Productivity seems to be all that matters. One could say that our times require us to be active and productive 24/7/365. In fact, it’s an old story. Already in the 18th century, Thomas Jefferson argued that tropical climates encouraged laziness and relaxed attitudes, whereas the frequent variability in the weather of the middle and northern latitudes led to stronger work ethics. Environmental determinism was used to justify colonialism, racism, and even slavery. The ‘productive’ part of the world felt entitled to subdue, own, and exploit the ‘lazy’ part of the world.
This post is not about colonialism though. This post is about what ‘being productive’ means. We hear and repeat this phrase like a mantra and we evaluate our days according to how productive we have been. ‘Did I manage to get anything done?’, we often wonder. ‘I haven’t done enough!’, we often complain. The issue seems to be linked to the definition itself. Most of the time we define concepts in contrast to their opposite: what does full mean? It means not empty, and so on with other words. However, is it correct to say that ‘being productive’ means not being lazy? I don’t believe so. Moreover, although a lazy attitude to life may be detrimental, some lazy moments can help us regenerate.
Nevertheless, the quality of our productivity must be assessed against different parameters. I usually like to quote books, studies, and articles written by people who have researched the topic I’m dealing with. In this case, I don’t have any interesting suggestion to share. Not that they don’t exist, I simply haven’t found anything particularly meaningful. So I’ll try to derive a conclusion from a series of personal considerations. In order to come up with a new definition, first we need to identify the area to which the term is applicable. If we apply it to life as a whole, or worse, to ourselves as individuals, we risk making a huge mistake. Life and people can’t be evaluated like a machine or a factory. And, most importantly, one must not rate people in a productivity scale in which the least productive is the most worthless.
It seems healthier to circumscribe the idea of being productive to a more restricted portion of our life (I’ll come back to this in a moment). Second, we need to choose whether productive ought to have a quantitative or qualitative meaning. I often happen to hear that people encourage others to look at the qualitative aspect of their work: ‘how much did I enjoy it?’ rather than ‘how much did I get done?.’ However, I feel like we need to quantify our work, if not for practical reasons, at least to get a sense of how much we have progressed. Again, though, quantity should not be a cause of stress. The portion of our life that needs productivity should be as ‘small’ as possible. A single goal rather than a life-long project, like one’s career, might work better. I firmly believe that we have a much steadier grip on single things, rather than on life as a whole. The future is too unpredictable.
What I am trying to say is that the bigger picture will eventually work out. In this way, we increase our chances of success and minimise our risks of failure. From this perspective, productivity is better explained as the ability to give the right weight to things. Both to our moments of work and to our moments of recreation. For a moment, a day, even a whole week of non-work can be very productive. Apart from that goal that we aim to achieve, the rest of our life is awaiting out there. I am not going to list all the activities that one can enjoy, from reading to doing exercise, to buying healthy food or talking to a friend. In order to be productive, we must acknowledge that we need some time away from work and, most importantly, we must understand that time away from work does not mean being lazy.
Quite frankly, it is not just a personal matter. A healthy balance between work and the rest of life is as much a political and cultural issue as an individual challenge. Microsoft Japan ran an experiment last August: a four-day workweek, in which people were paid the same but enjoyed an extra day-off. The experiment was more than successful: the four-day workweek resulted in more efficient meetings, happier workers and boosted productivity by a staggering 40%. Paradoxically, being productive 24/7 is unproductive.
On The Think Of 