Why Engineers Should Be Co-Located

​Or: How to build a big room without starting a fight

In engineering, we often need to find the compromise of two competing requirements. This can include the way we work – and not only the solutions we develop. Engineers need to be able to work autonomously while also ensuring collaboration. We want deep work for optimisation, but we can’t work in isolation. We want agility for speedy solution implementation, but the work still needs documentation. I refer to this in the book Global Engineering as modal shifting – where engineers often need to move from one mode of work to another as the nature of the challenge changes. In the post COVID world (been a while since I used that term) working from home (and hybrid working has become more common. This has added a new nuance to engineering colocation – in the past it was about things like international teams across timelines and siloed organisation structures.
I should note that engineers should be co-located.
Hybrid work is here to stay. Some of your best work probably happens when nobody talks to you for three hours. But colocation—being in the same space, at the same time, working toward the same goal—is essential for engineering excellence.
And this has been known for a long time.
The Case for Co-Location: Obeya, Agile, and Actual Progress
If you’ve studied Lean, you’ve likely heard of Obeya—the Japanese term for “big room.” It’s not just a room full of desks. It’s a space where multidisciplinary teams come together to share plans, data, goals, and progress. The aim is shared situational awareness. The result is faster decisions, better alignment, and a sense of shared purpose.
This should sound familiar. And agile agrees.
The Agile Manifesto explicitly states: “The most efficient and effective method of conveying information to and within a development team is face-to-face conversation.” Agile emerged from the trenches of software development, but its principles align perfectly with the needs of modern engineering: tight feedback loops, quick course corrections, and collaborative problem-solving.
None of that happens over email, text or online chats.
But Engineers Also Need Time to Think
And yet… engineers also need solitude.
There are moments when progress means going deep, not wide. When an engineer needs to put on noise-cancelling headphones, stare at a whiteboard, and lose themselves in a technical knot. That’s not just nice to have—it’s essential so you can leverage the power of your unconscious.
So how do we reconcile the need for co-location with the need for deep work?
The Maverick Middle Ground
One answer comes from Ricardo Semler’s Maverick. In his iconic book about transforming traditional management, he describes a system where employees aren’t told when to work, but rather when to be available.
Imagine a framework where engineers are expected to be onsite between 10 a.m. and 2 p.m.—a shared block that ensures collaboration, alignment, and quick decision-making. The rest of the day? That’s for solo work, whether it’s at the office, at home, or in a quiet corner of a café.
Or consider a structure where engineers are co-located Tuesday through Thursday, with the remaining days left flexible. The result? A blend of spontaneous conversation and uninterrupted focus. Team synergy and personal autonomy.
Co-Location Isn’t Just Old School Thinking.
This isn’t about going back to the old way of working. It’s about acknowledging what has always worked—and updating it for today. Engineering teams thrive when they have shared goals, shared knowledge, and shared space.
So yes, engineers should be co-located. But it need not be all the time. And not at the cost of deep work.
Instead, we can be intentional: design our workweeks to make the most of face-to-face time, while respecting the individual cognitive demands of engineering.
That’s not just efficient—it’s engineering.
If you have come across methods to find a balance between solo work and colocation that you think worked well, then let me know in the comments.