English language - help or hindrance

We, in the UK and US, are lucky to have English as our mother tongue.  It has become the de facto language of trade and commerce.

So, we have a 'head start' in trade negotiations.

However it also means that people inn the UK and US are not motivated to learn other languages.  We simply assume that everyone else will learn English.

This means that we also do not pick up on cultural differences that language learning helps to educate about.  This can make English speakers culturally insensitive - not recognising the nuances of culture, language - and body language - that people convey in trade (and other) discussions.

So our great asset is something of a liability - cutting us off from the learning that others get as a bonus with their language learning.

We need to work hard to make up this deficit.

Is technology an aid to higher productivity?

Does technology help or hinder productivity & performance? 

There are two basic schools of thought on this issues – though, as ever, these are not straightforward.

The first is that the introduction of technology can transform processes for the better, improving both quality and productivity.  Of course, this school of thought is largely promulgated by suppliers of the technology, keen to sell a positive message about their products.  The evidence is not so clear. We all know organisations that have ‘automated’ their processes using technology – but then found that they have automated their inefficient or unreliable processes, so that their key outcome is that they can now make mistakes and errors faster.

The second major school of thought, however, is that the introduction of many modern technologies – such as email and other forms of messaging – simply results in high levels of distraction for employees.

The truth is, of course, either somewhere in the middle – or, more likely, a combination of the two schools – some technology-based projects result in positive productivity gains; some do not.  It depends on how such projects are implemented – and whether the introduction of the technology is a part of an overall strategy, clearly linked to the overall vision of the organisation and its strategic objectives.

Running the country

All developing countries go through a stage of urbanisation - as people leave the countryside and flock to the cities in pursuit of a share of the wealth that cities create.

This generally results in higher national productivity.

However, those same countries need to address productivity in, and of, the countryside.

In a typical agriculture supply chain, there is plenty of scope for value to be lost - right from planting through to cropping, processing and distribution.  The best producing countries maximise value at all stages in the process.

This has the advantage of retaining labour in the countryside - and helping balance the economy.

Safely productive

There seems to be, in some people's eyes, a dichotomy between safety and productivity.

The former is regarded as a compliance issue - a chore, a headache, an imposition - a drain on productivity.

Of course it partly depends on how safety is treated as an issue. Those who have used poka-yoke as an error-reducing technique will realise that it can also be used as an accident-reducing technique ... so that it makes a process both safer and more productive at the same time.  In fact this is the best way to address safety - every time we reduce the chance of an accident or other safety incident, we reduce value losses.

So it is definitely not a case of 'either/or' but a vase of 'both together' - making what we do both safer and more productive.  Any other approach is unthinkable.

Austerity or ...?

In the UK, the Chancellor of the Exchequer has signalled a kind of U-turn by scrapping his plans to cut tax credits and offering more money for the health service, for defence and for the police.  This seems to be the end of his austerity planning - though he says he still intends to cut the deficit by the end of this parliament.

I'm not an economist so I tend to think in simple - perhaps even simplistic - terms.  I can see the sense in not spending more than you earn - at the personal, at the organisational and at the national level.

I also know that the Uk needs to improve its productivity.  The best way the government can help do that is to get the macro-economic climate right, to cut regulation and to invest in infrastructure.

So, George, what are you doing there?

What a way to run ...

Saturday 12th December has been dubbed “Out of Stock Saturday” by logistics analysts Clear Returns, as it will be the day when the largest number of retailers’ stock will be tied up in the returns loop and unavailable to buy.  They know this as it happens every year.

So does Christmas!

Yet peak, seasonal demand seems to surprise many firms each year.

It seems as though the art of sales forecasting and seasonal adjustment of those forecasts is a lost art. 

Perhaps I need to change the focus of some of the training I do .... to solve a problem that everyone seems to know will occur, but ono-one seems to prepare for.

Help those who help themselves

The title of this post is one of those things our parents taught us when we were kids. It was suggested that we should prioritise our support towards those who were already attempting their own recovery from a problem.

Well, if you still subscribe to that philosophy, I urge you to contribute to the current appeal to help Ethiopia deal with its current severe drought.

Over the last few years, Ethiopia has made great progress with its underlying productivity and economic situation - becoming one of the fastest growing economies in Africa.  They have tried very hard - and largely succeeded - in building a modern economy.

They deserve our help.  Please give it.

We all need help

Do you read the wise words of the business gurus, the management thought leaders?

No, me neither.

Of course these guys (for they usually are guys) must have done something right to get to where they are - to achieve their fame/notoriety.

But that doesn't mean they can necessarily create simple, pithy messages of use to you and me.

Perhaps they can when filtered through a professional writer or editor - but possibly not using their own literary skills.

Similarly, there are times when we all need help translating our raw knowledge or skills into useful end products.  The best thing we can all do is to build a team around us that has skills that complement - not duplicate - our own.

What drives UK SME productivity growth?

The third Albion Growth Report, designed to shed light on the factors that both create and impede growth among over 1,000 UK SMEs, highlights significant regional differences in tackling the productivity gap: 54 per cent of business owners in the South West said they will increase productivity over the next two years followed by 52 per cent of those in Yorkshire, London and South East. The least confident regions are the North West, East Midlands and West Midlands with only 46 per cent expecting further improvements.

According to the Report, the most common measures taken by firms to boost productivity have been better processes, (30 per cent), technology (24 per cent ), training (18 per cent) and flexible working hours (12 per cent).

When asked how the Government can help SMEs to increase productivity, 42 per cent said that investment in fixed line broadband would deliver the biggest benefits, followed by roads (31 per cent) and affordable housing (25 per cent).

Its not rocket science, is it?  So, why don't more firms invest in such factors?  And who doesn't the government do what these SMES ask?

Big Data saves the World!?

The World Productivity Congress is proving to be very interesting.

Just before the event I read an article by Robert Gordon about the state of US productivity, the gist of which was that the major innovations of the period 1870-1970 fuelled productivity growth but now we have 'used them up' and productivity is stagnating, compounded by the fact that we are incurring extra costs coping with the negative (environmental) effects of those innovation.

At this event we hear lots of papers extolling the virtues of Big Data in terms of creating Smart Cities, new forms of healthcare, competitive advantage - and so on.

Will this be reflected in the economic and productivity figures of the next few years - or decades?

We have to hope so - or our children and grandchildren are in for a long period of slow growth or stagnation.

Look and Learn

I am in Halifax (Nova Scotia) for the World Productivity Congress (being held in partnership with the Big Data Conference). This gives me 2 (well, at least 2) opportunities.

Firstly, I can meet up with old friends and contacts and find out about developments in the field of productivity across the globe.  This is always interesting and useful.

Secondly, I get to hear about developments in Big Data and reflect upon how they impact on productivity.

I have my own ideas, of course, but essentially I am here to learn.

After all, if we stop learning we might as well give up.

Core strategy??

The World Confederation of Productivity Science promotes the concept of SEE - Social, Environmental & Economic Productivities - suggesting that long-term business sustainability and success comes from  addressing all three.  Some have claimed that this is another 'take' on the concept of corporate social responsibility (CSR) but the WCPS ' view is that CSR is an add-on to a business, often for promotional reasons, whereas SEE is part of basic business fabric and must be treated as such.  There is a business case for addressing SEE - not a PR case.

The Volkswagen case has reinforced this belief.  Volkswagen was regarded as a leader in CSR - but it clearly wasn't part of core business strategy or core values.They didn't look a† environmental issues as a fundamental core of strategy - just something it was nice to brag about. And they completely forgot about that 'commitment' when tough business decisions needed to be taken.

Don't read productivity blogs (except this one)

I was browsing some 'productivity blogs' earlier this week - I use the inverted commas because many of them use the word 'hack - or lifehacks - only using the word 'productivity in the strapline or description.

One of them offered to remind me when to breathe to maintain my zen-like state - but I've been breathing quite successfully for many years so declined the advice.  If you read all of these blogs and tried to follow their advice, you would waste a lot of time... so read this blog and learn about real-world, real-life productivity as it affects organisations, nations and societies.

I don't say you won't waste time - but it should be more interesting and more rewarding.

Lifting productivity

Japan has a new government initiative to boost the adoption of intelligent machines and robots - as part of a drive to improve industrial productivity.

However, this has other benefits as well.

Mechanised workplaces are generally more suitable for female workers and for workers with disabilities - so improving automation supports greater workforce diversity .. and that provides another route to greater productivity.

If Music Be ....

Companies have long used music to set rhythm for production lines - and to boost morale of employees.  

Now a new study by the University of Illinois confirms that people do respond - positively in productivity terms - to music.

They suggest however that instrumentals are best - words can  interfere with language "tasks" which are part of the work.

Similarly,  music is more effective if it has a constant, easy beat and a light melody.

A report in the journal Neuroscience of Behavior and Physiology states that the Russian Academy of Sciences found that a person's ability to recognize visual images, letters and numbers, is much faster when either rock or classical music is playing in the background.

So - play on!

Structures

On the Internet, you get lots of tips about productivity - and what are called ' productivity hacks' (really just more tips).

However you and I know that what brings about higher productivity is structure - to organisations, systems, processes, working methods - structure based on an analysis of need and then an identification of how that need can be best met.  This can take time - but it will be rewarded and will be much more effective than trying to apply the latest 'hack'.

Think about building a building. You need form foundations and sound construction. Productivity is similar. Take the time to structure the 'edifice' soundly.

Climate Change and Crop Design

Is climate change happening? Yes.

Is it man's fault - down to greenhouse 'emissions'? Possibly,

It does not matter what the cause is - we have to accept it is happening.

There are  lots of implications - some of them potentially catastrophic.

Some parts of the world that are currently the world's bread (or fruit) baskets may end up with much lower yields unless they can introduce new varieties of the crops they produce.

So, we might need genetic engineering to maintain yields in areas of changing climate.

Can man's ingenuity and innovation beat climate change?

We have to hope so.

I hope i'm wrong,

The Taiwan government is planning to spend NT$36 billion (US$1.12 billon) over the next nine years as part of its Productivity 4.0 project to elevate Taiwan's status in the global supply chain, Taiwan president Ma Ying-jeou said recently.

Over the period, the government will spend NT$4 billion (US$124.4 million) each year on electronics/information technology, metals, transportation, machinery, foodstuffs, textiles, distribution and agriculture, helping to build smart factories to realize massive but diversified production, Ma said.

It is hoped that by 2024, the per capita productivity of Taiwan's manufacturing industries will have grown 60% compared with last year to NT$10 million (US$310,900), said the president.

Now, if I were a betting man (which I'm not) I would put money on failure ... though I hope I'm wrong.  Government's job is to build infrastructure (especially the right macroeconomic climate) and then 'get out of the way.

Choice

All companies have limited funds to invest in new projects. (Well, perhaps Apple has all the money it needs.)

And this inevitably means that those companies have to prioritise certain projects over others.

Unfortunately too many firms seem to concentrate on physical assets -new buildings, new technology, new equipment - and forget about new knowledge and new skills.

Too few business leaders believe what they say when they utter those words "Our people are our greatest asset".

Do we want to invest?

Businesses seem to be unwilling to invest in new facilities and even new skills for their employees.

I think part of the reason is that investors have become used to the rollercoaster of the tech boom and bust cycle.

On the one hand, many expect new technology to keep arriving and providing them with relatively cheap productivity gains.

Others are reluctant to invest as they see new tech as a 'fad', rather than as a proper contribution to improved performance.

It is time to see productivity improvement as a 'journey' not a destination. Like all journeys, it needs planning snd preparation ... but above all it needs a clear route. It also needs energy and focus - it won't just happen.  And it needs resourcing - it needs the development of infrastructure and skills, of thought and ideas.

Let's focus our energies, and our investments, on improving productivity - we can make the difference.

What about Google?

Last week I talked about the problem of national productivity measurement when we fail to count lots of 'intangibles.

Musing further, I got to thinking  about companies like Google and Yahoo who give away many of their services for free (at least to the end user at point of use). Google and Yahoo put lots of energy and resources into these services - and they clearly benefit the US economy - but they don't get counted in the official GDP figure.

This situation clearly affects the US - but also lots of other developed countries.

We need to think again about how we measure national productivity. 

Balancing the right measures

When coming up with the Balanced Scorecard concept, Kaplan & Norton reminded us of the need for balanced measurement - focusing on a number of important factors.

Yet when we measure and discuss national productivity, it is almost always in the context of a single measure - GDP per employee or employee-hour.

There is a growing view that this measure is not just 'unbalanced' but out-of-date.  It is a measure very suitable for older, manufacturing-based economies but fails to recognise the nuances of knowledge-based economies.

It 'counts' tangible assets within GDP (cars, widgets, fridges, etc) but does not gather data on intangible assets like patent portfolios, bright young people and so on.

Financiers and investors have moved on.  When they value a start-up, they do not value the physical assets -  but the intangible, intellectual assets and intellectual property - the ideas.

So, perhaps we need to catch up - and establish measures of national productivity that are suitable for this - and future - centuries.

Good for whom?

China and India are arguably the world's best performing economies over the last decade - both have seen large productivity gains.. Yet, China has managed to address poverty more effectively than India.

According to the World Bank, the rate of extreme poverty in Chinas declined from 84% in 1981 to just 12% in 2019.  The comparable decline in India during the same period was from 60 to 33%.

India's population have put great confidence in Prime Minister Modhi.  He has talked up good solutions - nut now is the time to execute. India's poor are relying on him to turn higher productivity into a fairer society.

Exhortation is not enough

Lots of national governments - and other agencies-  make calls to their populace for a productivity revolution.  They are simply urging people to work harder.

Bu we know that productivity revolutions do not occur because people work harder or when people work longer hours (despite what Jeb Bush might think).

So, a 'call to arms' is unlikely to be effective.

Governments need to do more - to build  a strategy (or at least a plan) for productivity development involving policy and infrastructure elements (macroeconomics, regulation, transport, telecoms, education, skills). They need to build a potential for higher productivity which enlightened firms can exploit. Individuals might then respond with higher productivity.

A Greek Tragedy?

If Greece is forced out of either the Euro, the EU or both - there are clear implications for theGreek economy. But will there be any implications for underlying productivity.

Well, there is some evidence - ironically from Greece itself - that national confidence and national pride do have a significant impact on the productivity of workers.

When Athens hosted the Olympics in 2004, there was a surge of national pride and of 'engagement' of the workforce with their country.   This resulted in both a sense of well-being for the workers and in a boost to the economy.

This suggests, unfortunately, that  exit from the Euro might have a negative effect on productivity and the economy - perhaps resulting in a kind of 'vicious spiral' of decline in the economy and national confidence.

Where did thr dream go?

When I was a teenager (warning - ancient history lesson coming up!), we were regaled with promises of the paperless office and factory automation - leading to a life of leisure (and luxury).  Now people work longer hours than ever before - and many are never really off duty - being permanently connected to the office network.

Where did it all go wrong?

This is one of life's great productivity paradoxes - increasing automation results in more work for people, not less.

Skills are not a quick fix

In the UK, the Confederation of British Industry (CBI - which represents British business organisations - especially larger ones) is asking the government for tax changes in the forthcoming budget to allow further investment in machinery/equipment and in skills development.

Whilst accepting that one of the roles of government is to create the right macro-economic climate to support rising productivity, I am not sure that I accept this 'special pleading'.

UK industry has seen a rise in the number of jobs over the last couple of years - but not a corresponding rise in output .... Productivity appears to have been falling. (It is difficult to be too precise since there is often a lag before employment and output 'catch up' with one another.)

If employment is rising but not output, it suggests that those new jobs are not being used productively - either because the people being employed do not have the right skills to perform productively ... or because the systems and processes in which those people are operating are not designed and operated to be optimally productive.

Even if it is a skills problem, it may be a basic skills problem - requiring fundamental change in the underlying nationals skills infrastructure - or it might be a more temporary problem of 'right skills in wrong places'.

Before asking for 'more money the CBI needs to find the 'root cause' of the skills problem ... and urge the government to address this as part of a longer-term strategy.  A 'quick fix' in an annual budget is either not needed or is not enough.

What's your timescale?

There are often 'quick fixes' we can apply to problems. There are also often improvements we can make to get yield up or improve throughput.  The problem is that some of these can have negative impact over the longer-term.

Global agriculture seems to be caught in this trap.  Yields per hectare are rising.  Good!  With a growing global population, this is not only desirable - but essential.

However, there is increasing evidence that underlying soil performance is falling.  This means we need more and more 'treatments' to maintain yields (putting costs up) - but it also means that there might come a time when the soil refuses to support effective growth.

So, though we might want to improve agricultural productivity, we need to be wary of the timescale over which we expect improvement to occur - and be sustained. Traditional agricultural practices managed to maintain soil quantity and slowly improving yields over centuries; our need for growth has resulted in massively increased yields - but for how long?

What are we doing wrong?

Total factor productivity around the globe seems to be slowing.  This is a major problem.

Rising productivity is what fuels increased wealth and well-being - it is what allows poorer nations to catch up to richer nations ... a basic requirement of longer-term political stability.

In developed nations, it is what allows a falling population to afford the pensions of a growing retired class.

If TFP is falling, then - collectively - we are doing something wring .. or not doing something right.

One thing we do is to continually increase regulatory burdens - with the best of intentions, but resulting in smaller firms in particular finding it hard to navigate the bureaucratic minefield.

We also - especially when times are hard - often seem to forget to educate, train and develop the workforce ... increasing their capacity and capability.

Governments work in fits and starts on infrastructure - but often more on 'vanity' projects and 'note grabbers' rather than concentrating on productivity infrastructures.

We need to do more - more consistently.

Now, when I rule the world ...

Stop!

We are all good at starting new initiatives, new ventures - and creating new teams or even new departments.  Of course, it is good that can do this speedily and (hopefully) effectively.

The problem is that most of us are not very good at closing down those initiatives, those teams when the job is done - or has proved to be ineffective.

Many organisations thus have the remnants and rumps of what were once effective projects, effective teams - even, of course, effective products ..... things that should have been positively closed down but have been left to 'wither on the vine'.

So, take a look around and see what you should stop doing.

Don't listen to me!

I have been doing some training this week - on Change Management. Both the group I was with - and myself - exhibited all the signs of a comfortable regularity - staying at the same hotel we always stay at, dining in the same restaurant, eating (broadly) the same lunch - and so on.  Its very good when you can use yourself as the role model/case study..

Of course I think of myself as a flexible innovator - but 'behind the scenes' I am as resistant to change as anybody else.  This doesn't make me odd, or staid, or old-fashioned or curmudgeonly - though I might be those things as well.... it just makes me normal.  It is my little routines that make the day go more easily.  No need to think; just do what you've always done.

... And hope that when its needed, you can switch into 'change' mode - and become that flexible innovator.

Before or after the event?

Some firms like to link pay explicitly to performance - with a direct link.(the 'carrot approach')
Some like to rely on post-poor-performance sanctions ( the 'stick' approach).
Those who think of themselves as enlightened pay good basic pay and expect good performance (the 'faith') approach).
Others pay poor wages but still expect good performance (the 'miserable fools' approach)
....  but the majority have never thought about it (the 'ignorant fools' approach)

Which one(s) do you think work?

Government failure ... or success?

In the UK, we have a new government ... similar to the last one... but without the need for a coalition.  I make no political comment on the government we have ... only that I am glad we have a single-party government that should be capable of directing its own strategy.

In another context, wearing another hat, I have been ruminating on the degree to which governments influence productivity.  My starting point was that governments have little long-term effect on productivity, though they can have an impact in the short-term.  Long-term trends though tend to proceed irrespective of government intervention until there is some revolutionary event that triggers a 'great leap forward'.

However, as I started to think - and to draft the paper I am working on - I started to change my mind.

I started thinking about the infrastructure elements that underpin high productivity - health, education, skills, transport, communications ..... in addition to the macroeconomic and research/innovation culture.  Clearly these are all factors where government has a major role to play ... and major influence to bear.

So, perhaps governments do have a major role to play ... in creating the potential for high productivity that industrial and commercial organisations can build on.

So, if you are in the UK, I hope you voted - for the greater productivity good - and not personal economic well-being.  Only the former can deliver the latter in the longer-term.

New Jobs, new management?

I am a governor of a secondary school in the UK.  We are preparing our pupils for a world of work in which many of the jobs do not yet exist ... and even many of those that do now exist will have changed substantially.

Our pupils will go through 'portfolio careers' in which they will have several jobs - often multiple part-time jobs at the same time.

This means we are trying to instil flexibility and resilience into our pupils - alongside knowledge, understanding and core skills, of course.

What does all this mean for the future productivity of the UK?  Well, knowledgeable, flexible, resilient workers should form a good basis for a high productivity organisation - if that organisation is willing and ready to work with that flexibility, exploit it and allow it to underpin organisational flexibility and innovation.

My fear is that managers who are of a previous generation will continue to create inflexible, rigid structures that fail to exploit these new skills and attributes.

Diversity?

Diversity is a bit of a buzz word.  We are all, as employers, encouraged to monitor and manage diversity in our workforce.  But is there any evidence that having a diverse workforce makes any significant difference to an organisation?

Anecdotal evidence is fine.  And, of course, there is a degree of 'intuition' about making sure you exploit the talents and skills of all parts of the potential workforce.  But 'real' difference?

I don't know ... BUT... I came across something the other day that make me think.

A paper was published recently in the journal  Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences suggesting that when plant biodiversity declines, the remaining plants have lower productivity.

Can we draw a parallel with human diversity.  Probably not ... but it does make you think, doesn't it?

Turkey Time

Turkey has been through an economic transformation in recent years.  They have learnt well from incoming Japanese firms and Japanese management teams and have some indigenous companies that now rank as world-class in terms of manufacturing performance.

However, there is an odd situation.  In terms of developing SMEs and creating small-scale entrepreneurs (ready to move into becoming large-scale entrepreneurs), Turkey has done less well.

It has learned well where it has an established model to learn from but significantly less well where it has to develop its own ideas on an appropriate infrastructure and culture to support business start-up and early growth.

If Turkey cannot unlock this puzzle, it stands to enjoy a few years of success before slipping back down the slope to economic mediocrity.

Allow a little failure

Being frightened of failure can be a motivating influence.  However it can also be a constraining factor causing people to 'play safe' and avoid risks.

Most change involves some risk - that things won't go to plan or as we expected.  But if we don't take those risks, we don't get the change - and the benefits it brings.

So we have to encourage people to take a few risks - but managed risks.  We don't want  people taking unplanned, unmeasured and unmitigated risks with our resources, our business.  So we have to train them to assess the risk - and to ensure they know how to recognise when all is not going to plan-  and what to do  about it.

Sometimes they will get this wrong - and we get a failure.  But if we have the right mix of risks - and especially the right mix of people - then our successful risks should far outweigh our failures.

As they say.... "Nothing ventured, nothing gained!"

Its not the coffee and cakes

We've all heard of the kinds of facilities that really forward-looking (and generally rich) companies provide for their employees.

So, have you thought what you might provide for your employees.

Well, I'm here to tell you that if you are considering new staff facilities - standing desks, write-on walls, table-tennis tables, free coffee, basketball hoops, or whatever - you are probably wasting your time.

What really interests and motivates employees is 'good work' - work which fully exploits their skills, provides a challenge, has a role in the overall company mission (and a role they understand), has a social dimension - and which gives them satisfaction, pride and personal reward.

If you can't provide such work, the other 'add-ons' aren't likely to help.

The UK will have to switch after the election

The UK seems to have lost productivity - but gained jobs.  This seems about right.

Has it done the right thing?

Well, in the short term governments have to make decisions and adopt strategies to solve a problem, to get out of a crisis.

The UK government seems to have adopted policies that are enabling the UK to climb out of the pit of the financial crisis .... and since competitors are doing less well, the lower productivity is not a problem.

But in the longer-term productivity IS important - it drives competitiveness and it drives wealth-creation, without creating inflation.

So the UK has to find ways of improving productivity but as part of a growing economy so it doesn't result in job losses.

Only time will tell whether the next government (after the election in May) can do this.

The Secret of Higher Productivity

Did that title grab you?

Do you want to know what the secret is?

Sorry to disappoint you ... but there isn't one .... and anyone who says there is is a snake-oil salesman.

The nearest I can get to giving you a 'secret recipe' is that you have to consider both processes and people.  Creating 'efficient' processes doesn't work unless you also have a skilled and motivated workforce operating those processes.

My 'secret' is that:

Engaged employees with improved skills result in improved productivity.

Sorry if you are underwhelmed.

Has the UK made the right choice?

Recent economic figures show that unemployment has fallen in the UK - there are more people employed than there have been for many years.

Yet, over this period of jobs growth, productivity has fallen.

The UK seems to have chosen jobs over productivity as the way out of the economic crisis.

This might be a sensible short-term approach ... but there is a danger that the country ends up as a low cost, low skill economy.

if the rest of Europe starts to pull out of its current poor economic shape the UK might find itself uncompetitive.

You don't need write-on walls

We've all seen the kinds of things that tech companies do to engage and maintain staff - and to hopefully maintain high creativity levels.  Not all of us can  create high-tech offices with write on walls, supply sports facilities, free coffee or whatever it seems to take.

BUT .... we don't need to.

What seems to matter is that employees think they are valued, and their contribution is important.   They also like to think that their personal values chime with those of the organisation they work for.

 These can be signalled in lots of small, inexpensive ways.  Firstly, of course, employees have to know what your values are - what shapes company policy and strategy.

And they are far too smart to take the platitudes you put on your website and in your press releases. Your values are shown in what you do - not what you say.

If your values include the recognition of contributions and the valuing of teamwork, you will already be finding ways to praise, to reward (not necessarily financially) and to recognise what your staff do.  You will create space in which they can be creative and innovative ..... and you will value (and be seen to value) the ideas they put forward.

If you are not doing these things, then the write-on walls and the free coffee are not going to help!

Wasting your time?

In a recent paper, the governor of the Central Bank of Barbados said that even though Barbados is relatively prosperous as a Caribbean nation, it will only move up the international 'league table' by improving its labour productivity. 

He then suggested that this is difficult because only about 30% of the Barbadian workforce feels fully committed to their jobs.

I wondered how you productivity professionals out there felt about this ...  and whether you agree that that the systems, processes and procedures you put in place can be largely ineffective if workers are not 'committed to their jobs'.

Small failing

In small businesses low productivity is rarely the fault of the workers - it is because the owner/manager has not set up production processes properly -or has failed to manage them effectively.

Too many owner/managers want to micro-manage ... they see their job as 'keeping on top of things'.

It is - of course... but they must set up systems of production - and then measure the performance (of the system, not the people) so that they know whether it is  effective - and improving.  This should not need hourly - or even daily intervention, especially if they have a good production supervisor.

They need to give the supervisor responsibility, authority - and if necessary, training ... and let them 'keep on top of things'.  They should then check progress with the supervisor weekly or ask them for a regular report (brief and quantitative).

The aim is to make the system work - then the owner/manager can plan for improvement and growth.

Innovation or Productivity?

There has been discussion on the Productivity Futures LinkedIn group this week discussing whether productivity and innovation are natural enemies or bedfellows.

Of course I chimed in - well, I can't resist - and my view is that real productivity development - revolutionary rather than evolutionary - is unlikely without innovation.  Innovation can transform productivity.

Tor Dahl reminded the group that productivity is about doing the right things in the right way 100% of the time.  Innovation can change what we do - and how we do it.  Systematic approaches to improvement - and the standardisation that goes with them - ensure we do the right things ALL the time.

Any of you who want to try to run your organisations without innovation please inform me - I want to stay clear of investing in you.

Spare Me The Surveys

I have started this blog before with words such as ..."I read a survey the other day..."

Sometimes reading the results of these 'business surveys' can be interesting .. but too often it seems the results are so obviously in favour of the organisation who commissioned the research.

I read a survey the other day (see its a habit) that suggested that dirty and untidy offices harm productivity.  No surprise there, then .... if 5S is good for factories, its good for offices ... but when you see that the report was commissioned by the Contract Cleaning Association, alarm bells start to ring.  Often you get little indication of how many people were surveyed or what the questions were ... just the results or 'conclusions'.

Perhaps if I stopped reading these surveys, I would be more productive.

A Chemical Reaction

Teams are sometimes more productive than the sum of their parts - because the 'chemistry' among the team is 'right'.

We've all seen such 'chemistry' at work - in working teams and in personal relationships.

But is it a lucky accident - or can we create it?

Team building is not about taking teams on outward-bound, adventure experiences .... or getting them together to discuss emotional issues.

It is about putting the right people together in the first place - understanding their abilities, strengths, weaknesses, preferences, sensibilities, and so on.  And about making sure they have the skills, the resources, the time and the support they need for the task in hand.... and making sure they share the overall vision for the outcomes of the task.

We build a team by understanding the task, understanding individuals ... and then taking the time to think about ways in which different individuals will fit with each other - or can be made to fit with each other.

Its not rocket science - but it certainly isn't a 'given' either.

Its not my fault!

Productivity is a 'neutral' measure - it doesn't come with praise or blame attached.  To understand the reasons behind the figures we have to dig deeper, sometimes much deeper, than the headlines.
For example, we might read that the construction industry has had a poor quarter in terms of measured productivity - but a scratch of the surface might reveal that bad weather caused lots of projects to be delayed and/or mothballed.

Such 'environmental factors' are chance events .... or are they.  If we know that every winter the construction industry loses a large part of its productivity, wouldn't we expect them to do something about it - rather than simply bemoan the fact.

Of course they can't change the weather ... but there are always things that can be done to ameliorate the effects.  Those things might not be cost effective ... but a little imagination and ingenuity should identify strategies for coping with cold, wet, frost or whatever.

So, when people (and industries) say , "We've been unlucky",  don't take it at face value.  Challenge them to make their own luck in future.

Me-Time

We all need a bit of ‘me-time’ … when we forget about all the tasks we have on our To-Do list, forget all our work pressures, forget our commitments and concentrate on ourselves.  ‘Me-time’ needn’t be long; it is the quality that matters.

Well, of course the other thing that gives us real pleasure is ‘you-time’ given us by others; when people give us a present, their time, their company but above all, their consideration.

This applies in a work environment.  A ‘pat on the back’ or a quick “Well done” is our ‘you-time’… it lets us know our work is appreciated, that we are making a difference, making a contribution that is valued.

For this to work – as a motivating phenomenon - you have to give people tasks for which they are well-prepared … with the right equipment, the right tools, the right knowledge and the right skills.  Then reward.  Praise must be seen to be due and deserved.  If it is, the ‘warm glow’ that people feel raises their performance a couple of notches over quite a long time period.

So, get the conditions right – and start to give your employees or your colleagues some valuable ‘you-time’.  It is an investment worth making.

Focus!

I've been doing a lot of writing recently.  I'm lucky - I find that words just come out - easily - in torrents.  My problem is not writing; its marshalling my thoughts and turning the words into something readable and sensible.  When I read back what I've written, I invariably think it is too long - too discursive - failing to get to the nub of the matter, to realise the main points of the argument.

Of course I know I should plan, shape and construct - treat writing like any other project.  I should do the 'marshalling of thoughts' before I put fingers to keyboard.  My aims should be clear, I should have thought about the intended audience, identified my aims - and therefore my key points .. and then concentrated on getting across those key messages.

Too many people plan projects how I write.  They know what the overall target is but they fail to plan the milestones, the waymarks that signal progress.  They ramble around in the general direction of the project aims, consuming resources that need not be deployed - and confusing those who are involved.

It is often easier to work without detailed planning ... but it is a wasteful way of working.

So, let's plan and then focus.  We know it makes sense!

Your next productivity gain?

What will lead you to higher productivity in 2015?

New products, new technologies, new structures?

For most organisations, the answer is none of these.  Those that succeed in improving their productivity will do so by doing what they do now a little more effectively and/or efficiently.  Big gains come from lots of small, incremental gains.  Revolutions in productivity are rare.

So, start your structured, disciplined, comprehensive review of your operations today - and look for those areas where you can shave a bit off cycle times, waiting times, and waste.

Give voice?

I read recently that Coca-Cola has withdrawn its voicemail system from its Atlanta headquarters in an effort to improve productivity.  Callers now get a simple message suggesting they should use another means of contact.

Voicemail was originally introduced as an 'added value' service for callers - saving them the need to call again - but is now seen as an 'overhead' that sucks time and effort out of the organisation.  It is worse than email in some ways since taking down details from a voice message can take multiple listenings.

Presumably there are other services we have introduced as time-savers or value enhancers that will, in time, be regarded as unnecessary or positively harmful.

email? text messaging?

Or have Coca-Cola got it wrong.  Will all those callers who are forced to ring again or use some other means of contacting Coca-Cola personnel simply vote with their feet, become annoyed, not bother to pursue their contact.  I will be interested in any follow-up comments/actions once 'the dust settles'.