When I read the Wall Street Journal article “A Pod of One’s Own“, it first brought out the cynic in me. A small room with almost none of the standard hotel amenities? Who wants that? And really, who can fit into these small rooms?

Then I rethought all that and decided this could be a great idea in the right places. The point of traveling somewhere is to see and visit what’s unique to that place . . . . not see and visit the interior of your hotel room. Even business travelers want to see something new that doesn’t remind them of their business. If you’re in Amsterdam shouldn’t you be out enjoying Amsterdam as opposed to thinking about how small your room at QBIC is? When in New York doesn’t it make sense to at least see The Met or Central Park as opposed to locking yourself in the The Pod? Although, I’ll admit that visiting The Pod’s site did make me want to go hang out there. That’s almost the point though: these places are cool enough to hang out in, but really encourage people to get out and experience the surrounding environment.

So don’t these pods have to be in great places where there’s lots to see? Initially, I thought yes. Again, I rethought. If you were staying in a pod in Columbus, Ohio wouldn’t you be more likely to eat at Schmidt’s than the questionable restaurant off the lobby? Or even in a place like Mineral Point, Wisconsin won’t staying in a pod hotel make you more likely to visit the Pendarvis Historical Site than not? I think so.

I have convinced myself. I love the pod concept. Not because it could be more profitable for developers to fit more rooms into a smaller space. Not because it requires less staff and could make good management companies look great. I love it because it could force the proverbial “broadening of horizons.” In a world that is becoming increasingly homogenized, I think understanding what makes places – and people – unique will allow for good new ideas … like pod hotels.