Press 1986, ISBN 0-521-31947-1, 461pp. PB
This book is extremely readable and is an attempt to survey and comment on
important workplace studies to date. Includes chapters on psychological
processes, lighting and windows, temperature and air, noise, music, colors,
work-stations and supporting facilites, self-identity and status,
communication, privacy, small groups etc. etc.
Anxious managers might be surprised to find that, given a free choice in the
matter, not everyone will opt for a private office. Problems involving
private offices seem to stem from the fact that, historically, they have
been assigned based on status, not need.
In a more humorous vein, it has been found difficult to complete controlled
studies regarding music and productivity. It seems that once music has been
introduced to the office, workers become indignant if it is taken away
(because of experimental protocols or for any other reason).
------------------------------
Date: 2 Aug 88 12:39:41 GMT
From: pdn!reggie@uunet.uu.net (George W. Leach)
Subject: Is it hot in here or is it me?
>Anxious managers might be surprised to find that, given a free choice in the
>matter, not everyone will opt for a private office. Problems involving
>private offices seem to stem from the fact that, historically, they have
>been assigned based on status, not need.
In some companies this is true. Just like the type of furniture one
is given is a status symbol. However, this is not a justification for sweeping
the issue under the rug! Constantly one hears about how important an issue
productivity is. Yet, whenever a suggestion is put forth concerning ways to
improve productivity it usually involved an increase in spending for more
and better equipment, offices over cubes, etc..... These involve REAL money.
Increased productivity, while it reduces costs, is not an immediate or very
visable quantity. Any type of study that can make valid measurements via a
controlled experiment to show that the cost of such improvements will result
in paybacks over many years would be a help.
The amazing thing is that almost all companies are willing to provide
some sort of financial assistance to the *individual* for the purpose of
continuing education, either in the form of pursuing a degree or attendance
at a seminar, conference or outside course. Yet, the turnover rate in this
industry is quite high. So what is the net return on this investment for an
employer? Now, when an employee leaves you loose all that training as well.
But offices, equipment, etc.... do not leave with the employee. In fact, the
environment has a lot to do with the ability to attract and keep employees.
The financial investment in continuing education is something that most people
expect. To not offer it puts you at a disadvantage in attempting to attract
quality people. Yet, how many companies view issues like offices, equipment,
etc... in the same light?
------------------------------
Date: 3 Aug 88 01:02:41 GMT
From: linus!philabs!ttidca!hollombe@husc6.harvard.edu (The Polymath)
Subject: Is it hot in here or is it me?
>Anxious managers might be surprised to find that, given a free choice in the
>matter, not everyone will opt for a private office. Problems involving
>private offices seem to stem from the fact that, historically, they have
>been assigned based on status, not need.
This has been a bone of contention between me and management here for over
three years. My title merits a private office. I've turned down every
one offered because the only ones available had no windows. They can't
understand why I don't consider being stuffed into a small, windowless,
artificially lit box to be a step up. Given a choice, I'll take sunlight
over privacy. I'd prefer both. (The fact that people nominally junior to
me have private offices with windows is a sore point, too).
------------------------------
Date: 6 Aug 88 14:36:16 GMT
From: uwslh!lishka@speedy.wisc.edu (Fish-Guts)
Subject: Is it hot in here or is it me?
>>private offices seem to stem from the fact that, historically, they have
>>been assigned based on status, not need.
Not to mention being lonely. I would rather work with other
people, rather than just me and a computer terminal.
>This has been a bone of contention between me and management here for over
>three years. My title merits a private office. I've turned down every
>one offered because the only ones available had no windows. They can't
>understand why I don't consider being stuffed into a small, windowless,
>artificially lit box to be a step up. Given a choice, I'll take sunlight
>over privacy. I'd prefer both. (The fact that people nominally junior to
>me have private offices with windows is a sore point, too).
I agree: windows are an absolute must, although with large
buildings *someone* has to take the offices without them. Flourescent
lamps and false ceilings are no substitute for sunlight, blue (or
grey) sky, and clouds.
Although you can take my opinion for what it is worth (I am still
a student, although I am holding down a full-time this summer), I
would rather work in an office with other people than be stuck in a
private one. I prefer to be able to talk to others every now-and-then
so I don't lose my mind by staring at glowing phosphors for 8 hours.
I would feel isolated in a private office.
My requirements for a good working environment are: (1) a huge
desk, absolutely enormous, to spread source code all over; (2) a
decent terminal, with a nice display, preferably an LCD...I don't like
CRT's all that much (IMHO, LCD's are closer to paper and ink than glowing
phosphors); (3) a good bookshelf to place a library of reference books
on, including necessities such as a dictionary and thesaurus, as well
as the Kernigan/Ritchie C text and the Red Dragon Compiler book; (4) a
very comfortable chair, as well as a leg rest to put my feet up on
(let's face it...sitting down, watching the screen for over 5 hours
can be damned uncomfortable with lousy office equipment); (5) the
ability to eat snacks and drink soda or juice while programming, so I
do not have to lose my train of thought in order to go for lunch
(although there are many times when getting away for lunch is very
welcome; however, there are also times when I need to work straight
through to get the job done); (6) other people, so I can crack a joke
every now and then, or discuss some topic unrelated to computers and
programming when I need a brief rest from coding; (7) a walkman and
some nice Sennheiser headphones, so I do not bother anyone else by
listening to music; (7) a couple small cloth dividers to absorb office
noise; (8) no dress code, so I can wear some comfortable (and
fashionable!) threads like T-shirts and jeans.
I really do not want to work in a job where I become "part of the
machine;" i.e. I get my own office with no windows, have to wear a
bloody 3-piece suit, and the office is a "pristine" textbook example
of an impersonal, very neat place where it is more important to look
like an office than function like one. I find that computer
programming can be sort of a lonely job, where I constantly interact
with a machine. I would like a little humanity in my working
environment.
------------------------------
Date: 30 Jul 88 19:00:04 GMT
From: unisyn!matheny@boulder.colorado.edu (John Matheny)
Subject: Office architecture
Several months ago there was a discussion in this newsgroup on how
office architecture (i.e. cubicles vs closed offices) affects the
productivity of software development organizations. I believe that
several formal studies were mentioned in this discussion. I would
appreciate it if anyone knowing of such studies would send me the
reference via mail. I will summarize the results to the net if there
is sufficient response.
------------------------------
Date: 2 Aug 88 15:05:53 GMT
From: vsi1!daver!mfgfoc!ray@ames.arpa (Ray Lillard)
Subject: Optimal environments for S/W engrs
A few years ago I attended a lecture by Tom DeMarco. He spoke
on the subject of s/w engineering productivity and factors
which influence it. While discussing office arrangements he
made reference to a study at IBM (San Jose - Santa Teresa,
I think) which showed that software engineer offices with
walls, a door, a phone which could be disabled, 30 sq. ft.
of work surface and 100 sq. ft. of floor space were desirable
and cost effective.
Can anyone point me to the study (assuming it was published)
or to any other studies addressing the topic. The software
team here is in a large room with constant chatter, telephone
calls and personal radios that drive me nuts.
------------------------------
Date: 4 Aug 88 23:55:23 GMT
From: littlei!reeder@uunet.uu.net (reeder)
Subject: Optimal environments for S/W engrs
>A few years ago I attended a lecture by Tom DeMarco. He spoke
>on the subject of s/w engineering productivity and factors
>which influence it....
The article "IBM's Santa Teresa Laboratory - Architectural design for
program development", by Gerald M. McCue, was published in the "IBM
Systems Journal", Volume 17 Number 1, 1978. The abstract follows:
The special needs of the computer programmer in terms of working space,
furniture design, access to terminals and conference rooms, and overall
working environment led IBM to construct a facility intended to enhance
programmer productivity in a development environment. That facility is
the Santa Teresa Laboratory in San Jose, California, designed by MBT
Associates of San Francisco. This essay discusses the programmer's needs,
how they were perceived, and the process by which they led to unique
design concepts, as well as the architectural philosophy underlying the
design process.
------------------------------
Date: 5 Aug 88 12:19:12 GMT
From: hubcap!ncrcae!ncr-sd!ncrlnk!emdeng!tmcclory@gatech.edu (Thomas.J.Tom.McClory)
Subject: Optimal environments for S/W engrs
The article documenting the IBM Santa Teresa Laboratory study is:
IBM's Santa Teresa Laboratory -- Architectural Design for
Program Development
G.M. McCue
IBM System Journal, volume 17, Number 1, 1978 pg 4-25.
Also reprinted in:
Tutorial: Programming Productivity: Issues for The Eighties
(2nd edition)
IEEE Computer Society, 1986
Editor: Capers Jones
------------------------------
Date: 5 Aug 88 16:00:29 GMT
From: voder!pyramid!prls!gordon@bloom-beacon.mit.edu (Gordon Vickers)
Subject: Optimal environments for S/W engrs
>In article <387@mfgfoc.UUCP> ray@mfgfoc.UUCP (Ray Lillard) writes:
>A few years ago I attended a lecture by Tom DeMarco. He spoke
>on the subject of s/w engineering productivity and factors
>which influence it....
Could anyone point me to studies that would help me justify getting
a window installed ? I'm not trying to be silly, I'm serious. I need
to be able to occationally focus my eyes on something that's more than
just a few feet away. There would also be psychological benifits;
o I'd feel better and more productive if I didn't feel so caged in,
o There's a certain comfort in being able to "see" the day progress,
(changing light level, amount of outside activities, etc)
o I never know what it is like outside (weather), I miss being able
to see the tree's sway, the birds pass by, etc. Part of me feels
like I'm just wasting my life away.
------------------------------
Date: 5 Aug 88 18:45:26 GMT
From: vsi!friedl@uunet.uu.net (Stephen J. Friedl)
Subject: Optimal environments for S/W engrs
This topic, along with many others, is mentioned in _Peopleware_
by Tom DeMarco and Timothy Lister. This book is very good in
talking about making for a productive shop -- easy to read and
full of great anecdotes.
*Excellent* reading.
------------------------------
End of Soft-Eng Digest
******************************