A friend from Japan recently surprised me with a remark: he said that productivity in Germany is so much higher than in Japan. He said it in a positive light, almost admiringly.
I thought about it for a moment, and then asked: What exactly do you mean by that?
The school test
A few years ago, my son had to solve a classic maths problem: one painter takes 6 hours to paint a room, another takes 8 hours. How long will it take them both together?
The solution is elegant. The first painter’s productivity is 1/6 of a room per hour, the second’s 1/8. Together, they manage 1/6 + 1/8 = 7/24, or roughly 3.4 hours for one room.
This works because a crucial condition is met: the work is comparable. Both are painting walls. Same task, same scale, clear result.
In real working life, this condition is rarely met.
Number of PowerPoint slides per hour?
Let’s take the call centre example. One employee handles three calls in an hour. Another handles just one, because they have carefully resolved a complex issue raised by an annoyed customer who would otherwise have taken their business elsewhere. Which of the two is more productive?
The answer depends on what you want to measure. Call volume? Definitely the first. Customer retention and quality? Possibly the second. Long-term company value? It’s not that straightforward.
Productivity without context is a meaningless figure.
The problem with international comparisons
When comparing productivity between countries, things become even more complicated. The standard metric is gross domestic product per hour worked. Germany actually performs better than Japan in this respect.
But what lies behind this? Different economic structures, different sectors, different definitions of working hours, and culturally different notions of what constitutes good work. Japan is known for a work culture in which presence and diligence are highly valued – values that are hardly reflected in simple productivity metrics.
Comparing apples with oranges yields no insight. It merely produces a figure.
What this means for data-driven decision-making
I believe in the power of a data-driven decision-making culture. Key performance indicators are valuable, provided you understand what they measure and what they do not measure.
The most dangerous way to deal with KPIs is not to have any at all. It is to use them without reflection. A system of metrics that measures quantity but ignores quality optimises the wrong things. It rewards the person who has three superficial conversations, rather than the one who actually solves a difficult problem.
Good metrics always ask two questions: What are we measuring? And what do these figures tell us about what really matters?
What remains
Productivity is not a bad term. But it is more demanding than it sounds. It requires clarity about what the task is, what constitutes a good result, and whether the units being compared are actually comparable.
My friend from Japan and I didn’t end the conversation with an answer. But with a better question.