[Coworking] Basic elements for a definition of coworking
Hi everyone, I'm working on a definition of Coworking to make it easier to choose who to include in the map of coworking spaces in Belgium http://coworkingbelgium.be/belgium-coworking-spaces-map. I know it can be a controversial subject and I don't want to start a flamewar, but I would like to have your feedback on the basic elements to build this definition. I think it could also be helpful to make it easier to explain to our potential customers and journalists. In my definition a Coworking space : - Calls itself a coworking space. - Has a fully dedicated espace for cowoking (not just a few hours or a cafeteria shared with patrons). - Treats coworkers as 1st class clients, not as a lesser kind to fill unused space. - Has somebody dedicated to connect the members (a facilitator, not an administrative asistant.) - Provides a non hostile and friendly environment that encourages collaboration and interaction. What do you think? Ramon Suarez Serendipity Accelerator, Betacowork Author: http://coworkinghandbook.com email hangouts: ra...@betacowork.com Phone: +3227376769 GSM: +32497556284 Twitter:http://twitter.com/ramonsuarez Skype: ramonsuarez Try coworking: http://betacowork.com http://betacowork.com/free-coworking-tryout/?utm_source=emailutm_medium=468x60_bannerutm_content=girl-homeutm_campaign=ramon-signature -- 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+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [Coworking] Basic elements for a definition of coworking
I’m pretty sure that Emergent Research has a rubric they use for when they do their research for their annual report, but I can’t remember exactly what is on it. Having some consistency with that would probably be helpful! I think it had some of the items you described, but it was a lot more specific with many of the attributes. Hopefully Steve can chime in! I used to be more opinionated about self-describing as “coworking” and the regular mis-use of the term, but I’ve become more and more comfortable with the idea that the word coworking is as specific as the word “restaurant”, which doesn’t really describe much on its own. I’d love to see more maps (including the one you’re putting together) display with more detail what people can expect. It’s more important that people find a place that makes them happy and productive than anything else…and reducing that to “coworking” is like reducing fine dining french restaurants and mcdonalds to “restaurant”. Technically accurate, but not really helpful. Related, this recent post caught my eye (I think Liz posted it from the GCUC account): http://www.cloudvirtualoffice.com/blog/a-coworking-safari/ I’m especially interested in the things vary widely, really impact the experience, but are hardest to really quantify: things like “ambiance” and noise level are such relative descriptions, so the source matters a lot, too! Who’s doing the describing: the owner? The members? Visitors? In a lot of cases, their descriptions vary quite a bit. To that point, even “non-hostile friendly” is relative. It’s become a common theme that I hear from coworkers who visit startup-centric coworking spaces that the only time people talk to each other is when they’re pitching their startup. For some people, that’s non-hostile and friends but for others, it’s their worst nightmare. -Alex On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 12:34 PM, Ramon Suarez ra...@betacowork.com wrote: Hi everyone, I'm working on a definition of Coworking to make it easier to choose who to include in the map of coworking spaces in Belgium http://coworkingbelgium.be/belgium-coworking-spaces-map. I know it can be a controversial subject and I don't want to start a flamewar, but I would like to have your feedback on the basic elements to build this definition. I think it could also be helpful to make it easier to explain to our potential customers and journalists. In my definition a Coworking space : - Calls itself a coworking space. - Has a fully dedicated espace for cowoking (not just a few hours or a cafeteria shared with patrons). - Treats coworkers as 1st class clients, not as a lesser kind to fill unused space. - Has somebody dedicated to connect the members (a facilitator, not an administrative asistant.) - Provides a non hostile and friendly environment that encourages collaboration and interaction. What do you think? Ramon Suarez Serendipity Accelerator, Betacowork Author: http://coworkinghandbook.com email hangouts: ra...@betacowork.com Phone: +3227376769 GSM: +32497556284 Twitter:http://twitter.com/ramonsuarez Skype: ramonsuarez Try coworking: http://betacowork.com http://betacowork.com/free-coworking-tryout/?utm_source=emailutm_medium=468x60_bannerutm_content=girl-homeutm_campaign=ramon-signature -- 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+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. 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 coworking+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [Coworking] Basic elements for a definition of coworking
One of the measuring sticks I use more and more is related to defining community rather than coworking. As I stated at the conference in Durham, community is more about being, than doing and fulfils needs beyond the practical. (space, tech, programs, etc) A real community meets our human needs. To BE loved to BElong To BE Unique To BE Safe Your space, programs, interactions, billing, events, etc need to be filtered through or based on one or all of these. When this becomes the foundation/filter, it's easy to walk into a space, interact a bit and know, this is legit and I want to be here! Then you can differentiate between the Mcky D's and The Ritz by food and decor and price. Both satisfy a need, but which one creates community? Coworking is like CHEERS. where everybody knows your name. Chad Ballantyne 705.812.0689 c...@thecreativespace.ca Barrie's Coworking Community Perfect for small businesses, startups and entrepreneurs. 12 Dunlop St E, Barrie Ontario, L4M 1A3 Memberships start at $25/mth www.thecreativespace.ca 705-812-0689 On Sep 11, 2014, at 12:48 PM, Alex Hillman dangerouslyawes...@gmail.com wrote: I'm pretty sure that Emergent Research has a rubric they use for when they do their research for their annual report, but I can't remember exactly what is on it. Having some consistency with that would probably be helpful! I think it had some of the items you described, but it was a lot more specific with many of the attributes. Hopefully Steve can chime in! I used to be more opinionated about self-describing as coworking and the regular mis-use of the term, but I've become more and more comfortable with the idea that the word coworking is as specific as the word restaurant, which doesn't really describe much on its own. I'd love to see more maps (including the one you're putting together) display with more detail what people can expect. It's more important that people find a place that makes them happy and productive than anything else...and reducing that to coworking is like reducing fine dining french restaurants and mcdonalds to restaurant. Technically accurate, but not really helpful. Related, this recent post caught my eye (I think Liz posted it from the GCUC account): http://www.cloudvirtualoffice.com/blog/a-coworking-safari/ I'm especially interested in the things vary widely, really impact the experience, but are hardest to really quantify: things like ambiance and noise level are such relative descriptions, so the source matters a lot, too! Who's doing the describing: the owner? The members? Visitors? In a lot of cases, their descriptions vary quite a bit. To that point, even non-hostile friendly is relative. It's become a common theme that I hear from coworkers who visit startup-centric coworking spaces that the only time people talk to each other is when they're pitching their startup. For some people, that's non-hostile and friends but for others, it's their worst nightmare. -Alex On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 12:34 PM, Ramon Suarez ra...@betacowork.com wrote: Hi everyone, I'm working on a definition of Coworking to make it easier to choose who to include in the map of coworking spaces in Belgium. I know it can be a controversial subject and I don't want to start a flamewar, but I would like to have your feedback on the basic elements to build this definition. I think it could also be helpful to make it easier to explain to our potential customers and journalists. In my definition a Coworking space : Calls itself a coworking space. Has a fully dedicated espace for cowoking (not just a few hours or a cafeteria shared with patrons). Treats coworkers as 1st class clients, not as a lesser kind to fill unused space. Has somebody dedicated to connect the members (a facilitator, not an administrative asistant.) Provides a non hostile and friendly environment that encourages collaboration and interaction. What do you think? Ramon Suarez Serendipity Accelerator, Betacowork Author: http://coworkinghandbook.com email hangouts: ra...@betacowork.com Phone: +3227376769 GSM: +32497556284 Twitter:http://twitter.com/ramonsuarez Skype: ramonsuarez Try coworking: http://betacowork.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 coworking+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. 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 coworking+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit
Re: [Coworking] Basic elements for a definition of coworking
Tricky business for sure. One factor I've been looking more and more at is the motivations and intentions of the champions behind each community, or said another way, why the space was started in the first place. There are many conversations that come up again and again that, with hindsight, I can see are just a miss-match of intentions. For example the Open one space or many spaces conversation. It's a perfectly reasonable motivation to want to open multiple spaces and have a wide reach and impact. I personally started Office Nomads because I want a home and a community I want to be a member of. Understanding this helps me see why it doesn't make sense for us to make a chain of Office Nomads, and also why it's a waste of everyone's time to argue about this. If we can find neutral language to highlight distinctions like this it would go a long way to that goal of finding like-minded spaces and filling our communities with happy members. Jacob --- Office Nomads - Individuality without Isolation http://www.officenomads.com - (206) 323-6500 On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 9:48 AM, Alex Hillman dangerouslyawes...@gmail.com wrote: I’m pretty sure that Emergent Research has a rubric they use for when they do their research for their annual report, but I can’t remember exactly what is on it. Having some consistency with that would probably be helpful! I think it had some of the items you described, but it was a lot more specific with many of the attributes. Hopefully Steve can chime in! I used to be more opinionated about self-describing as “coworking” and the regular mis-use of the term, but I’ve become more and more comfortable with the idea that the word coworking is as specific as the word “restaurant”, which doesn’t really describe much on its own. I’d love to see more maps (including the one you’re putting together) display with more detail what people can expect. It’s more important that people find a place that makes them happy and productive than anything else…and reducing that to “coworking” is like reducing fine dining french restaurants and mcdonalds to “restaurant”. *Technically* accurate, but not really helpful. Related, this recent post caught my eye (I think Liz posted it from the GCUC account): http://www.cloudvirtualoffice.com/blog/a-coworking-safari/ I’m especially interested in the things vary widely, really impact the experience, but are hardest to really quantify: things like “ambiance” and noise level are such relative descriptions, so the source matters a lot, too! Who’s doing the describing: the owner? The members? Visitors? In a lot of cases, their descriptions vary quite a bit. To that point, even “non-hostile friendly” is relative. It’s become a common theme that I hear from coworkers who visit startup-centric coworking spaces that the only time people talk to each other is when they’re pitching their startup. For some people, that’s non-hostile and friends but for others, it’s their worst nightmare. -Alex On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 12:34 PM, Ramon Suarez ra...@betacowork.com wrote: Hi everyone, I'm working on a definition of Coworking to make it easier to choose who to include in the map of coworking spaces in Belgium http://coworkingbelgium.be/belgium-coworking-spaces-map. I know it can be a controversial subject and I don't want to start a flamewar, but I would like to have your feedback on the basic elements to build this definition. I think it could also be helpful to make it easier to explain to our potential customers and journalists. In my definition a Coworking space : - Calls itself a coworking space. - Has a fully dedicated espace for cowoking (not just a few hours or a cafeteria shared with patrons). - Treats coworkers as 1st class clients, not as a lesser kind to fill unused space. - Has somebody dedicated to connect the members (a facilitator, not an administrative asistant.) - Provides a non hostile and friendly environment that encourages collaboration and interaction. What do you think? Ramon Suarez Serendipity Accelerator, Betacowork Author: http://coworkinghandbook.com email hangouts: ra...@betacowork.com Phone: +3227376769 GSM: +32497556284 Twitter:http://twitter.com/ramonsuarez Skype: ramonsuarez Try coworking: http://betacowork.com http://betacowork.com/free-coworking-tryout/?utm_source=emailutm_medium=468x60_bannerutm_content=girl-homeutm_campaign=ramon-signature -- 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+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. 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
Re: [Coworking] Basic elements for a definition of coworking
If we can find neutral language to highlight distinctions like this it would go a long way to that goal of finding like-minded spaces and filling our communities with happy members.” I don’t think that more neutral language is what we need. In fact, I think we need the opposite. The restaurant industry has fine dining and fast food, regional cuisines, varying price points, etc. But people need to have terms like “fast food” and “korean BBQ” to narrow down what they’re looking for. I know that this sounds like fragmentation, which freaks a lot of people out. I think this is HEALTHY fragmentation, though, like this: http://dangerouslyawesome.com/2014/07/theres-never-only-one-community/ It doesn’t mean that we can’t be friends, or even help each other, but I’m firmly convinced that having some more narrow specific terminology to add to add to the more neutral term ‘coworking’ is going to help the industry, not hurt it. -Alex On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 1:16 PM, Jacob Sayles ja...@officenomads.com wrote: Tricky business for sure. One factor I've been looking more and more at is the motivations and intentions of the champions behind each community, or said another way, why the space was started in the first place. There are many conversations that come up again and again that, with hindsight, I can see are just a miss-match of intentions. For example the Open one space or many spaces conversation. It's a perfectly reasonable motivation to want to open multiple spaces and have a wide reach and impact. I personally started Office Nomads because I want a home and a community I want to be a member of. Understanding this helps me see why it doesn't make sense for us to make a chain of Office Nomads, and also why it's a waste of everyone's time to argue about this. If we can find neutral language to highlight distinctions like this it would go a long way to that goal of finding like-minded spaces and filling our communities with happy members. Jacob --- Office Nomads - Individuality without Isolation http://www.officenomads.com - (206) 323-6500 On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 9:48 AM, Alex Hillman dangerouslyawes...@gmail.com wrote: I’m pretty sure that Emergent Research has a rubric they use for when they do their research for their annual report, but I can’t remember exactly what is on it. Having some consistency with that would probably be helpful! I think it had some of the items you described, but it was a lot more specific with many of the attributes. Hopefully Steve can chime in! I used to be more opinionated about self-describing as “coworking” and the regular mis-use of the term, but I’ve become more and more comfortable with the idea that the word coworking is as specific as the word “restaurant”, which doesn’t really describe much on its own. I’d love to see more maps (including the one you’re putting together) display with more detail what people can expect. It’s more important that people find a place that makes them happy and productive than anything else…and reducing that to “coworking” is like reducing fine dining french restaurants and mcdonalds to “restaurant”. *Technically* accurate, but not really helpful. Related, this recent post caught my eye (I think Liz posted it from the GCUC account): http://www.cloudvirtualoffice.com/blog/a-coworking-safari/ I’m especially interested in the things vary widely, really impact the experience, but are hardest to really quantify: things like “ambiance” and noise level are such relative descriptions, so the source matters a lot, too! Who’s doing the describing: the owner? The members? Visitors? In a lot of cases, their descriptions vary quite a bit. To that point, even “non-hostile friendly” is relative. It’s become a common theme that I hear from coworkers who visit startup-centric coworking spaces that the only time people talk to each other is when they’re pitching their startup. For some people, that’s non-hostile and friends but for others, it’s their worst nightmare. -Alex On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 12:34 PM, Ramon Suarez ra...@betacowork.com wrote: Hi everyone, I'm working on a definition of Coworking to make it easier to choose who to include in the map of coworking spaces in Belgium http://coworkingbelgium.be/belgium-coworking-spaces-map. I know it can be a controversial subject and I don't want to start a flamewar, but I would like to have your feedback on the basic elements to build this definition. I think it could also be helpful to make it easier to explain to our potential customers and journalists. In my definition a Coworking space : - Calls itself a coworking space. - Has a fully dedicated espace for cowoking (not just a few hours or a cafeteria shared with patrons). - Treats coworkers as 1st class clients, not as a lesser kind to fill unused space. - Has somebody dedicated to connect the members (a facilitator, not
Re: [Coworking] Basic elements for a definition of coworking
Ah let me clarify. By neutral I didn't mean less specific I meant less hostile or actually more open to the difference. Using terms like Korean BBQ is a good example of this as it's not derogatory. Likening another space to a fast food joint is a little less neutral. Jacob --- Office Nomads - Individuality without Isolation http://www.officenomads.com - (206) 323-6500 On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 10:24 AM, Alex Hillman dangerouslyawes...@gmail.com wrote: If we can find neutral language to highlight distinctions like this it would go a long way to that goal of finding like-minded spaces and filling our communities with happy members.” I don’t think that more *neutral* language is what we need. In fact, I think we need the opposite. The restaurant industry has fine dining and fast food, regional cuisines, varying price points, etc. But people need to have terms like “fast food” and “korean BBQ” to narrow down what they’re looking for. I know that this sounds like fragmentation, which freaks a lot of people out. I think this is HEALTHY fragmentation, though, like this: http://dangerouslyawesome.com/2014/07/theres-never-only-one-community/ It doesn’t mean that we can’t be friends, or even help each other, but I’m firmly convinced that having some more narrow specific terminology to add to add to the more neutral term ‘coworking’ is going to help the industry, not hurt it. -Alex On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 1:16 PM, Jacob Sayles ja...@officenomads.com wrote: Tricky business for sure. One factor I've been looking more and more at is the motivations and intentions of the champions behind each community, or said another way, why the space was started in the first place. There are many conversations that come up again and again that, with hindsight, I can see are just a miss-match of intentions. For example the Open one space or many spaces conversation. It's a perfectly reasonable motivation to want to open multiple spaces and have a wide reach and impact. I personally started Office Nomads because I want a home and a community I want to be a member of. Understanding this helps me see why it doesn't make sense for us to make a chain of Office Nomads, and also why it's a waste of everyone's time to argue about this. If we can find neutral language to highlight distinctions like this it would go a long way to that goal of finding like-minded spaces and filling our communities with happy members. Jacob --- Office Nomads - Individuality without Isolation http://www.officenomads.com - (206) 323-6500 On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 9:48 AM, Alex Hillman dangerouslyawes...@gmail.com wrote: I’m pretty sure that Emergent Research has a rubric they use for when they do their research for their annual report, but I can’t remember exactly what is on it. Having some consistency with that would probably be helpful! I think it had some of the items you described, but it was a lot more specific with many of the attributes. Hopefully Steve can chime in! I used to be more opinionated about self-describing as “coworking” and the regular mis-use of the term, but I’ve become more and more comfortable with the idea that the word coworking is as specific as the word “restaurant”, which doesn’t really describe much on its own. I’d love to see more maps (including the one you’re putting together) display with more detail what people can expect. It’s more important that people find a place that makes them happy and productive than anything else…and reducing that to “coworking” is like reducing fine dining french restaurants and mcdonalds to “restaurant”. *Technically* accurate, but not really helpful. Related, this recent post caught my eye (I think Liz posted it from the GCUC account): http://www.cloudvirtualoffice.com/blog/a-coworking-safari/ I’m especially interested in the things vary widely, really impact the experience, but are hardest to really quantify: things like “ambiance” and noise level are such relative descriptions, so the source matters a lot, too! Who’s doing the describing: the owner? The members? Visitors? In a lot of cases, their descriptions vary quite a bit. To that point, even “non-hostile friendly” is relative. It’s become a common theme that I hear from coworkers who visit startup-centric coworking spaces that the only time people talk to each other is when they’re pitching their startup. For some people, that’s non-hostile and friends but for others, it’s their worst nightmare. -Alex On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 12:34 PM, Ramon Suarez ra...@betacowork.com wrote: Hi everyone, I'm working on a definition of Coworking to make it easier to choose who to include in the map of coworking spaces in Belgium http://coworkingbelgium.be/belgium-coworking-spaces-map. I know it can be a controversial subject and I don't want to start a flamewar, but I would like to have your feedback on the basic elements to build this definition. I
Re: [Coworking] Basic elements for a definition of coworking
Likening another space to a fast food joint is a little less neutral.” Lots of people love fast food and don’t think of it as derogatory at all. Again - the source matters. -Alex On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 1:38 PM, Jacob Sayles ja...@officenomads.com wrote: Ah let me clarify. By neutral I didn't mean less specific I meant less hostile or actually more open to the difference. Using terms like Korean BBQ is a good example of this as it's not derogatory. Likening another space to a fast food joint is a little less neutral. Jacob --- Office Nomads - Individuality without Isolation http://www.officenomads.com - (206) 323-6500 On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 10:24 AM, Alex Hillman dangerouslyawes...@gmail.com wrote: If we can find neutral language to highlight distinctions like this it would go a long way to that goal of finding like-minded spaces and filling our communities with happy members.” I don’t think that more *neutral* language is what we need. In fact, I think we need the opposite. The restaurant industry has fine dining and fast food, regional cuisines, varying price points, etc. But people need to have terms like “fast food” and “korean BBQ” to narrow down what they’re looking for. I know that this sounds like fragmentation, which freaks a lot of people out. I think this is HEALTHY fragmentation, though, like this: http://dangerouslyawesome.com/2014/07/theres-never-only-one-community/ It doesn’t mean that we can’t be friends, or even help each other, but I’m firmly convinced that having some more narrow specific terminology to add to add to the more neutral term ‘coworking’ is going to help the industry, not hurt it. -Alex On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 1:16 PM, Jacob Sayles ja...@officenomads.com wrote: Tricky business for sure. One factor I've been looking more and more at is the motivations and intentions of the champions behind each community, or said another way, why the space was started in the first place. There are many conversations that come up again and again that, with hindsight, I can see are just a miss-match of intentions. For example the Open one space or many spaces conversation. It's a perfectly reasonable motivation to want to open multiple spaces and have a wide reach and impact. I personally started Office Nomads because I want a home and a community I want to be a member of. Understanding this helps me see why it doesn't make sense for us to make a chain of Office Nomads, and also why it's a waste of everyone's time to argue about this. If we can find neutral language to highlight distinctions like this it would go a long way to that goal of finding like-minded spaces and filling our communities with happy members. Jacob --- Office Nomads - Individuality without Isolation http://www.officenomads.com - (206) 323-6500 On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 9:48 AM, Alex Hillman dangerouslyawes...@gmail.com wrote: I’m pretty sure that Emergent Research has a rubric they use for when they do their research for their annual report, but I can’t remember exactly what is on it. Having some consistency with that would probably be helpful! I think it had some of the items you described, but it was a lot more specific with many of the attributes. Hopefully Steve can chime in! I used to be more opinionated about self-describing as “coworking” and the regular mis-use of the term, but I’ve become more and more comfortable with the idea that the word coworking is as specific as the word “restaurant”, which doesn’t really describe much on its own. I’d love to see more maps (including the one you’re putting together) display with more detail what people can expect. It’s more important that people find a place that makes them happy and productive than anything else…and reducing that to “coworking” is like reducing fine dining french restaurants and mcdonalds to “restaurant”. *Technically* accurate, but not really helpful. Related, this recent post caught my eye (I think Liz posted it from the GCUC account): http://www.cloudvirtualoffice.com/blog/a-coworking-safari/ I’m especially interested in the things vary widely, really impact the experience, but are hardest to really quantify: things like “ambiance” and noise level are such relative descriptions, so the source matters a lot, too! Who’s doing the describing: the owner? The members? Visitors? In a lot of cases, their descriptions vary quite a bit. To that point, even “non-hostile friendly” is relative. It’s become a common theme that I hear from coworkers who visit startup-centric coworking spaces that the only time people talk to each other is when they’re pitching their startup. For some people, that’s non-hostile and friends but for others, it’s their worst nightmare. -Alex On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 12:34 PM, Ramon Suarez ra...@betacowork.com wrote: Hi everyone, I'm working on a definition of Coworking to make it easier to choose who to
Re: [Coworking] Basic elements for a definition of coworking
Case in point: WITHIN the fast food industry, they refer to themselves as “QSRs” or “Quick Service Restaurants”. Sometimes it’s “Fast Casual”. That industry by itself is huge and diverse, even as a subset of the larger restaurant industry. http://www.qsrmagazine.com/ http://www.qsrweb.com/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fast_food_restaurant But tell me one time that you’ve heard someone dining at Micky D’s call it “Fast Casual” :) -Alex On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 1:40 PM, Alex Hillman dangerouslyawes...@gmail.com wrote: Likening another space to a fast food joint is a little less neutral.” Lots of people love fast food and don’t think of it as derogatory at all. Again - the source matters. -Alex On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 1:38 PM, Jacob Sayles ja...@officenomads.com wrote: Ah let me clarify. By neutral I didn't mean less specific I meant less hostile or actually more open to the difference. Using terms like Korean BBQ is a good example of this as it's not derogatory. Likening another space to a fast food joint is a little less neutral. Jacob --- Office Nomads - Individuality without Isolation http://www.officenomads.com - (206) 323-6500 On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 10:24 AM, Alex Hillman dangerouslyawes...@gmail.com wrote: If we can find neutral language to highlight distinctions like this it would go a long way to that goal of finding like-minded spaces and filling our communities with happy members.” I don’t think that more *neutral* language is what we need. In fact, I think we need the opposite. The restaurant industry has fine dining and fast food, regional cuisines, varying price points, etc. But people need to have terms like “fast food” and “korean BBQ” to narrow down what they’re looking for. I know that this sounds like fragmentation, which freaks a lot of people out. I think this is HEALTHY fragmentation, though, like this: http://dangerouslyawesome.com/2014/07/theres-never-only-one-community/ It doesn’t mean that we can’t be friends, or even help each other, but I’m firmly convinced that having some more narrow specific terminology to add to add to the more neutral term ‘coworking’ is going to help the industry, not hurt it. -Alex On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 1:16 PM, Jacob Sayles ja...@officenomads.com wrote: Tricky business for sure. One factor I've been looking more and more at is the motivations and intentions of the champions behind each community, or said another way, why the space was started in the first place. There are many conversations that come up again and again that, with hindsight, I can see are just a miss-match of intentions. For example the Open one space or many spaces conversation. It's a perfectly reasonable motivation to want to open multiple spaces and have a wide reach and impact. I personally started Office Nomads because I want a home and a community I want to be a member of. Understanding this helps me see why it doesn't make sense for us to make a chain of Office Nomads, and also why it's a waste of everyone's time to argue about this. If we can find neutral language to highlight distinctions like this it would go a long way to that goal of finding like-minded spaces and filling our communities with happy members. Jacob --- Office Nomads - Individuality without Isolation http://www.officenomads.com - (206) 323-6500 On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 9:48 AM, Alex Hillman dangerouslyawes...@gmail.com wrote: I’m pretty sure that Emergent Research has a rubric they use for when they do their research for their annual report, but I can’t remember exactly what is on it. Having some consistency with that would probably be helpful! I think it had some of the items you described, but it was a lot more specific with many of the attributes. Hopefully Steve can chime in! I used to be more opinionated about self-describing as “coworking” and the regular mis-use of the term, but I’ve become more and more comfortable with the idea that the word coworking is as specific as the word “restaurant”, which doesn’t really describe much on its own. I’d love to see more maps (including the one you’re putting together) display with more detail what people can expect. It’s more important that people find a place that makes them happy and productive than anything else…and reducing that to “coworking” is like reducing fine dining french restaurants and mcdonalds to “restaurant”. *Technically* accurate, but not really helpful. Related, this recent post caught my eye (I think Liz posted it from the GCUC account): http://www.cloudvirtualoffice.com/blog/a-coworking-safari/ I’m especially interested in the things vary widely, really impact the experience, but are hardest to really quantify: things like “ambiance” and noise level are such relative descriptions, so the source matters a lot, too! Who’s doing the describing: the owner? The members? Visitors? In a lot of cases, their
Re: [Coworking] Basic elements for a definition of coworking
I agree with Alex. I have been arguing for sometime the restaurant metaphor. I think we would be better served trying to define the categories instead of the industry. Hell one could argue that coworking is already a category of an industry. :) Commercial Real Estate - Shared Space - Coworking - category 1 - category 2 - category 3 For a long time we distanced the work we were doing at Gangplank from coworking, because so many of the coworking spaces were indistinguishable from Regus and the movement that existed felt like it had little soul (it has improved a lot in the last few years). We started to use the word collaborative space instead of coworking. It was our way of defining the category as we saw our world without having to fight for a definition of coworking that matched our world view. Sharing space to work beside each wasn't what we were doing. Collaborating as a community to work with each other was far more descriptive. We stopped saying.. We are not a restaurant. Instead we started saying yeah we are restaurant style we call a collaborative space. One could argue does Regus (executive office suites) fall under Shared Space or under Coworking? etc.. but I think those discussions and getting some shared concepts of the categories is far more useful than trying to come up with either a generic term for coworking or narrowing the funnel of what coworking is. My two cents. On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 10:45 AM, Alex Hillman dangerouslyawes...@gmail.com wrote: Case in point: WITHIN the fast food industry, they refer to themselves as “QSRs” or “Quick Service Restaurants”. Sometimes it’s “Fast Casual”. That industry by itself is huge and diverse, even as a subset of the larger restaurant industry. http://www.qsrmagazine.com/ http://www.qsrweb.com/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fast_food_restaurant But tell me one time that you’ve heard someone dining at Micky D’s call it “Fast Casual” :) -Alex On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 1:40 PM, Alex Hillman dangerouslyawes...@gmail.com wrote: Likening another space to a fast food joint is a little less neutral.” Lots of people love fast food and don’t think of it as derogatory at all. Again - the source matters. -Alex On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 1:38 PM, Jacob Sayles ja...@officenomads.com wrote: Ah let me clarify. By neutral I didn't mean less specific I meant less hostile or actually more open to the difference. Using terms like Korean BBQ is a good example of this as it's not derogatory. Likening another space to a fast food joint is a little less neutral. Jacob --- Office Nomads - Individuality without Isolation http://www.officenomads.com - (206) 323-6500 On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 10:24 AM, Alex Hillman dangerouslyawes...@gmail.com wrote: If we can find neutral language to highlight distinctions like this it would go a long way to that goal of finding like-minded spaces and filling our communities with happy members.” I don’t think that more *neutral* language is what we need. In fact, I think we need the opposite. The restaurant industry has fine dining and fast food, regional cuisines, varying price points, etc. But people need to have terms like “fast food” and “korean BBQ” to narrow down what they’re looking for. I know that this sounds like fragmentation, which freaks a lot of people out. I think this is HEALTHY fragmentation, though, like this: http://dangerouslyawesome.com/2014/07/theres-never-only-one-community/ It doesn’t mean that we can’t be friends, or even help each other, but I’m firmly convinced that having some more narrow specific terminology to add to add to the more neutral term ‘coworking’ is going to help the industry, not hurt it. -Alex On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 1:16 PM, Jacob Sayles ja...@officenomads.com wrote: Tricky business for sure. One factor I've been looking more and more at is the motivations and intentions of the champions behind each community, or said another way, why the space was started in the first place. There are many conversations that come up again and again that, with hindsight, I can see are just a miss-match of intentions. For example the Open one space or many spaces conversation. It's a perfectly reasonable motivation to want to open multiple spaces and have a wide reach and impact. I personally started Office Nomads because I want a home and a community I want to be a member of. Understanding this helps me see why it doesn't make sense for us to make a chain of Office Nomads, and also why it's a waste of everyone's time to argue about this. If we can find neutral language to highlight distinctions like this it would go a long way to that goal of finding like-minded spaces and filling our communities with happy members. Jacob --- Office Nomads - Individuality without Isolation http://www.officenomads.com - (206) 323-6500 On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 9:48 AM, Alex Hillman
