Skip to main content

Cheap Desk – Expensive Chair

I think Joel was the first I heard this sage advice from – you can live with a cheap desk, but you need an expensive chair.

Yes, I too want that really impressive desk in the corner office. But day-in and day-out what I need is a really expensive (read well designed) desk chair. What is the cost ratio of desk to chair? Where is the sweet spot? I’d really like to find this data and see a plot.

So let’s talk about the desk/chair issue, wants versus needs. I need a desk that meets my needs. At SolutionsIQ we have arrived at a desk that allows us to pair program (it is wide enough), to arrange and rearrange in minimum of time (about 2 hours max for a team of 7 – 12 people), to move a container (the desk) not items to a new container (personal items to a new cubicle), all for around $800 – $1000 per desk. It has met the needs of hundreds of developers for years now in the development bays of our office. They are not perfect (no built-in personal sound system) but they are very functional!

How about the chairs? Well they are sufficient – not the Aeron chair, I’m going to estimate the cost at $200. Sure they have up/down adjustments, some back tilt, etc. But I have to sit in those things for 6 to 10 hours a day. The longer I sit there the lower my energy levels drain, because the human body was not designed to sit, although we have adapted quite well thank you.

That’s a 5:1 ratio for desk to chair. Is that following the advice given?

At home we have a $300 TV set (hard to call it an entertainment system) and a $700 couch, where we spend a great portion of the rest of the day. A 3:7 ratio. OK, yes we have a really cheap TV, but it appears we are putting our money where our butt rest! My wife and I are discussing upgrades – to the couch not the TV! Yes, we want a flat screen/big screen but my back hurts more.

Last week James Shore talked at SolutionsIQ about the four qualities that differentiated a great team from a good team, and in the discussion of team space he gave the example of his office space. He changed it from the traditional furniture spread out around the premiter of the room to a space that was more efficient but looked kinda funny, furniture grouped into the center of the room. It was an enjoyable talk/group discussion.

Speaking about smart chairs – did you see the video of a robotic chair (from Cornell) that when it falls apart can put its self back together again?

My father builds furniture and I have a desk chair that he made, jointly designed by us in the Sam Maloof style. So I know a bit about chairs, some of it passed down the family line, some from experience.

See Also:

How the Universally Hated Cubicle came to Be by Joseph Stromberg


2 comments

Most Popular on Agile Complexification Inverter

Exercise:: Definition of Ready & Done

Assuming you are on a Scrum/Agile software development team, then one of the first 'working agreements' you have created with your team is a 'Definition of Done' - right?



Oh - you don't have a definition of what aspects a user story that is done will exhibit. Well then, you need to create a list of attributes of a done story. One way to do this would be to Google 'definition of done' ... here let me do that for you: http://tinyurl.com/3br9o6n. Then you could just use someone else's definition - there DONE!

But that would be cheating -- right? It is not the artifact - the list of done criteria, that is important for your team - it is the act of doing it for themselves, it is that shared understanding of having a debate over some of the gray areas that create a true working agreement. If some of the team believes that a story being done means that there can be no bugs found in the code - but some believe that there can be some minor issues - well, …

Elements of an Effective Scrum Task Board

What are the individual elements that make a Scrum task board effective for the team and the leadership of the team?  There are a few basic elements that are quite obvious when you have seen a few good Scrum boards... but there are some other elements that appear to elude even the most servant of leaders of Scrum teams.









In general I'm referring to a physical Scrum board.  Although software applications will replicated may of the elements of a good Scrum board there will be affordances that are not easily replicated.  And software applications offer features not easily implemented in the physical domain also.





Scrum Info Radiator Checklist (PDF) Basic Elements
Board Framework - columns and rows laid out in bold colors (blue tape works well)
Attributes:  space for the total number of stickies that will need to belong in each cell of the matrix;  lines that are not easy eroded, but are also easy to replace;  see Orientation.

Columns (or Rows) - labeled
    Stories
    To Do
    Work In P…

Webinar: Collaboration at Scale: Defining Done, Ready, and NO.

I was invited to participate in a Scrum Alliance Webinar.  Maybe you would like to listen to us in a discussion of techniques to collaborate at scale (remotely and with many people).  The topic is one that I've got some experience in discussions - yet I never seem to get to done...
Collaboration at Scale: Defining Done and Ready and NO for Distributed Teams
With Joel Bancroft-Connors, Agile Organizational Coach; David A. Koontz, Agile Transition Guide; and Luke Hohmann, CEO and Founder of Conteneo, Inc.


14 February 2018 11 a.m. ET (USA).




The Scrum Guide is pretty clear on the criticality of the definition of Done: "When a Product Backlog item or an Increment is described as "Done," everyone must understand what "Done" means. However, the Scrum Guide ALSO says that the definition of Done can "vary significantly per Scrum Team." This leads us to examine when and how the definition of Done should vary, how distributed teams should cr…

A T-Shaped 21st Century Knowledge Worker

Knowledge workers in the 21st Century must have many areas of deep knowledge, while also be capable of collaboration across multiple other domains with dissimilar T-shaped individuals.  This description of a person is a metaphor.  Compare it to the shape of the "I" in the classic saying there is no "I" in Team.


I first read about Scott Ambler's term "Generalizing Specialist" - but it's so hard to remember the proper order of the words... get it backwards and it has an inverted meaning... T-Shaped is easier to remember. 
A generalizing specialist is someone who:
Has one or more technical specialties (e.g. Java programming, Project Management, Database Administration, ...). Has at least a general knowledge of software development. Has at least a general knowledge of the business domain in which they work. Actively seeks to gain new skills in both their existing specialties as well as in other areas, including both technical and domain areas.  General…

A FAILURE to Communicate

I was working with a failing team some time ago.  I use "failing" to describe the outcome of the team - not the people on the team.  Are you OK with that description?



An issue arrose in the stand up - a team member that was to verify the quality of a procedure did so and reported that there were a few records that didn't match expectation in the data set.  Upon inquire the number of records not matching was over 2000.  Most people acknowledged immediately the exaggeration - I could tell by the laughter.  After about 10 minutes of discussing the details of the problem - it appeared the team had a handle on the specific situation.

I stopped the discussion and inquired if they could name the impediment.  One team member did a great job of describing the impediment as a _communication gap_.  Wonderful - I could work with that - the problem had a name and it didn't include anyones Proper Name.

"If the problem has a first name; we are going to have a problem."

I&#…