113

Senior management at my company are talking about possibly introducing hot desking*, which might be introduced at the same time as an office move planned in a few months. The new location will be large enough to accommodate the company size; there will be enough desks for everyone, space is not a problem.

What problems does hot desking strive to solve, apart from not having enough desks?

Does it actually solve those problems?


*From Wikipedia: "Hot desking is an office organization system which involves multiple workers using a single physical work station or surface during different time periods. The "desk" in the name refers to an office desk being shared by multiple office workers on different shifts as opposed to each staff member having their own personal desk."


Update

Etiquette is: I select only one answer, but several answers here answer this question; there are several other excellent answers.

PunkUnicorn
  • 1,082
  • 2
  • 8
  • 14
  • 36
    Why do you think hot-desking strives to solve any problem apart from space utilization? – Bernhard Barker Oct 29 '18 at 16:30
  • 9
    Does senior management plan to also participate in hot desking? If they are or are not participants affects the how quickly "problems" are solved. – chux - Reinstate Monica Oct 31 '18 at 05:11
  • 3
    I think desk sharing is a more common term (Maybe 'regional'? I've never heard of hot desking) and understandable without having to look it up. –  Oct 31 '18 at 10:07
  • 2
    @JanDoggen To be fair, it's a fairly well-established term in the English-speaking working world. I've never heard of "desk sharing" so this may be a term specific to your locale, and perhaps others with which I am not familiar :) – Lightness Races in Orbit Oct 31 '18 at 10:26
  • Given the consensus on your question is "Only a few very specific situations, other than space utilization (which you say is a non-problem in your company)", you may want to rephrase the question "What is the impact (pros and cons) of hot desking?" – smci Nov 02 '18 at 13:34

17 Answers17

153

Hotdesking doesn't solve any problems, no matter whether the office is too small or not.

I've worked at a company that had 20-40% fewer seats than employees. Battles for chairs cost us (and company...) plenty of time. It was a drama. The most important part of the day was ensuring you had a chair.

Your company is probably expecting to grow. This could explain why they want to introduce the system now.

Or maybe they just want people to "network more". But that's not the way to achieve that.

AndreiROM
  • 49,631
  • 26
  • 124
  • 186
BigMadAndy
  • 22,894
  • 15
  • 43
  • 99
  • 20
    If the company believes that many of their employees are out on call, remote, or occasional office visitors, then they might believe they are reducing the footprint of the office space, by having desks to accommodate the attending employees, without reserved desks to accommodate the unlikely to be present employees. The problem is, at times when all hands meetings are held, you have too few desks under this plan for your employees. – Edwin Buck Oct 29 '18 at 15:23
  • 17
    @EdwinBuck, in the case of occasional office visitors, it's still better to have a few seats reserved for "occasional visitors" than make everybody fight for seats and take all their things with them every evening because some people aren't in the office most of the days. – BigMadAndy Oct 29 '18 at 15:28
  • 5
    I didn't have to read past "Hotdesking doesn't solve any problems" to agree. As good as the intentions might be for the company, I have yet to meet someone in person who found it a positive experience in the long run. Perhaps there are industries where there are more part-time workers where it actually does solve some problems? –  Oct 29 '18 at 15:56
  • 1
    "Battles for chairs cost us (and company...) plenty of time" - that's just bad management. Hot desking can certainly resolve the problem of having less seats as long as there's a mechanism to report when people work from home to ensure that people who come in have a desk. – UKMonkey Oct 29 '18 at 16:01
  • 2
    @UKMonkey: We had such a mechanism. But still, many people seem to decide in the morning whether they will come or not. Also, the company didn't calculate the number of seats we needed appropriately. There were simply not enough seats for everybody. – BigMadAndy Oct 29 '18 at 16:03
  • 67
    @Kozaky I didn't have to read past "Hotdesking doesn't solve any problems" to disagree and to think that this is a poor answer to a good-faith question specifically seeking to identify what problems it does solve. It might introduce more issues than it solves and specific implementations might be a net negative for a company (as with this answerer's experience), but in my opinion this isn't a good Answer to the question. – WBT Oct 29 '18 at 16:49
  • 13
    Just make them all standing desks. Boom, chair problem solved. – GalacticCowboy Oct 29 '18 at 16:57
  • 3
    Answers like these are what gets people to close questions as opinion-based. Please be specific: list things hot-desking might be expected to solve, and explain why it doesn't. Just stating a verdict is useless for helping people form an informed opionin. – reinierpost Oct 29 '18 at 17:07
  • 1
    @reinierpost: no, opinion-based questions make people write opinion-based answers. I've seen questions about advantages/ disadvantages, risks, red flags, closed on here. – BigMadAndy Oct 29 '18 at 17:08
  • @385703: they do, but IMO the problem is usually with the answers. – reinierpost Oct 29 '18 at 17:13
  • 1
    @WBT taking your line, the only answer to "what problems does it strive to solve" is "We have no idea what problems the guys who proposed it are striving to solve" and to "does it actually solve these problems," "I would happily bet my own money that it won't, even when I don't know what it is intended to solve". – alephzero Oct 29 '18 at 19:50
  • 1
    This seems more like a rant because you didn't perceive it as solving any problems at your place and it apparently was inadequately handled than a well founded answer. – Frank Hopkins Oct 29 '18 at 22:34
  • This should not be the most upvoted answer to the question just because it's the first one in the default sort. – WBT Oct 30 '18 at 00:08
  • @WBT True, hence why I said I merely agreed rather than think this should be the correct answer, and too why I'm curious to see if there are examples of workplaces where it is of obvious benefit to employees as well as the company's wallet. –  Oct 30 '18 at 08:13
  • 3
    This does not answer the question as asked, and it disappoints me (though does not surprise me) that it's so highly upvoted. – Joe Oct 30 '18 at 16:29
  • 1
    So based on your personal experience of how many jobs where hot desking was standard in how many different industries can you decide that it cannot possibly work in all situations? What if we're talking about an international organization where the vast majority of employees work from home and only meet for specific scheduled meetings? Why would having 90% empty chairs all year round be an improvement in such a situation? – Voo Oct 30 '18 at 20:14
  • 1
    Although I agree it's not a good policy, saying it "doesn't solve any problems" because A) it has downsides, and B) it didn't work at your office, isn't a very sound answer. If you've got more detailed reasons as to why you think this, you might want to consider adding them to your answer. – Lord Farquaad Nov 01 '18 at 21:04
104

I am not a fan of the hot desk principle, but here are a few reason why people might be for it:

  1. Tidier working area. If people can't keep their belongings at their desk, the desks are typically clutter free
  2. Fresh perspective. Some people actually think differently when they are moved around. I don't, but I know people who claim where they sit affect them
  3. Collaboration with new people. Depending on your field, this may encourage to work with more people than before and it could cause a rise in productivity

Again, I am not for hot desking; these are just reasons I have heard in the past.

padd13ear
  • 103
  • 1
SaggingRufus
  • 14,961
  • 9
  • 51
  • 64
  • 7
  • Smaller office space (eg 20% less chairs than people with the 20% working from home) requires hot desking.
  • – UKMonkey Oct 29 '18 at 16:02
  • 6
    @UKMonkey that is correct, but OP asked for reasons other than that – SaggingRufus Oct 29 '18 at 16:03
  • I agree totally with this one. I'd only also add that it can be useful for organisations spanning several offices when organising meetings if there aren't any dedicated meeting/board rooms in said office. –  Oct 29 '18 at 16:51
  • 61
    Re #1, that isn't solving a problem. For many people, it's creating one. If my desk isn't "cluttered", I am not working effectively. – jamesqf Oct 29 '18 at 16:59
  • 3
    @jamesqf depends who you ask. I know a lot of manager that would disagree. I personally keep a very messy desk (and I find it effective for me at least), but I know managers that would rather it be tidy and have used this to help with that – SaggingRufus Oct 29 '18 at 17:08
  • 51
    @SaggingRufus, what managers "want" and what is productive for individual employees are sometimes at odds... – CramerTV Oct 29 '18 at 18:08
  • 11
    @SaggingRufus: But the purpose of managers is to hinder individual productivity. See e.g. "The Peter Principle", or innumerable Dilbert cartoons :-) – jamesqf Oct 30 '18 at 04:19
  • +1 for #3 - if your work is done in dynamic teams that change from week to week or project to project, then being able to move and all sit together easily can be a big advantage for collaborating. (The flip side to this is having to spend 20-60 minutes trying to track down that elusive person who's been procrastinating over giving you a critical update you need to finish your work!) – Chronocidal Oct 30 '18 at 08:10
  • @SaggingRufus OP asked if it solves it... to which the answer is yes... in that it is the only method short on entire wfh policies that allows more people than desks. Adding it to the list is just another way of saying "yes" imho. – UKMonkey Oct 30 '18 at 10:25
  • @jamesqf If my desk isn't "cluttered", I am not working effectively. - we must differ with our definitions of "clutter" and/or "effective". – ESR Oct 31 '18 at 03:20
  • 2
    @ESR it probably depends on the work you are supposed to do. As a software developer I normally don't work with papers nor any equipment other than a computer. Therefore everything on my desk is just private stuff and a cup of coffee - it's there to build my zone and help me focus. – ElmoVanKielmo Oct 31 '18 at 10:38
  • Disagree with the idea of tidier desks. You run into the tragedy of the commons. It's no one's responsibility, so clutter accumulates. – Rob Crawford Oct 31 '18 at 20:23
  • @ElmoVanKielmo: As a software developer myself, I certainly do work with papers - and manuals, textbooks, &c. It's often much easier to use them, even it the same material is available on-line (which it sometimes isn't). But then work habits are an individual thing: just ask anyone who expects anything coherent from me before 10 AM at the earliest :-) – jamesqf Nov 01 '18 at 02:26
  • @RobCrawford Tragedy of the commons likely doesn't apply because an office is not an unregulated area. Company might establish rules that enforce cleaning up after one's done with work. Yes, this can start to feel like kindergarten. No, it's probably not going to make a comfy work environment for everybody. – MauganRa Nov 01 '18 at 12:37
  • @MauganRa And, at the point, the particularly good people get fed up and go elsewhere. Making an unpleasant work environment in software development is generally not a good idea. – David Thornley Nov 02 '18 at 22:42