Policy has driven inequality

I have the advantage and disadvantage of being old. I remember what I think were 'better times' (but all old people in most historic eras have felt the same.

When I first worked in industry, unions were strong and fought well for what they saw as a fair share of the results of productivity gains made by their companies.  Strong unions did manage to keep the pay divide (between the worst and best paid employees) under control - and they did this in an age when productivity rose constantly (largely as a result of technology improvements and innovations).

Many said that the unions were too strong and so political priorities were for a time focused on reducing the power of unions.  This, again for a time, improved the economy but - whether as a direct result or not - did start the widening of the pay gap.  This has widened continually over the years as self -and mutually -serving remuneration committees secured vast increases in pay for senior executives whilst those further down the food chain received only modest increases.

This seemed to be acceptable for a while . Only the unions occasionally complained - but they by now had too little power to do anything about it.

A few policy decisions have attempted to ameliorate the situation (minimum wage, equal pay, and so on) but industry bosses have so much power, they can safely navigate around these little problems.  Their pay - even for those in the public sector, in hospitals and universities - has continued to rise steadily. They have bonus schemes which seem to have little to do with long-term success snd can sit smugly even when the fortunes of their company start to wane.

The politicians of the 'new right' form alliances with the great industry leaders and we enter a spiral of mutual interest' making the problem worse.

I have written before how I expect AI to make things worse (in the medium to longer-term) so the cavalry are not coming anytime soon.

Well, as I said at the start, I am old.  This not my problem, my fight. I hope younger generations can address these problems - but I an not sorry I won't be around for the fight.

Our People Are Our Greatest Asset

 How many times have you heard a CEO or senior exec trot out those words. It is a common phrase but a rare company that acts as if they believe it. I have railed before about the invention of the title 'Human Resources' but that's how many companIes treat their employees - numbers on the payroll, another resource to be used (and abused). I hope this doesn't soundv like you.

These execs create job roles and work regimes their have no consideration for human form or function.They create impossible targets . They create confusion, exhaustion and burnout. They communicate badly or not all.

These managers need to go back to school .  Actually that's too good for many of them who are possibly incapable of learning new ways of working - snd managing

Someone needs to help the leave - or art least to help them establish a people-centred strategy for productivity- improvement. They have to learn that their people truly are, or could be, their greatest asset - and plan, act and mange accordingly.  

Human factors - the collective term for factors such employee skills and experience, the organisational  culture, employee communication, team building, facilitating collaboration, etc.  These factors directly influence employee engagement and motivation which then go on to drive productivity and creativity.

Look after your people and they will look after your productivity.

Our People Are Our Greatest Asset

How many times have you heard a CEO or senior exec trot out those words. It is a common phrase but a rare company that acts as if they believe it. I have railed before about the invention of the title 'Human Resources' but that's how many companIes treat their employees - numbers on the payroll, another resource to be used (and abused).

These execs create job roles and work regimes their have no consideration for human form or function.They create impossible targets . They create confusion, exhaustion and burnout. They communicate badly or not all.

These managers need to go back to school .  Actually that's too good for many of them who are possibly incapable of learning new ways of working - snd managing

Someone needs to help the leave - or art least to help them establish a people-centred strategy for productivity- improvement. They have to learn that their people truly are, or could be, their greatest asset - and plan, act and mange accordingly.  

Human factors - the collective term for factors such employee skills and experience, the organisational  culture, employee communication, team building, facilitating collaboration, etc.  These factors directly influence employee engagement and motivation which then go on to drive productivity and creativity.

Look after your people and they will look after your productivity.

Virtuous Circles

The UK does not have a good record on employee training and development. Compared to many other developed countries the skill levels in our workforce are low.  Government incentives to train and develop employees are not strong. - and many employers are fearful about giving employees skills which increase their value to competitor organisations.

"Train them and they will go elsewhere" is a common mantra.

Well, perhaps employees with higher levels of skills do deserve higher wages - and if those higher skills make the organisation more productive, perhaps the organisation can afford higher pay.

If the higher skills levels have not resulted in higher productivity, something is wrong. The organisation has not developed systems and processes which can exploit - or which even demand - higher skills levels.

Organisations should be continually refining working systems, processes and work methods to increase productivity - and which give employees meaningful and rewarding work to do.

The organisation should be treating these valuable assets (the highly skilled workers) well and the workers should feel well looked after and valued.

They then have no need, and no inclination to go elsewhere.  This is a virtuous circle and should result in continuously increasing productivity - and resulting wage development.  

Everyone is happy!

Task Traceability

 I worked for some time ii the seafood sector.  Traceability was a major issue, as it is across the whole food sector.  If there is an outbreak of something like salmonella, rthe authorities need  to be able to identify those who might be affected by it.  Traceability should work across the whole supply chain - from farm (or fishing boat) to fork.  Because food safety is so important, there is detailed regulation ensuring and testing traceability.

However the principle of traceability applies elsewhere - in other areas of industry, in other areas off applicability - even inn other parts of life.

Take strategic - or other forms of -planning.  The overall mission and vision have to be converted into strategic aims and objectives which then must be cascaded and translated into different levels of planned tasks and activities throughout the organisation

Once the planning has been done and, in theory, everyone knows what their role is in delivering the strategic plan i t is useful to carry out an audit. Check there is traceability of the links across the planning chain. 

Why are the lower level tasks necessary?  

How do they link to the overall plan?  

Are there any elements of the plan that do not presently translate into lower level tasks?

This is a relatively standard traceability exercise - and thus there are lessons to be learned from traceability in the food sector.

Is Manufacturing positively productve?

  f course it is.  By its very definition, it produces. It turns out goods - often in high quantities.

But does manufacturing have high productivity?

Yes, normally it does.  Over the years, manufacturing has adopted lots of new technologies - and all of these have had a positive effect on productivity… reducing the time taken to produce goods - and reducing the number of people required to produce them.

What this all means is that over the years since the Industrial revolution brought about the modern manufacturing sector, productivity has risen massively.  This has resulted in those who own and run the sector becoming wealthy - in some cases, massively wealthy.

In the early decades, it also saw massive growth in labour as people flocked from the countryside to the cities and took up jobs in the emerging manufacturing sector.  

This was accelerated as agricultural productivity also rocketed and the demand for labour in the farms and fields steadily diminished.

But more recently the rise in automation, in robotics - and now in AI - has seen the need for manufacturing labour decline.

So, manufacturing still generates wealth - but that wealth is shared by fewer people!

The continuing rise in robots and AI will mean fewer opportunities for people to engage in well-paid, skilled work in the sector.  Fewer people still will share in the wealth generated.

If these trends continue unabated, we might one day see a world where a few mega-factories produce lots of goods - and produce them with high productivity processes and systems … but there is no-one left  to buy the goods produced.  The potential customers are on the breadline - worrying not about new phones or TVs but about their next meal.

Please tell me my vision of the future is not real!.  

Please tell me government - and academics - are working on new forms of government and policy that will prevent this future coming about!

Please tell me that the pursuit of higher productivity is not shortly to become counter-productive!

All-Purpose

When starting a task - a simple one or a complex multi-faceted project - the most important factors are to fully understand the context of the task - and your purpose in starting it.

What are you trying to achieve?

Why is this task/project important in achieving your goals?

If you do fully understand the purpose, you are more likely to have a positive attitude towards the task.

This is particularly important if the task itself has unpleasant or inconvenient aspects to it.  For example if the task is to discipline a member of staff, you might find such a task difficult and keep putting it off. If, however, you can see the true underlying purpose (or purposes) of this task - perhaps to help this member off staff improve their contribution, or to show other members of staff that you treat everyone fairly , praising and penalising as appropriate - it becomes easier to undertake. 

For more complicated , perhaps more serious tasks, understanding the purpose should mean you are much less likely to make a mistake or to mis-communicate to others with regard to the task.

It should also help you set meaningful goals and intermediate targets.

So, take the time to think through the items on your ToDo list or in your strategic plan - and fully understand why each needs to be successfully completed.  If you don't understand the purpose, why do it?