Ethan Bernstein

Why don't open offices engender more face-to-face collaboration--and what should managers do about it? Long-time friend @bwaber and I try to answer those questions in our latest HBR (in the Nov-Dec issue). Let us know what you think! @HarvardBiz hbr.org/2019/11/the-tr…

When @StephenTurban, @bwaber, and I published our research on the downsides of open offices, @emollick said it might be the final nail in the coffin. Maybe what it really took was @nytdavidbrooks's pen & wit. The Immortal Awfulness of Open Plan Workplaces nytimes.com/2022/09/08/opi…

Thank you, @emollick, for a perfect, eloquent summary of my new @ASQJournal article with @ErinLFrey and Nick Rekenthaler about rehabilitation through #transparency and #personalnarrativecontrol!!!

The Scarlet Letter works, sometimes: a military academy made people who broke rules wear a pin. This both empowered & rehabilitated the transgressor, since, rather than be shunned, they were asked about the pin, & could tell a story about how they changed. journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.11…

It was a joy to write this @HarvardBiz article with @ethanbernstein & @yanche. hbr.org/2022/01/how-co…

hbr.org/2022/01/how-co… If tech will make things redundant, why not replace things we don’t like—overly matrixed coordination, red tape bureaucratic processes, command-and-control decision-making — vs those we do (human colleagues)?" @yanche @corp_rebels @HarvardBiz @HarvardHBS

We are very excited to announce the release of 'Get Better at Flatter' by Prof Markus Reitzig. In it, you'll learn when flat structures work, and when they’re a bad idea for #business. Order or download your copy now: bit.ly/3AoNHnO

Such a pleasure to have joined @KellyCNBC on @CNBCTheExchange as we talked about 'The Great Resignation' and 'The Great Attraction' -- and how a human-centric (versus organization-centric) approach to career "progress" might address it. cnb.cx/3zeKM0m

A nation "devolving into children." 'We can’t yell at Covid so we yell at people who are trying to help us' @sarahlyall & @ethanbernstein joined @SRuhle on the state of anger in our country right now - and its impact on our labor force. msnbc.com/stephanie-ruhl… via @msnbc

@vanishingcorp @terrigriffith @nytimes Please let me know when the DL version is available--like @terrigriffith, I can't wait to read (and cite) it!

Do Chance Meetings at the Office Boost Innovation? There’s No Evidence of It. Thank you @nytimes for using @ethanbernstein research rather than opinion. buff.ly/3h0hU38

@ariegoldshlager @OpsProf But you raise a very good point, and I agree that just because there isn't data doesn't mean we shouldn't look (hard) for it!

@ariegoldshlager @OpsProf It means that I'm not aware of data that the content of conversations born of "random serendipity" is productive for organizational purposes (as opposed to discussing sports outcomes, Netflix episodes, office gossip, etc). So should it justify ending Work-From-Anywhere policies?

@bwaber @scotthaylon @ellenchisa @natematias @zanmuny and (2) to achieve engineered serendipity, don't we have better technologies than the "water cooler"... and aren't many of those technologies effective remotely such that "water cooler conversations" shouldn't be an excuse for managers to force employees back to physical offices?

@bwaber @scotthaylon @ellenchisa @natematias @zanmuny When I said that *random* serendipity might not be productive, it was in contrast to engineered serendipity (to quote Jackie, Karim, et al). So here are the two questions I have for you: (1) if engineered serendipity is more productive for content, why should random be the goal?

It's so pervasive that it never occurred to me that there was no research behind the water cooler idea 😳 nytimes.com/2021/06/23/ups… (@ethanberstein would be cool to add an MHC case on unique aspects of remote work!)

@bwaber @scotthaylon @ellenchisa @natematias @zanmuny Happy to weigh in. @bwaber, we've done too much work together for me to ever say that social structure is not affected by proximity. You are correct that Claire's focus was on whether the *content* of water cooler conversation was productive. I'm still looking for that evidence.

@vanishingcorp @terrigriffith @nytimes And if engineered might be better (and tech allows for successfully engineered serendipity), then should water cooler conversations be the excuse managers use for refusing to support Work From Anywhere policies?

@vanishingcorp @terrigriffith @nytimes Of all the people in the world, there is no one I would rather be proven wrong by. That said, Claire's focus with me was on the *content* of water cooler conversation, not how water cooler conversation might affect social structure and therefore innovative capacity of the org.

@vanishingcorp @terrigriffith @nytimes So here's the question: is "random serendipity" our most productive option, or is "engineered serendipity" (which is much more possible with the technologies we've adapted to over the past 15 months) perhaps better?

@klakhani @inaganguli @mattsclancy @LISHarvard Don't you think there is a difference between the value of serendipitous F2F interactions in your context vs. in an ordinary, physical office space that employees are forced to return to post-pandemic?

@klakhani @inaganguli @mattsclancy @LISHarvard @klakhani, as you know, I love that paper (that I saw from early draft to final publication). In my interview with the NYTimes, I distinguished between the office and other settings (like offsites or a medical research symposium)--her focus was on a return to physical offices.

Wait, what? @klakhani!