Hard workers can’t save a firm; top management is the key

Manama : John Heap, Chairman of the World Confederation for Productivity Science (WCPS) visited Bahrain recently for the preparation of the 18th World Productivity Congress to be held in Bahrain during November 27-30, 2016, first time in the Middle East and North Africa. The event aims to attract 800 plus delegates from more than 72 countries and will be hosted in collaboration with Bahrain-based JAFCON.

He is also the Managing Director of the Institute of Productivity, a think tank, publishing house and strategic consultancy based in the UK, which specialises in social productivity, a concept through which improved productivity is used to drive social benefit.

The veteran expert in productivity says that governments and corporates across the globe are inefficient and there are only a few examples of organisations achieving true productivity levels.

Welcome to Bahrain. How do you feel?

I am very surprised by the culture and tolerance here. It was not expected. This is a beautiful country with a great heritage, culture and progressive attitude. I am impressed.

I reached here because Akbar Jaffari, JAFCON’s Chief Executive, whom I met earlier abroad, felt that the Kingdom should host WCPS.

As a leading expert in the field of productivity, what are the trends observed across globe?

Governments and organisations are very inefficient, across the globe. There is hardly any organisation that can be considered efficient; albeit a few examples on a global level.

Why are Governments inefficient?

Governments are inefficient because they don’t understand their roles or are trying to do a lot many things at the same time. They think they are very powerful, but are not. Governments are basically incompetent.

What else should governments be doing then?

Governments should focus solely on being enablers rather than getting involved in business decisions. They should create a better environment to do business and provide better infrastructure for growth.

For example, it is better if the government doesn’t insist on knowing the progress of each and every child enrolled in the education system. Generally, governments tend to show that behaviour across various sectors and issues.

Can you please highlight an example for a successful transition in productivity?

Margaret Thatcher, in her stint as the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, ripped off and simplified laws related to starting and running businesses; it did make a lot of effect in improving productivity of the country.

What are your suggestions to the corporate and political world?

I believe social, environmental and economic impact of businesses should be measured. Businesses that create wealth, but are not ready to share with the communities including its employees, should change themselves. We have to measure whether companies are acting as good neighbours in the community they operate.

In corporate as well as political settings, the strategy should be clear. Then methods to measure the impact of various actions should be in place.

In the political scenario, the solution can be reached only after going into the situation. But I am aware of consultants who peddle solutions without going into the situation. Consultants are usually good in telling, but not listening.

What we hope, when we do the Productivity Congress in the Kingdom, is that we will leave a legacy behind. After the event, we plan to meet with bodies like Tamkeen to offer our insights about what could be done better.

How is productivity pattern across countries?

The UK has a very poor productivity record. A high percentage of its population goes for higher education, the population knows things but those who can do things are very less in number. They need to create more skilled practitioners.

If you look at India, many of them are highly educated, but not employable. Japan is very good at doing things right, but they are not good at doing the right things. The United States is good at doing right things, in terms of productivity.

Similarly, in the GCC, everyone needs an MBA or degrees like that. But, the region needs more trade and apprenticeship-based education.

On a global level, productivity can be said to be at 50 per cent, which could be improved vastly.

From where does the lack of productivity come from?

Productivity issues are created mostly by top management, who gets the strategy wrong. Employees are usually very efficient, but they will be following an inefficient system set by the top guys.

It is rarely the fault of the employees; it is the system in place that pushes down the productivity.

What types of organisations are inefficient? Small scale or big?

All types of organisations are inefficient. Exceptions are very rare.

Why the system fails?

Not taking care of overall picture is what pushes down productivity. The practice of business process redesign, which was widely discussed, was not really implemented by companies.

Why the resistance?

I think, most managers are looking for quick solutions and they want to buy it... they want to buy a new machine, technique or tool. What they don’t want to do is to analyse in detail and build better processes.

Why programmes like Kaizen couldn’t solve the productivity issues?

Because organisations implement such programmes for six months and then fail to follow through. Only sustained implementation of such programmes can make a change.

What can be done by human resource department regarding this?

Human resource as a term gives the wrong focus, it is better to address them as Talent Managers. It is the worst curse that happened to the profession.

Talent Managers have to ensure that the right talent is found for a job. Only when employees enjoy their job, the productivity goes up. They have to design measures and methods to do that.

Talent Managers who can think like entrepreneurs is what organisations need now. Entrepreneurs can make big impact on productivity, because of their passion.