Good Morning!

We begin with a contradiction hiding in plain sight: workers are busier than ever, tech is more advanced than ever, and yet productivity is barely budging. Across industries, we’re told to optimize, streamline, grind. There are apps to plan our days, software to log our minutes, and entire business models built around squeezing more from every hour. But for all the dashboards and hustle, the math isn’t adding up. Output is flatlining, burnout is rising, and no one seems quite sure what any of it is actually producing.

This week’s news only deepens the paradox. The Fed kept rates steady, citing a resilient labor market, while major firms like Disney and BMW posted optimistic earnings. U.S.–China trade talks resumed, and markets rallied, despite persistent inflation and structural slowdowns. Meanwhile, WeightWatchers filed for bankruptcy even as it pivots into a booming new business model. Everywhere you look, effort and outcome are out of sync. It’s not just an economic puzzle, it’s a cultural one.

Welcome to Part Four of Irrational Thinking in a Logical Economy. Today, we’re looking at the productivity paradox; why all our striving isn’t delivering the returns we expect, and what that says about the systems we’ve built. Because in a world that prizes motion over meaning, maybe the real measure of productivity isn’t how hard we work, but whether the work is actually worth doing.

-Skool Projekt Staff

Part 4 of 10 in Irrational Thinking in a Logical Economy
by JD Washington

The Productivity Paradox

By all appearances, we are living in an era of relentless productivity. We have more tools, more apps, more dashboards, more data than any generation before us. Workers answer emails at red lights, take Zoom calls from their kids’ soccer games, and triage Slack messages while brushing their teeth. Entire industries exist solely to help us optimize; our time, our calendars, our sleep, our output. The self-help section is filled with titles promising to unlock your hidden efficiency. Yet despite all of this effort, something strange is happening. Productivity, at least by traditional economic measures, has stalled. In the United States, gains in labor productivity have slowed dramatically over the past decade. In other advanced economies, they’ve nearly flatlined. It’s as if we’re sprinting in place. For all the hustle, we’re not actually getting anywhere. This is the productivity paradox: the harder we work, the less it seems to matter.

The idea that more effort should lead to more output is one of the most basic assumptions in economics. But that assumption, like many others, starts to fall apart when exposed to human behavior. The textbook definition of productivity is simple: output per unit of input. In practice, it’s much messier. Think about a nurse working a double shift, a teacher juggling hybrid classrooms, or a marketing team frantically revising a campaign for the third time in a week. What these people experience isn’t a lack of effort. It’s a flood of motion with little time for reflection. There’s more work, but not necessarily more value. Much of what we now do in the name of productivity (sending emails, attending meetings, updating dashboards) is performative. It looks like work. It feels like work. But the return on that labor is increasingly unclear. We have created a culture where being busy is seen as a proxy for being useful, and in doing so, we’ve made it harder to tell the difference.

There’s a story about a mid-level executive who introduced time-tracking software to measure productivity across their team. The goal was to identify inefficiencies and improve output. But soon, employees began logging more hours, scheduling unnecessary meetings, and responding to emails with robotic urgency. The real work didn’t change. The output didn’t improve. But the illusion of productivity soared. What began as an attempt to measure efficiency became a performance about appearing efficient. The metric became the goal. It’s a common phenomenon in workplaces everywhere. When you reward the appearance of output instead of its actual value, people will optimize for appearances. You get longer hours, more documentation, endless updates; but very little that actually moves the needle.

This problem isn’t confined to offices or corporations. On a national scale, it plays out in entire sectors. Take healthcare, for example. The United States spends more per capita on healthcare than any other country in the world. Hospitals are busy. Doctors are overworked. Insurance paperwork could fuel a small forest industry. And yet, by most outcomes (life expectancy, infant mortality, rates of chronic disease) the US lags behind nations that spend far less. The system is overflowing with effort, but underdelivering on results. This is what happens when activity is mistaken for effectiveness, when the incentives push people to do more instead of do better.

Part of the issue is what we choose to measure. GDP. Hours worked. Number of emails sent. These are convenient proxies, but they tell an incomplete story. If you measure a software developer by how many lines of code they write, you encourage bloated, inefficient code. If you evaluate teachers by test scores, you get better test preparation, not necessarily better education. In both cases, the measurement distorts the goal. We fall into the trap of optimizing for the things we can count, even when they aren’t the things that count. And once a metric becomes a target, it stops being a good measure.

What’s perhaps most overlooked in all of this is the role of rest. In theory, we know rest is valuable. It boosts creativity, reduces burnout, enhances decision-making. But in practice, we treat rest as a luxury, something you earn only after proving your worth through constant motion. Many companies expect their employees to be available at all hours, responding to messages from their phones even while technically “off the clock.” Yet studies from countries that have implemented shorter workweeks show that when people work fewer hours, productivity doesn’t fall. In some cases, it actually rises. People become more focused, more creative, less prone to mistakes. They do less, but get more out of it.

So if working harder doesn’t lead to better outcomes, what does? The uncomfortable truth is that true productivity is not about grinding. It is about design. It is about setting up systems that allow people to do meaningful work without burning out. It means recognizing that some of the most valuable contributions (ideas, relationships, trust, long-term thinking) are difficult to measure but easy to feel. And it requires asking harder questions, like whether what we’re producing is worth the effort at all.

The productivity paradox is not just an economic puzzle. It is a cultural one. We have built a world that equates effort with value and movement with meaning. We celebrate busyness and treat stillness with suspicion. But maybe the way forward is not to double down on the hustle. Maybe it’s to step back and ask a more fundamental question: what, exactly, are we trying to produce? Because true productivity is not about doing more. It’s about doing what matters. And right now, we’re not always sure what that is.

A message from Projekts Workshop

At Projekts Workshop, we help brands find their voice, sharpen their story, and show up with purpose.

We design and run newsletter strategies that align your message, voice, and content—delivering consistent, audience-focused stories across email and social. And we build brand strategies that connect positioning, messaging, and visual identity into one cohesive, lasting story.

Whether you’re building, rebuilding, or growing, we’re here to help you do it with clarity, confidence, and consistency.