If a stranger were to ask you today how productive your day was, what would come to mind first? For the majority of us, it’s how many things we have managed to do in the limited hours of the day. We, as a society, have agreed to this particular definition of productivity, and not often does one stop to question it. If we want to define this word we so commonly use, we start by studying its multiple origins. The first known use of this word is in the early 1600s, and its etymology is part French from the word productif, “serving to produce”, and part Latin from the word productivus, “fit for production” (Oxford English Dictionary, n.d). The Oxford English Dictionary enlists nine different meanings for productivity, varying depending on the field and time period, and we find about 20 occurrences of it per million words written in modern English. It unconsciously forms part of our everyday life, yet it is not so trivial to define.
Its initial definition emerged in an agricultural context, and in the eighteenth century, it made perfect sense. One had a piece of land, and could easily count its productivity by looking at the quantity of crops each square meter of land produced. You had clear and tangible inputs and outputs, and more productivity translated into economic prosperity. This economic prosperity then led to the wave of technological advancements known as the Industrial Revolution, where processes were automated through emerging machinery, and production skyrocketed. Within this new context, the word productivity gained not only more relevance, but was also adapted to what was happening during the time period. Factory owners and business owners now cared about “marginal productivity”: how much output each worker produced, and the collective interest was to raise the numbers, disregarding the well-being of workers. With time and bargaining from both parties, the labour market eventually found its equilibrium, and the definition of productivity rested on the same principle: producing more quantity.
Then, a couple of decades ago, the wave of changes brought by the digital revolution crashed, where automation was further increased, and jobs started to require less manual labour and more intellectual effort. We started to see nine-to-five jobs as the typical day for a big part of the labour force, and a blurring line between home and office spaces, because of the connecting bridge that is the internet and technology. This led to the fast-paced, digital world we live in today, where the concept of productivity has failed to adapt, and the emphasis on quantity is misleading in many contexts.
The difficulty arises when trying to measure quality, because what we work on today is not necessarily tangible, and cannot be counted as previously we counted crops. A business owner has no true way of knowing the marginal value produced by each employee, and the only certainty he finds is in quantity, so naturally, the focus remains there. As a result, we see the prevalence of long working hours, an endless feeling of overwhelm amongst people, and the chronic inability to slow down. Our lives start feeling like an endless to-do list, and we find “comfort” in completing as many tasks as we can in one day. However, do you really?
Dr Cal Newport, productivity expert and Georgetown professor, spoke on the Mel Robbins podcast, touching on how to gain control of your free time, improve productivity, and get motivated. He highlights that “Doing fewer things, but doing them well has to be the recipe for a deeper life” (Newport, 2025), and introduces to the audience the concept of slow productivity, made up of three main principles.
The first one sounds simple: do fewer things, which, in implementation, can be hard. Because of the invasive technology that surrounds us, our human brain has more inputs than ever before, and we multitask almost by default, claiming to be doing more. However, Cal explains that paradoxically, what happens is that you get slower, and the value of what you produce goes down. We are trapped by the idea that everything has to be done immediately, but taking your time with things adds up over time and goes a long way in terms of quality. The second principle is to work at a natural pace. The challenge here comes in accepting that we will never get through the entire to-do list, and Cal proposes instead to write wish lists. He differentiates between deep work, where no distractions at all are allowed and a designated block of time is separated for the task, and non-deep work, where you can bounce between running errands or accomplishing small tasks. Finally, the third principle is to obsess over quality, which is not meant to be confused with perfectionism. It simply means aiming for the best possible quality within a given timeframe, while continuously improving over time.
In the end, true productivity lies not in how much we do, but in how well we do it. Our commonly accepted definition of “producing abundantly” is unrealistic for our current time period, and adapting the definition of this concept to our personal lives and situation is key to living a more peaceful and purpose-driven life.
References:
Oxford English Dictionary (n.d.) productive, adj. Available at: https://www.oed.com/dictionary/productive_adj (Accessed: 24 March 2026).
Robbins, M. (2025) Episode 322: How to get things done, stay focused and be more productive (with Cal Newport). Available at: https://www.melrobbins.com/episode/episode-322/ (Accessed: 24 March 2026).
Newport, C. (2021) A new philosophy of productivity. Available at: https://behavioralscientist.org/a-new-philosophy-of-productivity/ (Accessed: 24 March 2026).
B.BIAS 