Summary
In this CHRO Perspective episode Natasha Wallace, international people partner at ClickUp, explores what really drives productivity in modern organisations and why many common assumptions miss the mark.
Drawing on research and real-world experience, Natasha explains how technology, communication and culture intersect to enable high performance. She highlights the differences between high- and low-productivity organisations, including the role of collaboration, team cohesion and access to the right tools.
The conversation also examines flexible working models, the limits of productivity monitoring, and why trust-based measurement matters more than surveillance. Natasha shares how poorly designed HR processes can hinder productivity and outlines three practical steps HR and business leaders can take to build more productive, sustainable organisations.
Productivity growth has slowed down in many economies since the global financial crisis of 2008. Despite advances in technology and investment in workforce training and development, productivity growth has remained low, puzzling economists and policymakers. Wages are stagnant or declining.
The exact causes of this productivity slowdown are not well understood, and there is ongoing debate among experts about the various factors that may be contributing to it. But, says Natasha Wallace, business leaders can take steps to improve productivity with the right technology, resources and training.
In this video Natasha, fromer international people partner at productivity technology providerClickUp, highlights that output/results and trust are more important than the number of hours spent at work and that there is a disconnect between employees' and managers' perceptions of productivity.
She discusses how new ways of working, such as the four-day work week, show promise in improving productivity, but implementation success depends on the industry. Plus Natasha examines new research which shows the differences between highly productive and low productive organisations and warns against intrusive employee monitoring. She notes the difference between monitoring and measuring.
“Productivity monitoring is using systems and tools to check on employees to ensure that they're not slacking off, for example. And this surveillance is really demotivating,” she says. “By contrast, productivity measurement is a practice that's rooted in transparency and fairness and trust. And this really empowers teams and leads to the best results.”
Listen to a deeper discussion with Natasha on productivity on our podcast episode Solving the Productivity Problem
About Natasha Wallace
Natasha Wallace joined Anthropic as people partner in October 2024. Previously she wasthe international people partner at ClickUp, where she managed HR, benefits, employee development and more. She joined the ClickUp team to do what she does best, making sure people feel valued and supported in their roles and driving business initiatives. As a seasoned professional with over 9 years of experience working with global technology companies, Natasha has spent time honing her skills in many areas of HR, including employee development, performance management, organisational design, and well-being at work. With an LLB Law degree specialising in employment and discrimination law, and a post-grad certificate in International Law, Natasha decided to bring her legal know-how to the world of HR, where she could use her expertise to help companies build a people-focused strategy.
Transcript
Why productivity remains such a challenge
Many have speculated on the reasons behind the UK's productivity puzzle as I often hear it being referred to. But there is still no consensus really on that root cause. But when I'm talking about individual organizations there are various steps that business leaders can take that will significantly improve productivity, which include the right technology enhancing team collaboration, eliminating communication barriers.
Our recent research has shown that companies that do take these steps to provide their employees with right technology resources and training, they're considerably more likely to experience high levels of productivity. 88% of people in highly productive businesses that we spoke to feel that they do have the appropriate tools at hand.
So while there's no consensus of the root cause, I think that it's important to recognize that toggling between apps and just trying to find information all the time is such a huge time waster. So having one system or being able to know where to find the information really helps to eliminate cross-functional silos and barriers to ensure that the correct collaboration is in place.
What high productivity organisations do differently
There are a few standout differences between the high productivity and low productivity organizations. So open channels of communication were found in 91% of high productivity businesses compared to only 8% of low productivity organizations, which shows just how important that communication is.
High levels of team cohesion were also found in 94% of highly productive businesses but only 13% of low productive organizations. And then also 88% of people in high productive organizations, as I mentioned before, said they were provided with the correct technology to help them thrive, and this drops quite considerably to 48% in low productive organizations.
There's also quite a lot of correlation between high productivity and better job satisfaction. Also work-life balance and higher motivation. And these really keep employees staying at businesses for a longer period of time.
Flexibility, trust and measuring productivity well
True flexibility and new ways of working are really important. And it does differ across industry. So the four-day work week has shown huge promise in trial programmes. 92% of all businesses are saying that they would stick with the working week, shorter working week, that have taken part in the pilot programme. But of course this model doesn't work for everyone.
ClickUp's research has shown implementing a shorter working week will have differing levels of success depending on the sector you work in. For example, 80% of IT and telecoms believe it's realistic to adopt that four-day working week. But that goes down to 55% of those working in education as, of course, there are certain roles that need to be on site for a specified number of hours.
Myself, working at ClickUp, I am obviously in that technology sector. I do flex my hours depending on what time zones I'm working in, what the business need is. So I think that businesses need to ask themselves, can all roles be performed with flexibility that isn't then detrimental to business performance? And also how much further can productivity be improved to support that required flexibility? It's important to create a culture that's focused on results rather than the presenteeism aspect and also just investing in the ways that will enhance productivity.
When monitoring productivity does more harm than good
I agree that output and results in knowledge economies are much more important than the numbers of hours spent at work. And this is really ultimately based on trust and communication. But I do recognize some industries such as finance and legal firms, they do require that time tracking from a billing perspective.
But employees still shouldn't feel micromanaged or monitored because that's likely to harm productivity. And also employee satisfaction, if they don't feel like the trust is there.
There's a disconnect as well between how productive employees think that they are versus what their managers think. And this is why more companies are monitoring productivity.
But there's also a difference between monitoring and measuring. So productivity monitoring is using systems and tools to check on employees to ensure that they're not slacking off, for example. And this surveillance is really demotivating.
By contrast, the productivity measurement is a practice that's rooted in the transparency and fairness and trust that I spoke about. And this really empowers teams and leads to the best results.
Another angle of this very much sits with the managers. I think it's important for them to be very clear about what success looks like in a role and give meaningful feedback regularly just to ensure that everyone understands which tasks should take priority and why.
People often think of productivity as just completing tasks on an arbitrary to-do list and ticking off a checklist. But it's so important to give flexibility in the work environment, transparency and openness to make sure that people can get the tasks done.
I think that most of the time when HR processes hinder productivity, it's because of a lack of automation and scalability as well. I think if you can make sure that everything is automated where possible and scale it so it's repeatable, that takes away a lot of the hindrance around HR processes.
For me, I love looking at the culture of organizations. So rather than ditching processes, I would actually encourage businesses to see how culture plays a really critical role in improving productivity. And just emphasize the importance of building a really strong and inclusive culture.
Practical steps to build a more productive organisation
Taking that initial step is brilliant. So as a first three, I would say invest in the appropriate technology and tools. This will really enable everyone to work together and enjoy their work and know what they're achieving. Create that positive culture. So we've spoken a lot about trust and open channels of communication.
I think it's really important to have that set and standardized. Of course make tweaks along the way, but setting out the initial expectation is very important.
And then just ensure high levels of team cohesion and culture. I think that it's important to have those relationships in place and just drive towards the goals.
About the author
