The past 10-15 years have seen a number of technology advances, from smartphones to machine learning. Yet, despite these impressive advances, for most of this period economies around the world have been stuck in an era of slow productivity growth. Opinions abound, but in the end, there’s no consensus on the causes of this apparent productivity paradox, on how long the slowdown will likely last, or on what to do about it.
Some economists have argued that secular stagnation is the reason behind this unusual situation, caused primarily by a reluctance of companies to invest and of consumers to spend. Others feel that aging populations around the world, accompanied by slow or declining labor forces are major factors. A few contend that there’s been a fundamental decline in innovation and productivity over the past few decades, compared to the period between 1870 and 1970.
Yet others argue that there have always been time lags between technology advances and their impact on economic growth. While technologies may advance rapidly, humans and institutions change slowly. And, the more transformative the technologies, - as is currently the case, - the longer it takes for their impact to be felt across economies and societies.
But, companies and industries are not the only ones trying to adjust to our fast changing digital economy. Individuals are also experiencing their own version of the productivity paradox. Personal computers, along with applications like word processing and spreadsheets introduced a whole new category of personal productivity tools in the 1980s. A decade later, the Internet and World Wide Web enabled people to easily communicate with each other, and gave them access to all kinds of information and applications.
In principles, these tools should save us time and make our lives easier. But, as we well know, that’s not quite been the case. Article after article reminds us that thanks to the Internet and smartphones, everybody is available all the time; that work can feel like a never-ending cycle of overflowing inboxes and urgent demands; that no matter how hard we work, we’re overloaded and overwhelmed because there’s far more to do every day than there is time to do it.
What accounts for this personal productivity paradox? Financial executive and MIT senior lecturer Robert Pozen has long been interested in the productivity challenges faced by professionals. He’s written extensively on the topic, including his 2012 book Extreme Productivity: Boost your results, reduce your hours.
“Are you feeling overwhelmed by your obligations at work and home?,” asked Pozen in an August, 2018 article in the Harvard Business Review (HBR). “You are in good company. A majority of U.S. employees complain that they feel overwhelmed.” The article referenced a 2016 survey, which found that 58% of workers say they’re at least sometimes overwhelmed by their work, 28% feel that way only rarely, and just 9% say work never overwhelms them.
Pozen’s article included a series of questions to help professionals assess their own personal productivity. The assessment consisted of 21 questions divided into seven categories: developing daily routines, planning your schedule, coping with messages, getting a lot done, running effective meetings, honing communication skills, and delegating tasks to others.
The results were published in a March, 2019 HBR article, What Makes Some People More Productive Than Others. Almost 20,000 respondents from around the world answered the questions: roughly 50% were from North America; 21% from Europe; 19% from Asia; and the remaining 10% from Australia, South America, and Africa. 55% of respondents were male ad 45% female. Overall, three key patterns stood out.
Working smarter is more important to personal productivity that working long hours. Professionals with the highest productivity scores generally exhibited a few key behaviors: “They planned their work based on their top priorities, and then acted with a definite objective. They developed effective techniques for managing a high volume of information and tasks. And they understood the needs of their colleagues - for short meetings, responsive communications, and clear directions.”
Age and seniority were highly correlated with personal productivity. Respondents were grouped into five age brackets, from under-30 to over-60. Productivity scores rose systematically the older the respondents, most likely reflecting the benefits of learning how to work smarter from years of experience. “The drivers of these higher productivity scores for respondents in older age brackets were their stronger habits in four areas: developing routines for low-value activities, managing message flow, running effective meetings, and delegating tasks to others.”
The data also captured five levels of seniority, from the most junior to the most senior. As with age, the productivity scores were higher in the higher levels of seniority, suggesting that good productivity habits may help professionals attain higher level positions, and that as people rise up in the organization, they have to learn how to become more productive. “More senior respondents achieved high productivity from better planning of their schedules, getting a lot done, and stronger communication skills.”
While the overall productivity scores of male and female respondents were almost the same, there were gender differences across particular categories. Women had higher scores in preparing their calendars the night before and in running effective meetings, - e.g., sending out an agenda ahead of time, keeping meetings to less than 90 minutes and making sure there was an agreement on next steps. Men tended to score higher in coping with high message volume, keeping free slots in their schedules for unplanned events, and moving quickly to finalize tasks and products.
The article concluded with a set of recommendations for dealing with the productivity challenges faced by most professionals:
Plan your work based on your top priorities, and then act with a definite objective. These include revising daily schedules the night before to emphasize priorities, and sending out a detailed agenda to all participants in advance of any meeting.
Develop effective techniques for managing the overload of information and tasks. These include making daily processes into routines you don’t have to think about, leaving time in your daily schedule to deal with unplanned events, and delegating tasks to co-workers that they can handle without your personal involvement.
Understand the needs of your colleagues for short meetings, responsive communications, and clear directions. These include limiting most meeting to no more than 90 minutes, ending every meeting with clearly defined next steps and responsibilities, and establishing clear objectives and metrics for team efforts.
Hi Irving,
It's an excellent summary. Really intriguing - but I have to wonder about one thing: how do we actually measure productivity these days? Because I would argue that in the age where we have new business models (platforms etc.), one can no longer use the "legacy" model of how much output we create. Hence, while I agree with the points about your productivity improves with age, I'm not sure that is the right measurement or rather that you can accurately measure it. Thoughts?
Posted by: Urs Gubser | June 03, 2019 at 07:08 AM
Urs, excellent point. There has been good research on the impact of new digital business models on the economy and organizations. I just wrote about one such research project a couple of weeks ago - https://blog.irvingwb.com/blog/2019/05/a-novel-method-for-measuring-the-value-of-free-digital-services.html
But, I have not seen similar research on legacy versus new digital models of personal productivity other than the proper use of digital tools. There has been quite a bit written about multi-tasking, being distracted, etc, but I have not seen evaluations on the difference this makes on real personal productivity.
Posted by: Irving Wladawsky-Berger | June 03, 2019 at 07:41 AM
I think there is a flip coming that may change some of this. Too many providers of productivity are looking for people to use their unique digital experience. Their tools. Their apps. What I have seen is that we all define our own digital lives and those services we use most are those that integrate into our digital lives rather than expect us to integrate into theirs. The exceptions to this maybe the base tools we use like facebook or google. Still, unless you are one of these top top tier providers, the best advice for companies seems to be integrate into the consumers digital life, don’t expect them to integrate into yours.
Posted by: Nigel Dessau | June 03, 2019 at 08:03 AM
Irving:
The debate you has proposed during the last two weeks is very interesting. Only a semantic problem: What exactly does personal productivity mean? (not only for white collar jobs).
I believe that a clarification, far from the language of the economists and its GDP of the post WWII, can help to glimpse the authentic importance of Digitization.
Thoughts?
Posted by: gregorio martin quetglas | June 04, 2019 at 04:36 AM