I'm only saying that when engineers discuss how they are affected by their work environment, they should keep perspective on the actual value they provide to their employer, which is not equivalent to what and how much they produce on a daily basis.

Of course, but engineers are expensive. When is it ever in the employer's interest to get less output from them? Meet with them in person, do code reviews and such as often as you'd like, but once you've defined a problem for them to solve, what possible value could you get by keeping them in a distracting work environment?

In the very rare case that there is a clearly defined Problem which has been presented to from Above, which you can work on in isolation, and which you should prioritize to the exclusion of all else, then sure, distracting them will cause the Solution to be delayed. Many engineers like to view this kind of situation as their only responsibility and only avenue for adding value. I'm not sure it's accurate.

We have to use a more broad and nuanced perspective on the value we provide when we talk about how that value is affected by our work environment.

> ...more broad and nuanced perspective on the value we provide ...

This sounds like "leveraging synergies". If it was possible to explain any tangible benefit to such an environment, the conversation would move forward. Really, with the Very Rare Case? Developers don't have enough work to do where they don't need to stop and talk every 10 minutes?

Your point assumes that management understands that value better than they do.

I think that's a questionable assumption.

No, I'm not saying that you should accept someone else's valuation of your contribution. Instead, I am questioning this particular person's valuation because, like those of so many other employees, it is too narrow.

If you do not even address the long-term value you provide to the company, then you can't possibly make a reasonable argument that open-offices are a detriment to that long-term value. For the record, I believe they probably are a detriment, so I have an incentive for the discourse and arguments to improve.