Below is the complete interview with Darshini and Dr. Ritwik on ‘Workplace Productivity’:

• The traditional definition of productivity is very objective and mathematical, differing from sector to sector. In certain cases, even organizations define productivity differently. So, do you think this definition has evolved over time, especially in the post pandemic era?

Ritwik: Absolutely! So, I won’t completely attribute it to the pandemic. Even before the pandemic, the advent of a multi-generational workforce with their own unique expectations and preferences about working had led to a growing recognition among professionals about the importance of good leadership. This gave rise to the market for leadership development programs and highlighted the significance of first-time managers, empathy, empowerment, growth, and aspirations.

Because of all this, the focus has shifted from just achieving output and input to the journey taken towards achieving it. Learning from the journey is crucial, and these learnings should be incorporated into future projects or initiatives to avoid repeating mistakes. This shift towards valuing the journey over just the output had already taken place before the pandemic and was largely driven by the new generation entering the workforce and the importance of leadership development in the workplace.

Darshini: I agree with Dr. Ritwik that productivity should not only be measured by the quantity of work produced but also by the quality of work. In a typical workplace, productivity is often measured by the amount of work or effort put in during a day. For instance, a BPO company may have a target of closing 300-400 tickets in a day. However, productivity should not only be measured by the quantity of work done, but also by the quality of the output. Closing 400 tickets in a day may not matter if none of them meet the client’s needs. Conversely, producing 200 high-quality outputs can make a significant impact on the clients, and keep them coming back. Therefore, productivity should be measured by the quality of the work produced, rather than just the quantity.

• So, the next question is an extension of what we have already discussed. How would you, for the benefit of the audience, list the key drivers in workplace productivity?

Darshini: Okay so for me, the first key driver is the work environment itself. It is crucial to create a conducive environment where employees feel safe and empowered to work. A positive work culture is necessary for this, and employees should receive adequate support in their workplace.

Another critical driver is providing employees with the necessary tools to complete their day-to-day tasks. If the right tools and environment are not provided, employees may not be able to produce work that meets expectations. It is essential to bridge the gap between what management or employees expect from the workforce and what is provided to them.

So, the work environment and tools are crucial drivers of workplace productivity.

Ritwik: Yes, I absolutely agree with Darshini. In fact, Deloitte has conducted significant research on this topic and identified three drivers of productivity.

The first driver is strengths. It’s essential for team leaders and members to understand their strengths and for leaders to create opportunities for members to utilize their strengths daily. The second driver is purpose. It’s important to connect day-to-day work to a larger purpose or organizational strategy, answering the question of why a person is doing what they’re doing. The third driver relates to expectations. Clear, unambiguous expectations of the role and person, communicated effectively and providing necessary resources, are crucial for success.

• So we’ll now move to something very contextual and, relevant to the current times. The entire industry is witnessing large scale layoffs. Even some of the giant tech companies are having their employees laid off. So, do you think it is a productivity issue or is it way beyond that?

Ritwik: I agree that this is not entirely a productivity issue. On the flip side, some organizations are still actively hiring and have recently released positive quarterly or annual results. It seems that the layoffs are concentrated in certain areas where people are hired but aren’t doing well, such as the Metaverse industry, where growth may not be as expected. Therefore, it appears that these layoffs are more of a business decision rather than solely based on productivity.

Darshini: I agree with Ritwik’s assertion that productivity is not the sole factor behind the recent layoffs. While it may be a contributing factor in some cases, over the past three years, layoffs have primarily been driven by changes in business strategy due to economic and financial conditions. Companies may face redundancy in certain areas as a result of these changes, leading to layoffs.

Furthermore, companies may still be hiring in other sectors that support the new business strategy. For example, a company may close a department that relies on manual work when the industry is shifting towards hybrid or online work. This may require the hiring of new employees in departments that can better support the company’s new direction.

Therefore, changes in demand from clients and suppliers and the evolving nature of the business itself are the main drivers behind layoffs. While productivity may play a small role in certain cases, it is not the primary cause.

• What is the role of organization culture in workforce productivity, and how can leaders encourage more employee engagement and motivation to boost their productivity?

Ritwik: I believe that a strong organizational culture is key to creating a productive environment. To achieve this, it is important to help employees identify their strengths, provide opportunities for them to practice these strengths, connect their work to a larger purpose, and establish clear expectations.

However, there are a few fundamental elements that underpin all of this. Trust is essential – employees need to feel that they can trust their employer completely. Providing psychological safety is also crucial, as this enables employees to bring their authentic selves to work without fear of repercussions. Everyone has their own way of working, and people are most productive when they can work in their own natural style. If we create a space where employees can speak up, push back, be assertive, and do what they love in a supportive environment, we can enhance engagement and productivity.

Darshini: I agree with Ritwik that organizational culture plays a critical role in productivity. In the past, we have always yearned for work-life balance and asked for hybrid working and work from home facilities. While we have been granted these opportunities, after two years, employees are returning, feeling exhausted and burnt out. This is because we have been given work-life balance without meaning to it, and as a result, we have been spending more hours working from home than in the office.

To cultivate a positive work-life balance culture, companies need to focus on productivity in a more positive way. This means working within the set hours and putting up barriers to take time off for a balanced life. The current environment, where we are dwelling into work-life balance and hybrid working, has created a negative perception that work-life balance no longer exists.

However, what we are actually looking for is a more positive environment where we are empowered and recognized for our efforts, and where we receive motivation to drive our work forward every day. I call this an appreciative team culture, which has been missing in the past few years as we have been working from home and meeting our colleagues only online. We need to appreciate and support each other to ensure everyone is balanced and productive.

So, it is essential to encourage a workplace culture where teams appreciate and support each other. This will introduce a more positive work environment, and everyone will feel supported, which will automatically increase productivity.

• We’ll now move from the culture aspect to the process aspect. And the question would be: how significant is process enhancement for productivity growth? And how can organizations involve employees in the process of this process improvement?

Ritwik: I strongly believe that process improvement is a crucial factor in boosting productivity, but it’s equally important to involve the last mile employee in the process. These employees are the ones who deal with customers, tools, machinery, and information, and their inputs are essential in creating effective and efficient processes.

In the past, there have been numerous cases where process improvements were created by higher-ups who had no direct experience in using the process, resulting in breakdowns and inefficiencies when it came to the last mile employee. Therefore, it’s crucial to get their feedback and co-create process improvements that will work for them.

Involving the last mile employee builds a sense of ownership and accountability for the changes made. A prime example of this is Southwest Airlines, who empowered their gate agents to make decisions on discounts, rechecking, and baggage, leading to increased customer satisfaction and retention. By empowering and involving the last mile employee, we can achieve customer delight and satisfaction, ultimately leading to better business outcomes.

Darshini:  I agree with Ritwik. The involvement of front-line employees is crucial in the ownership and improvement of processes. Decisions made solely by upper management may not work on the ground and cause breakdowns in the system. Therefore, it’s vital to give employees the opportunity to be involved in the decision-making process, through surveys or feedback groups, as they provide essential insights into enhancing processes and improving productivity.

Management may not always identify the gaps in the process, and involving employees who work on the ground can offer valuable feedback on how to improve the process. Conducting surveys and seeking employee feedback can create a sense of ownership and accountability among employees, leading to increased productivity and a smoother workflow.

When employees feel appreciated and heard, they become more invested in the process, leading to better customer satisfaction and retention. Empowering employees with ownership of the process, making them a part of the team, and valuing their feedback, can lead to a more efficient and successful process.

• Very interesting. Now you mentioned the hybrid workplace and how it is impacting productivity. So also, because you handle several locations, under your portfolio, how do you think leaders can ensure that processes standardize across departments and locations, especially in context of the entire hybrid?

Darshini: Okay so taking our organization as an example, with 34 offices worldwide, aligning learning and development programs requires thorough training analysis. We need to understand the unique challenges faced by each region and address them accordingly. Hybrid work environments can make this difficult. Even when I am physically in the office, I often only see my team members during virtual meetings. To overcome this, clear communication is crucial. Instructions must be structured to be easily understood in different cultural perspectives and languages.

Localization is an important aspect that many companies are now prioritizing. Providing training materials and instructions in local languages helps support employees from diverse cultural backgrounds. Having a clear workflow that identifies who is responsible, accountable, and informed is also crucial for successful implementation. With this model in place, we can close any gaps and ensure that each team member understands their role in the process. It is important to appreciate and value cultural differences, making employees feel supported and heard. Overall, clear communication, localization, and a well-defined workflow are essential in the hybrid workplace.

Ritwik: This is a crucial question, and one of the main reasons why process improvements or productivity enhancements fail. As organizations grow and different regions develop, varying hiring patterns and cultural differences arise. This leads to microcosms of organizations within a larger one. However, enforcing a standardized process across different geographies without considering localization or local context can lead to resistance and challenges.

It’s a delicate balance that needs to be struck. Open, honest, and frequent communication with all stakeholders, collaborators, and frontline workers is critical. Making decisions that prioritize the organizational view over local, title, or role views is also important. The implementation of mechanisms such as reporting and monitoring plays a significant role in this.

Darshini: I would like to add to that point. In my opinion, the buy-in process is crucial when implementing changes at the organizational level. It is important to not immediately impose changes without considering the impact it may have on different cultures or regions within the organization. Instead, we should focus on gaining the buy-in of all key stakeholders and ensuring that everyone understands the proposed changes.

Through a buy-in process, we can incorporate feedback from different regions and cultures, and once everyone agrees, we can move forward with implementation. This approach can lead to significant results as everyone has had the opportunity to provide input and agree on the changes.

So, I believe that the buy-in process is a critical aspect of balancing standardization and localization within an organization. It ensures that decisions are made with the best interests of the entire organization in mind and that all key stakeholders are involved in the decision-making process.

• That leads me to my next question, and a lot of organizations may be interested in learning how they can actually measure whether a certain process enhancement has led to an improvement in the overall productivity of the organization.

Ritwik: Yeah, it’s like the old saying goes, right? If you measure and report something, it’s more likely to get done. So when organizations are trying to make changes, it’s important to take a step back and look at the big picture. You need to understand what you’re trying to change, why you’re changing it, and how much you want to change. That’s the first step.

Then, you need to figure out how you’ll measure success. What are the indicators or metrics that will tell you that you’re on the right track? This is your second step. Once you know that, you need to figure out what capabilities and skills you need to support those changes. That’s the third step.

And of course, like Darshini said, getting buy-in from all levels of the organization is key. You need to keep your frontline people informed and involved. Find out what kind of work they’re doing and what metrics will be impacted by the changes you’re making. Then, you can start working backwards to figure out how to implement the changes successfully.

Darshini: Yeah, I totally agree. Based on my experience in L&D, measuring success usually involves looking at how well a project has been implemented and accepted by everyone involved. For example, if we’re introducing new software or technology, it could take up to a year to fully implement it. To measure its success, we need to consider how quickly and easily employees can onboard and adapt to the new system.

Sometimes, we may face setbacks or negative outcomes where people stop following the process because it’s not working for them. In these cases, it’s important to take a step back and reassess the situation. By putting a pulse on the project and measuring it at every stage of implementation, we can make necessary changes along the way based on feedback and impact.

Most companies follow a pilot phase before implementing something on a larger scale. This phase allows us to measure the initial impact of the implementation and make adjustments as needed. By measuring success in phases, we can ensure that the end result is positive and effective.

Ritwik: Absolutely, and I will like to add more to it. So, when it comes to measuring the success of a project or a new process, it’s important to break it down into smaller phases. That way, we can measure the impact and make changes along the way, instead of waiting until the end to see if it worked or not.

Another thing that’s often overlooked is the importance of pilots and stress testing. It’s a great way to see how the change is affecting things on a smaller scale before rolling it out more broadly.

But one thing that’s really crucial in all of this is data. We need to be using the language of data to set clear objectives, understand what we’re measuring, and track progress. Sometimes, people shy away from this because they’re afraid of being wrong or vulnerable. But using data can actually make things more objective and help us make better decisions.

• With that, we come to the last question. And for that, again, I’d like to touch upon something that is more recent and relevant to today’s times, with the entire example of Chat GPT and other AI tools in perspective. However, do you think that tech enablers like these enhance the overall productivity gain or lead to more de-motivation?

Ritwik: You know what? I’d love to throw all these questions at ChatGPT and compare how Darshini and I are doing! But let’s talk about technology. It’s always been evolving, and it’s not going to stop. The reason we’re here today is that we’ve seen changes and enhancements over the years. Now, some folks worry that these advancements will lead to job loss, but I don’t think that’s the case.

Sure, the way we do jobs may change, but that’s why re-skilling and upskilling are becoming more and more important. The new job is all about knowing how to use ChatGPT, for instance. That’s the new skill, knowing how to train and utilize it for various purposes. There are already loads of tutorials online about how to use it.

So, it’s crucial that we understand the trends and know how technology can influence our adjacent areas. That way, we can keep ourselves up to date by learning new skills and staying relevant.

Darshini: I totally get what you’re saying about chat GPT. It’s pretty impressive how it can interpret ideas and help with writing and publishing. But I can understand why you might feel a little apprehensive about AI taking over. It’s definitely a topic that’s been on a lot of people’s minds lately.

I completely agree with you though that AI won’t be able to replace humans anytime soon, especially when it comes to jobs that require a human touch and creative thinking. In fact, AI can actually be really helpful in supporting our work and giving us a boost when we need it.

For example, in my organization, we use AI for localization and translation, but we still need humans to make sure the translations are accurate and culturally appropriate. There’s a lot more to language than just translating word for word, and AI still has a long way to go in terms of being able to interpret language the way humans can.

So I definitely don’t think people should feel demotivated by AI. Instead, we should see it as a tool to help us do our jobs better and more efficiently. As long as we keep upskilling and adapting to the changes in technology, we’ll still be able to have fulfilling careers and make valuable contributions to our industries.

Ritwik: To add to that, it’s true that there are certain skills and abilities that are unique to humans and cannot be replaced by AI, such as social intelligence, emotional intelligence, empathy, decision making, critical thinking, and creativity. These are all things that require a human touch and can’t be replicated by machines.

And as Darshini mentioned, language is incredibly complex and heavy on context, so even with the advancements in AI, there’s still a long way to go before machines can fully understand the nuances and subtleties of human communication. So I definitely agree that humans will still be relevant and needed, even with all the automation and technology around us.