Comment by glitch | Hacker News Reader

Comment by glitch | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

The stairs maybe singularly interesting as a novelty or curiosity, but to gain better perspective, you'll want the stairs, hallways, entry/exit-ways, etc.

If you can gather data of human traffic flow around the workplace in all sort of spots, you can then analyze that data to gain perspective on that flow. And it's not so much of the obvious patterns, but maybe those that didn't seem obvious (until hindsight after the fact). Proximity and placement of different facilities (printing/copying facilities, toilet facilities, lounge/kitchen facilities) within the office space can lend to different interactions or even wasted time.

And, of course, one can casually observe and make qualitative observations. But those qualitative observations may not necessarily be impartial nor rigorous in their recording. To avoid subjectivity and anecdotal evidence, quantitative evidence through raw data recording aids in eliminating potential subjectivity.

Based on this, you may choose to layout the office space differently. Or when choosing a new office, you may better know certain attributes you're looking for in a space.

For example, Pixar's centrally located toilet facilities intentionally shape traffic flow with the intent of increasing interactions among employees for facilitating potential conversation and discussion.

As shiftpgdn mentioned, another example seen often is stairs vs. escalator/elevator usage for encouraging subtle, healthier choices. The counter, when displayed publicly for those respective areas, can serve as a mechanism for real-time, interactive feedback to the observer. Confronted with this reminder, it may coax them a little, giving them the little mental kick to use the stairs instead.

Maybe you determine that if you put an appropriately shaped obstruction — e.g., a wall with a sign of company logo — carefully placed immediately in front of the entryway, it may result in better flow through the that area. Notably, it might encourage people to not stop in the doorway, blocking; but rather proceeding further into the lobby area to converse.

Although more of a larger crowd thing in this example, studies have been done in this area and have demonstrated such results: http://www.americanscientist.org/science/pub/strategically-p...

Related reading:

"Handbook of Positive Behavior Support" by Sailor, et al.; "Behavior Supports in Nonclassroom Settings" chapter, "Features of the Physical Environment" section (page 499).

"Office Planning and Design Desk Reference" by Rappoport, et al.

But how do you know which interactions are useful to your business and which are not? How do you the right amount of flow through an area? What about the things you can't measure, but may matter to the health of your workers? I still don't see how knowing stair steps in isolation will generate any valuable insight.

It's probably what the other commenter said. Trying to motivate people to use the elevator less

> But how do you know which interactions are useful to your business and which are not? How do you the right amount of flow through an area? What about the things you can't measure, but may matter to the health of your workers?

For most people, using their experiences throughout their life as a perspective. Once you get into a new workplace, you can use those years of experience as a basis for perspective relative to the observations of the new workplace. For a lot of people, their intuition makes this kind of thing obvious once they start looking at the data and look around casually in the workspace with note of looking at the people, their movements, and what they're doing. It's the kind of thing that after working at a new place for a week, I already would have a solid feeling and a useful perspective — not just from the new workplace, but comparing that new workplace based on my experience of other workplaces that I've worked in, consulted for, and otherwise visited.

But, there are formal studies on human interactions in the business workplace addressing all three of these questions. I don't have particular citations of interest off-hand.

> I still don't see how knowing stair steps in isolation will generate any valuable insight.

Strictly empirically speaking, it doesn't really. However, this set data from one location combined with observational perspective of the people within the space, could easily lead to more informed conjecture and related hypotheses.

However, the novelty of the single location data set may be as useful distraction; to serve as an element introducing "fun" and "amusement" into the workplace at acceptable levels of "fun" and "amusement". (There are studies on this, as well. This information can serve as a device to break monotony and a "humdrum" atmosphere. You can employ other devices as well. For example, free soda can be used as a device. Whether or not that device works effective and the full consequences (positive & negative) is beyond the scope of this simple comment.)

If you want to pursue this beyond typical intuition, I recommend taking human behavior studies in psychology with respect to interior design and architecture.

This goes beyond just traffic flow, but incorporates other aspects of the environment and its influence on humans.

However, you don't need to have academic training to be useful. Many people have the intuition to reasonably and appropriately make observations, analyze, and comment on their surroundings.

But, on the more academic side of things, here are some quick and dirty Google search results. Random examples of literature in ballpark of this field in an assortment of contexts:

A Homely Approach is Paying Dividends for Patients and Staff. (2012). Nursing Standard, 27(2), 20-21.

Rydeen, J., Erickson, P., & Lange, J (2008). Built for Brains. Industrial Engineer: IE, 40(3), 32.

Joye, Y. (2007). Architectural Lessons from Environmental Psychology: The Case of Biophilic Architecture. Review of General Psychology, 11(4), 305-328. doi:10.1037/1089-2680.11.4.305

Read, M., & Upington, D. (2009). Young Children’s Color Preferences in the Interior Environment. Early Childhood Education Journal, 36(6), 491-496. doi:10.1007/s10643-009-0311-6

Moore, G. Architecture and Human Behavior: The Place of Environment-Behavior Studies in Architecture. http://sydney.edu.au/architecture/documents/staff/garymoore/...

Cummings, N. Fostering Sustainable Behavior Through Design: A Study Of The Social, Psychological, And Physical Influences Of The Built Environment. http://scholarworks.umass.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=20...

Esmaili, Y. Consideration Of Human Behavior In Designing A Green Office Space For Environmentalists A Simulation Study. http://architecture.arizona.edu/sites/default/files/faculty_...

I'm very interested in the studies on how people interact with their workspace. Thank you.

But you admit, the data can only inform our intuition. Perhaps with more datapoints, and a rigorous platform for testing, we could use stair data to improve the workplace. But just giving us stair data doesn't make us any smarter. I'd say it makes us dumber. It creates a distraction. It makes us think we know more than we really do. It tempts us to see the problem in terms of stairs, when maybe the problem lies elsewhere (or maybe the stair steps are meaningless).

Such is the innate aspect of data gathering and analysis. The more (relevant) data, the better. (What determines relevancy is not discussed here for brevity.)

Partial data will only serve as a distraction if you allow it to. EDIT: If you falsely present partial data as important, yes, then it very well probably is distraction because by you are facilitating it to be a distraction by virtue of presenting thusly. As consciousness, you should try to be aware of inappropriately disproportionately presented data expressed by others in your environment and to not let it serve as a distraction to you as an observer. For example, Fox News and how it goes about its interactions displaying information (true information, false information, incomplete information, etc.) with the masses is a popular subject for case study in this type of scenario.

If you are aware that it is an incomplete picture, then you should be fine. Again, the more data, the better. Be aware of limitations and incomplete pictures. Be aware of context. Same old story of much everything in life. Always be exploring further. Always keep on questioning what's happening in the environment and the universe. Ignorance is bad. Of course, balance is needed. Pros are something that exist. Cons are something that exist. Things exist. Actions exist. Interactions between things and other things with actions exist. Systems of interaction exist. It's turtles all the way down. But yes, based on history, most humans fail at comprehending their own basic existence, their interactions with others, and anything else contained within their neck of the universe. Rather depressing actually. Nothing new here.

EDIT: As far as what belongs or doesn't belong on a dashboard, that would take a long time for me to discuss. In this particular example provided in the original posting, yes, it has various flaws. Not discussing that.

Also, with regard to "the more data, the better", yes, irrelevant data has negative consequences and must be dealt with accordingly. Of course, the a perspective exists where you should try to identify irrelevant data and not gather it to begin with. Conversely, there is a perspective where you should gather it all so as not to presumptuously exclude and that the data itself will tell you what is relevant and irrelevant during analysis. Both approaches express certain positive merits and also negative qualities. Identifying what is irrelevant and what is relevant has its own intricacies which are not discussed here in any relatively significant capacity.

Partial data will serve as a distraction if you present it as important. I'm saying this doesn't belong on a dashboard. Granted, they just did this for fun.

The more data the better - That's not true. Some data is better than others. Some data is poor quality. Some is unimportant.

> Partial data will serve as a distraction if you present it as important.

If you ascribe to the importance of its display, then you are allowing it to be a distraction as an observer of the display. But, yes, in practice I agree that most humans are foolish and will allow it to serve as a distraction.

> I'm saying this doesn't belong on a dashboard. Granted, they just did this for fun.

Maybe or maybe not. There are definitely good reasons for removing it from the dashboard. I agree that it is not presented well. Outright permanent removal of the vague notion and concept of this particular data and its relevancy is a different matter. Exploring alternative presentations, getting more sensors and more relevant data, etc. (This is of course stating the obvious.) But I'm not really commenting on that at this time.

> The more data the better - That's not true. Some data is better than others. Some data is poor quality. Some is unimportant.

This is often debated with vigor on both sides (okay, there's actually a gradient of n-dimensional in-betweens, not explicit sides) of the argument. (Collect it all and figure out relevancy from analysis, then scale back data collection where it was determined to be irrelevant. Be presumptuous based on experience and collect only what you believe is relevant. Expand and contract collection periodically as something in-between. The list goes on and on and on and on of possible configurations and approaches.) Of course some data is better than others. Some data is more relevant than other data for a given operational context. And, yes of course, besides just relevancy, fundamental things like accuracy, precision, and error are all aspects of data collection and analysis. But, back on topic, both sides of the argument have merit. The reality is, like all things in life, there is a pragmatic balance point. (Not necessarily a point, though. In reality, usually an n-dimensional volume, but that's another topic.)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com