There is a lot of hard science to productivity. The research methods employed by psychologists and researchers into human cognition have evolved a great deal over the past few decades. There is a catch however. Most of the findings on productivity can never be applied due to fundamental, performance diminishing factors that, interestingly enough, people unknowingly tend to choose for themselves.

In other words, the thing about productivity is that it depends not only on direct productivity-boosting efforts but also on a numbers of fundamental precursors, without which, all improvement efforts will inevitably fail.

1. Wrong or unspecific goals

Can goals be wrong? From the productivity point of view, they can. Although at first sight goal setting is a highly individual task, not connected to the actual methods of how a person does work, unspecific or wrong goals leave no room for targeted, pinpoint-precise performance improvement efforts.

Productivity must be viewed as a function of the objectives set. This means that depending on objectives, performance levels change. This also means that the successfulness of performance improvement efforts depends on how well existing goals and future improvement efforts fit with one another. The interesting thing here is that all this happens without your active participation. Some goals are just better wired for performance than other goals.

It is also better to follow a big goal than a small one, it seems. In part because committing to a bigger vision, a bigger idea feels better. Furthermore, it is self-evident that the higher the goals you set, the more productive you realize you have to be. On a more subconscious level, bigger objectives stimulate us harder than those with a more realistic outlook. So, in a way, following a bigger goal pays off in the long term. Hard goals energize us and increase our resilience and persistence, also providing a suitable plateau for further performance improvement.

Broadening the scope of your ambition and taking on more goals is productivity-wise, always worth it. At the very least, larger goals will always translate into potential for performance improvement in the future.

2. No split into creative and mechanical tasks

Most jobs in business require both creative thinking and the ability to accomplish small, recurring tasks with great speed and ease. The former requires, say, mindset A and the latter requires, say, mindset B.

Although it is not hard to differentiate between the two tasks and the two mindsets, respectively, it is extremely hard to switch between the two mindsets at will.

3. No split into rhythms

Violinists, whose jobs demand consistently high levels of focus and attention, have been proven to perform better over periods of 90 minutes of intensive play, followed immediately by 15 minutes of rest. This is a reference to a so-called ultradian rhythm, which is a scientific way of saying that our bodies and minds follow a set dynamic of going from full attention capability and full work capacity to low. One way to combat this high-to-low dynamic is to split work into rhythms, just as violinists do.

It is always psychologically easier to maintain peak performance doing a single task, while knowing that well-deserved rest is around the corner. It is similar to workplace rewards. People will perform better knowing that they will be rewarded shortly after task completion rather than one month after.

4. Natural stress to mind and body

Sitting down in a chair all day long is unhealthy and, as a result, not fully productive. Just as human attention suffers natural degradation, so does your body. Mind fatigue and body fatigue are clearly connected, so maintaining productivity at full means having no stress in both your mind and your body. There are many excellent manuals on workspace optimization, recommendations of such sort are only good within a specific setting – when you are sitting down and doing paper or computer work.

A person can never be fully relieved of the perfectly natural degradation in how well he or she concentrates on a single task. The only thing we, as professionals, can do is delay and slow down the ultradian dynamic of attention going from full to empty for as long as possible.