
The task you have set provides a unique opportunity to do things differently, and perhaps better.
A project of this magnitude would, of necessity, require at least a month or two of lead time, given the need for notice on leases and financing etc. In the real world it would be unlikely to occur with “a week’s notice”.
The first question to be addressed is: “how is the current situation working?” The ONLY way to find out is by asking the people you are proposing to accommodate. They will be more than willing to tell you.
There will be some natural division of the business into “teams” of people working in complimentary areas.
Set up, or suggest, self-selection of the people into teams of about 8. They are told that this is for the purpose of designing their new premises. Sizing these teams at approximately 8 people is based on the long history of group therapy. Within a group of 8, people do not feel that they are too conspicuous. There is enough of a critical mass of variations in personality and intellect to allow a ready flow of ideas. The size of this group also makes it very difficult for any one or two people to dominate proceedings.
These teams are asked the following questions:
These teams will then be asked to discuss these questions in a manner which they devise, and to report back within a reasonable time frame. As these are such important questions they might well choose to do this during work time. They will probably self select a chair person, whose role will be to run their meetings. Either way, one person should report back to the design committee which makes the final decisions.
The whole idea of this process is to have the intellect of 90 people working on the problem. They should have a master floor plan to work with.
This might seem, superficially, to lack the decision-making speed familiar to traditional hierarchical management. However, if I have a major question to address, I would much rather have the intellectual fire power of 90 people “on the case” than half a dozen.
You will discover that this all happens very smoothly provided the “end users” are left to get on with the task. The extra benefit is that people working on this will feel like they have been appreciated and will “own” the result, having contributed to its creation.
After accumulating the team’s answers to the above questions, I would predict some consensus on major issues. It is likely that they would prefer accommodation which allows for free exchange of ideas and easy contact with colleagues, whilst maintaining a sense of individual space and privacy. Informal work contact is usually facilitated by having communal areas where people meet to eat, relax, have coffee etc.
As a result of the above process you should now be armed with a very specific brief for the designers to follow.
Of necessity there will be some compromises, given the issue of expense of setup. It would surprise me if people were not aware of this. If people are asked for their opinion rather than handed a fait accompli, they will be more willing to compromise.
When first drafts of the floor design are complete they should be shown to the teams. This increases the chances of some major error or omission coming to light.
If these longer-term considerations do not take precedence over short-term cost cutting, the fate of many open plan offices awaits; decreased productivity, increased interpersonal conflict, increased staff turnover and increased rates of stress induced medical problems.
In business, short term expedience is often a compelling force. However, in something as important as people’s workspace, a longer term, more carefully considered view will pay huge dividends.