How to Decide Office Layout

Just as every new government reinvents the education system — small classrooms to large ones, cursive to print-only, “traditional math” to “new math” and back again — office blueprints change with each new leadership team, new owners, or the latest management fad. Open plan or private offices? Managers in cubicles with their teams or tucked behind doors? Light, airy spaces or cozy nooks?

Every choice has its own set of dilemmas.

Open or Closed: The Space Dilemma

Open-plan offices promise collaboration, accessibility, and save on real estate costs. But they amplify distractions: coughs and sneezes, echoing phone calls, or the relentless “quick question” which is never quick. Private offices give employees the quiet they need to focus, think, and even shed a few tears without anyone noticing. They also risk isolation and the perception that leadership has gone into hiding.

Then there’s the hybrid approach: small desks with “focus rooms” for private work. But who decides how long someone can reserve a room? And if someone hogs the good space near the window, are we starting a silent turf war?

Sometimes the building dictates the answer. In cities like Paris or Budapest, offices often occupy former mansions with soaring ceilings and huge windows. Not exactly ideal for drywall mazes. You can try carving up Versailles, but that’s how revolutions start.

Who Sits Where: The Window Dilemma

Windows bring light, health, and happiness — or at least more happiness than fluorescent despair. Charlie Munger once offered $200 million to build dorms without windows, believing students would socialize more in shared spaces. They did not. They were just unhappy but still alone in their rooms.

Windows are finite. Give them to senior staff, and you look hierarchical. Give them to juniors and you annoy loyal employees. Rotate window privileges? You’ll need a full-time Window Position Manager. Let early risers claim spots? Chaos. Some companies even have employees put everything on a trolley at day’s end, picking a new desk each day. Not very personal — though you can bring a few family photos to remind yourself of life outside work.

I’ve worked in offices where some desks were in hallways with zero natural light. Some say this motivates people to get promoted. I say it motivates them to leave.

To Have or Not to Have: The Office Dilemma

Offices traditionally signal seniority. I once visited a friend at a top investment bank. The managing directors lined the outer wall in tiny windowed offices; new MBAs sat in cubicles inside, with nearly all daylight blocked. It felt like prison — especially if you were working 18 hours a day, seven days a week. Surely as a society we can do better.

Some companies give offices to “high performers,” but if performance dips, will they rotate offices like musical chairs? The stress alone could increase attrition.

Together or Apart: The Collaboration Dilemma

Should managers sit in cubicles with their teams to encourage collaboration, or does everyone need an office to think? Some offices experiment with circular tables — everyone in a giant loop. It worked for King Arthur in medieval times, after all. Great for brainstorming, terrible for processing financial reports or writing a 12-page memo under deadline. Others go to the other extreme: walls, booths, fortress-like cubicles. Collaboration dies, hallway chatter disappears, and informal mentoring vanishes.

Consulting firms often split the difference. Senior staff get offices; juniors sit in pods. At my consulting firm before business school, we worked in groups of six with low walls. Easy to ask a neighbor for help — or for a post-work drink. Partners had glass-walled offices: wonderful for light, less wonderful for secrecy. One sharp-eared colleague stationed outside an M.D. office ensured we were never entirely uninformed. Principals had bigger desks but no offices. Thirty years later, I still have friends from those pods. Layout matters.

Function Versus Fun: The Distraction Dilemma

Tech startups love open layouts with ping-pong tables and communal kitchens — “creative chaos.” But constant interaction can lead to “collaboration fatigue,” burnout, or losing again at foosball.

How Much Room to Play With: The Cost Dilemma

Packing employees tightly reduces rent. Humans, inconveniently, require space to breathe and think. Especially if they’re working long hours and balancing families at home. Remote work complicates things further. Does it make sense to dedicate permanent desks to people who appear once a week? If you try to please everyone on space, you still won’t succeed, or your company won’t.

Even cubicle size matters. Is there room for a photo, a mascot, a drawer for confidential files? Or must employees parade to shared storage every evening to put away their work?

Maintenance of Confidentiality: The Oversight Dilemma

Financial firms prize privacy — client calls, trading decisions, confidential spreadsheets. Yet in open layouts, nothing is fully confidential. If there is a water cooler, there is information flow.

The Human Factor: The Same but Different Dilemma

People differ. Some thrive in noise and chaos; others need calm and quiet. Some need daylight; others prefer dim corners. Some love constant collaboration; others get anxious at a group brainstorm. What works for one employee can feel like torture for another.

Technological Needs: The Access dilemma

Modern offices must accommodate monitors, charging stations, video screens, and increasingly sophisticated tools. Hybrid schedules add complexity. Desk-booking apps help — until someone takes “your” seat and the Wi-Fi dies in the collaborative zone. Wireless has improved, but not enough for high-stakes trading or serious data work.

But Who are We: The identity dilemma

Layout signals culture. Closed doors whisper hierarchy. Open chaos shouts transparency — or lack of discipline. Windows and corner offices quietly announce importance. Plants, art, and color can reinforce creativity, calm, or focus. Even chairs matter: ergonomic chairs say “we care,” cheap plastic says “we don’t” — or “we do but we have no money.”

Leaders often design for themselves. One CEO thrives in open-plan buzz and assumes everyone else does, too. Another cannot function without a door. Then fashion rolls in: treadmill desks, nap pods, agile benches — and out again.

So what’s the answer?

Oh, if only it were so easy. As in life, little in the office is black or white. We all operate under a huge range of grays. Ask employees what they need. Account for individual and team preferences. Maximize light, and, if possible, fresh air. Above all, be transparent. Explain choices and admit there’s no perfect solution.

As for me, I’ve discovered that my brain prefers doors. I want the quiet space to think and create without distraction. Otherwise, I would have to wear headsets the whole time which defeats the alleged collaboration benefit. But earlier in my career, I loved having helpful neighbors either side to ask to borrow a cup of sugar or milk or spreadsheet modelling tip.

There is no universal answer. Offices evolve with leadership, culture, and technology. The art lies in balancing collaboration with concentration, light with privacy, flexibility with stability — and remembering that people are not identical components in a floor plan.

After all, a well-designed office isn’t just about desks, chairs, or walls — it’s about helping people do their best work, feel valued, and enjoy showing up every day. And that, ultimately, is the whole point.

Janet Lewis Matricciani is a two-time CEO who has worked all over the world and is multilingual, now sharing her business lessons publicly. She is a regular contributing writer to this magazine and can be reached at jlmatricciani@gmail.com. Click the link to see more of her articles.