The nature of the business drives the necessities of the workplace

We work efficiently and at our optimum if we have everything we need. Most people however will still be able to manage some work, even in an uncomfortable or uninspiring space, as long as they have the basic resources to carry out their work. I am curious to the difference between the working environments of both the ‘business world’ and the creative professions. After trawling through interviews, articles and images of both the typical office space and the very varied design studio, I am beginning to understand why these professions have such different working environments.

An example of the progression of needs of a typical office worker:

- Much easier to work on a flat surface: need a desk
- To be able to sit at the desk: need a chair (preferably swivel to spin in & out of cubicle easily)
- Bit odd for this desk & chair to be outside: need a building (for arguments sake, an office)
- Due to moving indoors causing a reduction of natural light: need a desk lamp
- Most offices will have more than one floor, Dave on floor 4 has a message: need a phone for inter-departmental conversations
- Customers, contacts or a communal office message about the boss’s leaving party: need to read emails, which in turn creates the need for a computer (along with mouse & keyboard)
- Keep my desk clear of papers and client files: need a filing cabinet
- Keep my desk clear of scattered stationary: need a desk tidy
- I miss my family during long hours at the office: need a family photo

Just like that, I have become a typical grey suit office worker.

What, where & how do you need to work?

If you are an artist, it is vital to your work that you be surrounded by the appropriate and needed materials and subjects, it could be argued however that an artist may thrive with limited materials, for example pencil and sketchbook as long as they are in environment that stimulates and inspires them, beyond any range of paint, pastels and canvas’s ever could.

The same could be said for a teacher, if she has no board to write on and no books to teach with, is it possible that with the correct amount of preparation of the information beforehand and a class of pupils willing to listen & learn, she is able to make more of a difference than a worn-out teacher in a well supplied school with pupils who care less about the lesson and more about what’s for lunch?

These examples however are extreme and in most cases, a balance is most effective. Also, it completely depends on the individual, especially for people in the creative profession as so many different things will inspire different artists and designers. As for teachers, a room full of pupils will always contain a mixture of those willing to learn, and those not.

Networking products

I had an odd realisation after talking to one of my lecturers, and something that I must quote her on: "the thing that 'networked' most of you guys in the studio was the crossbow".

A while back I bought a small crossbow that fired foam darts and brought it to the studio at uni. Within a few days, there were drinks cans hanging from the light fittings cord, drawings of animals to be 'hunted' on the walls and other various targets to be shot from varying distances. Everyone from lecturers, to the camera man from a newspaper (who had came to take photos of the group and the winner(s) of a recent competition with dundee uni and a live client) had a shot of the crossbow.

But all good things come to an end and during my feedback session for my hand-in, I was asked (told) to take the crossbow home that day. Residing back in edinburgh until it is reassembled and taken to the studio of my masters course, the crossbow really did 'network' the group.

...Though only for a brief period as the balance of work/play had to be restored. Could design ensure this balance? Would the crossbow have been allowed to stay if it worked for 5 -10 minutes every hour? A mechanism that would work for the same length of time it would take to boil the kettle and fix yourself a brew?

And how about a football that deflated before and after lunch, ensuring that up until and after your 1 hour kick-about, you and your colleagues would have a productive days work.


- "To all managers": if you feel that your team needs a break, or that your office water cooler can only keep staff energized for so long, try buying several crossbows (pictured below) to give your colleagues the boost they need. (under a tenner from most online toy/games websites).

Body language in business

I've been looking into how body language can make an impact in the office/workplace, and how what you're saying to another collegue could be completley different to what you really mean, which can be unhelpfully given away through the involuntary movements of your body.

Most people have heard that eye contact can show an interest in a conversation, that a smile will relax a group of people, but I also looked into how a simple thing like a sigh or a yawn could be a sign that someone needs some help, or at least some coffee... a gesture in itself which would probably be more helpful that reading books on "how to improve your body language".

A thought did occur, should people read info on how to ensure other people that we are interested in what they are saying or that we like them? Should there be so much time spent on something which is not always backed up with the truth? The dynamics within a workplace start as early as when we are in primary school - you dont talk to the geeky kid because then you will be viewed "uncool". Similarly kids will avoid the boring one in their class because that person simply is not interesting enough. The best, or at least most important part of our actions when we were young was that there wasnt such emphasis placed on the pretence of a smile or an 'open arms' approach: if we didnt like the boring kid, we would tell (s)he very bluntly.

Though, because (most) adults dont have that guilt & conscience free nature of their younger years, we must try to match our body language to what our mouths are saying (a few examples below).

Self-directed Project

To give me an initial direction in the project, I was told to choose 3 words from 9 - Inclusive, Networked and Living (including elements of working & playing). I felt that inclusive design as a practice was something that I wanted to experiance as I had previously written essays on examples of good inclusive design and wanted to back it up with some practical work. 'Networked' was really a follow on from 'Inclusive' as I wanted my final design to be something to bring people together... in the workplace? Or somewhere else? This question essentially choosing 'Living' as I could include both a work & play element to the project.

"Creaive solutions to the water crisis" (from the same Rawsthorn article in the post below)

- Some of them are being tested at Z33. Hanging outside the building is Rain Catcher, a giant raindrop-shaped device developed by the Spanish designer Jordi Canudas to add rainwater to the drainage system. Taking pride of place in the garden is Pig Toilet, an experimental dry sanitation project devised by the Dutch artists Atelier Van Lieshout. It combines a pigpen with a human toilet, the contents of which are eaten by the pigs, rather than being flushed away and wasting water.

- More conventional (and less stomach-churning) proposals include the LifeStraw, a $5 portable device invented by the Swiss company Vestergaard Frandsen to purify water as it is sucked up through a straw. Another is the Aquaduct, a concept tricycle developed by the American design group IDEO, which carries water, and purifies it using a mechanism started by turning the pedals.

(info taken from http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/08/09/style/DESIGN11.php?page=2)

All of the solutions that are being tested are possible and could work for sure, but you also wonder that during the process of the solutions how much water was used? Or is it similar to "you have to spend money to make money", you have to use water to make water?

I was skimming through the "objectified" blog the other day and saw a link to an article by Alice Rawsthorn about "creating solutions to a water crisis". This caught my attention because I saw another article a few days before about 'water being the new oil'. It talked of how much water a single person uses in one day through consumption, and if we keep heading this way then we could see a similar situation to the oil crisis arising.

Another important point being that you can choose to not use your car, but obviously you cant choose to not take a drink.

"Some 70 percent of the earth's surface consists of water, but only 3 percent of it is freshwater, and less than a third of that (the 1 percent in the exhibition's title) is drinkable. The amount of water we consume is increasing, whereas the supply of freshwater is static, which is why it's running out. More than a third of the world doesn't have enough water, and the situation is worsening." (http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/08/09/style/DESIGN11.php)

This quote kind of sums it all up. There isnt enough water for all our needs, or at least there wont be very soon..... shit. It seems that the more we expand and develop as nations/businesses/people, we produce more and more waste and use things that will someday run out. In our defense, when u look at the world and its statistics (70% of surface, water) you wouldnt think that water would be one of the things to run out. As we develop, the word "Renewable" seems to be getting more important.

We all have basic needs, shelter/food/water, that we need to survive. Though what the article talks about is the wastage during these necessities. For example, the water that comes out of your taps is drinkable, yet you use that water for washing the dishes, washing your hands, running a bath, brushing your teeth, watering the plants, etc. What if the water you needed for other uses than consumption was not drinkable, if this was the case, then the wastage would be less.

One of the main wastages of water that the article points out is sanitation. Britain and lots of other countries have wet sanitaion systems, but dry sanitation systems do work and can and have been used before.

"It sounds disgusting, but it works," said Crawford. "In the 19th century there was a vigorous debate between the advantages of dry and wet sanitation systems. The urgh! factor is the reason why wet systems won, but dry sanitation was a perfectly workable solution."