Why We’ll Still Be Going Into The Office

A while back, there was a piece in New York Times bout the future of the city where the writer suggested that despite technology that allows us to live and work miles from one another, we’ll still cluster in cities because of the way the environment encourages the sharing of ideas. We’re reminded of that […]

A while back, there was a piece in New York Times bout the future of the city where the writer suggested that despite technology that allows us to live and work miles from one another, we’ll still cluster in cities because of the way the environment encourages the sharing of ideas. We’re reminded of that article when we read a piece by Lane Wallace over at the Atlantic. In this piece, the author uses a similar argument about why we’ll still be drawn to congregate in an even more micro-environment, namely the office. Wallace says that there’s just no substitute for face to face contact with people, no matter how much new technology we develop:

While one could argue that the above connections could be made in sporadic meetings, not requiring an office, remote communication doesn’t nurture the same level and quality of “hey, what do you think about this idea” casual, quick collaboration that physical proximity allows. It’s far tougher to be creative in a vacuum … or even within the constraints of separate locations. Convenience, access, and physical energy and synergy all matter.

The Daily Dish | By Andrew Sullivan

[img via unixville]

Comments

Quantcast