Providing productivity environments is not a particularly risky activity, but the few risks involved are worth noting.

Lost productivity from status-oriented office improvements. One hazard of stepping up to providing Productivity Environments is that management might treat the improvement in the office environment as a status upgrade instead of a productivity upgrade. In some organizations, private offices are status symbols, and management sometimes interprets developers' lobbying for private offices as lobbying for improved status. As a result, organizations sometimes spend money on cosmetic improvements that don't improve productivity—and that sometimes damage it. Management might upgrade the developers' cubicles from standard cloth walls to walls with smoked-glass inserts. They might assign developers to larger cubicles that hold small conference tables. They might replace the standard cubicle furniture with tasteful antique wood furniture.

Though well intentioned, each of these measures is more likely to damage productivity than to improve it. Smoked-glass inserts reduce the already limited amount of privacy available to a developer who works in a cubicle. Conference tables increase the chance of holding impromptu meetings in a cubicle, which increases the number of distractions to the developers in adjacent cubicles. Antique wood furniture reduces leg movement and therefore reduces the usable work area inside the cubicle. I haven't met a developer yet who wouldn't prefer working at two large, fold-up, banquet tables instead of a small, finely crafted antique desk.

If true productivity offices cannot be provided, more effective productivity measures would include increasing the height of the cubicle walls from 5 feet to 7 feet and adding doors to them. Be sure that your office improvements stay focused on productivity.

Transition downtime. Changing office space nearly always involves a host of administrative headaches that have an adverse effect on productivity. I've seen problems in the transfer of file boxes and other materials from the old site to the new one and problems with new phone systems, new voicemail systems, computer network installations, power supply reliability, delivery of office furniture and equipment, and a variety of other areas.

In addition to administrative headaches, there is the inevitable downtime associated with a move or a remodel. Developers lose time packing and unpacking. People succumb to the temptation to reorganize their files and bookshelves at moving time. If the move is to a new building, people spend time exploring their new environment. And there is sometimes a loss of morale on the part of developers who do not get the new office locations they had hoped for.

All things considered, you should assume a minimum of one lost person-week per developer for any group move. Moving to productivity offices will produce positive benefits in the long run, but the final stage of a project under pressure is usually a poor time to make such a move. Such a move should generally be made between projects or in the early stages of a new project.

Political repercussions of preferential treatment for software professionals. In an organization that doesn't generally provide private offices to its staff, non-software staff members can interpret the provision of private offices to software developers as preferential treatment. You can mitigate this risk by explaining the special needs of software developers to other staff members who feel slighted or by locating software developers in a separate area where the differences in office accommodations won't be as noticeable.