Do we have a problem with productivity?

I have been interested in productivity (some might say obsessed) for quite some time. So naturally, "The Frustration with Productivity Culture" article by Cal Newport in The New Yorker has drawn my attention. Why would anybody be frustrated with productivity - I thought.?

The article is long and very detailed, and I recommend you read it. It made me think and question my understanding of "productivity". Cal acknowledges that "productivity" is "output produced per unit of input", but he later suggests we must collapse the definition of "productivity" to its "precise meaning of maximising output". Perhaps it is necessary to compress the definition to understand why there might be so much frustration around the topic. Still, I cannot think about it without considering the input part. Here is why.??

To me, productivity is about the balance—output per unit of input. We are (I am, and the article is about people like me) thought-workers. Our input is our time, and there is a very hard limit on that resource, so I see the temptation to remove the "input" part from the equation as something we cannot control. But removing it leads to Cal's suggestions with which I'm afraid I have to disagree.?

"Leaving individuals to focus on executing their work well, while letting scrutinised systems tackle the allocation and organisation of work [...] to allow growth without dehumanisation" might temporarily reduce frustration, but it will come back with a vengeance, as we will end up mindlessly producing work units without any sense of accomplishment, satisfaction or pride, except for the fact that we work no more than the contracted hours. If we accept that, we agree we should sell off 25% of our time and have nothing but some money in return. I cannot accept it. I think we can do much better.

I think we can find a solution by considering the "output" definition. We are thought-workers. Our input is time, but what is our output? It is not the units of work. It is not the number of thoughts we had per unit of time; it is not the execution of our work even if done well. Those are all constant as much as the input. Our output is the value we create for our customers, and by value, I mean problems we solve. The more severe (not necessarily more difficult) problem we solve, the more value we generate, the greater our productivity potential.?

I work with digital products, and the productivity increases I seek are very much based on lean and agile thinking. However, I think the ideas have wider applicability. There are things our customers care more about than others. If we engage not only in our work but also in the organisation of work - and by that, I mean being actively involved in deciding which work we will do and which we will not - we can not spend the time to do the things of little value.?By reducing the input, we can increase our productivity. By eliminating the waste, we are making ourselves and the systems we are part of more efficient, more productive.

This is the productivity I seek. This is my solution. It is achieving more while doing less. But to do it, we, as individuals, must engage in the systems of defining, organising and allocating the work. It is contrary to what the linked article suggests.?

If you are still reading, I would really like to know what you think (comments, please). Is it possible to increase productivity by doing less? Am I alone in thinking that focusing on doing our work well without engaging in work allocation and organisation is what drives work dissatisfaction, long-term frustration, and burnouts? Wouldn't it be better if it was true that we could get as much or more customer value (output) in half the time (input), and we split the dividend and moved to working 6 hours a day, 4 days a week? I think it is true, but it does require our involvement, not dependency on the system.?

---

The cover image is from www.freepik.com. We cannot compete with the robots in the amount of work we can do, but perhaps we could still be more competent and aim to do less instead.?