This seems to be a favorite topic here. It gets discussed in a way that I find strange, because it seems to me that most participants are being dishonest. At least I think this is true in many cases.
On the side that decides on and pays for the offices, open floor plans are cheaper and more convenient. They take less space per person. You can moved stuff around and rearrange them. You don't have to decide on team sizes in advance. You don't have to allocate office quality based on seniority. Managers can get a feel for happenings just by being present. etc. Moving in does not mean a big upfront cost and it is easier to make the decision. These are price and convenience concerns. Those drive the decision most of the time. There are a whole bunch of arguments that can be used to justify the decision. knowledge flow, agility, egality, whatever. You can agree for disagree with them but they're not honestly making up a significant part of the decision so the argument is pointless.
On the other side are the people who work in the companies who mostly don't like open floorplans. It seems to me we don't like them for the same reason we don't want to live in a big dormitory. We want our own space. We want to control our environment. Same thing every 14 year old wants. We spend half our lives at work and we want a pleasant office for the same reason we want a pleasant home. More space is more pleasant. These are "quality of life reasons. This side has abstract arguments too. Quite. concentration. etc.
The whole argument is dishonest. One side wants to make life cheaper and easier for themselves. The other wants to make life more pleasant. Both are pretending to be discussing productivity, creativity and whatnot.
Calling everyone who needs peace and quiet to concentrate a petulant teenager doesn't win an argument.
Walk into any open plan office with developers in it, they will all have headphones in. You think they want to listen to music all day? 10s of thousands of dollars in lost productivity disappearing down the drain right in front of your nose but you're too blind to see.
I'm in an open office at this moment. Nobody is wearing headphones. Everybody is working, there is a tiny bit of chatter now and then but nothing distracting. The feeling of other people working seems to affect my own productivity positively (no, the irony of me being on HN is not lost on me. I'm taking a five minute break).
But then, I also like to work in cafés. In fact, when I work from home I will sometimes open www.rainycafe.com to "simulate" that feeling. As long as nobody is speaking really loud or addressing me directly, it doesn't disturb me.
It will only take one sales person to shatter that.
If everyone is being quiet creative it's fine.
Introduce a person constantly on the phone and it's not.
The other ones, and god I hate them, are the pacing round the office while on a mobile. Only topped by pacing round the office on a mobile who's route goes behind your chair. The most distracting thing in the world to me.
I once worked in a small dev room, no door, on a mezannine above a recruitment agency. 16 people whose job it was to be on the phone all day. And they had the radio on.
My three month review ended when I walked out after being criticised for wearing headphones all day.
I think cubes are actually worse than open plan; in a cube you can't see that someone is working intently three feet away, and you don't see their death glare.
This is exactly the issue I have in my current open floor plan. Developers are intermixed with project managers and business analysts and anyone else who happens to occupy the empty desk at the end of the row.
However, the worst distraction I have is actually another developer whose voice carries like buckshot out at 12 gauge. He's been asked to keep it down but it seems like he is physically incapable of understanding how loud he talks.
I once spent a summer writing software in a room full of telephone order takers. My requests for a quieter office were rebuffed and only granted when I offered to quit.
I took the office, finished the software, and quit.
Or just team issues. I recall one friend telling me how open spaces became strategic games.
- You don't wanna be next to this employee (too lazy, friction)
- Being too close to a [bad] manager
- Being moved was a very cheap lever toward fear of inflicted unspoken sanctions
Ditto here. I enjoy open environments, I derive energy from other people working around me.
There are ~30 people on the floor around me right now. There's a quiet conversation happening somewhere, which I didn't notice until I checked just now. Otherwise it's quiet and everyone is working. I can see two pairs of headphones in the bunch.
The frustrating thing about this particular issue is the vehemence of the "pro private office" side - people like mattmanser or mgkimsal routinely talk past people like myself, and pretend we don't exist. When we express our satisfaction with open arrangements we're talked down to, accused of shilling, and otherwise treated like idiots who are too stupid to have valid opinions on something that is a core part of our daily lives. Every single argument boils down to "there's simply no way you've had a positive experience, your experience was actually negative but you're too dumb to know it". There is no concept that some people might actually legitimately like the arrangement.
What works for us might not work for you. This isn't a value judgment upon you or anyone. People are different, shocking, I know. No one here is trying to shove an open-plan office down your throat.
I'm not talking past you, your crowd generally talk past me with "it's fine - works for me - just wear headphones - actually it's a benefit", etc.
In my own experience - I've known a few people who were genuinely better at their development work in open environments. Better as in measured output vs what they thought of themselves. They felt better - they liked the atmosphere - but they also thought they did good work, when they weren't doing terribly good work. Was it causal? Probably not, but it more proves the point that it's harder to self-assess beyond emotional state (which, really, IS a component of work life - I get that).
But what also happens with these religious wars is that the few anecdotes of "hey - I ENJOY working in open plan areas" is used to justify it for everyone.
You want open with other people - that should be allowed. You want an office with a door to shut to work? That should be allowed too. You want to switch between the two - that should be allowed and it EXTREMELY RARE.
Essentially, without loud 'anti' open office plan voices, the 'hey, this is cheaper' crowd gets its way. And when they can find a small percentage of people who do work well in that environment, it's justification-icing on the decision cake.
You're paying a team of people... say, $500k per year - spend the extra few percent and get an office that can accommodate multiple working styles to have the best possible places for all types of people to work. The larger world tends to default to the benefit of extroverts, and 'open plan offices' is one more 'default' that needs to be challenged, especially for many knowledge workers.
In every place I've been with open plans or open cube farms - management NEVER sat there - always had private offices. There's an acknowledgement that it's useful for some type of work, and you're not it. Incredibly divisive attitude for a 'team' to have to put up with. And... for every one example of "but... famous person X sits in an open plan with the team" there are hundreds who don't - it's not the norm.
"No one here is trying to shove an open-plan office down your throat."
MOST companies are because it saves a few bucks. The costs may be non trivial, but the cost compared the salaries, benefits and lost productivity generally are trivial.
> "In my own experience - I've known a few people who were genuinely better at their development work in open environments. Better as in measured output vs what they thought of themselves. They felt better - they liked the atmosphere - but they also thought they did good work, when they weren't doing terribly good work."
See the part of my original post: "Every single argument boils down to "there's simply no way you've had a positive experience, your experience was actually negative but you're too dumb to know it""
You're doing it right now. I'm not prescribing open-plan offices on you, so don't prescribe yours onto me. Furthermore, this blind assertion "people who like open plan are actually more productive in private offices" has a gigantic "citation needed" on it. It is a universal assertion every time it comes up, yet is NEVER substantiated.
> ""hey - I ENJOY working in open plan areas" is used to justify it for everyone."
Except no one here is doing this. You're setting up a straw man and declaring gleeful victory knocking down a stance no one in this thread has advocated.
Look at what others are saying:
"I understand why open floorplans don't work for some people but I personally enjoy working in one..."
"Open floorplans are fine so long as there's an alternative option available."
"We had private rooms too, and many engineers preferred working in quiet, but I'm glad it wasn't all private offices."
No one here is prescribing open floor plans on you, but you have spent many replies in this thread behaving as if they are, and prescribing private offices onto them by insisting that you know their productivity better than they do.
You have spent this entire thread accusing people of forcing their preferences onto you, but it would appear in actuality it's the reverse.
Some of those comments weren't in place when I originally commented.
Yes, not everyone here is advocating that. It's one of the few hot-button issues for me, and it still feels like 'moderate' tones get used to justify herding people in to open plans to save a few bucks.
I'm not accusing people in this thread of doing that - I'm saying it happens a lot on the outside, and the voices of moderation - the types expressed in this thread - get used by non-programmers to justify open plans. Perhaps I didn't clarify that, or perhaps it's a distinction without a difference.
I agree. This is a largely a subjective question. What you like, what makes you productive and what you feel makes you productive all play a part and are all pretty subjective.
I think people feel like because it's work related it is and must be objective. Measurable and provably better for all involved. It gets very transparent when you hear the reasoning behind very senior people's large expensive offices. There's always some pseudo rational justification.
I'm not saying that environment doesn't affect productivity. I'm saying I don't think that's what is enflaming passions. I see office environments as a form of consumption. Our standards for homes and cars and phones have gone up. Why not office chairs and square footage? Thinking of it that way naturally lends to subjectivity. What you like is supposed to be subjective.
"I derive energy from other people working around me."
That's great and all, but what effect does it have on the others around you. It's a rather self-centered view (almost by definition!) but.. "I derive... around me". It may be extremely draining on the people around you, but if it's OK because you get something from it, that makes it fine?
I'm projecting here, certainly, but the whole statement about what works for you bothers me. I've seen more teams be under-productive in open floor plans compared to similar teams that have the options of shared and private workspaces. Is the floor plan the only factor? Probably not, but it's certainly one that was very noticeable. Perhaps it's just symptomatic of something larger?
Please excuse the bluntness that follows - I am genuinely frustrated by your attitude. This is my final reply with you on this matter, because frankly your behavior doesn't deserve any more time, and this is putting a bigger dent in my productivity today than any office environment-related concerns.
In this thread you have accused myself, and others, of prescribing our preferences to you. We have not, in fact you have done the reverse to us.
In this thread you have accused myself, and others, of being selfish when in fact we advocate for people to work in any environment that best suits them.
In this thread you have insisted that you know our (none of whom you've ever met) productivity better than we do ourselves.
In this thread you have presumed that we work in environments where we are disrespectful of our peers. Speaking only for myself, that cannot be further from the truth. Around here we have discussed candidly what works for people and what does not, offer alternatives to people who do not want open environments, and we continue to encourage people to speak up on any issues relating to the work environment, whether it's productivity-related or simply related to their enjoyment (believe it or not, not all open-plan-preferring people work best in just any open-plan setup). We are fully cognizant that different people work better in different environments, and we offer that freedom to everyone.
You have falsely accused many of us the same disrespect you have shown us. You have falsely accused us of projecting and prescribing, when the only one doing the projecting and prescribing is you.
You are looking for a Big Bad Guy so hard it borders on the absurd. You have approached anyone here even slightly pro-open-plan with hostility and condescension when no attitude has been shown to you.
We get it, you've had bad experiences at previous companies re: open-plan. Don't take it out on us. Neither myself nor anyone who has commented here is responsible for your past experiences, and none of us take anything close to the stance you have previously experienced. So don't treat us like it.
I acknowledged I'm likely projecting some of this. That you or others took some of this personally is odd - I thought I was pretty clear in indicating that these were my own experiences. Outside of that, apologies for the one dig at you specifically about your 'deriving energy' comment - my reply was worded correctly, and certainly came across differently than I intended.
Agreed on dropping this - not intending to cause offense - I also suspect that if this was a face to face conversation we'd have agreed more than disagreed (as has happened when this has come up at user group meetings in the area now and then).
I'm in a coworking space right now and I'm one of the only one I can see with headphones on all day. And I wear them by choice, I really love to work with music, not because I want to avoid the noise around me
woah, cool down! I didn't call anyone a petulant teenager, not even teenagers. Your own space that you control is nicer and I'm arguing that people want it mostly because it's nicer. Productivity often overlaps with privacy and it may in this case, but I don't think people are as passionate about productivity boosting choices when they don't overlap with pleasantness.
BTW, There is nothing wrong with wanting a nicer work environment.
I like getting loads of work done. I like getting into the zone. You feel good afterwards. I so rarely get into the zone at work I can often count the times in the last month on a hand. And usually it'll be after most people left.
You're putting words into people's mouth that aren't true (and you did compare us to 14 year olds!). Yes privacy is good, but mostly we'd just like to be able to get on with work without constant interruptions.
If you'd have claimed all CEOs are inherently paranoid and don't trust their workers to work in private offices you'd have been as wrong.
For what it's worth, I read their comment as meaning that some things we desire are the same throughout our lifetimes. In the same way that teenagers want to decorate their rooms to reflect themselves, as adults we have the same drives (though maybe with fewer posters of slightly-shameful bands).
I don't see how you read petulant teenager from what I wrote.
>> We want our own space. We want to control our environment. Same thing every 14 year old wants. We spend half our lives at work and we want a pleasant office for the same reason we want a pleasant home. More space is more pleasant.
PSA - As an alternative to headphones I came up with "stealth" earplugs. Take regular memory-foam earplugs, cut them down so the outer edge is flush with your ear hole, and color the outside edge black with a sharpie. The cut out the background noise but let enough sound through that you can have a normal conversation with someone next to you. Sometimes I wear them all day.
It's possible you may have misunderstood or misinterpreted posters here. There is no inconsistency in preferring a more pleasant workspace, while also pointing out to the employers that it makes software people more productive. One proposition does not make the other false or dishonest.
In fact, most tech professionals are ethical people who enjoy their work and prefer to be more productive. Posters here have been hoping, I think, to point out to employers that a cost savings on workspace, walls etc. may actually cost more in productivity, turnover, inefficiency.
There may be some dishonesty in management claims that open plans are beneficial for anything other than the short-term budget. Managers may have to make such decisions to produce numbers their bosses are demanding, because of the way corporations work. However, there is no apparent basis for the implication of some conflict between employee comfort and work-product benefit to the employer.
I would so give up a part of my salary if I could:
1. Have some peace and quiet and do my job
2. After getting done with however much work I have I can leave early
It would be about the same amount of work done, but I would save myself so much time. But of course companies want me to be a factory worker with people looking over my shoulder to make sure I'm actually working and forcing me to work 8 hours no matter what. This is why I am no longer a software engineer.
> ... forcing me to work 8 hours no matter what. This is why I am no longer a software engineer.
The problem wasn't that you were a software engineer. The problem was the companies you were working for.
I usually find this distinguished by whether a company is a software company or a non-software company that requires software by extension (i.e. IT/Big Co).
Stop working for IT companies and go work for a software company. You'll get exactly what you are asking for -- peace and quiet, flexibility, and giving up part of your salary.
> I usually find this distinguished by whether a company is a software company or a non-software company that requires software by extension (i.e. IT/Big Co).
It also happens at any company that bills government contracts, because they have to submit time cards with actual hours worked in order to get paid. You also need to keep a daily timecard.
> open floor plans are cheaper and more convenient. They take less space per person.
Cubicle walls aren't that expensive. You can put them around small teams. What is expensive are unproductive engineers that cost you $10,000 a month each. In comparison I bet those walls and a little bit more space are worth it.
This is why we invented cubicles. Middle ground between cost/personal area/flexibility.
The only problem with cubicles is when you get the half-height wall ones. Then literally you have almost all the same problem as open-floor while literally costing more money and reducing flexibility.
But happier employees are more productive employees, so this is a false dichotomy. I wonder if it would be possible to sell management on non-open floorplans by making a convincing case that people will get enough more work done to pay for the extra costs of open offices.
I am pretty sure a dormitory is the exact opposite of an open floor plan, in most dorms people have their own space that they may share with someone and then common spaces that everyone shares. Contrast to open floor plan where every space is a common area.
I think the real title of the blog post "I Hate Open Floorplans, It Makes Roger Come Out…" makes a lot more sense. I understand why open floorplans don't work for some people but I personally enjoy working in one and always have so I don't see them as bad for developers, only bad for some. The conversations floating around, the noise and animation helps me focus a lot more than in a closed office at work. I don't know exactly why but I work a lot better with a lot of people around me. Also it is so much easier to follow what is going on around in your team, who is stuck on something, who is speaking about something new that might be useful to you.
I've always worked this way, focusing on something while a part of me was processing what was said around and being able to "pause" what I was doing to help around and get back to my work pretty easily. Of course it does not work all the time and some times you just need to focus for a few hours and in this case I just increase the volume of my music in my headphones and stop caring about the rest.
For me the main issue with open floorplans is when other people assume they can just come to your desk and ask you anything without thinking you could be busy and/or in the zone as you describe it when having a closed office would make them think twice before just dropping by unanounced. For me this was easily solved by explaining that it is a lot easier to drop me a line by email or chat and I'd get back to them as soon as I was available.
"The conversations floating around, the noise and animation helps me focus a lot more than in a closed office at work."
I wish I could say the same :) I get pulled into a million conversations simply because I'm there and accessible. Open floorplans decimate focus, in my experience.
I think there's a difference between willingly join a conversation when you know you can help and being pulled in the conversation by someone asking for your opinion all the time. I agree that if the second one happens all day that's a big issue for me too.
I've never been in a situation where I was working and people around would all the time interrupt me and ask for my opinion for everything everyday. And I've worked in big open floorplans. So I would not say it is always the latter here.
Consider yourself very, very lucky. I'm lucky if I get 20 minutes of solid thinking time at my desk. I'm also an architect on a 60 person project, so it may just be different for me.
"For me this was easily solved by explaining that it is a lot easier to drop me a line by email or chat and I'd get back to them as soon as I was available."
Easier? For them? Or you? A perennial argument for open floor plans is that it 'fosters open dialogue' and other such twaddle. For someone to be standing 6 feet from you and be told it'd "easier" to go back to their desk and send you an email instead of just talking to you is ... counter-intuitive at the very least. Unbelievable to some.
I was in an 'open floor plan' a few years back, and would email over to the sysadmin who sat 8 feet from me. The owner yelled at us (and by extension, the other 8 people in the open area, distracting all of them) because we weren't talking directly. "That's why you're all out here - to communicate better!" And then he stormed back to his private office.
"I've always worked this way, focusing on something while a part of me was processing what was said around and being able to "pause" what I was doing to help around and get back to my work pretty easily. Of course it does not work all the time and some times you just need to focus for a few hours and in this case I just increase the volume of my music in my headphones and stop caring about the rest."
If this is actually the case, you're in the minority. After doing this for... 19(?) years, few developers I've met or worked with are actually more productive in open environments. A fair number are more comfortable, but they've not been any more productive (and in some cases, less so) than anyone else on the team, nor have they ever been markedly more productive than people with more private surroundings. My metric for this is purely subjective reading of the quality of their work - number/severity of bugs, features worked on, complexity of code/project/features/bugs/etc. Yeah, so and so was great to work with, pleasant, fun, etc, but always was the last to get things done, always had a few lingering bugs to clean up, never took on the harder features/bugs, etc. Again, totally subjective reading on my part, and it might be biased some because I'm generally not in favor of open floor plans.
I'm in favor of private work spaces and open common areas where people can meet to collaborate when they want. I understand it's an extra expense, and there are times when it's simply not possible. The best teams I've seen operate were ones where it was s small team with private offices and available open areas for collaborative meetings. Tables/desks there allowed for bringing laptops to work on code when needed for longer periods as a small group. Usually a group of 2-4 would brainstorm an issue in the open area, possibly hack out a few things on laptops, people would generally go back to private offices for a while to hammer things out, then come back to discuss and demo. I saw this most recently as an outside contractor coming in to a local company, and they were one of the best teams I'd ever worked with. Things got done rather quickly, everyone had a good sense of responsibility, etc (this was ... 4 people, then 5, IIRC). But then things changed, a couple more people came on, physical environment changed, and things went downhill. I can't say it was entirely the change in physical space, but personally I think it contributed a lot - more people were in open spaces, more 'collaboration' was someone standing near someone's desk trying to do that there (the open area and large meeting rooms were rarely available due to company expansion). Things took longer to get done, and there were more lingering bugs that took longer to sort out.
Yes, 100% anecdotal, but I watched this myself as a partial outsider. I had no long term vested interest, and was only onsite part time - the open vs closed stuff didn't actually affect me - I always did my work at home.
Easier? For them? Or you? A perennial argument for open floor plans is that it 'fosters open dialogue' and other such twaddle. For someone to be standing 6 feet from you and be told it'd "easier" to go back to their desk and send you an email instead of just talking to you is ... counter-intuitive at the very least. Unbelievable to some.
It depends. When someone is stuck on a compiling issue, pinging me on our chat/IRC is clearly easier than speaking loudly and hoping I'll hear and help. But at the same time, being able to hear other people discussions and chose when I think I'd be able to help is awesome. It also helps me learn a lot just by hearing other people technical issues.
Also open floorplan does not mean "just 8 members of your team" in the same place. Where I was before it meant 120 developers working on different project for the company but in the same place. An issue with this is that people outside of the developer teams would just pop over to my desk because I was the one that seemed available to ask for things. This can be annoying if it happens 10 times a day especially when none of the questions have anything to do with you. Explaining them that sending an email with questions would help worked most of the time and forced them to try and contact the right person instead of asking the developer closest to the door especially at lunch time.
If this is actually the case, you're in the minority. After doing this for... 19(?) years, few developers I've met or worked with are actually more productive in open environments
That may well be true. I've worked this way for 8 years now and clearly enjoy a lot more open floorplans especially when it is "developers-friendly" so no sales team next to you using the phone all day.
I'm in favor of private work spaces and open common areas where people can meet to collaborate when they want.
The issue with this is that I then lose the ability to follow what other people are working/stuck on and whether I can help, etc. Because people will most of the time stay in quiet area and use the open spaces only for informal gathering, having fun, or even meetings when no rooms are available.
I'd be interested to hear if anyone else agrees with the author about disliking it when people walk behind him. For some reason, I find having people behind me really distracting. I think it stems from having people watch my screen while I try to code. Instant productivity killer.
Interestingly, I don't find this precludes open plan offices. It just means I want to grab a corner desk.
It's the same for me I really dislike the idea of having people behind me and not knowing what they are doing. I also don't really like knowing people can stare at my screen so I always try to win a spot in a corner or with my back to a wall
It's a primary reaction : animals dislike to show their back to "enemies", even if coworkers aren't technically enemies (some aren't really allies either).
I've noticed, when you invite a guest to sit in a room, the guest will almost always takes the chair with the back facing the wall.
Agreed, I intensely dislike having my back to a room (including in places such as restaurants), and this was always my explanation, too.
(Actually, the explanation I give to people is that I'm terrified of assassination attempts, which is related from a scientific point of view but has the bonus of making my life sound much more exciting than it is.)
This title is wrong, the real title is better. You don't like open floor. I love it. I can get in the flow and I have my colleagues here with which I can joke/interact/discuss. I think being isolated would make me feel bad. I think that the most important factor here is that people need to know how to behave on open floors. You can be distracted by a ringing phone everywhere.
That is true but I think that most people use headphones. Personally I made a habit of wearing them even when I am not listening to anything. They are not noise cancelling but it help to not listen to anything that is "out of scope". But obviously you can't ignore your own phone.
Most people who don't have offices use headphones, yes. If you don't like to wear headphones all day, that's another reason why you're uncomfortable in an open office.
Open floorplans are fine so long as there's an alternative option available. Working in an environment where peace and quiet is never available is not going to make you as productive as you can possibly be - an open plan office has to come with the authority and autonomy to take yourself off to a different, quieter place to work from instead should the office get too distracting.
It's very rare that one solution works all of the time.
No, that's precisely the misconception I'm trying to address here. Taking homeopathic treatments won't make any difference to your health. But following the principles of feng shui (even if the beliefs behind them are bullshit) will, more often than not, lead to a psychologically-pleasing layout.
I'm still not sure exactly what distinguishes an open floor plan from other floor plans. I prefer working directly with the rest of my team in the same room. I don't want a private room. But a room where people unrelated to the team are constantly walking around and making noise and disturbing people is bad.
Are there no rooms, or is there one big one? And how big? I'm currently in a room with about 20 desks, which works very well. But an adjoining building has rooms with probably less desks, but a main corridor going through the middle, and I can imagine that's not such a great idea, because everybody in the building is constantly walking past.
Even sharing a room with your team can be a problem. My colleagues prefer to have the radio on, which conflicts with my desire for an almost eerie silence.
I simply work better and more efficient if there's complete silence. I can work with a low level of background noice, but if certain songs / types of songs are playing on the radio I just stop until it's gone. My ears simply won't tune out some sounds, such as a high pitch female singers. Also some radio shows are just designed to have annoying sounds because it's "fun".
Forcing your music on others in an office is simply not done. Your colleague can use headphones if they want to listen to music. I've usually had a co-worker who preferred to listen to music, which was never a problem.
All of my work music has vocalists. Most of what I listen to is rock w/female vocalist. But basically there's consistency and familiarity in what I'm listening to, as well as minimum interruption between songs so I'm able to tune it out. I think radio would be super jarring going between songs and commercials and morning shows, so I never listen to it unless I'm in the car.
That just means that open floor need different rules regarding sound. We don't say that libraries are terrible places just because some people insist on having loud conversations there.
Many libraries also have private rooms where people can go for more private study or concentration than they can get in the 'open floor' part, even though the library is already typically quiet.
What I need is simple: a large desk, a good char, a room with glass walls, dry-erase markers, pen and papers. I also want to be able look outside. Confine myself in a tiny room or on a floor full of people but no windows is a torture. That's all. That's my dream workstation area.
I'd like to see some science applied to this topic.
A decrease in productivity may not be an insurmountable business problem. Private offices take up more square footage which has a direct annual cost. Open floor plans have higher density, which might offset the decrease in productivity. Open floorplans may/may not work well depending on the number of folks involved (eg. a team of 100 vs a team of 10) and types of job functions and size of the open floor plan area (maybe "pods" work better than one wide open area).
I'm sure there's lots of interest questions that could be answered if some rigor where applied to this issue.
As a counterpoint, interning at an open floor plan company is brilliant. If you're considerate about your coworkers' space, it lowers barriers to conversation (obviously you have to respect space) and just listening in on other conversations helps pick up stuff.
We had private rooms too, and many engineers preferred working in quiet, but I'm glad it wasn't all private offices. I can usually get more out of one minute of conversation than five minutes of instant messaging.
It seems to me that most complaints stem from the fact that many people here have worked with inconsiderate people.
I think it is nonsense to say that what doesn't work for one person won't work for another. The whole thing is completely context dependent. Here in Europe most people feel cubicles are so isolating that you might as well be working remotely because of the lack of interaction with your co-workers.
Don't get me wrong I think its really important to be able to 'plug in and get on' without distraction as a programmer, but I'm just making the point not everyone works well this way if they do it all the time.
Open-plan offices are backdoor age and health discrimination, also known as "culture fit".
With all the project-management garbage (often in the name of "Agile") designed to mash software down into chunks that can be done mindlessly by CommodityJavaDrones, making software development superficially reliable (but the product soulless) the job is easy, which the business wants. It's more expensive to dumb down the job and hire idiots (legitimate 10x programmers only cost 1.5-2x) but more reliable-- the risks are long-term and thus pushed off to the next guy-- as they see it. So the attrition for promotion has to be conducted by subjecting people to petty stresses, but in bulk, and seeing who cracks first. When someone has the first panic attack, goes to the ER (a real panic attack, if you don't know what it is, is terrifying) and one way or another isn't working there in 3 months, that's part of the design.
Also, as one who suffers panic attacks, it's not the noise that makes people sick (and, with enough time in an open-plan office, almost everyone will get sick) because people will tune that out over time, but open-back visibility, which is much harder to get used to. The creepy feeling of being watched is what fucks peoples' health up. That could be fixed with booth-style seating if regular offices can't be afforded, but you never see that either.
There's a false egalitarianism to it as well. Managers typically have desks in the bullpen as well so they can say that it's a blanket policy, but that's making an unfair comparison. Managers can come and go as they please, typically only spend a couple hours per day in the bullpen, and don't have much to fear from visibility anyway; but workers who take the side offices "too often" draw suspicion and, even if they're getting a lot of work done, have to worry about getting "culture fitted" (that is, no-hired or fired for being old, sick, or female.)
I love programming itself but this is a fucking shitty industry and it's goddamn time we rise up and take it the fuck back.
On the side that decides on and pays for the offices, open floor plans are cheaper and more convenient. They take less space per person. You can moved stuff around and rearrange them. You don't have to decide on team sizes in advance. You don't have to allocate office quality based on seniority. Managers can get a feel for happenings just by being present. etc. Moving in does not mean a big upfront cost and it is easier to make the decision. These are price and convenience concerns. Those drive the decision most of the time. There are a whole bunch of arguments that can be used to justify the decision. knowledge flow, agility, egality, whatever. You can agree for disagree with them but they're not honestly making up a significant part of the decision so the argument is pointless.
On the other side are the people who work in the companies who mostly don't like open floorplans. It seems to me we don't like them for the same reason we don't want to live in a big dormitory. We want our own space. We want to control our environment. Same thing every 14 year old wants. We spend half our lives at work and we want a pleasant office for the same reason we want a pleasant home. More space is more pleasant. These are "quality of life reasons. This side has abstract arguments too. Quite. concentration. etc.
The whole argument is dishonest. One side wants to make life cheaper and easier for themselves. The other wants to make life more pleasant. Both are pretending to be discussing productivity, creativity and whatnot.