Twenty years ago when I worked at NASA Ames, our group moved to a new office building. We put up a map of the new offices, and invited folks to put their name on a office they liked. People were ranked by seniority, and a higher ranked person could bump a lower ranked one from an office. People changed their office assignments based on what office they liked and who they wanted to be near until changes slowed to a trickle. And that was our new office arrangement.
Opportunity costs are essential to ensure the efficient allocation of scarce resources. How much salary would each worker be willing to forgo in order to attain their preferred office space?
While we're at it...why not allow taxpayers to directly allocate their individual taxes?
I think the problem with your proposal is that it gets confuses what people claim that want and people actually want. What they really want is that the office size, location, and co-workers correspond with their status. The method used at NASA Ames solved that pretty well.
:)
Opportunity costs are essential to ensure the efficient allocation of scarce resources. How much salary would each worker be willing to forgo in order to attain their preferred office space?
While we're at it...why not allow taxpayers to directly allocate their individual taxes?
I think the problem with your proposal is that it gets confuses what people claim that want and people actually want. What they really want is that the office size, location, and co-workers correspond with their status. The method used at NASA Ames solved that pretty well.