Agree with more happy = more productive (interesting question remains on what we define as ‘productive’, the word itself seems not to fit in the enterprise 2.0 world!)

I like you question on what makes a good knowledge worker. We should tell schools and universities! Access to and managed of information I agree is key. The fact that most information these days is online, automatically implies a certain mastery in internet/technology.

As for office environment vs IT Infrastructure; I’m afraid the answer might be verys simple: Legislation. Our good old (not sure how old) “Arbowet” (legislation in the Netherlands that defines minimum standards to protect the physical health of employees) probably stimulated not only companies to improve office environments, but also studies that made the connection between the workplace and performance (helps with selling fancy office environments;-).

Then again, the workplace is changing (see Arjen’s blog!) to include basically anywhere, and highly depended on connection to the internet. Who knows this might well result in a change in the Arbowet to include also standards that guarantee the well being of employees in the online world!

You are right: I am mainly writing about knowledge workers, although it might even be true for all workers as:

• I do believe that all people are happier in a situation where they have choices and that happier people are more productive people
• I think that most people don’t need somebody to tell them how to be happy or productive (I don’t like the assumption that somebody else would know better)
• I much prefer output management over input management

So if we are talking about knowledge workers it boils down to the question: “What is a good knowledge worker?”. I would say that nowadays a mastery of (Internet) technology and how this could help you get to networked knowledge and deal with information filtering/overflow should rank highly in any competence framework for knowledge workers.

You don’t address one of my other points: Why do you think that organisations do understand the importance of a good environment when it comes to office buildings and not when it comes to end-user IT infrastructure? Or should I be more cynical and suspect that organisations have nice offices for branding, image and prestige reasons only?

Thanks again,

Hans

Just want to check if you speak of all employee’s, or only the knowledge/information worker. My point is that allthough I think I agree with your statement, I think it comes from a perspective where you make an assumption that the employee has the knowledge and experience to be able to choose the technology most suited for him/her AND the responsibility to use it accordingly.

I’m convinced that is NOT the case. There are still plenty of organizations and industries where this is not relevant. And even for organizations that have innovation as a core business and have knowledge workers, the risks of being to open might prove to much (especially when you consider that not all knowledge workers are experienced in IT!). The company might still be requires the boundaries conditions and standards that their employees should work with.

In my opinion, you’re statement is true for just a very limited group of people in a limited group of organizations.

You’re right about performance troubles. However the functionality boost is too big to bother about initial startup functionality. As I see you’re list then we use about the applications. I use as a bonus Openoffice.org.

Bye

Pieter

Cheers,

Hans

Agree with your comments. For as you want to use your ubuntu (agree totally did you ever consider as a workaround : portableapps.com ? This I use on my locked down XP flaptop (GIMP, OOo, etc)