The Private-to-Open Spectrum. Since the advent of open plan in the 1960s, there’s been a healthy conversation about open versus private offices. The long-running discussion has been fueled, in part, by semantics. Even seemingly clear terms such as “enclosed” and “open” can have a range of meanings.

“It is a spectrum,” notes Tracy Brower, practice leader workplace consultant at Blackburn Young Office Solutions, Inc. “At one end are completely enclosed, walled offices. Midway is systems furniture with standing-height panels and desk systems with seated-height panels. At the far end of the spectrum is a totally open area without any type of partitions to divide space.”

Very few companies today fall at the extreme ends of the private-to-open spectrum. Most are somewhere in the middle, using a mix of the several kinds of spaces. That fact has been apparent in the Future Pull workshops Blackburn Young Office Solutions conducts. These sessions are based on the group brainstorming technique developed by George Land. Their purpose is to work with customers and their architect and design partners to envision an ideal office environment and then help them find out how to make it happen.

In analyzing the responses of over 1,000 participants, Blackburn Young Office Solutions found the attribute “collaboration and connection” was top of mind. Respondents described this as a physical space that supports connection with others and promotes communication with them in formal and informal ways. Achieving collaboration and connection implies spaces on the “open” end of the private-to-open spectrum.

Yet, “retreat” was another attribute that made most top 10 lists. This was described as spaces that offer individuals one or more places to escape distractions and focus on work tasks or personal matters. This description sounds very much like the “private” end of the spectrum. Clearly, organizations desire a mix of spaces that let people both collaborate and concentrate. The million dollar question is: What is the right mix?

Context for the Discussion

The offices of the 1920s into the 1960s reflected the mass production mentality popular with Henry Ford and, before him, Fredrick Winslow Taylor. Rows of desks in completely open rooms became the norm. Largely in reaction to these “bullpens,” Robert Propst invented Action Office®, the world’s first systems furniture. Blackburn Young Office Solutions, Inc., introduced this new way of working in 1968.

In his design, Propst sought to keep the ease of communication inherent in the bullpen. More important, he sought to temper that openness with partitions of various heights that were designed to give people more privacy. Systems furniture obviously caught on and is now a common fixture in most offices, particularly in North America.

According to a survey the International Facility Management Association conducted of its members, the current breakdown of office types is 59 percent open plan, 34 percent private, and 7 percent bullpen.1 These statistics indicate the prevalence of a mix of spaces within the average company. The trouble is, no two companies are alike. Finding the right mix means that a facility and its layout must reflect corporate culture, structure, goals, and branding—all the things that make an organization unique. The question is this: What is the right mix for this company, one that will best help it achieve its goals?

It’s a question that’s more relevant than ever, as companies use every means at their disposal—technology, quality improvement, branding, and facilities—to solidify their positions in the global economy by reacting to changes in the marketplace more quickly, decreasing their time-to-market, and attracting and retaining the best workers.