No Laptop, No Phone, No Desk: UBS Reinvents the Work Space
nytimes.com
nytimes.com
> Inside, UBS has significantly reduced the number of individual offices, by about 40 percent. None sit against the windows, allowing light throughout the building.
They seem to be getting caught up in scandal after scandal every time some news about something shady going on in the financial industry, the first thing I look for in the article is the letters 'UBS'.
Maybe I'm being too negative/tin-foil-hat here.
Anything that needed a longer persistence had to be typed-up into a document and stored in Sharepoint, which was more manageable in terms of legal discovery than individual e-mails.
"So there is no paper in a Fed office. All the workstations are the same. You come in in the morning, pick one at random, sit down, and get to work. You could try to favor a particular station, try to sit there every day, but it would be noticed. "
I wouldn't be surprised if offices are doing that now too.
The whole point of the chapter is that if you want to work for the feds, you don't want to get noticed. Ever. Later in that chapter she mentions how you're just supposed to sit in the first unoccupied desk closest to the door. That also serves as a visual indication of when you got in to your coworkers.
> That also serves as a visual indication of when you got in to your coworkers.
This sounds like an excellent way to be noticed. If you don't want to be noticed, you need your actions to carry less information, not more.
I didn't bother replying to that part of your comment, because it was obvious that we were talking about two different things. There is nothing "natural" about the office seating arrangement. The management wanted to reduce the employees to interchangeable cogs. You don't have personal desks, and any attempt to favor one, to make it "your" desk was quickly noticed and frowned upon.
> If you don't want to be noticed, you need your actions to carry less information, not more.
If everybody else acted the same way as you did, the way that management favored, your actions carry absolutely no information at all except for the fact that you follow management's dictates. If everybody just grabbed the closest desk to the door that was unoccupied, nobody is giving up any information that they didn't already have to give up by following management.
You just specified that the accepted method of sitting reveals who arrived when. Sitting at random wouldn't do that.
That´s assuming of course that you want to keep the job. If you don´t, do whatever you like. They even had time guidelines on how long it should take you to read memos.
And I think you missed my sentence that you weren´t already giving up information that was required by management´s dictates.
It's a great story though. The first chapter is a work of transformative art. I recommend it highly.
After you (the general you) read it, there will be time for debating forehead tattoos as criminal justice, personal nuclear devices, and the role of mafioso in fast food. :)
Just writing this comment has made me want to read it again.
Back in the day during the SARS outbreak, a few investment banker types either came down with SARS or were caught up in the quarantine measures. The HK health authorities came in closed entire office seating sections (possibly even floors but I'm fuzzy on the details).
Imagine how the quarantining measures would work in an environment where people sat wherever. "Oh today, I sit north side 7th floor, but tomorrow south side 8th, but 2 days prior I was on 6."
Such chaos could easily prompt a building wide closure instead of an easily identifiable seating section.
That was over 20 years ago so I guess all lessons have been forgotten and we have to learn them again.
One interesting angle to this is arguably better security for the corporation as there are no USB ports on employee machines.
This prevents employees from making copies of corporate data or bringing malware on their USB flash drives.
I know that there's software that disables USB ports, but there are always exceptions or workarounds that are enough to cause an incident.
This also eliminates potential of data loss in case of hard drive failure/damage or theft of employee's computer as everything is on corporate servers where enforcement of backups is much easier than on actual computers.
You plugin your laptop in a docking station and start working.
I .. hate the idea and felt uncomfortable the couple days I stayed. This is definitely not new or UBS specific though.
It was unpopular, to say the least. Your personal belongings went into a pedestal on wheels that you could take to whichever workspace you wound up at that day. This was in 2000/2001 or so.
And they can be great. My work issue laptop is a Pixel 2 ChromeBook, and I love it. But that's mine, which I alone use (except when I lend it to someone), and the grease on the keyboard comes from my fingers.
That clearly doesn't work for the monitor.
(Not originally written as a Douglas Adams reference, but I suppose it sort-of fits.)
I can't imagine why office workers wouldn't mind typing in lengthy documents using an on-screen keyboard. /s
Desks are now like parking spots: first come, first served. When you log in, you get your own VM, not your own PC. So the placement and configuration may well be innovative in some way, but it would be a separate concept. You lose the ability to be special at all (prefer a trackball or ergonomic keyboard? Grossed out by that grey crap on someone else's--wait, your--mouse? Too bad, sucka!)
Digital nomads... but none of their digitals are nomadic. :)
What I found noteworthy is the lack of laptops. Nobody works from home?
Back in the day when we were featured in a news story I actually took the time to setup the scene (in advance) for the photographer that was sent over from the local big city paper. As a result he was able to get a great shot and the article was syndicated in 20 newspapers across the country. Was well worth the effort. Even had a ladder for him so he could get the shot from the top easily.
> UBS executives insist the shift is not all about costs. “I would be wrong to sit here and say there isn’t an economic efficiency dimension,” Mr. Owen said. “In and of itself, that’s not the reason to do it. It would fail on that basis. It has to be of value to our staff and our structure in the way we operate. There has to be a value there.”
Translation: It's all about costs and making employees absolutely replacable, only we're calling it "value addition" or some such nonsense. And what the fuck is an "economic efficiency dimension"?
And yet, somehow, the new thing in laptops is touch screens.
:(
We're back to normal seating arrangements.
It sounded perfectly horrible when I read it then as fiction, but reading it now as reality, I find myself filled with an unpleasant sensation of dread and loathing that well surpasses my previous response.
It might be needed for external information, but companies should start to think how to get it retired