SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Submitted via IRC for chromas
Workers in open-plan offices are more active and less stressed than those with desks in cubicles or private offices, research suggests. This could be because they make the effort to find privacy to talk away from their desk, the researchers said. The US study used chest sensors to track movement and heart rate in hundreds of people in different buildings over three days.
The potential health benefits should not be ignored, they said.
But they said the study was observational only and factors like location of stairs and lifts could be at play too.
The University of Arizona study, published in Occupational & Environmental Medicine, claims to be the first to measure activity and stress in office workers, rather than asking them in a survey.
It said office workers tended to be a sedentary group compared to other workers, making them more likely to have health issues, including heart problems, tiredness and low mood.
Being less active during working hours has also been linked to greater feelings of stress. In the study of 231 office workers in government buildings in the US, those in open-plan offices - with no partitions between desks - clocked up 32% more physical activity than workers in private offices and 20% more than those in cubicles.
And those who were more active had 14% lower levels of stress outside the office compared to those who were less active.
Source: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-45247799
(Score: 3, Insightful) by urza9814 on Tuesday August 21 2018, @04:20PM (8 children)
4) It's harder to stuff additional people into a cube. With "open plan offices", you can have one long desk designed to seat six...and then a month later it seats 8, and a month after that it seats 10, and pretty soon you've got people straddling filing cabinets all day long because what used to be one desk with a filing cabinet under each side has now become three desks.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 21 2018, @05:13PM (7 children)
Reminds me of a new hire we had once. We told facilities and HR we needed a new person. HR got on it right away, but facilities kept dragging their feet and then finally told us that they couldn't do anything until the person was actually hired. We hired the guy and IT provisioned their equipment, but certain secure things can only be accessed if you are connected via Ethernet. And because everyone claimed the various breakout and conference rooms, his "desk" was a file cabinet near the corner, as that was the only place near the rest of us that could reach all the necessary connections.
A few days in, VP was giving the SVP (who is actually a cool guy who knows what he is talking about) a tour and generally schmoozing and the SVP saw the guy in the corner working away. After inquiring about the situation and being greeted by excuses, the SVP said, "So let me get this straight. You think it is good management practice have a guy literally working on a filing cabinet for 2 months while you wait for a desk because facilities is too slow and people are too territorial? Tell you what, if I come back tomorrow and you can't find a way to resolve this by then, I'll show you how to manage a situation. But, and this is just a suggestion, you could give the poor kid one of your desks. [pause for 5 seconds or so] Wait, how many did you show me you had to 'maximize efficiency'? Six?" And then he just walked away.
Well, what do you know, we show up the next morning and the new hire has a desk, and it wasn't one of the VP's six! FWIW, the VP has a convertible corner desk, a convertible second desk forming a pentagon with the first desk, a treadmill desk, a breakout room on permanent reserve, and a sitting desk and standing desk in different areas of the floor.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 21 2018, @06:18PM (6 children)
What's an "SVP"?
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 21 2018, @07:13PM (1 child)
Companies learned long ago that if you give people a fancy sounding title, then they will take less money due to the prestige. So our hierarchy goes like this: Chairman of the Board; Vice-chairs of the board; the board; the President; 5(?) C*Os (e.g. CEO, CFO, CTO, COO); the ~15 SEVPs (Senior Executive Vice Presidents) of a specific area, such as accounting, or facilities, or legal; then comes the countless EVPs (Executive Vice Presidents) of whatever; SVP (Senior Vice Presidents) of whatever; VPs (Vice Presidents) of whatever; GMs (General Managers) of whatever; Seniors (as in Senior Job Title), (this level just uses the job title); and, finally, juniors (Junior Job title).
Hope that clears things up and helps illustrate how job titles in Corporate America are on a giant euphemism treadmill.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 21 2018, @07:31PM
Oh, and fun fact. I'm a "General Manager" despite the fact that I have evaluation powers over nobody. It is literally the next step up from my last job as a Senior. They don't even ask me how my secretary is doing (sorry, I meant my Senior Legal Assistant, Compliance). Instead, she reports to the Senior Vice President of Legal Paraprofessionals.
(Score: 1) by pTamok on Tuesday August 21 2018, @07:17PM (1 child)
SVP = Senior Vice-President
VP = Vice-President
They are predominantly American (USA) titles that indicate the relative position in an office hierarchy. SVP outranks VP.
'C-level' indicates someone on a company's board - like Chief Executive Officer (CEO), Chief Information Officer (CIO), Chief Financial Officer (CIO)
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Tuesday August 21 2018, @08:06PM
EVP = Executive Vice President
(I happen to have the ear of one of those, and on occasion it is a good thing.)
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 2) by TheGratefulNet on Tuesday August 21 2018, @07:42PM
senior vice president
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
(Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Tuesday August 21 2018, @08:55PM
Lots of people have answered this correctly, but I think they're all a little bit wrong too.
After working at a massive US-owned multi-national for a few years now I think a Senior Vice President is someone who once ran a part of the business, and was promoted into a role he (or she) has no clue about and in the intervening time lost any insight into the part of the business they did understand.
They then travel around the company asking irrelevant questions about things they don't understand and starting expensive and pointless projects that do nothing useful until they're found out and "retire".
At least that's how we do it.