Move Further Away to Find Labour

 

Times are tough for both commercial organisations and governments in terms of recruiting the labour needed for economic growth.  Employment is high in most developed countries and there is a trend towards disengagement and; ’quiet quitting’.

This means that firms have to look further afield (than traditional labour markets to find new staff.  This ‘distance’ brings into play:

• early school and college leavers taking their first step onto the employment ladder;

• the long-term unemployed who have found it challenging to get back to work;

• immigrants looking to establish  new careers;

• Released prisoners., who find securing employment to be difficult

• Early retirees who find themselves in difficult financial situations.

Each of these categories offers a challenge but all will need some form of training and preparation for employment to maximise their chances of success - and their contribution.

Governments have a role to play in providing routes to these new markets, especially since many of the people involved may be in the social benefits ’system’.

Firms may want to look at their present aging workforce and consider how they can retain their skills for longer - at least while they train and mentor the next working generation.

A new set of markets might need a new set of employment policies and practices - with increased flexibility of contracts to suit the differing needs of these new groups of potential workers.

So, remember… your talent pipeline may be longer than you think but you may need to carry out some work to make it effective. 

Building Engagement

Engaged employees are more productive.   This is not surprising.  If employees feel they have a  significant part to play in the organisation they work for, they are much more likely to share the goals of the organisation and to contribute fully to those goals.

The culture of the organisation is a major determinant of the nature and level of engagement.  Employees want to share the values of their organisation and want to work for an organisation that treats them well, communicates fully with them and respects their role and contribution.

They, themselves, will know if their role is meaningful one - if the work they perform genuinely ‘makes a difference’

They expect to receive the training they need to carry out their role to the full - and to understand the performance expectations the organisation has for them.  Even those with mundane or simple jobs should feel their role is worthwhile.

There is a story that JFK (President Kennedy) was once on a tour of the Cape Canaveral Space Center when he saw a man pushing a broom. JFK asked the man what he was doing and expected a simple response such as “I’m keeping the place clean and safe.  The response he received, however, surprised and pleased him.  The broom pusher simple said “I’m helping put a man on the moon.”

This is an engaged employee, knowing that his simple role was a contributing factor in the overall mission of the organisation.

Such engagement is not fostered through rigid monitoring - of attendance, of throughput, of ability or …. 

Truly engaged employees can be trusted to perform, to question, to improve.  Engagement creates a virtuous circle of high performance, of job satisfaction, of challenge and offer suggestions for improvement.

So, instead of using simple performance monitoring processes in an attempt to gain improvement, take the longer view and consider how you might increase engagement.  This ma ybe a road less travelled but it is a more precise route to performance and productivity improvement.

Enhancing Staff Productivity in Today's Workplace

Over the last two decades and especially since the pandemic -  the workplace has undergone significant transformations. The rise of technology-driven companies brought flat hierarchies, attractive employee perks, and open-office concepts. Meanwhile, the integration of productivity tools like Slack, Trello, and generative AI has aimed to make workflows more efficient. However, despite these advancements, more employees are suffering from stress, leading to burnout and reduced productivity.

So, with all these innovations, why are firms still struggling to maximise productivity?

While personal productivity techniques—such as the Pomodoro Technique and zero-inbox strategies—have gained popularity, they only address individual efficiency. The real challenge lies in managing people in teams effectively and fostering a collaborative environment.

David Allen, the productivity expert behind *Getting Things Done*, highlighted this issue in his latest book, *Getting Things Done… with Others*. He argues that the key to workplace productivity isn’t just about personal efficiency—it’s about how teams work together. And that, ultimately, comes down to management.

One of the most significant productivity barriers in companies, particularly startups, is inexperienced leadership. Many new managers are promoted because they excelled as individual contributors, such as programmers or analysts, rather than for their leadership skills. Without proper management training, they struggle to transition from *doing the work* to *managing the work of others*.

You must invest in training programs to equip (especially new) managers with the skills to:

- Align diverse work styles and personalities towards common goals

- Facilitate clear and open communication

- Foster accountability without micromanagement

- Encourage team collaboration and problem-solving

One of Allen’s key insights is that while personalities cannot be changed, rules and workplace standards can be established. Clear standards help eliminate confusion and reduce workplace stress. For example:

Define when meetings should start and how long they should last.

Set expectations for response times to emails and messages.

Establish protocols for renegotiating commitments when priorities shift.

By implementing these ‘standards’, firms create an environment where employees feel supported rather than overwhelmed.

Burnout is often less about having too much work and more about uncertainty, miscommunication, and unaddressed stressors. When employees don’t have a clear framework for renegotiating deadlines or addressing workload concerns, they internalise anxiety, which affects both mental well-being and productivity.

To combat this, you should:

Encourage transparent discussions about workload and deadlines

Promote a culture of psychological safety where employees feel comfortable voicing concerns

Implement well-being initiatives, such as flexible work arrangements and mental health support

Enhancing workplace productivity is not just about implementing the latest tech tools or adopting personal productivity ‘hacks’. The key lies in effective team management, clear workplace standards, and reducing unnecessary stressors.

If yoy want to boost productivity in a sustainable way, you must focus on building a culture of collaboration, training effective leaders, and establishing clear, supportive workplace structures. 

After all, productivity is not just about getting things done—it’s about getting things done together.

Thankyou, Sergey

 Last week, I asked “What should we measure?” And talked about the need to measure outputs/outcomes rather than inputs - in terms of workers’ contributions.  Working long hours is not a key to success.  Those hours have to make a contribution to strategic goals.

Now, I read that Google co-founder Sergey Brin has called the 60-hour working week the "sweet spot of productivity" as he urged staff to have more  onsite days to help the tech giant meet its AI goals.

I agree that we need more staff to be in the office - but this is to improve communication, interaction, creativity and team bonding, rather than as a direct impact on productivity.

But this does show that very smart - and very successful - people can misunderstand the nature of productivity and concentrate on the wrong measures.

Sergey Brin might not have been saying exactly what he seemed to mean but it was very kind of him to underline my message and my lesson in such a timely manner.

Engage and Reward

I have written before about my belief that WFH imposes a brake on productivity.  There are all sorts of reasons - big and small.  The other day I thought of another reason which I thought I should bring to your attention.

When working from home, employees obviously (well it’s obvious to me anyway), have less engagement with their colleagues ….  but also with their supervisor or manager.  This means they miss out on all those little ‘strokes’ they receive on the various interactions and engagements they would normally have with their manager.

Though these may individually be insignificant and trivial, collectively they continually reinforce the relationship and bond between the two of them., Assuming this is a positive relationship, this is clearly a good thing and very difficult (if not impossible) to replicate over Zoom or Teams or any other communication platform - especially as it is often non-verbal.  

All of us need to know our contribution is respected and valued and that we are meeting or exceeding the demands placed upon us.  Though this can happen formally at reviews, assessments and at the end of projects, we need ongoing, regular feedback.  This is what we get from perhaps tiny ‘strokes’. Nothing may be said but we know everything is OK and we are making valued progress.

So, get your people back to the office - and let these informal interactions blossom once more.  The productivity figures will thank you.

Don't Multitask

If, on reading this headline, your first response was “If I don’t multitask, how do I get through my long and varied To Do list?”, then read on.

If you switch regularly snd swiftly between tasks, or even worse, try to do two things at one, (like handle your emails while in a meeting), you simply switch your focus too often, ruin your concentration on any one task and show little respect for others you are dealing with.  This is not a recipe for effective and productive work.  

Of course you need to address a variety of tasks but you need to work on any one task for sufficient time to remain familiar with all the contextual information and give strong focus to the current steps in your process of handling this task.    

This is why you should not have too many task on your ToDo list.  If you cannot give this level of focus to each task in turn ,there are too many on your list. You need to delegate some tasks or negotiate with others (including your boss) to reduce the number to a level where you can give full focus to each and deliver quality outcomes.

Then you have to schedule your day to provide periods when you can give full concentration to tasks in turn.  

This presupposes that you know what you want to achieve.from your workday - and you understand the key priorities for your focus of attention.

I know that the above is not necessarily a simple process but if you don’t address the problem, your ToDo list will get longer and the quality of your work will deteriorate.

Crisis, What Crisis?

Media pundits love to talk about the productivity crisis.  (Well, let’s be honest, they love to talk about any crisis…. and if there isn’t a crisis to talk about, they will invent one.)

The productivity crisis isn’t really a crisis.  The decline and stagnation in productivity has been a general factor in the Western world for the last decade. There are lots of reasons suggested and causes put forward but as we said last week, it is is too easy to blame the workforce - or to assign it to any one of a host of external factors.

The real reason for the productivity decline (take a deep breath here) is a lack of bold leadership over a significant time period.  One off the problems of the Western approach to business ownership and to government is its focus on the next 5 years as a maximum planning horizon.

Governments must achieve whatever they set out to do - or at least whatever they promise to do - before the next election

Business executives have a much lesser time period; they are forced into concentrating on the next quarter’s profits.  If these are down, the share price may tank- and with it, the executive’s bonus.

This is no recipe for infrastructure investment by government or business process investment by companies.

We need leaders that are willing to explain to their citizens, or their shareholders, why they intend to take longer-term decisions and make longer-term plans.  They then need the courage of their convictions to set in train the long-term actions that will ensure these plans are implemented successfully. 

If we have a crisis now, it is a crisis of leadership.

And just remind you,  it was not, and indeed is not, always thus.  

Quite a few countries with an authoritarian regime do take a longer-term view because they do not fear the electorate.

Even democratic Victorians made lots of profits but built lots of infrastructure - railways, roads, sewage systems and so on.  Without this infrastructure, we would not have had the industrial revolution.

So, leaders - stand up, take deep breath, look at a calendar rather then your current diary and start to formulate a longer view.

We might just avert ‘the crisis’.