An empirical study on the effect of open offices: "the volume of face-to-face interactions decreased significantly (approx. 70%)" http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/royptb/373/1753/20170239.full.pdf …pic.twitter.com/2xtgG4561v
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
The public discussion about open office plans has is weird. The public talk is almost uniformly against, but people continue to do it, and not just for cost reasons. Also, almost no one seems to acknowledge that there are trade-offs...
That open-office plans are better for some users for other, that they advance some purposes and retard others. And people seem highly partisan, interpreting research that leans their way overly charitably. (Not something you've been doing, though, which is great.)
I’d add that the potential explanation about wanting private conversations is tough to square with cubicles. Isolating yourself with headphones and feeling watched is a better explanation.
That "sociometric badge" is dodgy af.
The only evidence I'm aware of (but it's fairly convincing for its niche) is the Xerox anecdotes in John Seely Brown's _Social Life of Information_.
I'd say it's about employees not wasting time on the internet, but this is accusatory and so it's talked about euphemistically.
In a quasi infinite variable field I would say that as much as one strives to keep results meaningfull you will end up discoveri your suppositions in the majority of the cases. Also I would argue that some ancient knowledge follows a scientific approach as well, not all
You’re not picking on the study too much; you’re critiquing evidence that doesn’t seem strong.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.