Set Goals at the Right Level

Organisational strategies obviously work at the corporate level - they are overarching, sometimes summed up as BHAGs - Big, Hairy, Audacious Goals.

Such goals are useful in expressing the longer term direction for, and aims of, the organisation but they must be translated to make them fit for shorter term planning.  Those within the organisation must know if they are on the right track to achieve these longer-term BHAGS.

Leaders have to create action plans which  teams and individual workers can execute - and they should create short-term targets to motivate and drive action in the right direction.  These shorter-term goals also fix actions in a particular timeframe, consistent with achieving the longer term goals.

Of course if there are too many goals people can get confused - and if every goal is given a high priority, people are unsure as to where they should put the greatest effort.

So any organisation needs strategy and execution. Strategy ensures the organisation does the right things but good (effective) execution ensures those  right things actually get done. 

An organisation that also has higher productivity as part of its fabric will attempt to make execution efficient as well as effective.

So, you need strategy,’ you need effective and efficient execution - and you should end up with a high performing organisation that achieves its longer term objectives.  

Aa a key element of this process toy have to create a series of cascading goals that translate your overall mission (and associated BHAGs) into end points and way points that individuals and teams know they have to meet to keep tyour organisation on track.

Which Decisions?

Clearly industry leaders havre difficult decisions to make at particular times and under particular circumstances.   At all times, these difficult decisions should be informed by the overarching organisational mission and strategic plan.

However, we are particularly interested in the productivity of the organisation.  So where should this figure in the decision-making?

The answer is very simple …. EVERYWHERE.

Whenever a decision is taken, those taking it should be aware of the effect of different choices or actions on organisational productivity.   Though for short periods, an organisation may prioritise another factor, such as market share, no organisation  can forget the importance of productivity for very long without heading for trouble. 

Only raising productivity leads to higher sustainable profits.   If productivity does not rise, higher output or income will be countered by rising inflation.

i.e. the rising costs will exceed the rising income.

So. the concept of productivity should be constantly at the forefront of all your strategic thinking.

Do As I Say

There is an old saying that poor leaders can be summed up with the phrase ‘Do As I Say, Not As I Do’ meaning that leaders who do not ‘walk the walk as well as ’talk the talk’ are not likely to be successful in the longer-term.

Perhaps nowhere is this more true than in the public (government) sector.

Productivity has been rising very slowly, if at all in many developed countries - almost as if there is a collective belief that productivity has plateaued, rising to a level that cannot be improved upon with current approaches and technologies.

Whether this is true or not (Spoiler: This is not true) is not then point of this post.  I have another argument to make.

The new UK government is striving for economic growth - and has made growth its main mission. There is plenty of rhetoric but, so far, little action.

They are urging companies to invest and to improve their productivity.

Meanwhile over the last 10 years, under all governments, the productivity of the public sector has plummeted. Public sector workers are now being paid at a premium over private sector employees and they have much better pension arrangements - yet they continue to respond to inducements, exhortations and rewards win lower and lower productivity.

If government cannot stop this slide and. Indeed, reverse it - the nation is doomed to lower productivity on the wider scale. More and more of the economic wealth of the nation will be used to shore up public sector pay snd pensions - with little positive impact on the economy.

So, I urge this government to DO something - to back up their avowed commitment to their mission with action that will start to turn up the dial on public sector productivity.  Lead by example, not by rhetoric - ands before its too late!

Where Digital toolss Might Fail

 Technology has been a significant driver of enhanced productivity over the last several decades.  Now many are predicting that AI will be the next major revolution.

However, the current crop of digital tools (including AI) is, by and large, aimed at backroom tasks and personnel.  Front line workers are certainly less well-served, even in service industries.

This is partly down to the nature of the tasks undertaken by these front-line personnel but even where appropriate or useful tools might be available, they are often let down by the way in which they are intended to be used - by the user interface (UI).

Most backroom and office staff are used to computers and the over-arching UI but most frontline personnel are not.  They find it difficult to adapt to interface concepts (windows and cursors, for example)  that are new to them and fail to relate to machine interfaces they may use elsewhere in their lives.

This is not solely a training issue.  There is a need to relook at user interface principles and practice and design new forms of interface, more appropriate to this new set of users.

Workers who struggle to integrate new digital tools into their workflows because of poor interface design are not going to improve their productivity.  They will become frustrated, less motivated snd even disengaged.

Potential productivity improvements may not be realised or may be sub-optimal.

Do Governments Innovate?

 Most people - including me - would answer immediately - and say ‘No’.

However, things are not so simple.

Think of recent large-scale innovation changes.

Nuclear power for example.  Or space exploration.  Such massive innovations could not have happened without large-scale investment (and planning and coordination) from governments.

Other innovations cannot be fully diffused into markets without support from government t and government t agencies.  The rollout of electric vehicles cannot work without a sound national strategy for there provision of charging stations.

Spo, sometimes innovation needs a helping hand from government. This can be upfront in supporting massive technological change or post-event in supporting the diffusion snd uptake of new technologies.

Thus, new technology may take some time to show up in productivity figures.

This is, of course, exacerbated by the need in innovating firms to train the workforce in the use of new technology or systems - and promote the innovation to potential customers.

Government education and training policy also has to adapt and reflect technological change.

So change includes the major change (introducing a new technology, for example) and the few or many intangibles which must be changed to exploit the technology.

Governments clearly have a role to play here.

Governments perhaps do not directly innovate … but the support they provide can make the difference to the success is a new innovation in improving national productivity.

Trust is Key

Bad title.  There is no one key to productivity. Yet, research shows a strong correlation between mutual trust and performance in organisations.

Mutual trust means that:

• Senior leaders trust employees
• Managers trust their team members
• Managers are trusted by their direct reports
• Employees trust their fellow team members
• The senior leadership team is trusted by employees

If you can generate and then maintain such trust, you move forward.

Establishing and Improving such trust involves the training of employees and especially managers/leaders - on effective business communication and on how and why trust bonds are formed, and how they are broken. An innate sense of empathy in senior leaders is also very helpful.

So, ‘all’ you have to do (as ever) is to hire the right people for supervisory/managerial/leadership roles, and give them appropriate training and development opportunities.   Mentoring by an.established peer with the right qualities is also helpful.

Listen to the Sound of Silence

Many people like to listen to music while they work on their computer or carry out other individual tasks.  Music can drown out the sounds of the task itself or the sounds of colleagues - especially when working in an open plan office.

Others think music is a distracting  influence and prefer to work in silence.

A ‘listening’ brain is continually processing sensory input (including multiple changes in rhythm, tone and volume) even when a person is not consciously paying attention. This constant input can put a considerable cognitive load on the brain, potentially leading to mental fatigue and reduced productivity - the brain is working at something other than the work task in hand.

In contrast to the potential mental overload caused by noise, silence can have a soothing effect on the brain. Moments of silence can help lower blood pressure and heart rate, reducing the levels of stress hormones 

The calming effect of silence can contribute to improved concentration, better decision-making, and an overall sense of well-being.

Furthermore, a study published in the journal "Heart" showed that just two minutes of silence can be more relaxing than listening to "relaxing" music, 

Silence has also been recognised as a catalyst for creativity and productivity. By reducing auditory distractions, silence can help people focus, make connections between ideas, and solve problems more effectively.

So encourage staff to throw away (or lay aside) their headphones, turn off the radio and listen to … silence.  They will feel better and be more productive.