The New Productivity Metrics

Richard T. Dué

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10580539608907019

1996-01-01

Information Systems Management

Abstract:Effective management of growing IT resources requires new quantitative metrics that measure IT productivity from the perspective of the overall rate of return to the organization.

computer science, information systems

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The new productivity paradox

Mark C. Anderson,Rajiv D. Banker,Sury Ravindran

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/636772.636776

IF: 22.7

2003-03-01

Communications of the ACM

Abstract:High valuation multiples on IT spending suggest that companies are underinvesting in IT.

computer science, theory & methods, software engineering, hardware & architecture
New Growth Accounting

Binlei Gong

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ajae.12009

IF: 3.757

2020-01-01

American Journal of Agricultural Economics

Abstract:This article opens the black box of total factor productivity by decomposing this “all‐in‐one” index into various input‐embedded and input‐free productivities in a new growth accounting framework. The new method identifies different channels through which growth drivers affect economic growth and finds the most effective way to boost the economy, which is unidentified in standard method. This new approach uses a varying coefficient stochastic frontier model, which integrates the standpoints of the endogenous growth theory and the induced innovation theory into a reduced‐form productivity analysis. The new growth accounting is then applied to study the impacts and contributions of R&D investments, international trade, and structural transformation to world agricultural growth during the period of 1962 to 2014. The empirical results provide new evidence to support the endogenous growth theory and the induced innovation theory, indicating the necessity of using the new growth accounting method.
A new perspective to productivity measurement

Ephrem Berhe,Birhanu Abebe,Daniel Azene

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2015.1053804

2015-06-16

Abstract:Productivity has been practised by every company as a performance measure and indicator. It is broadly defined as the ratio of output values to input values. Usually, the total output value is represented by the sales revenue of conforming products, whereas the total input value constitutes all incurred costs, used or not. However, only those useful inputs are consumed by the conforming products. The remaining is not practically incorporated within the conforming products. This study intends to devise a new productivity measurement approach which discretely considers the effective and ineffective components of organisational inputs by taking advantage of the arithmetic inverse of the usual productivity ratio. The practicality of the new model is demonstrated in a selected manufacturing company and it is found that the inverse of the effective productivity is 0.58. This signifies that the company's productivity, if all inputs are efficiently used, can reach up until 1.72 – an inverse value of the inverted effective productivity. The cost of ineffective inputs is also found to be 23.2% of the total sales revenue. The new model can notably help decision-makers when working on the identification, measurement, and elimination of wastes from manufacturing processes.

management
Information Technology and Productivity: A Review of the Literature

Erik Brynjolfsson,Shinkyu Yang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/s0065-2458(08)60644-0

IF: 3.067

1996-01-01

Advances in Computers

Abstract:In recent years, the relationship between information technology (IT) and productivity has become a source of debate. In the 1980s and early 1990s, empirical research on IT productivity generally did not identify significant productivity improvements. More recently, as new data are identified and more sophisticated methodologies are applied, several researchers have found evidence that IT is associated not only with improvement in productivity, but also in intermediate measures, consumer surplus, and economic growth. Nonetheless, new questions emerge as old puzzles fade. This survey reviews the literature, identifies remaining questions, and concludes with recommendations for applications of traditional methodologies to new data sources, as well as alternative, broader metrics of welfare to assess and enhance the benefits of IT.

computer science, software engineering, hardware & architecture
A new productivity paradigm for competitive advantage

Rudyard L. Istvan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250130705

IF: 8.3

1992-10-01

Strategic Management Journal

Abstract:A decade of observed large differences in productivity driven competitive advantage cannot be explained by traditional productivity notions or conventional strategic analysis. We conclude on both empirical and theoretical grounds that most traditional sources of productivity have encountered diminishing marginal returns. Large competitive differences appear to arise from a new productivity source, nonlinear systems dynamics in business organizations. This has both theoretical and practical consequences for managing toward competitive advantage and requires a new approach to management, control, and organization.

management,business
Productivity as a Performance Measure

Susan D.A. Misterek,Kevin J. Dooley,John C. Anderson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/eum0000000001294

1992-01-01

Abstract:Both the improvement of productivity and the effectiveness of performance measures have been topics of extreme interest to managers and researchers in recent years. Looks at the potential advantages and disadvantages of using the traditional productivity measure, output/input, as a measure of performance at the firm, work‐unit, individual, product, or product‐line level. Considers the ability of productivity measures to adjust for price changes and to detect factor substitutions. The distortion of productivity measures by fixed expenses and the inability of productivity measures to consider quality changes are among the disadvantage cited. Also, criticisms that have been levelled at traditional cost accounting measures are found to apply to productivity measures. Proposes three criteria that can aid in determining when productivity measures are appropriate as performance measures. Makes recommendations for ways of using productivity measures effectively also.

management
Decision Making and Productivity Measurement

Dariush Khezrimotlagh

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1604.08237

2017-12-02

Abstract:In this article, the concepts of technical efficiency, efficiency, effectiveness and productivity are illustrated. It is discussed that when firms are not homogenous, the situation is the same as when each factor has a different unit of measurement from one firm to another, and there-fore, no meaningful discrimination can be expressed, unless a set of known weights are introduced to standardize data. A linear programming DEA model is used when a set of known weights are given to calculate the technical efficiency and efficiency of a set of homogenous DMUs with multiple input factors and output factors. A numerical example is also provided.

Optimization and Control
Productivity Measurement: Racing to Keep Up

Daniel E. Sichel

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-economics-080218-030439

IF: 5.97

2019-08-02

Annual Review of Economics

Abstract:This article provides a nontechnical review of the literature and issues related to the measurement of aggregate productivity. I begin with a discussion of productivity measures, their performance in recent decades, and key measurement puzzles that emerge from the data. The remainder of the review focuses on two important questions. First, how do we make more accurate the measures of prices used to deflate nominal output so as to win (or at least not lose) the race for economic measurement to keep up with a changing economy? I frame the issues and point to the most important and promising areas for further research. Second, what does or should GDP measure? I defend GDP as a valuable measure of production and offer suggestions for improving it. At the same time, I emphasize the importance of measuring economic welfare (well-being) and argue that GDP should be supplemented with a satellite account that measures economic welfare.

economics
Long-term Productivity for Long-term Impact

Spencer Smith,Jacques Carette

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2009.14015

2020-09-29

Abstract:We present a new conceptual definition of 'productivity' for sustainably developing research software. Existing definitions are flawed as they are short-term biased, thus devaluing long-term impact, which we consider to be the principal goal. Taking a long-term view of productivity helps fix that problem. We view the outputs of the development process as knowledge and user satisfaction. User satisfaction is used as a proxy for effective quality. The explicit emphasis on all knowledge produced, rather than just the operationalizable knowledge (code) implies that human-reusable knowledge, i.e. documentation, should also be greatly valued when producing research software.

Software Engineering
Is Our Organization Actually Measuring Productivity? How Contrasting Organizational and Individual Measures of Engineering Success is an Opportunity to Drive Engineering Transformation

Carol S. Lee,Morgan Ramsey,Catherine M. Hicks

2023-05-23

Abstract:Background: Previous research highlights that common misconceptions about developer productivity lead to harmful and inaccurate evaluations of software work, pointing to the need for organizations to differentiate between measures of production, productivity, and performance as an important step that helps to suggest improvements to how we measure the success of engineering teams. Methodology: Using a card sort, we explored how a Three Layer Productivity Framework was used by 16 software engineers at a Software Engineering focused conference to rank measures of success, first in the current practice of their organization and second in their individual beliefs about the best ways to measure engineering success. Results and discussion: Overall, participants preferred organizations to 1) continue their prioritized focus on performance layer metrics, 2) increase the focus on productivity metrics, and 3) decrease their focus on production metrics. When asked about the current metrics of their organizations, while all roles reported a current focus on performance metrics, only ICs reported a strong focus on production metrics. When asked about metrics they would prefer, all roles preferred more performance metrics but only leaders and ICs also wanted productivity metrics. While all participants were aligned on performance metrics being a top preference, there was misalignment on which specific metrics are used. Our findings show that when measuring developer success, organizations should continue measurement using performance metrics, consider an increased focus on productivity metrics, and consider a decreased focus on production metrics.

Software Engineering
DuPont analysis of an IT-enabled competitive advantage

Bruce Dehning,Theophanis Stratopoulos

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/s1467-0895(02)00032-5

IF: 5.111

2002-10-01

International Journal of Accounting Information Systems

Abstract:Recent research has shown that if used effectively, information technology (IT) can provide companies with superior performance relative to their direct competitors [MIS Q 24 (2000) 169; Inf Manage 38 (2000) 103]. The most common benefits from the successful use of IT are in increased profitability or efficiency. Return on assets (ROA) decomposition (DuPont analysis) allows financial statement users to examine where this IT-enabled competitive advantage shows up in accounting performance measures, whether in profitability, efficiency or both. Using a matched pair design, comparing companies with an IT-enabled competitive advantage to their direct competitors, we find that successful use of IT pays off in a combination of increased profitability and efficiency. This is different from a competitive advantage that is not IT-enabled, where the only performance advantage is in profitability. All data used in tests are available from public sources.

management,business, finance
Long-Term Productivity Based on Science, not Preference

Spencer Smith,Jacques Carette

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2112.12580

2021-12-16

Abstract:This position paper argues that decisions on processes, tools, techniques and software artifacts (such as user manuals, unit tests, design documents and code) for scientific software development should be driven by science, not by personal preference. Decisions should not be based on anecdotal evidence, gut instinct or the path of least resistance. Moreover, decisions should vary depending on the users and the context. In most cases of interest, this means that a longer term view should be adopted. We need to use a scientific approach based on unambiguous definitions, empirical evidence, hypothesis testing and rigorous processes. By developing an understanding of where input hours are spent, what most contributes to user satisfaction, and how to leverage knowledge produced, we can determine what interventions have the greatest value relative to the invested effort. We will be able to recommend software production processes that justify their value because the long-term output benefits are high compared to the required input resources. A preliminary definition of productivity is presented, along with ideas on how to potentially measure this quality. We briefly explore the idea of improving productivity via an approach where all artifacts are generated from codified knowledge.

Software Engineering
Software Productivity Measurement and Prediction Methods: what can we tell about them?

Wladmir Araujo Chapetta,Guilherme Horta Travassos

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5753/sbqs.2016.15136

2016-10-24

Abstract:An adequate way of making software organizations to remain competitive is to ensure their innovative capacity and the continuous increasing of their software process productivity with quality. Indeed, the ability on increasing the software productivity relies on among other issues in the organization's measurement and prediction capacity. Productivity refers to the rate at which a company produces goods, and its observation takes into account the number of people and the amount of other necessary resources to produce such goods. However, it is not clear how productivity can be observed when the product is software. Therefore, this work presents the results of an investigation regarding software productivity measurement and prediction methods. A previous systematic literature review was evolved and re-executed, limited to the year 2013. It allowed the identification of 89 new primary studies evidencing that: (1) ratio-based and weighted factors analyses still represent most of the methods applied to measure, describe and interpret software productivity; (2) 24 factors present evidence of influencing productivity, and; (3) SLOC-based measures, despite the criticism and issues associated with these sort of measurements, are the most common measures used in the studies.
Real-time management of IT

Bernie Minard

Abstract:The ability to successfully manage information technology-driven transformations of work processes into value--which has always been a critical requirement yet often a huge disappointment--is now becoming a main ingredient of success in all industries, including healthcare. This article prescribes management dimensions that healthcare leaders should focus on to improve their ability to manage and derive value from the re-invented work flow, especially the highly visible opportunities offered by e-commerce and the consumer movement.
The Productivity J-Curve: How Intangibles Complement General Purpose Technologies

Erik Brynjolfsson,Daniel Rock,Chad Syverson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3346739

2019-01-01

SSRN Electronic Journal

Abstract:General purpose technologies (GPTs) such as AI enable and require significant complementary investments, including business process redesign, co-invention of new products and business models, and investments in human capital. These complementary investments are often intangible and poorly measured in the national accounts, even if they create valuable assets for the firm. We develop a model that shows how this leads to an underestimation of output and productivity in the early years of a new GPT, and how later, when the benefits of intangible investments are harvested, productivity will be overestimated. Our model generates a Productivity J-Curve that can explain the productivity slowdowns often accompanying the advent of GPTs, as well as the follow-on increase in productivity later. We use our model to assess how AI-related intangible capital is currently affecting measured total factor productivity (TFP) and output. We also conduct a historical analysis of the roles of intangibles tied to R&D, software, and computer hardware, finding substantial and ongoing effects of software in particular and hardware to a lesser extent.
The Drivers of Product Return in the Information Age

Honggeng Zhou,R. Daniel Reid,W. C. Benton Jr.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1504/ijiem.2006.010237

2006-01-01

International Journal of Internet and Enterprise Management

Abstract:The importance of product return has risen in the last two decades as firms face an increased pricing pressure and more stringent environmental regulations. Anecdotal evidence and a few scholarly studies document the importance of product return, but as yet no scale to measure the use of product return practices has emerged. This study using the data from 125 North American manufacturing companies develops a scale for product return practices and tests the influences of several factors on the product return practices. These factors include information quality, manufacturing technology, Just-In-Time (JIT) production, delivery process, cost leadership strategy and supply chain dynamism. The statistical analysis shows that these factors have a significant positive influence on the use of product return practices. Discussion of our findings and future research opportunities are also addressed.
Measuring the productivity impacts of new ways of working

Harri Laihonen,Aki Jääskeläinen,Antti Lönnqvist,Jenna Ruostela

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/14725961211218749

2012-04-27

Journal of Facilities Management

Abstract:Purpose “New ways of working” refers to non‐traditional work practices, settings and locations with information and communication technologies (ICT) to supplement or replace traditional ways of working. They are being deployed in knowledge work context in order to increase employees working motivation, job satisfaction and productivity. However, these benefits are not self‐evident. This paper aims to examine the task of measuring the expected benefits. Design/methodology/approach This paper synthesizes the existing literature on measurement of knowledge work productivity and identifies some key prerequisites and restrictions that should be taken into account when measuring the impacts of organizational change. Findings The paper proposes a measurement approach for evaluating the impacts of a new ways of working initiative in a knowledge work context. Originality/value Previous literature has focused on studying whether facilities and ICT solutions are appropriate from the viewpoint of an individual knowledge worker. However, there is a lack of studies focused on the actual business impacts of different working arrangements.

English Else
Information Technology Productivity Paradox at the Firm Level

梁樑,周垂日

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1006-480X.2004.03.005

2004-01-01

Abstract:The information technology (IT) productivity paradox describes the mismatch between actual and expected gains from information technology investment. This article divides the period of the research on IT productivity paradox at the firm level as three parts based on the new research results: productivity paradox was confirmed and explained before the mid-nineties of 20th century; productivity paradox has been refuted since the mid-nineties of 20th century; the new productivity paradox comes forth after 2000. The article analyses the cause of the new productivity paradox and discusses the problems about the new productivity paradox. Finally, the article presents some reference to Chinese firm information technology investment.
Engineering Productivity Measurement: A Novel Approach

E. AlChaer,C. A. Issa

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)co.1943-7862.0001875

2020-08-01

Journal of Construction Engineering and Management

Abstract:The productivity of an engineer could be used as a factor in decision-making in construction management and the coordination of work execution. In this study, an empirical assessment tool is proposed to be used as means to measure the individual productivity of an engineer in a fair and objective manner. The method involves the implementation of a point system for work tasks as well as the definition of repetitive work and different types of delays, these values are then input into a mathematical equation that results in a productivity measure in a percentage format. The final productivity value can be used to assess the engineer, build effective teams, and recalculate engineers’ wages based on their monthly productivity. Moreover, the productivity values can be used to determine more accurately the time estimate for the completion of construction tasks. The proposed assessment tool was developed based on construction site observations. Through conducted trial cases, this tool was found to be applicable to different engineering departments; the point system used for the trials was suggested by the authors and can be adjusted to each firm’s preferences because no standard exists. Although the method is proposed in the context of construction, the authors hope to further develop the implementation of this methodology in other industries. This proposed novel methodology should be further validated and adjusted as required; this paper serves as an initial step to advance the search for a more wholesome method of productivity measurement.

construction & building technology,engineering, civil, industrial
How Developers and Managers Define and Trade Productivity for Quality

Margaret-Anne Storey,Brian Houck,Thomas Zimmermann

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2111.04302

2021-11-08

Software Engineering

Abstract:In this paper, we present the findings from a survey study to investigate how developers and managers define and trade-off developer productivity and software quality (two related lenses into software development). We found that developers and managers, as cohorts, are not well aligned in their views of what it means to be productive (developers think of productivity in terms of activity, while more managers think of productivity in terms of performance). We also found that developers are not accurate at predicting their managers' views of productivity. In terms of quality, we found that individual developers and managers have quite varied views of what quality means to them, but as cohorts they are closely aligned in their different views, with the majority in both groups defining quality in terms of robustness. Over half of the developers and managers reported that quality can be traded for higher productivity and why this trade-off can be justified, while one third consider quality as a necessary part of productivity that cannot be traded. We also present a new descriptive framework for quality, TRUCE, that we synthesize from the survey responses. We call for more discussion between developers and managers about what they each consider as important software quality attributes, and to have open debate about how software quality relates to developer productivity and what trade-offs should or should not be made.

The New Productivity Metrics

The new productivity paradox

New Growth Accounting

A new perspective to productivity measurement

Information Technology and Productivity: A Review of the Literature

A new productivity paradigm for competitive advantage

Productivity as a Performance Measure

Decision Making and Productivity Measurement

Productivity Measurement: Racing to Keep Up

Long-term Productivity for Long-term Impact

Is Our Organization Actually Measuring Productivity? How Contrasting Organizational and Individual Measures of Engineering Success is an Opportunity to Drive Engineering Transformation

DuPont analysis of an IT-enabled competitive advantage

Long-Term Productivity Based on Science, not Preference

Software Productivity Measurement and Prediction Methods: what can we tell about them?

Real-time management of IT

The Productivity J-Curve: How Intangibles Complement General Purpose Technologies

The Drivers of Product Return in the Information Age

Measuring the productivity impacts of new ways of working

Information Technology Productivity Paradox at the Firm Level

Engineering Productivity Measurement: A Novel Approach

How Developers and Managers Define and Trade Productivity for Quality