Wrike: Workers Doing Less With MoreWrike: Workers Doing Less With More
Expecting technology to make up a shortfall in headcount because the "improved productivity" can replace a human worker is a recipe for burning out the human workers you have left.
October 10, 2024
One of the questions we have been trying to answer over the last year is this: How can you define "productivity"? We're asking that question, and digging for answers for a few reasons: because "productivity" is one of those metrics by which enterprises assess worker performance; because "productivity" is a way for workers themselves to feel as if their work has a purpose, thus boosting their on-the-job engagement; and because "improved productivity" is one of those benefits that vendors promise with their workplace platforms.
So what is productivity and do these technological tools really deliver on it?
One metric that gets tied to productivity is time saved. Another way, as described in a primer No Jitter published this year, attempted to answer the question of how to measure productivity among knowledge workers whose tasks may be tied to highly variable situations and call on different skill sets or background experiences. So productivity is tied to reduced time or resources required to complete tasks.
This is why the findings from work management platform Wrike's 2024 Impactful Work Report were so unexpected. Reports the company:
Knowledge workers report a 31% increase in their workloads over the past year, while business leaders see an even larger increase at 46% for their teams.
However, despite these rising demands, knowledge workers say only 54% of their work is high impact, compared to 57% as reported by business leaders for their own work. This disconnect is causing widespread burnout and dissatisfaction, with less than two-thirds of workers expressing happiness in their roles.
The cause, the company says, is linked to cost-cutting:
There’s been a consequential cutback on resources, leading to a “do more with less” approach within organizations. Workloads have increased, causing confusion around work that matters most, disrupting workflows, and creating burnout. The unintended consequence? Knowledge workers are now doing more but achieving less.
Expecting technology to make up a shortfall in headcount because the "improved productivity" can replace a human worker is a recipe for burning out the human workers you have left. According to Wrike's finding, 51% of workers reported seeing any positive productivity impact from generative AI and the promised productivity boosters like meeting summaries, autogenerated emails or automatically-generated transcripts -- a smaller percentage than the 80% of bosses who think this technology is boosting worker productivity.
This wasn't part of the study but it is worth noticing that Wrike's research reflects a worker/manager gap much like the one found in Hewlett Packard's 2024 Work Relationship Index. Remember, in the HP Work Relationship Index, managers reported feeling much more engaged and less burnt out than the people they manage.
So while Wrike's study is worth downloading and reading because it clocks the risks of using technology as a substitute for more people on a team, it's also part of a bigger story we're all watching unfold: Workforces are rife with gaps in experience on productivity, engagement, burnout and purpose. Managers ignore these gaps at their own risk.
