أنشئ حسابًا أو سجّل الدخول للانضمام إلى مجتمعك المهني.
What is productivity and how is it measured?
Productivity growth is frequently lauded by the business community, media commentators and politicians as the solution to improving living standards, yet there is little agreement on what productivity actually is.
To economists, productivity is the efficiency with which firms, organisations, industry, and the economy as a whole, convert inputs (labour, capital, and raw materials) into output. Productivity grows when output grows faster than inputs, which makes the existing inputs more productively efficient. Productivity does not reflect how much we value the outputs — it only measures how efficiently we use our resources to produce them.
The generation and application of technological and organisational knowledge (innovation) are the main drivers of firm-level productivity growth. These determinants are broader than technology in an engineering sense. The choice of production technology and how production is organised, which are management decisions, play a crucial role in productivity performance.
Firms can improve their productive efficiency in three ways:
Improvements in firm level productivity translate directly into national economic growth, but productivity growth in the economy can exceed that of the individual firms. This is because competition favours firms that are more productive, and so these firms' market share expands, while that of less productive firms contracts. In the process, the average level of productivity is increased. This process of competitive dynamics is important for keeping the economy close to its production possibility frontier. Policies and market behaviour that undermine competition may cause the economy to slip below its potential.
There is also potential for 'spillovers' between firms that mean productivity improvements can be contagious. That is, the things that firms do to benefit themselves benefits other firms as well. Proponents of proactive industry policies (such as government support for innovation hubs and clusters) often cite the importance of spillovers as a source of productivity growth. However, proposals for public expenditure in this area need careful scrutiny to ensure that spillovers are indeed generated, they are from activity that otherwise would not have occurred, and the benefits exceed the public cost.
Measured productivity is the ratio of a measure of total outputs to a measure of inputs used in the production of goods and services. Productivity growth is estimated by subtracting the growth in inputs from the growth in output — it is the residual.
There are a number of ways to measure productivity. In Australia, the most common productivity measures used are:
The calculation of MFP using the traditional accounting methods requires independent measures of inputs and outputs. For Australia, this is calculated for 16 industries, which the ABS terms the market sector of the economy. Hence, economy-wide MFP estimates reflect productivity growth in only around 80 per cent of the economy (the share of the 16 industries in total GDP). LP can be measured for both the market and non-market sectors of the economy. This is because labour input can be measured in real volume terms as hours worked.
MFP is a measure closer to the concept of productive efficiency than LP as it removes the contribution of capital deepening from the residual.
Two potential sources of change in measured productivity warrant special attention: unmeasured inputs that affect real costs, and capacity utilisation. There are also a number of measurement problems associated with estimating output and input volumes.
In some industries, inputs other than capital and labour (and knowledge) can have a strong influence on output. Where these inputs are not purchased in the market, as is the case with some natural resource inputs and volunteer effort, they are not included in the measure of inputs. If the availability or quality of these inputs is changing then productivity estimates, as the residual, will be affected.
Recent Commission research has identified Mining, Utilities, and Agriculture as industries where the MFP estimates are affected by changes in unmeasured inputs. These industries are all dependent on natural resource inputs. Deterioration in the quality of the natural resource input, or more stringent regulatory restrictions on the uses of such inputs, can reduce measured productivity despite the productive efficiency of the firms in the industry remaining unchanged or even improving.
Business output responds to market demand. As demand rises or falls over time with the business cycle or other influences, firms adjust the output they produce. In the case of cyclical downturn, many firms will reduce output volumes, but cannot easily reduce their capital and labour inputs as they need these inputs ready for when demand recovers. As a result, firms are likely to underutilise their capital and labour inputs in a downturn and productivity will be lower. When business is booming, firms will fully utilise their capital and labour. Hence, measured productivity tends to be pro-cyclical as utilisation rates of inputs rise in upswings and fall in downswings.
Many industries experience cycles in demand that affect capacity utilisation but industries with high levels of fixed capital, such as manufacturing, tend to be more exposed to the business cycle. This means that annual productivity estimates are likely to under or overstate the underlying trend level of productivity depending on where the industry is in the business cycle.
To assist users to interpret measured productivity, the ABS divides time series MFP into productivity cycles for the market sector. The start and end points of the cycles correspond to points where the levels of capacity utilisation are likely to be comparable. Average productivity growth between these points is a more reliable measure of productivity growth over a given period than those based on different years in the cycle.
Problems in both the accuracy of the raw data and in the methodologies applied generate measurement errors. Improvements in data quality and methodology are a part of the ongoing function of the ABS, resulting in periodic revisions of the estimates of MFP.
Two problems in measuring inputs that can introduce errors into the estimates of productivity are difficulties in measuring the volume of capital services, and lags between investment (when it is counted as adding to the productive capital stock) and when it is actually utilised in production. These issues arise mainly where there are large infrastructure projects and when major new technology is introduced, such as ICT.
Measured productivity growth (MFP and LP) reflects a number of influences:
The key point is that it is important to unpack measures of productivity to understand the proximate and underlying factors affecting productivity growth.
Thanks
I support the answer which given by my colleague Ahmed
Productivity in its simplest form can be defined as the number of units produced per consumed unit.
Productivity is an extremely important factor in analyzing strategy to determine the cost position of a business unit.
Hourly productivity per person = Number of units produced / Number of hours worked
Measuring productivity in hours per capita does not take into account the consumption of other resources such as raw materials and capital.
Productivity = Production / Consumption
Total productivity is a measure that takes into account all the resources consumed by production: capital, labor and materials.
Productivity in a functional unit of a company is measured by production criteria such as invoices, hours of operation or units sold in relation to hours per person or pay sheets.
You must identify tools to measure performance, under which employee productivity is measured
- Time required to accomplish the task.
- accuracy and quality of information.
- Required reports.
I think these are the most important performance measurement tools.
Productivity is very subjective. It can be anything from getting a guy to work and give his 100%. I will lay it out in points.
* Attaining efficiency.
* Cost reduction
* Maximum use of resources.
* Reduce defects considerably.
Productivity should be measures by the set parameters from the management. The best way to follow these standards are described in Six Sigma. It is a great tool to measure productivity and efficiency.
Productivity can be measured by time,effor you spend on each task and the method used to get the result. this can be achived by automated tools and scripts.
Productivity can be measured in terms Units delivered incase of Manufacturing Industry and value addition to business in case of Service industry. There are many methods and formulas to calculate productivity, since it is directly related to company performance atmost care should be taken to select the apt method to calculate productivity.
measured by outcomes quality resulted by the process created and followed
Productivity can be measured by allowing team members to act their part on the whole project. No project can be accomplished without them working together in as much as no productivity can be recorded without the individual contribution of the respective team units.
Many consider productivity as a mathematical equation comprised of graphs and KPIs but the real aspect of productivity lies in the manner that the respective team units synchronize with each other as a whole unit. This, in turn, will determine the "real" measurement of productivity based on overall output and concerted effort by the entire entity or of the office.
This is not a philossphical take on productivity. It is simply taking out the science behind productivity measurement and focusing more on the human dimension that is primarily responsible for such measurement in the first place.
