IIDA Perspective - Spring/Summer 2014 - 14

Big data
Social media was considered from a management perspective:
how to set up and enforce appropriate guidelines for staffers'
use. A big issue was squelching promiscuous use of Facebook
and the like. Many participants noted challenges with how
transparent offices can or should be-especially how much
employees should be allowed to reveal on social media, in
the age of over-sharing. "How people use social media in the
workplace, and what they use it for, is a major concern-what
staffers can put on social media, what we can access and
how we get it," intoned Zarick. The challenge is how to protect
the needs of the organization while supporting the needs
of individuals to express themselves and show their
engagement in the workplace.
Many had issues with employees wanting to post intel on
networking sites about projects they are working on-and
thus prioritizing their needs to grow professionally over the
privacy needs of both the firm and the client, whose
nondisclosure agreements they are contractually obligated
to uphold. "Legally, employees' social presence is theirs,"
said Zarick. "We have a policy that says, 'Don't be stupid.'
But that is an incredibly grey area."
Manage for the team, manage for culture
The ideal leadership style is more akin to coaching than
managing: Communicate big-picture strategy and business
goals and get employees to buy into those goals but also
encourage autonomy. Create a flexible structure that
accommodates different work styles and enables more
personal goals to be supported, encouraging the team to
work at their own strengths to leverage those goals. Manage
collaboratively and push ownership and accountability
downward, dispersing power.

Where We Work Matters
The rise of the open-plan office continues apace, spurred on
by cultural trends and cost-consciousness. But what's hailed
as a management boon-a design scheme that, at its best,
encourages communication, transparency, and the dismantling of hierarchies-too often becomes a management
liability, undermining concentration, inhibiting productivity,
and draining morale. Many yearned for a recalibrated ratio
between open communal areas and enclosed focus spaces-
whether the latter is dedicated, shared, or able to be booked.
Openness is just one part of the delicate open-office
ecosystem. "When the phenomenon started, back in the early
1990's, research advocated that team rooms and phone booths
were needed to complement the openness," explained
Susanne Molina, IIDA, Klawiter & Associates.
"Companies saw they could reduce the RE but didn't
implement the whole concept: 'I want this but not that.'
They didn't embrace the right ratios," instead cherry-picking
the attribute they liked best, i.e. density. And that disproportionate allocation of enclosure to openness got perpetuated.
"We are now looking at densification, not just from a realestate and financial perspective, but also what it does to
the morale, humanity, and culture of an organization,"
noted Michelle Kleyla, Industry IIDA, from Haworth.
Designers and manufacturers agreed that openness can
and should take many forms within an office, from quasicubicles and benching systems to pods and informal breakout
zones. "The research we're doing suggests it's important
to provide variety; you can't bench everybody," Kleyla added.
Staffers want to be able to work in different kinds of settings
throughout the day.

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of IIDA Perspective - Spring/Summer 2014