The shared kitchen on a Lane Cove floor that nobody claims

A shared kitchen deteriorates faster than any other space of its size because the behaviour that damages it is invisible to the person doing it. Somebody leaves a cup, somebody else leaves a plate, and within a week the sink is full and nobody feels individually responsible. No cleaning frequency prevents that; it only determines how often the room is reset. The room is a collective action problem with a cleaning contract attached to it.

The honest position is that the room's condition through the day is a function of how the occupiers use it, and cleaning determines the baseline it returns to. Saying that plainly to the parties involved is more useful than increasing attendance, which is the response most buildings try first and which changes almost nothing about the experience at three in the afternoon. Setting the expectation honestly is cheaper and more effective than raising the frequency.

The most common dispute in a shared kitchen is what happens to items left out. A cleaner who washes everything creates an expectation and rewards the behaviour. A cleaner who touches nothing leaves the room unusable. A cleaner who discards items will eventually throw away something somebody cared about, and that becomes a complaint about the contractor. Every option annoys somebody, which is why the choice has to be made deliberately.

The scope has to take a position. Common workable rules include stacking items without washing, clearing to a designated area, or removing food from a fridge on a stated day with notice given. Any of those work provided the occupiers know the rule in advance. What does not work is leaving it to the individual attending to decide each time. An unstated rule guarantees a different answer every week.

Occupiers with a complaint about a shared kitchen usually raise it with the cleaner, who cannot change anything, or with each other, which rarely improves matters. The party who can change it is the building owner, the owners corporation or the building manager, depending on how the space is held and funded. Both routes produce frustration and neither produces a change. The occupiers end up frustrated with each other and with a contractor who was never able to help.

A stated route makes the difference. Where the occupiers on a floor collectively want a different arrangement, a written request from all of them carries far more weight than three separate complaints. Clean Best can quote an alternative so the request reaches the decision-maker with a figure attached rather than as a general description of dissatisfaction. A specific request with a price attached is a decision; a complaint is not.