I know. I know. It’s been a while. But we have been busy here at DEGW working on lots of innovative and interesting projects, so we will have more to blog about soon! In the meantime, here are some links to what we are reading around here. Don’t forget to follow us on Twitter and like us on Facebook!

Designing a More Work-Friendly Workspace
Entrepreneur Magazine By Katherine Duncan
Groupthink
The New Yorker By Jonah Lehrer
Facebook’s ‘Cool Space’ Campus Points to Future of Office Growth
Bloomberg News By Dan Levy
The human factor in service design
McKinsey Quarterly By John DeVine, Shyam Lal, and Michael Zea
In Tech, Starting Up by Failing
New York Times By Jenna Wortham
Less Space, More Green
Building Operation Management By Casey Laughman
Check Out The Swanky, Brand New Office Of Seamless 
Business Insider By Daniel Goodman
X Marks the Spot- Columbia’s Studio-X, a think tank with labs all over the world, may be a new model for design education
Metropolis Magazine By Ian Volner
In Data Deluge, Multitaskers Go to Multiscreens
New York Times By Matt Richtel

By Dinesh Acharya
Recently I attended the CoreNet  event in New York that explored “The Talent Pool & Real Estate: How the Workforce Continues to Drive Location Decisions”. The following blog stems from that discussion:

In today’s knowledge economy and with new ways of working, workplace location can be as important as workplace facilities, if not more so. An issue from a tenant perspective are matters of cost, convenience, corporate image and resiliency in addition to meeting the preferences of the next generation of workers, many of who value their lifestyle options as highly as their career options.

Combined with the increasing competition for talent globally, many leading edge companies are using their location, workplace and corporate cultures as key tools in recruiting and retaining the right people.

In response to this, regional hubs including but not limited to the greater NY and NJ, must continue to position themselves attractively from not only a financial perspective, but also in terms of accessibility (the ease, convenience and comfort with which people can travel to the workplace), amenity (people-related facilities such as food, retail, health, recreation, services and social interaction) and activity (the need for the workplace location to be secure and have a sense of vibrancy and buzz).

While location has always been an important consideration in premises selection, this has traditionally been predicated on the notion that all workers must come into the workplace to do their work. However this attitude is changing with the pervasiveness of mobile devices and the subsequent emergence of distributed and/ or alternative workplace strategies that enable location-independent working.

For those organizations that prefer all of their workers to come into the workplace all of the time, workplace location decisions will continue to have a tangible daily impact on workers and thus bare more weight, while those organizations that pursue flexible work practices reduce the burden of daily commuting and thus diminish the impact that workplace location decisions have on workers.

In the latter scenario, aforementioned tenant drivers of cost, convenience, corporate image and resiliency can actually be enhanced! Whatever the approach, it would seem that workplace location will continue to have meaningful and symbolic value in an increasingly virtual world.

By Jung Hoon Kim
The Learning Space Toolkit is an IMLS-funded project to develop a web-based collection of tools, references, and resources for planning, evaluating, and operating technology-rich informal learning spaces. The toolkit will enable campus administrators, space planners / designers, facility managers, and campus experts such as library and IT professionals to envision needs for space, technology, and services and then plan for how best to meet those needs.

We are conducting a brief survey of potential users to gather feedback on priorities for the tools we are planning to develop. The survey is organized by the six sections within the toolkit (Roadmap, Needs Assessment, Space Types, Services, Technology, and Assembly instructions), offering an opportunity to rate the importance of the content planned for each and let us know if anything is missing.

It will take approximately 10mins to complete and your input will be aggregated and anonymized, with your name/institution only used for response tracking purposes.

Take the survey here.

For more information about this project, please visit us at learningspacetoolkit.org

By Bryant Rice
I love whiteboards. Of course I enjoy eliciting, prioritizing, editing thoughts from colleagues or outside groups, but I also enjoy reading them. I think whiteboards are the pictographs of modern life. Lascaux modernized.

The institutional or corporate whiteboard (refrigerator magnets still seem to rule residential settings) can unlock the secrets of an individual or community. Multiple whiteboards, wall-mounted, panel hung or mobile, can provide insight to the zeitgeist of the building. They describe organizations, suggest processes, envision results, pose hypotheses. The use of colors, symbols, sizes and placements adds complexity to the description providing subtle clues to relative importance and effort.  The pentimenti of the whiteboard can also suggest topics or challenges that have endured or returned after some time non-documented.

White boards are optimistic. They suggest multiple solutions to any problem. If you can post it, categorize it, assign it and monitor it, things are eventually going to work out. And whiteboards encourage risk taking. That’s what erasers (or your fingers) are for.

So go take a walk around any office or school and try to read the white boards. Remember to not only capture the language, but take note of the dialect. They can tell us a lot.

By Paul Schuette
DEGW recently hosted a government roundtable in Washington D.C. It focused on Re-thinking Learning Environments: The Evolution of Education and Training in Government. It brought together federal government professionals to share and discuss innovations around where and how the federal workforce is learning and training today, and trends for tomorrow.

Roundtable presenter, Gus Crosetto, the Chief Learning Officer at the Government Accountability Office discussed Ed Schein’s model of the Three Tiers of Organizational Culture. Schein, a professor emeritus at MIT’s Sloan School of Management, describes the three basic levels of organizational culture to be artifacts, values, and assumptions.

• Artifacts are visible structures and processes of an organization and include all aspects of the physical workspace.
• Values are the espoused policies and procedures that impact to the workplace environment.
• Assumptions are deep-rooted feelings and attitudes within an organization that are taken for granted.

As a result, assumptions may or may not strongly correlate to the values of an organization.  While these three levels are often depicted as being distinct strata, Schein’s model is based on how these three strata align, influence and ultimately affect one another. Feedback is a crucial element to the dynamic aspects of the model.

Following Gus Crosetto’s presentation, Dr. Alenka Brown led a presentation on “human interoperability networks” within an organization that facilitate knowledge sharing.  A crucial aspect of her presentation was the concept of feedback, the ability for systems to adjust based on the behavior of users.  Dr. Brown described social knowledge interoperability as the ability for “participants to collaborate and manage a community through continuous feedback that is used to shape and extend features of a social knowledge network.”

The final presentations of at the Roundtable by Kevin Kelly and Michael Bloom of the GSA tie into the theme of feedback.  Both presentations shed some light on how distributed tools have the potential to influence the three tiers of Ed Schein’s model of organizational culture. In describing the Workplace Solutions Library  (a tool developed in conjunction with DEGW), Kelly highlighted the tool’s features enabling users to understand their own works patterns and how this could be optimized with a better alignment between mobility, interaction, and the physical environment.  As a result, the tool has the potential at a minimum to influence and better align the Values (overtly stated policies and procedures) and Artifacts (the design of the workspace) tiers of the model.

Michael Bloom’s presentation on the Sustainable Facilities Tool (SFT), a tool developed to provide sustainable building and workplace design guidance, built off of the ideas of social knowledge interoperability. In describing the future development of SFT, Bloom described how it could serve as a platform for knowledge sharing as well as the fact that the tool itself could eventually be continually improved via user feedback. In this instance, different Federal agencies and subject matter experts could use a social media platform to begin to gain a greater awareness of aspects of their own values and assumptions, at least in the realm of sustainability.

Ultimately, all of these presentations lead me to wonder how social media and distributed tools via Internet are allowing for Schein’s model to become even more dynamic. How do social media platforms used by subject matter experts allow information to be shared across organizations and thus facilitate continuous learning and adaptation? How do online tools that respond to user feedback help organizations create better alignments between cultural artifacts and values? Can these tools more easily highlight gaps between cultural assumptions and values?

By William Plunkett
DEGW recently hosted a roundtable event in Washington, D.C to discuss the changing nature of training, education, and learning in the public sector.  In a time when government agencies need to make every dollar go as far as possible, training programs are frequently at risk of being reduced or even eliminated.  Presenters and professionals from across the federal government were on hand to talk about how training is happening today and the trends for tomorrow.

• How can we leverage cross-agency collaboration?
• Are shared training resources helping drive government innovation?
• What have been the impacts of distributed teams on virtual learning environments?
• How are social networks and social media creating new models of education?

The day started with a discussion led by Gustavo Crosetto, the Chief Learning Officer of the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO).  He presented his latest thinking and experiences with learning, using a case study on how GAO recently incorporated a learning program on Diversity and Inclusion.  In shaping the discussion, Crosetto explored ideas surrounding transactional vs. transformative learning and how these different models impact learning organizations.

Next, Dr. Alenka Brown of National Defense University led a discussion about “human interoperability networks” and how social relationships are successfully (or unsuccessfully) mirrored in system networks in the Department of Defense (DOD).  She advised the way someone makes decisions is almost always the same way someone learns and emphasized the importance of recognizing the differences in the way people sort, prioritize, and process verbal, visual, and kinesthetic information.

Rosalind Bailey, the Chief Learning Officer and Director at General Services Administration (GSA) outlined her current efforts to integrate training programs, succession planning, and performance management to better support the knowledge network in GSA.  She shared that 15,000 people each year engage in training programs at the GSA.  It was striking in both Dr. Brown’s and Dr. Bailey’spresentations how they emphasized individuals and specific stories, even while designing and implementing programs for large-scale organizations like the GSA and DOD.

The afternoon saw examples of new learning tools in action.  Kevin Kelly a Senior Architect Public Buildings Service Center for Workspace Delivery at GSA presented the Workplace Solutions Library. He discussed the emphasis the tool places on interaction and how the use of a survey customizes the experience of the tool to the user.  In addition to how the virtual tool was conceived to be interactive, he described the characteristics of a successful in-person training session as well, highlighting participants internalize or “remember” things when there is a story behind it.

As the final presenter for the day, Michael Bloom presented the Sustainable Facilities Tool. He reiterated the importance of interaction in the tool and spoke about the evolution of the tool.  Revised content, additional new content, a mobile app, and connections with social media platforms have all helped the tool evolve and improve.

Three key messages from the discussion of the day were:

Diversify.

Think about who you are helping to learn.  How will they learn best?  Might it be verbally in person or through visual means? What motivates this individual or group? Where is the best location physical or virtual to conduct the training?  Does the knowledge and learning need to happen in a formal, structured manner or can informal platforms facilitate?  Are there other organizations that could benefit from the training or might have additional expertise?

Seek Feedback.

Learning is too often one-directional from instructor to trainee.  Incorporate feedback mechanisms both during and after activities.  Does the training have enough flexibility to meet everyone’s schedule?  Were topics applicable?  What were the expectations?  How were outcomes determined?  Has the learning activity delved beyond the superficial to meet real challenges of the organization?

Evolve.

Test what works and what doesn’t and do not be afraid to change.  Does the training need to start with the individual or with the organization?  How is information being received and can the delivery method be modified or improved?  Can training become continual and informal over time?

If you would like to be added to our invitation list for our events in New York, San Francisco, or Washington, D.C, leave a comment (your email will be kept private).

We hope to see you at one of our upcoming events!

DEGW wishes everyone a happy and safe holiday.

photo: Interior Design Magazine

By Katie Boothroyd
The UNWIRED WORKTECH11 Conference was held this fall at the new Nokia workplace in Sunnyvale, California. Many experts in their respective fields came to discuss and learn about topics including the future of the workplace and spatial considerations, what’s important for attracting and retaining talent, and how to “rationally” integrate virtual and mobile working into one’s work schedule.

This was my first time attending a WORKTECH conference so I wasn’t sure what to expect. Below are a few “take-a-ways” from the event:

The Space
The space consisted of retractable walls to create different sized spaces and opened up to the event reception area where food and information tables were placed. It was unfortunate there was not a tour as part of the conference, but there is more information about the Nokia office in an Interior Design Magazine article. I was on my way to the restroom and noticed a very interesting feature of the workplace– the IT department and Workplace team’s service windows. These windows are set up for employees get quick and easy IT assistance. What a great idea!

Standout Presentations

• Increasing Populations in Urban Cities- Dr. Hamid Shirvan, President, California State University, discussed the trend of increasing populations in urban cities and the blurring of urban and suburban landscapes. Companies are moving out to smaller cities to create their “place” and develop small suburban nodes or mini-cities where people can work and live.  People want and expect flexibility to work out of the office, says Shirvan, but still want to be able to get to the office with a short commute. His discussion hit home for me after a few recent trips to Pleasanton and San Ramon in the East Bay near San Francisco. What seems like a future “wannabe” Silicon Valley, towns around the San Francisco Bay Area are offering more reasonable commutes and standards of living.
• Crowd Sourcing Collaboration-I was especially intrigued as to how companies are (and are not!) using technology to change the way they work and communicate. Open IDEO gave a presentation about crowd sourcing collaboration to solve some major world issues. It would be interesting to use a similar platform internally for large virtual brainstorms or knowledge gathering. Broader and virtual collaboration is something we at DEGW are trying to improve upon. We are also testing many new methods and tools, and helping our clients improve their virtual collaboration.

• Virtual and Remote Working- DEGW is seeing this as a major issue with many of our clients. Our client, Dawn Birkett from Salesforce.com said it best: most people in the pilot group were already working remotely about one day per week, either at other Salesforce.com offices or from home. However, there was not consistency between groups or any way to measure who was participating and when. A flexible work programed called Flexforce, was created to provide support and consistency at Salesforce.com. I should also mention that DEGW had a hand in developing the program. Kevin Kelly, senior Architect at the GSA Workplace research group  also had insightful things to say about flexible working and telework. Although the trend is to provide more flexibility and choice of where (and sometimes when) employees want to work, Kevin’s talk was about “rational mobility”, meaning giving the flexibility to those it’s appropriate for. A Mobility and Telework Policy has recently been put in affect at GSA and according to the GSA’s blog they are hoping to serve as a model for other Federal Agencies (and hopefully have the help of Kevin and his team).

By Emily Golembiewski
Recently, I attended the Global Service Design Conference with colleague Katie Boothroyd, client Greg Petroff, our favorite service design drinks host Jamin Hegeman, and a host of other wonderful folks. The service design community is truly international, and it cuts across academic, public and private industries.

Jeff Pollard from McDonald’s opened the session by showing their ‘test lab’  which is a giant warehouse with several working scale mock-ups of kitchens. These environments allow them to test innovations in spatial design and service design, and to train staff members in a contained (but realistic) environment. How wonderful would it be to be able to have full scale mock-ups before committing to construction and build-out schedules?

After that presentation, I heard Peter Scupelli  from Carnegie Mellon University speak about ‘socio-ecological service design: integrated services for individuals, families, organizations and communities’. Yes, it followed the McDonald’s presentation and yes, it was about obesity education and prevention (cue the ‘Super Size Me’ irony now). He talked about reinforcing systems for personal change. I guess that’s a fancy way of saying that it’s hard to make healthful changes on your own, so obesity (and other health programs) should take into account the individual motivation, the family network, a community of support, and the influence of policy.

While these two presentations were very different, it was great to see problem-solving that took into account behavioral, personal, social AND spatial influences.

Finally, a major high-five to Brandon Schaeur’s ‘The Business Case For (or Against) Service Design’ who was able to step away from the seduction of tools, methods and the people side of things in order to leverage a cogent, rigorous analysis of the business opportunities in this community.

 Click here for more information

By Adam Stoltz
I find attending industry conferences incredibly valuable. This is important, especially considering the rising costs of registration fees, travel and those little bottles of water in your room that hotels try to sucker you into drinking. [Full disclosure: only most hotels do this; but the Downtown Phoenix Sheraton isn’t one of them… the water in my room was complimentary! Ironically, I drank none of it and will be expensing the over-priced water I bought from the lobby gift shop.]

The obvious value for me comes from meeting new clients, partners, friends, and checking out the competition. But my recent experience in Phoenix at IFMA’s 2011 World Workplace provided me with some valuable takeaways I didn’t see coming: All of us industry professionals need to do a better job at sharing the stories, knowledge and insights we have when speaking or presenting  a topic. Most of us, me included, aren’t good enough right now. At least, not as good as we could be. Our shortcomings tend to detract from the message and fail to live up to rising attendee expectations.

So, here’s what I propose:

Stop reading
Presentations today are made available online, either pre or post conference. As an attendee, simply reading me your presentation during the session leaves me wondering why I chose to attend instead of downloading and reading it in the comfort of my own home. Make me pay attention to you. Look at me in the audience, rather than the computer in front of you. Telling me something I could have only learned from showing up also gives me knowledge my co-workers can’t get – because they weren’t there. It makes me someone with something to share when I go back to the office. Now that’s value.

Make it personal
There’s personal and then there’s personal. I’m talking about the former. Tell me stories. But let’s avoid stories about your sick kid. Illustrate your points with examples. But not examples of what you learned during your divorce. Reference an organization, project or product you’re familiar with that reinforces the general point you just made. Show me why you were chosen over others who likely submitted to present on the same or similar topic. Oh, and please smile. Remember, it’s 8am and I was out at the CORT party last night too.

Be a facilitator
Sure it’s your session, and I know you spent a good deal of time putting together that presentation and talking points. But remember that I came to this conference with at least one issue, and likely more, that I’m dealing with back at the office. I have questions (whether or not I ask them). I’m interested in your, and also others’ answers. I want to hear from peers who might be dealing with the same thing. Treat me to a conversation … I’ll be more inclined to say ‘hi’ after the conference. And isn’t that really why we do to these things anyway?

If you’ve recently attended or presented at a conference and have thoughts, I’d love to hear them here. Let’s start a dialogue and challenge each other to just get a little bit better.

As for me and IFMA, see you in April in Chicago for Facility Fusion!