The Rise of The Wise

For almost all time, humanity’s well-being has been determined by how well it does certain things - catch animals for food, grow crops, build ships, forge weapons, etc.

The Industrial Revolution changed the way in which things were done, but it didn’t change that basic formula - the people and the nations that produced more became richer.  Technology allowed them to produce more.

The real power of humans was to invent and exploit new technologies - steam power, electricity, the jet engine, the computer.  

When automation started to be deployed in factories, it was assumed that humans who ‘did’ but did not think would become redundant from the workforce but the thinkers behind the machines would thrive and prosper.

However, we are now seeing the emergence of machines (AI) that take away this ‘thinking’ advantage. 

So, what’s left for humans?

Well if intelligence is no longer required … perhaps only wisdom is left.   AI can work out how to do things, but deciding on what things need to be done takes more - it takes ‘wisdom’.

Is this a short-term role while we wait for the machines to reach a state of wisdom?  Possibly,but for now the tech bros and their counterparts in smaller organisations can concentrate on analysing the environment (geo-political and local political, financial, social, technological) and work out gaps that need to be filled by new products and services, new technologies, new alliances, new structures and so on.

The wise shall inherit the earth  - at least temporarily.

What Works In The Longer-Term?

 I read a piece recently suggesting that creating opportunities for staff to volunteer for charity work helps raise engagement, motivation snd job satisfaction - all factors that can have a positive impact on productivity.

I don't doubt this - though, of course, the increase in productivity has to be sufficient to balance any productivity lost to time off volunteering - and has to be sustainable over time. It is this second factor that intrigues me the most.

Far too many wellness and performance programmes have an immediate impact but run out of steam.  Employees fall into a routine that might make them feel a little better about themselves but has little direct impact on their performance and productivity.

Perhaps if the nature of the organisations being supported or the nature of the support work changes regularly, a fresh impetus can be introduced.  I would love to see some research results that look tt this situation over a significant time period- especially if the research does indeed show longer-term benefit. 

Forget about your personal productivity

Many people want to improve their productivity.  They are trying to get noticed, promoted and supercharge their careers - or they are trying to get through the mountains of work that seem to perpetually contained in their inbox. 

That's good - but nowhere near good enough if we want to transform the productivity of the company or even the nation.  These have little to do with personal productivity.

We have to look at the (much) bigger picture. …. and at structures, sytems, processes and procedures rather than individual activities.

We have to look at non-work as much as work - waiting times, travel times, rework activity and error correction.

We have to look at what we are doing as well as how we do it.

Ifv we are doing the right things (to move us nearer to our strategic goals) and we have organised and planned the work effectively - and (importantly) if we can execute those plans efficiently using our well-trained and motivated workforce…. we have a good chance of achieving high productivity.

So take a step back from looking at your personal productivity - and concentrate on these big issues.

We need policy and passion

Those interested in productivity improvement (such as me for writing this blog, and you for reading it) often look separately at different sectors off the economy.  This is not because the principles of productivity improvement differ across industrial sectors but the context does, as often do the priorities of organisations.

This means that treating SMEs like big organisations is often a mistake.  It also means that expecting public sector organisations to act and react like private sector organisations is  not going to work.

Public sector productivity is often seen as a 'priority' for a new government - but this does not seem to be so in the case of the new UK prime minister.  He is a staunch supporter (and defender) of the public sector and seems too be happiest throwing money at problems rather than tackling them.   

There appears to be no hint of a coming policy framework  to tackle low productivity but - worse - there appears to be no recognition that there is indeed a problem - and therefore no hint of any strategy, drive or initiative relating to productivity.

I fear for the productivity of the UK public sector. 

Go With The Flow

 Many of you will know of the concept of a 'flow state' whereby humans enter a mental state where they feel completely engaged and absorbed in the task in hand.  Distractions fade away and you concentrate fully onethe task and applying your skills to it.  It is sometimes referred to as being 'in the zone'. It is when you look at the clock and find you have been heavily focused and working productively for a much longer period than you expected.

The term 'flow state' was assigned  by psychologist Mihály Csíkszentmihályi to represent an optimal state of consciousness where action and awareness merge. 

Flow state is blocked by external interventions ands by a real or imagined lack of appropriate skills to deal with a task, and by mental fatigue interfering with full concentration.

Not surprisingly, telephone calls, emails and other forms of messaging interrupt a flow state as does multitasking for most people. Other obvious barriers to achieving a full flow state are anxiety about a task and boredom with the task (or previous similar tasks).

Of course there are things you can do to help achieve flow state - and you certainly need to prepare for it.  

You need to make sure you have everything you need (all the pieces of equipment, tools and so on).  You need (to try) to remove or mute all distractions.  Close down any messaging systems or websites you might be tempted to sneak a look at.

You need to schedule meaningful periods of time - at a time that is in harmony with your natural body clock.

Think about changing your location where others cannot easily reach you.

You will not easily reach a flow stare - but you will have given yourself the best chance of achieving it - and achieving peak performance.

Re-Visiting Working From Home

Those who read my posts regularly will know that I am not a believer in any positive productivity effects of working from home.  It van help but only if the organisation is able to save substantial accommodation costs on workspaces that are no longer needed - and this applies to very few companies who normally 'hedge their bets' by maintaining their properties snd only saving on lower energy costs.

I have been reflecting on this and though I have not changed my opinion, I do feel that perhaps I have been over-critical of those who have allowed employees to work from hime.  It may be that there is nothing inherently or philosophically wrong with home working.  The problem is that most organisations have management teams - and management training processes - which assume 'normal' in-the-workplace environments and systems and processes.  In practice, they need to adjust workflows - and perhaps working methods, communication processes and reporting processes to fit the new environment

Otherwise, processes fail, become inefficient or error-prone.  This is clearly not a recipe for productivity improvement.

So, by all means let employees work from home - if you think it has benefits in employee well-being or in cost-saving.  But ensure your working and communication processes are adjusted to suit the new arrangement. 

Counter-Intuitive Improvement

 Some (but thankfully fewer) managers believe that you increase the productivity of employees by driving them harder. increasing their workload and punishing mistakes.   Nowadays, most managers know that getting results is more of a balance between 'driving' and 'caring', ensuring that hard-working staff are not overworked, burnt-out or increasingly anxious about their work.

We need to increase output and productivity without damaging - or indeed, breaking - our employees.

Simple 'time and motion' or work-study men (for they were almost exclusively men) from 50 years ago built 'rest and recovery' periods into the times allocated for specific tasks.  The 'harder' (more demanding) the work, the greater the recovery time allowed.  The advantage of this approach is that the recovery time was built in - it wasn't given on the whim of the supervisor.

Employees should be encouraged to take 'mini' or even 'micro' breaks during the day - taking a few deep breaths, walking, taking a 'water cooler' moment, etc.

We should also make sure employees have time for focused work - free of (formal or informal) meetings, perhaps with a 'ban' on phone calls.Some organisations provide 'focus rooms' or spaces where people can get sway from their own desk and local environment.

Such small changes mean we give staff the opportunity to recover from their hard work, to feel better about themselves, their work - and the organisation.

They become more productive.