Why Training Might Not Work

 Developing the skills of the workforce is a clear way in which capacity and productivity can be increased.  Indeed, it is an approach often advocated in this blog.

However, there is quite a lot of evidence that at the moment significant (and large) number of employees are pushed too far (or push themselves too far) and are suffering 'burnout' 

If burnout leads to tensions within a group (as it often does),some managers turn to 'playing nice' and/or 'team-building'.  However these cannot compensate for burnout.  Workers become exhausted, demotivated, disinterested, unengaged and group performance can enter a downward spiral.  No amount of group activity can remedy this situation.

Similarly with training and development.  An employee who is already burnt out (or considers themself to be so) will look upon training as an additional imposition and burden n ot an opportunity to learn new skills.

Such employees can be taught new skills - but they will not learn/develop them effectively … and the processes/procedures/activities that rely on these new skills are very likely to fail - or at least operate with low performance.

Employees then go into 'defensive mode'.  They become less co-operative; they form silos against other individuals or groups, they communicate less.

Managers may take actions which worker feel are punitive and increased resentment fuels their burnout, making it worse.

Training is important.

But it is training for managers that is needed; so they can stop treating their workers as 'machines' and start to understand the pyschophysiological make up that is the human being at work. 

Keep Technology and People in Step

 Businesses have been through a series of trials and tribulations over the last decade - including economic shocks and, of course,  COVID.  It is not surprising that they are now looking for AI to give them a productivity boost and help regain their resilience and confidence for the future.

However, those of us who have been through 'technological revolutions' before know that exploiting the technology effectively requires the workforce to understand the technology and have acquired the skills and attitude that support it. Most workers are suspicious of, or frightened by, change - especially if they don't understand it and even more so, if they perceive it as a threat.

Most workforces are likely to be faced with continuing change over the next few years.  This is likely to involve changes in products, changes in working systems and processes, changes in work design, changes in organisational structure… and so on.

Employee skills will become more important than their roles - the role will adapt to thn kinds off changes likely to be involved.  Staff have to be adaptable, flexible, motivated to acquire new skills and to learn how to wokr with new technologies.  This is the only way they can survive and not be replaced by those technologies.

The role of the executive team is to prepare their workers for this new world of AI-supported change, reducing fear and increasing flexibility.  

It won't be easy but it is necessary.

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.