Buildings are a bugger

As I flit like a bee from one big organisational headquarters to another it occurs to me that such buildings add little benefit and restrict in the following ways:

    You have to waste time, money and energy traveling to them.
    They cost a lot of money to maintain.
    You are subject to IT networks that are slower and more restricted than your own at home.
    You have to pretend to be working even when you are not whereas elsewhere you can stare out of the window and think.
    You are less in control of who interrupts you and why.
    Their architecture is often depressing rather than uplifting.

Can you think of any more reasons?

12 thoughts on “Buildings are a bugger

  1. Perhaps what you’re identifying here is a subset of the overall class ‘buildings’. You’ve already identified one exception- home (assuming that is in fact a building, and not a boat, or hollowed out Tauntaun).I’d like to think that much of the elements you mention are in fact cultural, and though can be aided or assaulted by architecture, do in fact transcend it.


  2. …and the artifical air, lighting & furnishings sap your energy and creativity. On the other hand, they do tend to have lots of people to bounce ideas off and engage with face to face….


  3. I recently heard Dr Frank Duffy, founder of DEGW speak. Apart from being fascinating and eminent, he is one of the loveliest men you could meet.Here’s one of his articles: Lumbering To Extinction In The Digital Field: The Taylorist Office Building


  4. Little benefits – disagreethey keep you dry, often are warm,you can meet people – see people – touch people – talk to people – share ideas with peopleGiven the alternatives of no (non-domestic) buildings I like them.Lets bring back Roman baths with inspiring art (though not too good for iPhone addicts though)


  5. Lots of the people you meet outside those buildings are more interesting, or at a minimum less fearful of telling you what they really think or for that matter asking you what you really think ?


  6. People seem to like meeting each other. Lucky enough to be able to go to one when I feel like it. But agree with all your points. You could almost do the same with an agreed meet-up point, which is in effect what they are. I think we actually sold all our buildings off too, I know Lord Sugar of Apprentice now owns South Bank.


  7. Sometimes because buildings are laid out in a "departmental’ manner, companies act in strict silos of disciplines which is counterproductive to thinking in the connected social media world.


  8. Interesting thoughts Euan, as ever. I’m not sure about the IT point though. At least in a large corporation, they normally have an IT department who can immediately sort out your problems, whereas if you are anything like me (which you definitely are not) who doesn’t have a clue about IT, when things do go wrong, it’s a disaster! I can’t understand why everyone thinks "open plan" is so great? Generally, the kitchen is smaller as the executives don’t want "chit chat" from the minions which means that in effect the workers get glued to their computer screens; don’t communicate with anyone except with colleagues in their bubble and become extremely isolated. Furthermore, there seems to be a lack of consideration shown by those attending meetings who receive calls on their mobiles and take them outside the meeting in the "open space" disrupting everyone else.I like the idea of Roman baths!


  9. Came on this rather late (been away) but there’s one that seems to be missing. If you don’t have a corporate logon for the enterprise you’re visiting, you can’t get on the internet.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s