> An office, with a door I can close

Honestly IMHO having office rooms with ~4 (in exceptions 5 or 6) people is the bottom line for allowing productive work for any job needing concentration (and it's healthier either way).

I never understood how some companies promoted the mass offices as a good solution for the employee, sure it's maybe cheaper for the employer but that normally the wrong end to save money.

I've worked in a large loft with ~10 people, a 4 person room a 5 person room and a pseudo single room (it didn't had doors and was ineffective 3 person room).

My experience:

- The more people in the room the less the productivity even if it's a large loft.

- But if having to share a room with someone who is chatting all the time is even worse even if its a 2 person room.

I'd prefer my own office. I worked with 3 others in a room and it was still distracting. I got much more focused and less self conscious if no one was there. I turned the lighting, climate, and windows just how I liked, and boom, productivity increase.

What I wouldn't give for a cube. To my left and right in our open office are engineers who are normally quiet. The row in front of are all business strategy people. They never stop talking. They're on the phone, they're having meetings, they're casually chatting. There's nothing at all to block the sound or the sight of them grouping up in 2s and 6s at each others desk. One even has a rare sight in the office, a desktop phone.

The "cube" I had was a mega-cube with 6 people. Our group was spread among 2 adjacent mega cubes, so the divider was eventually removed, making a 12-person cube.

I had an end spot, and I had a portable whiteboard shoved between me and my neighbor to separate us, and I built a wall of empty Hint bottles around my desk to isolate me from the aisle. That removed a lot of visual distractions, but it was still quite noisy.

Speaking of this, one guy in a building across the street basically built himself a hut out of cardboard boxes glued together. It was amazing.

I've actually been in a similar situation except it was a former stationary closet that they had put counters around and there was five to six people in there. It actually wasn't that bad as we all face away from each other, and everyone was quiet. It was only 5-6 people of noise instead of the entire floor's.

Companies need to try to separate functions as much as possible. It's reasonable for people to find an empty office or conference room for occasional impromptu meetings or calls. But some jobs--recruiting, biz dev, etc.--basically live on the phone. It's not realistic for them either to shut up or find a room every time they're on a call.

I also worked at Google after almost 20 years of working at home. I didn’t mind the cube environment because I worked from about 6am to 3pm, giving me a few hours of quiet heads down time every day. My last job before retiring at Capital One was the same, I started work early in the morning for heads down work time, was available for brainstorming, etc., then knocked off work mid afternoon. I really recommend time shifting for people having problems concentrating in a cube environment.

I did the same thing. I would get to the office before 6 and have 2-3 hours of quiet time. That was the only way that I was able to get anything done.

The bad thing is that, almost 5 years later, my sleep schedule is still screwed up because of this. I have a really hard time sleeping past 5:30am, and I'm afraid its damaged my health.

You didn't find that there was pressure to work later? I tend to prefer to come in late because you can control your bound on that, but leaving early makes you look bad (despite the irrationality of that), and its just easy to fall into the habit of "oh just another hour, I will still be home for dinner..."

Then there are meetings scheduled for 3-6pm....

There was some, but we tended to put a bound on meetings to 10-3. I had a good excuse in that I had hard deadline of 3:45 to pick my son up from school most days. The days that I stayed late, it was mostly for social events. Either TGIF on thursdays, or group celebrations which were generally at 4.

I was in Mountain View and my manager was in NYC, so we started working at the same time, given the 3 hour time difference.

Also, the manager of everyone in the ocean of people around me was my peer, we had the same manager, and he came in almost as early as I did.

So, no problem, or at least no problem that I worried about.

YES. Early morning time is the most productive time for many people. It's all downhill after lunch.

The problem is, many companies are more hip about WFH than hour shifting. It's not a thing. If you start coming into work early to get more done, you will get the looks if you don't stay in the office until 6:00PM, just like everyone. That is not sustainable.

However, if you are a European or Indian offshore, then hour shifting is built in. Onshore, night owls are hard-working, and early birds are slackers - because no one can see them work.

What I am saying is, a lot of office work is optics. Being there and within line of sight of everyone counts more than being productive and in the zone. It's dumb as fuck.

> YES. Early morning time is the most productive time for many people. It's all downhill after lunch.

For me and many others it's right the other way around. The single way you can kill my productivity is to force me to get up earlier than 8. Now with Corona lockdowns, I can get up at 9 (!) and actually feel rested!

Yes, and if we work the same amount of hours, but I leave at 4PM, you will be perceived as doing more work.

I have an office with a door, and I generally prefer to go into the office, but the company is converting to cubicles, one floor at a time. When my floor gets the ax, I will probably transition to 100% WFH. This experience has shown me that I can do it.