Often, simplified cultural explanations of a nation‟s economy are common sense and taken for granted. Amidst the debate about the propensity of European countries to compete with other prosperous knowledge economies, some consultants in The Netherlands postulate that the Dutch will never be able to match the requirements of the new economy because of their „polder-model‟, a term used for the Dutch model of gaining consensus in which employers, syndicates and the government meet with each other to make agreements about labour. This postulation was made against the general opinion of some years ago, when this same polder-model was perceived as the main cause of the economic success of the Dutch in the 1990s: “Consensus lies at the heart of the Dutch success where unemployment has been cut to half (2% in 2000) of what it was in 1997. The government, with support of employers and unions, has cut public spending as a share of GDP from 60 to 50%. It is the combination of a quiet and flexible labour market with a solid monetary and fiscal policy and introducing more dynamic markets which is the core of the polder model.”
This paper explores the impact of the physical and social dimensions of the work environment on satisfaction and perceived productivity of knowledge workers in Dutch universities of applied sciences. The approach took the form of a literature review, multiple case study of six research centres using interviews and logbook analysis, and web-based survey (N = 188). Optimally facilitating knowledge production requires both space for concentration (to support internalisation of knowledge) and space for interaction (to support externalisation of knowledge). None of the work environments involved in the study adequately supported all the phases of knowledge development adequately. Cellular offices with personal desks are preferred for solo work and, whereas new workplace designs with a focus on the office as a meeting place support interaction and collaboration. Spatial layout and interaction have a stronger impact than comfort and absence of distraction. The spatial layout should support both in-depth concentration and communication, fit the internalisation/externalisation ratio of activities, and accommodate the proximity essential for collaborative knowledge development. Being able to choose is the key to success. In terms of research limitations, knowledge workers’ productivity was measured by self-assessment, but only a limited number of diaries were collected. The lessons learned can be used as inputs to decision-making processes regarding the design, implementation and management of working environments in higher education settings. Few studies have been conducted concerning the spatial preferences and needs of knowledge workers in universities of applied sciences. The results show that the physical dimension (comfort and layout) is more important for collective productivity, whereas individual productivity is more strongly influenced by the social dimension (interaction and distraction).
MULTIFILE
In the knowledge economy knowledge productivity is the main source of competitive advantage and thus the biggest management challenge. Based on a review of the concept from two distinct perspectives, knowledge productivity is defined as the process of knowledge-creation that leads to incremental and radical innovation. The two main elements in this definition are „the process of knowledge creation‟ and „incremental and radical innovation‟. The main aim of this chapter is to contribute to a better understanding of the concept of knowledge productivity in order to support management in designing policies for knowledge productivity enhancement. After elaborating on the concept of knowledge productivity, the two main elements are combined in a conceptual framework – the knowledge productivity flywheel. This framework appeared to be an effective model for supporting initiatives that aim for enhancing knowledge productivity.
