The Work Foundation seems to be turning out some quite interesting stuff of late. Their most recent report considers the so-called "knowledge worker" and the "knowledge economy" and how such phrases are so said to be so rhetorical they are useless in many ways.
As such, the report looks at the following:
"The main aim is to explore testable definitions. In other words, do they allow us to measure in a robust way through national and international statistical and survey data the knowledge economy, the knowledge workforce and the knowledge-based firm?"
As such, the report looks at the following:
"The main aim is to explore testable definitions. In other words, do they allow us to measure in a robust way through national and international statistical and survey data the knowledge economy, the knowledge workforce and the knowledge-based firm?"
If you are someone who believes the future belongs to knowledge-based industries and knowledge workers then it may pay to have a look at the report and determine whether you fall in or out this equation.
To see a press release of the report go to - Knowledge economy debate needs to move beyond platitudes (The Work Foundation).
The report can be dowloaded by going to - Defining the knowledge economy (Ian Brinkley).
2 comments:
Hmm, I think these ideas have some metrit. I think we can sometimes be guilty of overusing generalisations, particularly around the macro, to prove a point (or lack thereof!). Another example of this is trying to show how many days have been lost (or billions of pounds) due the world cup, or common cold etc. etc.
I get your point Bruce - they are terms that have a great deal of of merit and value.
But forgive for me assuming there is a lot bullshit talk in politics and big business (i.e. "weapons of mass destruction", "corporate values", etc.) and sometimes it takes a more critical eye to break down true meanings of certain terminology and to see if there are any hidden agenda in there too.
Post a Comment