Comments on: Contrary to popular belief, edgy carpeting doesn’t make ideas better.

by: G.B. Veerman

Tue, 03 Apr 2007 22:24:28 +0000

This is such a great subject (Schenck brough it up on his blog a while back: http://eschenck.typepad.com/ernie_schenck_calls_this_/2005/09/can_an_office_m.html) .

Tom, your angle is one of the fresher I’ve hear on the question: it’s about the atmosphere of open-mindedness — a very human dimension that has little to do with the architecture.

That said, my take (which you can read on the Schenck post) is that work space is studio space; a place to accomodate ideas, not inspire them. Also, your space says something to your external audiences. What do you want them to hear?

Luke’s point about space that kills ideas is totally on — unless you’ve been places like Intel or HP, which are architecturally soulless grids of gray cubes. But the people who work there share that “atmosphere of open-mindedness” — read: a creative culture — that let’s them reinvent technology every few months….

by: Tom Monahan

Mon, 19 Mar 2007 11:42:56 +0000

To Luke’s point, yes, changing an environment is a way to stay fresh creatively. I don’t know if it would guarantee it, but change certainly gives one different stimulation. I will say, personally, in regards to writing this blog (if this can be considered a creative exercise), I get some of my best ideas while traveling. Different environments can cause diverse perspectives, can inspire different thoughts. At the moment I just finished driving nearly 600 miles from the Pittsburgh airport, having been stranded there for a couple of days by USAir, in the wake of bad weather. I had dozens of ideas along the way (the steering wheel of my rental car had a couple of dozen stickies on it when I turned in the automobile), about half were blog topics. I can recall how many were inspired, by this song on the radio, by that roadside landscape, or by a passing vehicle. You want a changing creative environment? USAir can help.

by: Gary Bloomer

Fri, 16 Mar 2007 00:37:04 +0000

Remember Michael and Elliot from the mid ’90s TV show, Thirtysomething? They ran the Michael & Elliot Company, a sort of ad shop crossed with a not doing anything kind of design studio. And although I recall the interior of their office being hip and trendy, they declared bankrupcy for a simple reason: they never did any work.

I’ve seen the interiors of self-proclaimed wacky design studios and ad agencies where the staff sported loud colors and crazy, happy-go-lucky, hip-dude attitudes without producing a great deal of work.

I’ve also seen the interiors of plain offices with white painted walls and desks make of solid core doors and filing cabinets where the staff are engaged in the process of solving design problems.

My observation? Less is more.

OK, so having a splash of color is a fine thing, but the thing that matters most is the interior design inside your problem solver’s head rather than the jaunty nature of his or her office decor.

by: lukeMV

Thu, 15 Mar 2007 13:11:05 +0000

Tom-

Although I agree that space, color, and texture may not have anything to do with helping people be more creative, but is it safe to say that it may help people NOT be more creative? I think that a detriment to creativity, in regards to environment, is lack of change. Being in a fresh-vibrant environment for years would yield the same emotional disconnect as being stuck in a Mecca of off-grey cubes—although I, personally, think that I could survive longer in a funky space. Simply changing, rotating, (disassembling) these grey cubes would, at least psychologically, help people feel as though they aren’t stuck in a stagnant ecosystem. After all, a fish will die if its water is never changed—whether it’s swimming in a stark glass bowl or swimming around a castle and plastic plants.