V2. ashley0707 Since the physical work environment affects employee productivity and morale, the employees themselves should have the right to decide how their workplace is designed.
V3. ashley0707 : Since the physical work environment affects employee productivity and morale, the employees themselves should have the right to decide how their workplace is designed.”
原题：No. 68 “Since the physical work environment affects employee productivity and morale, the employees themselves should have the right to decide how their workplace is designed.”
* brings creativity and coziness
* makes colleagues more closely and companionate
* Admittedly, some companies such as consulting/consultant? company must avoid too much decoration.
However, no matter the employee or the employer, as for the environment is considered, compromise should be made from time to time.
View1: work character has great influence on the design of workplace.
Evidence: consulting company must avoid too much decoration in order to appear professionally and dependably. To some creative work such as AD agency and fashion design, the decorating of workplace is important not only for simulating inspirations but also for showing creative abilities.
View2: also, the designment of workplace should be compromise to company culture.
Evidence: Consider the influence it has done to co-workers and the harmony in work place.
I agree that physical workspace can affect morale and productivity and that, as a result, employees should have a significant voice in how their work areas are designed. However, the speaker suggests that each employee should have full autonomy over his or her immediate workspace, I think this view is too extreme, for it ignores two important problems that allowing too much freedom over workspace (工作区;工作空间) can create.
On the one hand, I agree that some aspects of workspace design are best left to the individual preferences of each worker. Location of personal tools and materials, style and size of desk chair, and even desk lighting and decorative desk items, can each play an important role in a worker’s comfort, psychological wellbeing, concentration, and efficiency. Moreover, these features involve highly subjective preferences, so it would be inappropriate for anyone but the worker to make such choices.
On the other hand, control over one’s immediate workspace should not go unchecked, for two reasons. First, one employee’s workspace design may inconvenience (v. to subject to inconvenience: put to trouble), annoy, or even offend nearby coworkers. For example, pornographic pinups ([钉在墙上的]偶像，偶像照片[例如裸体女人或影星、歌星的照片]) may distract some coworkers and offend others, thereby impeding productivity, fostering ill-will and resentment, and increasing attrition—all to the detriment of the company. Admittedly, the consequences of most workspace choices would not be so far-reaching. Still, in my observation many people adhere, consciously or not, to the adage that one person’s rights extend only so far as the next person’s nose (or ears. or eyes). A second problem with affording too much workspace autonomy occurs when workspaces are not clearly delineated—by walls and doors—or when workers share an immediate workspace. In such cases, giving all workers concurrent authority would perpetuate conflict and undermine productivity.
In conclusion, although employees should have the freedom to arrange their work areas, this freedom is not absolute. Managers would be well-advised to arbitrate workspace disputes and, if needed, assume authority to make final decisions about workspace design.