Productivity or Quality

Should you focus your improvement efforts on improving the quality of what you do ... or in improving the productivity?

It doesn't matter.

Productivity and Quality are inextricably linked. Improving quality adds value to goods or services which adds to the top line of the productivity ratio. 
Improving quality through systematic analysis and investigation of both product and process also throws up productivity improvements. 
Improving quality and productivity both require fresh thinking and innovation. 

An organisation that commits to quality, of necessity, commits to productivity.  One might even consider that one (a focus on improving quality) means improving the quality of what you do.  The other (a focus on improving productivity) means improving the quality of how you do things.

So, go ahead.  Do one or do both. You will end up improving your productivity.

Is your organisation race-ready?

When running a race, an athlete has to be in peak condition, with no injuries. They also have to be aware of the capabilities of their opponents and set their tactics accordingly (especially for long distance races).

Well, business competition is rather similar. 

A business organisation has to be in peak condition with no significant performance drawbacks. They then must be aware of what their competitors are doing and set out their strategy and tactics accordingly.

So, if the two situations have similarities can one learn from the other? Can the business organisation learn from how the athlete prepares for his/her racing?

The answer is ‘Yes’.

The athlete trains often, to a pre-determined training regime, takes care with diet, makes sure they warm up before activity and cools down after activity.

Now I’ve set the scene .. it’s up to you how you translate those tasks into actions your business could take to ‘train’ for improved competitiveness.

Are you ready to win some medals!

Does it fit>

Remember ergonomics?  Not many people seem to.

I often see products that look like the designer has no idea of the shape and size of a typical person.  They may have been designed for an average human being of the 1940s ...  but not thew 21st century.

Think seats on public transport, on aeroplanes, in cars.  You have to squeeze yourself into an impossibly small space - especially if the next seat is already occupied.

And control systems and and 'user interfaces' which are too often user-hostile rather than user-friendly.

And don't get me started on instruction manuals - translated from the original Japanese or Chinese into modern gobbledegook.

People change gradually from one size to another - or one frame of mind to another. There should be plenty of time for designers to 'catch up'.  This would involve a little more thought - but in addressing control systems, user comfort, user understanding, ease of use and so on could significantly improve productivity.

When you buy new products, new equipment, new machinery,. think about the ergonomics - and the well-being of your workers. You both benefit.

People or Profit

Some organisations treat  people badly as they pursue profit at all costs.
Yet this is short-termism of the worst sort.

As you travel around and visit various companies, you will invariably see a poster or plaque in reception claiming 'Our people are our Greatest Asset' or "We are Investors in People:".

Yet few of those companies act as if they believe what they say in reception.

People are an organisations's greatest asset - but only if the organisation can release their potential, their contribution, their innovation, their ideas.

This doesn't just happen - it happens when the organisation creates a high potential culture, appropriate procedures, and most of all - development opportunities for the staff to keep adding to their skills and knowledge.

People are not 'human resources' but they can be a valuable source of innovation.

'People' ands 'profit' are not in any way mutually exclusive - they are inextricably linked. If you fail to recognise - and act on - this, you are doomed to poor industrial relations and low contribution levels from your staff.