I'm not sure that humans' productive output can be modeled so simply (hours working -> amount produced). It's a bold assumption that the primary value of lunch on campus is to increase "hours worked".<p>I think that the other goals suggested in the article -- more frequent communication, and better friendships -- are most likely more valuable than the time gained, and perhaps significantly so.<p>Furthermore, there are still a few benefits associated with feeding employees that weren't mentioned.<p>Among them:<p>-- reduced cognitive load from meal choices (better focus, even subconsciously, on other things)<p>-- healthier options, since in-house food is not subject to competitive market pressures which force it to make its food more addictive and less healthy.<p>and what I feel like is the most important:<p>-- employee retention. People are wired to get pleasure from being fed [1], and getting pleasure from something usually makes you like it, so it is not a stretch to consider that being fed by a group may increase feelings of loyalty and belonging to that group, or at the very least make you like the experience of being fed by them.<p>From an employee retention perspective, which is one of the sorest spots in the tech industry in terms of lost productivity (workers leaving causes huge knowledge gaps and lost time), free meals make employees happy both consciously (money saved by employee = happiness) and subconsciously (being fed = happiness)<p>Of course, if every company does it it may not help. But the absence will definitely hurt, so it's likely always going to be the best option!<p>[1] - <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3004012/" rel="nofollow">http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3004012/</a>