DesksRoomsAndEquipment

A discussion of physical equipment (or lack) affecting productivty:

While at Fidelity Investments, our team's efforts at R & D conflicted with "Corporate Standard Desktop" configuration regularly. We were developing middleware for production servers that required testing out new releases of SQL Server, Open Data Server, and runtime libraries for NT multi-thread/multi-processor support. The corporate desktop was about 18-36 months retro in all components, and had too many cross-dependencies between email embedded tooling, Sybase SQL Server libraries, VB retro version DLLs, and other assorted things that we kept discovering whenever we upgraded our development desktop machines. Basically, all the helpdesk infrastructure required operability of lots of old Win16 components with naming conflicts in what we were installing for pure Win NT environments.

I pushed some hourly cost numbers once and figured that Fidelity could save $15,000 - $30,000 per seat in our unit by giving us a 2nd computer in each cube that "stayed vanilla corporate" for email, etc. with our development / research NT boxes totally separate. I would happily forego corporate email on my development machine, especially if that allowed me to ask for help when my development box was troubled. They couldn't accept that - "It would set a precedent!"

So, the desire to control upgrades has a lot more big game than sincerity to do it right.

-BobLee 2002.08.28

Bob,

Now I am really curious! Obviously politics rears its head...but can you tell us more about what exactly was behind (or what you think was behind) the "It would set a precedent" ? Why wouldn't a development team have different requirements and be allowed to have appropriate equipment? What was the relationship of the development group and the rest of the departments at the time?

- BeckyWinant 2002.08.28

Becky, Fidelity Investments had a lot of issues that made me crazy. They used to be located downtown in overcrowded quarters, almost stacked like cordwood in cubicals. When our division moved out to Marlboro (on the I-495 outer beltway), they bought a former DEC building and restructured the whole interior so that there were status-sized cubicals the same size as they moved away from! ("It wouldn't seem fair to those left behind in cramped quarters if you weren't cramped equally!")

The status ethic ran deep - manager's offices were private and about 15' x 20', the non-supervisory cubes were 5' x 6' the supervisory status cubes were 6' x 10' -- room enough for 2 monitors. If they had authorized dual machines for developers, the logical move would be to use supervisory cubes for developers, and mini-cubes for supervisors (more justifiable need for space!) This just must not be!

I figured that the implicit contract bought them the quality and productivity they deserved. That's partly why I left.

-BobLee 2002.08.28

Bob,

Ahhh. There are other solutions to the equipment and space problem, like shared larger shared rooms, but they may not have been able to think non-cubes.

So, If you wrote better software than me, would you have to write more poorly, so that all our code was equal? - BeckyWinant 2002.08.29

If I wrote better software than you, you would be bonus-eligible by heroically fixing the bugs during the midnight install/checkout. I, on the other hand, merely prevented bugs from occurring, and that was not bonus material. (I checked!) -- BobLee 2002.08.30

I wish Bob's experience at Fidelity was unique. A while ago, I worked for a small software company which was bought out by a Telco, then amalgamated with IT divisions and companies. Over a fairly short period, the developers were told that they were supposed to have the same desktop as everyone else. When it was established beyond any possible doubt that it was impossible to do development work for clients who had a different standard, they were allowed to have non-standard machines isolated so far from everything else that they had to sign off & use a different sign on to read email. This was allegedly to protect us from viruses, as they had "strange" software. Again, a second machine was not considered an option.

Did you ever try to set up a meeting with someone who can't check their email unless they stop working and sign off? The amount of time wasted in phone calls and visits to confirm meeting times was ridiculous.

SherryHeinze 2002.08.29

Maybe we should have a session on Desks, Rooms and Equipment to Amplify Your Effectiveness! Odd how people spend so much to avoid simpler, cheaper solutions.

I'm glad to report that I have seen environments where software and testing staff have the equipment and space they need. In those environments, people face other challenges - why isn't it done yet, we don't have time for that and other typical pressures.

- BeckyWinant 2002.08.30

What would you have in mind? Everybody dream up their dream working conditions? Mock-ups to try out? Cardboard / posterboard & duct tape & paper prototypes? Get Bob King involved in Peopleware architecture?

- BobLee 2002.08.31 B-))

Bob,

I like this idea. Perhaps people building a wish list and pricing it. Developing the pros and cons of current work space with any estimated costs, and then using this and priced wish list, transforming it into a management proposal. People could leave with something to discuss with managers.

- BeckyWinant 2002.08.31

Kent Beck says, "ExtremeProgramming begins with a screwdriver." I also like the discussion of muffling the phones in Peopleware. -- LaurentBossavit 2002.09.1

I see it now: Agile Furniture + bail bonding for cubical police busts!

"Don't move - we've got you cornered!"
"Nope, I've got a screwdriver, and I'm breaking out!"
"...I'm taking over a window!"
"I'm bolting in a new door."
"I've got all the bookshelves!"

-BobLee 2002.09.01

Updated: Monday, September 2, 2002