American Energy Partners Business Practices (Aubrey McClendon)

[jerrywall]

And while Apple is successful as a company, I'd like to more how their campus contributed to that.

It's a culture thing and a recruiting tool. Especially in the tech/new media industry, Campus style headquarters are very popular. The Googleplex, for example. It creates a "loosened" environment, encourages self direction and innovation (or is believed to do so at least), and enables rapid expansion.

It's not surprising that other companies would attempt to follow the behavior of some of the most innovative and successful companies of the past 20 years.

[sooner88]

It's a culture thing and a recruiting tool. Especially in the tech/new media industry, Campus style headquarters are very popular. The Googleplex, for example. It creates a "loosened" environment, encourages self direction and innovation (or is believed to do so at least), and enables rapid expansion.

It's not surprising that other companies would attempt to follow the behavior of some of the most innovative and successful companies of the past 20 years.

It also does a good job of removing (or at least dispersing) the visual hierarchy of the company. No longer are there execs on the top floor, etc.

CHK's campus was a good idea in theory, but as they grew the campus seemed to grow to a size that became inefficient on a company level. As someone mentioned, meetings across campus may take a 15 minute walk where in a tower you can just hop on an elevator. It would seem that once you reach a certain size you either need to abandon the campus or have multiple mid-rise buildings vs the 4 story buildings spread out over a large area.

[AP]

It's a culture thing and a recruiting tool. Especially in the tech/new media industry, Campus style headquarters are very popular. The Googleplex, for example. It creates a "loosened" environment, encourages self direction and innovation (or is believed to do so at least), and enables rapid expansion.

It's not surprising that other companies would attempt to follow the behavior of some of the most innovative and successful companies of the past 20 years.

Wait, is that true? I've read a lot recently about companies moving out of campus style office parks in the suburbs in favor of cities...

https://www.bostonglobe.com/business...03N/story.html
http://www.seattletimes.com/business...ure-of-cities/

[jerrywall]

Wait, is that true? I've read a lot recently about companies moving out of campus style office parks in the suburbs in favor of cities...

https://www.bostonglobe.com/business...03N/story.html
http://www.seattletimes.com/business...ure-of-cities/

*Shrug* Every company is different. I guess it depends which part you're questioning. Their popularity? It's sort of like choosing to live in the country vs the city... different strokes. The perception of the "loosened" environment. Well, that's going to be opinions so valid or not. The rapid expansion? Yes.

[jerrywall]

Wait, is that true? I've read a lot recently about companies moving out of campus style office parks in the suburbs in favor of cities...

https://www.bostonglobe.com/business...03N/story.html
http://www.seattletimes.com/business...ure-of-cities/

BTW - City vs suburbs is not the same as campus vs highrise. Amazon has a campus style headquarters in downtown Seattle. And while 63rd and Western isn't downtown, I wouldn't consider it in the suburbs. Someone could build some real interesting campuses in an urban environment.

[dankrutka]

It's an interesting discussion. Thanks for the thoughtful answers.

[Pete]

Really, it's about growth and expandability.

Most the companies that opt for the campus model -- apart from California where campuses make sense due to the beautiful weather and lots of outdoor common space -- are fast-growing.

This was exactly the case with CHK. Bought a few small buildings then added 2 or 3 every year and acquired enough land to keep growing.

Devon was much more mature and not growing nearly as fast. They already had their employees scattered between a lot of downtown buildings, so they knew pretty much how much space they needed. Also, Nichols himself was already highly involved downtown and the chamber, and the chamber is very, very downtown oriented.

Aubrey never got involved in the chamber and seem to have a personal preference for a campus with tons of landscaping and recreation facilities. He also truly loved helping design all the different buildings, most of which where quite different than the last.


BTW, I hear this "Aubrey didn't want tall due to hierarchy" statement and it's completely silly. He was among the most conspicuous consumers (dozens of antique boats, one of the largest private wine collections in the U.S.) and one of the highest paid CEO's in the world. Absolutely no one is saying, "Gee, his office is only on the 4th floor so he's really just like us". Beside the fact he had a huge, opulent office, big private bath, millions in artwork in it, etc.

He just liked a campus and may have used the 'man of the people argument' (although I think this was more conjecture than anything) but he was too smart of a guy to really think anyone bought into that.

[bchris02]

CHK's campus was a good idea in theory, but as they grew the campus seemed to grow to a size that became inefficient on a company level. As someone mentioned, meetings across campus may take a 15 minute walk where in a tower you can just hop on an elevator. It would seem that once you reach a certain size you either need to abandon the campus or have multiple mid-rise buildings vs the 4 story buildings spread out over a large area.

I agree with this. I would think that once a company reaches a certain size, the campus model would be come inefficient, at least as Aubrey did it. Now I do know that some of the largest, most successful companies on the West Coast like Apple, Google, Microsoft, etc do the campus model, but I am not familiar with the specifics of their campuses and how its set up as opposed to CHK.

[Pete]

Tech companies like campus because leadership things that the creative, younger types prefer them to more traditional vertical office buildings.

Campuses imply a certain informality (Look! We have a sand volleyball court and a lacrosse field!) and there is no way to duplicate that with monolithic office towers.

[tfvc.org]

I agree with this. I would think that once a company reaches a certain size, the campus model would be come inefficient, at least as Aubrey did it. Now I do know that some of the largest, most successful companies on the West Coast like Apple, Google, Microsoft, etc do the campus model, but I am not familiar with the specifics of their campuses and how its set up as opposed to CHK.

Also tech companies like Apple and Alphabet have many tentacles so splitting into different buildings are easier to do than companies who do fewer things and operational departments.