Listen carefully

We are about to enter a New Year.  Many people at this time make resolutions (personal promises) to change some aspect of their behaviour - like giving up drinking alcohol, going on a diet, managing their temper better, or whatever.

I suggest that instead of concentrating on the personal, you go external and think about the behaviours you can change in those around you.

Though the focus becomes external, almost certainly the only way you can change the behaviours of those around you is to modify your own behaviour first.  This teaches an important lesson about building, developing and improving interpersonal relationships. How people treat you and deal with you depends on how you treat them and deal with them.  The most important thing you can do is to listen - actively listen - to what they are telling you ... and add vision, to see what their body language is adding to what they say.

Active listening is an important but under-used skill. It needs practice. 

Start on January 1st and you might have it mastered in a short time. You will then understand and respond more effectively.  If you do, you will be a better manager, leader and productivity improver.

That must be worth a try - and a little effort. You will benefit - and so will your employees , and the business.

Good luck!

Is this your problem?

Data over the last decade suggests that labour productivity has been rising in developed countries but overall (or multi-factor) productivity has declined.

This means that people are working harder but 'the system' is letting them down.

We have been saying for 50 years that organisations need to work smarter, not harder.

Now is the time for companies like yours to invest in new technology, up-to-date equipment and machinery (including the Internet of Things) - and in skills for the workforce.

If enough of you do it, we might have a 'smart revolution' - and rising productivity at last.

No grants, please

When nations establish productivity campaigns and initiatives, one feature is often financial support for companies (snd perhaps  universities and support agencies).

Firms are encouraged to apply for grant funding for additional resources or for specific support (for advice and consultancy, for example).

Some firms are obviously successful - and some are not.

The problem with such an approach is twofold.

Firstly, it encourages firms to become good at applying for grants - rather than being good at their core competencies.  Firms learn how to play this new game.

Secondly, it can help 'shore up' poorly performing firms - which does little for longer-term national productivity.

The same is true at the level of the firm.  If you start looking for, and applying for, grants, it can take effort and thought away from the core business.

So, my recommendation is - don't do it .By all means (I would encourage you to) have a productivity initiative - but don't make grant funding central to it.

Think differently

Sometimes you hear or see something which really surprises you - and makes you think hard about your existing frame of reference.  Take this which I heard on the radio the other day...

A scientist who takes his inspiration for new inventions/innovations from the animal world (sorry, I can't recall his name) suggested that the received wisdom about the wheel being the greatest ever invention was fundamentally flawed.  The result he suggested of this flaw is that we have spent fortunes paving the world.  If we hadn't invented the wheel but had spent our time developing transport that could cope with uneven ground (as animals can), we would have saved all that investment - and had much more flexible transport systems.

What other received wisdom has similar 'flaws?  How can we unlearn and undevelop in ways that will create higher productivity?

How can you change your mindset in ways which help develop your business?

There needn't be a choice

I saw a piece recently suggesting that India has to choose between its traditional focus on spirituality and morality - and on modern profit-focused business methods.

What say I? I say 'Rubbish!"

There is no dichotomy here.  The two are perfectly in harmony.  Indeed I would argue that morality (but perhaps less so, spirituality) is essential.  Building a mission and vision on a core set of values with a strong moral focus is a good way to engage your employees - and have them make a strong, positive contribution.

So you do not have to choose.  You can - and indeed should -  have both!

We expect our staff to work hard and to do their best.  But what is 'best'. I would contend it is something to do with always being aware of the company's mission, vision and values ands always acting in furtherance of the mission and vision whilst acting in accordance with company values ... and wherever and whenever possible doing so pro-actively off their own initiative.

This, of course, begs the question - do your employees know, and understand the company's mission and vision - and are they aware of the core values you expect?  If my 'definition, is right, and they do not know these things, they cannot be expected to do their best.  If they don't, it is your fault, not theirs.

Skill up!

The UK's productivity performance - as reported by the Office for National Statistics and used in international performance tables- has been woeful recently.  I know I have argued in the past that the measurement scheme seems inherently flawed but that is irrelevant to today's argument.

There seems a consensus emerging that the figures are so bad - and have been for so long - that the problem is insoluble.  Certainly no-one seems  to have come up with a plan to address the situation.

I know there is no magic bullet - no quick and easy fix .... but we can tackle the issue by making sure we take a holistic approach in which government does what it can (with infrastructure and skills), organisations do what they can (with long-term investment, improvement programmes and skills), unions do what they can (with constructive partnerships and skills) and education/training does what it can (with targeted knowledge and skills).

You can probably see a theme emerging here.  We need a high skill, multi-skill workforce.  We don't currently have one.  We perhaps need a lesser focus on knowledge (more easily provided in a high-tech, AI world) and a greater one on competence and flexibility.  If we invest in a high skill workforce, everyone benefits - the individuals with the skills, companies who need the skilled workforce - and the nation with higher productivity.

Perhaps after all, there is a magic bullet!  Go get your gun.

Learning from education

Some universities and colleges in the US are now being funded according to a productivity-based formula. Does this make sense?

What is the productivity of a university? how is it measured?  Number of degrees per $1,000 of investment?

Get it wrong - and universities will play the measurement game - making the figures move in the direction which benefits them financially even if this is not the most appropriate measure.

This is not to suggests that productivity is not important - after all universities are spending public money - and should be held accountable for it.

But if we get the measure wrong - we get the wrong result. Universities might benefit - but society won't.  So we need a good, healthy debate on what the measure - or measures - should be.

The same is true in your business.  If you measure the wrong things, you get the wrong behaviours - and the wrong results. 

You are not Africa

A recent discussion paper from the African Union suggests that the fact that Asia has achieved the highest economic growth rates in the world in the last half century may not be unrelated to the existence of many vibrant National Productivity Organizations (NPOs) in the Asia-Pacific region and the activities of the Asian Productivity Organization (APO), the only intergovernmental regional organization that is actively promoting the cause of productivity.

Can the AU (and PAPA - the PanAfrican Productivity Association)  match the impact of APO?

Well, they are going to try. Let's wish them well. The world needs a productive Africa!
BUT are the existing NPOs in Africa 'vibrant'?  Sadly, I fear not.  But a new, collective initiative might re-energise them - especially if they have government and AU support.

Expecting others to supply the thinking and the resources is a recipe for little progress.

The same is true of your business.  Though you might get help (at a price) from consultants or aid agencies, in the end it is your own commitment to progress and new ideas that will make the difference.  African governments must heed this lesson but so must you!

At a recent Institute of Management Services event in the UK, I was lucky to share a platform with Prof. Colin Coulson-Thomas - -a an expert in corporate transformation.

His views (thankfully) overlapped with, and complemented, mine.

My 'executive takeaway' of his presentation is that:

In high performing organisations, rarely are key business processes carried out exactly as specified and trained. They rely on people who are above average and above mere compliance.

We need to explore new models and build flexible, adaptable, networked organisations - combinations of people and technology.

Think about those statements for a minutes or two - and then think how you can enact them in your business. You know it makes sense!

In 1940, one farmer supplied about 11 people with food for the year. Changes over time -especially in technology - mean that today the average farmer in the United States supplies 155 people with food for the year.

How many industries can match that kind of productivity growth? 

But history is not important.

A more important question is ...Where will you find your next phase of growth?

Where are the equivalent of your new pesticides, automation, crop systems, etc.

You might not have to feed the world - but your productivity growth is important to you - and to the nation.

You certainly need new ideas.  Start thinking NOW!

No thingy for me

'Thingy' is a word used in the UK by many people to represent something whose name they cannot recall - a 'whatdyacallit', a 'thingymajig'.  All cultures and languages have such words.

I use it here because it reminds me of the 'next big thing' (or should that be next big thingy)?

This - according to some - is the Internet of Things - the networking of physical objects.

Manifestations so far seem to be 'home automation' - devices that will change the colour of your lighting or switch on your kettle as you enter the house, or when you use your phone to direct it to.

So far, I have been underwhelmed. It seems remarkable how few of these things I want to do at all, let alone automatically or 'more conveniently'. It might be 'early days' and in a few years I might be amazed at the possibilities but, for now, you can keep these thingies that are so clever - I'll work with my old technology for now.

After all, this blog is called 'Do Not Complicate' - so I'll keep it old school and simple.

Has your open plan office had its day?

(If you don't have one, you don't have to read this.)

When they were first introduced, they were seen as being facilitators of communication, interaction and cooperation - bringing disparate groups together.

Now when I see them I think of them as being facilitators of noise and distraction.

It was always the case anyway that some employees found them uncomfortable - exposing and intimidating.

Ia m not saying that they cannot work - only that they should be chosen for those situations where they CAN work - and rejected for situations where they are distractors.

You  need more hybrid offices where those that need them can work in private spaces - after all there are other technical means now of improving communication and interaction ....  the office design does not have to do that.

If the government won't, you must!

Fairly recently, the UK government issued a draft Industrial Strategy.  Any discussion on this seems to have been drowned out by the Brexit rhetoric.  Yet it is too important to ignore. UK productivity is low - wages are low - living standards are low. We need a kick up the backside, to shock us into action ... or we need a sensible, long-term strategy.

Instead what we get is Brexit posturing - and all the media attention is fixed on that (and Trump, of course).

When I advise companies, I tell them to beware of concentrating on the urgent at the risk of ignoring the important.  Well, productivity improvement is both urgent and important - it is the only way out of the low wage, low living standards cycle.

Put the industrial strategy back on the table, please.

And, you - please relook at your own strategy. we might need to build from the bottom up if the government doesn't sort its own prioirities.

Last week we talked about productivity levels - and the conundrum about unemployment and wage levels.

I suggested, as I have done several times lately, that we might need to reconsider how we measure productivity - since the measure used to compare nations uses labour productivity.

But the growth of robots and other automation devices has distorted this figure.  The cost of the robots is not part of labour cost - and their g=hours are not part of labour hours.

So, nations that have automated the most lose in the productivity figures.  This does not seem right.
This investment goes unrewarded and we are no longer comparing like with like.

But remember - these figures are bot 'real' - so invest away, regardless of whether you distort the national productivity figures and the national standing in international tables.  Your job is to boost real productivity - and if automation does that, good luck to you.

Most of the old economic certainties have gone.

For many years, the 'rule' was the as unemployment levels dropped, wages would rise (to entice workers away from others to your organisation).  Since the great 2008 financial crisis, this has not proved true.  Unemployment has dropped to the point where the UK is close to full employment - but wages have not risen correspondingly (though they have risen).

This position is mirrored throughout the developed world.

The experts don't seem to know why this is so or whether this is a temporary phenomenon.

We seem to be in a position where all we can do is 'watch this space', 'wait and see'.

Of course, you might not be bothered about this - feeling low wages simply helps your business

But national wage levels are important - wages create money that circulares in the economy - and may buy your goods or services.

The Power of Benchmarking

The UK government recently established the Productivity Leadership Group (PLG)  to try and boost the nation's productivity.

The PLG says that if all except our most competitive businesses were able to improve their productivity to match the companies ranked 10 per cent above them, an additional £130bn Gross Value Added (GVA) would be unlocked every year – certainly a boost to business confidence and national productivity.

The power of benchmarking of this kind is that when organisations see that others (and especially others in the same sector) are already achieving such results, it shows the 'art of the possible'. "If they can do it, we can too."

This is why we always suggest that governments should carry out sector benchmarking - and show organisations what is achievable - preferably against a number of productivity variables.... so that any one organisation might find its performs well against some of these variables but poorly against others.  If it could raise performance to be among the top performers against all variables, it gains a significant productivity increase.

If the government is not doing it, you have to find ways of doing it for yourself.  There are a number of employer organisations and benchmarking 'clubs' that will help you share data with your peers to create sector benchmarks.

Take a longer view

The US has created lots of jobs since President Tump was elected.  I am sure he will take the credit - and bask in the reflected glory.

President Trump should be careful, though.  America's productivity is not rising.  Any wage rises will be at the expense of inflation.  In a year's time, we may have a better guide to the success of his policies - for now, those in work will be pleased... but may find their wage being eroded.

Short-term gains are often illusory.

The same is true within companies.  When judging your latest quarter results, set them in the longer-term context.  You can grow short-term profits at the expense of longer-term investment - but only improved productivity gives longer-term, sustainable growth.

What are you mesuring?

France takes the summer off.  many factories close down for a month while workers holiday en masse.

Other European countries also take longer holidays than the UK.

Yet the productivity of these countries is higher.

Can anyone explain this - it is intuitive.

I have voiced my doubts about the way we measure national productivity before.

Each time I note something like this, I become more convinced that we need to take a fresh look at what we measure and compare.

Similarly, you should be careful what you measure and compare in your business.

if you measure the wrong things, you will make the wrong conclusions - and worn decisions.

Don't wait for technology

Over the last 50 years, there is no doubt that technology has made significant contributions to GDP and thus to national productivity. However most technology soon reduces in price and thus any contribution is soon lessened. Worse, we appear to be in a relative technology slump - there has been little true innovation in the last few years.

So, technology is not going to come to our rescue. We have to take the 'low road' and pick up all the small productivity gains we can. We need a systematic, national productivity drive with government addressing policy and infrastructure and companies like yours addessing skills and culture. We can create impact but it's not going to be easy.

Not in your organisation

If your employees were fighting in factions, arguing among themselves and failing to do what you expect them to do, would you continue to pay them?  You might - but presumably you would also initiate disciplinary procedures to try to correct such behaviours.

I suspect, though, that your answer to the question is that you would not tolerate it - or that it wouldn't happen in your well -run organisation.

This is, however, what happens regularly, in politics. Both the US and the UK have exhibited such behaviours recently - infighting and squabbling between Republicans and Democrats - or Conservatives and Labourites.  All we, as the voting public, can do is to sit and watch - and perhaps seethe with anger - and wit until the next election.  These infighters and squabblers would not behave like this in the other compartments of their  life, surely.  But they seem to think this is how they are expected to behave as 'politicians'.

There is an old adage - 'we get the politicians we deserve' - so it must be our fault.

If we want productive government, we must demonstrate productive behaviours in all we do - and set these 'children' some role models.  We should also write to them and remind them of the constructive and productive behaviours we expect from our elected representatives - and we should certainly use our vote to sanction these unruly and unproductive behaviours whenever we get the chance.

As a businessman, you should also lobby whoever you can to put pressure on the political parties to control the worst excesses of their members.

The Lost Decade

UK productivity in the first quarter of 2017 was the same as it was in 2010.  This  after relentless if sometimes slow growth over many years.So, not only have we not had the bounce i refereed to last week; we seem to have had a capsize and a sinking.

Successive governments seem to be powerless to do anything about the problem but at leat this current government seem to have recognised the problem - and have set up a new UK Productivity Council to try to do something about it.

Making up for10 years lost growth is probably impossible - but at least we could get growth moving again.

If government can't get things moving, its up to you in the private sector to take charge and build momentum from lots of little improvemente.

Together, we owe it to the next generation to give them some momentum to build on.

No Bounce!

The Office for National Statistics says that, had productivity in the UK returned to its pre-recession trend, it would be 20% higher than its current level. Britain would be one fifth better off.

The normal pattern is that after a recession, productivity bounces back and we recover (at least most of) what we lost.

However, we have had no bounce since the great financial crisis.

It ts not just the UK - the pattern is remarkably similar around the globe.

The time to wait for the bounce has gone - the UK needs action to recover.

Let's hope the new Productivity Council can pull the trigger.

And, for your business, its up to you.  You have to find and pull your own trigger.... find your own bounce.

Canada's labour productivity rose 1.4% in Q1 2017.

This is not a spectacular result but a solid performance.

Sometimes, slow and steady progress is preferable to high gain, fall-back performance.  (Think 'tortoise and hare'.)

This is exactly why continuous improvement programmes, resulting in a number of evolutionary performance gains, often beat the occasional revolutionary improvement brought about by say, a technology change.

Ideally, of course, you want both - but waiting for the revolution is a bad strategy.  You  need to keep the pressure on your organisation to make the many, small improvements.

Take Canada as your role model!

Should you think or work?

We have been told a few times that what creates success is sheer hard work... the perspiration not the inspiration, and the 10,000 hours.  But many great men (and women) have achieved their greatness by original thought  by avoiding the 10,000 (wasted)  hours.

it seems that both routes might take you to success - and it perhaps depends on the kind of person you are as to what is right for you.

But what about a company.  They can't 'plod on' for 10,000 hours and expect an insight - or the achievement of some kind of superskill.

So, whoever runs the company has to have the insight - about a new product, a changed process, a new way of doing business - to transform the business.

If you are not thinking about how to transform and revolutionise your business -  wha are you doing?  How are you earning your keep?

You, the evangelist.

I try to keep up to date with productivity trends and productivity news.

In scanning the airwaves and the twittersphere, I often see governments urging their citizens to be more productive.

At least in religions when people are urged to be more 'holy' there are priests and other religious leaders helping prepare them to be more holy - and explaining what being more holy means.

So, who are the productivity priests explaining to these probably confused citizens what they should do - and how they should behave - to be more productive.

In your company, it has to be you.  you must be the evangelist of productivity - and explain it to the laity in terms they undersrand ... and can act upon.

Election promises

In the UK, we have been through a rather exciting General Election - though as I write this, we have the same government and the same Prime Minister.

In their campaigns, all parties made us promises - of what they would do and deliver - better health care, more jobs, lower taxes, etc.

How would they pay for those promises that cost money- by raising taxes or cutting costs elsewhere.  (Oh yeah, that's going to happen!)

But how many of the parties mentioned the only real way of paying for the promises - higher productivity.

You guessed it ... not one of them.

If politicians looking for solutions don't realise that productivity is the answer - what hope is there?

Luckily, you do understand - don't you.  You have to find ways of raising productivity -its the only solution that will create a win-win for you and your staff ... and form the basis of longer-term growth and success.

Exhortation is not enough

Many nations have realised that the only true long-term key to economic growth is productivity improvement.

The problem is that this realisation is often the end, rather than the start, of the matter.  Governments and their agencies exhort commerce - and perhaps even the population - to improve productivity and to compete - but without understanding their role in making this happen.

Exhortation and hectoring are not enough.  Governments need to provide infrastructure, skills, information and advice - in ways that are accessible - just in time, at just the right level - and at the right cost!

Similarly, there is no point you exhorting your workers to higher performance and productivity - without providing the advice, information, skills and tools needed.

Its not rocket science - but it isn't easy either!

Robots on the march?

I've referred to the subject (threat?) of robots several times in the last year.  Clearly they are going to have a big impact on many companies and on many people's jobs   - but exactly how, in what ways ,is not yet clear. For some time humans and robots are likely to be co-workers. Skilled workers will survive the longest.

Views on this subject vary - but sometimes writers seem to be scaremongering rather than making reasoned assumptions and predictions.

As ever, we will have to wait and see.

However, my reading in this area did throw up a word I wish I had coined - robopocalypse.  

Choose wisely how you proceed with robots in your business.  Short-term gains are clear .. but longer-term. ... Who knows?

Global rating agency Moody's Investors Service sees a persistent decline in labour productivity growth, stemming from an ageing population and slow investments, as posing a key threat to global economic recovery.

The agency's report, titled "Collapse of Global Productivity Growth Remains Sizable Risk to Credit Conditions," published last week said global labour productivity growth fell to an average 1.7% in the post global financial crisis years of 2011-2015, compared to an average 2.6% between 1995-2007, Moody's.com reported.

In 2016 alone, labour productivity growth slowed to just 1.2%. Moody's said if productivity growth remains unchanged, global economic growth next year might be as low as 2.5%, significantly lower than previous estimates of 3.5%.

all of this means you are likely to field requests for wage rises to compensate for inflation.  If you can't increase your productivity, this will cost you part of your current earnings.

How are your robots doing?

The last 2 decades have sen the inexorable rise of the robot - especially in motor manufacture.  We have all sen the robotic arms lifting and fitting panels, spray painting, and so on.  Some workers have presumable been displaced  - but the economic gains have been substantial, surely.

Well ,thisc rise of †he robot has been matched with the lowest productivity growth in recorded times.

Coincidence or causal relationship?

Well, there is some evidence that those displaced workers have had to take low paid, possibly part-time work - not the high skill jobs that were predicted.  And, worse - some could find no alternative work at all - the jobs are in the wrong place!

So, the rise of the robot might be good only for those who make and sell robots.  Or perhaps it simply takes time  for society to adapt to such a massive change.

Think carefully before you make the switch on your factories.

Do you value skills?

In the developing world, education standards have been rising for decades.  More and more of the population go to university and the number of degrees, and even higher degrees, rises relentlessly.

Yet, still employers maintain - as they always have done - that they cannot get employees with the right skills.

Note the word 'skills'.  Employers don't want more knowledge - that is easy to provide via Google - but skills are both expensive to provide -and take a long time to develop.

This means that the 'education' system must become more of an 'education and skills' system and skills must receive parity of esteem with knowledge.

In the UK, the proposed 'T levels' might help - but past initiatives have failed to change the 'esteem' with which skills are held. Teachers are knowledge-based - the wrong people to guide kids through a skills-based curriculum.  Changing this will take perhaps a couple of generations, helped by kids' increasing reluctance to take on the massive loans to fund university attendance.

But, of course, employers like you must play their part - by reducing their reliance on the degree as a 'first sift' of job applicants -and recognising skills where they exist.

Automate bur don't forget the rest.

Japan has a highly automated industrial sector which has fuelled productivity growth over several years. However this efficient sector is only a part of the Japanese economy (though an important part) and the rest of the economy - and especially the services sector has a very poor track record - relying on long hours of hard work to get things done, rather than streamlined processes and procedures.

Noe I know that most readers are not representatives of countries but entrepreneurs and business men.  Well, the lesson for you is that you need to make improvements where they have maximum impact, not where they are easiest to make.

How will Trump's Tax Turnoff Affect your Productivity?

Donald Trump is hailing his tax cutting plans as 'radical' and likely to stimulate US growth.How will they affect US productivity?

Well, the way in which productivity responds to trade measures is not clear ... but if you and other entrepreneurs are paying less tax, you may spend more on capital infrastructure or on R&D - and both of those are generally beneficial to productivity.  However, they take time to show up in the figures - so don't expect short term productivity gains.  And with long-term investments, often something else (some short term effect or expediency) often intervenes.

So, as ever, we wait and see.  We hope.  And if it all works our, we might have to hail Trump as a visionary.

Encourage your staff to be lazy

Is laziness helpful in making people more productive? does it encourage them to seek less arduous ways of achieving the same output?

Well, certainly the opposite is not true  Busyness is not a sign of high productivity. Too many people are busy but essentially unproductive - because they are either doing the wrong things or doing them in the wrong way.

Think about people like maintenance engineers - ideally we want them either doing nothing or carrying out planned maintenance - we do not want them working on breakdowns and emergencies.

So, perhaps we should encourage people to create more 'idle time' as a reward for improving how they carry out their own tasks.n

Perhaps having your staff sitting around talking is the best sign that they are thinking about their work and the contribution they are making.

Does the IMF matter to you?

The head of the International Monetary Fund, Christine Lagarde, has issued a stark warning that living standards will fall around the world unless governments take urgent action to increase productivity by investing in education, cutting red tape and incentivising research and development.

 Whether or not, you agree that her prescription is what is needed to improve productivity - or is complete, it is good that someone so influential is spreading the message about the need for productivity development. 

I actually think she has got it mostly right - I would add infrastructure development, and would add training to education ... but her summary is pretty effective.

Now, how does this apply to you and your business. Well, of course, you need your government to create favourable business conditions - to create the potential for high productivity which you can exploit. 

And, i hope, as a concerned, informed citizen, you want other governments to do the same and help create a better, more productive world. 

Key points

I have just returned from the World Productivity Congress in Bahrain -an interesting and useful even†. The programme was too rich and varied to be easily summarised but key points were:

1. productivity is fostered and supported in healthy communities of informed, engaged citizens and workers
   
2. innovation, if it is to be comprehensive and effective, needs a supporting innovation ecosystem.
   
3. a key determinant of organisational productivity is ensuring that employees have the appropriate skillset.
   
4. solutions have to be informed by local history and culture -beware of consultants selling pre-packaged and pre-determined solutions.

These statements sound 'bald' - but to hear the thinking - and the evidence  - behind them made the Congress worthwhile.

Tke help

Most of us will admit that we are not experts in all areas. (Some of us will even admit to not being an expert in any area.)

So, we take advice, help and support from those who know more than we do - or at least we do if we are sensible.

Of course we have to find knowledgeable people who know about our field of operation, or our type of problem.

Some of us use conferences to help us find experts.  We can use sector-based events that offer information and presentations form experts in our sector. Or we can use generic events, recognising that many lessons are transferrable across sectors  and it is the tools, techniques, approaches and methodologies we should be looking at.

I shall be at the World Productivity Congress shortly (April 2-4) to learn, share, discuss, reflect on issues around productivity - at the global,  regional, national and organisational level.  I don't necessarily expect to learn the 'great secret to productivity improvement' - but I do hope to hear about developments that will help me refine my own approach to supporting productivity development.

What have I got to lose.  Very little.
What have I got to gain. Possibly a great deal.

There is (just about) time to join me - what have you got to lose/gain?  You and your business wil e better for it. l
Check out www.wpc-bh.com for information.

Do you micromanage>

If so, stop.

Lots of management texts and courses tell us about the details of planning, organising and managing.  One problem is that you can tend to think that you yourself have to immerse themselves in the detail.  You  become a micromanager, obsessed about small steps and detail - instead of concentrating on the big picture and trusting others 'down the chain' to worry about detail. 

Employees see this as a lack of trust - and can often even see you doing parts of their job for them.  Naturally, they turn off and disengage

Nobody likes to be micromanaged. So, don’t do it. You have more important things to concentrate on - vision and strategy.

Do you want to be efficient - or productive?

These two terms are often used interchangeably - but they are different.  Here I am not concerned with technical differences - but with philosophical or attitudinal differences.

Organisations that pride themselves on being efficient usually strive to achieve the same performance with fewer resources - doing the same with less.

Conversely, organisations that aim to be highly productive usually strive to do more with the same resources -doing more with the same.  They concentrate on the 'top line' (of the productivity ratio) - and the 'bottom line' takes care of itself.

So to transform your organisation, look at the top line - how can I improve performance without increasing resources.

Is this why you voted for Brexit?

No-one is quite sure why the UK voted to leave the EU - but a recent study into the habits of 500 SMEs (small and medium enterprises), commissioned by online printing company instantprint, revealed that dealing with HR compliance forms, pension paperwork and health and safety regulations eats up an average of ten hours of the working week.

These companies took so long complying with regulation that they had  little or no time to focus on business growth.

This is not a recipe for success - and may be a small contributing factor to the Brexit vote - but a major factor for business owners and entrepreneurs.

Certainly we have to hope that Mrs May and her government will be looking to reduce the burden of bureaucracy as the UK leaves the EU.

Show your softer side

India is held up as the latest 'economic miracle' - transforming its economy over the last 20 years.  It is often suggested that success is down to 'hard' factors - such as technical ability, capital investment - and, of course, cheap labour.

But India has recognised the importance of 'softer' skills ands factors - such as teamwork, problem-solving and communication.  Young Indians are receptive to modern approaches to organising and managing a workforce and respond positively.

In fact, a study by the University of Michigan, on female garment workers (in Bangalore)  showed that providing training in soft skills raised productivity by 12%.

Sometimes, simple approaches are the best.

So, where can you use a soft skills approach to transform the productivity of your workforce?

AI revisited

I talked last week about AI - posing the question whether this is the next big technological driver of productivity improvement.

Some people are really worried about AI - and its effects on jobs, suggesting that most jobs in time can and will be replaced by some form of automation.

However, before that happens we are likely to hit a 'sweet spot' where automation/robots/AI assist human work  his will allow work which is not possible now.  the winners will be those that can spot the opportunities and create products and services that rely on these new forms of thinking and movement for their execution.

So the future is not bleak - as with most technology, it is full of exciting opportunities ... and the real forward-thinking entrepreneurs will win out.

Is AI the future of productivity?

Technological innovation can drive massive productivity gains - but it is some time since we have had innovations of the size of those in the 1970s and 1980s - when the PC first hit desktops - and 'productivity software' followed.

Now industry waits for the next major impetus  - and governments hope we might get something of such magnitude that it helps solve the great 'productivity puzzle' (whereby productivity growth stubbornly refuses to match pre-economic crisis levels.

Is Artificial Intelligence the answer?  AI is being trumpeted as the next big thing - and †he big tech players are investing millions.

Yet, so far, we see better ways to play our music or switch between apps - but nothing significant in the apps themselves ... or - even more important - new forms of app.

These might come, of course.  Technological revolutions do not happen overnight.

Certainly, at the moment, AI seems to be the only contender for 'the next big, technological productivity driver'.

Of course, as an entrepreneur, you might see this as an opportunity.  How can you exploit new developments? After all, someone has to come up with the next big, 'must-have' app.  Why not you?  There are plenty of organisations that can take your idea to reality - especially in Indi.

All you need is that idea.

Your role

The world needs to improve productivity - if we are to raise living standards, feed the world and avoid water and fuel shortages. Yet, governments seem unable to do this - productivity has been at best sluggish over the last 10 years.

Some governments - rightly - see a link between innovation and productivity - but then they go too far in thinking that increased R&D spending will improve innovation.

innovation is not invention - innovation is more concerned with identifying new uses for today's (and even yesterday's) technologies.

So ,yes, we need to improve innovation .
But no, R&D spending is not the way to do it.

I am not advocating spending less on R&D - invention is also important - but we need to look more at how we create the conditions in which people think differently - education, training, induction, empowerment - some of these are government responsibilities, others are for you in the private sector to work on.

Future success?

How well is your business doing?

How do you know?

What do you measure?

Turnover? Profit?

Important, yes ... but they tell you nothing about the future.  They might summarise good performance now - but fail to identify future threats.

Think again about what you use to judge success.  Otherwise you re gambling on the future. 

Has the UK (and you) got it wrong?

The productivity of Germany and France (GDP per hour worked) is strong - and almost identical ... even though Germany is normally regarded as a strong economy and France as a weak one.

Perhaps the 'social models' that exist in mush of European industry have some merit - and the UK might be better to embrace such models as a part of the EU rather than rush for the exit doors.

You, too, might reflect on the power of 'social thinking', of encouraging participation and engagement from the workforce.

There is strength in 'togerherness'.

Disruption

We've all seen technology completely disrupt certain industries - photographic film, film cameras, music recording, etc.

Sometimes what emerges from this process of disruption is a changed but equally strong industry; but sometimes the disruption is so great and over such a long period that the former industry dies but the new one takes a long time to get established. How many of you have got an electric car?

Internal disruption can be quite unsettling too.  If mis-managed, new initiatives and new ideas can cause disruption to current ways of working but the new form of working takes too long to establish - and customers are disappointed.  The drop in performance might be so huge that it takes months or even years to make up.

So, when making major change - plan, plan and plan - and then make sure you have the skills to execute.