Productivity is low and stalled in many organisations across most advanced economies.

This is a persistent issue and there is lots of published analysis.

Our eyes are, naturally, drawn to technology related causes and some favourite quotes are:

“44% of UK workers classed their Companies office technology as “woefully outdated.”

The CFO

“1 in every 3 hours in a modern workplace are spent on tasks that can be readily automated.”

McKinsey & Company

“48% of UK employees waste three hours or more a day working on inefficient systems.”

Talk Business

The rise in employment related inflation amplifies the consequences of low productivity in sectors that rely on people.

Young people’s reluctance to choose workplaces that do not meet their aspirations for fulfilling tasks creates shortages that further threaten long held assumptions about the costs and availability of humans to support operational systems.

There are reasons why the systems that organisations use to power their operations hit a plateau in terms of productivity (Technology driven productivity gains eventually stalls) which we call the Productivity Lock.

Expectations are Changing

Young people aspire to work in roles which fulfil them because, for them, technology has given them a positive experience; fast, highly convenient access. This is increasingly been seen more widely in financial services (on-line banking), retail (on-line shopping) and entertainment (streaming services).

The expectation for fast, convenient, anytime access to access is the new normal, particularly for those organisations who serve time poor customers. The ability to meet this expectation creates competitive differentiation. Those who embrace it have a significant advantage over those who can’t.

This advantage translates externally, into easier client / customer acquisition.

It also translates internally in three important ways:

1. Freeing humans from automatable tasks releases significant capacity
2. Providing a modern work environment makes candidate acquisition easier
3. Reducing the costs to serve (introducing self-serve options) increases productivity

Just one problem – Legacy Systems

Embracing the opportunities that modern technology offers is one thing. Delivering them in the real world is quite a different matter.

The Productivity Lock (Technology driven productivity gains eventually stalls) puts organisations between a rock and a hard place. Their legacy technology cannot become something it was not designed to be.

The option of replacing that legacy system requires careful planning because it is likely to have had significant adaptations which make it specific to the organisation’s needs. These increase the time, disruption and risk associated with replacement.

The challenge with system replacement is not just technology related. The users of legacy systems are typically challenged to cope with the changes that are sometimes imposed on their established working practices.

Making these changes in a short period of time (as system replacement demands) can be overwhelming for colleagues who are already working at high intensity.

Underestimating the care that is needed to bring people along the change journey has been a significant contributor to high costs and delay.

The Dilemma

Organisations who have invested in operational systems that can no longer keep pace with their operational needs face a dilemma.

Continuing the status quo impacts productivity; the productivity lock. This leads to an increasingly uncompetitive position.

Replacing the legacy system involves significant time, disruption, cost and risk.

Neither option is attractive. It’s a legacy dilemma

Some pain can be alleviated by bolting on additions that can address a range of specific needs. These can be provided by the organisation and maybe tightly integrated with other operational systems. In other cases, additions are provided more independently, enabling areas of the organisation to meet specific needs. There are however, potential compliance and security implications associated with these additions

In all cases these additions create complexity, additional cost and sources of risk. Many have experienced the disputes between vendors who point fingers when disparate systems don’t work as intended.

How Dilemma can become Legacy Frustration

It begins with patient resignation. Operational improvements are constrained by the legacy system. Inconvenient but there must be a way to fix it.

As time passes and the pressure mounts, resignation develops into much stronger feelings. Why can’t the existing vendor deliver (the often promised improvements). Why does it take so much time and resources to switch out systems? How are we supposed to meet our performance targets?

Legacy Frustration is the symptom of Productivity Lock.