For many, corporate and social productivity has only one aspect: it is to produce as much as possible and in any condition to have a profit, any profit or profit. But is productivity really this?
To answer this question we must take steps back in history and resume the term productivity from where it really began to exist.
The first to talk about productivity were Lysis and Lanzillo. All three spoke of it in reference to the socialism of the time, during and in the period after the end of the First World War.
For Lanzillo (see his book "Voce") the producers are not only the bourgeois and the upper middle class, because they have the economic possibility of giving work, so for him the subject changes the manufacturer is no longer just the entrepreneur all those involved in the production process of goods, the worker and engineer who are part of the same company are both productive in the same way. This is how the corporate vision of the family was born, of the "entrepreneur I can not go beyond you without a worker and everything is part of the internal productive circle for which we are all linked to the same destiny".
Lysis in the book "Vers la democratie nouvelle" said that the interest of socialism was the development of capitalism, because it is identified with industrial and commercial progress and that is what most interests the proletariat, because if the economy is stable and the companies the worker is flourishing (the employee to this day) has a safe place and a salary that he can always count on. According to Lysis, economic development would have made the unions and the working class stronger.
It was then that the term changed use. Mussolini wrote a first article and others followed more and more selective and angry in his newspaper "Il popolo d’Italia" at the end of September 1918. He first translated the excerpts and then changed the meaning, so productivity became something else.
Productivity according to Mussolini was not limited by those who give jobs, starting from Lanzillo, he changed everything and thus summarized productivity: productivity is given by those who produce for the company or the state regardless of whether they are managers or farmers ; I am a producer if I produce a good or a service. Subsequently Mussolini applied it to the state economy declaring that the productivity concerned anyone who produced an income for the state, the more we produced the more we were productive, the more the GDP grew, the bases of the fascist economy were born.
However, the change in productivity did not stop there; we began to see productivity as a total uniqueness, where the state was a large aggregator of all and there was no longer an individual and personal uniqueness, the state first of all. By letting people feel part of a single person, fascism encouraged them to produce more and more and to give more and more, whatever people asked, they gave and gave up. They also renounced their rights for that one, for that utopia of being part of a single encompassing society.
The production had to be always active and never stop, so all the rights of workers (those rights for which Mussolini himself had fought only a few before), radically changed his mind and began the era of what will be the ruin of Italian economy in the Fascist period.
Hence the kind of productivity that today is fashionable in all the companies of the world, that is, you have to produce more and more at all costs, you have to bring totals every hour, you have to send tots every minute, etcetera; here, this type of productivity is part of the fascist economy, an economy that takes away the rights to put them at the service of production and the company one.
This type of productivity is detrimental to the whole economic system, because not even a machine can produce endlessly without stopping at the same pace; this is called wear and when a car becomes weary it loses power and productivity, many will say it replaces it. The replacement is not really so cheap for companies, a machine replaces only when it is exhausted (ie when it is technologically obsolete or unusable altogether) otherwise it goes into maintenance, replacing it as soon as it loses a bit of power would be a waste would pay on the budget.
An employee becomes "obsolete" when he retires, what makes him productive is not the amount of working hours at a company but his experience, more experience has more value and more is productive, moreover his productivity depends directly on the quality of his work if it is not qualitative is not productive and this does not always depend on the employee.
To correctly calculate the business productivity it is necessary to add several factors. The average work experience of employees must be added to the average monthly production of the machines (average monthly invoicing for services) and divided by the total number of employees, this will give a productivity index. The qualitative index of the goods or services must be added to the productivity index and this will give the total productivity index. The more the productivity index is close to zero, the more productivity is suffering.
There is, however, a single case in which it is absolutely impossible to give a productivity index and it is craftsmanship, it has different rules for the production that is particular and at a high quality you can not give a timing as in a company therefore it takes a long time.
Rashna