Our friends over at NotAnMBA have posted an article that brings up some Big Questions that haven’t really been discussed publicly — at least not directly.
From The Business of Coworking:
If a space is for profit and sees itself as providing a place for independents and remote corporates to work, is this coworking? While I would answer yes!, there are plenty of voices out there that would suggest that this is not coworking but is rather just ‘office space’ rental.
LaunchPad Coworking is unabashedly for profit. We’re building a high-end space, no doubt about it. There’s no way we could sustain it charging people a few hundred bucks a month, which is why we’re renting space out in smaller increments (hourly for individual spaces, hourly/daily/multi-day for meeting rooms).
So let’s look at 2 ends of the alternative workspace spectrum.
At one end are places modeled after Citizen Space in SF and Indy Hall in Philadelphia. These locations are run by champions of the coworking movement. They are very cooperative in their setup. Their aim is not to make a profit, but to make enough to keep things going, and to be a catalyst for the careers of independent workers. They put community and collaboration and accountability and transparency high on their list of criteria for success. Conjunctured Coworking will be using a similar model here in Austin.
At the other end of the spectrum are companies that are basically executive suites. Regus falls into this category nicely, so I’m going to use them as my prime example, but there are many others,.
To me, executive suites are all about the façade. You get a mailing address, share a receptionist, have an office in a fancy shiny (and usually soulless) space, and you can bring clients in and pretend you have a company this is more than “just” you.
Maybe that was useful 20 years ago. I know back in the day when Go Media, a business I started on a shoestring, was me in my garage, I had to work extra hard to convince clients I was capable and reliable. My setup wasn’t unheard of, but it was pretty rare (we’re talking late 80s here) and corporate folks frowned upon it. Because I lacked a slick office it was hard for them to take me seriously despite the fact I was producing great work. (Or something like that.) I never did go the executive suite route, but I knew many who did in large part to impress such clients.
That’s no longer necessary. Most of the professionals out there these days know that companies like Microsoft and Dell and HP and, later, the majority of successful internet companies started with a geek in a garage..
I’ve heard more than one person say “coworking is about the people, not the place”. I think it’s about both. And I suspect the people who have adopted that mantra actually do understand that you also need to have a comfortable place to work. A great team will quickly lose steam in a dark, dreary setting. But they’re very right that if you don’t have a bunch of people ready to get on board with your concept, and eager to see you succeed, merely having a groovy space won’t bring success.
LaunchPad Coworking has a hell of a lot more in common with Citizen Space and Indy Hall than with our local executive suites. I, and everyone working to make LPC a reality, have way more in common with Tara Hunt, Alex Hillman, and the great guys of Conjunctured than we do with Regus.
We are doing this because we want the opportunities for community and collaboration. And we’re building the kind of place where we want to work.
Some of this may well be an age thing. Much to my astonishment, many of the folks starting coworking spaces (you know who you are!) are *cough* young enough to be my kids. The LaunchPad Coworking core team is mostly folks in our mid- to late 40s (sorry, Marie, but as the one person in your 30s, you get stuck being a parenthetical :)
But really, this is a lot more about finding some “right” definition of coworking, isn’t it? A broader definition makes room for coworking to be about different ways to work. Geography isn’t irrelevant, but its much less relevant than ever. Virtual teams are commonplace. Public wifi and broadband cards allow us to be online always, everywhere.
Not everyone is cut out to work independently. Some people need the office, the cube, the structure, the stability. Nothing wrong with that. But those of us who have the discipline and the temperament to work remotely need some options. Sometimes home is right. Other times a coffee shop might work just fine. And for some people, a low monthly fee for a coworking spot is perfect. But for many folks, on-demand works best. That’s the niche we’re filling — the spirit of monthly coworking spaces without a monthly commitment. Plus, for customers with a smaller budget and those who are content to work in a more bustling atmosphere, we have free wifi in our café.
That we’re building a for profit business doesn’t leave me feeling inauthentic or untrue to the spirit of coworking as it currently exists. Our way isn’t competing with other ways, it’s just adding to the possibilities. It’s all coworking.
Favorite This Post
13 responses so far ↓
1 Todd O'Neill // Jun 2, 2008 at 11:12 am
This may be rhetorical to your rhetorical but I think coworking is about the “what” rather than the “how” or “where”.
It’s about the ability and intention to communicate, collaborate and connect with the workers around you rather than sitting in isolation, either in your home office or a coffee shop or a cubicle.
2 Drew // Jun 2, 2008 at 11:15 am
Thanks for this Julie! I think it helps clarify that coworking is a big tent, and that different forms/styles fit inside the same tent. For example, I see Jelly as coworking in almost its purest form, though others actually don’t see it as coworking, per se. To be a broadstroke kind of guy, I’d say coworking is something like a cafe space where like minded people do their (individual) work in a shared space…
These sorts of conversations, I suspect, are just getting started-
3 Julie Gomoll // Jun 2, 2008 at 12:35 pm
I like that you point out the intention, Todd. That’s such a huge piece of it. It’s why if you go to Cafe Caffeine or La Taza on a Friday, it’s coworking, but if you go Tuesday, you’re just going to a coffee shop.
Drew — I’m with you on the broad strokes. I think we’re all better served by an inclusive definition of coworking.
4 Alex Hillman // Jun 2, 2008 at 6:09 pm
Great post, Julie. And great follow up comments.
The best thing to remember is simply, different strokes for different folks. With each new model emerging comes new opportunities for exploration and growth.
My FAVORITE part about this whole thing we’re doing TOGETHER is how we share our opinions, ideas, and experiences. It’s not a zero-sum game. It’s not win or lose. We’re a community of explorers, and every new map we draw means we’ve paved the way for all kinds of new settlers to come along.
5 rachel // Jun 3, 2008 at 5:55 am
i love reading what people define as coworking.
here in toronto my coworking partner and i had a town hall meeting to discuss the possibility of another coworking facility, and the task of differentiating between shared office space and coworking came up. one person argued that if is truly is about the people and the community, then the people and community can make that happen in any great space (cafe, office, or otherwise).
personally i feel like collaboration happens more freely when the general public isn’t watching/listening. a private space, even space where drop-ins are welcome, seems more fertile.
thanks for the post!
r.
6 Susan // Jun 3, 2008 at 10:27 am
Echoing the other so far, thanks for the post, Julie! It is great to watch this conversation grow and develop.
As with so many other things, it seems that coworking lives on a big continuum. I’m personally thankful for it as I watch individuals come through our doors at Office Nomads. For some, our space, our vibe, our coworkers, seem to be a perfect fit. For others the fit is not as strong, and I feel lucky that I have other spaces I can direct them to in our own fair city.
Keep up the great blog, Launchpad ladies - it’s a wonderful resource!
All my best,
Susan
7 Julie Gomoll // Jun 3, 2008 at 11:30 am
Dusty Reagan proposes we redefine coworking as:
Coworking is two or more individuals working independently or collaboratively who are socially interacting while they work.
I like it. It can happen anywhere with any (or no) business model. It’s a way of working.
Thanks Dusty!
8 Dusty Reagan // Jun 3, 2008 at 9:03 pm
Thanks Julie! :) Love the conversation that’s happening.
9 Wade Holloway // Jun 3, 2008 at 11:31 pm
Yes, it’s still co-working if it’s for-profit. In my humble opinion, co-working is about working together, regardless of the underlaying business model.
“It’s about the ability and intention to communicate, collaborate and connect with the workers around you rather than sitting in isolation” -Drew
I agree Drew, and one more thing… actualization.
I know many will naturally gravitate towards the social aspects when the space opens and they are sitting in the cafe next to one another.
Here are some ideas to interconnect the community on a project-level:
Leverage social media.
Twitter - opt-in list of Austin Coworker’s usernames for following.
Linkedin - Launchpad group
Facebook - Launchpad page and group… widget…
LaunchPad listserv or forum?? subscribe to daily/weekly project postings…
Any other ideas on community collaboration technology to leverage?
-wade
10 Julie Gomoll // Jun 4, 2008 at 8:04 am
Dusty’s post about redefining coworking struck quite a nerve with Tara Hunt. She wrote in the Coworking Google Group:
I’m wondering why there is a need to redefine it. It seems to be doing pretty well as it is.
Plus, it has a great deal to do with the vision of a small group of people (including myself) who had a very specific type of space in mind. There have been shared office spaces and coffee shops for a long time. Coworking is very different.
My response:
Tara, your vision for coworking has inspired people all over the world. That’s a truly amazing accomplishment. What good does it do the movement to hold on tightly to a definition that excludes so many people who embrace the very values you champion? Great ideas aren’t static. They evolve as they are adopted by others who share the passion.
It’s worth redefining coworking to encourage more people to think about working differently. How does it help anyone striving for community, collaboration, transparency, accessibility, and sustainability to say “Nope, sorry, that’s not coworking” because it doesn’t fit the original definition? A simple, clear definition says “You can do this too! Join us!” We should be inclusive and welcoming to everyone who shares these values.
Coworking is a starfish movement. Coworking locations are not starfish organizations. They may be cooperative, they may be egalitarian, they may do everything by consensus. But someone’s name is on the lease. Someone files for names and permits with the city or state. No one runs coworking, but someone runs the space.
11 Julie Gomoll // Jun 4, 2008 at 8:09 am
Wade - actualization is a great addition to Drew’s list. Yes We Can!
I did start a LaunchPad Coworking Facebook group, but haven’t done much with it. I’m not really very active on Facebook. I find it has a pretty high signal to noise ratio.
I’m very active on Twitter, though, as are lots of coworking folks. I’m http://twitter.com/juliegomoll
We haven’t set up forums yet, but we will.
12 Jerome // Jun 17, 2008 at 12:01 am
Hi. I want to commend you for designing what appears to be some fantastically modern architecture. The for-profit angle is also the way to go, in my opinion. Co-working as a cultural “workstyle” is completely independent from the financial underpinnings of its real estate. If that workspace fosters such an open collaboration, then that workspace is “co”-working. At the newly opened http://www.BLANKSPACES.com, people have not only shared resources and leads, but are already hiring each other.
13 Julie Gomoll // Jun 18, 2008 at 12:18 pm
Thanks, Jerome. We’ve been watching Blankspaces progress - I’m really glad to hear things are going well!
Leave a Comment