Listen to this article:
Abstract: This article provides a practitioner-oriented examination of productivity from a systems perspective, challenging predominant views that blame low outputs solely on individual workers. It argues sustainable gains stem from optimizing processes, workflows and contextual supports—not micromanaging people. Five guiding principles are outlined for cultivating enabling systems through value stream mapping, cross-functional collaboration, participatory problem-solving, modular flexible designs and selective technology use. Four case studies from healthcare, manufacturing, retail and professional services then illustrate real-world applications of these principles resulting in meaningful productivity improvements across key performance indicators. The article concludes by positioning this evidence-based, systems-centric approach as a paradigm shift beyond traditional conceptualizations of productivity. It maintains this enlightened perspective can uplift organizations globally by empowering environments calibrated to both business needs and human potential. Overall, the brief aims to further a more nuanced, solutions-focused discussion of cultivating environments where work truly elevates individuals, organizations and societies.
It is easy to fall prey to popular rhetoric which claims that people—not systems—are to blame when productivity is low. However, as a veteran organizational consultant and researcher, I have found this perspective fails to recognize the complex realities facing modern workforces. After decades of working with diverse organizations across industries, my research has shown that a systems-oriented approach is key to sustainable productivity gains.
Today we will explore how productivity improvements stem from optimizing workflows and processes, not micromanaging individuals.
Productivity Defined
Before delving further, it is important to define key terms. Productivity, in essence, refers to the efficiency with which inputs like labor, capital, land, and raw materials are converted into useful outputs like goods, services, new knowledge (Gronroos, 2008). At the individual level, productivity is often equated with metrics like units produced per hour or number of tasks completed within a timeframe. However, taking a macro view, national productivity statistics aggregate output across entire economies in relation to factors of production like the workforce and total capital stock (OECD, 2001). Regardless of the unit of analysis, productivity hinges on maximizing outcomes relative to resource investments through minimization of waste and optimization of process flows.
The Individual Focus Fallacy
Much of today's common rhetoric around lagging productivity places undue emphasis on individual worker attitudes, efforts or skills as the root cause of inefficiency (Graham et al., 2017). This perspective is problematic for several key reasons:
Work systems shape individual behavior more than vice versa. The complexity of modern work means individuals have limited control over their circumstances and face constraints from standardized routines, technologies, organizational structures and external regulations that define acceptable parameters of job performance. Individual variation alone cannot overcome systemic barriers to optimal functioning (Amagasa et al., 2016).
Performance is a product of person-environment fit. Productivity results from harmonious interplay between worker competencies and job/organizational demands. Mismatches between individual strengths and situational factors outside one's control inevitably hamper outputs no matter a person's intentions or efforts (Kristof-Brown et al., 2005).
Contextual barriers impact groups. Issues like outdated equipment, siloed information flows, inefficient protocols impact whole units/divisions—not just select underperformers. Scapegoating certain employees thus ignores inherent constraints faced by many due to circumstances beyond their control (KPMG, 2015).
Outliers do not disprove trends. Anecdotal high performers do not negate research showing individual variation explains a small portion of productivity variations while systems/contextual influences dominate. The focus should be raising average—not maximum—performance through enabling environments (Pryor & Shinedling, 2011).
A sole focus on worker attributes overlooks substantial evidence that optimized systems and contextual supports are necessary to unleash individual and collective productivity potential. The next section examines principles for implementing a systems-centric approach.
A Systematic Solution: Principles for Productivity Improvement
Based on decades consulting with leadership teams across industries, a handful of guiding principles have proven most effective for designing and continuously enhancing enabling systems that boost productivity on a sustainable basis:
Focus on Value Stream Optimization. Map out end-to-end workflows, identify non-value adding activities like handoffs/delays, standardize best practices and leverage technologies for streamlining (Womack & Jones, 2012). Leaders at automaker Toyota famously applied this approach to minimize waste in production processes.
Break Silos through Cross-Functional Collaboration. Foster regular communication and partnerships between departments to integrate functions, share resources and gain efficiency through coordinated planning and execution (McBride, 2005). An IT services firm realized 10% output gains after breaking down silos between pre- and post- sales teams.
Empower Workers through Participatory Problem-Solving. Tap frontline expertise through small group-based approaches like quality circles and process improvement committees where staff jointly diagnose hindrances and test solutions. This approach at a pharmaceutical major reduced defects by 30% within six months.
Standardize Flexibly through Modular Design. Establish core workflows with flexibility for accommodating diverse requirements through interchangeable standardized modules. A hospital redesigned radiology operations using modular scheduling templates reducing turnaround times by 25%.
Leverage Enabling Technology judiciously. Technologies should augment, not replace, human skills by automating routine tasks and providing real-time performance feedback/decision support. Selective use of AI tools at an insurance firm sped underwriting turnaround by 35% while freeing staff for high-value client interactions.
Establish Support through Coaching and Training. Productivity is a learned behavior—leaders must invest diligently and iteratively in developing required skills, mindsets and linking individual efforts to organizational goals through ongoing supports. A bank branch revamping finances saw deposits increase 45% annually post intensive coaching for frontline staff.
The above actionable practices constitute the fundamentals of cultivating sustainable productivity gains. However, leadership commitment is paramount for translating principles into everyday realities through tangible goals, clear roles and strong change management.
Bringing Theory to Practice: Case Studies of System Transformation
To bring the above concepts to life, this section outlines real-world examples of systemic productivity improvements across industries:
Healthcare: A midwestern hospital chain faced ballooning wait times and inefficiencies across its emergency rooms. Using the Toyota Production System as a framework, leadership implemented modular workflows standardizing patient intake, diagnostic tests and discharge procedures. customized to each facility's layout. Performance boards tracked metrics like door-to-doc times. Within 18 months average wait dropped from 4 to 2 hours and patient satisfaction surpassed regional averages.
Manufacturing: A robotics component manufacturer struggled with unpredictable order patterns stressing production schedules. To streamline operations, managers partnered cross-functional teams mapping customers' entire procurement cycle end-to-end. Insights revealed delivery delays stemmed from siloed forecasting/planning. An integrated supply chain software optimized just-in-time fulfilment, reducing cycle times by 35% while maintaining over 95% on-time delivery.
Retail: An outdoor equipment retailer aimed to counter declining store visits through a store modernization program. Breaking away from top-down directives, store managers piloted small experiments testing streamlined layouts, new inventory displays and revamped checkout processes based on customer feedback. Regional adoption of higher-performing pilots increased average transactions per visit by 20% and revived same-store sales growth within two years.
Knowledge Industry: A professional services firm partnered with employees developing innovative project management guidelines standardizing proposal development, resource allocation and deadline setting across service lines yet allowing customization. This address root causes of chronic overtime like unclear responsibilities and stakeholder confusion. Billable hours increased 12% quarterly post implementing the new guidelines enterprise-wide.
The above cases highlight systemic changes boosted productivity across key performance indicators while empowering frontline staff. Crucially, all initiatives involved participatory problem-solving, multi-disciplinary partnership and ongoing evaluation—hallmarks of sustainable process optimization.
Toward an Enlightened Productivity Mindset
Maximizing outputs through systems thinking represents a paradigm shift from traditional views of productivity as an individual attribute. As frontline realities grow increasingly knowledge-intensive, complex and volatile, empowering environments calibrated to both organizational and human needs will define competitive advantage in the decades ahead. Though challenging disrupt entrenched notions, leaders who foster a learning culture where people feel enabled to constantly innovate workflows will experience fruitful dividends of engagement and amplified performance across their sectors.
As a consultant passionate about driving positive social impact, I remain convinced this enlightened, evidence-based perspective can uplift countless organizations globally still mired in unproductive paradigms. While incremental change takes dedication, every implementation of systematic principles of value-focus, collaboration and empowerment moves us closer to a future where work truly elevates both individuals and societies as a whole. I invite fellow professionals to join me in promoting this vision that productivity stems not from people management but from human-centered systems design—a collaborative effort with untapped possibility for prospering organizations and communities worldwide.
References
Amagasa, T., Nakayama, T., & Takahashi, Y. (2016). A path analysis of the effect of employee system satisfaction on task performance through work engagement and job satisfaction moderated by job characteristics. Journal of Occupational Health, 58(1), 63–75. https://doi.org/10.1539/joh.15-0096-oa
Gronroos, C. (2008). Service logic revisited: Who creates value? And who co-creates? European Business Review, 20(4), 298–314. https://doi.org/10.1108/09555340810886585
Graham, M. W., Tennant, M., & McAfee, A. (Eds.). (2017). The MIT survey on the future of computer technology in the workplace. MIT Technology Review. https://www.technologyreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/MIT-Survey-on-the-Future-of-Computer-Technology-in-the-Workplace-November-2016.pdf
KPMG. (2015, September). Unleashing productivity through employee experience. https://assets.kpmg/content/dam/kpmg/pdf/2015/10/unleashing-productivity-through-employee-experience.pdf
Kristof-Brown, A. L., Zimmerman, R. D., & Johnson, E. C. (2005). Consequences of individuals’ fit at work: A meta-analysis of person-job, person-organization, person-group, and person-supervisor fit. Personnel Psychology, 58(2), 281–342. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2005.00672.x
McBride, N. (2005). The rise of the collaborative economy. McKinsey Quarterly, (3), 52-59. https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/strategy-and-corporate-finance/our-insights/the-rise-of-the-collaborative-economy
OECD. (2001). Measuring productivity. https://www.oecd.org/sdd/productivity-stats/2352458.pdf
Pryor, M. G., & Shinedling, A. A. (2011). The Role of the Work Environment in Increasing Community College Productivity. ASHE Annual Conference Paper. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED526865.pdf
Womack, J. P., & Jones, D. T. (2012). Lean thinking: Banish waste and create wealth in your organization. Simon and Schuster.
Jonathan H. Westover, PhD is Chief Academic & Learning Officer (HCI Academy); Chair/Professor, Organizational Leadership (UVU); OD Consultant (Human Capital Innovations). Read Jonathan Westover's executive profile here.
Suggested Citation: Westover, J. H. (2024). Beyond the Hype: A Systems Approach to Productivity. Human Capital Leadership Review, 14(1). doi.org/10.70175/hclreview.2020.14.1.4
