A lot of attention has been given to engaging the best talent to achieve this however, without a program to optimize the performance of all human resources, an organization cannot expect to realize the desired return on those investments.
While it would not be unreasonable to assume an average office worker performance gap in excess of 25%, even a 5% productivity improvement would represent several billion dollars in cost savings annually for employers. For example: An organization has 1,000 office workers and an employee attrition rate of only 9% annually. Even at a very conservative annual cost of $80,000 per employee, the employer would save $7,200,000 per year if they did not replace the 90 employees lost through attrition the first year.
First the premise must be accepted that there are correctable conditions in every organization which contribute to the performance gap. Secondly the factors creating the performance gap and the extent to which they are contributing to the gap must be considered. The three primary contributing factors to a “performance gap” are:
Ergonomics: The gap caused by work environment conditions preventing workers from performing their duties to the best of their abilities.
Proficiency: The gap between current worker capabilities and potential.
Technology: The gap between currently employed technologies (hardware and software) and available technologies which could improve performance.
Can Ergonomic services really help with proficiency? Of course. When employees are comfortable, there are many benefits, not the least which is productivity. Listen to the Ergonomics Podcast on this issue.