Basic elements for a definition of coworking

I totally agree with Alex L. about Open not being a requirement. We have chosen the path of being dedicated to the creative business and I think our members appreciate being a part of a community where everyone can find some synergistic benefits. Importantly, we consider the creative business to include both creative professional entrepreneurs and businesses who want to buy their services on a project basis, operating in new more collaborative models. We believe our mission goes beyond space and services to actually creating a better marketplace for the creative business - for everyone's benefit.

K-

The space totally irrelevant. Members that never show up, even. Pure sense of belonging. Fascinating, indeed. But not coworking.

Alex: For the purposes of our coworking definition “open” means the coworking facility will consider anyone within their target segment as a member, make it easy for anyone within that segment to apply and has a membership process such that anyone within the target segment could potentially be accepted as a member . It does not mean they have to accept everyone who applies.

I left out “target segment” in my post to save space, but should have included it. The reason we include “target segment” in this definition is because of the growing number of vertically oriented coworking spaces. These spaces, like Katherine’s, are focused on members from a particular industry and because of this exclude people who don’t fit in their vertical. We consider these open as long as their membership process allows anyone from the vertical to be considered.

Your example - “fill out your info and maybe we’ll let you work here if we think you’re a good fit based on our criteria which we can’t/don’t publicly disclose” - is nicely chosen because it’s both tricky and highlights the subjectivity of this criteria:). We exclude facilities we consider “invitation only”. I think this would exclude many (but not all) of the spaces that would fall under your example.

We would also exclude any facility we felt discriminated unfairly against any group. Fortunately, we’ve yet to see an example of this.

But we give spaces broad latitude in terms of who they accept as members. If a space has an application process that looks open and a membership that appears to have been chosen somewhat openly, we would consider them open even if the membership decision criteria are murky. This is, obviously, subjective based on our view of the space’s process.

The good news, at least so far, is this “if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck” approach to coworking has worked. But we’re the first to admit it’s not comprehensive, doesn’t work in all cases and is subjective. Also, the rapid hybridization of coworking means things are changing very fast - making any definition questionable in terms of accuracy.

That’s why threads like this are so useful.

Steve

The duck reference reminded me of one of the other times the “define coworking” conversation happened, and Raines brought rubber ducks to SXSW for us. :slight_smile: mine still sits on my desk, and reminds me of that time.

Susan

···

On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 10:29 AM, Steve King [email protected] wrote:

Alex: For the purposes of our coworking definition “open” means the coworking facility will consider anyone within their target segment as a member, make it easy for anyone within that segment to apply and has a membership process such that anyone within the target segment could potentially be accepted as a member . It does not mean they have to accept everyone who applies.

I left out “target segment” in my post to save space, but should have included it. The reason we include “target segment” in this definition is because of the growing number of vertically oriented coworking spaces. These spaces, like Katherine’s, are focused on members from a particular industry and because of this exclude people who don’t fit in their vertical. We consider these open as long as their membership process allows anyone from the vertical to be considered.

Your example - “fill out your info and maybe we’ll let you work here if we think you’re a good fit based on our criteria which we can’t/don’t publicly disclose” - is nicely chosen because it’s both tricky and highlights the subjectivity of this criteria:). We exclude facilities we consider “invitation only”. I think this would exclude many (but not all) of the spaces that would fall under your example.

We would also exclude any facility we felt discriminated unfairly against any group. Fortunately, we’ve yet to see an example of this.

But we give spaces broad latitude in terms of who they accept as members. If a space has an application process that looks open and a membership that appears to have been chosen somewhat openly, we would consider them open even if the membership decision criteria are murky. This is, obviously, subjective based on our view of the space’s process.

The good news, at least so far, is this “if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck” approach to coworking has worked. But we’re the first to admit it’s not comprehensive, doesn’t work in all cases and is subjective. Also, the rapid hybridization of coworking means things are changing very fast - making any definition questionable in terms of accuracy.

That’s why threads like this are so useful.

Steve

Visit this forum on the web at http://discuss.coworking.com


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups “Coworking” group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected].

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

… the rapid hybridization of coworking means things are changing very fast - making any definition questionable in terms of accuracy.

That’s why threads like this are so useful.

(Steve)

Very useful indeed, for analysing the “things” in and around coworking. One important such thing being this “openess” vs. “invitation only” dicotomy (scale?) Another fundamental thing is of course the “community”, or sense thereof. I suspect a general definition of coworking is impossible, but nevertheless understanding the “basic elements” is essential.

[Whatever we do w.r.t. a definition we must avoid equating coworking with community (for example). Coworking is a fuzzy balance of more than one thing. A single thing is of course the thing. Community is a single thing, and already has a name: “community”! This aside is in connection with the other subthread, about members of Les Satellites (?) that never show and just want to “belong”.]

Let's hear it for you definition Randy!

Let's hear it for you definition Randy!

Re: “clients” vs. “members”.

I would definitely agree on the philosophical distinction. Essentially,it’s trying to tease out whether the space exists to build a community (“members”) or to earn a margin on real estate (“clients”). This is an important dichotomy, but it’s also strictly false as we all exist on a sliding scale between these two extremes.

I don’t think we want to start to see “client” as a dirty word…at a nice restaurant the clients will be on a first-name basis with staff, have a special table, regular meal selections, and even Christmas cards in the mail (and may even be called “patrons” to distinguish the relationship), while at McDonald’s “clients” are a mass of impersonal and transactional relationships.

I find myself slipping interchangeably between terms when talking about The Office, because as a coworking space manager and business manager I have to think both in terms of building and strengthening our community (“membership”) and in terms of making the numbers work and communicating with potential partners and investors (“clients”). When I’m thinking in terms of investment and expansion, I intellectual categorize “members” as “clients”…this is often sub-conscious and I used to even feel ashamed when I realized that I had done it, but I wonder if this is really such a horrible thing. Because, when I think about why I do what I do and the people I work with and for, I think of “friends” and “members”…

What do you think?

  • Jon
···

On Friday, 12 September 2014 13:15:23 UTC+2, Alex Hillman wrote:

In my opinion a coworking space – being a community of coworkers – always calls and treats its coworkers members.


I like this one a lot!!

-Alex

I think a general definition of coworking is entirely possible

I chose poorly the word “general”, sorry. I meant something else, to be discussed when I find the right words.

Incidently, I have just proposed a definition on the hyphenization thread.

Jon, I do as you do. They are members of a community and at the same time they are clients. They pay for a service, not only for belonging.

···

Ramon Suarez
Serendipity Accelerator, Betacowork
Author: http://coworkinghandbook.com
email & hangouts: [email protected]

Phone: +3227376769

GSM: +32497556284

Twitter:http://twitter.com/ramonsuarez
Skype: ramonsuarez

Try coworking: http://betacowork.com

On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 11:58 AM, Jon Stever, The Office RW [email protected] wrote:

Re: “clients” vs. “members”.

I would definitely agree on the philosophical distinction. Essentially,it’s trying to tease out whether the space exists to build a community (“members”) or to earn a margin on real estate (“clients”). This is an important dichotomy, but it’s also strictly false as we all exist on a sliding scale between these two extremes.

I don’t think we want to start to see “client” as a dirty word…at a nice restaurant the clients will be on a first-name basis with staff, have a special table, regular meal selections, and even Christmas cards in the mail (and may even be called “patrons” to distinguish the relationship), while at McDonald’s “clients” are a mass of impersonal and transactional relationships.

I find myself slipping interchangeably between terms when talking about The Office, because as a coworking space manager and business manager I have to think both in terms of building and strengthening our community (“membership”) and in terms of making the numbers work and communicating with potential partners and investors (“clients”). When I’m thinking in terms of investment and expansion, I intellectual categorize “members” as “clients”…this is often sub-conscious and I used to even feel ashamed when I realized that I had done it, but I wonder if this is really such a horrible thing. Because, when I think about why I do what I do and the people I work with and for, I think of “friends” and “members”…

What do you think?

  • Jon

On Friday, 12 September 2014 13:15:23 UTC+2, Alex Hillman wrote:

In my opinion a coworking space – being a community of coworkers – always calls and treats its coworkers members.

I like this one a lot!!

-Alex


Visit this forum on the web at http://discuss.coworking.com


You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups “Coworking” group.

To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/coworking/Tvf2gg-WZ5w/unsubscribe.

To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to [email protected].

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Based on your responses I’ve got this:

  • Calls itself a coworking space.

  • Has a fully dedicated space for coworking (not just a few hours or a cafeteria shared with patrons).

  • Has an active community of members, not just clients.

  • Has a facilitator dedicated to connect the members and build trust among them, engaging in activities to build the coworking community.

  • Treats coworkers as 1st class clients.

  • Promotes and encourages collaboration, interaction and serendipity.

  • Offers one or many kinds of membership (full or part time)
    I did not know how to phrase the open/closed part.

What would you add, remove, change? Be specific :slight_smile:

···

Ramon Suarez
Serendipity Accelerator, Betacowork
Author: http://coworkinghandbook.com
email & hangouts: [email protected]

Phone: +3227376769

GSM: +32497556284

Twitter:http://twitter.com/ramonsuarez
Skype: ramonsuarez

Try coworking: http://betacowork.com

On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 5:29 PM, Ramon Suarez [email protected] wrote:

Jon, I do as you do. They are members of a community and at the same time they are clients. They pay for a service, not only for belonging.

Ramon Suarez
Serendipity Accelerator, Betacowork
Author: http://coworkinghandbook.com
email & hangouts: [email protected]

Phone: +3227376769

GSM: +32497556284

Twitter:http://twitter.com/ramonsuarez
Skype: ramonsuarez

Try coworking: http://betacowork.com

On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 11:58 AM, Jon Stever, The Office RW [email protected] wrote:

Re: “clients” vs. “members”.

I would definitely agree on the philosophical distinction. Essentially,it’s trying to tease out whether the space exists to build a community (“members”) or to earn a margin on real estate (“clients”). This is an important dichotomy, but it’s also strictly false as we all exist on a sliding scale between these two extremes.

I don’t think we want to start to see “client” as a dirty word…at a nice restaurant the clients will be on a first-name basis with staff, have a special table, regular meal selections, and even Christmas cards in the mail (and may even be called “patrons” to distinguish the relationship), while at McDonald’s “clients” are a mass of impersonal and transactional relationships.

I find myself slipping interchangeably between terms when talking about The Office, because as a coworking space manager and business manager I have to think both in terms of building and strengthening our community (“membership”) and in terms of making the numbers work and communicating with potential partners and investors (“clients”). When I’m thinking in terms of investment and expansion, I intellectual categorize “members” as “clients”…this is often sub-conscious and I used to even feel ashamed when I realized that I had done it, but I wonder if this is really such a horrible thing. Because, when I think about why I do what I do and the people I work with and for, I think of “friends” and “members”…

What do you think?

  • Jon

On Friday, 12 September 2014 13:15:23 UTC+2, Alex Hillman wrote:

In my opinion a coworking space – being a community of coworkers – always calls and treats its coworkers members.

I like this one a lot!!

-Alex


Visit this forum on the web at http://discuss.coworking.com


You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups “Coworking” group.

To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/coworking/Tvf2gg-WZ5w/unsubscribe.

To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to [email protected].

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

I think the “open/closed” part might be summarized as:

“Open decision-making: sets explicit, transparent, public limits on who can be a member and how they can participate; does not have implicit or hidden rules or processes for determining or excluding potential members.”

That still leaves some room for the processes to be various degrees of transparency, but would exclude a place that says, “We let some people work here but we don’t tell you how we choose who gets in.”

It would include a place that says, “Tech-only,” or a place that says, “You must meet these criteria to work here.” It would include a place that says “Submit your application and we’ll get back to you soon.” as long as the criteria are transparent. By transparent, that might be defined as “someone who guesses if they’ll be able to become a member or not, will be right almost all of the time.” There can be transparent discrimination against industries or work styles, and that would be “open” under this definition.

It would exclude a place that says, “Please send 3 references of former employers/co-workers” without saying what criteria is being looked for when the references will be called.

It would not include a “curated membership” if how the curation process worked wasn’t transparent, but it could if it was transparent.

All of these are actual examples of places I’ve seen.

What do you think?

Alex

···


Alex Linsker

Collective Agency’s Community Organizer / Proprietor

(503) 517-6900 http://collectiveagency.co

Tax and Conversation’s Statewide Community Organizer

(503) 517-6904 taxandconversation.com

(503) 369-9174 mobile (503) 517-6901 fax

322 NW Sixth Ave, Suite 200, Portland, Oregon 97209

On Monday, September 22, 2014 4:48:15 AM UTC-7, Ramon Suarez wrote:

Based on your responses I’ve got this:

  • Calls itself a coworking space.
  • Has a fully dedicated space for coworking (not just a few hours or a cafeteria shared with patrons).
  • Has an active community of members, not just clients.
  • Has a facilitator dedicated to connect the members and build trust among them, engaging in activities to build the coworking community.
  • Treats coworkers as 1st class clients.
  • Promotes and encourages collaboration, interaction and serendipity.
  • Offers one or many kinds of membership (full or part time)
    I did not know how to phrase the open/closed part.

What would you add, remove, change? Be specific :slight_smile:

Ramon Suarez
Serendipity Accelerator, Betacowork
Author: http://coworkinghandbook.com
email & hangouts: [email protected]

Phone: +3227376769

GSM: +32497556284

Twitter:http://twitter.com/ramonsuarez
Skype: ramonsuarez

Try coworking: http://betacowork.com

On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 5:29 PM, Ramon Suarez [email protected] wrote:

Jon, I do as you do. They are members of a community and at the same time they are clients. They pay for a service, not only for belonging.

Ramon Suarez
Serendipity Accelerator, Betacowork
Author: http://coworkinghandbook.com
email & hangouts: [email protected]

Phone: +3227376769

GSM: +32497556284

Twitter:http://twitter.com/ramonsuarez
Skype: ramonsuarez

Try coworking: http://betacowork.com

On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 11:58 AM, Jon Stever, The Office RW [email protected] wrote:

Re: “clients” vs. “members”.

I would definitely agree on the philosophical distinction. Essentially,it’s trying to tease out whether the space exists to build a community (“members”) or to earn a margin on real estate (“clients”). This is an important dichotomy, but it’s also strictly false as we all exist on a sliding scale between these two extremes.

I don’t think we want to start to see “client” as a dirty word…at a nice restaurant the clients will be on a first-name basis with staff, have a special table, regular meal selections, and even Christmas cards in the mail (and may even be called “patrons” to distinguish the relationship), while at McDonald’s “clients” are a mass of impersonal and transactional relationships.

I find myself slipping interchangeably between terms when talking about The Office, because as a coworking space manager and business manager I have to think both in terms of building and strengthening our community (“membership”) and in terms of making the numbers work and communicating with potential partners and investors (“clients”). When I’m thinking in terms of investment and expansion, I intellectual categorize “members” as “clients”…this is often sub-conscious and I used to even feel ashamed when I realized that I had done it, but I wonder if this is really such a horrible thing. Because, when I think about why I do what I do and the people I work with and for, I think of “friends” and “members”…

What do you think?

  • Jon

On Friday, 12 September 2014 13:15:23 UTC+2, Alex Hillman wrote:

In my opinion a coworking space – being a community of coworkers – always calls and treats its coworkers members.

I like this one a lot!!

-Alex


Visit this forum on the web at http://discuss.coworking.com


You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups “Coworking” group.

To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/coworking/Tvf2gg-WZ5w/unsubscribe.

To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to [email protected].

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

I know I'm jumping into this discussion late, but just getting to my overflowing in box!

I just wanted to respond to the discussion that popped up about the physical "space" itself not being a huge factor when people think about "what makes a good coworking space". I don't speak French, unfortunately, Nicolas, so I can't read what you wrote on the subject, but here at The Commons one of the first things people say that they enjoy about our space is the actual, physical space.

We put a lot of effort into making the space feel comfortable, sophisticated and inviting and this has paid off tremendously. I would say that, yes, people choose to work here because they like the vibe and the community but I would argue that one of the factors contributing to the vibe and community is the physical space. It encourages people to talk, lounge and be comfortable.

One of the big things that factor into them choosing us above other coworking spaces in town is that they are proud to bring their clients here, that it is comfortable to work in and it really does feel like a home away from home. Our members take great pride in our space - we can tell as they bring their clients on a tour when they come in and talk a lot about the design.

I was a member here before I became an owner and I knew when I took over that that was one of the biggest criteria for me - to work in an inspiring, well-designed space. This is something I feel quite passionately about, in fact, and was a huge debate when my brother and I took over the space as he just wanted to put in the least expensive, most utilitarian furniture possible and said no one would care.

It may be just sibling rivalry, but I do like the fact that he had to admit a year later that I was right and he was wrong ... :wink:

~Erynn

···

On 2014-09-14, 11:45 AM, Nicolas Bergé wrote:

I recently asked the members of Les Satellites "What makes a good coworking space ?". I received different answers, none of them put the "space" as a criteria.

I've realized that members are the best to define what coworking is and what coworking is not, even though they only know a few coworking spaces, if not only one. I wrote something here (http://www.les-satellites.com/2014/09/les-personnes-qui-font-du-coworking-ne.html\) explaining why members of coworking spaces are not interested by the space criteria (in French).
If you can include, Ramon, the members' - your members' - viewpoints on the definition of coworking you wish to show, you'll be better off - we'll all be better off.

Nicolas Bergé
Les Satellites
--
Visit this forum on the web at http://discuss.coworking.com
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Coworking" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to coworking+...@googlegroups.com <mailto:[email protected]>.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout\.

--
--
Erynn Lyster
The Commons Calgary
a cowork apothecary

(403) 399-1716 (cell) or (403) 452-7938 (office)

I like the list as well as Alex’s add on open membership decision-making.

···

You can get away with imperfections in the space when the community vibe is good. It’s much, much harder to get away with cultural dysfunction (or nonexistence) when the space is good.

It’s not debate of if space OR community is valuable or important. Both are important.

What’s important is that the returns in absence of each other are unbalanced.

Here’s what I’ve observed across LOTS of different styles/kinds/scales/breeds of coworking, including “dedicated" coworking spaces like what many of us run, but also including some of the bigger patterns in how/where people work in other kinds of businesses & corporations.

Perfectly designed, beautiful, ergonomic, and inspiring spaces without an attractive culture are the ones that find themselves weak for new membership, weak to retain their members, and very, very difficult to sustain without constantly applying pressure.

I’ve seen the lack of community lead to the burnout and closure of a LOT of beautiful coworking spaces that people seem to be “impressed" by. Meanwhile, the returns on well designed spaces is MULTIPLIED by a great community.

Take this out of the context of coworking for a second to see what I mean: companies are spending FORTUNES to create beautifully designed spaces to inspire their employees to create, collaborate, and be more productive…and they expect to get a return on those investments. If a company spends hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars on an office, they expect that it can generate some multiple of that more in recruitment, retention, collaboration, and innovation.

What I’ve learned along the way is that most of these companies design the space intentionally, but don’t do anything to design the culture of the company with the same intent. When the culture and the space design aren’t congruent, those hopeful returns are very hard to realize…

When those companies put even a fraction of the effort and intention into designing the culture of the community as they do the space, the results are tremendous.

COMBINE those two efforts, and the results are unparalleled :slight_smile:

-Alex

···

I know I’m jumping into this discussion
late, but just getting to my overflowing in box!

  I just wanted to respond to the discussion that popped up about

the physical “space” itself not being a huge factor when people
think about “what makes a good coworking space”. I don’t speak
French, unfortunately, Nicolas, so I can’t read what you wrote on
the subject, but here at The Commons one of the first things
people say that they enjoy about our space is the actual, physical
space.

  We put a lot of effort into making the space feel comfortable,

sophisticated and inviting and this has paid off tremendously. I
would say that, yes, people choose to work here because they like
the vibe and the community but I would argue that one of the
factors contributing to the vibe and community is the physical
space. It encourages people to talk, lounge and be comfortable.

  One of the big things that factor into them choosing us above

other coworking spaces in town is that they are proud to bring
their clients here, that it is comfortable to work in and it
really does feel like a home away from home. Our members take
great pride in our space - we can tell as they bring their clients
on a tour when they come in and talk a lot about the design.

  I was a member here before I became an owner and I knew when I

took over that that was one of the biggest criteria for me - to
work in an inspiring, well-designed space. This is something I
feel quite passionately about, in fact, and was a huge debate when
my brother and I took over the space as he just wanted to put in
the least expensive, most utilitarian furniture possible and said
no one would care.

  It may be just sibling rivalry, but I do like the fact that he had

to admit a year later that I was right and he was wrong … :wink:

  ~Erynn

  On 2014-09-14, 11:45 AM, Nicolas Bergé wrote:
    I recently asked the members of Les Satellites

“What makes a good coworking space ?”. I received different
answers, none of them put the “space” as a criteria.

      I've realized that members are the best to define what

coworking is and what coworking is not, even though they only
know a few coworking spaces, if not only one. I wrote
something here
()
explaining why members of coworking spaces are not interested
by the space criteria (in French).

      If you can include, Ramon, the members' - your members' -

viewpoints on the definition of coworking you wish to show,
you’ll be better off - we’ll all be better off.

Nicolas Bergé

Les Satellites

  Visit this forum on the web at [http://discuss.coworking.com](http://discuss.coworking.com)

  ---

  You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google

Groups “Coworking” group.

  To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,

send an email to [email protected].

  For more options, visit [https://groups.google.com/d/optout](https://groups.google.com/d/optout).

http://www.les-satellites.com/2014/09/les-personnes-qui-font-du-coworking-ne.html


-- --
Erynn Lyster
The Commons Calgary
a cowork apothecary
(403) 399-1716 (cell) or (403) 452-7938 (office)

www.thecommonscalgary.com

Visit this forum on the web at http://discuss.coworking.com


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups “Coworking” group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected].

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

"the returns on well designed spaces is MULTIPLIED by a great community. "

Well, I think the reverse can work as well: the returns of a good community can be multiplied by a well-designed space.

Just sayin’

:slight_smile:

···

JEROME CHANG

WEST: Santa Monica
1450 2nd Street (@Broadway) | Santa Monica CA 90401
ph: (310) 526-2255

CENTRAL: Mid-Wilshire
5405 Wilshire Blvd (2 blocks west of La Brea) | Los Angeles CA 90036
ph: (323) 330-9505

EAST: Downtown
529 S. Broadway, Suite 4000 (@Pershing Square) | Los Angeles CA 90013
ph: (213) 550-2235

On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 10:23 AM, Alex Hillman [email protected] wrote:

You can get away with imperfections in the space when the community vibe is good. It’s much, much harder to get away with cultural dysfunction (or nonexistence) when the space is good.

It’s not debate of if space OR community is valuable or important. Both are important.

What’s important is that the returns in absence of each other are unbalanced.

Here’s what I’ve observed across LOTS of different styles/kinds/scales/breeds of coworking, including “dedicated" coworking spaces like what many of us run, but also including some of the bigger patterns in how/where people work in other kinds of businesses & corporations.

Perfectly designed, beautiful, ergonomic, and inspiring spaces without an attractive culture are the ones that find themselves weak for new membership, weak to retain their members, and very, very difficult to sustain without constantly applying pressure.

I’ve seen the lack of community lead to the burnout and closure of a LOT of beautiful coworking spaces that people seem to be “impressed" by. Meanwhile, the returns on well designed spaces is MULTIPLIED by a great community.

Take this out of the context of coworking for a second to see what I mean: companies are spending FORTUNES to create beautifully designed spaces to inspire their employees to create, collaborate, and be more productive…and they expect to get a return on those investments. If a company spends hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars on an office, they expect that it can generate some multiple of that more in recruitment, retention, collaboration, and innovation.

What I’ve learned along the way is that most of these companies design the space intentionally, but don’t do anything to design the culture of the company with the same intent. When the culture and the space design aren’t congruent, those hopeful returns are very hard to realize…

When those companies put even a fraction of the effort and intention into designing the culture of the community as they do the space, the results are tremendous.

COMBINE those two efforts, and the results are unparalleled :slight_smile:

-Alex

On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 9:29 AM, Erynn Lyster [email protected] wrote:

  I know I'm jumping into this discussion

late, but just getting to my overflowing in box!

  I just wanted to respond to the discussion that popped up about

the physical “space” itself not being a huge factor when people
think about “what makes a good coworking space”. I don’t speak
French, unfortunately, Nicolas, so I can’t read what you wrote on
the subject, but here at The Commons one of the first things
people say that they enjoy about our space is the actual, physical
space.

  We put a lot of effort into making the space feel comfortable,

sophisticated and inviting and this has paid off tremendously. I
would say that, yes, people choose to work here because they like
the vibe and the community but I would argue that one of the
factors contributing to the vibe and community is the physical
space. It encourages people to talk, lounge and be comfortable.

  One of the big things that factor into them choosing us above

other coworking spaces in town is that they are proud to bring
their clients here, that it is comfortable to work in and it
really does feel like a home away from home. Our members take
great pride in our space - we can tell as they bring their clients
on a tour when they come in and talk a lot about the design.

  I was a member here before I became an owner and I knew when I

took over that that was one of the biggest criteria for me - to
work in an inspiring, well-designed space. This is something I
feel quite passionately about, in fact, and was a huge debate when
my brother and I took over the space as he just wanted to put in
the least expensive, most utilitarian furniture possible and said
no one would care.

  It may be just sibling rivalry, but I do like the fact that he had

to admit a year later that I was right and he was wrong … :wink:

  ~Erynn


  On 2014-09-14, 11:45 AM, Nicolas Bergé wrote:
    I recently asked the members of Les Satellites

“What makes a good coworking space ?”. I received different
answers, none of them put the “space” as a criteria.

      I've realized that members are the best to define what

coworking is and what coworking is not, even though they only
know a few coworking spaces, if not only one. I wrote
something here
(http://www.les-satellites.com/2014/09/les-personnes-qui-font-du-coworking-ne.html )
explaining why members of coworking spaces are not interested
by the space criteria (in French).

      If you can include, Ramon, the members' - your members' -

viewpoints on the definition of coworking you wish to show,
you’ll be better off - we’ll all be better off.

Nicolas Bergé

Les Satellites

  Visit this forum on the web at [http://discuss.coworking.com](http://discuss.coworking.com)

  ---

  You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google

Groups “Coworking” group.

  To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,

send an email to [email protected].

  For more options, visit [https://groups.google.com/d/optout](https://groups.google.com/d/optout).

-- --
Erynn Lyster
The Commons Calgary
a cowork apothecary
[www.thecommonscalgary.com](http://www.thecommonscalgary.com)
(403) 399-1716 (cell) or (403) 452-7938 (office)

Visit this forum on the web at http://discuss.coworking.com


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups “Coworking” group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected].

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Visit this forum on the web at http://discuss.coworking.com


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups “Coworking” group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected].

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Of all the spaces I’ve visited in Europe and the USA, the design has never been the defining factor of their success or not. People and community trump space every time. Depending on its design the space can be a better fit for the community it hosts. If you are talking about other hospitality businesses the space may matter more, but in Coworking the added value and what makes us special is the people not the space.

If your community is business oriented, a business like space will suit them better. If it consists of makers and coders, then it will probably be different.

I personally think that function and cleanliness is more important than looks. The function part of design is often forgotten in most discussions and some people mistake design with pretty. The space has to be functional for the community of clients it serves.

···

Ramon Suarez
Serendipity Accelerator, Betacowork
Author: http://coworkinghandbook.com
email & hangouts: [email protected]

Phone: +3227376769

GSM: +32497556284

Twitter:http://twitter.com/ramonsuarez
Skype: ramonsuarez

Try coworking: http://betacowork.com

On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 6:39 AM, Jerome Chang [email protected] wrote:

"the returns on well designed spaces is MULTIPLIED by a great community. "

Well, I think the reverse can work as well: the returns of a good community can be multiplied by a well-designed space.

Just sayin’

:slight_smile:

Visit this forum on the web at http://discuss.coworking.com


You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups “Coworking” group.

To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/coworking/Tvf2gg-WZ5w/unsubscribe.

To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to [email protected].

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

JEROME CHANG

WEST: Santa Monica
1450 2nd Street (@Broadway) | Santa Monica CA 90401
ph: (310) 526-2255

CENTRAL: Mid-Wilshire
5405 Wilshire Blvd (2 blocks west of La Brea) | Los Angeles CA 90036
ph: (323) 330-9505

EAST: Downtown
529 S. Broadway, Suite 4000 (@Pershing Square) | Los Angeles CA 90013
ph: (213) 550-2235

On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 10:23 AM, Alex Hillman [email protected] wrote:

You can get away with imperfections in the space when the community vibe is good. It’s much, much harder to get away with cultural dysfunction (or nonexistence) when the space is good.

It’s not debate of if space OR community is valuable or important. Both are important.

What’s important is that the returns in absence of each other are unbalanced.

Here’s what I’ve observed across LOTS of different styles/kinds/scales/breeds of coworking, including “dedicated" coworking spaces like what many of us run, but also including some of the bigger patterns in how/where people work in other kinds of businesses & corporations.

Perfectly designed, beautiful, ergonomic, and inspiring spaces without an attractive culture are the ones that find themselves weak for new membership, weak to retain their members, and very, very difficult to sustain without constantly applying pressure.

I’ve seen the lack of community lead to the burnout and closure of a LOT of beautiful coworking spaces that people seem to be “impressed" by. Meanwhile, the returns on well designed spaces is MULTIPLIED by a great community.

Take this out of the context of coworking for a second to see what I mean: companies are spending FORTUNES to create beautifully designed spaces to inspire their employees to create, collaborate, and be more productive…and they expect to get a return on those investments. If a company spends hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars on an office, they expect that it can generate some multiple of that more in recruitment, retention, collaboration, and innovation.

What I’ve learned along the way is that most of these companies design the space intentionally, but don’t do anything to design the culture of the company with the same intent. When the culture and the space design aren’t congruent, those hopeful returns are very hard to realize…

When those companies put even a fraction of the effort and intention into designing the culture of the community as they do the space, the results are tremendous.

COMBINE those two efforts, and the results are unparalleled :slight_smile:

-Alex

On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 9:29 AM, Erynn Lyster [email protected] wrote:

  I know I'm jumping into this discussion

late, but just getting to my overflowing in box!

  I just wanted to respond to the discussion that popped up about

the physical “space” itself not being a huge factor when people
think about “what makes a good coworking space”. I don’t speak
French, unfortunately, Nicolas, so I can’t read what you wrote on
the subject, but here at The Commons one of the first things
people say that they enjoy about our space is the actual, physical
space.

  We put a lot of effort into making the space feel comfortable,

sophisticated and inviting and this has paid off tremendously. I
would say that, yes, people choose to work here because they like
the vibe and the community but I would argue that one of the
factors contributing to the vibe and community is the physical
space. It encourages people to talk, lounge and be comfortable.

  One of the big things that factor into them choosing us above

other coworking spaces in town is that they are proud to bring
their clients here, that it is comfortable to work in and it
really does feel like a home away from home. Our members take
great pride in our space - we can tell as they bring their clients
on a tour when they come in and talk a lot about the design.

  I was a member here before I became an owner and I knew when I

took over that that was one of the biggest criteria for me - to
work in an inspiring, well-designed space. This is something I
feel quite passionately about, in fact, and was a huge debate when
my brother and I took over the space as he just wanted to put in
the least expensive, most utilitarian furniture possible and said
no one would care.

  It may be just sibling rivalry, but I do like the fact that he had

to admit a year later that I was right and he was wrong … :wink:

  ~Erynn


  On 2014-09-14, 11:45 AM, Nicolas Bergé wrote:
    I recently asked the members of Les Satellites

“What makes a good coworking space ?”. I received different
answers, none of them put the “space” as a criteria.

      I've realized that members are the best to define what

coworking is and what coworking is not, even though they only
know a few coworking spaces, if not only one. I wrote
something here
(http://www.les-satellites.com/2014/09/les-personnes-qui-font-du-coworking-ne.html )
explaining why members of coworking spaces are not interested
by the space criteria (in French).

      If you can include, Ramon, the members' - your members' -

viewpoints on the definition of coworking you wish to show,
you’ll be better off - we’ll all be better off.

Nicolas Bergé

Les Satellites

  Visit this forum on the web at [http://discuss.coworking.com](http://discuss.coworking.com)

  ---

  You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google

Groups “Coworking” group.

  To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,

send an email to [email protected].

  For more options, visit [https://groups.google.com/d/optout](https://groups.google.com/d/optout).

-- --
Erynn Lyster
The Commons Calgary
a cowork apothecary
[www.thecommonscalgary.com](http://www.thecommonscalgary.com)
(403) 399-1716 (cell) or (403) 452-7938 (office)

Visit this forum on the web at http://discuss.coworking.com


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups “Coworking” group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected].

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Visit this forum on the web at http://discuss.coworking.com


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups “Coworking” group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected].

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Is there interest in a discussion of the branding of "place" instead of "space"? I have a coworking place. I think it's very important to people new to the concept and place leads to a warmer feel.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/_/dict.aspx?rd=1&word=place

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/_/dict.aspx?word=space

I don't sell space in a community, I sell place in a community.

Alex

···

--
Alex Linsker
Collective Agency's Community Organizer / Proprietor
     (503) 517-6900 http://collectiveagency.co
Tax and Conversation's Statewide Community Organizer
     (503) 517-6904 taxandconversation.com
(503) 369-9174 mobile (503) 517-6901 fax
322 NW Sixth Ave, Suite 200, Portland, Oregon 97209

Randy, I’d agree that “place vs. space” isn’t the issue,

But the earlier discussion on this thread around “community vs. space” hits at the core of what coworking is about. Community is the differentiator between coworking and other office substitutes: McDonalds, Starbucks, Regus, home offices, corporate office wonderlands, whatever…

Design is incredibly important. Design can accelerate interactions, inspire lateral thinking, increase seratonin through natural sunlight, simtulate productivity, etc etc etc, but a well-designed office space does not a coworking space make.

Jon

···

On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 5:50 PM, Randall Arnold [email protected] wrote:

I think the conversation so far has shown that the “space vs place” debate is largely over pointless, polarizing, counterproductive semantics.

People are definitely attracted to places.

Many like a place that has some (elbow) space.

This topic could be kicked back and forth for who knows how long, but IMO it’s a distraction that takes eyes off of the prize… which is selling a largely-uninformed public on the benefits of coworking (or co-working, if you’re not into the whole brevity thing).

Randy

On September 24, 2014 at 10:38 AM Alex Linsker [email protected] wrote:

Is there interest in a discussion of the branding of “place” instead of “space”? I have a coworking place. I think it’s very important to people new to the concept and place leads to a warmer feel.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/_/dict.aspx?rd=1&word=place

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/_/dict.aspx?word=space

I don’t sell space in a community, I sell place in a community.

Alex

Alex Linsker
Collective Agency’s Community Organizer / Proprietor
(503) 517-6900 http://collectiveagency.co
Tax and Conversation’s Statewide Community Organizer
(503) 517-6904 taxandconversation.com
(503) 369-9174 mobile (503) 517-6901 fax
322 NW Sixth Ave, Suite 200, Portland, Oregon 97209


Visit this forum on the web at http://discuss.coworking.com

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups “Coworking” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Visit this forum on the web at http://discuss.coworking.com


You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups “Coworking” group.

To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/coworking/Tvf2gg-WZ5w/unsubscribe.

To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to [email protected].

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Thanks for that reply Alex. With that included here’s the whole list

  • Calls itself a coworking space.

  • Has a fully dedicated space for coworking (not just a few hours or a cafeteria shared with patrons).

  • Has an active community of members, not just clients.

  • Has a facilitator dedicated to connect the members and build trust among them, engaging in activities to build the coworking community.

  • Treats coworkers as 1st class clients.

  • Promotes and encourages collaboration, interaction and serendipity.

  • Offers one or many kinds of membership (full or part time)

  • Open decision-making: sets explicit, transparent, public limits on who can be a member and how they can participate; does not have implicit or hidden rules or processes for determining or excluding potential members.

We will review the map of coworking spaces in Belgium based on this list.

Now for the 1 Million question: should we weight this criteria? How? :slight_smile:

···

Ramon Suarez
Serendipity Accelerator, Betacowork
Author: http://coworkinghandbook.com
email & hangouts: [email protected]

Phone: +3227376769

GSM: +32497556284

Twitter:http://twitter.com/ramonsuarez
Skype: ramonsuarez

Try coworking: http://betacowork.com

On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 6:35 PM, Steve King [email protected] wrote:

I like the list as well as Alex’s add on open membership decision-making.

Visit this forum on the web at http://discuss.coworking.com


You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups “Coworking” group.

To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/coworking/Tvf2gg-WZ5w/unsubscribe.

To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to [email protected].

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.