• 13 Apr 2018 9:28 AM | John Heap (Administrator)

    Business people who come from the product, manufacturing or engineering disciplines have a natural instinct to try to exercise process control to improve efficiency and profits.


    Those without such a background often aim at controlling costs.


    Some take one or other of these approaches to extremes. (Think Six Sigma.)


    The great advantage of the former (exercising process control) is that it involves the establishment of useful metrics and experimentation to see what makes those metrics move in the right direction.


    The problem with he latter approach (exercising financial control) is that this measurement/experimentation process becomes much more difficult as the linkages between actions and financial consequences are often either too indirect or occur over too long a time. By the time the results are in, it is too late to change the parameters that have resulted in poor results.


    So though financial control might be the ultimate aim, something more direct is needed to give you useful levers to pull (or push).  You need some intermediate, relatively direct measures that will tell you promptly what is happening when you make changes.


    Control the process properly - and the finances will take caee of themselves.


  • 06 Apr 2018 12:05 PM | John Heap (Administrator)

    There is some debate about whether a concentration on productivity is bad for creativity.  However this is a fallacy. Over-concentration on quality - and especially compliance - can be bad for productivity, but productivity and creativity are natural bedfellows. 


    So it depends on how broadly or narrowly you interpret productivity.  Rigid compliance to standard operating procedures (SOPs) in the name of productivity might stifle productivity unless you give your employees another avenue where they can exercise invention and innovation.


    My old friend, Tor Dahl, always used to say that a natural approach to improving productivity is to:

    (a) unfreeze the organisation - allow staff the time and opportunity to contribute ideas as to how what they do might be improved

    (b) experiment with those ideas to arrive at new ways of working

    (c) re-freeze the organisation by creating new SOPs to reflect the new ways of working and lock in the productivity gains.


    Some time later, repeat the cycle. 

    Then we ensure that creativity is encouraged and that it underpins higher productivity.



  • 30 Mar 2018 7:36 AM | John Heap (Administrator)

    Being able to do two things at once might seem like the epitome of efficiency - why waste time doing just one task when you can complete two simultaneously?


    However, famously there is a belief (myth?) that women can mulitask but men cannot - hampered by having a 'one track mind'.


    In the real world, rather than the world of gender politics, multitasking seems to be unfruitful, since in practice the work style is not multitasking but micro-sequencing of two parallel tasks.  The problem is that the brain switches so often between the two tasks and focus is lost on each switch and there is a delay each time the switch occurs.


    So, stick to one task, focus and concentrate, complete it - and then move on to the next task. You will be more productive.


  • 23 Mar 2018 7:46 AM | John Heap (Administrator)

    We give ourselves a metaphorical 'pat on the back' when we complete another item on our 'to do' list ... and we do the same with our employees. We congratulate them for completing a task or project.


    What we should congratulate them for is their achievement - or the impact they have made.


    A teacher, for example, who complete a professional development course, has only achieved something if the course results in impact on the learning of students.


    The problem is that in recent years we have become more and more compliance oriented - and we have come to delight in tick boxes and 'sign offs'.


    Its time to shift the focus - to achievement and impact.  Much harder - but it is what matters!


  • 16 Mar 2018 8:12 AM | John Heap (Administrator)

    The global consulting organisation McKinsey is suggesting that the recent sluggish productivity performance in the developed world might be coming to an end.  We might soon see productivity rises like we did before the economic downturn - of the order of 2% per year.


    Are they right?


    Only time will tell.  The time is right - but are the conditions right?  Has all that quantitative easing improved the productivity infrastructure and prepared businesses for an upturn?  Have we been developing skills? Are there technological breakthroughs in the pipeline?


    (The answers are maybe, maybe and maybe - but, as we know from history, cycles occur for no good reason - ups and downs .... so perhaps the time is right and enough has been done to ride a wave.  So much of economics is down to confidence anyway that if McKinsey can convince enough people they are right, it will probably become a self-fulfilling prophecy.


    So good for McKinsey.  I'm with them.  Let's all talk higher productivity - and then deliver what measures we can in our own sphere to make it happen.


    If you - and others like you - all do the same, we can all meet up in the boom times.

  • 15 Mar 2018 7:46 PM | John Heap (Administrator)

    The world of employment has been changing for some time - especially in developed nations.  More people work part-time, change jobs frequently and have multiple jobs and 'portfolio' careers.


    What are the implications for productivity?


    One obvious point is that it becomes more important to get people 'up to speed' very quickly - what is often these days termed the 'onboarding process'.  It is imperative that organisations take this process seriously and do all they can to engage employees early and often, giving them the knowledge and skills they need to fill any gaps - but also to motivate them to add maximum value.


    Another implication is that retaining knowledge and talent is important - so if the job market is changing, perhaps organisations need to change their practices to reflect this. One approach is to offer employees a 'tour of duty' rather than a job - agree with them the outcomes they are to produce over a given project/timescale.  When the tour of duty is complete, they either move on -or agree another tour.  This retains their talent but still gives them the benefits of a portfolio career -  variety of work and experience, and a degree of freedom.


    It is possible to move with the times - and win .... but only when you recognise the 'spirit of the times'  and act accordingly.


  • 09 Mar 2018 7:23 PM | John Heap (Administrator)

    The world of employment has been changing for some time - especially in developed nations.  More people work part-time, change jobs frequently and have multiple jobs and 'portfolio' careers.


    What are the implications for productivity - and for your organisation?


    One obvious point is that it becomes more important to get people 'up to speed' very quickly - what is often these days termed the 'onboarding process'.  It is imperative that yous take this process seriously and do all you can to engage employees early and often, giving them the knowledge and skills they need to fill any gaps - but also to motivate them to add maximum value.


    Another implication is that retaining knowledge and talent is important - so if the job market is changing, perhaps you need to change your employment practices to reflect this. One approach is to offer employees a 'tour of duty' rather than a job - agree with them the outcomes they are to produce over a given project/timescale.  When the tour of duty is complete, they either move on -or agree another tour.  This retains their talent but still gives them the benefits of a portfolio career -  variety of work and experience, and a degree of freedom.


    It is possible to move with the times - and win .... but only when you recognise the 'spirit of the times'  and act accordingly.


  • 02 Mar 2018 10:25 AM | John Heap (Administrator)

    Do motivated employees create good work and higher productivity?  Yes!


    But this is a 'Which came first? Chicken or egg?' scenario.


    I would argue that giving employees good work motivates them and leads to higher productivity. 


    An effective business leader creates good jobs - and engages employees with regard to their role in the organisation.  The engaged employee now works for an organisation that seems to value them - and they respond by engaging more fully with their role.


    The organisation (via higher productivity) and the employee (via greater job satisfaction) both win.


  • 23 Feb 2018 9:20 AM | John Heap (Administrator)

    Recently I was writing some course material on improving innovation and I suggested there that to make people more innovative, you need them engaged and you need to give them freedom to explore.


    Then I came across Gallup's new State of the Global Workplace report which suggests that only 15% of employees worldwide are engaged in their jobs.


    If both of these are correct, then it is not surprising that the world is struggling to improve innovation and productivity.


    Developing our people (human capital?) is the single most important thing we can do. Yet, many do not do it.  


    Please explain!


  • 16 Feb 2018 8:39 AM | John Heap (Administrator)

    In the UK, much attention has been focused recently on mental health issues - with a dawning of understanding of the sheer scale - and the growing impact - of various mental health conditions ... including the impact on workplace productivity.


    Now research by Curaiink Healthcare suggest that properly constructed and focused  Employee Assistance Programmes can result in meaningful and lasting behaviour change that decreases absenteeism, increases productivity and improves healthcare outcomes for employees who present with depression and alcohol abuse.


    Many of us have known for some time that well-being is an important productivity factor and that programmes that improve employee well-being are an investment rather than a cost.   Evidence which corroborates this view is welcome.


    Now it is up to you who run companies and organisations to take well-being seriously and make the investment in future productivity.


Contact us

Address: 3rd Floor, Telegraph House,  80 Cleethorpe Road, Grimsby, DN31 3EF 

Phone:    +44 1472 358195

Email:     Info@instituteofproductivity.com

                     Privacy Policy

Powered by Wild Apricot Membership Software