The expression “we only manage well what we measure” perfectly sums up the very productivist spirit that reigns in the business world today. Initially used to measure the relationship between the resources used and the results obtained in industrial production processes, the concept of productivity has gradually asserted itself in other areas of activity, until it has become one of the most important economic indicators. more celebrated.
But in the context of an economy now based on services and digitization, is this still an appropriate criterion for measuring the performance of knowledge-based professions?
What if the cult of productivity was counterproductive?
The notion of productivity is closely linked to the emergence of the industrial revolution, when mechanization made it possible to increase the daily output of factories and farms by several orders of magnitude.
Today, 250 years after the beginnings of industrialization, a new revolution is underway: that of digital technology. But if the almost total automation of production has led most workers to turn to knowledge-based professions, the concept of productivity remains deeply rooted in managerial culture. We must then wonder about the relevance of an evaluation of intellectual work through the prism of productivity.
Let’s take the example of a writer who can write two mediocre books in the same time it takes to write a very good book. Two pounds means twice the yield, so a higher productivity rate. However, knowing that a good book sells better, its publisher will probably prefer quality to quantity. In this case, applying a productivist approach would definitely be counterproductive.
The same logic applies across the service and digital economy. An IT development agency working on improving an e-commerce application for one of its clients might decide to measure the performance of its team on the basis of exclusively quantitative parameters. This can lead to perverse incentives. If this team is rewarded for the speed of delivery and the number of changes made to the program, they will be encouraged to deliver a bunch of minor features that do not improve the end user’s shopping experience and do little to contribute to make the product more attractive. While she could have invested in longer and more risky substantive creative work, but also much more satisfying for the client.
Changing perspective: outcomes at the center of managerial thinking
While productivity has always been a reliable means of measuring the results of the use of technological and financial resources, it has never been a good management tool for evaluating the impact of humans. So what metric should we use instead?
We have the answer to this question if we agree to move from a model based on efficiency to another centered more on effectiveness. To explain this, English speakers make a substantial difference between the notion of outputs (immediately quantifiable results) and that of outcomes (results on a larger scale, which can be observed over time on the basis of objectives predefined).
For example: instead of ordering a marketing manager to publish five blog posts per month, you should rather ask him to contribute to the increase in web traffic, regardless of the number of articles published, and evaluate his work on the basis of the result according to this objective. One of the benefits of adopting this approach is the ability to stimulate creativity and innovation. If we impose short-term quantitative results, instead of setting a long-term strategic objective, we considerably reduce the creative possibilities. It is therefore essential to formulate the objectives in terms of outcomes, rather than outputs.
This management method is much more suited to the new flexible and decentralized way of working. It makes it possible to create fluid and adaptive processes, to manage resources more strategically, to empower employees, or to create a cross-functional team dynamic.
Of course, the outcomes are late indicators and it is therefore essential to know how to recognize the signals indicating that the achievement of the expected objectives is possible. Here are some ideas for practical actions to take:
- Define a schedule in intermediate stages. Planting milestones before starting a project allows you to keep control over the progress of the work and, if necessary, to correct them. Achieving results is always nice, but when there are delays or blockages, the sense of urgency can also encourage creative thinking and drive teams to find the right solution for achieving goals.
- Set up feedback loops. During the realization of a project, each completed action can be transformed into an input to improve the quality of the work and advance in the achievement of the objectives. A typical example of a feedback loop is the customer listening process, which aims to process the information gathered from customers in order to design solutions that better meet their demands.
- Aim for continuous improvement. In this context, measuring improvement means looking at rates of growth or reduction. Are service outages decreasing over time? Is the rate of new customer acquisition stable or improving year over year? If these indicators improve, it means that we are progressing as we go along. While qualitatively, it is advisable to organize retrospectives to reflect on the work done, learn lessons and apply them in the future.
- Ensure the well-being of employees. Health and happiness are not variables usually considered to promote productivity. Yet they are essential ingredients for the quality of work and the achievement of objectives. As indicators, for example, it is possible to examine the number of planned days off compared to unplanned days off or the number of weekly overtime hours worked. It is important to establish a relationship with your collaborators that puts the person, rather than the project, at the center, because it is on this basis that you can build a work environment conducive to quality and objectives.
Because of its simplicity, the productivist approach is attractive, but it is no longer really adapted to today’s world. This paradigm should have already been changed 20 years ago, with the rise of the digital revolution, but it is certainly not too late to do so today.