The Office Move and the Open-Plan Noise Complaint
A software company moves 120 engineers from private offices into an open plan with 48-inch bench desks and glass meeting pods. Six weeks in, a pulse survey shows a 22-point drop in 'ability to concentrate,' and three teams have asked to work from home full time. Facilities proposes white-noise generators and a heads-down policy. Engineering leadership proposes relocating the noisiest team, the sales floor, which shares the same open area, at a cost of $60,000. The company asks you to recommend the single best intervention.
1. Diagnose the concentration problem using human-factors principles, and evaluate the three proposed interventions.
Read the worked answer
The survey result is a classic open-plan speech-privacy failure. What degrades concentration most is not overall sound level but intelligible speech, because the brain involuntarily processes meaningful words. Co-locating a sales floor, which is by nature high-volume and phone-based, with engineers doing focused work creates continuous intelligible speech exposure. The 48-inch benches also reduce the distance and barriers that would otherwise attenuate speech.
White noise helps by masking speech, but it addresses the symptom and adds its own load; it does not restore privacy for confidential calls. A heads-down policy depends on compliance and does not change the acoustics. Relocating the sales floor removes the dominant source and is the only proposal that changes the underlying exposure. At $60,000 it is the highest-cost option but also the only one with a durable effect.
Recommend the relocation as the primary intervention, with acoustic treatment and a defined quiet zone as supporting measures. Note that the full-time work-from-home requests are a signal that the environment, not the employees, is the problem.
2. Leadership asks whether the productivity loss justifies the $60,000. How do you build the case, and what would you measure afterward?
Read the worked answer
Build the case on the exposed population and the measured symptom. A 22-point drop in concentration across 120 engineers is a large, quantified effect on the company's most expensive resource. Even a modest per-person productivity loss multiplied across 120 people and a full year dwarfs $60,000, and the three teams requesting full-time remote work represent retention risk that is more costly than the move.
Present it as avoided loss, not as a benefit: the current layout is already producing the loss, and the relocation stops it. Pair that with the cost of the alternatives, which are cheaper but do not address the source, so leadership sees they are buying a partial fix.
After the move, re-run the same pulse survey on the same cadence so the comparison is valid, and add an objective measure such as focus-block completion or meeting-room booking for confidential calls. Set a review date and a success threshold in advance so the decision is evaluated on evidence rather than impression. Document the recommendation and the outcome.