【正文】 Davenport, professor of information technology and management at Babson College, in Wellesley, Mass., and director of research for Babson39。s executive education ，他們的表現(xiàn)遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)低于它們的潛力，因?yàn)楣救匀徊恢廊绾喂芾硭麄?，達(dá)文波特說，托馬斯教授的信息技術(shù)和管理Babson學(xué)院，在韋爾斯利，馬薩諸塞州與研究部主管為巴布森的行政教育課程。 Knowledge workers are going to be the primary force determining which economies are successful and which aren39。t, he says. “知識(shí)工人將成為主要力量確定哪些經(jīng)濟(jì)是成功的，哪些是沒有， ”他說。 They are the key source of growth in most organizations. New products and services, new approaches to marketing, new business models—all these e from knowledge workers. So if you want your economy to grow, your knowledge workers had better be doing a good job. “他們的主要增長(zhǎng)源在大多數(shù)組織。新的產(chǎn)品和服務(wù)，新的辦法，市場(chǎng)營(yíng)銷，新的商業(yè)模式，所有這些來自于知識(shí)型工人。所以，如果你想你的經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)，您的知識(shí)工作者最好做了搞好。” Yet after studying more than 100 panies and 600 individual knowledge workers, Davenport has e to the conclusion that the old dictum of hiring smart people and leaving them alone isn39。t the best way to get the most out of knowledge ，在研究100多個(gè)公司和600名個(gè)人的知識(shí)型工人，達(dá)文波特已經(jīng)得出的結(jié)論是，舊的格言雇用聰明的人，使他們本身的最佳途徑獲得最大的知識(shí)型工人。 As he writes in his latest book, Thinking for a Living: How to Get Better Performance and Results from Knowledge Workers (Harvard Business School Press, July 2005), although knowledge workers can39。t be managed in the traditional sense of the word, you can intervene, but you can39。t do it in a heavyhanded, hierarchical way.正如他寫在他的最新著作“思考的生活：如何獲取更好的性能，結(jié)果知識(shí)工人” （哈佛商學(xué)院出版社， 2005年7月） ，但知識(shí)型工人“不能被管理的傳統(tǒng)意義上的總之，你可以進(jìn)行干預(yù)，但是你不能這樣做了繁重的手，分層的方式?！盓xecutive Editor Allan Alter has followed Davenport39。s career from his days as a pioneering thinker on business process reengineering and knowledge ，是一項(xiàng)開創(chuàng)性的思想家的業(yè)務(wù)流程重組和知識(shí)管理。 He met with Davenport in his office at Babson College39。s School of Executive Education in order to learn how managers, and CIOs in particular, can improve the performance of this critical segment of the ，以了解如何管理人員， CIO們尤其可以提高性能的這一關(guān)鍵部分的勞動(dòng)力。 An edited version of their discussion 。 CIO Insight: How do you define knowledge workers?CIO的洞察：你如何定義知識(shí)型員工？ DAVENPORT: People whose primary job is to do something with knowledge: to create it, distribute it, apply ：人民，其主要工作是做一些知識(shí)：創(chuàng)建，分發(fā)，適用于它。 Most of the time they also have a high degree of education or ，他們也有高度的教育或?qū)I(yè)知識(shí)。 They include anywhere from a quarter to a third of the workforce, but not everyone who uses ，但不是每個(gè)人都誰(shuí)使用知識(shí)。 If you are digging ditches, you may have some knowledge on the job, but it39。s not the primary purpose of what you ，你可能有一些知識(shí)的工作，但不是主要目的，你怎么做。 Are panies doing a good job of managing and improving the performance of knowledge workers?是企業(yè)搞好管理和改善性能的知識(shí)工作者？ They39。re 。 What most organizations do is HSPALTA: Hire smart people and leave them ：租用聰明的人并讓他們獨(dú)立。 We39。ve spent a lot of effort recruiting knowledge workers and assessing how capable they might be before we hire ，他們?nèi)绾慰赡茉谖覀兤刚?qǐng)他們。 But once they39。re hired we don39。t do a lot to improve their ，一旦他們雇用我們不會(huì)做許多事情來提高它們的性能。 Process improvement has mostly been for other workers: transactional workers, manufacturing workers, people in call ：交易工人，生產(chǎn)工人，人民的呼叫中心。 All the serious approaches to improving work have largely escaped knowledge ，改進(jìn)工作基本上逃脫知識(shí)的工作。 We let knowledge workers get away with saying there39。s no process to their work, that every day is ，沒有進(jìn)程，他們的工作，每天是不同的。 We don39。t measure much of anything about knowledge 。 If we don39。t measure knowledge work, why do you think there39。s room to improve knowledge worker productivity and performance?如果我們不這樣做衡量知識(shí)的工作，你為什么認(rèn)為有改善的空間知識(shí)工作者的生產(chǎn)力和業(yè)績(jī)？ It39。s a pretty wellinformed 。 People improve processes all the time。 they just haven39。t done it with knowledgework processes as ，他們只是還沒有做到與知識(shí)的工作流程多。 It39。s an extrapolation of the same logic in other work, that processes can be ，這過程可以得到改善。 Here is one number that indicates performance and productivity can be improved: IDC found that 1,000 knowledge workers can lose as much as $6 million a year just searching for nonexistent data, or repeating work that has already been ，顯示業(yè)績(jī)和生產(chǎn)力可提高： IDC公司發(fā)現(xiàn)， 1000個(gè)知識(shí)工作者會(huì)失去多達(dá)600萬(wàn)美元的一年剛剛尋找不存在的數(shù)據(jù)，或重復(fù)的工作，已經(jīng)做了大量工作。 Is it possible every knowledge worker is working to his or her potential?是否有可能每一個(gè)知識(shí)工作者正在努力他或她的潛力？ It39。s possible, but ，但可能性不大。 We can get a lot better at improving their 。 Why aren39。t more panies getting better performance from knowledge workers?為什么沒有更多的企業(yè)獲得更好的性能從知識(shí)工作者？ One of the problems is we treat all knowledge workers 。 Obviously it39。s more convenient and efficient to impose the same solution on ，這是更方便和有效的實(shí)施同樣的解決辦法大家。 Certainly in IT, broadly speaking, we try ，在IT ，廣泛意義上來講，我們嘗試。 It39。s troublesome if everyone wants different software and puting environments, so we create mon ，如果每個(gè)人都希望不同的軟件和計(jì)算環(huán)境，所以我們創(chuàng)造共同的環(huán)境。 But people work in different ，人們的工作方式不同。 And politically, we don39。t want to admit that some knowledge workers are better than others, and that some might deserve different office environments and ，我們不想承認(rèn)，一些知識(shí)型工人均優(yōu)于其他國(guó)家，而且有些人可能會(huì)得到不同的辦公環(huán)境和技術(shù)。 We don39。t mind treating the Csuite differently—why not our most productive knowledge workers?我們不介意治療的C 套件不同，我們?yōu)槭裁床荒茏罡挥谐尚У闹R(shí)工作者？ These are the people determining the future of your 。 Companies have spent billions on IT to help knowledge 。 Why aren39。t our knowledge workers getting more from all these inves為什么不是我們的知識(shí)型工人越來越多從所有這些投資？ Most people feel more productive, and in part they ，并在它們的一部分。 But we spend a huge amount of time futzing around with ，我們花了大量的時(shí)間與futzing周圍的東西。 Most organizations have no training or education on how to use these tools effectively in their 。 Call somebody in a big organization and say, Transfer me to your colleague Bruce down in accounting, and 90 percent of people will say, Gee, I39。m not really sure I remember how to transfer. Here39。s Bruce39。s number just in case.呼叫某人在一個(gè)大的組織和說， “我轉(zhuǎn)讓給您的同事布魯斯在會(huì)計(jì)， ”和百分之九十的人會(huì)說：“哎呀，我不相信我還記得如何轉(zhuǎn)移。這里的布魯斯的一些以防萬(wàn)一 。” We39。ve had call transfer capabilities for 40 years in ， 40年的組織。 Why can we still not use them?為什么我們還沒有使用它們？ The same thing is true of all these other devices—laptops, desktops, PDAs, cell ，筆記本電腦，臺(tái)式機(jī)， PDA ，移