This from The Irish Times notes the response of the Chief State Solicitor's Office to proposals for open plan offices. I've got to preface this by saying I only once worked in an open plan office across the years, then in a very very junior position. I had no particular issue with it, I was only there on a three month contract, but I could well understand how some would dislike it. Anyhow, the CSSO offers some good reasons for why it may not be most appropriate for them:
"Open floors led to 'challenged concentration levels'", had "a 'battery hen' impact", resulted in difficulties for teamwork and made it more difficult to recruit staff, it warned.
"The CSSO remains of the view that an open-plan environment for legal staff would not meet our functional needs and the site visits to those major firms which have (exceptionally) taken this approach to date have not presented suitable models."
And surely this seems reasonable:
Among the reasons the CSSO opposed open plan offices, it warned that discussions between lawyers often involved confidential client details that could not be carried out on the office floor. While staff were subject to the Official Secrets Act, risk was lowered where the number of people knowing sensitive details of cases was limited, it added.
But there's a broader point that in many workplaces there's a need for confidentiality. The reason for open plan offices, as noted on this site a while back: Cost savings.
Jane Ruffino in the Business Post addressed this issue six or so years back noting that of all office approaches open plan is arguably the worst.
Mind you the CSSO's concerns seem to end at a certain level:
They said they wanted single offices for all staff with management roles, and cellular enclosed office space for 152 legal staff.
The CSSO said they would "accept" that other non-legal staff could be accommodated in suitable open-plan offices or multiple-occupancy workspaces.
No comments:
Post a Comment