On Productivity

Productivity or the lack thereof, seems to be the running issue in Singapore these days. The issue of declining levels of productivity has been plastered all over Singaporean consciousness. It has made the headlines in the national papers; it is and continues to be the main report in televised news; it remains screaming throughout the blogosphere. The problems of productivity though can never go away until the human person is put in the centre.

The productivity issue is a reflection of a deeper malaise. It is an indication of our flawed utilitarian societal priorities. It is evidence of how our society has allowed money to become the end. This is neither unique to Singapore nor partisan. It afflicts the whole world. Industrialism and Capitalism require a delicate balance, keeping in mind the economic need of enterprise while recalling in heart the humanity of the worker.

Productivity is not an end; it is not even a means to an end. It is merely the by-product of the human-centric end. It should therefore come as no surprise that this global problem cannot be solved by any utilitarian scheme. It is akin to pushing harder on a car tyre instead of a steering wheel in a car. If anything, we solve the issue of productivity only by moving to a people-centric manner of thinking, by turning the steering wheel in the proper direction.

The fact that we worry of productivity is symptomatic of how society in general is suffering a systematic dehumanisation and degradation of human dignity. It should send a chill down ones spine that human resource has become a means to a productive end. The methodical dehumanisation begins with modern education that dehumanises people. It leads to contemporary societal values that beastialises man and finally to the predominant economic system that reduces humans to numbers. Civil societies may fight for human rights, yet what rights exists in a world made of economic units?

Education systems often have as the visions to groom a new generation of society. Put in another way, the next generation should be better than the present; it should bring humanity to a higher degree of civilisation. However, if education equips a human merely technically, what true worth does it add to human existence? Contemporary humans are objectively no more civilised and advanced than our forebears despite our manifold scientific knowledge and advancement. The same man who censorises his ancestors for burning witches at the stake and drowning adulterers will eventually be criticised for being a fool for some other deed he does not find anomalous today. Human education systems groom professionals by the millions with technical skills the previous generation did not have, ironically this reduces every single person to a mere statistic. His worth is judged by his skills, not by his character.

The anodyne and prudish Victorian sexual attitude, has given way to a liberal attitude to sexual promiscuity. It is said that the oldest trade in the world is prostitution. It is also the most successful trade. Sex sells and when money becomes the end, natural sexual desire is exploited as fair economic game. As politically incorrect as this sounds, how many female celebrities are ‘sold’ based on talent alone? Has not the constant sexual bombardment, made beasts out of man who judge women on sexual attractiveness? This is natural, to be sure. But the natural human is first an animal who then becomes man. Such sexual deviation takes the human character of sexuality away, leaving an animal behind. This is animalisation.

From a skill provider to an animal, dehumanisation reaches its end when the animal loses his life. What life does a statistic have? What further mention does it need?

Falling into the whirlpool of dehumanisation is not the fault of any person with malice aforethought. Humans collapse into this imbalance simply because it is extremely difficult to steady the unsteady. Also, it is in human nature to stray into excess.

What then is a human-centric approach? The human-centric approach is not some new economic theory. It is simply realising the place of the human in human society. It is recognition of the true dignity of every human person, regardless of education, finance or profession. It is returning the human to the axis, displacing money from the core.

The human-centric approach has worked before. And it had removed the problem of productivity, efficiency and quality. A practical example would be Japan after World War 2. It was this approach that led to the island nation’s rapid ascension to the upper echelons of capitalistic economies. By putting its staff at the centre of its operations, the Japanese corporations instilled a sense of ownership in its staff. When a company treats its staffs like family, the staffs reciprocate. The work really becomes their work. It is not a job but a responsibility; people take special pride in their possessions. A current example would be Google and the massive financial resources it puts into helping its huge ‘family’ enjoy its time with the company. Lest hypocrisy suggests itself, note that duplicity leads to disillusionment and disillusionment eventually dissolves a fantasy. The Japanese car manufacturers have shown taught this lesson in recent weeks. Money, not the staff or the clients, became the focus. The company boasted that it had saved millions in changing certain spare parts to cheaper versions. Now, it can only hang its head in shame over the billions in business it is set to lose.

By putting people at the centre, and doing so with sincerity, the thinking of any group unconsciously become more humane. This humanity translates into policies and practices that care for the human person. When a person’s concerns, whether business or private are allayed they naturally are more focused and serous in their work. Heightened concentration produces more efficient work as a result. An athlete with non-competitive concerns will not be able to focus on the job at hand, removing these worries free the athlete to perform to his maximum ability. The same logic applies in work productivity.

A worker who works 10 hours a day may only work at 50% of his maximum rate because he knows that what he does may not aid in promotion, he has a sick parent to support, his pay is insufficient to pay for his children’s school fees etc. To increase productivity, the company could introduce many additional schemes and systems. Yet the company will still not get the desired 100%, because the company has not dealt with the problem. Read the opening sentence in this paragraph again. The staff member does not perform to his maximum because… A human-centric system will try and solve those issues earnestly. Removing these distractions, what is to prevent the worker from putting in his 100%? The company will certainly have to invest more in its workers, but for the money it devotes it gets back products in quality and quantity.

It is admittedly hard to free one’s mind from the established train of thought. Apart from peeling away the veil of utilitarianism, the extra tape of individualism has to be removed. Bonum commune hominis should be changed into bonum commune communitatis. Productivity is not the problem; the problem is our assessment of humans itself. Only by realising the dislocation of the person, and acting to re-establish his centrality in the capitalistic economic model can the problem of productivity be solved.