TED, well-know from the TED organization’s office which as the architects Tina Manis describe is “a place where ideas and communication flow continuously and freely”. (via archinnovations) Our own Ernst & Young project can be found there too.
Hubert Blanz
Net hubs
In the early days of the web (don’t worry this is not a “once upon a time” story), in the early days of the web the limited access due to its technical nature meant that the people who used it were seen as hermits, people-shy geeks, who felt secured by the isolating element of the web. The early days of the web reinforced the geek’s idea of now finally (at last!) they were able to live without ever having to physically meet anyone. Now it was possible to order everything over the net, with the keyboard and the flickering green screen acting as a safe buffer between the modern day seclusive and the outside world. The internet acted as an individualizer. Ironically reinforcing the individuality of those who were afraid of social interaction as they went online they needed to proof their individuality but through their specific access codes, user names, passwords could hide behind larger than life avatars. The individualizing element of the web created the Kafkaesque fear that the web would turn us all into hermits, each of us psychologically unable to interact with anyone anymore. Even for sex we would use the computer for love, as the Kraftwerk song goes.
But as the net is becoming easier to access to more and more people we start to see that it is a great way of actually bringing people together. For example, when I joined Twitted recently I noticed that there are two types of tweets (is this how you call the people who are on Twitter?). There are those that are hunting for connections, their goal is to get as many connections as possible. Why? Maybe for to satisfy their ego (I have 100 or 1500 or 29,678 friends and that is important for ME to show this to everyone). What I also noticed is that apart from those that select their connections based on actual interesting topics, others are linking with people in their immediate vicinity. Although there is no actual filter in twitter to select locations (as far as I know) to do this, I noticed that many people based in Tokyo had a large part of their links to people based in Tokyo (or immediate vicinity).
One day after I went to a networking event, a message the next day on Twitter thanked 5 or 6 names that I knew from Twitter to having attended the event. I knew the online names, but was surprised that they were at the event as well. My point is that the border between online and offline is blurring. The net now provides ”us with the opportunity to meet more people than would be physical possible. But in contrast most of those online are not hermits, on the contrary many of the people online are very active both online as well as in real space. I have written in more detail about this in my chapter for the Denmark symposium paper “Tokyo City of Networks”. In the paper I argue that in cities such as Tokyo the net is providing an extra layer for the variuous tribes who are transversing the transitional spaces that is called Tokyo. I believe that when we think about the future of work, it are those urban nomads who easily jump from virtual into real space and back again that should be seen as the driving forces of where our societies are going. Many of the people I meet recently don’t have a typical nine-to-five-job anymore, but they all have professional passions and they meet up with liked minded people to share and discuss these passions. In a way the social networking sites are becoming more like dating platforms where contacts are initiated rather than merely ephemerally satisfied.
This is where space comes back again. Many of the network events are taking place in cafe’s or restaurants where presentations are given, name cards are exchanged, and new connections are made. Even though interesting by itself, wouldn’t it be even better to rather than merely talking and listening there could be a place where you could all of this, plus have the opportunity to work together? Maybe the future of work, and the future of the office is in these kind of net hubs like this co-working space in Portland called Nedspace. The net as a social platform staged on a local level.
Monkey Business
It is said that when you would put enough monkeys behind a typewriter in the end they would produce something like Shakespearian prose. According to a test done by Plymouth university giving six monkeys a computer and produced five pages of text, consisting of mainly the letter S, and later the letters A, J, L and M crept in. OK, ok, QED : monkeys don’t write works of shakespeare. So what do monkeys do in an office then? Well, Pan-kun, Japan’s favourite chimp does pretty much what many people do in the office: ignoring strangers, wasting paper, and trying to become invisible.
Â
Work 2.0
Work 2.0 is a book by Bill Jensen. I have not read the book, the title came to my mind when I was thinking about the future of work, or better the definition of work and not-work. Isn’t it time  that we seriously start to think about changing the way we work and how we define work. I mean not only the physical way of it, that’s easy (ok for me, it’s my bread and butter…), no what I mean is that work could be as in Bob Black‘s words “a new way of life based on play.”
Damn, I like that idea. Read that last sentence again: “A new way of life based on play.” That sounds awfully exiting!Â
A few years ago we designed an office and we added a few shacks (pictures were taken during construction) on artificial turf in the space. My vision was that these shacks could be used like children use the spaces they create. I was referring to those self-made clubhouses when we were young. Remember? During summer these huts made out of scrap wood where you would play for days, slept in, keep your treasures, read books, told jokes, played board games, maybe even had your first kiss… Play involves fantasy, imagination, and taking on spontaneous roles. Play creates a very powerful way of getting things done, play gets you in a state of flow, a state where you forget about time or anything else (until your mum shouts from the window to come and eat). In Black’s excellent article, he refers briefly to Huizinga’s book Homo Ludens published in 1937. Huizinga, a Dutch historian, who made an extensive study on the concept and importance of play. Huizinga writes: “Play is older than culture…[as] animals have not waited for man to teach them their playing. Play” Huizinga goes on “Transcends the immediate needs of life and imparts meaning to the action”.  Is is the intensity, a sometimes maddening absorbing power that is according to Huizinga, the essence of play.Â
So why can’t work be more like play? According to Black the main problem is that a lot of work that is being done today is “nothing but useless paper-shuffling.” The fact that the tertiary sector of service work is growing while the first (agriculture) and secondary sector (industry) is declining is proof according to Black that work is becoming less and less necessary. It is a contradiction that despite all the automation we work more than ever before. Black mentions a study by Paul and Percival Goodman who estimated that just 5% of the work being done would satisfy our minimal needs for food, clothing and shelter.Â
The question of work 2.0 for me is whether can we turn work into play? Black’s answer is that we first of all should discard the notion of a “job” and “an occupation”. If we forget about jobs then we can let people do things they actually like doing. Secondly there should be time limits to doing these tasks, a person might enjoy cooking, but the joy will disappear if it becomes toiling in a kitchen for 8 hours a day 5 days a week. Thirdly people should be able to have variety in what they do, or in Black’s words: “anything goes”. Just like in play, there should not be any need for “progress” in work. Huizinga saw in play the basis of who we are, Black in this sense wants to go back to this state of mind.Â
Can we play at work? I have my reservations about the examples that I am about to introduce, as some of them are only partly play, but at least these are not your standard-nine-to-five-work. The first and most well-known example of is of course Google, where employees can spend 20% of their time on their own projects. This extra “play-time” has let to the creation of Gmail, Google News and Google Finance. Projects that were created by Google staff out of their own initiative and time they could use as they wish. Another example might be the informal gathering in cafe’s where people from various fields come together to physically meet, discuss and work on collaborative projects. The idea behind this is that although IT made it possible of being able to work and collaborate anywhere, anytime, working together, talking in a physical environment seems be an as natural need as play.
Reclaiming design
via Inhabitat
Never get a job
According to Steve  Pavlina, we should never get a job, he gives 10 reasons: (my comments in brackets)
1. Income is for dummies, you only get paid for the actual time you spend at work, (ok, that’s a valid point)
2. You get limited experience, (you can get experience from anything, the problem is you should know when to move on)
3. You’re under the strain of lifelong domestication, (I have written about this before)
4. Too many mouths to feed (and you get taxed for it),
5. There’s too much risk,Â
9. You lose your freedom,
10. You become a coward (I especially like this criteria, read on of what he has to say about the courage to live life consciously here)
Moss carpet
A moss carpet made from Terramac, an eco-friendly 3D knitted and spun fabric which serves as a receptacle for the planter’s roots, protects the seeds, and holds the moss together. Made from plant-derived polylactic acid fiber, “this material is decomposed (biodegraded) by microorganisms in compost or in soil after 10 years. Eventually only carbon dioxide and water remain”. As the planter biodegrades, CO2 is captured by the plants through the process of photosynthesis. The name Terramac® means “sons of the mother earth”.
The result of using this is absolutely stunning. (via inhabitat)Â
Now to find a client who would like to use this…
Â
WorkVitamins: The book
I have started writing my book on WorkVitamins, so far it are going to be 28 chapters divided into 5 sections. Section one will be trying to address the fundamental question of why we work. The second section will deal with the concept of the office, why we have offices as we have them today, while part 3 deals with the ever increasing individualization of employees and the way employers view, or miss to view this change. The fourth part will be about the physical changes in the workplace and part 5 will be an explanation about our methodology: WorkVitamins, and will bring all this together.
So far the writing was going quite well, I had written 5 chapters. But yesterday I noticed that I accidentally overwritten one chapter (chapter 11 on individualizers). I was rather pleased with the chapter. Writing does not come easy to me, but this one was going so well. Now, it is all gone, and I am wrecking my brain thinking what I have written…( I am following the advice to get first a draft out and then to start the re-writing). I am also writing in a non chronological order thinking I will end with the first part. As I continue writing I will also look at sites on creative writing. Â Â Â