Understanding The Concept of Productivity: Related Papers
Understanding The Concept of Productivity: Related Papers
Understanding The Concept of Productivity: Related Papers
Int ernat ional Essays on Small and Medium Sized Ent erprises
Gregory T Papanikos
4. RESULT OF INVESTIGATIONS
Figure 3. Efficiency and effectiveness [8]
As expected, the result of the two empirical investigations
Effectiveness, on the other hand, is a more diffuse term and
confirmed previous research and showed that there was no
in most cases very difficult to quantify. It is often linked to
consensus of the view of productivity, neither between the
the creation of value for the customer and affects the output
the managers at the five companies nor among the
of the productivity ratio. In conclusion, a single focus on
employees at the particularly studied company. However,
efficiency does not seem to be a fruitful way to increase
productivity [9]. Unfortunately, this is often the case in
Proceedings of the 7th Asia Pacific Industrial Engineering and Management Systems Conference (APIEMS2002), Taipei
the investigations did also reveal a number of other Unfortunately, it seems to be practically impossible to
interesting issues. create an exact definition of productivity that is applicable
and accepted within all areas of manufacturing.
In both studies, the interviewed people agreed in that is was Nevertheless, it vital that the basic features that
very important to establish a clear definition of productivity characterize the term are understood in industry as well as
within a company as well as within the industry in general. in the academia. Otherwise, the existing misinterpretations
A common opinion was that a definition would simplify on the subject will continue to cause problems and declines
comminucation and help employees to understand company in productivity.
goals, but a definition would also help both managers and
employees to take appropriate decisions to improve
6. REFERENCES
productivity. Nevertheless, a clear definition of productivity
had not been advocated in none of the studied companies. [1] H. Singh, J. Motwani, A. Kumar, “A review and
analysis of the state of the art research on productivity
In the first investigation, the managers presented various
measurement” Industrial Management and Data
views on the meaning of productivity and numerous of
Systems, vol. 100, pp 234-41, 2000.
performance measures that the companies used. It was clear
that the manager’s opinions on the meaning of productivity [2] A. Kinnander and P. Gröndahl, “Productivity
were strongly influenced by the performance measures used development in manufacturing systems – a project
at each company. Many of the managers believed that they proposal within PROPER” Internal report, Stockholm:
fully understood what productivity meant, but at the same The Royal Institute of Technology, 1999.
time they had difficulties in explaining the differences
between productivity and similar terms, for example [3] E. Koss and D.A. Lewis, “Productivity or efficiency -
profitability that was mostly seen as the same thing as measuring what we really want” National Productivity
productivity. Review, vol. 12, pp 273-95, 1993.
At the particularly studied company in the second [4] J.W. Forrester, “Low productivity: it is a problem or
investigation, the lack of productivity definition had merely a symptom?” Handbook for productivity
unfortunately resulted in that the employees did not fully measurement and improvement, Cambridge:
understand the management’s goals for improvement, even Productivity Press, 1993.
though the goals had been specified in numbers. Many
different opinions of what characterize productivity were [5] S. Misterek, K. Dooley, J. Anderson, “Productivity as
emphasized during the interviews, including “making an performance measure” International Journal of
money”, “efficient use of labour” or just “good Operations and Production Management, vol. 12, pp
performance”, however, the term was seldom linked to the 29-45, 1992.
relation between output and input. Despite it was agreed
that a clear definition would be very useful, allowing people [6] D.M. Miller, “Profitability = Productivity + Price
to focus and “speak the same language”, the management Recovery” Harward Business Review, May-June, pp
did not show any interest in this issue. A major reason for 145-153, 1984.
not defining the term was the difficulties in actually
agreeing on what productivity meant. [7] N. Slack, S. Chambers, R. Johnston, Operations
Management. U.K: Pearson Education Limited, 2001,
ch 2, pp 38-62.
5. CONCLUSIONS
[8] D.S. Sink and T.C. Tuttle, Planning and measurement
In this paper, the confusion surrounding the concept of
of in your organisation of the future. Norcross, U.S.A:
productivity and its relation to other similar terms has been
Industrial Engineering and Management Press, 1989,
explored. Several characteristics features of productivity
ch 5, pp 170-184.
have been presented as well as a suggested taxonomy (i.e.
the Triple-P model) that explains how productivity should [9] M. Jackson, An Analysis of Flexible and
be distinguished from the terms; profitability, performance, Reconfigurable Production Systems. Disseration No.
efficiency and effectiveness. 640, Sweden: Linköping University, 2000, ch 6, pp 85-
104.
The result of the empirical investigations confirms that
there is no consensus in industry of what the term [10] S. Tangen, A Theoretical Foundation for Productivity
productivity actually means. The absence of productivity Measurement and Improvement of Automatic Assembly
definition within a company were also found to cause Systems. Licentiate Thesis, Stockholm: Royal Institute
problems. However, most managers and employees at the of Technology, 2002, ch 3, pp 19-30.
studied companies agree that an established productivity
definition would be beneficial to a company’s improvement
work.