Materi Bimtek Penulisan Artikel Jurnal Ilmiah Internasional 2017
II.1 Active Office: Action Office for Knowledge Worker
Office and home domains offer different significant behaviours for habitants. Office as
workplace is a place of productivity and home is a place for enjoyment and relaxation, but now it
becomes possible for different forms of work to be performed within the physical space of the
home.
The “workplace” is synonymous with a stereotyped notation of the “office”. Closer analysis
of the office as a container for work itself is not fixed (Churchill and Munro 2001). For example,
in 1904 when Frank Lloyd Wright’s Larkin Building was completed in Buffalo, USA, it was in
many people’s opinions the epitome of the concept of the office of that era. It represented the
state of the art in special-purpose, design spaces for knowledge workers. The space was laid out
efficiently as an assembly line of the document.
In this setting, workers were not mobile, not even locally. Documents were mobile and
mobility of the worker was confined to supervisors.
Later in the 1960’s Robert Probst proposed the Action Office, offering workers “power over
the walls”, where office interiors could be redesigned by moving walls and furniture as the need
arose. Similarly, 1960s Germany, the Schnelle brothers introduce Burolandschaft, offering
moveable furniture for the landscape office with information flow that led to the 70s cubicle
culture and cube farms.
In the 1990s “hotdesking” arrived as furniture once again become immobile, but its
“ownership” was highly mobile, with people and personal artifacts barely “touching the ground”.
Work often takes place “out of the office”. Much work takes place in other non-official
locations. Some people had home offices, while others talked of appropriating space in an ad hoc
manner. An example is “the corner of the kitchen table”, a location that feminist designers have
long noted represents a place where the domestic zone (the home) becomes an economic zone (a
place of work). Work also possibly takes place in public places, a central issue that arises is the
unpredictability of the environment and how technology including ubiquitous/pervasive
computing technology can fit into this situation.
Technologies like the elevator affected the structure of the workplace, making the skyscraper
possible and making for great concentrations of workers in one place. Further, innovations such
as lighting and air conditioning affected the hours people were able to work effectively and
comfortably.
Nowadays, communication technologies have affected the landscape of interaction, making
communications between distant locations possible. Communication technologies like wireless
technologies affected the way in which work gets done in terms of information flow without any
wiring. Computer technologies and network infrastructures that have taken work out of a single
place and into multiple places are one target of invisible computing.
In an Active Office, the worker will be mobile while information is available everywhere
and every time in the office. The user also can be seen logically in several locations. The user
mobility manages to provide relevant information at the right time and in multiple places. Our
approach is by understanding user mobility patterns, understanding user tasks which lead to user
activity in the corridor of Active Office criteria. The Active Office has three criteria i.e. high
productivity, efficiency and comfort. The questions to designers are:
What kind of working environment is it that the knowledge worker is expecting?
How do the workers interact with their physical environments?
Office and home domains offer different significant behaviours for habitants. Office as
workplace is a place of productivity and home is a place for enjoyment and relaxation, but now it
becomes possible for different forms of work to be performed within the physical space of the
home.
The “workplace” is synonymous with a stereotyped notation of the “office”. Closer analysis
of the office as a container for work itself is not fixed (Churchill and Munro 2001). For example,
in 1904 when Frank Lloyd Wright’s Larkin Building was completed in Buffalo, USA, it was in
many people’s opinions the epitome of the concept of the office of that era. It represented the
state of the art in special-purpose, design spaces for knowledge workers. The space was laid out
efficiently as an assembly line of the document.
In this setting, workers were not mobile, not even locally. Documents were mobile and
mobility of the worker was confined to supervisors.
Later in the 1960’s Robert Probst proposed the Action Office, offering workers “power over
the walls”, where office interiors could be redesigned by moving walls and furniture as the need
arose. Similarly, 1960s Germany, the Schnelle brothers introduce Burolandschaft, offering
moveable furniture for the landscape office with information flow that led to the 70s cubicle
culture and cube farms.
In the 1990s “hotdesking” arrived as furniture once again become immobile, but its
“ownership” was highly mobile, with people and personal artifacts barely “touching the ground”.
Work often takes place “out of the office”. Much work takes place in other non-official
locations. Some people had home offices, while others talked of appropriating space in an ad hoc
manner. An example is “the corner of the kitchen table”, a location that feminist designers have
long noted represents a place where the domestic zone (the home) becomes an economic zone (a
place of work). Work also possibly takes place in public places, a central issue that arises is the
unpredictability of the environment and how technology including ubiquitous/pervasive
computing technology can fit into this situation.
Technologies like the elevator affected the structure of the workplace, making the skyscraper
possible and making for great concentrations of workers in one place. Further, innovations such
as lighting and air conditioning affected the hours people were able to work effectively and
comfortably.
Nowadays, communication technologies have affected the landscape of interaction, making
communications between distant locations possible. Communication technologies like wireless
technologies affected the way in which work gets done in terms of information flow without any
wiring. Computer technologies and network infrastructures that have taken work out of a single
place and into multiple places are one target of invisible computing.
In an Active Office, the worker will be mobile while information is available everywhere
and every time in the office. The user also can be seen logically in several locations. The user
mobility manages to provide relevant information at the right time and in multiple places. Our
approach is by understanding user mobility patterns, understanding user tasks which lead to user
activity in the corridor of Active Office criteria. The Active Office has three criteria i.e. high
productivity, efficiency and comfort. The questions to designers are:
What kind of working environment is it that the knowledge worker is expecting?
How do the workers interact with their physical environments?