Advice
The Power of Productivity: Why Being Busy Isn't the Same as Being Effective
Our Favourite Blogs:
Here's something that's going to upset half the people reading this: most Australian workplaces are absolutely terrible at productivity, and I'm sick of pretending otherwise.
After 18 years of watching businesses from Perth to Brisbane fumble around with productivity strategies that wouldn't impress a first-year MBA student, I've come to one brutal conclusion. The majority of managers think being busy equals being productive. Wrong. Dead wrong.
I remember walking into a client's Melbourne office three years ago - won't name names, but let's call them a "major telecommunications provider" - and seeing people literally running between meetings. Running! Like they were competing in some sort of corporate Olympics. When I asked their operations manager what productivity meant to them, she proudly told me about their 14-hour workdays and back-to-back meeting culture.
That company went through three restructures in two years. Coincidence? I think not.
The Aussie Productivity Paradox
Here's where I'm going to contradict myself slightly, because productivity isn't just about working smarter - sometimes you do need to work harder. But here's the thing most productivity gurus won't tell you: the sweet spot between effort and efficiency changes depending on your industry, your role, and frankly, your personality type.
Take construction versus consulting. I've worked with both. In construction, productivity often means streamlined processes and eliminating physical waste. You can measure it in concrete terms - literally. But in consulting? It's about client outcomes and billable efficiency. Completely different metrics.
Yet everyone wants the same cookie-cutter productivity solution. It's like trying to use a hammer to fix a computer. Sure, you might get some satisfaction out of it, but you're probably making things worse.
The Meeting Epidemic That's Killing Australian Business
Let me share something that'll make you cringe. According to my completely unscientific but thoroughly observed research, 67% of meetings in Australian offices could be replaced with a well-written email. The other 33% shouldn't exist at all.
I once worked with a Sydney-based financial services firm - again, won't name them specifically, but their office had harbour views and expensive coffee - where middle management spent 4.5 hours per day in meetings. Four. Point. Five. Hours.
When did we decide that sitting in a room talking about work was more valuable than actually doing the work?
The worst part? These were often the same people complaining about not having enough time to complete their core responsibilities. It's like watching someone struggle to swim while refusing to let go of the anchor they're clutching.
Real Productivity Looks Different Than You Think
This is where I get on my soapbox about what genuine productivity actually involves. And spoiler alert: it's not about fancy apps or colour-coded calendars or whatever productivity hack is trending on LinkedIn this week.
Real productivity starts with understanding your natural energy patterns. I'm a morning person - always have been. My best strategic thinking happens between 6 AM and 10 AM. After lunch? I'm good for routine tasks and admin work, but don't ask me to solve complex problems or make important decisions.
Took me years to figure this out. Years! I spent my early career trying to force myself into productivity systems that worked against my natural rhythms. No wonder I was constantly exhausted and behind on deadlines.
Now, companies like Atlassian and Canva have figured this out. They don't just talk about flexible working - they've built it into their operational DNA. Their productivity metrics reflect outcomes, not hours logged.
Why Most Time Management Training Misses the Mark
Here's another controversial opinion: most time management training is solving the wrong problem.
Time management assumes the issue is how you organise your schedule. But what if the real issue is that you're doing the wrong things entirely? What if 40% of your tasks shouldn't exist, and another 30% should be automated or delegated?
I've seen so many professionals become incredibly efficient at tasks that add zero value to their organisation. They're like master craftspeople creating beautiful handmade buggy whips in the age of automobiles.
The productivity conversation needs to start with elimination, not optimisation. Cut ruthlessly before you organize efficiently.
This reminds me of Marie Kondo, but for your work life. Does this task spark joy? Well, maybe not joy exactly, but does it create genuine value? If not, bin it.
The Technology Trap
Speaking of things that don't spark joy - productivity apps. Sweet Jesus, the productivity apps.
I have clients who spend more time managing their productivity systems than actually being productive. They've got task managers talking to calendar apps talking to note-taking software talking to project management platforms. It's like watching someone build a Rube Goldberg machine to butter their toast.
Keep it simple. I use exactly three digital tools for productivity: my calendar, my email, and a basic note-taking app. That's it. Everything else is distraction masquerading as efficiency.
The best productivity tool ever invented? A piece of paper and a pen. No notifications, no updates, no subscription fees. Just you and your thoughts.
The Australian Context Nobody Talks About
Here's something that gets overlooked in most productivity discussions: Australian workplace culture has some unique challenges that imported productivity strategies don't address.
We've got this cultural expectation of being "laid back" that sometimes conflicts with high-performance environments. It's like we're apologising for being ambitious or focused. "Sorry for caring about results, mate."
Then there's our geographic isolation. When you're collaborating with international teams, traditional 9-to-5 productivity thinking falls apart. I've got clients doing calls with Silicon Valley at 2 AM and London at 6 AM. Their productivity rhythms have to account for global time zones, not just their natural energy patterns.
Plus, and this might sound harsh, but we've inherited some British attitudes toward efficiency that aren't serving us well in the modern economy. The "she'll be right" mentality works great for barbecues and cricket matches, less so for competing with Singapore and Seoul in the knowledge economy.
The Counter-Intuitive Truth About Stress Reduction
This is where I'm going to lose some readers, but stress isn't always the enemy of productivity. Sometimes a bit of pressure creates focus and urgency that leads to breakthrough performance.
The problem isn't stress itself - it's chronic, unmanaged stress. There's a massive difference between the focused intensity of a project deadline and the grinding anxiety of unclear expectations and impossible workloads.
I've worked with advertising agencies where creative teams produce their best work under tight deadlines. The pressure forces them to stop second-guessing themselves and commit to ideas. But those same teams need recovery periods, or they burn out completely.
It's like interval training for knowledge workers. Periods of intense focus followed by genuine rest and reflection.
What Actually Works (From Someone Who's Seen It All)
After nearly two decades of consulting with Australian businesses, here's what consistently moves the productivity needle:
Clear outcome definitions. Not activity metrics, not busy-work checklists, but specific results that matter to the organisation's success. If you can't explain why a task contributes to company objectives, stop doing it.
Energy management over time management. Schedule important work during your peak performance hours. Protect those periods like you'd protect your retirement savings.
Communication protocols that actually make sense. Email for documentation, instant messaging for quick questions, meetings for collaboration and decision-making only. No exceptions.
Regular productivity audits. Every quarter, examine what you've been doing and ask whether it's still necessary. Tasks have a way of multiplying like rabbits if you don't cull them regularly.
The companies that get this right - and there are more of them than you might think - create competitive advantages that are difficult to replicate. Their people are more engaged, their customers are better served, and their bottom lines reflect the difference.
But it requires leadership that's willing to challenge conventional wisdom about how work gets done. It means saying no to activities that feel important but don't create value. It means trusting people to manage their own productivity rather than micromanaging their methods.
Most importantly, it means recognising that productivity isn't about squeezing more hours out of people - it's about getting better results with the time and energy they've got.
And if that's not worth the effort, I don't know what is.
Related Articles: