Analyzing the analysts

Nomads at Last
Labour movement
The new oases

I just spent a half hour or so reading this three part series in The Economist about “nomadism” — essentially how increasing numbers of workers no longer need “second places” (offices) because they can work in “third places” (cafes, parks, libraries, etc). (“First places” is the term for home.) The word “coworking” does not appear anywhere in the articles, but the idea certainly is in there.

But here’s what struck me most, upon my completion of reading and my contemplation of what I’d read. There’s something almost funny about the peripheral movements something new, like coworking, inspires. I’m specifically talking about the growing number of news stories being reported about coworking and nomadism and the seemingly fast-changing (at long last) face of the Dilbert-style workspace. Don’t get me wrong — I’m psyched to see the media paying attention. But I’m also amused to read what sometimes comes across as an attempt to be definitive about a movement that is still (and might well always be) very fluid.

So let’s see, what is the story as we know it so far? First we have workers in offices. Then we have mobile workers avoiding the office and working from home. Then we have workers at home going bonkers talking to the dogs and picking their toenails. Then we have mobile workers going to cafes to at least be around other people, if not talk to them. Then we have mobile workers who realize this really isn’t much better than discussing work with the dogs. So we have smart mobile workers who decide coworking is the answer, a way to share space and ideas and, as we like to say at LaunchPad Coworking, a way to work smarter.

Which leads us to the analysts, critics, reporters, bloggers and other self-proclaimed pundits who are seeking a bird’s eye view, hoping to categorize this movement, tell us what’s right and wrong and how it all works.

And then! Ha! There’s me. I get to be uber-meta and analyze the analysts. How lucky is that? This reminds me of a book, The Tapir’s Morning Bath, by my friend, Elizabeth Royte. Elizabeth spent time on a research island near Panama where a lot of science graduate students go to observe this or that phenomenon in nature and use their findings to write theses in order to garner their degrees. Elizabeth, brilliant one that she is, decided that she would go and study the scientists — their communication skills, their mating habits, etc. Was there a whiff of parody to this? Yes. But really, the book is one of substance, and written so well that a New York Times critic actually said of it, “I love it!”

I know there is a need to observe, document, sort through, and make sense of this ever-changing world of ours. And I am only gently poking fun at the reporters who are scurrying to report on coworking. But it will be fun to look back at their theories and predictions and see, ultimately, which pan out and which will be retrospectively panned, like some Ptolemaic theories.

For example — in The Economist piece, the idea is put out there that all the so-called freedom that wireless devices offer actually trigger a lot of anxiety. Blackberry addicts are referred to as CrackBerries, unable to leave their devices alone. I say yes, it could be that the instrument has inspired the anxiety. But I think a better theory is this — those of us prone to anxiety and OCD (I am both) have a running start on our less anxious peers when it comes to living the wired life. Hitting send and receive all day feeds my need to do repetitive things, stimulates the anxiety that — like it or not I thrive on — and, how nutty is this, also manages to soothe me. So there’s an angle, analysts. Let’s take a look at that next time you’re on your delicious, nerve-wracking deadline, looking desperately for yet another way to examine the wifi-nomad-cowork-telecommute-whatever-you-want-to-call-it lifestyle.