The 2014 South African general elections have come and gone. Held on May 7, to elect a new National Assembly and new provincial legislatures in each province, the fifth election under a democratic dispensation proved to be yet another milestone for the country. Now that the spadework has been done in terms of selecting the leadership to carry the country forward, it is time to trudge the puddles and deliver on essential services that stand to bolster the country’s economic growth.

Beyond utilising our right to vote to put a government in power, how we can we ensure that productivity within the public sector is at its optimum level? The answer to this question is not as straightforward as it should ideally be. Government, by its nature, is an enabling tool for economic growth and a service vehicle for various deliverables such as social services. The ability to truly measure the attainment of the deliverables is essential. One of the key areas that may assist in improving productivity within the public sector is time management.

Simplistic as it may sound, the issue of time plays a fundamental role in the improvement of productivity. It can be argued that technological advances, especially within the information technology area have relegated things like snail mail to something that can be associated with the Stone Age. However, with all these tools of the trade in the forefront, time and productivity remains a sore point. With issues like traffic congestion becoming a real problem in terms of productivity, should government be considering shorter working times and faster turnaround times? Many would baulk at such a suggestion but perhaps it is time to consider prioritising the issue of working hours and debunking the notion that 8-4 or 9-5 working hours should be the de facto working hours. Is it not time to start putting emphasis on flexitime and shorter working hours to promote productivity?

An interesting development came into place in Sweden recently, whereby an experiment for a six-hour work day was put into place for some public sector workers. The Swedish experiment challenges the norm of a 9-5 work day and it recognises the potential economic and social value of a shorter work day. It is seemingly also consistent with the broader movement to promote leisure time as the means to a higher standard of life. It may be mentioned that experiments in shorter working times have proved to be successful.

The food manufacturing company, WK Kellogg, which produces a wide variety of popular breakfast cereals famously, improved productivity at its plant by operating a six-hour work day. The economic benefits from shorter work time stem from workers being more refreshed and focused at work. It would seem six productive hours can yield the same output as a full eight hour work day. As we enter into a new term of governance, considerations on such issues to improve productivity within the public sectors may be looked at. Perhaps it would augur well for flexi -hours to be introduced wholesale within the public sector.

As I have written before, the case for working less is ultimately about promoting a higher quality of life, including a higher quality of work. It is about giving us more time to realise our creative potential in all kinds of activities, it is about achieving a life that uplifts us, rather than leaves us exhausted and frustrated. But given the benefits on offer, why are we not working less and smarter?

By: Bongani Coka –  CEO of Productivity SA

This article was originally published on the Productivity SA website