My new assistant, Stanley, is getting on my nerves. He’s determined to push this agenda that he seems to have picked up at uni, which essentially boils down to our office not being good enough to elicit peak performance from our team. I’ve tried telling him that it’s been working fine for a good 15 years now, but he still keeps bringing it up, pointing out potential areas of improvement.
For example, he’s repeatedly suggested that we invest in new lighting. I mean, I get it – the fluorescent bars aren’t exactly easy on the eyes, and the energy efficiency of the system leaves a lot to be desired. But is replacing it really going to lift our revenue? If not, I just don’t see the point. Stanley keeps bringing it back to employee retention rates and stress management and things like that, but hey – we’re an investment firm, not a day spa.
He’s also hinted at our cubicle workstations being old hat. God knows what he wants to replace them with – probably some open plan nonsense with hot desks or modular meeting rooms or some other trend that’s going to pass as quickly as it came. Put it this way, hipster graduates of Melbourne. Office interiors are office interiors, and there’s nothing you can do to make them fun places to be.
Alright, I’m hearing myself. Maybe I ought to give Stanley a bit more of a chance to explain where he’s coming from, just in case he’s onto something that goes a bit deeper than superficially styling up the place. After all, I’ve already been contemplating calling in some quotes from office fitout companies. Where do I start? How much of my valuable time should I assign to Stanley and his ideas?
He’s made it clear that he’s willing to spearhead an office overhaul if we’ve got the funds for it. I guess, at the end of the day, I should probably just give the kid a budget and delegate the operation to him. He is a double major in architecture and business psychology, so maybe it’s meant to be.