Quantcast
Search for: Search what?
Jul 6, 2008  

 Newsletters
Industrial Market Trends
Get our free bi-weekly Industrial Market Trends newsletter delivered by e-mail.
Subscribe    View Sample

Product News Alerts
Get customized, daily news on the products and services you want to know about.
Subscribe   View Sample
 Recent Entries
 Archives by Year
 Recommended Reading
BOOK8.16.JPG

Paperback, 288pp
Publisher: The McGraw-Hill Cos.
Pub. Date: May 2007
ISBN-13: 9780071492607
Read more


 Blogroll



Advertisement

« Factory Automation’s New Ecosystem | Main | Merger Exploration: Proposed Alliance Could Save GM...or Not »


July 5, 2006

National Productivity, Multitasking Efficiency, Individual Engagement

By David R. Butcher

Herewith is our productivity scorecard: From what government officials and the scientific community say has been driving long-term productivity growth and how technology enables us to multitask better but increases stress, to how individual employee engagement levels drive or derail productivity.

The Big Picture
Economists, business analysts and policymakers have all focused considerable attention on United States productivity growth in recent years. While calculating productivity seems to be a subjective science, there is simply no getting around it: productivity is critical -- to individuals, to businesses, to industry and to the nation.

A significant body of related statistics shows that productivity in the U.S. remains healthy.

Foremost, the Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistics last month reported that 2006’s first quarter productivity — as measured by output per hour of all persons — increased 3.9 percent in the business sector from the fourth quarter of 2005 to the first quarter of 2006, as output increased 6.4 percent and hours worked by all persons grew 2.4 percent (seasonally adjusted annual rates). Non-farm business productivity advanced at a 3.7 percent annual rate in the business quarter.

In manufacturing, the annual rate of productivity change (increase) was as follows:

• 3.8 percent in manufacturing;
• 3.5 percent in durable goods manufacturing; and
• 3.7 percent in nondurable goods manufacturing.

As the Dept. of Labor puts it, “advances in productivity, that is the ability to produce more with the same or less input, are a significant source of increased potential national income.”

Manufacturers were already outpacing their rivals in developed countries during 1995 to 2000, when their productivity was growing by 4.0 percent a year. After 2000, the country's metal-bashers somehow managed to raise their productivity growth by another notch, to 5.1 percent a year, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The Economist just last week stated that, while no serious economist thinks that America can maintain “such a torrid rate of productivity growth over a longer period […] there are signs that America's productivity in manufacturing has been boosted by forces inherent in the structure of the economy, so that the sector should continue to thrive.”

Research by Dale Jorgenson of Harvard University and Kevin Stiroh of the New York Federal Reserve Bank, along with Mun Ho of think-tank Resources for the Future, has compared U.S. productivity in the late 1990s — during which the information-technology boom tailed off — with the productivity growth of the past five years. The economists looked not only at manufacturing but at the entire private sector, and suggested that there could be several explanations for the recent strong performance. The researchers’ paper says that not only has productivity growth accelerated further — by another 0.7 percent a year, to 3.2 percent — but the forces behind it also appear to have become more broadly based.

According to a Newsweek story last year, high productivity growth rates these past few years were driven by new technology, from speedier, more affordable computers to more efficient machine tools, which continued to boost productivity even after the bubble burst. In addition, businesses became better configured to make use of technology. According to Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, the strong performance has been bolstered not only by greater use of computers and other technologies but also by the economy’s flexibility. Now, according to the aforementioned report, U.S. firms are finding numerous ways to raise productivity and are not merely “riding one wave of innovation from the IT boom.” As such, the economists think, productivity growth will settle at a rate above what the U.S. achieved in the two decades prior to 1995.

Bernanke says the strong national productivity advances look likely to continue. And Messrs Jorgenson and Stiroh, along with Mun Ho, expect private businesses as a whole to boost productivity by 2.6 percent over the next decade.

Indeed, that would be good news. Manufacturers, which are boosting productivity even more rapidly than the rest of the economy, should do even better, The Economist notes.

Always Connected, Always at Work
Perhaps the most significant catalyst for individual-worker productivity is technology. Between BlackBerrys and other PDAs, cell phones and, pretty much everywhere you go now, constant wireless Internet access (on increasingly less-expensive laptops), the modern worker has become “untethered,” notes a Kentucky Herald-Leader business article earlier this week.

A recent study conducted for a cable TV network concluded that such technological devices and constant Internet access have increased worker productivity by 50 percent, due in part to their enablement of multitasking.

Essentially, the study says, people now can do 12 hours of work during their eight-hour shifts.

Of course, multitasking is nothing new. Yet the last decade has seen technology help speed its spread to most frontline personnel. The average yearly increase in a business worker's productivity has routinely been above 2.5 percent since the late 1990s, according to U.S. Labor Department studies. That same percentage hovered at 2 percent or below for the majority of the late ‘80s and early ‘90s.

While workers are doing more in less time, however, multitasking and the bombardment of constant tech-enabled communication are increasing stress.

“The stress side of that can be that people truly are inundated with communication,” said Dr. Gary Patton, a psychiatrist with the Behavioral Medicine Network in Lexington.

Check your work e-mail from home before you go to bed, and there is still anywhere from 10 to 100 e-mail messages in your inbox by the time you arrive at work the next morning.

While technology has “radically changed the world” of workers, reducing the time it takes for correspondence, it has become “much more stressful.”

“I hate to be the old-fogey-sounding person ... but when I started practicing law, there was an expectation that if somebody asked you a question, you could take a little while and respond to them," Lexington attorney Lucinda Masterton said in the Kentucky business article. “Even if it was an emergency, people didn't expect to get an answer right away,” she said.

One current argument is that if somebody asks you a question now, you're expected to have an answer -- or at least a response -- to them immediately.

Construction executive Jim Gray summed it up with a laugh, saying, "There's no credible avoidance technique."

This feeling of immediate access can be stressful to people who "feel like they are always available and even maybe in trouble if they don't respond immediately." Thus, we often see people in the evenings or in social gatherings — outside of work hours — with BlackBerrys in hand, responding to a work-related inquiry despite the fact that the person may even be on vacation. (Dr. Patton said one of his friends uses a BlackBerry so often that the PDA has been dubbed the “CrackBerry, because we think he's addicted.”)

“The Extra Mile”: Individual Engagement, Individual Productivity
A December 2005 study by human-resources consultant Towers Perrin, which surveyed more than 85,000 workers at large and midsize companies in 16 countries, concluded that only 14 percent of workers are fully engaged on the job. Engagement here is defined as a measure of people’s willingness and ability to give discretionary effort at work.

This means workers fully engaged as expressed in a willingness to “go the extra mile for their employers, doing more than their job description requires,” tops out at only 14 percent, a Pittsburgh Post-Gazette article (via The Northwest Herald) noted.

An additional 62 percent are engaged only moderately, while the remaining 24 percent are disengaged.
In the U.S., 21 percent of workers are fully engaged on the job and willing to go the extra mile for their companies, down slightly from 22 percent in 2003. (The highest levels of employee engagement are in Brazil, 31 percent, and in Mexico, 40 percent.)

Engagement levels vary from industry to industry.

Engagement levels might be lacking in the U.S. because of “the way workers perceive that they are being treated.” Amanda Randall, leader of the organization research practice in Towers Perrin's Chicago office, said that motivated employees responded to recent cost cutting by working more hours and doing more with less help. When employee efforts are not rewarded, a resonant decrease in engagement is the result.

“They are feeling a little bit resentful that there has been this lip service to pay-for-performance,” Randall told the Pittsburgh paper. Pay-for-performance is used widely enough to result in less engaged workers generally being paid less than highly engaged ones.

Randall says the survey confirms other studies that proved helping employees become more committed boosts productivity and thus the bottom line. Increasing engagement levels 5 percent results in a 3 percent improvement in customer service scores and nearly a 1 percent improvement in operating margins, she says.

Conclusion
In the end, time is an unmanageable commodity, as it is a finite resource. Rather, how we manage ourselves impacts our productivity. We can manage what we do with the time we have, and thus improve individual productivity. “Disorganization, unclear goals, too many personal phone calls, disjointed processes, no routines, poor planning, procrastination, lack of focus, lack of training, junk e-mail, surfing, and it goes on,” said Peggy Duncan, a personal productivity expert, workshop leader and author of several books, in an About.com interview. “These are all time bandits that steal our time and people often don’t make the connection that it’s why they never have enough.

“Working in this state is an absolute breeding ground for stress,” she says.


Resources

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
Productivity & Costs, People Are Asking

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
Productivity and Costs, First quarter 2006, Revised, June 1, 2006

American manufacturing: Lean and unseen
The Economist, June 29, 2006

Out of Steam
by Karen Lowry Miller
Newsweek International, Feb. 21, 2005

Technology gives workers a new leash on life
by Scott Sloan
The Kentucky Herald-Leader, July 3, 2006

Study: Workers focused on other things
by Len Boselovic
The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (via the Northwest Herald), Dec. 18, 2005

Increase Productivity and Decrease Work-Related Stress
by Elizabeth Scott
About.com Stress Management

Additional

8 Sure-Fire Strategies for Boosting Productivity
Gaebler Ventures

Engaged Employees Help Boost the Bottom Line
ISR (via PR Newswire), June 26, 2006



| Add to Y!MyWeb | Digg it | Add to Slashdot

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://news.thomasnet.com/mt41/mt-tb.cgi/629




Advertisement
Micro Plastics, The Worlds Largest Manufacturer of Threaded Nylon Fasteners
Machine Screws, Nuts, Washers, Standoffs, Spacers, Rivets, Clamps, Clips, Knobs, Printed Circuit Board Hardware, Panel Fasteners, Wire and Cable Hardware. - - - FREE SAMPLES

Comment

14 Comments

Ann said:

"people now can do 12 hours of work during their eight-hour shifts".

Who are they kidding. The new software system has put us back at least 5 years. Productivity has gone down due to the slow system that came with the new, improved version of our software.
Stress has gone up, way up, because of the above.

I wish someone would get the big picture!

July 5, 2006 1:56 PM


Dan Vera said:

IF there is such a thing as over production, a lean manufacturing concept, then maybe there is such a thing as over productivity. I used to manufacture and sell many wrought iron kitchen pot racks in the $125 -500 range. Someone in China merged a few of my designs and produced a $19 Pot Rack. This ruined the market. Now a Pot Rack, regardless of its quality or cost, is equated with "that cheap import".

Ebay has done much to conquer markets: giving away marketable design and market trade insight knowledge is one of them. There are thousands of Pot racks now at $19. Why would you even think of paying $125 or even $500 for a pot rack. Just when I thought I had made a job for someone, the more productive elements of Ebay and cheap overseas commodities took it away and even destroyed it. I have no choice; the milk has been spilt and the glass is empty.

July 5, 2006 3:53 PM


john said:

What is one to believe...one reads this article and sees the internet...home to the ever present e-mail that has helped boost productivity and with little searching can find equally scholarly articles that point to the same internet as the biggest source of wasted time while "on task" in the workplace. Can we have it both ways??

Companies want workers to become more "connected so we can all share in the increased profits from better productive", BUT that sharing will only come after you have become that more connected worker...MAYBE.

Management wants the the profit reward[s] and will then unilaterally decide if sharing is to happen. How well does one suppose it would work to go into the best steak house in town, insist on quality service and the finest cut of meat, cook exactly to your direction and then pay for it based on what you perceive its value to be.

Truly connected workers need to see finite goals with the rewards of attainment of those goals clearly spelled out...then maybe those truly worth keeping in your work force will become apparent and the rest be removed or be less rewarded.

You get what you pay for...IF YOU ARE LUCKY..OR MAKE THAT HONEST AND SMART!

July 5, 2006 4:20 PM


Sherwyn Drucker said:

The communication "pendulum" is going to swing too far in the very near future. It will have to swing back, I predict. There is just too much pressure these days to keep up with the latest and greatest communication gadgets. I see so many people checking their business emails on their Blackberrys and PDAs....in the movie theater, on a Saturday night! Is that really necessary? I think not in most cases. Yes, this increased stress is going to lead to breakdowns, if it hasn't already.

July 6, 2006 2:34 PM


bob bartol said:

If you want the ultimate test instrument for increasing productivity, try a mag-probe. How effective is it? A Japanese company translated the first two pages of the instructions into Japanese at their expense. It's a stock item with a major US railroad and it's the first test instument taught by a company that teaches trouble shooting the braking system on the trains.

It's used by major US manufacturers and shipped duty free to Canada. The mag-probe has been exported to Japan, China, South Korea, Aus, Singapore, South America, Germany, England, Hungry, Russia and others.

A complete set of instructions may be downloaded at mag-probe.com. It tests electrically operated solenoid valves in two seconds without making a direct connection or using a schemetic. A mag-probe is about the size of your thumb and weighs 3 OZ.

Bob Bartol,Jr
mag-probe inventor

July 7, 2006 12:44 AM


R. LAVAYE said:

Increased Productivity sounds great. But, eventually you begin to approach the law of diminishing returns. One cannot continue improving their productivity by X% forever. Eventually 100% is achieved and there simply is no where to go.

Of course, that assumes that each worker is still probably working his/her usual 12-hour day and the same software is in place.

Take into account that management abuses have substantially lowered worker morale and the same software/computer problems plague us, as always.
Then, productivity must begin to suffer.

As I see it, workers must be treated more as human beings whom are contributing to the Company's profit picture and not being pushed until they break, or begin to lose their pride in doing a good job (in spite of poor management)that I had instilled in myself when I first entered the job market, by my father.

Otherwise, America loses their advantage in the global market (which has already happened) and we are no longer a major innovator, nor command the markets as we once did.

As for quality -- forget it. Each day I'm seeing more quality problems developing than I have in the past.

Corporate America wants more profits. Why not achieve those profits by bringing our work back home, employing more American workers, improving morale and re-instilling our pride in a job well done, in order to beat the products being built off-shore.

Try it -- it just might work. I for one, would really like to see us building the best "Mouse Trap" the world has ever seen. Once we dominate the market, the products will sell themselves and we can command a better price for our products than the off-shore competition.

Bob L. -- Dallas, TX

August 25, 2006 10:54 AM


Glynis said:

The process of creating engagement in the American worker will require building trust. And will require doing certain aspects of management differently.

Most corporate cultures pay lip service to some vision and values, yet the truth, on the ground, is often dog-eat-dog competition, who-you-know not what-you-know, and politics rather than results.

I think this captured the mood:
http://lushforlife.com/more.php?id=203

One of the ways forward is competencies. If people know what they need to know and do, and are given comprehensive competency profiles for their positions, and a buddy-mentor when they come into that position (come on - not hard to do!) they have a fighting chance at being successful (and let's face it - business is about making ordinary peopel successful.)

Then metrics. How hard is it to measure a few simple metrics like success against the key criteria of a job, and satisfaction and retention?

Then training. No - not that stuff where someone waffles while the poor trainees try not to sleep. Training which engages the brain and makes a new neural connections. That is outcomes-based sustainable learning. Get rid of trainers who have no knowledge of neuropsychology and who lecture instead of applying the laws of adult learning. They are a blot on your training budget. It's more fun to burn your money or pour it down the drain.

And more cost effective - your people are worth approximately their annual salary divided by 1000 per hour. Work it out. So putting them in a room with a useless trainer for 8 hours costs serious money. Get a competency-based training. If the trainer can't tell you what your people will know, or will be able to do differently after the training, and you can't assess this empirically, there is something seriously wrong.

The rest of the first world trains like that (search NVQ, NQF etc on google) so you should too.

Should I start on what needs to be done differently in management? Arghhhhhh. It's 160 pages. And I owe those damned MBA students at USF another lushforlife column.

http://lushforlife.com/more.php?id=233

September 17, 2006 12:42 PM




Leave a comment

 












Type the characters you see in the picture above.


 
 


Brought to you by Thomasnet.com        Browse ThomasNet Directory

Copyright © 2007 Thomas Publishing Company
Terms of Use - Privacy Policy