Productivity is on every C-suite agenda, but new research from Endeavor Business Intelligence suggests leaders may be measuring the wrong things. Its World Productivity Day survey found that 33% of respondents consider themselves very productive and 44% somewhat productive, while one in five say shifting priorities or unclear direction get in the way. Nearly a quarter also say they do their best work outside standard hours. 

In this conversation, ExecutiveEDGE Senior Editor-at-Large Geert De Lombaerde and Paul Mattioli, executive vice president of Endeavor Business Intelligence and Continuing Education, discuss why productivity signals can be misleading and what organizations need to change before AI can deliver on its promise. 

Geert De Lombaerde: Productivity is a loaded question. In preparing for this, you mentioned that this report surfaced some artificial productivity signals. What does that mean, and how should leaders think about those signals? 

Paul Mattioli: This study really started out almost as a journey to look at redefining productivity. Then we dialed it back a bit to stick with the standards and what organizations have historically looked at as productivity: output and the way employees produce related to their expectations. 

The feeling part of it, and how employees actually process that, is where Endeavor Business Intelligence plays really strongly. We like to make it very personal for the end user, as opposed to them talking about the technical side of their job. 

It seemed that we were capturing a little bit of the emotion around what productivity really means now, in this generation and the way we work, together or separately, and the ability to turn things around quicker. 

I think it was bookended by that other stat you mentioned: I feel most productive early, before everyone is on my inbox or I’m on calls with colleagues or clients, and then after hours, when I can finally take a breath and plow through my piled-up emails. That formerly known as 9-to-5 productivity becomes the bookends when I can do it by myself. So there are some artificial signals in here about what productivity means in this new-world definition of output. 

Geert De Lombaerde: People say one of the biggest things to help them be more productive is, “Can you please get rid of the distractions? Can you please get rid of the low-value meetings?” There is a lot of clarity in terms of what people want from their organizations. But there’s a conversation that still needs to be had, it feels like. 

Paul Mattioli: Who owns productivity from a management standpoint in the organization? Is it finance? A lot of times it is. Is it sales and sales leadership and marketing, because productivity is reflected in your ability to fill your pipeline, move your pipeline to close and continue that process? 

I think it may be muscle memory for people to always point to the amount of meetings preventing them from doing their work. I’m using meetings as a very specific example, but it could be any busy work or filling out your expense reports. 

We’ve tried all types of headline-worthy initiatives: meeting-free Friday, no meetings from 12 to 2 every day or every Monday, Wednesday and Friday. The numbers never prove that that’s really the issue with productivity. I think it becomes an easy target. 

A lot of productivity, which surfaced in this study as well, was about goal setting and understanding what I’m supposed to be doing every day. I can be as productive as can be with a to-do list that shows me what I’m going to be doing, however long it takes. 

I think that’s the problem: There’s this very fuzzy direction right now in terms of setting clear goals and employees feeling that North Star that I’m pointing at every day. 

Geert De Lombaerde: We asked people how many organizations actually identify and track productivity explicitly. Thirty percent said they do. More than 40% either said stronger cross-team communication and collaboration or clearer strategic alignment and priorities would generate the most positive impact. There’s a straight line connecting those ideas. Tracking productivity or having clear goals — it’s not one or the other, but it kind of feels like it could be in an organization. Is that fair? 

Paul Mattioli: I think it’s super fair. The lines are very blurry at the moment. In meetings with leaders across different market verticals, one thing remains the same: As soon as you start to track it, behavior will change. 

If you track something, fundamentally, the definition puts walls up. Some of what I consider productive time may be ideation. Some of it may be time away from my screen. But as soon as someone defines the time that’s being tracked and the expectations of what that means, it starts to become a little bit about behavior change and not about the feeling.