Any comments about this productivity graph posted

[truedelphi]

Over at tinyrevolution.com ?? (You'll need to scroll down to today's top story.)


I like the idea of only working only four days, even if the PTB won't allow it to happen.

But I don't know enough about productivity versus compensation to determine if the author is right.

http://www.tinyrevolution.com/

[Old and In the Way]

1. I remember how productivity became such a big measurement

starting in the 90's. What was the real purpose of this measurement? Efficiency? Maybe early on, when the use of computers had a positive impact on getting more done with this tool. But what did it morph into? In the Bush years it really became something different - as more people got fired or laid off, the remaining people had to do more. Productivity kept going up and up and up in the Bush years, as employment went down and down and down.

[mentalslavery]

2. Graph is too simplistic and non-contextualized to draw any

significant conclusions. Simple plots that reveal a trend association as this one over time do not support causal explanations. Assuming that this association is causal, compensation would have to explain 100% of the variation in productivity to draw the conclusions in the link. Therefore, graph is interesting but without knowing some of the cleaning, recoding, and control variable (context) used in this data set, it is what it is, merely interesting.